Are we all racists?

The Sussexes didn’t coin the term ‘unconscious bias’, but they’ve certainly raised its popularity rating.

The distinction between that and racism is so subtle that we must be grateful to Harry for elucidating it. As he explained, “The difference between racism and unconscious bias, the two things are different.”

What better explanation could one wish for? The difference is that they are different. That’s it, in a nutshell.

There was no need to enlarge any further, but I’m glad Harry did. It gave us a chance to appreciate the fine stylistic nuances the English language makes possible:

“But once it’s been acknowledged, or pointed out to you as an individual, or as an institution, that you have unconscious bias, you therefore have an opportunity to learn and grow from that in order so that you are part of the solution rather than part of the problem.”

The phrase “if you aren’t part of the solution, you’re part of the problem” made me feel warmly nostalgic. It brought back the memory of Texan honkytonks, where signs with that adage adorned the walls, next to “There are no strangers here, just friends you haven’t met” and “Now it’s Miller time.” The old ones are the best.

But what exactly is the problem? And is unconscious bias the same as racism or not? (In case you missed it, I was facetious when saying Harry explained it perfectly.)

Before we try to understand what it is, let’s remind ourselves that it’s because of ‘unconscious bias’ that Meghan won’t attend the coronation, staying behind in California to look after Archie and Lilibet.

Of course, another explanation of Meghan’s absence may be that the Sussexes can’t afford a babysitter. But considering the rip-roaring success of their sustained media efforts to undermine our monarchy, one doubts they are especially hard up.

Apparently, the real reason is indeed that ghastly unconscious bias. Four years ago, that subcutaneous villainy emboldened an unspecified member of the Firm to wonder out loud about the skin colour of the child Meghan was then expecting.

Geneticists tell us that the odds of a mixed-race child being darker than the darker parent are less than one in a million. All those stories of throwbacks are basically old wives’ tales. But they are persistent tales, and our royals, for all their sterling qualities, aren’t known for their voracious study of genetics.

Nor are they really students of any other scientific discipline, with the possible exception of climatology. That they do study, by never missing a single Guardian article on the subject.

Anyway, that seemingly innocuous question left a deep scar on Meghan’s brittle psyche and, vicariously, also on Harry’s. That’s when the talk of unconscious bias started, to culminate in Meghan’s absence from the coronation.

It’s no use asking you whether you have an unconscious bias against members of other races. How would you know if it’s unconscious?

Still, though I can’t delve deeply into your unconscious inclinations, I can try to come to grips with my own. And then I can be so presumptuous as to suggest that, whatever bias I have lurking deep down is extremely common, not to say universal.

We all feel more comfortable in the company of our own kind. Call it communal spirit, call it tribal instinct, call it anything you want, but it’s an observable fact. As is its opposite: we feel less comfortable in the company of those visibly different from us.

Walk through any major city and you’ll get proof galore. You’ll find Chinatown and Little Italy in New York, a Chinese area around Paris’s Place d’Italie, predominantly Muslim areas in London’s East End and Paris’s Saint-Denis, Jewish neighbourhoods in Brooklyn and North London, black areas in all three cities I’ve mentioned. You’ll also find solidly middleclass neighbourhoods everywhere.

How did that come about? No one forced those groups to stick together, whatever The Guardian tells you. Unlike some ghettos of yesteryear, people gravitate to those places because they like to live next to those who aren’t too different from them. That’s the positive end of unconscious bias, whether of race, ethnicity, wealth or class.

The negative end is a momentary sense of unease we experience in the presence of someone looking drastically different. ‘Momentary’ is the operative word. For at that point civilisation either kicks in or it doesn’t.

I’ll venture a guess that any white person experiences that nanosecond of discomfort when suddenly encountering a member of another race. But in the next nanosecond, a civilised white person will suppress that feeling. Because, if our civilisation teaches anything, it’s the unique and equal significance of every human being based on the fact that he is indeed human.

Denying him that ultimate equality is therefore shameful. Thus it’s that second nanosecond that makes a difference. If a man has heeded the lessons of his civilisation, he’ll rebuke himself for that initial reaction and turn truly colour-blind. Once overcome, that first nanosecond will sink into oblivion.

If, however, he played truant when civilisation taught this particular lesson, the initial reaction will linger. He’ll ignore all that stuff about “neither Jew nor Greek” and will treat the other man not as a brother, but as a variously unpleasant alien.

No one should be held responsible for that first nanosecond – and everyone should be held responsible for the second.

Now, that first nanosecond could be legitimately called ‘unconscious bias’ if Harry and Meghan hadn’t given the term a bad name. It’s an intuitive awareness of group identity and a natural human instinct to gravitate towards similarity.

Demonising that bias is the same as castigating the self-preservation instinct or the urge to procreate. Doing so would be denying our humanity.

However, if the second nanosecond fails to override the first, especially if a man still feels that belonging to a certain group makes him not just different but ipso facto superior, then he must be rebuked for it. Doing so would be asserting our humanity.

I realise that my attempt to distinguish between unconscious bias and racism is more prolix than Harry’s, and less epigrammatic. But hey, unlike him, I wasn’t born to the language.

However, also unlike him, I wasn’t born without some basic intelligence. That’s why I know how idiotic it is to blame our royals or anyone else for any ‘unconscious bias’ – or, come to think of it, ignorance of genetics.

Still, say what you will about unconscious bias, but it has done us all a favour. We’ll be spared Meghan’s presence at our milestone constitutional event.