Counting Cats in Zanzibar Rotating Header Image


The Guardian’s CiF writer Lemn Sissay is advocating what can only be described as apartheid. Oh and he also launches into a deranged (and irrelevant) rant on gollywogs and refers to children as “resources”. It’s truly a class act!.


  1. Ian B says:

    It’s only teh racism if teh whitey does it, you knows.

  2. Lynne says:

    If it walks like a cunt and talks like a cunt…

  3. Peter MacFarlane says:

    “…the Association of Black Social Workers and Allied Professionals…”


    Is this even legal?

    Is there an Association of White Social Workers and Allied Professionals?

    If not, why not?

  4. bloke in spain says:

    No doubt the writer would prefer if black people had special reserved seats on buses. At the back, maybe?

  5. RAB says:

    This cunt hugs his racism like a gun doesn’t he?

    The important bit is this…

    “the failure of the social services departments to recruit enough black foster and adoptive parents”.

    Ah yes THEIR failure. So what are they supposed to be doing then? Going out on the street and lassooing black people and forcing them to be adoptive parents? If they don’t come forward then they don’t come forward, and the kids should be placed with whoever is prepared to love and care for them. Because that’s all kids need, love and security, whatever the colour of the skin of the parent providing it.

    Of course the reason for the shortage of black and Asian adoptive parents is rooted in their attitude to progeniture. Which basically boils down to… If the kid aint mine, I don’t want anything to do with it. And as is so often in the case of Afro Caribbean males, they don’t want anything to do with them even if they are theirs. A prime example of this kind is that great race crusader, Darcus Howe, who has 7 kids by five women and always pisses off into the sunset the moment they are born.

    I know at least 8 Afro Caribbean mothers none of whom live with the father of their children, oh except one. She is married to a white guy. Funny that.

    Yet this Sissey cunt wants to perpetuate the horror of having black kids perpetually in the care of the local authorities out of some stupid notion about identity politics. Any loving home, whatever the colour of the parents skin, will be a million miles better for the child than the institutionalised prison of a Council care facility, and this twat must know that, but he seems intent on building yet another generation of victims.

  6. Edward Lud says:

    I’m a honkey. My daughter, bearing in mind her mother’s origins in Ceylon, is half-wog (at 3, she (the daughter, not the mother) looks like a cross between Princess Jasmine from Disney’s Aladdin and the same organisation’s Mowgli, ie, cute as the proverbial button). If my wife and I were killed by the falling body of a random orphan throwing himself off the roof of the local borstal, then how, in Sissay’s utopia, would it be decided which set of grandparents young princess Jasmine ends up with?

  7. Stonyground says:

    Is it a possibility that online newspapers are now deliberately employing utterly witless columnists in order to generate traffic in the comments?

  8. NickM says:

    I think the issue fundamentally is this guy doesn’t believe at all in individuals – only communities and he looks at mixed-race adoption as diluting black culture – whatever that is.

    Yes, it’s enough to have Rosa Parks spinning in her grave and it’s a shame we couldn’t arrange a debate with thee is moron and the shade of MLK.

    You don’t say…

  9. Stonyground says:

    NickM, I infer from that last comment that I must be the last bloke to catch on.

  10. David Gillies says:

    Identity politics is evil because it treats people as means rather than ends and so violates the Golden Rule.

  11. NickM says:

    Stony, nah…

    I’d like to say something clever here (but have to cook dinner). A first order approximation though would be “Yes!” Much more on that to come round here but I had to just say “Yes” with the caveat that I always assumed the GR was based upon individual interactions of people and not the alleged “rights” of groups as groups.

  12. RAB says:

    And what’s wrong with a gollywog anyway?

    Er, well quite. What is wrong with them?

    Quick anecdote… I had a CO on my section in the Crown Court called Sam, this is the late 70s early 80s when the whole bruhaha about Robinson’s Gollys was beginning to start. He was a big strapping Afro Caribbean lad who loved sport and had the looks of a Sydney Poitier. He had collected the full set of Robinson’s Gollys and was very proud of them. He told me he thought they were role models not denigrating or demeaning at all, especially the Tennis player one, and the Golf one, at a time before Arthur Ash or Tiger Woods had turned up on the sporting scene. He thought they were asperational, showing that Black folks could do anything white folks could do.

    I had a golly as a kid too (I didn’t collect the Robinson’s set, I have never been much into collecting stuff except books and records) and all it made me feel was benign warm and affectionate to my toy. Just like Sam did to his enamel badges.

    But neither of us was a fuckwit racist Guardianista.

  13. Edward Lud says:

    Indeed, Rab. I can still remember the early days of ‘political correctness gone mad’, between about 1986 and 1990, after which fighting it became, for most, too much trouble and it instead became default.

    The problem with satire, or even with facts which are as awful as satire, is that neither ever prevents the encroachment of the awful.

    On the other hand, remember Derek Hatton and “deNIGRATE”? We’ve heard nothing of that madness since ’87. A battle won, a war lost.

  14. Paul Marks says:

    Nick – life is bad enough without going on the Guardian site.

    Unlike the BBC or the Economist (or….) the Guardian does not pretend to be anything but what it is – a leftist rag.

    It is utterly evil – but it is SUPPOSED TO BE EVIL.

    Complaining about the Guardian is like rolling in a trench full of pitch and then (on comming out) saying “I am covered in pitch…..”

  15. NickM says:

    Got to disagree. I disagree with much Guardian editorial content but as The Times is behind a paywall (and wasn’t worth it beforehand anyway) and The Telegraph increasingly dumbs down (why does it have to explain every Google Doodle? what is left. Anyway that is not the point. I think it is important to point out such flagrant nonsense and (in this case, certainly) evil munterings. DK has an entire category on his blog, “Polly is wrong – again!”.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *