The final moments of Henry Nowak, the 18-year-old Anglo-Polish student murdered by a Sikh in the English city of Southampton in December, constituted an exercise in double standards. Confronted by the twin sights of an unarmed white boy lying bleeding to death on the floor, and a brown boy with a knife claiming to have been the victim of a racial assault, attending police officers (themselves all white) chose automatically to believe the brown boy, handcuffing Henry rather than immediately calling for an ambulance. One cop’s weary response to Nowak’s repeated gasps that he had been stabbed—“I don’t think you have, mate”—has now become indisputable proof of the two-tier racial policing regime which now prevails across the entire country.  

Or has it? According to some on the British left, this is all just a subjective perception. At no point did the officers involved explicitly say “We’re believing you because you’re cold milk, and the other boy’s hot coffee.” Therefore, those who have seen the released bodycam footage have to rely upon their own personal interpretations of why precisely the officers acted as they did. To most sane observers, the reason seems pretty obvious: D.E.I. made Nowak D.I.E. 

To other commentators with a stake in wishing to deny this, however, like Deputy Prime Minister and long-time black activist David Lammy, there is no such thing as two-tier UK policing, and the constables acted recklessly not through in-house antiwhite indoctrination, but only through sheer incompetence, a subject on which, to be fair, Lammy himself is a world expert. To reassure a shaken nation there was indeed no such thing as two-tier racial policing, Lammy then went on TV to patiently explain how—wait for it—different races needed to be treated in different ways by the police.

“Look, there are particular circumstances in which, of course, the police have to go a bit deeper than treating everybody equally,” Lammy told the BBC. The truly bizarre example Lammy concocted was that of expecting an Orthodox Jew to turn up at a police station to be arrested on a Saturday, this being their holy Sabbath, a requirement which was “unacceptable.” So, if you’re a Christian, make sure you commit your murders on a Sunday, or on a Friday if you’re a Muslim, and you’ll have a full day free to make your getaway. 

As well as Deputy PM, David Lammy is also currently the UK Justice Secretary. This fact alone helps explain quite a lot. 

Rage, Rage, Against the Dying of the White

The reaction to the murder on the UK’s political right has been unanimous: burn the bad lawbooks. Rupert Lowe, leader of the hard-right Restore Britain party, called for the end of the “rife antiwhite filth that has infected Britain,” demanding the repeal of various aggregated laws imposed since the election of Tony Blair and his New Labour constitutional vandals in 1997, which, collectively, amounted to one gigantic “antiwhite monstrosity.” Lowe promised that a Restore Britain government would “Replace it all with one simple Act that ensures every British citizen is equal before the law and positively outlaws antiwhite discrimination, so as to prevent judges from reading their own prejudices into the law.” For calling for such explicitly antiracist legislation, Lowe was, naturally, labelled a racist.  

The British establishment has worked hard for the past 30 years to develop this unjust regime and has no intention of giving it all up just because some stupid white kid got stabbed to death by a man in a turban or something. Andy George, head of the National Black Police Association (there is no National White Police Association) called the demands of men like Lowe a ridiculous “auto-correction” that was “reactive to the current swell that we’re seeing in social media.” The danger, George said, was that reforms made now would be rushed and ill-thought out, as “we’ve never seen policing move as quick as what they’re advocating for right now.” 

Apart from in May 2020, that is, when George Floyd was “murdered” by the large amount of drugs he had previously ingested, when Andy’s own National Black Police Association itself demanded that UK policing leaders “act decisively to take necessary and swift action” by reforming the entire British justice system in response to what it opportunistically called “racism as a public health crisis.” Unfortunately, the UK Government did indeed act swiftly and decisively, implementing a National Police Race Action Plan, which explicitly repudiates “treating everyone ‘the same’ or being ‘color blind’”— i.e., institutionalizing two-tier policing. 

Hampshire Police Force, which has responsibility for the area where Henry Nowak was murdered, has wasted over £850,000 on mandatory DEI training for officers over the past three years. The likely effect of this training upon the mindset of those who took it can be judged by the fact that, on subsequent evaluation forms, one in seven officers complained of being “controlled and pressured” to adopt leftist race dogma, or worried that “mistakes [of a racial nature] would be held against me” by superiors. Given this, it is hardly unreasonable to suspect the Hampshire Police officers who presided over Nowak’s death, who presumably underwent such preparation, will have been ideologically or professionally affected by it.

So, in a sense, Andy George is correct after all in saying that over-hasty political responses to police-related deaths can sometimes be ill-advised and counterproductive: his own organization’s over-hasty response to the death of George Floyd proves it.  

Straw-Man Arguments

The genesis of the circumstances surrounding Nowak’s death goes back far further than 2020, of course. In 1993, a black 18-year-old named Stephen Lawrence was stabbed to death at a London bus stop by some white men in a racist murder. The subsequent Metropolitan Police investigation was by all accounts somewhat inept, but this was perceived by left-wing black activists not as ordinary inadvertent incompetence, but as resulting from the deliberate or unconscious racism of the officers involved.

By his own admission, when he came into office as Tony Blair’s first Home Secretary in 1997, New Labour grandee Jack Straw was eager to set up an inquiry into Lawrence’s murder, designed to condemn alleged racism in the British Police Force, one of his very first acts. These days, in light of Nowak’s death, Straw now thinks things have gone too far. Yet he is too blinkered to realize that they were always supposed to go too far.

The man chosen by Straw to oversee the inquiry was a retired judge, Sir William Macpherson, who lived in a big Scottish castle, from whence he had once seen 10 minutes of The Cosby Show on TV. His abysmal Macpherson Report, published in 1999, has since constantly been cited as “proving” the widespread existence of “institutional whiteness” in the British Police Force. It didn’t. It merely demonstrated the existence of institutional shiteness in the British Police Force, which Macpherson then arbitrarily attributed to racism, because various black radical groups were whispering in his wide-open ears that this could be the only possible explanation for police misconduct.

For instance, when asking Lawrence’s parents to ID their son’s body in the hospital on the night of the murder, the presiding detective’s words were arguably a bit awkward, embarrassed, and blunt. This may well simply have been because it is never an easy task to inform families their child is dead. But Lawrence’s mother viewed this as being due to “racism” instead, and so, mechanically, to Macpherson it was. His report even implies the white Christian couple who found Lawrence bleeding to death in the street, took him into their house, and washed his wounds clean, were “racist” too, on account of the fact they momentarily hesitated before aiding him. Everyone involved, bar the actual murderers, denied racism. Yet racism was perceived by outsiders, and so, automatically, Macpherson ruled it must therefore have existed, meaning the entire UK justice system now had to be remade from top to bottom to rectify this “fact.”

Principles of Perception

This idea is now formally codified in UK law as “The Macpherson Principle,” which, as per Recommendation 12 of his 1999 report, officially defined for the police a racist incident as being “any incident which is perceived to be racist by the victim [not “complainant,” do note] or any other person,” even a self-evidently malicious one. The Macpherson Principle was officially adopted throughout the UK justice system in 2007, with Kafkaesque Metropolitan Police advice to anyone who feels themselves the victim of a hate-crime now reading as follows:

Subscribe Today

Get daily emails in your inbox

Email Address:

Evidence of the hate element is not a requirement. You do not need to personally perceive the incident to be hate-related. It would be enough if another person, a witness or even a police officer, thought that the incident was hate-related.

Such bizarre thinking, which makes you guilty of racism explicitly without any “evidence of the hate element” being needed, reveals the Macpherson Report as little more than a secular witch-hunting manual, a modern-day left-wing Malleus Maleficarum. At the time, those few persons who actually bothered to read all several hundred pages of Macpherson’s drivel warned cases like that of Henry Nowak would be the inevitable result if its findings were implemented. Now, 27 years later, such Cassandras have at last been proven right.

Applying Macpherson’s ideas to the Henry Nowak case may, ironically, prove an excellent means to finally defeat them, however. According to the officially recognized Macpherson Principle, if any observer of the relevant bodycam footage perceives Hampshire Police’s actions against Henry as being racist against whites, then, automatically, that should function as proof that they were. Or does this sacred post-Blair legal principle not apply to white people? Because if that is so, then that in itself is undeniable proof of a two-tier UK racial justice system, is it not?