Labour deselecting left-wing candidates and women of colour in first week of campaign
Labour deselecting left-wing candidates and women of colour in first week of campaign
Attached: 1 image #GE2024 What have Labour done in their first campaign week? Deselected left-wing (not Israel supporting) candidates!! Diane Abbott (not sure but looks like it), now Doctor Faiza Shaheen, in Chingford, and more. This is appalling. Really angry. #UKPolitics EDIT: it’s become a bit...
Labour has decided to start their campaign with a bang, pruning women of colour and left wingers from the ballot due to reasons such as liking tweets sharing Jon Stewart videos. At the end of the day it boils down to support for Palestine.
Looks like Labour is doing what they can to make sure UK politics remains completely fucked even after the end of the Tory rule.
You're viewing a single thread.
Has "people of colour" caught on over here now? It always sounded uncomfortably close to "coloured people" as a kind-of-offensive term for all non-whites.
That's how it used to be used, but has since been reclaimed. It's safe to use.
That's good to know. Doesn't really matter if I think it's weird as long as it's not actually upsetting anyone!
Pretty sure the UK term was BAME, but US culture is pretty pervasive.
There has been a move away from BAME in recent years in favour of more accurate, less broad terms:
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-53194376
https://civilservice.blog.gov.uk/2022/05/19/why-weve-stopped-using-the-term-bame-in-government/
Thanks, those were both really good articles!
Seems "BAME" is being rejected mostly for qualities it shares with the term "PoC".
Happy to help, and yes, there is definitely a move away from the more general "catch-all" terms that seem to exist mostly to make life easier for those outside of the group in question, rather than those in it. It's a good move.
They're basically fancy ways of saying "non white".
There's a use case for making that distinction but it's a lot narrower than expecting people to self-identify in those terms.
Which, within that use case (e.g talking about wide and systemic oppression by white-led cultures) I guess that could be like the argument some people from certain countries have made that "Third World" is useful term because it does retain the history of its useage, whereas when it's exchanged for terms like LDCs>Global South>LICs>etc that sort of obscures the historical material conditions and relational aspects which inform the present. Or something.
They're basically fancy ways of saying "non white".
Exactly
And yeah, it can get confusing and complicated when terms are a bit vague or euphemistic, which like you say, is intentional in probably most cases for both identities and countries examples (and others). But really it means we just have to put in a little more thought in to what we actually mean to say, and also be open to learn an adapt.