The resistible rise of Blancophobia as a dominant reality in the UK

If you have ever been a passenger on a large, ocean-going vessel which has had to turn through 180°, then you will know how long it takes. A cruise-liner or a super-tanker moves at glacial speed on the turn, and it is reminiscent of something; the British national consciousness. After almost two years of the latest — and hopefully last — incarnation of the British uniparty, the people of those rainy islands seem finally to be waking up to two inescapable facts. The first is that uncontrolled immigration is intentional and not a by-product of incompetence. The regular influx of undocumented, fighting-age, non-white Muslim men into the UK is not a glitch in the British political class’s coding, it is a feature. The second fact, harder to swallow for the famously tolerant British, is that their government hates them. More specifically, it hates them if they are White.

We live in an age of phobias, but there is one which dare not speak its name. Blancophobia, a fear or hatred of white people, is never mentioned, not even by those on the genuine political Right. We know that a phobia is actually defined as an irrational fear of something, not “hatred of” as the Left have re-branded it, but the concept of definition is passé, like wearing last season’s fashion. Language is increasingly what the hegemonic Left say it is, and definition is at their discretion. If the Left ever do have an auto da fé, a burning of books as the Nazis did in 1933, when 40,000 books were consigned to the flames, then the dictionary would be first on the pyre. But the phobia it is not okay to mention in polite society is blancophobia, and this is because polite society is now policed society.

Blancophobia is defined as “a fear or hatred of white people” not in any of the internationally recognized Anglophone dictionaries such as the Oxford English Dictionary (OED) or Merriam-Webster. The only definition I can find is in something called the “Urban Dictionary”, a fairly minor internet outpost.

Why this omission? It is not as though the compilers of dictionaries, from Dr. Johnson onwards, are not sensitive to any change in meaning. Merriam-Webster — the American OED — famously changed their definition of “racism” when a black woman requested they do so. Yes, ma’am, said the company. What uppity Black women want, they get. But no mention of blancophobia. So, there is no point looking for a definition of this whisper-word. How does it manifest?

We moderns have a tendency to think in news cycles, which is exactly what the Western media wish. We don’t need an Orwellian memory-hole, we have our own. We do have to store a lot away these days, it must be said, and we forget quickly, but let’s look at how blancophobia has been incubating this century.

Why not start with what I am writing? I am using Word, and I can tell you what spellcheck recognizes. Of the following five words, only one gets the red line underneath it from a Microsoft spellcheck: Islamophobia. Homophobia. Transphobia. Negrophobia. Blancophobia. There are no prizes for working out which one is not recognized.

This tallies with what has become a saw among those on the Left; it is not possible for non-Whites to be racist concerning White people. I have said many times that this is an ex cathedra statement made ex nihilo; a statement made with no rationale to back it up, but having the power of a Papal edict. It began in 1970, when an American academic named Patricia Bidol-Padva wrote in Developing New Perspectives on Race that racism is “prejudice plus power”. Despite being rationally untenable, this formula was taken up by modern Critical Race Theory (CRT) authors such as Robin DiAngelo and Reni Eddo-Lodge, author of Why I’m No Longer Talking to White People About Race.  Now, this concept is an established part of the UK school curriculum, and is one example among many of blancophobia in the classroom.

Apparently, the only reason given for the impossibility of non-Whites being racist to Whites is that, in some mystifying way, Whites have power and Blacks don’t, or “White privilege”, as it is known in some circles. The truth, as it so often is, is the polar opposite of this. As Enoch Powell’s famous constituent warned would happen in 1968, the Black man now has the whip-hand over the White man, aided and abetted by the largely White political class and their executive arm in the public sector.

The current concerted attack on Whiteness in the UK is now blatantly obvious in sectors as disparate as advertising, employment legislation, and policing. Although only around 5% of the British population is Black, it is estimated that up to 50% of British advertising features Blacks, and mixed-race couples are disproportionately represented, almost always showing a Black man squiring a White woman.

As for employment, one of the top brass in the RAF, the famous Royal Air Force which won the Battle of Britain, complained about “useless White men” when recruiting. He didn’t mean useless in the air, he meant useless for his DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusivity) quota.

As for the police, when hundreds of Black teenagers recently ran riot in a once-genteel part of London called Clapham, the police presence was sparse and seemed entirely uninterested when they did arrive at what would have been condemned as a riot had it been Whites smashing property and looting stores. When White crowds assembled peacefully to protest in migrant-afflicted towns such as Crowborough and Epsom, however, the police were present in force and wearing full riot gear. This is the famous “two-tier policing” that the government claims does not exist in Britain, a denial that certainly shows that it does. Anyone presenting an argument that blancophobia is not by far the strongest racial animus in Britain today shows themselves to be deeply unserious.

Despite it clearly being open season on Whites, the government diktat is that it is ethnic minorities, and various other groups with “protected characteristics” who are under threat. This thinking is reverse induction; you start from the answer and work back to the question. And the answer is always that Whites can only ever be the problem.

This can be seen in miniature in UK television advertising. Ads are little dramas now, and the morphology of these tales in miniature is not hard to find. Whites are shown as incompetent, objectionable, and humorless, while Blacks are portrayed as invaluable, empathetic, and the saviors of any given situation.

When the government produced a series of ads to dissuade young men from harassing young women in the street, the sexual aggressors are always White, while the gallant knights who save the girl and scold the boy are always Black or British Asian. Britain, and its White political ruling class in particular, is profoundly blancophobic, and it is at long last starting to be noticed and spoken about.

British non-Whites (or at least non-Whites in Britain) fall into two broad classes: Blacks of Caribbean or African heritage, and Muslims either from sub-continental Asia or Africa. I am from London, and lived there for much of my life, so I have seen both groups at close hand. Blacks are notably the more racist of the two groups, disliking Whites purely because they are White. The young Muslim sees kuffar before he sees Whiteness, and so the animus is more religious than racial. Blacks and Muslims don’t really get on, and the attitude of Muslims such as the London Mayor, Sir Sadiq Khan, is that the only good Black is a convert to Islam. This is why Khan campaigned at the last Mayoral election on a ticket which would ban stop-and-search, by far the easiest way to reduce knife crime, and yet prone to racial disparity. Khan is entirely unconcerned about Blacks stabbing one another — and the occasional White boy — stabbing them to death because these people are not of the ummah, they are out-group delinquents.

“Integration”, or rather the lack of it, is much talked about in British political commentary, and one point is never made; Muslims have integrated perfectly well into another culture. This is not the vanishing culture of the host country they infest, of course. Almost all young Muslim men speak, act, dress and behave like young urban Blacks. They have integrated perfectly.

Even the White image of Blackness in Britain is blancophobic because it is coerced. No White Briton is free to form their own opinion of Blacks and Black culture based on, say, empirical evidence. The White experience of Blackness is pre-fabricated and mandatory. Whites are not required to have their own experience of Blackness, but rather they are told what that experience is and must be. It is also explained to them that their experience of Blacks is tainted by their own prejudice, snobbery, xenophobia and racism. Whites are told that they have a visceral hatred of non-Whites, and Blacks in particular.

In a relatively short period of time, the British Black caucus, in collaboration with their White liberal handlers, have produced a White personality which is far more of a social construct than race is deemed to be by the promoters of CRT. Blacks have long monopolized the grievance industry, and the White persona they have come up with is general issue and melanin-dependent. It is that of the racist.

Racism has had an interesting arc of development this century. At first, it was enough not to be a racist. Then, as the Black caucus realized they could expand on this theme, it became compulsory to be anti-racist. This was further refined so that it became necessary for Whites to declare their anti-racism on request, like a member of the Stasi demanding to see a person’s papers. This is a part of an overall program in which Blacks demand “respect” — a big word in that community, if rarely exhibited by its members. No one has ever dared to point out to Blacks that respect must be earned. No one would dare if they wanted to stay in position. Blacks just expect respect to be there automatically, like a hotel towel. Even after this state-imposed humiliation ritual, of course, Whites are still racist. Racism has replaced Adam and Eve’s transgression as the original sin. On the subject of history, blancophobia is hard at work in what was once a respected academic field.

Blacks and their enablers have learned to master cognitive dissonance, a psychological dysfunction which involves an individual holding two contradictory ideas simultaneously. So it is that the Black caucus has no problem with holding two contradictory versions of history. Firstly, Blacks require a bogus history in which Blacks invented everything from the plough to the Large Hadron Collider, pausing only to kick-start the Industrial Revolution and come up with the internet.

In fact, of course, Blacks have invented very little of use, and in fact represent a negative asset to history’s development, White-led as it is and will remain. And yet schools are filled with books such as Brilliant Black History, which propagates the myth of Black exceptionalism. In the arts, famous historical figures who were clearly White are portrayed as Black in dramatic productions. Thus, Anne Boleyn was Black, according to the BBC, and there were plenty of Black Romans, Tudors, and Victorians, even though the actual numbers were vanishingly small. The latest incarnation of this is Christopher Nolan’s upcoming film version of Homer’s Odyssey, in which Helen of Troy is played by a Black woman, despite Homer specifically describing her as White. We also saw a Hollywood version of Snow White and the Seven Dwarves in which the role of the little princess was played by a Latina, despite the name being a translation of the German, “Schneewittchen”.

Drama based on actual fact is not confined to history. Readers will remember the BBC drama, Adolescence. This featured a young boy who has been “radicalized” online, and goes on to kill a female classmate. For extra authenticity, the writers based the show on a real case. What puts something of a dent in that authenticity is that, in reality, both killer and victim were Black. When scriptwriters tinker with a script, that’s permissible.

When they tinker with reality, not so much. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer wanted Adolescence shown in every school, and repeatedly referred to it in the House of Commons as “a documentary”.

The arts are a hotbed of blancophobia. In 2023, a Black theater group in London announced that one performance during a run of its play, Tambo & Bones (which is, as you might expect, about race) would be to a black-only audience. The producers did not exclude Whites from attending, nor could they do so legally, they simply suggested they not attend. Given that their White audience would be mostly liberals who would do anything a Black man told them to, that order was obeyed. The producers wanted, they said, to have one performance “free from the White gaze”. This is a curious choice of phrase. In London, no White person gazes at a Black if they know what’s good for them.

Blancophobia is not treated as a criminal offense, as are all other racial phobias. What of crime itself? Media bias is used to screen Black violence, as with a piece from The Guardian in February, 2023. The headline informs us that “Black people four times as likely as White people to be murdered, ONS (Office for National Statistics) data shows.

The piece unpacks this data, but at no point mentions the ethnicity of the murderers. The sub-textual hint is that these dead Black people were killed by Whites. This is not the case, or I feel sure we would have heard more on the subject.

A feature in The Daily Telegraph from December 2023 has a helpful hint beneath the headline, which reads “London knife and gun crime surges amid gang warfare”.

Now, it is axiomatic that no such feature will mention Blackness except in the context of victimhood, and this one does not. But the newspaper extends to its readers an invitation to “find out how much knife crime is in your area using our searchable tool”. They say there is an app for everything, and now there is one for Black dysfunction, although it is not exactly framed in those terms.

Alternatively, rather than bother installing the app, you could just walk out of your London front door, stroll around for a while (accompanied, if female), count how many Black people you see, and use that as a reliable indicator of the dangers inherent in the place where you live. You don’t need an app to recognize what Paul Kersey calls the “Black undertow”. What happens when Black academics are the ones compiling crime statistics?

Tony Sewell is a Black education specialist. In 2021, as Chairman of the Race and Ethnic Disparities Commission, Sewell was tasked with producing a report on those very categories. This was one of those governmental reports which are produced “to show” a pre-judged result, and the one Mr. Sewell’s commission came up with showed very much the wrong result. Instead, the report found that racism was not the dominant factor in Black dysfunction, but trailed behind geography, family, wealth, culture and religion. This was not what the deep state wanted to hear, and the vitriolic attacks on Mr. Sewell began immediately.

In 2007, then-Prime Minister, Tony Blair, took something of a political risk. In a studio panel Q&A, Blair told a Black woman the following about crime: “We won’t stop this by pretending it isn’t young Black kids doing it”.

But it is what Blair said immediately beforehand which shows the ultimate avoidance of Black culpability:

The black community — the vast majority of whom are decent, law-abiding people horrified at what is happening — need to be mobilized in denunciation of this gang culture that is killing innocent young black kids. [Italics added].

This deflects culpability away from “young black kids” (who liberals believe not to have moral agency) and relocates it in something abstract: “gang culture”. This removes responsibility from Black culture, which alone is responsible for the current toxic and dangerous state of London’s streets. But even that was not enough for some of the screeching choir. Amnesty International’s Director at the time, Kate Allen (a crop-haired White woman), found the “gang matrix” most unsavory:

It’s part of an unhelpful and racialized focus on the concept of gangs at the expense of concentrating on the most violent offenders. The entire system is racially discriminatory, discriminating and stigmatizing young men for the type of music they listen to.

Quite what Black crime in London has to do with Amnesty International is not clear, but that organization has long since wandered from its original remit as representatives of political prisoners. Many inner-city Whites are now effectively political prisoners, however, unable to go out at night, and wholly unsupported by the police. That would be unlikely to interest Ms. Allen.

Years later, Sadiq Khan would order 1,000 Black men to be removed from a so-called “crime matrix”. (Don’t those in power love calling data a “matrix”?). These men, said Khan, were not deemed a threat. Young Black men are not only a threat to one another, however, they are a threat to Whites, and so are the blancophobic police. This was shown very recently when a young White man, Henry Nowak, was stabbed to death by Vikrum Digwa, a Sikh, using a ceremonial “shastar” knife, an 8” blade Sikhs are legally allowed to carry on religious grounds. When the police arrived to find the White boy trailing blood, the 23-year-old Sikh claimed he had been racially abused. Accordingly, with an accusation of racism easily out-trumping the obvious need to get the boy an ambulance, the police promptly arrested Nowak. While they were handcuffing him, he bled out, collapsed, and died. This is blancophobia in action.

Blancophobia first appeared on the national political landscape in what now looks like quite an anodyne comment made in 2001 by then-BBC Director-General, Sir Greg Dyke. The BBC, he said, was “hideously White”. Now, a quarter of a century later, this seed has grown into a mighty bough, and blancophobia is steadily on the rise in the United Kingdom. It represents precisely the type of “divisiveness” politicians won’t stop accusing Whites of. White Britons are just beginning to grasp just how much the political class hate them, and will weaponize non-Whites, as well as racial legislation, against them. Perhaps it is time for British to reclaim the meaning of “phobia” and give them reason to fear us as well as hate us.