From pioneer to problem: what Diane Abbott’s suspension says about race equity in the UK today

In a recent BBC interview, the veteran MP Diane Abbott was asked whether she regretted a 2023 letter to The Observer, where she argued that Jewish, Irish and Traveller communities experience prejudice “similar to racism,” but not the same as the racism faced by people of colour. Her reply “No, not at all” has led to another year-long suspension from the Labour Party.

“Clearly, there must be a difference between racism, which is about colour and other types of racism,” she said. “I just think that it’s silly to try and claim that racism, which is about skin colour, is the same.”

Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner said she was “disappointed” by Abbott’s defence of her earlier comments, adding: “There’s no place for antisemitism in the Labour party.” 

Background on Diane Abbott's suspension

Diane Abbott is the longest-serving woman MP in the UK. She’s faced relentless abuse throughout her career, much of it racist, and much of it from within her own party. The 2022 Forde Report, commissioned by Keir Starmer, laid this out clearly: among other comments made about other Black MPs, WhatsApp messages from Labour staff referred to Abbott as “truly repulsive,” mocked her for crying in a toilet, and even suggested tipping off journalists.

And just last year, we covered the disgraceful comments made by Tory donor Frank Hester, who said that looking at Diane Abbott made him “want to hate all Black women” and that she “should be shot.” His defence rested on his own experience of discrimination as the child of Irish immigrants in the 1970s, and yet he was let off, still lining Conservative Party pockets with millions late into the year.

Her point isn’t even controversial 

Frankly, it is this exact differential treatment and confusion regarding how racism is experienced that is precisely why Diane Abbott made her point. Racism experienced by different communities is not the same. That’s not a denial of antisemitism or anti-Irish prejudice. It’s an observation rooted in lived experience and data.

Skin colour and how someone “passes” day-to-day shapes how they’re seen and treated. It may seem like common sense, but clearly it isn’t. That visual difference combined with historic oppression influences and forms stereotypes and labels, which are not only harmful, but shift depending on how someone presents and situational factors. All of this results in differential treatment in institutions, in workplaces, in the media, and in everyday interactions.

Abbott wasn’t ranking suffering. She was naming differences. That includes visibility; for example, among Jewish communities, a person not wearing religious clothing may be treated differently in public than someone who is visibly Hasidic. Both can face harm, but not always in the same way. But I digress. The point wasn’t to create a hierarchy of oppression. It was to show how racism manifests differently depending on who you are, how you’re racialised, and how you're perceived.

Furthermore, the experiences of Black people in Britain are consistently marked by disproportionate and systemic suspicion, hostility and disregard across institutions and in everyday life. That reality demands attention, and the treatment of Diane Abbott is a clear example of why.

The current racial climate in the UK is increasingly bleak

Recently, Keir Starmer warned that the UK risked becoming “an island of strangers”, a phrase that drew comparisons to Enoch Powell’s infamous “Rivers of Blood” speech. Although Starmer later expressed regret, saying he and his speechwriting team hadn’t understood the association, his words reflect a wider landscape of growing tension and hostility toward racialised ‘others’ in Britain.

Immigration now ranks as one of the top issues for voters, and parties like Reform UK are gaining momentum by fuelling anti-immigration sentiment. In this context, being outspoken about racial inequity and offering nuance is bold and should be encouraged in the name of inclusivity in clearly growing, divisive times, especially by those in power. Instead, this government has chosen to discipline a figure who has spent her career not only addressing racial injustice, but also standing against antisemitism and advocating for her constituents.

It’s deeply worrying to see where their priorities lie.

Diane Abbott goes from being a pioneer, Britain’s first Black woman MP, to being a problem the moment she speaks up. Her contributions are disregarded. Her intentions are twisted. Then the stereotype of the “angry Black woman” is evoked again to curtail her opportunity, allowing for abuse and punishment.

How much longer can conversations about racial difference be shut down so defensively, so carelessly, and without proper consideration? 

I, for one, am tired.