Read on Twitter
This is vile and stupid; but coming from Dr Gopal that should come as no surprise. It's also disingenuous. "Parsing" surnames is as intellectually respectable as phrenology, and just as reliable. If it's possible to conceive of something worse than racism, this is it. (Thread)
2/ We need to recognise that someone's name/surname probably makes a difference to whether they get an interview, let alone a job ( https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-49410986). Quite rightly, we see this as racist discrimination and we should find ways of ensuring this does not happen.
3/ However, if you happen to be a Tory MP, then your "surname" (vide infra) is fair game. Your father's name, or a family name already hundreds of years old is enough to damn you. Dr Gopal completes her nonsense "parsing" thus:
4/ Let's look at the recent history of interrogating surnames. It has always been a means of control and discrimination. Go to anywhere which is a flashpoint and you will find that surnames (and names) matter. Consider the way in which Jewish surnames are quickly identified by
5/ antisemites. In Glasgow and Belfast, people know instantly whether a 'William' is a Catholic (Liam) or a Protestant (Billy). How many times have racists tried to suggest that someone "isn't really British" because they have a "foreign-sounding" name? 
6/ But there are two big problems with Dr Gopal's interrogation of surnames. The first is that not all South Asians, at least outside the UK, really have a concept of "surname" (or family name). If 'Imtiaz Ishaaq' has a son called 'Omar' then the son's name might be 'Omar Imtiaz'
7/ 2nd, there is the reality of history. Someone might have a family name that means 'landowner' (Khan, Patel, Chowdhury, etc), but it doesn't follow that they're themselves landowners. When I worked in Peshawar, one of my colleagues, Mr Chowdhury, didn't even own his own house.
8/ But aside from not understanding family names in the subcontinent, Dr Gopal also fails when it comes to etymology. "Mirza" ("میرزا" in Farsi) *could* mean "son of a prince", but it could just as easily mean "son of a clerk" or just be a patronymic.
9/ If you're reading this thread in the UK then you will have encountered Pakistanis with the surname "Shah". They might run your local shop or restaurant. The surname (sic) "Shah" means "King" or "Emperor". If you think that the surname "Shah" means that there is a "nexus"
10/ between Asian British people called "Shah" and "the Tories" then I can't help you. A lot of black British people still bear the surnames of the white men who once "owned" them as slaves (Harewood, Codrington, etc.). Judging people by their names is disgusting.
