Date: Thu, 5 Feb 1998 15:43:42 -0500 (EST)
From: Siddharth Chatterjee <siddhart-AT-mailbox.syr.edu>
Subject: Re: M-I: Re: Amsterdam Treaty




On Thu, 5 Feb 1998, James Heartfield wrote:

> 
> What this misses out is the way that the official political culture in
> all the Western capitals is changing. White supremacy was a central
> feature of European and American ruling class ideology when those
> nations were in the ascendent. Today the official ideology is
> 'multicultural' while explicitly racist ideology is largely
> marginalised.

You are correct in one sense, 'white' supremacy has now gotten itself a
social democratic cloak in order to better disguise itself. In certain
times, like the present it is preferable to see the wolf in full view
as Malcolm X commented when asked about the difference between the
republican (openly anti-African American) candidate Barry Goldwater in
comparison to his opponent from the Democratic party. Yet in another
sense, the cloak sometimes comes off. The very concept of the EU is a
racially exclusionary concept. Try as much the Turkish big bourgeoisie and
its military to turn somersaults in the air and lick the
boots of the EU, they are not granted entry into this bastion of
'white' privilege. But a portion of Turkey is in the European continent.
That is why, as I said before, the EEC should be renamed the ERC -
European Racist Community. There is nothing progressive about this
community. It is racist and imperialist union from the point of view
of the majority of the world's peoples.
 
> 
> There is much talk of fascism on the rise in Europe, but somehow it
> never seems to get there. Instead all of the warnings about fascism only
> indicate just how out of step the far right is with the official
> culture. Sid says there is no record of anti-racist movements in Europe
> comparable to Civil Rights. That is certainly true since most anti-
> racism in Europe took place under the umbrella of the Social Democratic
> and Communist Parties which were famous for their adaptation to national
> chauvinism. I can well remember that any anti-racist initiative in
> British Trade Unions used to be immediately torpedoed by the Communist
> Party apparatchiks on the grounds that it would only provoke raical
> strife in the workforce.
> 

Nothing is stationary in this world. The form in which fascism presents
itself may change while its content remains essentially the same. We
have to learn to recognize these new forms and guises in which fascist
ideology cloaks itself. To simply extrapolate from Nazi Germany and
Fascist Italy, which were a culmination of a long process, to the
present, will be a mistake. While it is true that in the grand finale,
fascism reveals its face for all to see, in the process of build up
to the final naked terror, it often hides itself. Mussolini was a
"socialist". The Nazi party wanted, what they called "national socialism"
in Germany. Today in India, the BJP, is attempting a similar tactic.
It is now hiding its revanchist and exclusionary ideology behind some
progressive (sometimes even anti-capitalist) rhetoric. This has led to
people of the "lower" castes and even Muslims to join the BJP - the
largest single united party in India today. Many middle-class people are
also supporting the BJP which certainly has a chance to form a government
with its allied parties in the coming elections. 


> But in more recent times the only large demonstrations there have been
> have been on the anti-racist theme. In Britian the Anti-Nazi League
> organised massive demos in the early nineties. In Germany Chancellor
> Kohl marched on an anti-Nazi demonstration that was the largest of its
> kind. In France demonstrations against Le Pen and in favour of
> immigrants are supported by the intelligentsia and up-and-coming
> starlets, as well as the vast majority of young people.
>

It is amusing to see the "closet Nazi" Chancellor, Kohl, marching along
with the anti-racist demonstrators. Either the old fox (or better, wolf) is
having a sincere change of heart. Or he is upto another game. I suspect
the latter.
 
<snip>

> But for all that I think you would find it very hard to identify the
> explicitly racist outlook of a Margaret Thatcher (who famously warned
> that we were in danger of being 'swamped' by people of an alien culture)
> amongst any leading British politicans today - at least in their public
> statements.
> -- 


Clinton and Blair are two of the smoothest operatives today. They
actually represent big capital but they are like the liquid state -
they have a remarkable and opportunistic ability to take the shape of
the container they are in. So if the times demand anti-racist rhetoric,
they have no qualms about going along with it. Clinton has a nickname;
Slick Willie, this name actually reveals a profound truth about him.
Same with the suave Blair. But in times of crisis, you can hear them
growl like in the present crisis over Iraq. They will have no hesitation
in conducting bombing runs over a third-world country for the sake
of Mideast oil and its control, runs which if carried out, will surely
kill tens of thousands of poor people. In one sense, Thatcher and Reagan
were more "honest" if that term can be used. They loudly, openly and
clearly proclaimed their reactionary agenda. By the way, it is also
kind of sick to watch countries like Canada (which has a maple leaf
in its flag) and the countries of the EU like the lackey Britain 
bomb and kill third-world, mostly poor people, especially when one
considers their social-democratic slogans.

For too long, too much of attention, world rersources and blood has been
shed on account of the Western European countries and their progeny in
other parts of the world. This also regards culture and what is called
civilization. There were other great civilizations which were destroyed
by European imperialism. These civilizations too had a great culture,
literature, music, art and what not. One could even say that some of
the literature amd art was more richer and sophisticated than the
European ones. One can place a single figure like Tagore against the
entire gamut of the English bards and writers including Shakespeare. But
how many in the west know this? I am forced to communicate in English
since today it has become a world language. But I could have equally
communicated in 4-5 other languages. How much do we know about the
civilization and culture of the "peoples without history"?

Once, an elderly Italian gentleman was trying to explain to me the links
between Latin and Sanskrit, which according to him, showed a connection
between two ancient civilizations.After a while I asked him what he thought
about the Arabic civilization. since it was closer to Italy. His immediate
reply was that Arabs (note that this word "Arab" actually
includes some very diverse people with rich cultures) were not civilized.

It is time to look beyond the narrow confines of European chauvinism -
including for those on the left. To remark on the revolutionary potential
of the EU is fantasy. Rich, well-fed people, especially those
indoctrinated in the ideology of white supremacy and anti-communism
from their very birth will not bring about revolutions as long as the
current state of affairs continues. But it is also true that without
the participation of the European, North American and Japanese
working class, the revolutionary transformation of the world will not
be possible, will not be complete.

Sid  
 
   

   



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