It has long been my belief that if there were a prize for the most loathsome of all the loathsome scum currently floating around the Palace of Westminster, then Keith Vaz would probably win it. The passport-flogging former Europe minister and current MP for Leicester East, who in 1989 led a 3,000 strong mob against the publication of Salman Rushdie's Satanic Verses, has made something of a career for himself as a professional "anti-racist". Earlier this year, for example, his experience of leading a lynch mob no doubt stood him in good stead when he led the witch hunt against the white Celebrity Big Brother contestants accused of racially-abusing the Indian actress Shilpa Shetty.
Today, I read that he has called for a new law to be introduced, enabling the Labour Party to impose all non-white shortlists on local constituency associations selecting parliamentary candidates, and has pledged that he, the Valiant Vaz, Champion of the Oppressed, will personally introduce this proposed law into parliament. Why is this new law needed? Well, at the moment discriminating on the basis of race when selecting parliamentary candidates would fall foul of laws against racial discrimination. The exact laws, in fact, that people like Keith Vaz profess to champion. Of course, those who genuinely champion anti-racism legislation don't tend to demand that that legislation be overridden the moment it inconveniences them.
Personally, I'd be happy to see all anti-racism laws abolished. It's true that if I were a member of the Labour Party, I would certainly not be at all happy if the party started imposing all-black shortlists, but I'm not a member, and if those who are members decide that they want all-black shortlists, then that's nothing to do with me. If I, as a non-party member, object to this, then I am free to vote for another party. Equally, if a white businessman wishes to employ only white employees, then he should be free to do so - if other people don't like that, they are free to boycott his products.
So, on the first issue, the right of the Labour Party to impose all-black shortlists, I would actually agree with Vaz that they should be allowed to do so, although that is of course not the same as saying that they should do so. But I rather doubt that he would share my view that a white business owner should be free to hire only white employees. Anti-white discrimination is more than okay, anti-black discrimination is evil!
The reason for this discrepancy, is that Vaz is, like most race baiters, an utter hypocrite. His belief in racial equality, which he expresses loudly and often, really amounts to little more than, to paraphrase Orwell: "all races are equal, but whites are less equal than others". Of course, even his commitment to advancing the interests of non-whites in general (at the expense of the interests of the majority population, if need be) comes only a poor second to his commitment to advancing the interests of Keith Vaz in particular. In a parliament and a Labour Party stuffed full of intellectual and moral pygmies, Vaz still contrives to appear Lilliputian. He may not have done as much damage to the country as the likes of Tony Blair, but for his own smug, hypocritical, and utterly amoral personality, he is the most loathsome MP around.