COMPLAINT ABOUT LIDL'S 'PC' ANTI-MALE / ANTI-'WHITE' COMPLAINTS PROTOCOL / POLICY -- THE 'IT'S ANYTHING ANYBODY SAYS IT IS' IDIOTIC MALICIOUS NONSENSE. Lidl (LIDL GB) has been stonewalling my complaint since I sent it on April 19. I had been admonished by a store manager, who had summoned me to his office after (on my previous visit to the store) a till worker had made a transparently empty, indeed inadmissible obviously groundless complaint (nonsensical, or frivolous, or malicious) against me. I had what was agreed to have been a friendly brief chat with a (fellow ‘white’) till worker, to whom I expressed sympathy with workers being exposed to COVID-19, mentioning I possessed risk factors and that ethnic minorities also were now found to be at risk. This the till worker, behind my back, later deemed ‘racist’! My behaviour had been in all respects impeccable. The till worker apparently is either some sort of extreme-political nut, had either willfully or somehow inadvertently misinterpreted, or was himself anti-male ‘sexist’ and/or ageist, and/or ‘racist -- either anti-’white’, or possibly anti-ethnic minority -- as I have an unusually dark skin for a local ‘white’. The manager voiced the usual ‘it’s anything anyone says it is’ baloney (the so-called ‘Macpherson’ principle re discrimination / harassment), which is not subject to any test of reasonableness by definition: any defence can be rebuffed as ‘case proved’ from the very outset, and if not upheld the complainant could cite that the complaint had been facilitated or actively encouraged by company policy under false pretenses. So I challenged Lidl GB Head Office on the basis of its complaints policy. They repeatedly refused to divulge what it is, nor how they dealt with my complaint, and deem the case closed. It is not. Lidl owes me an apology and an explanation -- and an undertaking to review policy and get rid of any adherence to ‘Macpherson’. Going straight to chastisement before asking my side is fundamentally against any sort of due process in any processing of complaints. The very basis of law is establishing facts and then applying some standard of proof. I contend Lidl’s policy re complaints would not withstand legal challenge. Furthermore, given the basis of ‘Macpherson’ in ‘identity politics’ (/‘PC’) in political Left backlash against ordinary people, specifically ‘the workers’, deemed male, ‘white’ and heterosexual (pique for us all not buying Marxist bull), then Lidl’s behaviour is itself directly ‘sexist’ and ‘racist’ towards me. I have received several recorded-delivery stonewalling replies but still no answer. I will persist.