Morning Star.png

 

 

Racist, Middle-Class Liberalism

 

 

Kevin Ovenden, The Morning Star, London, 18 January 2015

 

Wasn’t Charlie Hebdo once something to do with the left, loosely a product
of a previous upsurge of social struggle many years ago?

 

Yes it was. So were Sir Oswald Mosley, Benito Mussolini, Georges Sorel…

 

So, I am afraid that that excuse is no mitigation and that the long screeds
which point to anti-Establishment articles the publication has run in the
last half-century are fundamentally misplaced.

 

That is especially so as all of those apologias ignore filth from as early
as 1971, when it had the front page over the manifesto for the legalisation
of abortion in France by the 343 women, including Simone de Beauvoir, who
declared that they had had an illegal abortion, saying: “Who knocked up the
343 bitches from the manifesto on abortion? It was for France!”

 

One of the main mechanisms through which all sorts of people passed from
left to right a century ago was via accommodation to racism or reactionary
ideas about sections of the specifically oppressed.

 

In Britain, racist opposition to immigration figured prominently in the
shift to the right of some figures in the labour movement.

 

Chauvinist nationalism and nativist populism played a role everywhere. So
too did liberal disdain for the great unwashed — anti-Establishment
sentiment fused with fear of the working-class city to produce an
intellectualised new elitism with the educated middle class as the bearer of
reason against the ignorant. Not rule by the rich, but rule by the cultured.

 

Socialism of fools

 

Anti-semitism — the socialism of fools, as the great German socialist August
Bebel so brilliantly put it — had a special corrupting effect.

 

It provided an alternative world view — what we might now recognise as a
“clash of civilisations” — with “the Jew” representing both international
finance and international Marxism.

 

It gilded the path from socialist opposition to the capitalist system
towards all sorts of reactionary positions, including fascism, which had a
pseudo-anti-Establishment veneer.

 

Islamophobia is the Jewish question of our day. It is not simply one
reactionary idea among many, which all principled socialists oppose.

 

It plays a particular corrupting role across politics and society as a
whole.

 

One effect is revealed when some people’s reaction to a viciously racist and
Islamophobic cartoon is quickly to start talking about freedom of speech, as
if the “freedom” to pump out that stuff in Europe were at all under attack
from the states and governing political forces.

 

It is not under attack from them — those in power, those who hold immense
power. At all. To call to rally against a threat which is not there is,
whatever the intentions of those ringing the tocsin, to divert us from those
threats which really are there.

 

Freedom is under threat in France. There is a state of emergency. Scores of
Muslim places of worship are slated for closure by the state.

 

The courts have declared that boycotting Israeli goods is illegal.
Pro-Palestinian demonstrations have been banned.

 

Roma have been rounded up and deported. Trade unionists who occupied their
factory against job losses have had nine-month jail sentences handed down.

 

The already extensive repressive arms of the state are being further
extended into the banlieues and cités.

 

Instead of systematic and serious attention given to this — and similar
developments in other countries — liberal intellectual and political life in
Europe tilts at windmills.

 

You get a flurry of panicked concern between two rounds of one of the very
regular sets of elections in France.

 

Then it is back to normal — the new normal of drowning refugees, anti-Muslim
racism and a battery of repressive legislation in the name of national
security.

 

In Germany, the entire political discourse has been dominated so far this
year by the conjoining of migration and male sexual violence.

 

Yet the liberal European press is full of calls for us to discuss what has
apparently been off-limits — when in Europe’s largest country people have
been doing little but discuss something which is allegedly a taboo.

 

“After our women”

 

We are further meant to obsess about the artistic merits and integrity of
those parading one of the foundational myths of the West in its modern
period — eastern men are after our women. All as if we were discussing
something comparable to the British novelist EM Forster, rather than
something which is more like racist graffiti daubed on a mosque.

 

Of course, these ladies and gentlemen say they are opposed (and most
genuinely are) to the fascist forces such as the 200 neonazi skinheads who
rampaged through an immigrant area in Leipzig this week.

 

But this high-minded, exquisitely balanced, liberal anti-fascism is not only
not robust enough to stop the far-right — it consistently now concedes to
the racist mythology and generates its own versions.

 

It has the whiff of those German liberal bourgeois who found the nazi
burning of books in the 1930s more abhorrent than the incineration of actual
people a little later: “I know the Nuremberg race decrees are excessive, but
have you heard the scandal that they have banned the poems of Heinrich
Heine!”

 

And when you challenge their inconsistencies and evasions, out goes their
defence of free speech and “satire.” In comes self-righteous indignation.

 

So right now I’m drawing on what I learnt through experience growing up in
working-class areas of a port city in the north of England as a kid in the
1970s into the 1980s, before going to a university which is a byword for
Western liberalism (we had Isaiah Berlin at All Souls, don’t you know).

 

It’s pleasing when bits of the liberal middle class are on side and it is a
mistake to write them off as a whole. Not every petit bourgeois is a racist.

 

It was nice when various figures in the firmament of the great and good
spoke out against the National Front in the 1970s.

 

But it was incidental to my life and to those of millions of others at the
base of British society. It made a difference only in so far as it was
hitched to a movement based on something far more profound.

 

Working class life not anti-intellectual

 

What was fundamental was the outcome of the conflicting moods, struggles,
shades of opinion, political forces, ideologies and all of that inside the
working class and the organised expressions of the working class in
movement.

 

That life is rougher. It is less highfalutin, but no less intelligent:
anyone who thinks it anti-intellectual has never spent time with the kind of
the men and women I met many of when growing up.

 

It is often more bitter and more confrontational. But it is capable of great
things and it has — sometimes more open, often less — running through it a
lived reality of solidarity. Of class solidarity, forged in antagonism and
absent as a category in liberal thought.

 

It is gloriously unforgiving of hypocrisy — often through the mechanism of
the most mordant satire and mockery. And it is now more multi­racial than at
any time before.

So in this Europe of extremes, I’m staking my lot — including my own
personal sense of security, of hope against fear — on the proles.

 

I sure as hell would not be able to sleep soundly if I thought my fate
rested upon the European liberal middle classes.

 

•    Kevin Ovenden blogs at kevinovenden.wordpress.com

 

 

From:
<http://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/a-a159-Racism-the-Achilles-heel-of-middl
e-class-liberalism#.Vpx3_Pl9600>
http://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/a-a159-Racism-the-Achilles-heel-of-middle
-class-liberalism#.Vpx3_Pl9600

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

-- 
-- 
You are subscribed. This footer can help you.
Please POST your comments to [email protected] or reply to this 
message.
You can visit the group WEB SITE at 
http://groups.google.com/group/yclsa-eom-forum for different delivery options, 
pages, files and membership.
To UNSUBSCRIBE, please email [email protected] . You 
don't have to put anything in the "Subject:" field. You don't have to put 
anything in the message part. All you have to do is to send an e-mail to this 
address (repeat): [email protected] .

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"YCLSA Discussion Forum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to