STROLLING through the Central Market a couple of weeks ago, I came upon a little second-hand paperback entitled ‘The Channel Island Joke Book’.

It was no surprise to discover that along with a generous helping of gentle teasing of Hedley, Winter, Mazel and other local caricatures came the inevitable chapters taking the rise out of the inhabitants of our sister islands.

It’s reminiscent of the sort of ribaldry between every neighbouring nationality — English and Irish, French and Belgian, Polish and Russian, Australian and New Zealand — they’re all the same. All depend on stereotypical attitudes and prejudices to claim superiority; not intentionally wounding, but undeniably derogatory.

Poking fun at your neighbours has always been a national pastime. It’s a feelgood factor going back to classical times. For the Greeks and Romans, anyone not of the toga was a barbarian, a foreigner, which made them easy targets for derision or worse. The motives are easy to identify: tribal envy, animosity or lack of understanding, territorial competition, ideology, sheer greed, or derision — all powerful motivators.

So is this racism? Well, actually, no. But xenophobia and jingoism each exert a powerful dividing influence between communities, and while boasting some shared elements, they are probably best described as ‘negative patriotism’.

Racism, on the other hand, is a hideously cruel ‘hate crime’. It exists institutionally. It demoralises individuals and robs others of their rightful place in a society which signs up to plurality and equal opportunity.

Since 1976 it has been a crime in the UK to discriminate against any individual on the grounds of race, and the law has a powerful influence on job recruitment, policing and representation. It’s easy for us to see this as a black-on-white thing. And, frankly, over the past couple of decades in the UK, that’s what it has come down to. Because in a generally harmonious society, such obvious differences have been just the things which have excited the newspapers and activists.

Crime statistics, in particular, have been calibrated on racial grounds. Jobs, sporting achievements, the entertainment industry — all fail to escape racial labelling.

Racism isn’t just ‘colourism’; it goes fundamentally deeper, and it works both ways. The denigration of incoming fellow citizens because of their colour and racial origins is just as unacceptable as the behaviour of those who manipulate the term ‘racist’ as a slogan whenever they find themselves in a corner. The foul-mouthed tirade vented on an unsuspecting British Airways cabin crew by a cat-walk-stumbling, publicity-seeking mobile clothes peg over mislaid baggage is but one blatant example.

Moreover, the use of the race card comes with the expectation that the PC-cowed ‘assailants’ will fail to mount a defence. In effect, it exposes a culture in which bullies can capitalise by clothing themselves in the mantle of ‘victim’. National TV has just witnessed night after night of outspoken ranting on Channel 4’s vacuous Big Brother, where overt and loud racism is a core element. We’re not talking here about Paddy, Jock or Taffy. It only becomes an issue when the victim hails from an ethnic minority.

Prince Harry’s laddish nicknaming of his Sandhurst officer colleague in a three-year-old military training video not surprisingly attracted all measure of derision from the ‘race police’, in denial of the cruel barbs they may have exchanged in their own youth. Maturity would probably have induced caution, although Harry does have a family tradition to maintain.

But what a gift for an orchestrated anti-royal witch-hunt, and a golden opportunity for mischievous press hounds to print the alleged slander or insult in full.

Then came the local uproar over the racial overtones of the embarrassing apology for a joke perpetrated by Guernsey’s maladroit Deputy Chief Minister. And now we have the ridiculous affair of the outspoken former Prime Minister’s daughter, hirsute tennis players, marmalade jar motifs, un-private conversations, mischief-making and suppressed bigotry.

What then does this all really amount to? It’s certainly a rainy plain away from the baying Spanish F1 fans waving derogatory placards against Lewis Hamilton, or mindless racial taunting from the stands at football grounds. Nor can it compare with the vicious assault on a young English woman in Aberdeen a month ago because she had an English accent. Like many overseas victims in the UK, she had actually been living in Scotland for 18 years and had been assimilated into the local community.

It was not good enough to dispel prejudice, and, according to Grampian police, it was not an uncommon incident. It might not strictly be defined as racism, but targeting an individual just because he or she is from a different region embodies all the same heinous undertones.

Nevertheless, in the week that the United States passed its own historic racial milestone with the inauguration of Barack Obama as its 44th president, it was indeed heartening to hear Trevor Phillips, the chairman of the Equality and Human Rights Commission, declaring that race relations in the UK had improved dramatically in the last 15 years.

A long-term critic of the nation’s record, he went on to suggest that Britain was, in fact, the least racist country in Europe. He did add, however, that this progress could be wiped out by the worsening economic crisis if, for example, poor Britons lost out to better-qualified immigrants in the battle for scarce jobs.

So no cause for complacency. Any community has to be on its guard. Indignation and envy can quickly turn into prejudice — our own Portuguese and Polish communities are not immune from senseless reproach. But like the exploits of Hedley, Winter and Mazel, it’s vital to retain a sense of perspective.

By the way, have you heard the one about the French construction company, the Jersey technical services minister and the incinerator contract . . ?