Ash Sarkar's 'racialised lens'

Play stupid games, win stupid prizes

Jun 11, 2026

You may not have heard of Ash Sarkar. By way of a potted overview, she’s, quote, ‘literally a communist’, and one of the woke left’s most militant voices. As such, she is, of course, a regular guest on British mainstream media.

Here’s what she had to say yesterday:

I vaguely agree with certain parts of her claim. But the hypocrisy here is so intense it’s hard to know where to begin.

She and her fellow ideological travellers led the charge to re-racialise both crime, and socio-political life more broadly, under the guise of progressivism. Try as they might to paper over that fact now, they played a central role in letting the identitarian genie out of the bottle.

This post sets out some examples of that hypocrisy. There are countless others I could have chosen.

1. George Floyd and the ‘system that terrorises black people’

Here’s Ash, who’s currently arguing crime must not be viewed through a ‘racialised lens’, using a single death in the US to frame ‘the system’ as one that ‘terrorises black people and people of colour’ — a claim that is both explicitly racialised and, though repeated endlessly within polite society and treated as virtually unquestionable, not supported by the available evidence. In fact, I wrote an entire essay debunking it. Please, I’m begging you, read it (here’s a link). I also recorded a half-hour podcast episode on it, which you can watch here.

2. The ‘need’ for spaces with no white people in them

Here Ash describes how she ‘needs’ places without any white people in them. As she claims to be someone who is outraged by the use of a ‘racialised lens’, that strikes me as a bit, erm, weird?

Thought experiment: what would Ash say if a white person said they ‘needed’ spaces with no black people in them?

Enjoying this article? Please make sure to subscribe. If you feel like supporting my work, paid subscriptions are a huge help.

3. The presence of white people = racism

Here she is claiming the mere presence of white people in a room ‘automatically means the presence of racism’. White people’s very existence, in other words, is racist.

If that isn’t viewing things through a racialised lens, I struggle to see what is.

4. Newtonian physics and the structure of ‘whiteness’

In this clip, Ash holds forth on how Newtonian physics and the refraction of light relate to the structure of ‘whiteness.’ Now she’s furious that things are being ‘racialised’.

5. Calling white people ‘gammon’

A couple of instances (there are others) of Ash calling white people she disagrees with ‘gammon’ (for you see, white men are supposedly red and sweaty and look like pieces of meat. And so ends today’s ‘anti-racism’ lesson).

Another thought experiment: what would Ash say if you disparagingly compared members of an ethnic minority group to a bit of a dead pig that is the same colour as their skin?

6. The unbearable whiteness of Brexit

Another classic.

‘We interrupt this broadcast on the unbearable whiteness of Brexit to remind you that it is unforgivable to racialise anything’.

7. Racialising a one-off incident on anecdotal evidence

‘It’s ok when we do it…’

8. ‘When were white people invented?’

Ah yes and let’s not forget the time Ash walked around London asking random people ‘when were white people invented’. Sorry to be a sweaty gammon but isn’t that, you know, the definition of using a racialised lens?

9. In defence of race riots

My two cents: If you’ve written pretentious screeds in defence of race riots, you cannot legitimately now claim to be outraged and terrified by…riots.

Ash is just one of countless figures who spent years injecting race into every corner of public life, browbeating anyone who pushed back, and treating the ethnic grievance narrative as sacred. This was not a fringe leftist pursuit, I might add. On the contrary, vast swathes of our media, as well as key academic, cultural, political and even corporate institutions, were (and still are, to varying extents) captured by this worldview, and people literally lost their jobs and were censored for challenging it.

For those same individuals and organisations to now express horror at the ‘use of a racialised lens’ is beyond parody.

Max's Newsletter

Discussion about this post

Ready for more?