There was some appaling coverage on the Radio 4 Today programme this morning. Humphreys was going on about “political correctness” and challenging the need for a Black Police Association just because of Desai. I suppose the Gilligan thing still rankles. The whole piece was so crass it made me wonder whether BBC Radio 4 should be renamed BNP Radio 4.

And the need for a BPA is what, exactly?

So they can tell black people not to apply for jobs at the Met (as they did recently)?
Was Dizaei involved in that decision?

Are you really surprised at the “backlash”, such as it is?

The whole piece was so crass it made me wonder whether BBC Radio 4 should be renamed BNP Radio 4.

Or just the Beeb sniffing change and deciding to roll over for their new masters ?

Biggest tarts in the world the Beeb.

“Police corruption might not appear to have much in common with guitar-based rock bands. But what is beyond dispute is that both were so much better in the 1970s“ Does this mean that Black Metal guitar band Living Colour are also corrupt. The police seem quite good on life in mars 1970s althought I hear its fiction

Is this really about race?

Dizaei bears all the hallmarks of the sort of flawed individual, who, down the years, has exploited organisations, simply to further their own ends.

I’m sure there must be comparable wheelers & dealers in politics, banking, or the legal profession (to name but a few other professional spheres).

The first rule is to climb the greasy pole at all, and any cost (and as fast as possible), the second rule is avoid getting caught, and the third, should the situation arise, is to lie, lie and lie again – one thinks of the likes of Lord Archer, for example.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1424501.stm

I agree with Dave Osler, the main ‘crime’ committed by Dizaei seems to be hubris, but I very much disagree that jail is an appropriate sentence; professional ruin, and national disgrace are enough for most former hi-flyers to be dealing with, surely?

“Is this really about race?”

Well yes and no. Ultimately its got nothing to do with race. Except that the Dizaei has consistently turned it onto something racial with his complaints. This has played into the hands of the Daily Mail and their ilk who will use it as an example of “political correctness gone mad” and “broken Britain”.

My annoyance is the right-wing backlash has begun against the BPA and this case will haunt and undermine it for the foreseeable. When you look at the cold figures – BME policemen are more likely to go through formal disciplinary procedures, less likely to be promoted and leave in large numbers – all still point to an organisation with race issues. Of course you can argue about the tactics of the BPA but to question their need to exist – especially with the trite “what about a White Policeman’s Association” – is ignoring the facts.

I agree with Dave Osler, the main ‘crime’ committed by Dizaei seems to be hubris, but I very much disagree that jail is an appropriate sentence; professional ruin, and national disgrace are enough for most former hi-flyers to be dealing with, surely?

No, his main crimes were perversion of the course of justice, abuse of position and misconduct in public office. Four years seems pretty appropriate – it’s the same as Archer got for an equivalent offence.

A good article.

That Ali Dizael is a manipulative awkward bugger has been plain to see for the past 7 years, though I wasn’t sure the rumours had substance to them. It’s a shame we had to wait for him to pick on a member of the public for him to get his come uppance.

Earlier today I heard one of his former colleagues on the radio, a sergeant I think, who claimed to have been on the recieving end of his malpractice and spoke of his using the BPA to further his own desire for power – but was quite clear in saying he didn’t think he was a corrupt policeman.

I think the timing of the case sits neatly with the general outrage at the behavior of many MPs and rising expectations as to the standards of behavior for all types of public servants.

The whole Dizaei thing is a terrible blow for those of us brought up to expect nothing but good from black people.

Ghandi, Martin Luther King ,Mandela, Papa Doc to name just a few of the greats.

How we shivered with pride on the anti apartheid marches in the 70s.

How we encouraged our daughters to have black boy friends.

And to what avail ?

My faith in the world has been shattered.

Bloodnokk
The Savoy Wing
Broadmoor

I thought John Humphreys got bitch slapped out of the studio by both Paddick and the new dude who chairs the BPA. Quite amusing.

“Several members of my family have served in the force, and I can testify that at least until recently, ‘sootie’ was standard London copper slang for black people.”

Fascinating – now can I reveal that several members of my family have served in the force and can testify that racism is on the increase there because of the horrendous amounts of evidence that more crime is committed by black people and they are sick of having either to deny this or pussy foot around it, because people of people like Ali Dizaei?

It shouldn’t be about race, but about the appalling criminality of a senior police officer, but he sought to muddy the waters and make it abour race as a cover or shield for his awful behaviour. The more you focus on the race aspects of this, the more you implicitly or explicitly echo his deliberate obfuscation.
That said the BPA is in a fix now, having been used as a vehicle by Dizaei in which to shelter from scrutiny. It now has to completely denounce the man,no equivocation and it must go back through his actions and behaviour done in their name and examine them thoroughly to see if there are wrongdoings. They should also put stringent measures in place to prevent bullying and abuse of the system of the kind demonstrated by Dizaei. They must be able to root out those who hide behind the ‘race card’ to crooked,self-serving ends, which actually does a massive disservice to BME communities at large,let alone in the police.By doing this, they could clear the air and remove the unhelpful race angle that Dizaei deliberately kept floating to attempt to cover his tracks

Fair article, I think. It’s not about race. He wasn’t a victim of racism, nor was he promoted beyond his abilities because of ‘political correctness’ or any such nonsense. He’s just bent cop who got caught, no real lessons to be learnt.

Hello? His conviction was based on the testimony of an alleged petty criminal and a police forensic pathologist. It is a blatant fit-up. Do you know how many millions they spent chasing this man 1999-2003? They couldn’t convict him on a single thing. The gutter press has been unleashed on him now. I don’t believe it for a second. One day he’ll clear his name and the Humphreys of this world will be kissing up to him. Who takes part in vendettas when they’re out for dinner with their wife?

6. Stewart – “When you look at the cold figures – BME policemen are more likely to go through formal disciplinary procedures, less likely to be promoted and leave in large numbers – all still point to an organisation with race issues.”

No they don’t. They may suggest an organisation with race issues, but they do not point to one. There are any number of reasons why the police might get lower quality BME applicants. BMEs are less likely to finish their A levels, get good A levels, go to University and so on. Some communities, at any rate, do poorly at school. I am not sure the ones that do well prefer police work either. I have never met a British police officer of Chinese or Hindu South Asian origin. All by itself differing educational outcomes are likely to explain all of that.

“Of course you can argue about the tactics of the BPA but to question their need to exist – especially with the trite “what about a White Policeman’s Association” – is ignoring the facts.”

The line is not trite. You may well assert that racism is acceptable when used in a good cause but you can’t avoid the fact that it is still racism. And there are no facts that even suggest the BPA is a good idea. This man hid behind his Ali G’s style defence for decades. He should have been removed a long time ago. It is a pity it has taken so long for justice to catch up with him.

@ Asanka. Er, hello? Just because the site’s entitled Liberal Conspiracy doesn’t mean it’s the place to float conspiracy theories.

Why were the top commanders so affraid of him? Because of race I think.
They were outwitted by the tactics he and the BPA used.
And were even forced to promote him to Commander for hevans sake, after they knew he was a wrong ‘un.

The Tarique Ghaffur case was never resolved satisfactorily, and it was Ghaffur who helped Dizaie get off previous charges.

He should have been convicted of threatening behavior years ago for what he said to his girlfriend over the phone.

Oh yeah, Black Police Officers Assocations are racist because they are for black officers, not white officers.

That means:

Youth clubs are ageist because they are for young people, not old people.

Old people’s homes are ageist because they are for old people, not young people.

The Women’s Institutes are sexist because they are for women, not men.

You guys are great!!!!!!

15 Somuchfor…

“No they don’t. They may suggest an organisation with race issues, but they do not point to one. There are any number of reasons why the police might get lower quality BME applicants. BMEs are less likely to finish their A levels, get good A levels, go to University and so on. Some communities, at any rate, do poorly at school. I am not sure the ones that do well prefer police work either. I have never met a British police officer of Chinese or Hindu South Asian origin. All by itself differing educational outcomes are likely to explain all of that.”

So are you arguing that the police drop entry criteria for BME applicants? Because all we are talking about here is those BME candidates with the appropriate quals – which may explain why a smaller proportion of BME candidates apply to the police. However, it emphatically does not explain why they are more likely, in statistical terms, to be formally reprimanded and are not promoted in the same numbers.

“The line is not trite. You may well assert that racism is acceptable when used in a good cause but you can’t avoid the fact that it is still racism. And there are no facts that even suggest the BPA is a good idea.”

Of course it is – its pure sophistry. The reason it is required is because of the institutional racism of the force. Once that is no longer an issue then it will disappear.

“This man hid behind his Ali G’s style defence for decades. He should have been removed a long time ago. It is a pity it has taken so long for justice to catch up with him”

I agree totally, he did use the system. Of course were it not such a believable accusation to level at the Met then it would have been easier to see it for the ploy that it was.

I hate to lower the tone, but Melanie Phillips was on to this guy way back in 2003.
http://www.melaniephillips.com/diary/archives/000077.html

I don’t agree with her very often, but she seems to have been right about this.

”For both the Metropolitan Police and the Home Secretary have caved in to the moral blackmail and intimidation that is now corrupting our society. Dizaei claimed he had been the victim of a racist witch-hunt. Race activists in the police threatened to boycott the Met’s drive to recruit more ethnic minority officers, and planned a demonstration. The Home Secretary told the Metropolitan Police Commissioner to close the issue down. So the Commissioner has capitulated.”

How many 100,000’s of individuals are now in good positions because of political correctness and not merit ? The great dumbing down of Britain. His behaviour may be the norm for Tehran, but London NO.

So Much For Subtlety:

You may well assert that racism is acceptable when used in a good cause but you can’t avoid the fact that it is still racism.

Actually, you can in this instance. In current terminology from the field, racism and racial prejudice are explicitly distinct. Racial prejudice is defined, roughly, as discriminating based on race when irrelevant, such as in employment or legal contexts. It can equally apply to a Hackney local who happens to be Afro-Caribbean, and who sees a white man over 50 and assumes that man will be casually rude to him. It’s a prejudice based on racial generalisation, for all it’s a pretty likely guess in this example.

Racism, however, is defined as racial prejudice combined with systemic power. That is, unless you are of a group which in your polity is systemically advantaged your racial prejudice cannot be racism. So having a BPA can’t be a racist act; people of colour are not systemically privileged by Britian’s establishment. Equally, feminist organisations are not sexist; women are not systemically advantaged in the west.

To have a White Police Association would absolutely be racist; prejudice combined with power. Equally, a More Men In The Boardroom organisation would be sexist; men are already systemically advantaged by the western kyriarchy, so this would be prejudice combined with power.

Summary: prejudice is prejudice, it only becomes the relevant -ism when seen in a formula such as:

Racism = prejudice + power
Sexism = prejudice + power
JCI-ism = prejudice + power

and so on. For further reading, this is the best source I know.

21. Phunph

“How many 100,000’s of individuals are now in good positions because of political correctness and not merit ? The great dumbing down of Britain. His behaviour may be the norm for Tehran, but London NO”

Oh come on. I#m assuming because of the “tehran” comment you are trolling here.

You can’t really believe that hundreds of thousands of BME people are in jobs just because they are a minority. Its absurd. As is the claim that it is dumbing down Britain.

Racism, however, is defined as racial prejudice combined with systemic power.

Given that this guy demonstrated the systemic power to fight off disciplinary action and prosecution for so long, I don’t think that line of argument actually leads to the conclusion you are drawing from it.

23. Stewart,

Well I’m a WASP and cannot get a job because of BME’S getting priority throughout the recruitment process and beyond. And I am constantly reminded of incompetance brushed under the carpet.

22. John Q. Publican – “Actually, you can in this instance. In current terminology from the field, racism and racial prejudice are explicitly distinct”

Current terminology being defined by those who want to justify their racism and use of racist policies, not being defined by common usage or the majority of the speakers of English. Of course.

From now on I shall define Fascism as anyone who disagrees with me. After all it works for a large number of people here on LC. I expect you to conform to this usage. After all, I have no power here.

“Racism = prejudice + power”

Although that may have been partially true 50 years ago, to assert that BMEs do not have considerable power these days is absurd. Childish even.

18. John W. Booth – “That means: Youth clubs are ageist because they are for young people, not old people.”

Yes, John, that is precisely what that means. That is exactly what youth clubs are. Clubs that discriminate against people on the basis of their age. I hate to break it to you. You may think that this discrimination is justified. You may not. But you cannot deny it exists.

It is also a problem for the Courts. And the way that the Courts seem to work is to establish a hierarchy of discrimination. The more discriminated can demand the less discriminated, as defined by the Perpetually Aggrieved, have to make allowances. There was a lovely legal case in Australia where a Gay Gym was sued by some heterosexual women. The Gays-only policy was, of course, sexist. Should they have won? Also in Australia, the NSW Female Cricket team was sued by a player who had been cut because of her sexual orientation. The Captain said that she made the other players uncomfortable in the changing room and so should not be allowed to pay. A clear cut case of discrimination don’t you think?

19. Stewart – “So are you arguing that the police drop entry criteria for BME applicants? Because all we are talking about here is those BME candidates with the appropriate quals – which may explain why a smaller proportion of BME candidates apply to the police. However, it emphatically does not explain why they are more likely, in statistical terms, to be formally reprimanded and are not promoted in the same numbers.”

No I am not. I am only pointing out that there are good reasons for thinking other factors besides racism is at work. It does explain why they are more likely to be formally reprimanded and less likely to be promoted. Competence tends to go with educational level. People will be promoted until they fail. If more candidates from any ethnic background whatsoever are employed with lesser academic credentials (and perhaps abilities) they will be reprimanded more often and promoted less. After all, if the police recruited a lot of illiterate non-English speaking immigrants from, say, Nepal, I would tend to think they would violate people’s rights a little more often and get promoted a lot less. I am not saying that this is the case, I have no idea, but I am saying you cannot simply pretend these factors don’t exist and it is all down to racism.

“Of course it is – its pure sophistry. The reason it is required is because of the institutional racism of the force. Once that is no longer an issue then it will disappear.”

Well I don’t think your line was pure sophistry. Highly concentrated perhaps. You, again, assume what you feel no need to prove. I am sorry that you have a deep and abiding prejudice against the police, but the fact you do does not make the real world agree with you. There is no evidence at all the Force is racist in an institutional sense or otherwise.

And of course there is no rational reason *whatsoever* to think groups like the BPA will disappear. On the contrary all the evidence we have is that when such groups get preferential treatment, when they are successful rent seekers with a rent worth having, they become entrenched and institutionalised. Affirmative Action does not disappear when it is introduced. It becomes more complex and more important. It creates bureaucracies that never disappear. It becomes part of worf of ordinary life. India is not even close to abolishing its programmes. Nor is Sri Lanka. Nor is Malaysia. Nor is China. If we tolerate a racially based approach, the people who benefit will find reasons to continue their existence. Probably by screaming discrimination at the drop of a hat.

“I agree totally, he did use the system. Of course were it not such a believable accusation to level at the Met then it would have been easier to see it for the ploy that it was.”

Except it was never believable. Everyone knew what he was like. The MSM was even willing to go on record making it perfectly clear what sort of person he was like. Go back six years and read anything written about him outside the Guardian and the Independent. It may be true that you are so prejudiced against the police that you will believe anything he said, but I doubt that anyone else much in the country would agree. The jury deliberated for all of ten minutes. Think about that. Ten minutes. They did not bother to have a glass of water first.

John Q. Publican @ 22:

Racism, however, is defined as racial prejudice combined with systemic power.

You seem to have omitted a prepositional phrase of agency here. Could you clarify who does the defining here?

And in the interests of clarity, why doesn’t the BPA rename itself as the “Non-white police association”? Surely, it’s in everyone’s interests to be accurate?

Abritrary definition is a useful ploy for dissimulators, but only successful when used among those with uncritical faculties. Remember the famous example of Stokely Carmichael, coiner of the term “black power”, who was a big fan of the new Cuba:

Stokely Carmichael: “All white men are imperialists”.
Journalist: “What about Fidel Castro and Che Guevara?”
Stokely Carmichael: “Ah, but I don’t regard Fidel Castro and Che Guevara as white men.

29. Trofim – “Abritrary definition is a useful ploy for dissimulators, but only successful when used among those with uncritical faculties.”

Indeed. Also used by Goering who famously said he would decide who was a Jew.

This whole “power” thing is kind of interesting. Given that open Nazis are now very much a minority, does that mean that Copeland guy is not a racist? Given the decline of the KKK, does that mean that they are no longer racists either? Is the murder of abortion doctors not a Hate Crime because everyone supports abortion? Is a lynching of Jews in Poland pre-1945 not racism because Poles had no power, but one before 1945 is because Catholic Poles did? Given that after 1945 Poland was run by the Soviet Union, does it follow that isolated massacres of Jews were not racist because Poles had no power? I am utterly fascinated to see where this is going.

28. Somuchfor…

“I am only pointing out that there are good reasons for thinking other factors besides racism is at work. It does explain why they are more likely to be formally reprimanded and less likely to be promoted. Competence tends to go with educational level. People will be promoted until they fail. If more candidates from any ethnic background whatsoever are employed with lesser academic credentials (and perhaps abilities) they will be reprimanded more often and promoted less.”

So you do believe that the police drop the entry requirements for BME candidates? There are minimum standards for entry into the police which are universal, not racially based. Therefore the entire rest of your logic above falls apart.

“I am sorry that you have a deep and abiding prejudice against the police, but the fact you do does not make the real world agree with you…. It may be true that you are so prejudiced against the police…”

Where do you get the impression I have anything against the police? To say they are institutionally racist does not equate with a deep seated hatred of them. You really need to argue with the words on the screen not the caricature in your head.

The BPA are not an affirmative action group. They are not asking that their members should be promoted, or even hired, because of their race. What they are saying is that BME offices have to be treated equally with their white counterparts or the police will remain a white bastion. This is a particular problem for the Met as the police the most culturally diverse in Europe. A police force must reflect the society which it protects if it is to get their consent. The concept of consent is fundamental to British police.

31. Stewart – “So you do believe that the police drop the entry requirements for BME candidates? There are minimum standards for entry into the police which are universal, not racially based. Therefore the entire rest of your logic above falls apart.”

I have made no such claim. I assume that the majority of people who apply to the police are well above the minimum level entry requirement. It is just that some communities that report lower educational outcomes are likely to produce more candidates that are closer to that minimum than some other communities.

By all means, when you have understood my point, feel free to explain how it falls apart. Besides repeatedly implying I have said something I have not, how do you think you’re doing on that score?

“Where do you get the impression I have anything against the police?”

You normally like racists do you? I would tend to think that anyone who thinks someone is a racist tends not to like them much. Wouldn’t you?

“To say they are institutionally racist does not equate with a deep seated hatred of them. You really need to argue with the words on the screen not the caricature in your head.”

I have not used the words “deep seated hatred”. You, on the other hand, have repeatedly asserted the police are racist and worse. Despite having no evidence for this view whatsoever, or at least not presenting any. The problem with an empty caricature is not mine.

“The BPA are not an affirmative action group. They are not asking that their members should be promoted, or even hired, because of their race. What they are saying is that BME offices have to be treated equally with their white counterparts or the police will remain a white bastion.”

Yes and I have a bridge to sell. It is clear that their idea of “equally” is measured by promotions and hirings. So if BMEs are not being promoted it is because of “racism”. This amounts to a policy of AA, unless, of course, the police are racist.

“This is a particular problem for the Met as the police the most culturally diverse in Europe.”

So not very racist then are they?

It is shame that HP is making it a race issue. There are no corrupt white coppers ?

John Q
publicanism = bigotry + no power

@32 So Much For Subtlety: “I assume that the majority of people who apply to the police are well above the minimum level entry requirement.”

A pedantic point from me… Anyone can apply to become a police officer, and applicants are judged on their suitability. Thus your sentence should read: “I assume that the majority of people who *are accepted into the police* are well above the minimum level entry requirement.”

I know a couple of young, white, non-graduate but well schooled men who applied to become police officers. The applications were rejected and the young men were advised to work in a couple of jobs, get some experience of life, and then re-apply. Which they have successfully done.

In their circumstances, I would have been pissed off if a minority candidate with equal qualifications had been selected in their place. But that was not the case, as far as we know. And anyone who has been through selection/appointment training in the public sector will have learned that if you discriminate in selection in any way, you may rightly be up in front of an employment tribunal. The lads just needed to grow up a bit before joining the police force.

And if the Dizaei story is a bit of a mystery to you, just google for “Dean solicitor Dizaei”. Much racism but also illumination.

Absolute nonsense to suggest that there is as much consternation about this case as there is because Dizai is, erm, ‘black’. That is heavily implied by arguing that this case is not a muti-million pounds one.

That misses the point. The reason why there is so much dismay is that Criminal Ali should have been disciplined internally before now, but the politically correct Met was scared to do so. He was compensated and promoted instead, despite admitting lying. That is gross misconduct and he should have been dismissed.

It should never have been allowed to happen and there should be an independent inquiry.

“Sections of the left, for the best of motives, might be tempted to agree. The extent of racial prejudice in the Met is shocking. Several members of my family have served in the force, and I can testify that at least until recently, ‘sootie’ was standard London copper slang for black people.”

I have got the 1970s on the phone for you – they want their racist insults back. I think you are making this up, frankly.

“You only need to walk around the capital with your eyes open to know which kids get the most street hassle.”

An inexorable result of most street level crimes being committed by people with a specific ethnic background? It would be negligent for the Police’s work not to reflect this. Afre the New Year shootings in Birmingham in 2003, the parents of Ellis lamented the fact that the lack of Police presence was because the POlice didn’t care about black people. Yet, it was the arrest of a black man about a tax disc that led to riots 18 years earlier.

Just WHAT are the Police to do?

Not putting up with corruption and lies because they were committed by a ‘black’ officer would be a good start, I suggest.

Soru @24:

I think you have failed to understand what ’systemic’ means in context; for example, in this instance the system in question is not the Force. It’s also a mistake replicated three or four times by others in the thread below, I really can’t think why.

SMfS @26:

I’d just like to officially say GODWIN! and leave it at that. Those who Godwinated themselves later in the thread, consider yourself covered.

In answer to your question, I’m going to quote what I wrote:

In current terminology from the field, racism and racial prejudice are explicitly distinct.

That is, the current technical lexicon in the multi-disciplinary field of race relations [1], that being the academic field which studies our current topic. Many traditional disciplines, including history, archaeology, political science, psychology, anthropology, anatomy, migratology, religious studies and english literature all contribute to the field. This is the current consensus definition. I did make that fairly clear, and even provided a further reading link, yet you went on to say:

Current terminology being defined by those who want to justify their racism and use of racist policies, not being defined by common usage or the majority of the speakers of English. Of course.

From now on I shall define Fascism as anyone who disagrees with me.

Not only did you autoGodwinate, you also illustrated a complete failure to bother reading what I’d written. I told you exactly who defined the terms; those who work in the field professionally. They seem like the best candidates to me. Since I would hope political debate here is well above “general usage” competency mark, and since I did specify that the definition was technical, I’m not sure how you got confused. The next one, on the other hand:

“Racism = prejudice + power”

Although that may have been partially true 50 years ago, to assert that BMEs do not have considerable power these days is absurd. Childish even.

is fairly obvious where you went wrong. It’s called quote-mining: you carefully failed to pay any attention at all to my actual argument, clipped out the bullet-point version, and are trying to pretend that makes a difference. This kind of thing is precisely why I also said, and said first for the hard of thinking:

Racism, however, is defined as racial prejudice combined with systemic power. That is, unless you are of a group which in your polity is systemically advantaged your racial prejudice cannot be racism.

The closest you could get to attacking my argument was by misquotation followed by apparent misunderstanding. Good trick.

Trofim @29:

You seem to have omitted a prepositional phrase of agency here. Could you clarify who does the defining here?

I didn’t omit it at all. Current terminology from the field, i.e. academic consensus on the technical use of language in the field in question. I was quite clear about it, yet somehow both you and So Much For Sense above managed to miss it. I’ve repeated the points just above, so I’ll not C&P them again.

And in the interests of clarity, why doesn’t the BPA rename itself as the “Non-white police association”? Surely, it’s in everyone’s interests to be accurate?

It is accurate. Bigots collectively describe People of Colour as “blacks”. This is an organisation of those people to defend themselves from an institutional racism which is and has been an established reality since at the very, very latest the murder of Stephen Lawrence. The precise reason why Dizaei being a bent copper is so catastrophic is that it opens a door for people to criiticize a necessary organisation, and an entire category of officers, on specious grounds; more or less what’s happening here.

Your restatement of the No True Scotsman fallacy seems to be a complete non sequitur, although always an amusing anecdote? The definition I quote isn’t arbitrary.

Golden Gordon @34:

*cackle* that’s very good. It’s something I’ve also noticed is entirely true of a hefty chunk of the profession. They are, on average, those publicans responsible for the recent figures, don’t know if you’d heard, where 56 pubs a week were going down? Cask Ale Report made it clear that these were overwhelmingly inner-city, cheap-lager VDEs, which is exactly where I’m used to publicanism equaling bigotry without power.

[1] Possibly worth noting that most of the progress made in the English language in this field is from the American academe.