Thread. 1/ The MacPherson principle arising from the Stephen Lawrence inquiry defines a racist incident as one perceived as racist by the victim. Now imagine a public figure demonstrating a pattern of behaviour spanning decades that reveals hatred towards a particular...

2/ minority, say black people. Of anyone, black people are best placed to identify words and deeds that commonly target their ethnicity and cause offence: they are likely to be acutely attuned to anti-black racism, in all the ways it is manifested...

3/ Now imagine if that individual was repeatedly given platforms to voice that hatred, to this day. And imagine if other prominent figures not only downplayed and denied that hatred, but instead heralded that person as virtuous and talented, endorsing...

4/ his assertion that the minority in question speaks out not because of the vile racism directed at them but because they have malign intentions and are in fact responsible for said racism. It would be an utter outage. That individual would never be allowed to get this far...

5/ But it’s all fair game when it comes to one particular minority. Every public figure who overtly, proudly declares that they stand with Ken Loach is sticking two fingers up to the Jews. Holocaust denial? No problem...

6/ Holocaust inversion? Nothing to see here. Blaming the single Jewish state for hatred against all Jews? Well it’s Israel, isn’t it? War crimes and, er... something... Palestinians have the right to be safe and govern themselves, but obviously not Israelis...

7/ It could be argued that standing with racists is racist in itself. It’s a bit like defending and declaring solidarity with the likes of Bernard Manning. To those who stand with the perpetrator rather than the victim, we see you. #KenLoachAntisemitism #jewsdontcount

8/ Said pattern of behaviour https://twitter.com/jobellerina/status/1359858803173449732