No, the countryside isn’t racist

The Welsh government is just the latest institution to make this baffling claim.

The Welsh government believes that the countryside presents a problem for ethnic minorities. Its latest report on “racism relating to climate change, environment, and rural affairs” concludes that certain racial groups “face barriers created by exclusions and racism preventing them from fully participating in ‘environmental’ activities.” In response, the Welsh Conservative leader Andrew R. T. Davies has told a reporter from Guido Fawkes: “This kind of outdated virtue signalling nonsense is completely out of touch with the needs of the people of Wales. Labour is stuck on yesterday’s thinking, the kind that is being roundly rejected globally. Time to turf them out.”

The horticultural pun is forgivable given the sheer magnitude of the absurdity. While we might dismiss this as the usual brain-addled antics of the Welsh government, it’s just the latest example of a trend that has been ongoing for years. In September 2020, an article appeared in the Metro claiming that the countryside was “shaped by colonialism” and therefore is “unwelcoming to people of colour”.

Apparently, the illustration of three white people scowling at a black woman while standing in a meadow is proof of the article’s central thesis. I may as well sketch a shiny goblet and claim it as evidence that I’ve found the Holy Grail.

And then there was that article in the Guardian in December 2020 which insisted that “the British countryside remains a distinctly white and often intimidating place for BAME communities”.

And what about the presenter of BBC’s Countryfile who also claimed that the countryside is racist?

And let’s not forget the guide issued by Transport for London in October 2021 which asserted that gardens are racist and full of “problematic plant life”. Wisteria was specifically cited as having colonial roots. The guide also singled out rhubarb which, although not racist in of itself, is often an ingredient in puddings along with sugar, and because sugar is associated with the slave trade rhubarb is therefore racist-adjacent. (I’m not making this up.)

The outdoors is surely about as inclusive as it gets, given that it’s outside and therefore anyone can go there. It goes without saying that all of this is incredibly patronising to minority groups. It’s yet another example of regressive ideas being repackaged as progressive.  

The maniacal identitarian weaponisation of the countryside doesn’t stop with race. You might recall in 2023 when Kew Gardens launched its “Queer Nature” project. It was a celebration of diversity in art, plants and fungi, which seeks to draw connections between plants and LGBTQ+ communities.

It sounds like the kind of thing I would invent for satirical purposes. But when quizzed on the purpose of the project by a member of the public, the official Kew Gardens Twitter account responded: “Plants and flowers have often been associated with queer identities, both positively and negatively, and this will be explored in the Queer Nature festival by amplifying queer voices through art, allowing for new conversations.” Another tweet explained that “while the basic system of reproduction in lots of plants involves the fusion of male and female gametes, some individual plants do not neatly fit into binaries”. While it is true that most flowering plants are hermaphrodites, it should be noted that human beings aren’t plants. That said, it does look as though Kew’s Twitter account is being run by vegetables.  

Kew Gardens was established in the mid eighteenth century and was opened to the public in 1840. This incredible resource cultivated plants from across the globe, some of which had come from Captain Cook’s voyage to the South Seas. Kew is a UNESCO World Heritage Site and houses over 8.5 million items. According to its website, it has “the largest and most diverse botanical and mycological collections in the world”. So why all the infantile attempts at activism?

It isn’t clear to me how flowers are relevant to being gay. I suppose you could mention the trend started by Oscar Wilde of wearing green carnations in the lapel, which some have interpreted as a secret symbol of “the love that dare not speak its name”. Another example might be the Ancient Greek poet Sappho, known for her depiction of lesbian love, who incorporated the motif of violets into her work. And I was called a pansy at school, so perhaps that counts too.

But let’s be honest, flowers and plants have generally been associated with heterosexual love. One thinks of Robert Burns: “My Luve is like a red, red rose”. Or Shakespeare: “There’s Rosemary, that’s for remembrance”. Or that old mawkish classic: “roses are red, violets are blue”. If anything, Kew’s emphasis on flora seems a tad heteronormative.  

What’s happening at the Welsh government and Kew Gardens is the familiar story that has played out throughout this interminable culture war. All it takes is a handful of activists in any given institution for it to fall. This explains why back in June of this year the Chelsea Physic Garden (London’s oldest botanic garden, established in 1673) ran a “Queer Ecology Evening Walk”.

The dominance of activists in every nook of life, no matter how mundane, also explains why a group of self-proclaimed “queer hikers” decided to set up their own walking group. In March 2022, an article appeared in the Pink News entitled: “Meet the queer hikers proving the great outdoors isn’t just for cis, straight, middle class folk”. The organisers claimed that they wanted “to challenge what they see as a lack of equality around access to the outdoors”. In truth, gay people have been going outside for years. (Apart from Peter Mandelson, who sleeps in a coffin because direct sunlight will kill him.)

And the idea that lesbians don’t go hiking is absurd. It’s practically compulsory.

All of these examples are ostensibly frivolous and easy to dismiss as yet more “woke gone mad” news items, but there are other sinister aspects to consider. For instance, I was able to discover the reason why Kew Gardens went along with this ideological bilge by reading its Equality, Diversity and Inclusion Delivery Plan. One of Kew’s EDI “strategy pillars” includes the seeking of accreditation by outside activist groups including Stonewall. Like many public bodies, ideas are implements in the workplace in return for points on schemes like Stonewall’s Workplace Equality Index.

And this has serious ramifications. You might remember when the Times uncovered documents revealing that Stonewall has attempted to control what NHS trusts, government departments and local councils say on their social media accounts, demanding public support for its views on gender identity ideology, and then rewarding them with points towards its Top 100 Employers index. This means that if a government department uses the term “birthing parent” instead of “mother” they are able to advance in the scheme. It’s quite the racket.  

Worse still, 10% of the Scottish government’s score on the index was relating to consultation with Stonewall on revising legislation. In other words, for a while there it was looking very much as though the SNP were using taxpayers’ money to fund a lobbying group that would in turn reward the government for changing the law according to their ideology.  

The Welsh government is one of the worst offenders when it comes to pushing gender identity ideology onto children and working at the behest of identitarian activists. A Freedom of Information request in 2023 revealed that “Stonewall Cymru was directly funded by Welsh Government in the sum of £100,000 for the financial year requested”. (The full details can be accessed here.) I am not alleging that the latest drive to “problematise” the countryside is being directed by activist groups for financial gain, but it does suggest a certain susceptibility when it comes to this kind of ideological mania.

So when the Welsh government and other institutions insist that the countryside is racist, or that chrysanthemums are homophobic, or that badgers hate Sikhs, or whatever the current delusion might be, we shouldn’t just laugh it off. These are just the latest and silliest symptoms of a much deeper cultural malaise. This is an illiberal and regressive ideological movement masquerading as liberal and progressive, and it has ways of asserting its power.

Let’s face it, if they can convince you that the countryside is a domain of heteronormative white supremacy, they can convince you of anything.

---