All three are linked to the extent they demonstrate the complexities of issues relating to race and immigration, and the fact that, collectively, we’re not fully at ease with such issues.

Bagehot used his column to contrast the differing analyses of what the Lawrence convictions meant about British society:

“…each side is talking about a different thing. Mrs Lawrence is offering an answer to the question: is race still a problem in Britain? She says, accurately, that it is. In contrast, those heaping praise on the Lawrences are addressing separate, if related questions: have public attitudes to race changed, and did the Lawrence case play a part? The answer is yes, twice over.

Caution is needed. Britons have not become swooning converts to internationalism. Transatlantic Trends, a big annual opinion poll, found the British unusually hostile to immigration in its latest survey, with 68% of Britons seeing it as more of a problem than an opportunity, far exceeding the gloom found in France, Spain, Germany, Italy or America.”

Dorian Lynskey deftly deconstructs the opportunistic outrage against Diane Abbott about her tweets this week:

“What this absurd flap demonstrates is the desperate longing of some privileged people to wear the rags of victimhood. Any whiff of black-on-white racism, like misandry and heterophobia, is an excuse for these delicate souls to downplay the dominant prejudice and argue that there is a level playing field of bigotry or, on the crazier fringes, that there is a “war” on white people/men/straight people/motorists, etc. Coming so soon after the Lawrence verdict, Abbottgate is a nasty attempt to pretend that, hey, there’s racism on both sides now. A black man gets knifed to death by a white mob; a black MP writes a carelessly worded tweet about white people. It all evens out.”

And the Economist argued against net migration caps:

“…the City can compete successfully with other financial centres only if Britain has the right policies on regulation, tax and immigration…

The British government’s own policies on tax and immigration are … doing a lot of damage.…

Tight limits on talented immigrants damage the City’s prospects—and indeed the prospects of every bit of British business.”

The government’s bizarre net migration cap policy appears unworkable*, and also does little to prevent what Amartya Sen terms ‘plural monoculturalism’:

“This government has fallen into the same trap as the previous one – it is making policies based on negative perceptions and fears rather than addressing immigration as a neutral social phenomenon that can be as beneficial or as damaging as we make it. Sadly our government has a fantasy that if it can prevent people from coming and staying here, it will solve all our social problems.”

Issues of race and immigration are vexed and this week’s events have served only to underline that fact.

What remains unclear is whether the UK will ever reach a truly settled position on race and immigration, or whether – as seems more likely – we’re fated to muddle along with the appearance of a multicultural society, but with deep-rooted racial tension simmering under its surface.

*Read Cameron’s ‘good immgration, not mass immigration’ speech to see how confused the policy is.

For what it’s worth, this is a (personal) summary of what I learnt at those hustings:

• The two Eds could barely conceal their contempt for one another. Ed M had a good line about it “being like the Treasury” when Ed B was pulled up for waffling. Ed B made some pointed remarks about the manifesto Ed M wrote.
• Diane Abbott will make the hustings more entertaining, for sure. But she’s likely to drag the other candidates left as they attempt to combat her popularity amongst a fairly vocal section of the Labour party. (See Hopi Sen’s post on why Mili D may come to regret Abbott being on the ballot).
• We should avoid a three-month long public self-flagellation. We lost the last election because we didn’t have a positive vision/narrative for the future of the country. Spending the whole leadership contest picking over what went wrong in 13 years will be an horrifically pointless waste of time and is unlikely to endear us to the electorate (this is an question of balance, not one of avoiding talking about the difficult introspective issues).
• Only two candidates, in my view, showed they had the ‘common touch’ – Diane Abbott and Andy Burnham. The Milibands show flashes of passion, although at times came across as managerial automatons. Ed Balls has a surprising ability to mix verbosity, pomposity and aggression when speaking.
• All of the candidates need better lines on the economic issues facing the country – Abbott, Burnham and the Milis need more substance, Balls need to stop sounding like he’s reading from a textbook.
• The consensus from those in the room tweeting about the event was that Andy Burnham had an awful hustings. I disagree. I thought he performed well and certainly better than could have been expected. He was passionate and refused to abandon his record for expediency – not populist, but principled. I think he will play well on television, too – unlike some of the other candidates. Far from being an “also ran”, I think Andy Burnham may be a dark horse in the campaign. Some of his answers lacked polish and substance, although this will change as the campaign drags on.
• David M was impressive on defence and foreign affairs. His answers on Trident showed real leadership potential, even if they weren’t universally welcomed by the audience (the event was co-sponsored by the CND).
• The battle between the Miliband brothers is going to be a key focus of the media, and their facile analysis of it will annoy and irritate me by the end of the summer.
• Andy Burnham’s make-up was good.
• This is going to be a long campaign, fuelled by the same half-baked phrases and jokes. I’m glad I’ll only be going to a couple of hustings. I’m more glad I’m not one of the candidates.
• We should have had a proper leadership contest in 2007.
• Hecklers should stop looking so smug with themselves. They are not big. Or clever.

I am undecided as to who to support. Genuinely.

In truth there is more that unites the candidates than divides them. Hopefully by September there will be an obvious choice for Leader.