When, two
days ago, I wrote
for the first time from “Weimar Little England” I did not realise that I
was being anachronistic because we had already opened
hostilities with the Poles. The random deportations of European migrants
for allegedly sleeping rough joins the recent
mass deportation to Jamaica to reveal to us the society in which we have
been living for some time.
The official
racism which legitimates, but never satisfies, right-wing populism is as happy
scapegoating white “foreigners” as black (perhaps nearly as happy?) Bigotry is
simple and straightforward (and all too
common). For socialists trying to work out how to respond to these
darkening days these are, however, confusing times.
I know that
there would be great value in a united response to the resurgent forces of
reaction and the far right (and I am inclined to be present outside the Supreme
Court on Monday even if it is true that Farage
has called off his attempt to
be Mussolini).
However. I
am confronted by some questions, of which these are three;
How can we
unite with those who campaigned (whether they are
comfortable to acknowledge it or not) alongside the populist and far
right in favour of a vote to leave the European Union which, by
the time it was cast, was a vote against
immigration?
How do we
engage, as anti-racists and anti-imperialists, with those
whose first response to
the death this weekend of Fidel Castro was to echo
ill-informed criticisms
rather than acknowledge
achievements?
How do we work
with those cowards and careerists are misleading
the “Momentum” organisation
having engaged in
a blatantly racist
witch-hunt
of their own Vice-Chair as part
of a craven capitulation
to Zionism (never mind the Labour
right-wing to whom they gave ground)?
I do not
know the answer to these questions, but I do know that we will not succeed on
the basis of simply ignoring these divisions. As urgent as is the task of
uniting against our adversaries an even more urgent task is to understand what
we face and to respond on the basis of principles.
We must
start from a position of socialist internationalism, of unyielding support for
equality and opposition to racism and imperialism. These principles we cannot
compromise if we are to be useful in dealing with the rising tide of racism and
reaction nationally and globally.
I shall keep
thinking about what this means in practice.
7 comments:
Might a starting point be to drop the sectarian whining?
Then maybe you can get involved with this lot: http://www.standuptoracism.org.uk/ along with many other trade unionists, socialists and anti-racists.
Just a suggestion.
Another SWP front organisation? Is that really the best the left can come up with?
(And do we have to accept Brexit to become involved?)
Good grief, what is the matter with you? You ask how you can unite against the rising tide of racism with those you have disagreements with. The answer is to stop wallowing in a sectarian cesspit and organise. In other areas of the country Unison members and branches are involved in setting up SUTR groups. I'm sure they wouldn't object to working with someone who stood four-square for Remain with Cameron and May as they plotted mass deportations of Jamaicans and rough sleepers. [it's easy being sectarian, but much better to do the right thing ;) ]
While we're at it, see this on the relationship between SWP and SUTR: http://labourlist.org/2016/10/yes-the-swp-were-at-the-stand-up-to-racism-rally-we-organised-but-i-have-spent-my-life-arguing-against-the-hard-left/
The use of the word "sectarian" to describe anyone who disagrees with you is not particularly good use of language and seems completely to miss (or perhaps dismiss) the point I am trying to make (and think about).
Although I don't know you personally, I have followed your blog over the past couple of years and admire the way you've stood up to and exposed the bureaucracy in a certain union. Up until this particular post I hadn't found anything particularly objectionable.
Now perhaps I was misreading you, but to me this post came across as an extended riff on how difficult it would be to fight racism alongside groups you disagreed with about Brexit or Castro or the treatment of Ms Walker or whatever.
I answered your point at the end of the blog by suggesting you get involved with SUTR. You responded with the classic sectarian line: "Another ---* front organisation." [* insert initials of whichever group you disagree with] When I pointed out your error you claimed I was misusing the word sectarian! Classic avoidance technique. So let me be clear:
I use the word sectarian to describe those who look for what divides us rather than working together on what unites us. [see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sectarianism#Political_sectarianism]
So now maybe you understand how difficult it is for the rest of us to bite our tongues and work alongside people whose party leaders think it's a wizard wheeze to bomb other countries back to the stone age, or to support I D Smith illegally backdating legislation on Workfare so as to destroy a few more poor people's lives.
We manage it because to do otherwise would be damaging to the movement we are trying to build together - be it about fighting fascism, austerity, war or even racism. If you can't do the same, if your principles are more important than the fight against racism what does that make you, besides irrelevant?
Start by stop coming accross as a patronising know-it-all who needs to lead the workers to the promised land because we're too thick and racist to know what's good for us. You're a pompous arse and a barrier to our class advancing.
Describing the criticisms of Jackie Walker as 'racist' and 'a capitulation to Zionism' seems to ignore the blatantly anti-semitic content of what she said and wrote. I mean, come on - she wasn't criticising the settlements. She was saying (on Facebook) that Jews were responsible for the slave trade and (in the training session) that it would be 'wonderful' (weird choice of word) if Holocaust Memorial Day commemorated 'other Holocausts' (it does commemorate genocides since 1945). It's a far cry from the legitimate criticism of Israel which is usually attacked as 'anti-semitism' - these are far-right talking points. I'm sure her comments came from ignorance rather than hatred, but I'm disappointed to see you failing to question what she actually said.
Post a Comment