Comments by "Ash Roskell" (@ashroskell) on "a review of Financial times article on "white working-class frustration"" video.

  1. So, “other ethnic groups,” do not get the suffix of, “British,” attached to them, even though, “White British,” is a category in this article which is entirely about British people in Britain, which makes ALL of them, “British.” Can you see the wilful myopia in these terms being used? So, what is, “White British,” in this context, when set against, “other ethnic groups,” if not low level racism? . . . It would not seem so egregious if the article used terms like, “Black British,” and, “Asian British, “ as well, but it is using, “White British,” and, “other ethnic groups,” which is inherently racist. By differentiating, “other ethnic groups,” without attaching, “Britishness,” to them, yet putting them alongside, “white British,” people rhetorically, the author betrays an unexamined, hopefully unconscious, inherent, low level racism of the type that has fanned the flames of division in Britain so effectively in these last years. I am guilty of making my own assumptions here, since I am only going on what your video says, not having read the article, as I assume that the author is both white and British? But, even if either of those values measures differently, I doubt that changes the effect of their content very much, if at all.
    2