Deal at all times with the root of racism/sectarianism and promote an inclusive working class socialism in the communities etc

The working class can never be completely united as long as some sections of it discriminate others on the basis of a fictional idea. Working class organisations have an absolute duty to make this a high priority.

Your last post poses a difference between capitalism and class inequality on the one hand, and racism on the other. Ultimately I don’t think this is correct. They are interpentrating aspects of a generalised system of exploitation that we are fighting to abolish. Racism and capitalism developed together in the same historical period, and the full realisation of a world without racism is incompatible with a world of continued class hierarchy.

I had a read of the article “Multiculturalism & identity politics – the reactionary consequences and how they can be challenged” (http://www.iwca.info/?p=10146) on the IWCA site and I think I have a few problems with it’s approach. To some extent I definitely agree that the multiculturalism as policy as practiced by UK governments from Thatcher onwards is problematic. State policy has relied on a policy of divide and rule, not just between “black” and “white” communities, but also within the movement against as racism, as different ethnic communities are pitted against each other in a deliberately fostered competition for public funds, influence etc.

However, I think a glaring omission in the article is consideration of the ongoing institutionally racist practices of the British state. This particularly applies to how state policies are deployed as part of “anti-terrorism”, which is what I was trying to highlight originally. The reason the state has used divide and rule policies is mainly of course towards limiting the possibility of united working class politics, but it’s also a racist policy of containment that the state perceived new populations in the UK and their unwillingness to be subjected to racism.

To some extent the article seems to be articulating a French approach to cultural integration, where, theoretically, anyone living in France is French and is guaranteed equality as citizens of the Republic. Of course, this is not actually the case. Ethnic minorities in France face huge and debilitating discrimination in housing, economic opportunities and how they are treated by the police and the state. In France the MIR (Movement of the Indigenous of the Republic) I think has quite an interesting approach that I think is maybe more fruitful than the way the IWCA put it in that piece. They are a movement that aims to unite all people who have come to France from the former French colonies in an attempt to bring the de-colonisation struggle to France itself and gain the right to have a real say in the re-defintion of French society. There’s a couple of good interviews with their activists here:

http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/2009/bouteldja281009.html
http://indymedia.org.au/2010/01/27/the-left-and-racial-domination-in-france-an-interview-with-sadri-khiari-mir

This is the other thing that seemed to be missing from the article I read. There was a real absence of non-”white” people’s perspectives from struggling against racism. There’s a lot of decrying the liberal left for supposedly guilt tripping the working class and being reflexively “anti-western”, and claims that we idealise the identities of other communities. Not something that I can recognise much from my own experience on these issues in Scotland, but let’s leave that to one side. Where is the place in this picture for the decades of struggles waged by working class immigrants to the UK against racial discrimination at work, in housing, for fair pay or for the re-assessment of the history taught children in schools? The main people I would be guided on by anti-racist strategy would be those that actually suffer it and therefore see the struggle against it as a higher priority. That’s far from incompatible from class politics, and need not be based around particularising different communities-but it must be done on the basis of people’s right to self-determination and autonomy. The article seems to make out that communities are prisons for people in them, filled with people desperate to integrate into an enlightenment united society where their origins are irrelevant “leaving the past behind” as it puts it.

I think things are quite a bit more complex than that. Of course I think it’s vitally important to support people in being able to live freely and as they want to, e.g. supporting women subject to reactionary marriage practices, or opposing the homophobia of islamism. The articles on this blog about islam4uk or the SDL have always made clear that SSY opposes Islamist ideology, and we don’t advocate any kind of status for unofficial sharia courts or anything like that. But you can’t ignore the fact that many people adopt certain ideological or identity positions because of their experience of racism, both unofficial and institutional, as evidenced by the racial profiling of anti terror operations. And just as it’s wrong to reject everything that’s ever come out of the west, I think the article goes too far the other way, implying that if you move to the UK holding on to parts of your culture you brought from where you before is almost reactionary. Although it may be uncomfortable for many people, including working class people, who want to see “more integration”, people have a right to their culture in the form they want to express it. And before anyone says it, of course this does not justify abhorrent practices like female genital mutilation or honour killings. But it does mean that the right to cultural autonomy if desired should be defended. One of the main reasons why unpleasant practices are highlighted so much in the media is to justify much wider racist oppression that has nothing to do with human rights.

At the end of the day, I don’t see a conflict between this kind of position and a politics based around uniting the working class around common interests. The article talks about the left retreating from class into “identity politics around race, sexuality and gender.” I really disagree with this-the left in fact still has a huge way to go in establishing consistent engagement in the struggles against racism, patriarchy and homophobia, including within its own organisations. People can be more than thing at once, and fighting discrimination and oppression in all its forms doesn’t blunt our commitment to abolishing class society. Our organisations and politics should fight for all the working class, including the gay black people in the working class!

Just what are you proposing here? That racism is put off as a priority until we have sorted everything else out, i.e. the old catch all “well under socialism everything will be all right”? I think the point that Shark Attack was making is that people who suffer racism day in day out put it considerably higher up their list of political priorities than you seem to do. People who suffer from racism need allies, not to be told their problems aren’t a priority for us just now.

I also don’t agree that the only root cause of racism is imperialism. The process by which different groups of people become socially constructed as racialised groups is a complex one, and has as much to do with class and economic grievances misdirected at the wrong target as it does with the state’s need for troops who will kill their enemies. Modern racism has it’s origins in the ideological justification of the Atlantic slave trade, before many parts of the world had been colonised and the full global imperial system had completely taken shape.

I can have an abstract position that racism ultimately is caused by class hierarchical control of society and the economy, and serves as a confusion and cloak for the exploitation of everybody. That doesn’t mean that racism doesn’t have real material consequences for people, that can concretely affect your life as much as your class position. As someone who has never experienced racism first hand I just wouldn’t presume to lecture those who have on what is the most “important” factor. But until people suffering the impact of racism see that socialists are consistent allies, take racism seriously, and don’t treat it as an add-on to make sure we’re covered, as your interpretation seems to, then I doubt very much whether they’ll have any interest in socialism. (Incidentally allowing a vacuum for politicised young people that could be filled by Islamists.)

Guess what – white guys don’t get to decide.