Police in the UK: It’s not always about race
JC
Guardian Unlimited featured a brief story on a brawl that involved a couple of groups of men — 40 people total — some white, some Asian. It hasn’t necessarily been classified as a racially motivated fight, but that is what people are assuming. The police say, don’t jump to conclusions!
Police investigating a fatal stabbing during a mass brawl between white and Asian men played down suggestions of racial tensions in the area. Shezan Umarji, 20, was stabbed when 40 people began fighting on the Callon estate in Preston, Lancs, in the early hours. Some of the men were armed with knives, bottles and baseball bats.
Superintendent Peter White, Operations Manager for the force’s Central Division, said there was no suggestion so far that the brawl was racially motivated. “We are currently working to establish a motive but do not have one yet, and we are not ruling anything out. “I can understand why people might think there is a racial element at play but so far, as far as I know, there is nothing to indicate that this was a race crime. “The community here are very shocked and concerned that this will be made out to be a racist crime, when there is no evidence that it was.” Mr Umarji’s family were said to be “traumatised and shocked” by his death, but appealed for calm.
Whether or not this was racially motivated — whether or not any fight is racially motivated, I think it’s a sad commentary that race is automatically assumed to be the cause of conflict between people of different races. Not saying anything new here, but again, this just shows how very charged race still is. We always think it’s the reason for our problems. 
(Of course, many times it is at the center of our conflict …see the vicious cycle? :()
Lyonside wrote:
I pretty much expect MMW readers to know this, but just to remind others:
For the Americans, for “estates” read “projects.”
Never ceases to amaze me when all the $500,000 McMansions in my area are called “Normandy Farms Estates”.
Posted 25 Jul 2006 at 7:07 am ¶
site admin wrote:
good clarification…thanks for that!
though wouldn’t it be fun to see some rabble-rousing in some swank neighborhood? just kidding. kind of. 
~JC
Posted 25 Jul 2006 at 8:00 am ¶
dcase wrote:
This is why it is absurd when people suggest if we stop talking about race, it will stop being an issue. Moreover, simple conflicts that do not begin with race as an issue often expand due to perceived racial differences. For example, I’ve seen over parking spaces, places in line, even arguments over algebra in college classrooms expand in fistfights over the phrases like “you people always ________,” black(white) people do ___________, or the words “nigger,” “boy” and “white boy” come out over simple stuff. I like to think that race acts as an accelerant in conflicts; it fuels the flames and increases the intensity of conflicts.
Posted 25 Jul 2006 at 9:14 am ¶
Ben wrote:
dcase, i don’t immediately see how your conclusion (this is why it is absurd…) follows from the premises of the article. could you elaborate?
i ask because i drew the opposite conclusion. the reason this article is on MMW is not because people got in a fight, or because someone got killed, or even because the fight involved people of different races. it’s here because the general public (most of whom were not there) assumes this was racially motivated, even when the police explicitly state that none of the evidence indicates a racist motive.
so, if we abandoned race as a primary dividing agent of humans (easier said than done, of course) the public wouldn’t be so primed to jump to unsupported conclusions about its role in conflicts.
Posted 25 Jul 2006 at 7:56 pm ¶