‘THERE is a certain class of race-problem solvers who don’t want the patient to get well’, goes the famous quote by black Republican Booker T. Washington, and it often became relevant during the course of the latest example of Cultural Marxism pushed by Channel 4; ‘The School That Tried To End Racism’. Beyond its main experiment being questionable and often bordering on child abuse, its disturbing messaging and emphasis on racial identity politics are prescisely the wrong thing to spread out at a time whereby racial harmony is desperately needed.
The show centres around an experiment in Glenthorne High School in south London, involving examining race and supposed privilege among ethnic groups in British society. These include going in to conservations about their race, examining alleged racist tents in British society and celebrating their heritage. It may sound alarmist, but it does get worse; the main impetus surrounds a game that exposes the rather Orwellian sounding ‘unconscious racial bias’ – whatever that means – and those in charge want it removed. While this had been previously normalised in other leftie shows, like BBC Three‘s ‘Is Britain Racist?’, it failed due to being catered to a niche audience, and unlike now, racial tension wasn’t as high. The George Floyd protests and riots have unfortunately changed that, even if the disgusting sentiment of certain activists remains the same. Initially, the show is quite interesting in its planning, and explorations of race. However, that comes tumbling down like a house of cards once more sinister agendas are revealed.
The most troubling thing about the show comes from the very premise; this school and its surrounding area are a success of multiculturalism in general Britain. Kids from different races get along, they are colourblind together and that can only lead to a healthy society later on, right? But no, they are forced to take part in this experiment whereby they are divided by race, told they are kept privileged or down by it and that it matters beyond anything else. Not only is this obviously meant to incite racial tensions within this group of perfectly peaceful children, but given that it incites guilt in some students based on their skin colour, it borders on child abuse.
But as bad as it sounds, it manages to get worse. Many of the experiments that they do take part in is literally creating racial tension where none had existed previously. If that isn’t the case, why do they emphasis race as the most important character trait to these children, beyond those of nationality and religion among others? Why do they promote numerous lies around institutional racism – a term coined by a Hitler admiring Black Panther banned from the UK, I might add – which creates anxiety among the BAME kids, leading to one being verbally abusive to his mother? And why, oh why, do they promote white privilege being a thing, especially in a country whereby 19K young white girls were raped by Pakistani grooming gangs and ignored, due to their race? It’s literally making a concoction of nitro-glycerine, and is undoubted to explode at any point in their adult lives.
But what is the point of a lot of this, you may ponder? Good question. It becomes heavily obvious, with some of the lecturers involved admitting that they aren’t happy with a colourblind society, as it can stop racism for good, something that doesn’t benefit them personally. One of the main scientists involved, Dr. Nicola Rollock bluntly admits this, stating that ‘pretending’ not to notice ‘the colour of her skin’ means that her experiences and ‘history’ are being ‘erased’, all the while the supposed racism against her is ‘ignored’, meaning it isn’t ‘healthy at all’ – meaning problematic for aggrieved race baiters who are going to be out of a job shortly. This is accompanied by narration which openly states that ‘many experts argue that colourblindness is itself a form of racism’. Remember that Booker T. Washington quote at the start?
To make matters worse, they openly admit that they’re using children for a purpose, so they’re easier to manipulate with less developed minds than adults. One professor admits that tackling it from an ‘early age’, otherwise supposed unconscious bias could affect their ‘lives’ and their ‘areas of employment’. No evidence is made of this, and surprisingly, no-one challenges this Orwellian line of reasoning. This speaks of a more curious and questionable desire from the programmers, to highlight a problem not by showing it exists, but by using flimsy evidence to fit predetermined theories. Basic science theory and test procedures usually don’t run like this, and for good reason. It undermines any objectivity in collecting data and thereby the argument that you make, as well as having the possibility of failing anyway, as confirmation bias is no substitute for hard data.
Meanwhile, it often attributes racism to where none exists. This mainly comes from how BAME people aren’t heavily represented in aspects of British media, mainly that of white models being heavily promoted in the MSM, white historical figures having their portraits in the National Gallery and how there is general disparity of BAME allegedly in general society. Not only is that not true often, but what would necessarily be the problem with that premise, given that Britain has been a historically European country? As Oxford professor Nigel Biggar notes, the reason much of British culture is ‘Eurocentric’ is inevitable as it creates cultural unity, and it is therefore important ‘should focus on helping budding citizens understand the cultural and political environment for which they are about to become directly responsible’.
It was done out of the necessity to show that British history belongs to all Britons regardless of skin colour, not out of maliciousness for those of others, as the achievements of those figures in question reflect better for the nation as a whole. The figures picked were done so out merit, not race. And given that there is representation of BAME people in wider society, and several initiatives on that to improve it, it’s not like we’re not making progress on it. It’s the most extreme example of the post hoc, propter ergo hoc fallacy there is out there, and it’s ridiculous anyway. Would the producers involved state the same thing in a majority Asian, African or Arab whereby similar logistics are applied? Obviously no, as that is racist regardless of who does it.
There is also a sneering anti-English sentiment in the show, akin to anything Kehinde Andrews, Mel Gibson and the worst parts of Trainspotting put out there. For example, the English flag, when shown as someone’s pride reminded one of the academics involved of the far-right National Front and British National Party. Being truly part of the ‘transnational order’ there, as the late, great Sir Roger Scruton put it.
In the aforementioned exercise included a part whereby children were ‘privileged’ if their parents’ first language was English. Apparently speaking the native tongue, an important part of community cohesion and something that is therefore collapsing whereby the lack of it is promoted, is racist now. Makes sense. It indicates a more sinister motive to the show; beyond promoting so-called ‘anti-racism’, it advocates dismantling nationalism and love of country for globalism and open borders. To young children no less. Feel sick yet?
Its ending is even more grotesque. After a ‘debate’ on whether the UK is a racist country or not – between young children of course – most agree, and that is the conclusion of the series. It then goes around the children to talk about what they’ve learnt, and are now more ‘racially aware’, meaning now they are indoctrinated in to left-wing agitprop, presumably for the rest of their lives. Pass the sick bucket, please and hopefully a restraining order for these lecturers involved, conducting the most evil child-based study since Dr. Money’s ones from the 1970s.
In conclusion, this is a horrid show. It borders on child abuse, pushes heavy identity politics narratives onto an audience not suited for such evil and only succeeds in pushing race baiting narratives that benefit race hustlers and their allies on the left, with little others benefiting. That’s not even taking it’s more sinister undertones in to consideration; many race baiters aren’t interested in racial harmony but want their grievances forever aired for cynical reasons and that we should accept a globalised world over one whereby nation states are crucial. As Douglas Murray rightfully notes in his 2019 acclaimed book The Madness of Crowds, ‘to assume that… skin colour mean nothing would be ridiculous. But to assume that they mean everything will be fatal’. It’s this message we should consider for a better and more racially equal society, not poisonous junk like this.
Shame to all those involved, who should sit in a corner and ponder whether it was all worth it.