Nels Abbey discusses the Conservative Party's approach to diversity, questioning whether their commitment extends beyond surface-level representation. Despite a diverse cabinet under Boris Johnson, the party's actions and policies, such as the handling of the Windrush Scandal and the 'war on woke', have not been anti-racist, alienating Black and ethnic minority communities. The article suggests that the Conservative Party could gain the support of Black voters by reigning in divisive figures and implementing policies that address issues like unemployment and business development in Black communities.

Diane Abbott, the UK's first Black female MP, is a focal point for racism, revealing the true nature of Britain. The Conservative Party's largest donor, Frank Hester, allegedly made racist comments about her, and the article criticizes the Conservative and Labour parties for their treatment of Black politicians. Rishi Sunak's inaction on racism is highlighted, and the article suggests that real change in attitudes towards race in politics is yet to be seen. The piece implies that Abbott will only be truly appreciated posthumously, similar to Martin Luther King and Malcolm X.

The article discusses the concept of 'racism laundering,' where minority voices are used to express or endorse reactionary opinions, shielding the true proponents from criticism. It highlights instances where minority figures in the UK, such as politicians Kwasi Kwarteng, Priti Patel, and Suella Braverman, have made controversial statements or supported policies that could be perceived as racist. The author, Nels Abbey, references Dominique Samuels' claim that the MailOnline requested her to be the face of a ghostwritten piece, which she declined. The article suggests that this practice is part of a broader strategy to promote divisive narratives and policies while avoiding direct accusations of racism, as seen in the government's appointment of ethnic minority home secretaries post-Windrush scandal and the Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities report.

The article critiques the portrayal of diversity at the British coronation, particularly the performance of a gospel choir that lacked authenticity. It argues that this reflects a broader issue of 'Johnsonian diversity,' where symbolic gestures replace meaningful progress towards racial equality. The piece highlights Floella Benjamin's role in the ceremony as a testament to the Windrush generation's achievements and acknowledges Prince Charles's efforts against racism. The absence of Meghan Markle is noted as significant, and Adjoa Andoh's comments on the lack of diversity are commended. The article concludes by questioning Britain's national priorities and calls for a deeper understanding of fairness, inclusion, and equality.

A Sky survey reveals a significant portion of Britons haven't laughed out loud recently, highlighting the importance of laughter for health and well-being. The article draws parallels between the British and Nigerian attitudes towards humor, suggesting Britons could learn from Nigerians to find humor in adversity. It satirizes various British political figures and decisions, such as Boris Johnson's earnings, Liz Truss's short stint as Prime Minister, and Rishi Sunak's appointment of Lee Anderson as deputy chair of the Conservative Party. The piece also touches on the economic challenges faced by Britons, including high electricity bills and rising interest rates, and criticizes the Conservative Party's handling of issues related to race and diversity.

The article argues that booing football players who take the knee is a form of racism, and that making excuses for such behavior is part of the problem. It highlights the historical unpopularity of anti-racism movements and the backlash they receive. The author dismisses efforts to educate those who boo as futile, labeling them as racists rather than uninformed. The piece praises England manager Gareth Southgate for his principled stance on anti-racism and his leadership, which has led to the team's success. It concludes that opposing racism and embracing diversity yields better results for society, while excusing racism benefits only those making the excuses.

The UK government's proposal in the Queen's Speech to limit the right of immigrants and asylum seekers to challenge deportation orders in the High Court is criticized as a shameful attack on vulnerable individuals and a part of the 'culture wars'. The article argues that this dehumanizes people who, despite lacking official status, contribute significantly to British society and embody British values. It contrasts Boris Johnson's current stance with his previous support for an amnesty for undocumented immigrants during his tenure as Mayor of London and suggests that his failure to act on this is a missed opportunity to make a positive impact.

Meghan Markle's interview with Oprah Winfrey revealed damaging allegations of racism within the British Royal Family, including concerns about her son's skin color and a lack of support that led her to contemplate suicide. The interview has significantly eroded the trust of Black Britons in the monarchy, highlighting the missed opportunity for the monarchy to embrace diversity and progressiveness. The article discusses the broader context of racism in British society and the media's role in perpetuating it, suggesting that the interview could have been a moment for national reflection on racism but expressing skepticism about the likelihood of such an outcome.

Dominic Raab, the UK's foreign secretary, has been criticized for his comments on the Black Lives Matter movement and the act of taking a knee, which he incorrectly associated with 'Game of Thrones' and viewed as a symbol of 'subjugation and subordination.' The article argues that his remarks reflect a broader pattern of the current Tory government's actions that seem designed to enrage black citizens and ignore their concerns, citing examples such as the redacted Bame Covid-19 report and the selection of a racism-denier to lead a commission into racial inequality. The author suggests that these actions will have long-lasting negative effects on Britain's post-Covid-19 and post-Brexit reputation.