What are we gonna make of this British insanity? Asks VDH; Once a person is identified as a victim or the oppressed, that serves as a get out of jail card

 
Over at the Daily Signal, Victor Davis Hanson explains Britain’s ‘Sickly Reversed’ George Floyd Moment. 

 … when police arrived, [Henry Nowak] was on the ground bleeding out, clearly bleeding out and muttering, “I’m dying.”

What was the reaction of the police? Did they render immediate first aid and restrain [Vickrum Digwa]? No. No. What they did was they—Mr. Digwa then made up a lie, … that he had been a victim of racism, that Mr. Nowak had exchanged words that were racial in nature to him that prompted the stabbing.

So, what did the police do? They put handcuffs on the dying young Mr. Nowak. And of course, he died with the handcuffs without any medical attention at all.

 … at some point, the police finally caught on after Mr. Nowak died, or they had surveillance, or they had witnesses, that there had been no racial taunts, that that was a complete lie.

And they had watched and, in some ways, abetted the death of Mr. Nowak, who was a white male and was on the wrong side of the oppressor-oppressed binary, apparently.

What are we gonna make of this British insanity?

 … What can we learn from all this? We’ve talked about the problems with DEI. DEI not only destroys meritocracy and promotes people who did not earn that admission or that hiring based on widely accepted criteria that everybody accepts.

We’re an equal opportunity Western civilization. We are not a mandated equality of result, at least we weren’t until recently.

But there’s another wrinkle to DEI. Once a person is informally or formally, identified as a victim or the oppressed, that serves as a get out of jail card. That is the end of deterrence.

 … It’s also kind of tragic that the Sikh community has been one of the most hardworking, law-abiding communities of immigrants in America and in Europe.

And they’ve had a tendency to look at themselves as individuals, not as collectives. But it would be a shame if the Sikh community did not condemn members of their own community if they’re going to talk in collective terms.

They’re under no obligation to single out Mr. Digwa in Britain. But if they talk about the Sikh community, then they are, and they had.

One of the Sikh leaders in Great Britain said that now the Sikhs were subject to hate crimes. And so, he was trying to take the onus away from the murderer to now his community is victimized.

Wouldn’t it have been better for the Sikh leader to come out and say, “Mr. Digwa is not representative of our community.["?]