After yet another acquittal, I wonder what it will take to get a conviction for using racist language.
Okay, taking on the point that maybe the policeman involved was an unpleasant piece of work – and, possibly unfit to serve, the use of racist language should not result in a criminal conviction. Disciplinary action and possibly loss of job, yes, if he was not behaving in a manner befitting his uniform, bringing the force into disrepute, but, speech should not carry a criminal conviction, no matter how unpleasant. Yes, I know, “nigger” is now verboten in the modern orthodoxy (unless you are black and have “reclaimed” it, in which case it is all okay or some such fuckwittery) and I have no problem with people complaining when someone says it. I have no problem with someone being ostracised for being a nasty racist. But freedom of speech means that people get to say nasty things and reasonable people get to tell them where to get off.
That’s how it is supposed to work. Unfortunately, cretins such as Benjamin Zephaniah either don’t – or don’t want to – understand this basic principle. Rather, they would have people handed down criminal convictions for what they think and say. I know who I find the more obnoxious and it ain’t the racist copper.
———————-
As a footnote, it’s worth mentioning that after two trials and two juries reaching the same verdict, maybe not all is as Benjamin Zephaniah reckons it is, eh?
I recall some years ago that a school teacher was hauled over the coals for using the word niggardly. Due to some people being too stupid to use a dictionary, it is risky to even use a word that isn’t the slightest bit offensive but sounds a bit like another word that is.
Except you’ll hear that particular word scattered throughout most modern rap music and every Spike Lee film ever made…
Truly we are heading for an idiocracy.
Reading BZ’s article, and making due allowance for not knowing what was in the heart of the policeman, his defence makes sense. He seems to be saying that the man called himself a ‘nigger’, and the policeman was saying – sure, you will always be a ‘nigger’, you will always be black – don’t use that as an excuse. That is, don’t see yourself as a victim.
i.e suggesting to him that the reason he was in trouble was not due to skin colour (and others’ racism), but because of his actions, and that he should face up to that and stop thinking it’s everyone elses fault. Essentially telling him – it’s up to you. Sort yourself out, you have that choice.
Trying to empower him, basically.
Which as I said could all be defensive guff, but the juries were obviously not sure, so, rightly, they couldn’t convict.
(This is beside the point that criminalising free speech is simply wrong, of course.)
What was the ditty? Sticks and stones?
I agree with you, but I fear you may be wrong; the likes of Benjamin Zephaniah are doing their uttermost to make that so.
It seems that only the jury system is protecting us from our ‘betters’ intention to punish us for such utterances.
This is just another version of the John Terry farrago. As PRM says, we don’t know what was in the copper’s heart but prosecuting these people for using these words demeans the significance of actual racism, and that’s irrespective of the free speech issue.
That’s the whole problem for the racism industry, they have to clutch at these straws else they would have nothing else. Can we declare victory against racism in the UK now?