John Cleese got thoroughly schooled for his latest tweet about race
Last week, John Cleese somewhat ruined our vision of him by tweeting a very out-of-touch opinion on the diverse culture of London.
Some years ago I opined that London was not really an English city any more
Since then, virtually all my friends from abroad have confirmed my observation
So there must be some truth in it…
I note also that London was the UK city that voted most strongly to remain in the EU
— John Cleese (@JohnCleese) May 29, 2019
Labour MP David Lammy wasn’t having any of it, so he posted this response.
.@JohnCleese says London isn't really an English city any more.
I challenge John Cleese to not define Englishness by DNA.
Let's define it by shared values in the country we all live in.
Let's have a civic nationalism, not an ethnic nationalism.pic.twitter.com/4CCyh7lHn3
— David Lammy (@DavidLammy) May 30, 2019
It took him a few days, but John Cleese posted his own opinion on that point of view – and it wasn’t great.
A very likeable Labour MP called Davis Lammy wants to tell me that Englishness is not defined by DNA
I do know that, David. I've known it a very long time
That's why I make a clear distinction between race and culture. Race is defined by DNA ; culture isn't
Are we agreed ?
— John Cleese (@JohnCleese) June 3, 2019
He was very swiftly put straight by geneticist and broadcaster, Dr Adam Rutherford.
John, I’m a geneticist; there is no definition of race that corresponds with variation in DNA. Race is not defined by DNA. We’ve known this for quite some time now, and I’m happy to send you my last book which explains this in detail.
— Dr Adam Rutherford (@AdamRutherford) June 3, 2019
We largely abandoned the term race in biology decades ago for this reason. It is not a useful or informative term for science. Instead, race most certainly exists as a social construct. But folk and colloquial racial definitions correspond poorly to human variation in DNA.
— Dr Adam Rutherford (@AdamRutherford) June 3, 2019
Let’s hope that puts an end to whatever crusade Mr Cleese is currently on.
Adam Rutherford wasn’t the only person to weigh in.
When you lean on science to make your argument…but science disagrees with you.
“The concept of race has no genetic or scientific basis.” — Craig Venter, who led the first draft sequence of the human genome https://t.co/1rNZFbvPpx
— Christian Christensen (@ChrChristensen) June 3, 2019
Never realised in all my childhood enjoyment of Monty Python that would be a moment when the Dead Parrot Sketch would be an appropriate description of John Cleese trying to single handedly defend both colonialism and scientific racism, but here we are https://t.co/4ZLaOA5iNv
— Zara B (@zaranosaur) June 3, 2019
No, no, no, @JohnCleese! Race is NOT defined by DNA. That is exactly wrong. "Race" is a social construct (no matter what the DTC ancestry companies market). Pushing idea there are biologically meaningful demarcations can do real harm.
My take: https://t.co/ChzseMlKrv @vivsjones https://t.co/ISA2Xlmteq
— Timothy Caulfield (@CaulfieldTim) June 3, 2019
It's so sad that John Cheese died in 2007 but he definitely did and we all agree that he did someone change his Wikipedia https://t.co/hBpFYGl7Vc
— Thomas Smith (@seriouspod) June 3, 2019
How disappointing that he's going full Morissey.
— Martin Sykes-Haas (@martinsykeshaas) June 3, 2019
Thankfully, there was some good news to raise our spirits.
I'm pleased to report that Michael Palin is still lovely.
— Chris Ward (@christopherward) June 3, 2019
Read more: Just 11 perfect replies to John Cleese after he said London’s ‘not really an English city anymore’