Introduction
The old lines of demarcation between what was left wing and what was right wing are blurred:
Brexit, which was Labour policy in the 1980s, is now considered right wing.
NATO against which the left demonstrated, is now viewed with suspicion by the far right.
Antisemitism, once the yardstick by which we measured the right wing, was the reason the EHRC investigated the Labour Party.
Globalisation, once the demon of the far left and anarchist movements in the 1990s, is now the pet hate of the alt-right.
The split these days between ‘left’ and ‘right’ is to be seen in how we treat minorities. The right wing is more populist, and the left wing view is that the rights of minorities transcend the rights of the majority. Subject areas, where this has been seen, are listed below.
Halal compulsory in schools
Providing halal meat in schools is fine, providing it doesn’t replace non-halal meat and most meat eaters prefer non-halal meat. Across Kirklees, which is a borough of West Yorkshire 43 schools receive Halal meat via the authority’s catering service. Seventeen schools with predominantly Muslim children do not offer a non-halal meat alternative.
In Wales a local council was quizzed by a leading Conservative politician after a secondary school started offering “Halal only” lunches. Welsh Tory leader Andrew RT Davies approached the Vale of Glamorgan Council after a constituent flagged the issue.
The 2021 Census also revealed 0.9 per cent of the Vale of Glamorgan identifies as Muslim, with Cowbridge’s Muslim population dropping to 0.2 per cent. The proportion of people who identify as Muslim across Wales is slightly higher at 2.2 per cent.
Non-stunned Halal meat is being served in these Yorkshire schools – as council leader defends policy
Wales news: School serves ‘Halal only’ lunches as local council faces demands for urgent answers
Trans right v majority rights
The debate here is quite simple a small number of people, mostly men, want to be legally defined as women, insisting that it was their right, and that their ’rights’ should have precedence over any rights held by the majority, namely the right of women to single sex spaces.
“People should be allowed to live here if they want to”
The title reflects a view often heard when discussing immigration. It is quite plainly undemocratic. Self determination and autonomy are key components of a democracy, and self determination means that society’s majority opinion will determine immigration policy and who lives here, not some non-citizens whose relatives had a whip-round to get them across the Channel.
Those self-identifying compassionate people would quite clearly throw away the rights of a majority in favour of a non-elected minority.
Rights of asylum
The UK is a signatory of the 1951 Refugee Convention. Many countries like India, Pakistan and Bangladesh are not. These Commonwealth countries are not criticised for this, and Pakistan accepted one million Afghan refugees without being a signatory. Likewise Bangladesh has Rohingya Muslim refugees on its shores too
Fleeing conflict is one thing, using asylum as a feature of your immigration policy is quite something else. In November 2024 the Irish PM declared that his country was “at capacity” when it came to asylum claims. The country reached capacity by producing leaflets in many languages declaring that it didn’t just welcome all asylum seekers, it actively wanted them to come. So they did.
Unable to learn from this simple and obvious mistake there are people in the UK urging the government to do exactly the same by creating “safe and legal routes” to the UK for all and any who might want to come. That would certainly stop the boats and smash the gangs.
No-one yet has been brave or stupid enough to estimate how many applicants this might attract in a world where there are 100,000,000 people with refugee status. No-one has suggested asking the people whose country this is, whether they think this is a good idea either. The view though is that people wanting to come here have a greater right than those who live here and whose country it is.
Blasphemy laws
Every religion in this country is a minority religion. Two Muslims were murdered in the UK in the past ten years for the offence of blasphemy. They were murdered by fellow Muslims. Once you give a small group of people the idea that blasphemy should be punished, they’ll take you at your word.
There is no law against blasphemy, but a small minority would like to see one, and to have the right to punish any member of the majority for causing offence to their god or religion. They want the majority of people to be subject to their religious minority rules. Their views hold some sway and they are not without influence.
Recently the CPS charged a man with ‘intent to cause against religious institution [sic] of Islam, harassment, alarm or distress’, this despite the fact that laws protecting religions from harassment, alarm, or distress do not exist in this country. He had burned a book.
DEI
As a rule of thumb, it might be thought that when a certain demographic is disproportionately over-represented in a privileged sphere of life, then some form of remedial action needs to be taken. This is certainly true when the demographic is a majority demographic, but not the case when it’s a minority demographic holding the privilege.
According to Chat GPT White British people are under represented in many high profile and well paid sectors such as Premier League football, Athletics, medicine and healthcare, tech and IT, retail and hospitality, financial services, transport and on our TV screens. Nobody complains about this inequity.
In occupations traditionally regarded as dangerous or hazardous in the UK, White British workers are generally over represented. Nobody suggests that non-White workers should have better access to deep sea fishing, mining, quarrying, building, or agricultural work.
https://notwokedot.com/black-job-white-job-brown-job/
It’s not confined to paid work either. One of our woke charities is the RNLI. It does not publish data on the ethnicity of its volunteers. We can speculate why easily, but let’s broaden the question and see which demographics are active as charity volunteers.
Community Life Survey (England) – 2022/23
This is one of the most reliable sources, run by the UK government. Proportion of people doing formal volunteering (once a month or more) by ethnicity:
|
Ethnic Group |
Volunteering Rate (monthly or more) |
|---|---|
|
White |
~22% |
|
Mixed / Multiple |
~17% |
|
Asian / Asian British |
~15% |
|
Black / African / Caribbean |
~13% |
|
Other ethnic groups |
~14% |
✅ White British people are the most likely to engage in regular formal volunteering.
⚠️ Black and Asian groups are under-represented relative to their population share.
It is perhaps for the same reasons that White British predominate in areas of nationals service such as the Reserve Forces, regular Armed Forces, Firefighters, Police and Paramedics.
Universities
In many universities, especially selective ones (e.g. Oxford, Cambridge, Imperial), applicants from ethnic minorities who attend underperforming schools, are from disadvantaged areas, or have experienced systemic barriers may receive lower grade offers, be flagged for further consideration, be invited to special access schemes or summer schools. Universities run outreach programmes for school pupils from marginalised backgrounds, often including ethnic minorities.
Universities must show progress in closing gaps, e.g. between White and Black students in offer rates and degree outcomes. Some institutions offer bursaries or scholarships specifically for Black or minority ethnic (BME) students, refugees and asylum seekers, Gypsy, Roma and Traveller students
In the UK, universities set explicit goals to reduce or eliminate the attainment gap. As of recent years:
~81% of White students get a 2:1 or above
~68% of Black students do
So they change the curriculum to include “diverse perspectives and authors”. They avoid “Eurocentric” or “colonial” bias, especially important when teaching a degree in a European language in a country which shed its colonies several generations ago. This apparently helps ethnic minority students feel more engaged, valued, and intellectually represented, improving performance and confidence.
What they’re not telling us is that Indian and Chinese students are doing better than white students anyway, and are over represented in STEM degrees compared to their share of the population, are well-represented at top universities, including Oxford, Cambridge, Imperial, and UCL. Both groups achieve higher proportions of Firsts and 2:1s than White British students on average. That the Chinese and Indian students don’t require the curriculum to be de-colonised and also don’t suffer from Eurocentrism.
This is because of their culture. When Chat GPT produced a list of what high performing Black students said had helped them, it was a list of attributes, ethics, circumstances and attitudes which Chinese and Indian students would be all too familiar with, but which Black and White working class cultures lack.
In other words, the entire university curriculum must change, because some demographics won’t do what is required to achieve success.
Employment and Public Sector Recruitment
Positive action schemes in hiring and promotion (especially in the civil service, police, NHS) aim to increase ethnic minority representation, even when white applicants (especially from lower-income backgrounds) may be under represented.
Race-focused employee networks and leadership programmes (e.g. for “BAME leaders”) are often funded in ways that have no parallel for underprivileged white groups.
Media and Arts Funding
Public funding bodies (like the Arts Council or BBC) have diversity quotas or targets for minority representation in media, theatre, and film. Creative grants and competitions may be restricted to people from minority ethnic backgrounds, women, or LGBTQ+ artists, without equivalent offers to disadvantaged majority-group artists.
Government and Political Representation
Public discourse and policy documents often place emphasis on “representation” of minorities in government roles and panels, including gender and ethnicity targets, even though the working-class white population (especially outside major cities) is arguably the least politically represented group by class and region.
Will the tax-paying MAJORITY get annoyed at all this money being spent on minorities who are more economically inactive, with lower rates of employment and who are increasingly immigrating into the UK in large numbers?
Left leaning Chat GPT said:
Short answer: Yes, there is growing resentment among parts of the White working class — and it’s already shaping politics, identity, and trust in public institutions.
Perceptions of Unequal Treatment
Many working-class White people feel that they receive little targeted support, despite being one of the most disadvantaged groups in terms of education, health, and life expectancy. Minority groups seem to receive more attention, funding, or institutional advocacy — especially in areas like housing, university access, arts/media funding, and political representation.
This is made worse by being told they benefit from “White privilege” despite evidence of deep hardship in deindustrialised towns and rural communities. There is a lack of elite or media representation of their concerns (e.g. economic insecurity, lack of local investment).
Tensions over Public Spending
If working-class taxpayers feel that their taxes fund services they can’t access, or that others with lower contribution levels are receiving more targeted help (e.g. recent immigrants or long-term economically inactive groups), then resentment naturally follows — especially when public services (like the NHS, housing, and education) are under pressure. These concerns often aren’t just about race — they’re about fairness and the perception that contributions and effort aren’t rewarded equally.
Immigration and Economic Insecurity
High levels of immigration, especially in working-class areas, can create wage pressure or job competition (perceived or real), strain on housing, schools, and GP services. Cultural disruption will take place in communities already feeling economically and socially vulnerable. This can lead to the feeling that: “We’re being asked to adapt and sacrifice, while others are prioritised and protected.”
Political Impact
These concerns have already had political consequences:
Brexit was strongly supported by the White working class — partly due to concerns about immigration, economic neglect, and cultural change.
Decline in support for Labour in its traditional strongholds (Red Wall) reflects a sense of abandonment by left-leaning parties in favour of identity and urban-based politics.
Populist rhetoric — including from the right — increasingly speaks to these voters with language of fairness, belonging, and national interest.
Comparisons With The USSR
We live in a polity, a single nation-state of four nations, created by act of parliament, and which contains many ethnic and other types of minorities. In that respect the UK resembles the USSR, a polity which spontaneously imploded for a variety of reasons. One of those reasons is examine below.
In the 1970s and 1980s, per capita spending on minority ethnic groups in the Soviet Union was often higher than on ethnic Russians. This spending was strategic and political, not necessarily a sign of preferential treatment in power or status.
Ethnic and regional inequalities in spending, power, and development—including the disproportionate per capita spending on minority regions—contributed to the downfall of the USSR, though they were not the only or even the main cause. However, they played a significant role in the complex mix of internal pressures that led to the Soviet collapse.
Wealthier, more productive republics like Russia and Ukraine resented subsidising poorer Central Asian republics. These subsidies strained an already stagnating economy in the 1980s. As the Soviet economy faltered, this uneven burden became more politically visible. Ethnic Russians increasingly saw the USSR as a burden, propping up backward economies and being constrained by the multiethnic federal structure. Minority groups, despite higher spending, felt politically marginalized, with real power concentrated in Moscow and dominated by Russians. This created mutual distrust: minorities felt colonised, and Russians felt exploited and unappreciated.
The imbalance of spending and power between Russians and ethnic minorities was not the sole cause, but it exacerbated economic and political fractures. Combined with declining central authority, rising nationalism, and economic stagnation, it helped make the Soviet Union unravel along ethnic and regional lines.
The Fall of the USSR & and how favouring Ethnic Minorities brought this about – Not Woke
The 2024 Riots
HM Inspectorate of Constabulary investigated these “disturbances” is it termed them, and in its conclusions wrote:
The causes of the widespread disorder in 2024 were complex
“Taking all our evidence into account, we conclude that the causes of the widespread disorder were extremely complex. It isn’t possible to attribute the cause to one single factor.
Some people, including politicians, and many media outlets have suggested that the disorder was the result of well-organised and co-ordinated action by extremist groups. Others stated that the disorder was caused by deliberate, targeted disinformation from a variety of sources.
However, we found that the causal factors were more complex than were initially evident. Some of the main reasons for the widespread disorder were social deprivation, austerity and the economic downturn, political policies and decisions on migration and asylum, and decreasing trust and confidence in policing.
What is clear, in common with the recent policing history of disorder, is that an unprecedented event triggered the initial disorder. In this case, the murders of three young girls in Southport, compounded by some of the harmful online reporting that followed.”
The volume of this online content, and the overwhelming speed at which it was shared, further influenced widespread disorder. It served as a call to arms for large groups of disillusioned people.
