Did anyone see it on C4 a couple of nights ago? If so what did you make of it? I though it was some of the most depressing and uncomfortable viewing I have ever seen, especially the 16 year old afro-carribean boy talking about the Somali refugees as vermin :( Having said that I did think it was a program that needed to be shown...

Yes I saw it too, and found it very interesting and disturbing. Just shows that it's not just white people who are racist and I'm sick of white people getting the blame for everything. Show's how tribal everyone is, which has been mentioned in other threads. Racism will always exist, whether subliminal or blatant.

Also, quite interesting that C4 was allowed to use such a title, after all the recent discussions about the N word.

I thought it was great viewing, but nothing that surprising. I think people should remember that people with this attitude, of whatever race, while vile, they are in the minority... just as the BNP are.

I think Darcus Howe did a great job with this show.

I found it depressing too...
I wondered what the point of showing it was - other than to point out that prejudice [based on whatever premise] is universal.

On the one hand, I think Mr H was trying to trace 'where it all went wrong'; however in this one hour he was only able to scratch the surface of a contentious and problematic issue, and I felt that this probably did more harm than good. What was the point? Did Mr H or any of his guests suggest a way forward? Were the few West Indians/Africans watching this say: "Oh my goodness, is that the way I am perceived, I must strive to rebuke those stereotypes!" ; Do people who behave like those Asian youths think - oh my goodness, is that how ridiculous I sound? Or will this reinforce their belief that they must stick together to fight 'THE MAN' and not realise that the only fight they have on their hands in the mental slavery they have subjected themselves too?
I kept thinking - oooh the BNP must be rubbing their hands in glee.

The N word is not really an issue [as used in this program] but I didnt see the point of naming it this because it had nothing to do with the show. Other than to attempt to be provocative and controversial!

We say [for the record, I am of African origin], ****** is a state of mind. If someone calls me a ******, in truth it has nothing to do with me coz I know it has nothing to do with my race, but with that person's idea of what it represents, and I refuse to acknowledge that.

Anyway..like that documentary, there is not enough space here to discuss the real issues around prejudice and racism. And in any event, for the most part I would be preaching to the converted [on un-convertable].

Nuff said!

Did anyone see the prog on channel 4 last night at 11 pm,it was called dont call me a ******,and before people start to call me for saying the n word i'm only saying what it was called.
Darkus Howe was indeed a brave man to go in to such a hostile enviroment,I thought at one point that the asians he was talking to were going to beat him up.
The film seemed to vindicate everything we in the BNP were saying in that the multi racial experiment is a recipe for violence.
To hear black people use the language which was heard seems to show they are as racist if not more so than the white population.
What a boiling pot we have created and it seems like it's going to get worse,but the one person who I felt sorry for and this may suprise some of you was the little old black woman who is terrified to sleep at night incase the somali gangs attack her or her property.
What a sad state of affairs this country has got into when this happens to a defenceless old woman.
But finally I will congratulate channel 4 for having the balls to show this film at all shame the BBC can't do something similar.

I didn't see the programme so I can't comment on its contents.

What I will say is that one programme cannot possibly represent the views and actions of all black people. In the same way that I'm sure Roy would argue that the BNP documentry a few weeks ago does not represent every member of the BNP.

Mod: threads merged

Yes Andy that last point of yours is correct you can't label everyone because of a few.
I also beleive that the other programme which was pulled from the schedule is also going to be shown this month,it is the one which is in the town of Keighley in yorkshire.
The programme delves in to the accusation that asian people were so called grooming white children in to prostitution.
I'm not sure exactly when this will be shown other than this month,shoul'd be interesting.

The programme was good.It proves just how the left have lied to us about how great multicultralism is.Well done channel 4.

The show was called: "Who you callin' ******", and I think you would agree that its very different in syntax and sentiment from "Don't call me a ******" as you suggested in your thread. Anyway let's not split hairs...

"The film seemed to vindicate everything we in the BNP were saying in that the multi racial experiment is a recipe for violence"

1. You have missed the point. I lived all my life in a 'multi racial experiment' as you term it. My brother in law is Scottish, my nephew is of Indian ancestry, my cousins are half chinese. There is no racial violence in my country. People disagree, as they are bound to, but we don't live in a battle zone because we respect each other as human beings. Our national anthem ends - Here [my country] every creed and race find an equal place. Violence is borne out of ignorance.

2. Darcus Howe's intent, which he intimated to in his interview with the young man who had been stabbed was to question where the division between West Indians and Asians occurred, because in his experience as a young immigrant, these two groups worked together - had each other's backs - as the saying goes. I guess he is wondering as the Black eyed peas song says - where is the love? Additionally, in his interaction with the young West Indian boy, he sought to bring him in a positive conversation to speak to a Somalian in an attempt to mediate...to make clear the struggles of the Somali, and to show a more human side.

"To hear black people use the language which was heard seems to show they are as racist if not more so than the white population."

The people in this documentary have been stabbed, attacked, and threatened. The anger which comes out as racism, and the language at which you were so surprised has come out of personal experience. Qualifying racism by degree, as your statement above attempts to do, does not justify it. Hating someone because of the colour of their skin has no justification. Every man for himself, even in prejudice. Let the BNP answer for their own hate. These people will answer for theirs.

The feeling I got from it is that its actually the younger people who are more racist and that not so much from a feeling of world against them but more from a feeling of social vacuum where they are growing up bereft of any real social structure and so build clans for themselves as a reaction to it in much the same way as people join gangs et al its just they wear their colors on their skins rather than on their clothing. I think Darcus did an exceptional job with a very tough subject but I couldn't help feeling that his frame of reference (colonialisation etc.) didn't quite fit with the financial frame of reference that most others seemed to be using.

Trying not to turn this into a BNP thread but I feel I must reply to Roy - yes there is racism in every race, creed and colour to a greater of lesser degree which doesn't mean that a) it is the prevelent feeling, in much the same way that the BNP represent a tiny minority of whites not all of them and b) just because this tiny minority are racist it seems a bit extreme to segregate the races?

Originally posted by royjames
Yes Andy that last point of yours is correct you can't label everyone because of a few.


But that's what you're best at.

Originally posted by Lianndi
IThe N word is not really an issue [as used in this program] but I didnt see the point of naming it this because it had nothing to do with the show. Other than to attempt to be provocative and controversial!

We say [for the record, I am of African origin], ****** is a state of mind. If someone calls me a ******, in truth it has nothing to do with me coz I know it has nothing to do with my race, but with that person's idea of what it represents, and I refuse to acknowledge that.


Perhaps you can answer this: why has the N word become so taboo? For whites it's become almost the worst swear word imaginable.

For other races however it's used with total abandon. In conversation, films, song lyrics etc it’s used as almost every second word.

Why is this so?

Mojo, perhaps you could reaquaint yourself with what you said in this thread (http://www.sheffieldforum.co.uk/showthread.php?s=&threadid=10070&highlight=******) where that particular aspect was discussed in great detail.

Originally posted by Tony
Mojo, perhaps you could reaquaint yourself with what you said in this thread (http://www.sheffieldforum.co.uk/showthread.php?s=&threadid=10070&highlight=******) where that particular aspect was discussed in great detail.

I haven't forgotten Tony, but the question wasn't really answered properly back then either.

Hehe, well that's a different matter.

Wasn't the concensus about how words were used, the context, and the intent behind them?

For example, '******' at a BNP meeting has a very different intent to '******' in a NWA track.

Originally posted by Tony
Hehe, well that's a different matter.

Wasn't the concensus about how words were used, the context, and the intent behind them?

For example, '******' at a BNP meeting has a very different intent to '******' in a NWA track.

So does that mean it's OK to use it if you're black, but it's off limits for whites? That sounds hypocritical to me.

Originally posted by mojoworking
So does that mean it's OK to use it if you're black, but it's off limits for whites? That sounds hypocritical to me.
I would say any word is accept , if it meant to be friendly positive statement.

If you meant the same word to upset or anger someone that is off limits for everyone.

I might call a friend a b*tch if she came to me with good news.

My friendly meaning would be, good for you but you are so jammy.

But if I turned to some stranger and shouted the same word to upset them (not that I would) I would be out of line.

Originally posted by mojoworking
So does that mean it's OK to use it if you're black, but it's off limits for whites? That sounds hypocritical to me.

Why does everything have to be black and white, pun intended? Context and intent are the key words. You can call your friend a b*****d in good humour but try it in a pub to a stranger and the reaction would be different.

Originally posted by max
Why does everything have to be black and white, pun intended? Context and intent are the key words. You can call your friend a b*****d in good humour but try it in a pub to a stranger and the reaction would be different.

That's the theory, but in reality it doesn't work like that. When was the last time you heard a white person use the word "******" in any context other than derogatory?

Originally posted by mojoworking
That's the theory, but in reality it doesn't work like that. When was the last time you heard a white person use the word "******" in any context other than derogatory?

When was the last time you went into a pub and called some stranger a b*****d? It's not something you'd do is it?

Incidentally, if you listen to white rap music I'm told they use the n word quite frequently.

Enough, check out the link tony posted and let's keep this thread about the program.

I didn't see it. (Keeping this post on topic). :D

Keeping this post on topic, I dont know why it was pulled from it's original slot?
I fail to understand the logic behind that decision,yes it was slightly contraversial but not THAT contraversial.

Originally posted by max
When was the last time you went into a pub and called some stranger a b*****d? It's not something you'd do is it?

Incidentally, if you listen to white rap music I'm told they use the n word quite frequently.

Enough, check out the link tony posted and let's keep this thread about the program.

I didn't see it. (Keeping this post on topic). :D

Off topic or not, there are so many holes in that argument it could pass for a string vest. Of course you wouldn't go into a pub and use that word to a stranger. That's not the point. But I think you know that.

Originally posted by royjames
Keeping this post on topic, I dont know why it was pulled from it's original slot?
I fail to understand the logic behind that decision,yes it was slightly contraversial but not THAT contraversial.

It's a thread about a TV program, where else should it be other than in the TV and Movie Chat forum?

Originally posted by mojoworking
That's the theory, but in reality it doesn't work like that. When was the last time you heard a white person use the word "******" in any context other than derogatory?
Haven't you just proved the point?

Originally posted by Tony
Haven't you just proved the point?

What point is that? That the word has been hijacked by the left and that no one else is allowed to use it unless they (the left) deem the context/usage politically correct/acceptable?

You could be correct.

Not really mojo.

I can't say that I have ever thought that '******' has been hijacked by 'the left'. Don't you think that's stretching a point too far?

It has historically always been used in a derogatory fashion.

However, some sections of black culture are (rightly or wrongly) reclaiming it to remove its power.

Darcus Howe has written a follow-up article regarding the programme in New Statesman magazine.


Darcus Howe on colour-coded Britain
Darcus Howe
Monday 16th August 2004



The hierarchy of skin colour presumes that Caribbean folk are at the bottom of the pile, writes Darcus Howe

Regular readers of this column who saw my documentary Who You Callin' a ******? on Channel 4 last Monday will be familiar with the issues it covered, such as the hostility of Caribbean people in Britain to newly arrived immigrants, particularly Somalis, who have fought for and won refugee status.

I tried to draw a line between "Pakistani" and "Muslim" youths, definitions not always interchangeable. In Walsall, the former have broken from the traditional way of life and emerged with a violent aggression directed at West Indians.

This is what is really new: the depth to which some British Asians have sunk in their unbridled hostility to those who were once fellow immigrants. The old adage stands: you become - if only in part - that which you fought against. It is not inevitable, but only progressive and radical thinking protects you against the peril. For example, I remember that during the age of black militancy all the old immigrant groups were comfortable with the definition "black". But our friends from the Indian subcontinent came to prefer "brown" and "Asian", which put them nearer to whites in the colour coding.

Now, young Pakistani men have gone further and demand that they be referred to as Pakistanis, which by inference includes Islam, and implies a lighter shade of brown. This hierarchy of skin colour presumes that all Caribbeans are darkies, which places us at the bottom of the pile. It is a miserable process. Take the racial garbage spewed forth against West Indians in Handsworth. Add the stench of decay from the mouths of Caribbean people in their tirades against Somalis. We are all consumed.

Some claim the film ought not to have been aired. They include Nitin Sawhney, pioneer of a music that mixes drum'n'bass with qawwali. I could understand his grief: fusing the music presupposes a fusion in society. The current conflict between West Indians and Pakistanis in Walsall undermines his life's work. They also include Shahid Malik, who is on the Labour Party's National Executive Committee and has found a safe seat in Dewsbury. His response to the programme was to charge me with incitement to racial hatred. My reply is as follows: the programme represents the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Once the various communities accept this, we are halfway to solving it.


This article first appeared in the New Statesman. For the latest in current and cultural affairs subscribe to the New Statesman print edition.