Notes on: Arday, J. (2021) [editorial? ]. Fighting the tide: Understanding the difficulties facing [lower case sic] Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic (BAME) Doctoral Students' [sic] pursuing a career in Academia. Educational Philosophy and Theory. 53 (10): 972--79 https://doi.org/10.1080/00131857.2020.1777640 There are many issues within HE which reinforce aspects of inequality and discrimination, 'aligned to institutionally racist structures'. An organisation called Leading Routes produced a report in 2019 revealing that there were 15,560 full-time UK domiciled PhD students, but only 3% of those were Black, only 1.2% 2016 – 2019 were awarded PhD studentships by UKRI research councils with 30 from Black Caribbean backgrounds. This is a Darth, not reflective of the ever-increasing diverse university student population. Historically HE has been 'situated within a White Eurocentric majority context' and this conflicts with egalitarian ideals [referencing among others Arday 2019]. This has produced 'constant disillusionment ' and 'subtle resistance' to 'normative orthodoxy... and overt racial inequality'[references to him 2017 and 2018 and others ] Recent commentaries exploring institutional racism in HE include A&M 2018, Rollock 2016, Law 2017. The curriculum is Eurocentric and leaves BAME [a note explains the usage,same as in Arday 2020 above] individuals on the periphery. Embodied knowledge is valued 'within normative White academic spaces' (972). Attempts to decolonise have led to reluctance or distortion or consumerism. Ethnic minorities are currently 'healthily represented' with just under half of the [UG] student population from BAME backgrounds, but this is not reflected in the recruitment of academic staff — just 13% of the workforce. Commentaries have examined racial discourses [mostly his, 2015, 2017 and him and Mirza 2018] affecting career progression opportunities. BAME individuals are less likely to have permanent or open-ended contracts (AdvanceHE). Leading Routes (2019) and Mirza suggests a significant disadvantage, despite 'surface approaches' such as race equality documents. Senior university stakeholders and administrators should prioritise the agenda [he said in 2018] especially to recruit diverse staff, but this is often low on the agenda. There is a particular need for senior management and professorial level recruitment. This has been illustrated particularly by the Staying Power report produced by Rollock [?] — only 27 professors were Black women and there were other 'statistical lacerations' [sic] (973 showing the overwhelming preponderance of White men among university professors. Recruitment processes 'continuously facilitate unconscious and implicit biases' [he found in 2019], but Mirza 2018 found that they occurred automatically in judgements of capabilities and situations influenced by 'backgrounds, cultural capitals and personal experiences'. Going back to his own work [!] he found that individuals in positions of power must recognise and acknowledge these personal biases and mitigate their impact — 'this anecdote becomes a powerful tool for the validation of existing racial inequality' [what?] (974). Gillborn agrees that the beneficiaries of power within academia have been White middle-class individuals. 'Consequently, the landscape of academia operates within a patriarchal or, hegemonic normatively White backdrop, where White privilege is consciously and unconsciously advocated as habitual practice' [he said that, with others, in 2017 , and it is indicated by research undertaken by Alexander and  Arday 2015, and others]. 'Dominant discourses suggest that insidious racism and organisational discrimination have become interwoven into the fabric of universities with the authenticity of targeted widening participation interventions now heavily scrutinised and criticised for failing to address the structural and cultural inequalities that discrimination thrives upon within the sector' [?] Equality policies often fall short of their remit. Infrastructure is often weak. The issue has low priority. The agenda is prioritised only if tangible rewards and 'positive external exposure are to be gained' [would he include his own recent appointment?]. There has been policy directed towards gender inequality such as STEM initiatives and this could be a catalyst for initiatives that dismantle racial inequality. However, 'recent commentaries' [including even his own A&M 2018] suggest that this might be driven more by the potential for external funding. Gender inequality seems to have been more important and complacency about race remains, perhaps because it is too uncomfortable a narrative [he has argued this in 2019]. Developing awareness of discrimination might be seen as 'laborious and arduous' (975) [citing Tate and Bagguley this time]. There is more likely to be a resolution with image management rather than 'diligent examinations', agreed by Leonardo, 2009. Micro-aggressions maintain racist cultures [citing Huber and Solorzano and Rollock 2012]. These are indicative of 'insidious racism', and are a significant contributing factor to self-doubt [so he said in 2019]. It is 'carefully articulated through subtle persistent daily re-occurrences'[Rollock]. It has replaced the legal commitment to address overt racism. 'Arday (2019) [quoting himself in the third person now] contends that the viewing of racism through such a constrained lens reduces "racism" to merely the recording of racist incidents which only transpire outside of the "egalitarian" Academy' (975). The 'dearth' of academics of colour reminds doctoral students that the Academy is problematic. [Leading immediately to] 'Academia has been a vehicle for the symptomatic ways in which Whiteness is constructed as normative, and illustrates how differing discursive techniques of White privilege operate together to racialise, marginalise and exclude ethnic minorities from academic spaces (Modood 2012)'. [And what do you make of 'As power becomes the operative, it is essential to observe institutional occurrences… [Which] operates within a reluctance to diagnose and prioritise institutional racism', with a reference to his own work in 2019]. This is 'situated in colourblindness'. People of colour are now seen as hypersensitive or playing the race card, another 'definitive "tool of Whiteness"'. Racism is able to 'fluidly pervade' [sic] because many individuals within the Academy continue to consciously and unconsciously benefit from institutional racism, discrimination and inequality at the long-suffering expense of academics of colour'. Picower comments on the range of performative tools used to maintained hegemonic understandings of race [she does indeed]. So there is an alignment with a 'symbolically violent legacy' and this 'continually and residually effects the mental health and well-being of BAME academic staff', he found in 2018 (976). However, this is not enough, Gillborn says that even White privilege does not reveal significantly the 'multifaceted power and domination of this phenomena [sic] and it is impossible to determine the effect of dominant cycles of power and privilege, 'due to the fluid normativity of these hegemonic behaviours'. There is always a disconnect between actions and words regarding race equality. There is rhetoric to develop equality and diversity practices in HE, but a continuing inequitable landscape and a lack of targeted and penetrative action to dismantle and fragment racial inequality, rare monitoring. There is now an AdvanceHE Race Equality Charter [the one discussed in Rollock's 2016 Guardian article?] which might have helped set a benchmark [his work 2019 shows how] but there is a need for continuous evaluation especially as racial inequalities are 'ever-changing' (976). We must continue to hold universities to account if they are to be culturally diverse and be 'reflective of an ever-increasing multicultural society' rather than remaining 'the province of the White middle-class'. This requires greater urgency by the senior stakeholders. They must develop targeted initiatives and appoint future scholars and mentors. The 'discriminatory and exclusionary topography of the sector' needs addressing, with the development of communities of practice, peer mentoring, support and access to networks. Research awarding bodies must reflect on their distribution of funded awards. Academics of colour should be encouraged to mentor BAME individuals [as recommended in his work 2017]. Race relations organisation should be involved to provide 'pertinent counsel' (977). The Academy should prioritise racial discrimination and inequality as a persistent problem and develop 'an appetite to engage in difficult conversations'. A note points out the problems of using BAME, including a recognition that it is not universally accepted although widely used within the British vernacular — there is no empirical difficulty with it, however. It is the same format as in the other piece Biographical notes for this piece mention the amazing networks he is involved in — Runnymede trust, the Nelson Mandela Centre, the BSA, trade Union Congress race relations committee UQ, UK Council for graduate education UK advisory group on tackling racial harassment operation Black faux MP Parliamentary scheme, and a lot of references. He is also on the editorial board of education philosophy and theory and sociology