Professor Agustine John Accuses Keir Starmer of Racial Cynicism following "Island of Strangers" comments in close proximity to Windrush Day
In a blistering open letter, Professor Augustine John has levelled serious accusations against Prime Minister Keir Starmer, claiming he is complicit in perpetuating “The Other Windrush Scandal” — a term used to describe the commodification of Black British history for political capital while sidestepping real accountability.
Advertisement
Professor John draws a stark line between what he terms two distinct Windrush scandals. The first — well-documented — stems from the Home Office’s "hostile environment" policies that unlawfully targeted thousands of Caribbean British citizens. The second, he asserts, is the rise of a “Windrush industry”: a state-sanctioned effort to rewrite Britain’s post-war racial history through symbolic gestures, selective storytelling, and political stagecraft.
Windrush reception at 10 Downing street June 2025
“Rather than your hubristic endorsement... let us see evidence of you and Labour taking a lead in putting an end to this Other Windrush Scandal,” Professor John writes.
From 'Island of Strangers' to No.10 Reception
The letter accuses Starmer of deliberately speaking to “white Britain’s” immigration anxieties following Reform UK’s gains in the May elections. His choice of words — warning Britain was at risk of becoming “an island of strangers” — mirrored decades-old race-baiting tactics, John argues, comparing them to Enoch Powell’s infamous “Rivers of Blood” speech.
Yet, barely a month later, Downing Street hosted a Windrush Day reception, celebrating the very communities Starmer’s earlier language had alienated. John charges this pivot as evidence of duplicity: valorising Black Britons in ceremony while undermining their realities in policy and rhetoric.
Historical Amnesia in High Places
John’s critique isn’t limited to contemporary politics — it’s a reckoning with historical erasure. He locates Britain’s post-war Black migration within a wider colonial arc: one of systemic underdevelopment, coerced labour, and betrayal. From the West India Regiment to Smethwick’s racism to the sidelining of Diane Abbott, he pieces together a damning portrait of British institutional memory.
He contends that the modern Windrush narrative — narrowed to a single ship and a tokenised version of Black Britishness — sanitises the struggle, marginalises radical histories, and props up a self-congratulatory establishment.
Forde Report and Unanswered Questions
Further fuelling the fire is Starmer’s refusal to publish the Forde Report in full — a long-shelved investigation into Labour Party racism, bullying, and sexism. John suggests the same institutional logic that erased Windrush victims now suppresses internal dissent, especially from Black and Global Majority MPs.
What This Means for Labour — and Britain
For activists and historians, the letter reignites urgent questions: Who controls Britain’s racial narrative? Can symbolic reparations substitute for justice? And what does Labour’s future look like if it alienates the very communities it claims to champion?