“Sorry if you were offended” does not cut it, Diane

When Diane Abbott apologised for “any offence caused” over her racist comments, it was not a real apology - which is worse than none at all.

 

Last month, Left Foot Forward criticised Nazi-theme party attender/organiser Tory MP Aiden Burley for his non-apology over the issue.

Alex Hern wrote:

The MP has apologised – twice – albeit choosing his words carefully.

His first apology came in the original article:

“There was clearly inappropriate behaviour by some of the other guests and I deeply regret that this happened.

“I am extremely sorry for any offence that will undoubtedly have been caused.”

He made a similar statement on Twitter the day after. It may simply be that he doesn’t know that “I’m sorry” and “I’m sorry other people were bad and that you were offended” are different, but as apologies go, it leaves much to be desired.

Well, Diane Abbott has pulled a similar trick with her non-apology, following her twitter comments last night that ‘White people love playing divide & rule’

She said:

“I understand people have interpreted my comments as making generalisations about white people.

“I do not believe in doing that. I apologise for any offence caused.”

Something is either OK or is wrong. If it is OK, there’s no need for an apology but if it’s wrong, one is needed.

What Diane Abbott said was wrong and she needs to apologise for it – not any effect it had. Politicans need to learn that a weasel-worded apology is worse than none at all.

See also:

• Nazi Party Tory is sorry you were offended – Alex Hern, December 12th 2011

Action must be taken whenever racism rears its ugly head – including in sportSabby Dhalu, December 13th 2011

Too many on the Left are continuing to promote Islamic extremistsGeorge Readings, November 12th 2011

Four old acquaintances that Livingstone should forget – Daniel Elton, May 3rd 2011

The dehumanising rhetoric undermining the student movement – David Barclay, April 17th 2011

46 Responses to ““Sorry if you were offended” does not cut it, Diane”

  1. Daniela Midjecal Jurczyk

    She isn’t pretending to be oppressed, at no point did she ever mention feeling oppressed. She did say she was OFFENDED, like a lot of people are. OFFENCE and OPPRESSION are different you know?!
    I also read the link you posted. Whilst I think the term reverse racism is stupid, (racism is racism, surely reverse racism means non discriminatory) It is completely stupid to say only white people are capable of being racist. Did you know worldwide less than 25% of the population are white? Which completely collapses the argument that the article makes.
    Anyone who is in anyway racist shouldn’t keep there job. I think she can shove her apology up her @rse and should be sacked.
    Also John, even read in context she does refer to whites – not historical whites, not some whites, not whites in power or whites in the media, but whites. So that does mean people like kerrirenee. She has also made a whole load of racist comments in the past, like how west indian mothers are better than others, David cameron is a posh white boy and that when public service sector jobs are lost white men should loose their jobs but not blacks. People who are crap at there jobs should go first – like her.

  2. Nishma Doshi

    @NilamAtodaria did you see this: http://t.co/DaRUHULO ? WTF?!

  3. Nishma Doshi

    How to know that @leftfootfwd is made of New Labour twats: http://t.co/b89xOXmK

  4. Liam Barrington-Bush

    I think the ‘something is right or wrong’ dialogue is where this article screwed up… Dianne Abbott wasn’t very tactful. More nuance would have made her point stronger. That’s totally different from ‘racism’ or ‘reverse racism’ or anything else… if someone being offended by something makes it ‘wrong’ and requiring of an apology, any opinion would qualify. This approach doesn’t promote healthy dialogue. I think Abbott’s response was appropriate for the worrisome over-reaction of liberal whites who happen to have a tender spot about being reminded that we were born with privilege and thus whether we like it or not, there are ways in which we continue to reinforce systems of oppression.

    More fundamentally, the telling thing to me in many of the comments, and from this article itself, is that there are supposedly progressive white people who really feel this is a fight worth fighting. THAT is as much an indicator of privilege as anything else – that the worst thing you have experienced, in a time when the Government is exterminating the welfare state, is an MP making a slight generalisation on Twitter (a platform that practically enforces generalisation, due to the character limit)! Honestly?! Really?

    To those who are really concerned with fighting oppression, I’m sure you can find better things to do with yourselves – the implications of that Tweet are minimal at worst. The implications of trying to keep a dialogue about white privilege out of the open are potentially devastating…

  5. Liam Barrington-Bush

    I think the ‘something is right or wrong’ dialogue is where this article screwed up… Dianne Abbott wasn’t very tactful. More nuance would have made her point stronger. That’s totally different from ‘racism’ or ‘reverse racism’ or anything else… if someone being offended by something makes it ‘wrong’ and requiring of an apology, any opinion would qualify. This approach doesn’t promote healthy dialogue. I think Abbott’s response was appropriate for the worrisome over-reaction of liberal whites who happen to have a tender spot about being reminded that we were born with privilege and thus whether we like it or not, there are ways in which we continue to reinforce systems of oppression.

    More fundamentally, the telling thing to me in many of the comments, and from this article itself, is that there are supposedly progressive white people who really feel this is a fight worth fighting. THAT is as much an indicator of privilege as anything else – that the worst thing you have experienced, in a time when the Government is exterminating the welfare state, is an MP making a slight generalisation on Twitter (a platform that practically enforces generalisation, due to the character limit)! Honestly?! Really?

    To those who are really concerned with fighting oppression, I’m sure you can find better things to do with yourselves – the implications of that Tweet are minimal at worst. The implications of trying to keep a dialogue about white privilege out of the open are potentially devastating…

Comments are closed.