There is an unequivocal push to shed light on the deepening racial divides that continue to underpin the Black experience in the 21st Century. Black liberation movements around the world, from the bustling streets of London to the southeastern coasts of Jamaica, have brought the importance of blackness to the fore. Not only as a tool for understanding the Black identity, but also as a theoretical framework from which to view our emancipatory commitment to social justice, liberation and reconstruction.
From analyses of diaspora to the entangled processes of the transatlantic slavery, colonialism and modernity- Black thought has long been concerned with questions of race, place, and power. Yet, it’s plausible to suggest that these developments, which span centuries and continents, have been systematically excluded from more traditional notions of geography.
Within the past five years, however, Black Geographies as a discipline and epistemology has gained increasing institutional clout, with thanks to the tenacity and ingenuity of Black scholars to carve out institutional spaces for Black intellectual production. But, what exactly is meant by Black Geographies?
“Black Geographies’ is diasporic in its foundation through centuries of race projects of displacement, concealment, and marginalization that seek to render the Black body as “ungeographic” (McKittrick, 2006)
As a critical nascent body of scholarship, Black Geographies pinpoints Black spatial agency and the intersections between race, the state, and the dynamic distributions of power present in society. From the transatlantic slave trade to the lack of racial integration of Black and white families with similar class affiliations, to the mass incarceration of Black people, Black Geographies examines Black spatial experiences, including how Black life is reproduced in the wake of gentrification and redevelopment. In doing so, Black Geographies exposes the rich processes of Black socio-cultural and spatial reproduction to resist the confines of slavery, underdevelopment, and traditional human geographies.
Importantly, Black Geographies is not just for geographers. Amongst other schools of thought Black Geographies can also provide a foundation of understanding for the various means of organising political movements to both undermine systems of oppression, and efforts to positively contribute to the communal well-being of Black communities; as opposed to the individuality and exclusivity of our current Western world. Indeed, the scholarship of Black Geographies transcends boundaries outside of formal geography.
As the Black Lives Matter movement sweeps the globe, renewed efforts to address the ongoing injustices of racism and inequality further challenges the formal canon of disciplinary geography that we seem to value so much. We have reached a critical moment, and it is now time to re-examine our complicity in racial processes, evaluate the processes and frameworks that address issues of racial inequality, and reengage the scholarship of Black Geographies as a body of scholarship. This new body of thought must add to our understanding of the ways that race and place are inextricably linked.
Written by Malaika Laing-Grant– BLAM’s Volunteer Blog editor
Malaika is a professional with over five years’ practical experience in the international development space, providing comprehensive programmatic support to drive programme success in areas such as youth and politics, social and economic development, education and capacity building. She is a strong believer in the power of the Black community, Malaika is also committed to education as a form of Black empowerment to dismantle cycles of oppression and systems of social injustice
Source
McKittrick, K. (2006). Demonic grounds: Black women and the cartographies of struggle. Minneapolis: Univ. of Minnesota Press
The distinction between Black feminism and white feminism has long been established, due to the triple burden facing many Black women of race, class and gender. Black feminists have and continue to, highlight the differences in their experiences and issues they are confronted with. On the key issues of family, patriarchy and reproduction,
Black women have distinctly different realities to that of their white middle class counter parts, that often centre the feminist movement.[1] Black women are consistently confronted with racism, resistance and further oppression which white feminism has undermined and silenced. It was in acknowledgment of this that OWAAD was formed in 1978.[2]OWAAD functioned as an umbrella organisation, bringing together various groups of women with divergent interests and focuses.[3] OWAAD had a prominent impact on the women’s liberation movements in Britain, by placing the experiences of Black and Asian women on the liberation agenda. Attracting over 300 women to its first national conference, OWAAD successfully prompted the establishment of Black women’s groups across London.
The ‘Brixton’s Black Women’s Group’ opened in London as the first Black Women’s Centre and Asian and African – Caribbean women founded the ‘Southall Black Sisters’ in North West London.[4] As well as its undeniable influence, OWAAD contributed to several campaigns for the progression of the black experience in the United Kingdom. OWAAD joined the campaign to scrap the SUS laws, which gave the police the powers of stop and search without any cause and was disproportionately used against young Black men.[5] The impact of OWAAD and its initiatives are undeniably powerful and revolutionary. As Stella Dadzie (co-founder of OWAAD) emphasised, OWAAD worked to ‘show people sisterhood in operation’.[6] Not only did OWAAD take on the responsibility of upholding the Black-british community, they also established a legacy of justice and perseverance that remains a fundamental pillar of Black British History.
Many people think of Black British history in terms of London events like the Windrush arrival or Notting Hill. But important stories happened all over Britain. Black communities in cities like Bristol, Leeds and Newcastle have reshaped the country culturally, politically and socially. Let’s explore some inspiring tales: a bus boycott in Bristol, Martin Luther King Jr’s visit to Newcastle, ancient Roman soldiers in Cumbria, and Britain’s first Caribbean carnival in Leeds.
Bristol’s Bus Boycott of 1963
In 1963 Bristol’s bus company refused to hire Black or Asian people as drivers. Youth worker Paul Stephenson and others led a protest against this “colour bar”. For four months local activists and the West Indian community boycotted the buses until the company finally agreed to hire drivers of all races. Their victory made headlines. It inspired Britain’s first Race Relations Act (1965), which made racial discrimination in public life illegal. The Bristol Bus Boycott is remembered as one of Britain’s earliest and most powerful Black-led campaigns for equality.
Martin Luther King Jr in Newcastle, 1967
In the north of England, Newcastle has its own civil rights moment. On 13 November 1967, Dr Martin Luther King Jr crossed the Atlantic for a one-day visit to receive an honorary doctorate from Newcastle University. (It was the only UK university to honour him in his lifetime.) During the ceremony, King gave an unexpected speech warning against racist ghettos and poverty in Britain. He told the audience that “Racism is … the coloured man’s burden and the white man’s shame”. Decades later, King’s brief visit links Britain’s struggle for equality with the American Civil Rights Movement, showing how ideas crossed the ocean.
African Soldiers in Roman Cumbria
Black British history goes back far beyond the twentieth century. In north west England, at a Roman fort called Aballava (near modern Burgh by Sands, Cumbria), archaeologists found evidence of North African soldiers in Britain. A Roman altar dating to around AD 253 records that Caelius Vibianus, commander of the Numerus Maurorum Aurelianorum (a unit of Berber soldiers from Mauretania, now Morocco and Algeria), was stationed there. In fact, Cumbria is home to Britain’s first recorded African community, some 1,800 years ago. These findings show that people from North Africa lived and had families in Britain in the third century. It is a striking “did you know?” story: Black people were part of Britain’s story long before most of us think.
Leeds’s First Caribbean Carnival, 1967
In 1967 Leeds became the site of Britain’s first Caribbean-style carnival parade. Community leader Arthur France, a student from St Kitts-Nevis, organised the very first West Indian carnival in Chapeltown, Leeds. Hundreds of people in colourful costumes and steel bands marched from Potternewton Park to Leeds Town Hall as part of the new “West Indian Carnival” procession. About 1,000 locals watched that inaugural event. This Leeds carnival set the trend for later festivals – including London’s famous Notting Hill Carnival. Today the Leeds West Indian Carnival is a huge annual celebration of Caribbean culture and community. In other words, a party in Leeds in 1967 helped reshape British culture.
Across Britain
These stories show that Black history in Britain is not confined to London. From Roman soldiers in Cumbria to activists in Bristol and Newcastle, to cultural pioneers in Leeds, Black people have made their mark across the country. Each event helped change Britain – overturning racism, inspiring hope, and celebrating identity. As one writer notes, these Black communities outside London “have reshaped the country, culturally, politically and socially”. By learning these local stories, we get a fuller view of Black British history – one that truly reaches from coast to coast.
Observations from sitting in Courtroom 73 of the Royal Courts of Justice.
At the Royal Courts of Justice, before Lord Justice Holgate and Mrs Justice Farbey, a fundamental question about the relationship between technology, privacy, and police power is being tested.
This has been brought about by applicants Shaun Thompson, an anti-knife crime campaigner, and Silkie Carlo, the director of the civil liberties campaign group Big Brother Watch. Mr. Thompson was stopped outside London Bridge where officers asked for his fingerprints. After being wrongly identified by police facial recognition as a suspect, he brings the first case of its kind to review the Metropolitan Police’s use of the AI technology.
The case of Thompson (and another) v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis asks: how much discretion should police have in deploying Live Facial Recognition (LFR) technology across London’s streets?
Why is this important?
Live Facial Recognition (LFR) is not just another surveillance tool. As the Metropolitan Police themselves describe it during their submissions, LFR is “game-changing” and has “revolutionised crime detection”.
The technology works by converting facial features into numerical codes, then checking those codes against police watchlists in real-time. When someone passes an LFR camera, their biometric data is captured, processed, and compared against databases of wanted individuals.
With that power comes a profound civil liberties concern: should police be able to turn any public space into a biometric checkpoint?
The Core Legal Question.
At the heart of this judicial review is the concept of arbitrariness. In law, a power is considered arbitrary when decision-makers can act without sufficient constraints, rules, or principles guiding their choices. The claimants argue that the Met’s current LFR policy leaves too much to individual officer discretion, particularly regarding where these cameras are deployed.
This isn’t the first time British courts have grappled with LFR. The Court of Appeal’s decision in Ed Bridges v South Wales Police established that while LFR use is not inherently unlawful, there must be sufficient protections against arbitrary deployment. That case focused on South Wales Police’s use of the technology. Now, London’s approach is under scrutiny.
The Claimants’ Case: Too Much, Too Broad.
Dan Squires KC, representing the claimants, painted a picture of unchecked discretion. His central arguments include:
The Geography Problem: According to the claimants’ analysis, approximately 47% of London qualifies as a “crime hotspot” under the Met’s policy. When “access routes” (main roads leading to these areas) are added, the coverage becomes extensive. Squires argues that this gives officers discretion to deploy LFR across a large amount of the capital.
The Public Space Transformation: Perhaps most powerfully, the claimants argue that LFR fundamentally changes the nature of public spaces. Unlike border controls at airports, where people expect to be checked, LFR can turn Paddington Station or any busy street into a place where your biometric data is captured, processed, and checked multiple times a day.
The Parliamentary Question: Squires suggests this is a decision of such magnitude that Parliament, not police operational officers, should determine where and when such intrusive technology is deployed. As society grapples with what level of surveillance it finds acceptable, should that choice rest with elected representatives rather than police policy?
The Reality of “False Alerts”: While the Met Police offers a false alert rate of just 1 in 33,000, Shaun Thompson’s own experience illustrates the human cost of even “accurate” systems. When wrongly flagged, he had his passport and fingerprints taken, an extraordinary intrusion for someone who had committed no crime.
The Defence: Necessary Powers, Sufficient Safeguards.
Anya Proops KC, representing the Metropolitan Police, offered a vigorous defence of LFR deployment. Her arguments included:
Public Safety Imperative: The Met argues that criminals who pose a threat to public safety walk amongst us and are near impossible to find using normal police tactics. LFR provides a crucial capability to identify wanted individuals who would otherwise evade detection. Without this tool, dangerous offenders remain at large.
Policy Constraints Are Sufficient: The defence points to specific safeguards embedded in the Met’s policy that prevent arbitrary deployment. These include a clear definition of “crime hotspots” using quantitative crime data, mandatory proportionality assessments, clear procedures that officers must follow for each deployment, specific watchlist criteria, and compliance with the Surveillance Camera Code of Practice. Proops argues these constraints provide a “clear roadmap” that prevents arbitrary decision-making. Officers are not making capricious choices, but following detailed guidance that embodies legal principles of necessity and proportionality.
Broad Discretion Is Not Necessarily Unlawful: Drawing on case law including In the matter of an application by Lorraine Gallagher for Judicial Review, the Met argues that having broad discretion, even covering large areas, is not inherently problematic. What matters is whether the law governing that discretion is sufficiently clear and precise. The Met contends their policy meets this standard.
The Glukhin Distinction: The defence references Glukhin v Russia, where the European Court of Human Rights found against “unconditioned use” of facial recognition. The Met argues their approach is fundamentally different: it’s targeted, regulated, and proportionate, rather than blanket surveillance.
Looking Ahead
This is a judicial review case. That is a fundamental check on how public bodies exercise their powers over citizens. The court is not deciding whether LFR should exist, but whether the Met’s current framework for deploying it is lawful. That distinction matters enormously for what happens next.
If the claimant succeeds in his application, the implications could be far-reaching. The Met may need to redesign its LFR policy with tighter constraints on where and when the technology can be deployed. Questions that currently seem settled might be reopened: Must police seek explicit consent through prominent signage in areas operating LFR? Should people have a meaningful opportunity to leave an area before their biometric data is captured? Could deployment be restricted to specific intelligence-led operations rather than broad “crime hotspot” sweeps?
If the Met Police succeed in their defence, the consequences flow in the opposite direction. The Met has indicated plans to expand LFR use across London. A judicial blessing of the current policy framework could accelerate that expansion. More cameras, more locations, more Londoners having their biometric data captured and checked, potentially multiple times daily. The number of innocent people experiencing what the claimants term “intrusion of their privacy” could grow substantially.
Whatever the court decides will set the parameters for biometric surveillance across the UK. This judgment will determine not just the legality of current practice, but the boundaries of what is permissible.
This analysis is based on courtroom observations and should not be considered legal advice. The case remains ongoing and judgment is awaited.
Every February, the United States observes Black History Month. It grew from historian Carter G. Woodson’s 1915 call to preserve Black heritage. In 2026 the theme “A Century of Black History Commemorations” marks a century since the first Negro History Week.
Inspired by that theme, BLAM UK highlights African‑American radicals whose activism in Britain forged connections that continue to influence Black life on both sides of the Atlantic.
Frederick Douglass: freedom forged in Britain
A former slave turned leading abolitionist, Douglass crossed to the British Isles in 1845. Over nearly two years he toured England, Scotland and Ireland delivering powerful lectures against American slavery. His speeches drew large audiences and raised funds for the abolitionist cause. Douglass said he could dine with parliamentarians and feel “a human being”. The welcome sharpened his critique of American racism.
Ida B. Wells: internationalising anti‑lynching
Journalist Ida B. Wells travelled to Britain in 1893 and 1894 to denounce lynching. University of Chicago archives record that she spoke to large crowds about the “crime and terrorism of lynching” and helped establish the London Anti‑Lynching Committee. Wells argued that lynching enforced racial subjugation. Newspapers reported packed halls in Aberdeen and Edinburgh where she described the continuing oppression of Black Southerners. Her tours internationalised the anti‑lynching struggle and rallied British allies to pressure U.S. authorities.
James Baldwin: transatlantic dialogues
James Baldwin used Britain to debate racism and freedom. At the University of Cambridge in February 1965 he debated conservative commentator William F. Buckley, declaring that the “American Dream is at the expense of the American Negro”. The audience sided with Baldwin. 4 years later the filmBaldwin’s Nigger (1969) captured him and Dick Gregory in conversation with young Black Brits about imperialism and race. These encounters linked Black American radicalism with Britain’s Black diaspora.
Sarah Parker Remond: pioneering lecturer
Sarah Parker Remond, a free Black American, sailed to Liverpool in 1859 seeking refuge and a platform for abolition. Her Manchester lectures condemned the denial of political and social rights to free people of colour and described enslaved people as treated like “things with no rights – political, social, domestic or religious”. She continued speaking in London to enthusiastic applause and joined the London Emancipation Committee. Remond studied at Bedford College and became the first Black woman to lecture to mass audiences in Britain.
W.E.B. Du Bois: Pan‑Africanism in London
London hosted the first Pan‑African Conference in July 1900. Organised by Trinidadian lawyer Henry Sylvester Williams, the meeting brought delegates from Africa, the Caribbean, North America and Britain. W.E.B. Du Bois chaired the committee that drafted the “Address to the Nations of the World,” urging European powers to end racism and permit self‑government for colonised peoples. Du Bois warned that “the problem of the 20th century is the problem of the colour‑line”, linking Pan‑Africanism to London.
Malcolm X: confronting British racism
In 1964–65 Malcolm X brought his uncompromising message to Britain. On 3 December 1964 he addressed the Oxford Union, arguing that “extremism in the defence of liberty is no vice” and insisting that Black people were justified in defending their freedom. He also spoke to students at the London School of Economics and visited Smethwick, a town notorious for racist housing policies, to highlight discrimination. His tour exposed British racism and linked Black liberation struggles across continents.
Interconnected struggles and remembrance
From Douglass’s liberation campaign to Malcolm X’s solidarity visit, these stories show that Black history is not solely American or British but a shared struggle forged through travel, speeches and alliances. As we celebrate A Century of Black History Commemorations, BLAM UK invites readers to honour the transatlantic partnerships that nurtured Black freedom. Remembering these connections is a radical act: it affirms that our histories are entwined and that the fight against racism transcends borders.
Eric Huntley passed away on 21 January 2026 at the age of 96. We at BLAM UK honour his memory and the remarkable contributions he made as an educator, publisher and activist.
Born in 1929 in British Guiana (now Guyana), Eric became politically active from a young age. He helped found the People’s Progressive Party (PPP) in Guyana to fight for independence. His activism led to a year in prison in 1953 when the colonial government cracked down on democracy. In 1957 Eric moved to London with his wife Jessica, determined to continue the struggle for racial justice.
In London, Eric and Jessica quickly became voices of the Black community. In 1968 they co-founded Bogle L’Ouverture Publications, one of Britain’s first radical Black publishing houses. Named after Caribbean heroes Paul Bogle and Toussaint L’Ouverture, Bogle L’Ouverture gave a platform to writers who were often ignored by the mainstream. Its first book was Walter Rodney’s The Groundings with My Brothers, published in 1969. Over the years the press released works by Linton Kwesi Johnson, Valerie Bloom, Andrew Salkey and many others. Through this publishing effort, Eric helped bring Black history and culture to many readers.
Eric’s commitment went beyond books. He and Jessica opened the Walter Rodney Bookshop in West Ealing in 1974, creating a vibrant hub for community events. They were founding members of the Caribbean Education and Community Workers Association, working to improve schools for Black children. In 1975 they helped set up the Black Parents Movement in response to the wrongful arrest of a Black schoolboy. This campaign fought unfair treatment of Black students. In 1981, after the devastating New Cross fire in London, Eric helped organise the Black People’s Day of Action – a protest of 20,000 Black people demanding justice. These efforts showed how he linked education, community and justice.
The legacy of Eric and Jessica Huntley has been honoured in many ways. In 2018 a blue plaque was unveiled on their Ealing home to mark their contributions to Black British culture. Their archive of books and papers is held at the London Metropolitan Archives, preserving a treasure trove of Black British history. But perhaps the most important tribute is how we continue their work today.
At BLAM UK we carry on that work. Our mission is to embed Black narratives throughout UK education, not just one month of the year. We run school programmes like the Grounded Project, which brings Black history workshops into classrooms across London. We also offer advice and representation at school exclusion panels for Black British students, just as the Huntleys fought for fairness in schooling. In 2023 we published Global Black Narratives for the Classroom, a series of practical lesson-plan books for primary teachers that cover Black histories from Britain to Africa and the Caribbean. These books are full of practical lesson plans, interactive worksheets and activities, making it easier than ever for teachers to bring Black history into every lesson.
Eric Huntley’s life shows us what dedication to education and justice looks like. He built bridges between continents and generations. We at BLAM UK remain determined to dismantle anti-blackness in schools and celebrate Black heritage year-round. May he rest in power, and may his work continue to inspire. Rest in power, Eric Huntley.
The American streamer IShowSpeed (Darren Watkins Jr.) is currently live-streaming his travels through Africa, turning social media into a live classroom for millions of young viewers. This new generation of learning, through unscripted livestreams, allows people to discover history and culture in an engaging way. Speed’s trip became a lesson in African history and pride. By questioning guides and locals on camera, he helped his viewers “open their minds” to a fuller story of Africa’s past and present.
Ethiopia’s Proud History
In Ethiopia, Speed learned why the country has a unique place in colonial history. Ethiopia defeated Italian invaders at the Battle of Adwa (1896) and preserved its independence. Europe then recognised Ethiopia as sovereign, making it famously one of only two African nations (with Liberia) to escape being carved up in the 19th-century “Scramble for Africa”. In Addis Ababa and surrounding cities, local hosts showed Speed monuments and told stories of legendary warriors and emperors. These encounters reframed Africa not as a monolithic “poor continent,” but as home to ancient civilizations. As Speed’s camera captured it, Ethiopia’s rich past became obvious to his young, global audience.
Ethiopia defeated Italy at Adwa in 1896, winning its independence.
Apart from a brief Italian occupation in the 1930s, Ethiopia remained uncolonised, one of only two African countries to do so.
Ethiopia is celebrated as the birthplace of coffee, with wild coffee plants traced back to its highland forests.
The country has a long history of learning – early Christian schooling in Axum around 330 AD shows that Africa had educational traditions from ancient times.
These facts helped fans see Africa in a new light. Instead of hearing only about poverty or conflict, Speed’s viewers saw pride, history, and culture; a form of decolonising education through an internet platform.
Botswana and the Diamond Trade
In Botswana, Speed’s curiosity led him into a diamond office, where he was shocked to learn he could not buy rough diamonds on the spot. Locals explained why: Botswana’s diamond industry is mostly run by Debswana, a 50:50 joint venture between the government and De Beers. Under recent contracts, the state-owned Okavango Diamond Company is only allowed 30–40% of the production. In other words, Botswana owns the land and mines, but much of the value is captured by foreign companies. Speed’s livestream showed this asymmetry in real time. As he held a rough diamond on camera, viewers discussed how the gems were routed abroad to cutting centres in India and Europe. The live clip traced a pipeline: “Botswana holds the land and labor. Branding, resale and markups happen elsewhere,” as one analysis noted. In effect, Speed taught his audience about neocolonial patterns: the way colonial-era trade structures still influence Africa’s economy. A young fan watching might not see this math class lesson in real life, but he saw it live on YouTube and he learned how historic deals still shape modern wealth.
Botswana’s diamonds are managed by Debswana (a 50/50 JV with De Beers), and only 30–40% of output goes to Botswana’s Okavango Diamond Company.
Most rough stones are sold under fixed contracts (to big international buyers), so locals cannot just buy diamonds off the shelf.
Speed’s visit highlighted how the value of Botswana’s diamonds often flows overseas: local miners extract the stones, but the cutting, branding, and profit happen in foreign markets.
By questioning the guides, Speed educated his fans about how control of resources still reflects old colonial ties. The lecture wasn’t in a classroom; it was in a diamond office in Gaborone, streamed live to the world.
Zambia: Belonging and Shared Heritage
On a lighter note, Speed’s Zambia stop drove home another lesson: diaspora unity and pride. In his tour, Speed stood on a pickup truck in Zambia at sunset and admitted, “I haven’t been anywhere here where I didn’t feel like I belonged,”. His genuine emotion (backed by millions of online viewers) underlined the warm reception he received across Africa. In many countries, crowds danced, cheered, and embraced him. Media reports noted Speed felt at home “everywhere” he went, with communities welcoming him with “open arms”; a direct challenge to the myth of inevitable distance between Black Africans and Black Americans. One viewer online even said it changed how she saw her roots: watching a young Black American return and “be treated like a human, with respect and love… changed something in me”. In short, Speed’s continental trip helped rebuild a sense of shared pride. Seeing diaspora ties celebrated in real life – rather than told as political rhetoric – showed his fans that Africa and its diaspora are connected by more than stereotypes.
Decolonising Education and Rebuilding Pride
Speed’s tour illustrates a new generation method of learning. Instead of learning about Africa only from textbooks or news reports or docummentaries, millions of young people saw real-time history, geography, and economics taught through travel and conversation. In doing so, they also participated in the decolonisation movement of the mind: they are replacing colonial-era lies with knowledge of Africa’s true legacy and potential. By celebrating Ethiopia’s victory, by questioning diamond trade inequalities, and by feeling unity in Zambia, Speed and his audience “opened their minds” to alternative narratives.
In every step of his Africa tour, Speed’s journey opened a window to pride. Pride in history, in resources, and in shared humanity. His adventures show how a streamer can become an educator: inspiring young people to think critically and feel proud of African heritage. Such exposure can spark curiosity, leading viewers to learn more about decolonisation and to honour Africa’s rich past. In this way, new-media learning contributes to rebuilding pride and rewriting history from an African perspective.
International Migrants Day prompts us to reflect on our own stories. For Black Brits, whether from the Afro-Caribbean or African diasporas, migration isn’t just a distant concept, it is family history. Our parents, grandparents, and communities often arrived as migrants, helping build this country.
On this day we recall those journeys and the truths they teach us. Thinkers like Stuart Hall and Paul Gilroy help explain how Black identity is forged in motion and exchange. We also confront today’s politics: from the Prime Minister’s warning of an “island of strangers” to Nigel Farage and Tommy Robinson’s “great replacement” myths. By centering Black British voices, from academics to artists, we reclaim the migrant narrative.
Remembering Our Migrant Roots
We must honor the very real contributions of Black migrants to Britain’s story. The post-war Windrush generation is emblematic: on 22 June 1948, 400+ Jamaicans arrived on the HMT Empire Windrush to answer Britain’s call to help rebuild the economy and new NHS.
Within days, many had jobs; by 1958 roughly 125,000 West Indians (and tens of thousands from India and Pakistan) had come to work here. Black migrants filled crucial roles in public life. For example, by 1971 about 31% of NHS doctors in England were born and educated abroad. Caribbean nurses and African doctors ran wards that few Britons wanted. These dedicated pioneers did the work that kept schools, hospitals and businesses running, even as they faced racism at home.
Post-war pioneers: More than 400 Caribbean migrants on the Empire Windrush arrived in 1948 to help rebuild Britain, especially the fledgling NHS. Many West Indian women became nurses, often working “immaculately starched” in British hospitals as their descendants proudly remember.
Vital workers: By the late 1960s, foreign-trained staff were everywhere. In 1971, nearly one-third of English NHS doctors were educated overseas. Migrant porters, cleaners and cooks kept schools and hospitals open. Without them, as advocates note, “the history of the NHS is also the history of migration”.
Building communities: Caribbean and African migrants founded businesses, churches, Carnival celebrations, sports clubs and more. They raised generations of British-born children who are simultaneously proud Londoners and proud of their heritage.
These facts show that migrants, our communities included, made Britain work. Remembering this history challenges any claim that we “don’t belong” here.
Black British scholars have long explored what it means to live between worlds.
Stuart Hall (Jamaican-born theorist) famously said he lived “in the shadow of the black diaspora – ‘in the belly of the beast’”.
He described cultural identity as a process, not a fixed label. Hall argued that beneath surface differences there is a shared Caribbean and African legacy, a sort of collective one true self, that each diaspora member must discover, excavate.
In his writings on Black popular culture, Hall even noted that people of the Black diaspora have “found the deep form, the deep structure of their cultural life in music” – capturing how art and culture keep our stories alive. In short, Hall’s life and work embodied how migration and colonial history shape identity.
Paul Gilroy (London-born scholar of the African Diaspora) builds on this. In The Black Atlantic, Gilroy argues Black identity in Britain, the US and the Caribbean is inherently transnational.
He shows that over 150 years Black intellectuals and artists have “traveled and worked in a transnational frame” – thinking and creating across oceans, rather than being rooted in one nation. Gilroy’s “Black Atlantic” model reminds us that African and Caribbean cultures cross borders. We carry those voyages in us: our music, stories and politics connect to global Black history, not just to Britain.
Kehinde Andrews (Birmingham-born academic and activist) adds a modern perspective. As Britain’s first professor of Black Studies, he urges the diaspora to unite globally.
Andrews insists that, “as Black and African people, our true power… is in organizing ourselves globally”. In other words, Black Britons benefit by seeing ourselves as part of a wider struggle with Africans and the world’s Black communities, not just as an isolated group.
He also speaks frankly about our relation to Britain. For many of us, as he notes, “racism is as British as a cup of tea, which is why so many of us reject both the nation and the monarchy”. This blunt truth reminds us that Black Britons often view Britain’s national myths differently, understanding that the country’s wealth came from colonialism and slavery.
These thinkers teach us: our identities are complex and creative, forged across journeys. They encourage pride in diaspora roots and solidarity with other Black people globally.
Confronting Fear: Debunking the “Island of Strangers”
Last year even the Labour leader warned that the UK might become an “island of strangers” – echoing Enoch Powell’s infamous 1968 trope. But Black voices push back strongly. As one British-letter-writer put it: “Immigration doesn’t lead to an ‘island of strangers’, rather to a diverse, modern nation. The UK shapes immigrants, and in turn this country is shaped by immigrants and their descendants.”. Indeed, diversity is our reality and strength. Rather than division, migration has remade Britain’s identity again and again, making it a more modern, global nation.
On the far right, figures like Nigel Farage and Tommy Robinson peddle conspiracies like the “Great Replacement” – the idea that white Britons are being “replaced” by immigrants. But this is baseless. As a Guardian analysis notes, anti-immigrant fringe groups merge xenophobia with other agenda (such as anti-abortion) into claims that migrants “replac[e] white Brits”.
Even Tommy Robinson has promoted the same “great replacement” narrative. We must reject these scare tactics. We know from history (and from our own lives) that migrants and native-born people live and work side by side. Britain’s needs, from care workers to teachers, have long been met by immigrants, not hurt by them. In reality, warnings about being “submerged” or “invaded” are a political ploy to divide us.
Instead, we remember the real picture: our families, like one Chinese-Vietnamese family in London wrote in response to the “strangers” remark, not only became successful by running businesses and education, but loved being British. Diverse communities support each other: on one street neighbours of all backgrounds join together in celebrations and mutual aid, not isolation.
Culture and Identity: Our Stories in Art
Our perspective also comes through art and culture. British music has powerful stories of migration. For example, the rapper Dave (a British-Nigerian artist) released a song called “Black” that many of us found deeply personal. In it he declares “Black ain’t just a single fuckin’ colour, man – there’s shades to it”. Dave’s line reminds us that within Black identity there are many histories and backgrounds: Caribbean, African, mixed heritage, and more. The song even becomes a brief history lesson “West Africa, Benin, they called it slave coast”, highlighting how the Atlantic slave trade and colonisation still echo in our lives today.
Songs like Dave’s “Black” and other cultural works give voice to our collective memory. They celebrate that “Black is beautiful, Black is excellent” (as Dave also proclaims), while also calling out injustice: “A kid dies, the blacker the killer, the sweeter the news…” (another lyric) argues he, underscoring media bias. Listening to these artists, we feel seen: they echo Paul Gilroy’s idea that our shared histories travel through music, and Stuart Hall’s insight that diaspora cultures “play solos in tune and in contradiction” with Britain. When we hear our own stories in songs, literature or films, it affirms our place here and connects us to a larger Black creative legacy.
On this Migrants Day, we stand in solidarity with all migrants.
We remember that history offers undeniable evidence of the meaningful and enduring contributions made by migrants, refugees, and asylum seekers. This is no abstract claim; it is our history. In fact, hundreds of UK organisations recently pledged themselves to unity, declaring Britain an “island of solidarity, not strangers”. Their statement explicitly affirms the inherent right to live in peace, dignity and hope of every migrant. We Black Brits endorse that pledge. We know every immigrant, our parents, grandparents and neighbours, has that right.
So on International Migrants Day we do more than observe; we remember our own journey. We think of the courage of ancestors who crossed oceans, and the pride of cousins, children and friends born here. We draw inspiration from Stuart Hall’s, Paul Gilroy’s and Kehinde Andrews’s ideas: they teach us that we belong in multiple worlds at once, and that our home is enriched by all those who come to it. We celebrate our culture, from steel drums to grime rap, that blends African, Caribbean and British elements. We reject divisive myths (Farage’s and Robinson’s) and instead pledge community support.
International Migrants Day is a reminder that migrants built this country, and that Black people are a central part of that story.
Schools are meant to be places of safety, learning, and opportunity. But for many Black children in the UK, the school exclusion system tells a different story: one of unfair discipline, implicit bias, and institutional neglect. Permanent and fixed-term exclusions are supposed to be last resorts, used only when a pupil’s behaviour seriously breaches school policy but data, legal cases, and lived experiences show Black children are disproportionately subjected to exclusions. They are also less likely to have their complaints about discriminatory behaviour taken seriously.
This article explores the legal framework around school exclusions, recent case law, how discriminatory practices affect Black pupils (especially those with special educational needs or disabilities – SEND), and what change needs to happen to ensure fairness and justice in UK schools.
Legal and Statutory Framework.
To understand discrimination in exclusions, here are the key legal tools and duties:
Equality Act 2010 o Protects “protected characteristics” including race, disability, religion or belief, etc. o Makes both direct and indirect discrimination unlawful. Schools must avoid treating pupils less favourably because of protected characteristic or because of something connected to it. o Requires reasonable adjustments for disabled pupils to avoid putting them at substantial disadvantage.
Special Educational Needs & Disability (SEND) Regulations o Particularly the SEND Code of Practice (statutory guidance) outlines how schools should support children with SEND including behaviour that arises because of their needs.
Public Sector Equality Duty (PSED) under Equality Act: o Schools (as public bodies) must have due regard to eliminating discrimination, advancing equality of opportunity, and fostering good relations.
Regulations within Equality Act 2010 (Disability) Regulations 2010 o Notably, regulation 4(1)(c) which until recently excluded pupils having a “tendency to physical abuse” from being treated as disabled in certain exclusion decisions, meaning schools could exclude children for behaviours linked to their disability without needing to make reasonable adjustments.
Right to Education o Under Article 2 of Protocol 1 to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), children have a right to education. Exclusions must be lawful, proportionate, and should not unfairly remove access to education.
Key Case Law & Recent Developments
Here are some landmark or recent cases and legal developments that illustrate how the law is being tested
Case / Development
Facts
Held / Reasoned Outcome
Relevance to Black Pupils & Discrimination
“L” – autistic boy excluded for aggressive behaviour (Upper Tribunal 2018)
C & C v The Governing Body of a School, The Secretary of State for Education (First Interested Party) and The National Autistic Society (Second Interested Party) (SEN): [2018] UKUT 269 (AAC) ; [2019] AACR 10
A 13-year-old boy with autism was excluded for 1½ days after aggressive behaviour. The school argued the behaviour was “anti-social or criminal” under regulation excluding those cases from disability protections.
The Upper Tribunal ruled (backed by EHRC) that excluding children whose challenging behaviour is a manifestation of their disability, without adjustments, is discriminatory and incompatible with human rights. Regulations allowing exclusion under “tendency to physical abuse” were unlawful.
This sets precedent for Black pupils with SEND who are often excluded for behaviour without the support needed.
Court of Appeal – Exclusion Case (Black Caribbean pupil, SEND, free school meals)
A Black Caribbean pupil with special needs was permanently excluded for alleged assault. The school governors and then Independent Review Panel upheld the exclusion despite arguments involving equality duty under Equality Act.
The case emphasized that schools must consider their Public Sector Equality Duty when making exclusion decisions. While the specific challenge failed in that case, the judgment stressed the importance of PSED.
Shows how equality law is relevant and must be considered in exclusion decisions, especially for disadvantaged Black pupils.
Court of Appeal considers equalities duty in school exclusions (Mar 2025)
Permanent exclusion of Black Caribbean pupil with SEND. Challenge brought on basis of breach of PSED and whether schools responded properly to challenges.
Judgment provided guidance on how schools should approach exclusion decisions in relation to PSED, what role governors and IRP have, and how to treat exclusions involving SEND and race together.
Clarifies legal expectations for fairness and non-discrimination.
Evidence & Statistics
According to the School Exclusion Hub, vulnerable pupils (including Black pupils and those with SEND) are protected under the Equality Act: discrimination in exclusions is unlawful. – Vulnerable pupils – School Exclusion Hub
The Black Child Agenda notes that Black pupils are excluded at disproportionately higher rates; the decision to exclude must be lawful, reasonable, proportionate and fair. – Exclusions – The Black Child Agenda
A recent study (2025) by Durham and Birmingham universities found that when adjusting for poverty and SEND, ethnicity alone is not a statistically significant predictor of exclusion but campaigners argue this overlooks “off-rolling” (informal exclusion) and the compounding effects of race, class, and SEND. – Ethnicity not key factor in England school exclusions, study finds | Race in education | The Guardian
Discriminatory Behaviour and Complaint
Besides exclusions, Black children often face discriminatory treatment in schools in other ways:
Rules on hairstyle (cornrows, braids) being banned or treated as non-compliant with uniform policy.
Indirect discrimination in faith-based admissions policies affecting particular ethnic groups. Example: in Faith school admissions can indirectly discriminate on race a recent High Court judgment recognizing that oversubscription criteria based on religion can disadvantage certain racial groups. – Judge: Faith school admissions can indirectly discriminate on race | National Secular Society
Complaints mechanisms are often opaque, under-resourced, or adversarial; parents may feel discouraged from making complaints or fear backlash.
Impact: What Happens to the Children
When a child is excluded temporarily or permanently especially Black children or children with SEND, outcomes can be severe:
Loss of learning, falling behind classmates.
Increased risk of exclusion from further education, more frequent contact with the criminal justice system.
Negative effects on mental health, self-esteem.
Stigmatization and alienation from school community.
Disparities in disciplinary measures can reflect and reinforce broader societal injustice.
Potential Reforms & What More Needs To Be Done
To level the playing field, here are policy and legal reforms that could reduce unfair exclusions and discriminatory behaviour:
Strengthen legal enforcement of the Public Sector Equality Duty (PSED): The PSED must be clarified and enforced more strongly in the context of exclusions, with schools and multi-academy trusts (MATs) held legally accountable for breaches.
Enshrine protections against Regulation 4(1)(c): Enshrine into statutory guidance the 2018 Upper Tribunal decision, which removed the discriminatory effect of Regulation 4(1)(c) of the Equality Act 2010. This would ensure all schools fully comply with their duty to protect and make reasonable adjustments for children with disability-linked challenging behaviour.
Increase SEND support and implement reforms: Significantly increase support and funding for SEND inside mainstream schools, aligned with the goals of the SEND and Alternative Provision Improvement Plan. This includes mandatory training for teachers on managing behaviour linked to specific conditions, improved resources, behaviour support, and mental health provision.
Enhance transparent data collection and oversight: Require all schools, local authorities, and multi-academy trusts to publish disaggregated data on exclusions by race, SEND status, and socio-economic status. This data should be used to provide stronger oversight and to monitor and challenge discriminatory practices.
Strengthen appeals and complaint mechanisms: Overhaul the system to make it easier for parents to challenge exclusions. This must include offering legal aid or free advice for families, particularly those from disadvantaged or minority ethnic backgrounds.
Imagine a 12-year-old Black girl, “Aisha,” with diagnosed ADHD and mild anxiety. She has had several incidents of impulsive behaviour in class. One day, she lashes out verbally at a teacher. The teacher issues a fixed-term exclusion. The school fails to make adjustments (e.g., putting in a behaviour plan, using calming space or specialist support) because they say the behaviour is “deliberate”.
Under current law, Aisha’s parents could challenge the exclusion under the Equality Act and show that ADHD is a disability requiring adjustments.
If regulation 4(1)(c) were still applied strictly, the claim might be rejected under “tendency to physical abuse” exclusion, but recent rulings (e.g. the “L” case) suggest this defence is being eroded.
The school would also need to show that the exclusion was lawful, proportionate, and that Aisha’s race or other protected characteristics weren’t indirectly or directly influencing the decision.
This scenario shows how discrimination can be subtle omission (not doing adjustments), implicit bias, under-resourcing and how legal tools can (or sometimes fail to) protect children.
School exclusions and discriminatory behaviour are not just disciplinary matters: they reflect how society values or devalues certain children. Black pupils, especially those with SEND, often bear the brunt of a system that prioritises compliance over support.
The legal protections are strong on paper; Equality Act 2010, SEND Code of Practice, PSED, case law. But in practice, many Black children are excluded without adequate support or fair process. Legislation is only effective when respected and enforced.
To change the system, awareness is key (among parents, pupils, teachers). Reform is necessary in policy, in school leadership, and in law. True equality means giving every child not just those who fit the “model pupil” mould the chance to succeed in school without fear of being excluded or discriminated against.
A recent televised confrontation between journalist Mehdi Hasan and historian Nigel Biggar brought Britain’s colonial legacy into sharp focus. Hasan challenged Biggar, whose new book Reparations: Slavery and the Tyranny of Imaginary Guilt argues that Britons should not feel responsible for slavery, on his double standards regarding national history. Hasan pointed out that Biggar feels proud of Britain’s past triumphs (Biggar readily admitted he feels pride that Britain defeated Nazi Germany) yet refuses any sense of collective remorse for Britain’s past crimes like slavery.
This glaring inconsistency, pride in imperial achievements but no guilt for imperial atrocities, underscores a broader issue in British society: a selective memory of the Empire’s history. Biggar’s stance is part of a familiar pattern of historical amnesia and defensiveness. It reflects how some still seek to celebrate the British Empire’s “good bits” while dismissing calls for accountability as a “tyranny of imaginary guilt.”
From a pro-Black, anti-colonial perspective, however, the facts of history demand a very different response. Hasan’s combative questioning highlighted that we cannot have pride without responsibility. If Britons today choose to bask in the glory of their ancestors’ heroism, they must also reckon with the legacy of their ancestors’ horrors.
The debate exposed how uncomfortable that reckoning remains for many. Biggar’s claims, that slavery was a universal institution not unique to Britain, and that Britain somehow “atoned” for slavery by abolishing it, deserve critical scrutiny. To challenge these views, we must ground ourselves in historical truth: the British Empire’s deep entanglement in the transatlantic slave trade, the violent and extractive nature of its colonial rule, and the ongoing impact of that legacy on Black communities. Only then can we address Britain’s unpaid debt to the descendants of the enslaved.
Slavery Was Not “Universal”.
Biggar has argued that slavery was a near-universal practice in history; a claim meant to downplay Britain’s culpability. Yes, slavery existed in various forms around the world, but the transatlantic chattel slavery system that Britain helped create was unprecedented in its scale and racial brutality.
Between 1640 and 1807, British ships transported approximately 3.1 million enslaved Africans to British colonies in the Caribbean and Americas (one of the largest forced migrations in human history). Millions of men, women and children were shackled in the holds of British slave ships and sold into lifelong bondage on plantations from Jamaica to Virginia. The trade was so vast that by the 18th century Britain dominated the Atlantic slave trade, becoming the world’s leading slave trading nation. To dismiss Britain’s role because “others did it too” is to ignore the outsized part the British Empire played in a crime against humanity.
Crucially, Britain did not just participate in slavery. Britain profited immensely from it. The enslavement of African people was not an incidental footnote to British history; it was central to the nation’s rise as a global power. Enslaved Black labor in the Caribbean and Americas generated enormous wealth that fueled Britain’s economic growth and industrial revolution.
Cash crops like sugar, tobacco and cotton, cultivated by enslaved Africans under horrific conditions, poured wealth into British coffers. That wealth built industries, funded banks, and laid the foundations of modern Britain. As Professor Kehinde Andrews bluntly observes, “Britain should, apparently, be proud of ending slavery but not feel guilty about profiting from it”. Yet profit we did.
In fact, Britain’s industrialisation depended on the fruits of slavery, and “that wealth remains with us today”, as Professor Kehinde Andrews emphasises. Many of Britain’s grand institutions were erected on this blood money: banks like Barclays and Lloyds financed the slave economy; stately homes and museums were enriched by colonial plunder; even eminent universities and the Church benefitted from donations tied to slavery. The very fabric of British society was woven with threads of the slave trade’s profits.
Below are a few historical facts that put Britain’s role in slavery into context:
Scale of Enslavement: By the time Britain outlawed the Atlantic slave trade in 1807, it had trafficked roughly 3–3.4 million Africans as slaves; more than any other country except perhaps Portugal. Of these, about 2.7 million survived the Middle Passage to arrive in the Americas, fueling plantation economies. The sheer scale of human suffering under British slavery was enormous.
Wealth Built on Slavery: The plantation economy of the British West Indies (Caribbean) was a pillar of Britain’s wealth. British colonies like Jamaica and Barbados produced sugar “white gold” that was in huge demand in Europe. Profits from slave-produced sugar, cotton, coffee and tobacco were a significant driver of the British economy in the 18th and early 19th centuries. These profits were invested back in Britain, helping to finance canals, railways, banks, factories and the rise of cities like Liverpool and Bristol. As one historian noted, wealth from the slave trade, slave plantations and even the compensation paid to slave-owners was widely invested in Britain, visible in “many buildings” that stand to this day.
Human Cost: The practice of slavery under British rule was exceptionally brutal and inhumane. Enslaved Africans endured forced labour from dawn to dusk, frequent whipping and sexual abuse, and complete denial of their humanity. Families were torn apart on the auction block. Many enslaved people died from the cruel conditions , overwork, malnutrition, disease and punishment. On some Caribbean plantations, the enslaved had such short life expectancies that they had to be continuously replaced with new captives from Africa. This was not a benign institution – it was a system of racialised terror for profit.
African and Caribbean Resistance: Black people did not accept their oppression passively. Despite the risks, the enslaved resisted in numerous ways. From work slowdowns and sabotage, to flight (maroon communities), and outright rebellion. The Haitian Revolution (1791–1804), in which enslaved people rose up and overthrew French colonial rule to form the first Black republic, sent shockwaves through every slave society. In British territories, figures like Samuel Sharpe in Jamaica led courageous revolts demanding freedom. These struggles struck fear into colonisers and eventually bolstered the abolitionist cause. It’s a reminder that the drive for emancipation came not only from white reformers in London, but from Black resistance and bloodshed in the colonies.
In short, while slavery existed globally, the British Empire’s involvement was uniquely far-reaching. It helped turn a small island nation into an industrial powerhouse, at the horrific expense of millions of African lives. Any honest discussion of Britain’s past must acknowledge this central truth. Slavery was not a minor moral lapse to be relativized by pointing to ancient empires or African sellers; it was a core component of British imperialism. By obscuring this, arguments like Biggar’s serve to excuse and erase the scale of British culpability. The legacy of this crime cannot be waved away as “universal” or long ago – especially when its effects are still visible today.
Abolition without Atonement.
In 1834 Britain’s Parliament “abolished slavery” in name only. The Act freed only children under six and everyone else was reclassified as an “apprentice” forced to keep working until 1838–40. To get it through, the government even borrowed £20 million (around 40% of its annual budget) to compensate slave‑owners for their “losses”. Freed people received nothing. In effect, abolition meant a taxpayer‑funded payout to Britain’s rich slave‑owning class, while those enslaved for generations got neither apology nor share of the wealth they had created. This was no act of atonement.
The consequences of that theft still show today. Professor Kehinde Andrews reminds us that “the wealth generated from slavery is still with us, as is the poverty from centuries of exploitation”
Britain’s modern economy and institutions are deeply rooted in those profits, while the descendants of the enslaved, in Britain and beyond, live with the legacy of that stolen wealth. The fact that Britain’s Windrush scandal could even happen, Andrews argues, is a direct outgrowth of these origins: if our ancestors had not been kidnapped, we wouldn’t now be treated like unwelcome outsiders. So-called abolition may have ended the slave trade, but it did not atone for slavery. It simply entrenched inequality in new forms.
Imperial Myths and the Reparations Movement.
Britain’s self‑image as a benevolent liberator is precisely that a myth. Andrews points out that celebrating Britain as the nation that “abolished slavery” ignores the rest of the story. In reality Britain rose to become the premier slave‑trading power, and its empire was built on brutality. As he bluntly puts it, “the British empire was based on the exploitation, murder and devastation of people across the globe.” This is not sour grapes, but history: every cotton mill, plantation and naval port was enriched by enslaved labour and colonial plunder. Yet British narratives focus on white saviors and omit how our elites profited from slavery, embedding racism into society. Until that full truth is acknowledged, the imperial myth will continue to distort our understanding of justice.
Countering this myth is the growing chorus for reparations. Professor Verene Shepherd, a leading reparations scholar, emphasises that slavery was a crime against humanity in which Britain was a leading participant. She notes that even Britain’s 1807 Slave Trade Act did nothing to halt ongoing enslavement; thousands more Africans were shipped into bondage after it passed. For Shepherd, abolition without remedy was insufficient: she insists Britain “own up to their responsibility” with a full, formal apology, not a vague expression of regret, and put Caricom’s reparations plan into action.
This plan, backed by Caribbean governments, calls for concrete measures like debt cancellation, investment in education and healthcare, cultural programmes and financial compensation. Caribbean reparations leaders have framed it plainly: Britain should help “clean up the mess” its empire created, tackling extreme poverty and underdevelopment left behind. These demands challenge Britain’s refusal to even properly acknowledge its past, and show that reparatory justice must be both symbolic (apologies, truth‑telling) and material (funding, debt relief) to begin undoing the legacy of slavery.
Reparatory Justice Now: A Call to Action
Today Britain still refuses to apologise or pay reparations for slavery. Downing Street has bluntly confirmed that at Commonwealth meetings “there are no plans” for an apology or payments. But the moral case has not disappeared. Polls show a majority of Britons now favour a formal apology, and many support reparatory action.
We must insist on more than empty words. Reparatory justice means investing in Black communities in Britain, the Caribbean and Africa, cancelling odious debts, funding schools and museums, promoting trade justice, alongside a formal apology and honest curriculum change that teach our true history.
Artificial Intelligence (AI) is becoming a powerful force in everyday life. But one of the most important, and least understood, areas where AI is growing fast is policing.
At BLAM UK, our AI Accountability Project is focused on ensuring that Black communities understand how these technologies work, how they are used, and what rights and protections we need as they become more embedded in policing and surveillance.
What Is AI? A Simple Explanation
AI describes computer systems that can perform tasks that normally require human intelligence. That includes things like:
recognising faces
spotting patterns in large amounts of data
predicting what might happen next
sorting people into categories
making recommendations or decisions
AI works by “learning” from data. But if that data reflects racial bias, inequality, or over-policing of certain communities, AI can learn those same patterns and repeat and reinforce them at scale.
How Is AI Being Used in Policing?
Across the UK, police forces increasingly use data-driven systems and algorithmic tools to support decision-making. While some of these tools are marketed as “smart”, “efficient”, or “objective”, in practice they often deepen existing inequalities.
Here are the main ways AI shows up in policing today:
1. Live Facial Recognition (LFR)
LFR scans people’s faces in real time and matches them against police watchlists. It has been used at:
Notting Hill Carnival (for the first time in 2024).
Stratford Westfield
Oxford Circus
Concerns include:
Racial bias: Black faces are more likely to be misidentified
Lack of consent: People are scanned without knowing
Over-policing of Black and migrant communities
2. Predictive Policing Tools
These tools make predictions about where crime is likely to happen or who might be involved. They use past policing data, which is already racially skewed.
If Black communities were over-policed in the past, predictive tools simply reinforce that pattern.
3. “Heat Maps” and Risk Scoring Systems
AI tools can score areas or individuals as “high risk”, which influences how police deploy officers.
Issues include:
Labelling young Black people as “high risk” based on postcode, school exclusions, or previous contact with police
Reinforcing negative stereotypes
Lack of transparency about how scores are calculated
4. Gang Databases & Social Media Monitoring
AI is increasingly used to monitor posts, photos, group chats, and online activity. It can flag people based on:
Music lyrics
Clothing
Friend networks
Location data
This can lead to young Black people being labelled as “gang-associated” without evidence of criminal behaviour.
5. Policing Children and Families Using Data
Policing doesn’t only affect adults. Data-driven systems are now used to:
predict which children might be “at risk”
monitor pupils in schools
track families through multi-agency databases
Children with special educational needs, neurodivergence, or those from marginalised communities are disproportionately affected.This is why BLAM is also developing a child-friendly AI survey to understand young people’s experiences and needs.
Why This Matters for Black Communities
Our research shows that AI policing often repeats the same patterns of racialised over-surveillance Black communities have faced for decades, but now with the speed and scale of technology.
Risks include:
wrongful arrests
discriminatory stop and search
increased profiling of Black children
reduced trust in public institutions
long-term impacts on opportunities, safety and wellbeing
AI is not neutral. It reflects society, including its inequalities. This is why community knowledge and accountability are essential.
What we, at BLAM UK, are doing
Our AI Accountability Community Survey is gathering insights from Black people across England about:
public experiences of policing
views on AI technologies
levels of trust and awareness
hopes and concerns for the future
Your voice will help shape policy recommendations, community education, and advocacy for safer, fairer systems.
AI is reshaping policing right now, whether we know it or not. Understanding it is the first step toward protecting our rights, challenging harmful systems, and ensuring technology serves communities rather than harms them.
At BLAM UK, we are committed to building community power, transparency, and accountability around AI in policing. If you’d like to stay updated or collaborate, follow our social media channels and keep an eye out for upcoming workshops.
The UK government’s recent Curriculum and Assessment Review claims it will build a “world-class curriculum for all,” yet from a Black radical perspective it’s clear there are gaping holes in this plan. The Review document pays lip service to “diversity” and “equality of opportunity,” but nowhere does it confront the reality of racism in education. This absence is not an oversight. It’s symptomatic of a system that would rather celebrate a shallow notion of diversity than commit to true anti-racist change. In the words of BLAM UK’s own social media post, the government “talks about ‘diversity’ but refuses to commit to anti-racism or any real decolonising of the curriculum.” The tone of this blog is unapologetically confrontational and rooted in Black radical thought: if the curriculum review won’t say anti-racism, we will – loudly and clearly.
No Anti-Racism, No Justice: The Curriculum Review’s Silent War on Black Education.
The Curriculum and Assessment Review reads like a masterclass in deflection. It waxes poetic about Britain’s “diversity” being a great strength and the need for “all young people [to be] represented”. It even acknowledges that students not seeing themselves in the curriculum, or encountering negative portrayals, is “disempowering and demotivating”. Yet, glaringly, the Review never once mentions the words “racism” or “anti-racism.” The government’s own report admits “the curriculum needs to reflect society, support equality of opportunity, and challenge discrimination” but it pointedly avoids naming the very discrimination at play: racism. By failing to explicitly address racial injustice, the Curriculum Review effectively wages a silent war on Black education. It upholds the status quo of Eurocentric content under the guise of neutrality.
This is a classic tactic of what Black radical educators call racial silence. The government’s plan pretends you can achieve “high standards for all” while sidestepping the structural racism that holds Black students back. It speaks of “broadening horizons” and “shared values”, but offers nothing to dismantle the whitewashed narratives in history books or the unconscious biases in classrooms. No anti-racism, no justice – it’s that simple. Ignoring race while talking about diversity is a political choice, one that protects the comfort of those in power at the expense of Black children’s education. The Curriculum Review’s polite silence on racism is not just an omission; it is an insult to Black pupils who every day experience the gaps between the curriculum’s rhetoric and the reality of their lives.
BLAM UK Strikes Back: Exposing Systemic Racism in Schools.
BLAM UK is not remaining silent. As a Black-led education and advocacy group, BLAM has been documenting the very racism the government refuses to name. Our recent report, “Eradicating Anti-Blackness in the UK Education System: Achieving Curriculum and Policy Reform Through Litigation,” uncovers the systemic biases embedded in British schools. The findings are damning, if unsurprising to Black students and parents. Black pupils are over-disciplined, underrepresented, and erased from what they are taught. The curriculum still centres whiteness, with Black history either ignored entirely or confined to trauma and oppression narratives (slavery, colonialism, civil rights) devoid of Black joy or excellence. British schools, as BLAM bluntly states, “continue to centre whiteness while punishing Black identity”. In the absence of anti-racist guidance, many teachers lack racial literacy – they have never been trained to understand how racism operates in the classroom. This leads to biased expectations, harsher discipline for Black children, and unchecked racist incidents. The government’s review panel heard from young people about feeling unrepresented and demotivated, yet offers only vagaries in response. Meanwhile, BLAM’s research provides concrete evidence that without intentional anti-racist measures, schools will continue to fail Black students.
BLAM UK is striking back through activism and even legal action. Our report is part of the first legal challenge against the UK government for the curriculum’s racism. We refuse to accept a curriculum that leaves Black contributions out and Black children behind. The message from BLAM and other Black radical educators is clear: representation isn’t a favor, it’s a right. Tinkering around the edges with token “diversity” is not enough. We demand a decolonised curriculum that fully integrates Black history and perspectives across all subjects; not just a perfunctory Black History Month chapter. We demand mandatory anti-racism and racial literacy training for teachers, so that ignorance is no longer an excuse. And we demand an end to policies that police Black children’s hair, language, and culture in the name of “behavior” or “standards”. BLAM’s stance is uncompromising: as long as the government’s plan has gaps where anti-racism should be, we will shine a light on every one of those gaps and push to fill them with justice.
Wales Sets the Standard: Anti-Racist Education in Action.
It doesn’t have to be this way. Just look to Wales, proof that a different, anti-racist approach to education is possible right now. In 2022, the Welsh Government launched a bold Anti-Racist Wales Action Plan, explicitly aiming for an “Anti-Racist Wales by 2030” with zero tolerance for racism in all its forms. These aren’t empty words. Wales put action behind them. As of the new Curriculum for Wales, Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic histories and experiences are a mandatory part of the curriculum. That’s right: in Wales, learning about the contributions and histories of people of colour is required, not optional. Alongside this, Wales rolled out free anti-racist training for all educators (the DARPL programme) to give teachers the “knowledge, skills, empathy, and confidence to celebrate and value diversity” and actively develop anti-racist practice. The Welsh Education Minister, Jeremy Miles, even urged educators to join this national effort to make schools “truly anti-racist”.
The contrast with England’s approach could not be more stark. While Welsh authorities fast-tracked resources to embed anti-racism into every school, the English Curriculum Review remains timid and evasive. Wales shows that when the political will is there, curricula can be transformed to include all students’ heritage and tackle racism head-on. They are literally doing what anti-racist campaigners have been demanding – from mandating diverse histories to training teachers – without the sky falling. So why is the UK Government (and by extension England’s education system) so far behind? The answer lies in political choice. England’s leaders choose to frame curriculum reform in comfortable terms of “diversity” without the discomfort of confronting racism. Wales chose the opposite: to face racism in education directly and systemically. The result? Welsh students of color will see themselves in lessons and books in a way English students still can’t count on. Welsh teachers are being equipped to recognize and challenge racism, whereas English teachers largely are not. If the Curriculum Review panel in Whitehall needs inspiration on how to fill the gap in their plan, they need only look across the Severn Bridge.
No Justice Without Anti-Racist Education: From Tokenism to Transformation.
The message at the heart of this Black radical breakdown is simple: there can be no educational justice without anti-racist education. Anything less is a betrayal of Black children and a distortion of what a “world-class curriculum” should be. The government’s current review, with its genteel avoidance of the R-word, amounts to tokenism. It’s an attempt to placate calls for inclusivity with pretty words about diversity, all while leaving the foundational power structures of the curriculum intact. But as Audre Lorde taught, “the master’s tools will never dismantle the master’s house.” We cannot fix a curriculum built on colonial narratives and racial bias by sprinkling a few diverse examples here and there. Transformation is required.
BLAM UK and our allies are making it clear that we will accept nothing less than a transformational change. We’re talking about reparative curriculum reform – one that not only includes Black stories but critically examines Britain’s colonial history and legacy of anti-Blackness. We’re talking about empowering Black students in the classroom, not suspending them for wearing their natural hair. We’re talking about training teachers to understand racism as readily as they understand reading levels. Until the UK government’s plan addresses these demands head-on, its so-called commitment to “excellence for all” is a cruel joke. Black students deserve better than gaps in the curriculum and gaps in the plan – they deserve an education that tells the truth and prepares them to thrive in a society that still struggles with racism.
In conclusion, let this blog post serve as a warning and a rallying cry. We see the gaps. We feel their harm. And we will fight to fill them. If the official Curriculum Review won’t center anti-racism, then the communities and activists will do it themselves – but we shouldn’t have to. The government must be pushed from tokenism to transformation. Anything short of an anti-racist curriculum is a continuation of injustice. The call is out: No anti-racism, no justice. And we will not settle for anything less
BLAM UK CIC 