You see Dan, I don't need to prove to you what I know to be true.
The fact that I know it to be true is all that matters to me.

I don't care what you believe.

You can quote laws all you like. Anti prejudice legislation only works against White people. It is designed that way. It is intended to disenfranchise the 'White ruling class' and enforce 'diversity' whether they like it or not. It is the new fascism which, ironically, is supported by naive liberals and Leftists.

One has to wonder where all these directives are coming from. Why would those in the shadows want this?

Follow the money.

You see Dan, I don't need to prove to you what I know to be true.
The fact that I know it to be true is all that matters to me.

I don't care what you believe.

You can quote laws all you like. Anti prejudice legislation only works against White people. It is designed that way. It is intended to disenfranchise the 'White ruling class' and enforce 'diversity' whether they like it or not. It is the new fascism which, ironically, is supported by naive liberals and Leftists.

One has to wonder where all these directives are coming from. Why would those in the shadows want this?

Follow the money.

I took his viewed to be a commentary on a culture and accent that some present with (that is not entirely race specific). Far, far more people do not behave that way than do, so it's still not an example of why a minority would not be suited to a job.

Starkey often makes good points, but there are lazy, catch-all aspects to his commentary too that open him up to the accusations made. It may pay to consider that someone can be both racist, but also made some pertinent observations. It's more often than not only part of the story though (and typically people only want to listen to the half of the story that align with their politics).

David Starkey spoke and wrote at length about this. He is now a racist.