The Activist

Marieha Hussain: The Controversial ‘Coconut’ Placard Case

Fact:

When a person of colour behaves in a way perceived to be associated with white people, they could be called a 'coconut'. 

The Case:

Around the time of the Palestine marches in 2023 - 2024, Marieha Hussain, a teacher, faced legal action for holding a placard up showing Rishi Sunak and Suella Braverman as coconuts. Regardless of any humour which she insisted it was, the racial context was flagged as pejorative or derogatory. Although Hussain was acquitted, she lost her career and faced online abuse, but still defended the placard as satire throughout. It can appear petty to be put on trial over a placard, but is it always so? Marieha Hussain's protest board does pale in comparison to modern celebrity acts of racism. 

The Placard

It was unfortunate that the Hussain family faced such harsh treatment. However, despite the racial nature of her legal proceedings, Hussain spoke to the press and accused the system of misusing hate speech laws against ethnic minorities: 

'The laws on hate speech must protect us, but this trial shows they are weaponised to target ethnic minorities'. 

Naturally, the uncivilised treatment she endured would have warranted her to bite-back, so to speak. However, objectively, one trial—of which she was acquitted—is not proof of an entire systemic persecution of the ethnic population. 

The reality

An insightful blog here shows terms like 'coconut' and 'Oreo' are not new. They mean brown on the outside, 'white on the inside' and they are hurled at black or brown people who don’t conform to their racial stereotype. If Marieha Hussain fully understood the term before creating the placard, it wouldn't have been a surprise. Consider the archetypal activist; bold, purpose driven, passionate and focused on improving things. In certain circumstances, 'coconut' metaphors are not considered racist. Caution is advised with social sensitivities, and so, would more leniency with racial offences help? Especially after years of high profile racism? Are the less scrupulous more likely gamble with low level racial offences? 

Race Politics

Think back to the Black Lives Matter movement in the UK, when Sasha Johnson openly criticized whiteness as perpetuating systemic racism. She promoted Blackness with the intensity of a supremacist. Once, while on camera this BLM matriarch bullied a black man, calling him a 'coon,' with no legal consequence. It is a similar slur implying conformity to racist stereotypes. It’s not unreasonable to suggest that a non-Black individual would likely have been prosecuted for the same act. The same laws are needed for everyone because racism is not housed in certain quadrants of the country. 

Holding a candle to our inherent racial differences will eventually lead to stereotyping, strengthening our racial biases. Race-baiter's may present their ideology as a political agenda or choose to defend one specific culture over another. Professor Andrews is an expert in black studies, and he spoke in defence of the placard, stating:

'Who says it’s racialised? These terms, coconut, come from struggle, from others... you can’t tell me I should be proud to have a brown prime minister and a brown home secretary and then say, well, actually, when they do things which are racist, we can’t criticise them. This is political language, and the judge made it clear this is political satire!'

Racially charged insults like 'coconut,' 'monkey,' or 'elephant washer' clearly follow old generalisations. Whereas surprisingly, many anti-immigration concerns do lack the same overt racial overtones, yet they are often fiercely condemned as such! Judge for yourselves, but if Prof. Andrews' argument concerning the Placard is that Sunak and Braverman’s 'whiteness' is inherently racist, he is undeniably reinforcing negative racial stereotypes and demonising white people—which is racism. 

In an ideal world, we would all practice forgiveness and champion care before speaking. In reality, we need rules to live by.

 

Final Thoughts

The trial raises important questions about whether such debates are ultimately more harmful or helpful. Human diversity—cultural, physical, historical, linguistic, and genetic—demands respect for each individual. However, this respect often runs dry.

Excessively labeling every slight as 'racist' can exacerbate modern racial hostility rather than build better bonds. As we venture these grounds, it’s crucial to strike a balance that acknowledges and respects our wonderful differences without failing standards of decency and good faith.