BBC diversity ‘champion’ (2006)

A white person cannot fulfil this role because, if they could, the role would then become instantly unnecessary. Whites would then be able to understand Their own tendency to stereotype – rather than comprehend – those different from Themselves. Whites wouldn’t then need to present Blacks in a bad light in the first place because They’d have more insight into what Blacks are really like – as well as insight into Themselves.

But, there you go, such jobs are always racial self-contradictions that the Blacks (& it’s always Blacks – to make the White Employers look good & all fired up about pro-diversity) who fill these oxymoronic roles who will be destroyed by them. Destroyed because no-one can live a non sequitur for enough time to be useful: About the length of time it takes to realise that the job is self-nullifying. Self-nullifying because every racist stereotype removed will be hailed by Whites as a victory for pro-diversity, rather than what it really is: Proof that Whites still hate Blacks because They’re still presenting stereotypes - and not people – in Their media.

Will the programme-makers resent being told by a Black that they are racists and try even harder to get covert racist messages into their programmes as a form of feeble protest about being told the awful truth about themselves? Will the Diversity Executive be tempted to appease White Racism by passing racist representations of Blacks in order to keep her job? And what happens when the BBC – not the Diversity Executive – decides that diversity has been achieved and there is no longer any need for a Diversity Executive? She will then become redundant and more overt racist messages will return to the BBC’s output; prompting calls for a Diversity Executive! Whites can then pat Themselves – yet again - on the back about Their self-evident, yet false, enthusiasm for racial diversity.

A diversity executive is merely a racial placebo behind which Whites can attempt to conceal Their racism behind a stance of anti-racism. As in La Ronde (Arthur Schnitzler 1862-1931 Austrian writer known for his psychologically penetrating and sometimes erotic novels and plays, particularly La Ronde (1896)), this is no more than a merry-go-round that goes nowhere and constantly repeats itself.

But, this born-again enthusiasm for diversity isn’t for recruiting more blacks to represent blacks in the media but in recruiting blacks to oversee White Output to ensure it doesn’t offend anyone - while still keeping the output resolutely White. A Diversity Executive is a pre-censor who can have racist material removed before it’s broadcast. Not to ACTUALLY make the BBC less racist but to make it APPEAR less so. This is for the simple reason that then we would be far less likely to see the racist material and, the BBC hope, far less likely to view the BBC as racist. But this material still exists – it just hasn’t been shown. And this is always the problem with censorship – you merely brush the dirt under the carpet, you do not actually eradicate it.

A Diversity Executive is thus playing the racists’ game by helping them conceal their racism rather than enabling them to deal with, and finally eliminate, it. This is proven by the fact that Whites have hired a black woman to do this. This not only stereotypes her as a so-called expert – because Whites think one Black (any Black) can speak for all Blacks – since all blacks are assumed to lack the very internal community diversity the BBC claims to be supporting. In addition, Whites need to hire someone to do this job because They cannot see for Themselves when They’re being racist - which just goes to show how far Whites still have to go to deal with Their inbred, acculturated racism.

If Whites renounced racism, the programmes might be better - rather than merely diverse - because a more disparate talent-base would be creating these programmes. But the BBC is merely an organ of the White Race talking to, and among, itself. This is why the post of Diversity Executive is merely a sticking plaster on the gaping wound of White Media Racism.

Wishful thinking if ever Frank TALKER heard it: ‘She will review programmes to ensure they are "culturally authentic".’ Programmes made by white people about white people don’t show us what white people are really like – xenophobic, parasitic, self-loathing, vacuous, alcoholic, sex-obsessed, etc. So how, in fact, are any programmes ever going to be ‘culturally authentic’ when they never have been in the past? There is no call for such ‘authenticity’ because Whites want escapism, not reality.

When was the last time you saw a programme made by Whites that was honest about the endemic failings of Whites? As well as one about the fact that White Culture and its attendant economy are in terminal decline. And that these things are being blamed on Blacks by ludicrously declaring that a small minority of allegedly inferior persons can bring any country of millions of people to its economic knees. How can supposedly inferior people do this, if they really are inferior? No White Frank TALKER knows wants to admit the abject and stupid nature of Their racial views.

Whites can’t even admit that terrorism is the inevitable result of the racist foreign policies of various White Countries; while simultaneously claiming that Whites have a strong tradition of fair play, justice and being welcoming to foreigners! To admit such a thing would be to admit that Blacks respond in similar ways to identical stimuli – to admit that Blacks are just as human as Whites. When have Whites ever done this convincingly?

This is the kind of fantasyland Whites live in but where is this ever mentioned in the White Media? (Even Whites know this, hence Their employment of a Diversity Executive to make it look as if They aren’t such a destructive culture.) The risk is that the person mentioning the negative basis of White Culture would most likely lose their job for giving the game away. As well as being labelled a race-traitor by his Fellow Whites into the bargain.

‘BBC director of TV Jana Bennett said the role reflected the BBC's commitment to audiences.’ No. Only of a desperate desire to convince audiences of the BBC’s ‘commitment to audiences’. Why wasn’t this done years ago since the proportion of Blacks in the population hasn’t changed much in a long time. Answer: Because the BBC doesn’t want to APPEAR racist, it doesn’t care if it really is or it wouldn’t have appointed a Diversity Executive – it would simpler to be diverse to begin with.

‘She said she hoped to deepen the BBC's relationship with all its audience by "opening it up to diverse talents and voices".’ This has been tried before but the BBC still presents a White view of the world while Black views are deemed extreme or irresponsible because They don’t conform with White views. The reason such initiatives don’t work is because Whites aren’t going to hand over a large share of the ability to communicate to the “enemy within” (Blacks). Whites fear that Blacks will broadcast messages antithetical to the White Hegemony Whites desire. (A classic example of this was President Bush’s plan to bomb Al Jazeera and to ban their broadcasts in the US because coded terrorist messages could have been transmitted. White Paranoia, of course.) And also because Whites use such initiatives to blame Blacks for Their own White Racism when Blacks don’t apply (& are rarely accepted if They do) to work for an organisation They don’t trust because it constantly badmouths Their Black Culture.

‘The emphasis will not be on quotas or box-ticking, but on focusing minds on the fact that television audiences are hugely diverse and they rightly expect to see themselves and their life experiences reflected on TV.’ Whites never say why They should address such concerns, unless They’re after increased audience ratings. It’s too late now because the distrust between the races is now so deeply entrenched; in any case, audiences have always been hugely diverse. There have been different religions, social classes and genders in this country since the year dot!

It’s only now that tv ratings are plummeting - despite the despair shown in commissioning crap like Big Brother because the Internet is forcing former broadcasters to narrowcast - that audience diversity suddenly becomes an issue. And, when Whites can use falling ratings for racial effect; that is, as Whites say, “Play the race card”, They will do so with as little racial guilt or shame as they possibly muster. They’ll do this while also trying to make it look as though They’ve been committed to audience diversity all along. This, despite the fact that the BBC has a monolithic, regional structure and broadcasts a single message to the whole country because it is an organ of a single, White Government, not an independent business enterprise.

The fact is that audience diversity is bad for ratings because a diverse audience is a small one. It’s taken the BBC a long time to awake to the reality of the greater choice of tv channels and other forms of entertainment currently available; which diversity reduces their share of that audience. Only uncontrolled immigration and procreating with reckless abandon could ever make the numbers up to the days when comedian Stanley Baxter was scoring an audience of 18,000,000 way back in the seventies.

‘Ms FitzPatrick's previous role at Channel 4 was as editorial manager of cultural diversity’. This proves that Whites have ghettoised this black woman because Whites can’t imagine that a Black could or should perform any other kind of job within a White Organisation. The job she does is itself an example of the lack of diversity within the BBC and within White Culture, as a whole, that the BBC represents. Whites are unwilling to hire Blacks for any other purpose because Whites don’t want Blacks competing with Whites for the greater variety of jobs that are NOT ethnicity-related. Or, to put it another way, the vast majority of available jobs are those that Whites decide are only to be done by Them; that is, that they ARE ethnicity-related – so long as your ethnicity is Caucasian.

The post of Diversity Executive is inherently racist because it’s always going to be reserved for Blacks – as a token of White Racism. This is designed to keep Blacks locked-up in employment ghettoes. This is a tacit admission that Whites can’t scrutinise Their own racism and deal with it effectively by renouncing it. This is precisely why a Diversity Executive won’t work. Because the post is designed to perpetuate the racism of only employing Blacks for certain, pre-defined tasks and to allow Whites to claim that Their incessant racism is not Their fault because They’re not aware of it. Although They’re not aware of it because They don’t want to be because They employ a Diversity Executive precisely to run away from such self-understanding.

It’s not a for a Diversity Executive to tell Whites that They are racist, it’s for Whites to find out about themselves and correct Their own attitudes. No Black Diversity Executive can ever do this for Them since change always comes from within, not without. If Whites can’t see Their own racism, Themselves, then how are Whites ever going to renounce Their racism. Change can only ever take place through self-recognition, not from being told by others that you are wrong. This is why so many addictions are hard to deal with.

The history of the White Race proves that Whites are never going to change Their racist ways.

After all, imagine a surgeon who had to be continually told by a “quality executive” that his operating technique was endangering his patients’ lives. Such a man should be struck off.

The same applies to a quality-control manager in a factory. The very fact you have to have such a manager proves that quality isn’t built into the manufacturing process from the start. All such non-jobs prove that quality assurance is considered to be no more than an expensive add-on to appease those who call for quality in all commercial and political processes for political reasons. They have nothing to do with dealing with the ostensible problems that they were allegedly designed to solve.

If one has to continually tell Whites that Their behaviour is racist and yet They continue to be so, then what is the point of telling Them since it does no good. The iterative pointing-out of White Racism is a waste of time and energy. Deliberately so since it’s designed to keep Blacks busy and away from the vital task of actually dealing effectively with racists. By their nature, racists are too stupid to understand themselves or the world so can’t change. As most criminals never reform, so racists never confront Their own racism.

If one has to continually tell another man that what he does just isn’t good enough then it would be better for him to be removed from his post. But how many BBC staff will be sacked for being racist? None, obviously, since this would decimate the ranks of the BBC. Also, because it’s cheaper to keep employing racists than to re-recruit and/or to employ more Blacks. Ultimately, the cheapest action is simply to hire a Diversity Executive since renouncing racism is the most expensive option and so is extremely unlikely to be followed.

Such anti-racism is just apolitical ghetto into which Blacks can be corralled – but only with Their approval – by Whites to convince Blacks to waste Their time and energy focussing on White Racism rather than Black Success. This ensures Blacks will be the failures Whites want Them to be so that Blacks aren’t economic competitors and so that Whites don’t have to work harder than They do now to support a good lifestyle. And yet White Racism isn’t a Black problem – it’s a problem that Whites must solve Themselves.

The racism inherent in the post of Diversity Executive is equivalent to telling rape victims that it’s their job to convince rapists that rape is a bad thing to do. And that they should refrain from doing it in the future. The reason Whites propose such ludicrous ideas is that they’re a tacit admission that Whites have neither the desire nor the incentive to renounce the racism that is the fundamental preoccupation and basis of Their culture. In other words, it helps Whites evade a responsibility which is solely Theirs by trying to foist it upon stupid Blacks who then take (pseudo-)responsibility for a problem that They haven’t originated. This effectively makes Blacks take the blame for the racism They experience created by Whites – who are to blame.

This is Diversity Executive idea is all Piss ‘n’ Wind, I'm afraid. What we need now is a white Diversity Executive to ensure that the Catholics get an equal look in! And one minus a foreskin for those of the Jewish persuasion!