Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 10:22:58 -0000
From: Adam Rose <Adam-AT-pmel.com>
Subject: M-I: RE: reply to Adam on Australian racism



In reply to Gary:

I cannot give a concrete analysis of Hanson, since I don't know enough
about Australia to comment. How has Hanson been reported in the press here
? Since her initial electoral success, not at all. 

Nevertheless I think I still disagree with your basic methodology, even if
this methodology seems to explain the facts as they now stand. To move
>from the basic economic interests of the capitalist class DIRECTLY to an
implied orientation of right wing racist parties is a very dangerous thing
to do : it leaves socialists caught out when racist parties appear to act
"irrationally". 

The biggest single trading partner of British capital is Germany. Yet anti
German racism is probably the most acceptable form of racial prejudice
that the right wing press can indulge in in Britain - the long history of
anti racist struggles means that in general racism against Blacks has to
be at least slightly coded ( Firm immigration controls, crack down on
crime etc ).  The press in Britain is running a long campaign against
anything European, which has strong overtones of anti German and anti
French racism - yet the majority of big British based companies understand
that this is weakening their bargaining power in their most important
market, Europe. 

Is this "rational" ? I would argue yes, for two reasons :  i) The purely
political - workers expectations are building up like a pressure cooker.
Especially in the context of a Labour government, the ruling class does
need a coherent political explanation as to why things are getting worse.
I would argue that there is a serious, authoritarian, nationalist current
building up on the right of British politics, inside and outside the
conservative party.  ii) There is a "rational" economic base to the anti
German and anti French feeling.  The British ruling class is deeply pissed
off that "we won the war and now Germany rules Europe". The main market is
in Europe, their main competitors are based in Europe. British capital
DOES want to engage in competitive devaluation. It DOES want to keep its
social costs lower than France and Germany's social costs. Therefore the
anti EU bureaucracy stuff is in its interests. 


Gary writes:
> Under what circumstances would anti-Asian sentiment be encouraged? 
 Well > only in the kind of scenario that prevailed in the 50s when
Australia was > closely integrated into the British Empire.  I cannot see
that kind of > situation prevailing again. 

This IS Kautsky's method. He deduced from the integration of the world
economy that war was irrational from the point of view of the capitalists.
You are deducing the supposed "irrationality" of anti Asian racism from
Australian capital's economic interests. But, to take an extreme case,
what if there was a war in S.E Asia ? Are you seriously arguing that there
would be no anti Asian racism then ? Are you arguing that war in SE Asia
is completely out of the question, because war WITHIN a "trade bloc" is
out of the question ? 

I think the wobbles of "popular racists" like Hanson and the wobbles of Le
Pen or Fini between open Nazi style comments and a more "respectable"
racism have the same underlying common cause : the economic crisis is deep
but not so sudden or sharp as it was in the 30's, although I would argue
that it is more insoluble than it was then. This means the right as well
as the left is engaged in a "war of position"  rather than a "war of
manoevre". Part of this struggle is to get themselves accepted as
respectable politicians, to win a battle of ideas, BEFORE a war of
position breaks out. Fini and Le Pen have succeeded in this - and real
Nazi cores are SLOWLY( not rapidly like in Germany in the 30's or Italy in
the 20's ) being mbuilt up in their shadow.  British Nazis are trying to
reorganise on the fringes of Jimmy Goldsmith's referundum party.  Hanson's
wobbles are part of this overall pattern, IMO. 

Adam.

Adam Rose
SWP
Manchester
Britain.

> >
> >PS. Gary MacLennan is 102.
> >

> Why 102? or should I not ask?

If you haven't read private eye, you won't get the reference - sorry.









     --- from list marxism-international-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---