Skip to content or view mobile version

Home | Mobile | Editorial | Mission | Privacy | About | Contact | Help | Security | Support

A network of individuals, independent and alternative media activists and organisations, offering grassroots, non-corporate, non-commercial coverage of important social and political issues.

We need a new anti-racist movement

Anti-racist | 29.07.2010 15:37 | Anti-racism

Racism in the UK has moved on from simple prejudice about skin colour to a system rooted in ideas about Britishness. Today's racists, even those of the extreme right, rarely speak openly about 'race'. Instead they demand that people take on 'British' values and culture or they be punished. These demands are usually focussed on the same targets of the older racism - recent immigrants and those whose way of life is different to what is deemed to be traditional.

The new racists, like the old racists, suspect migrants to the UK of trying to cheat British people out of jobs, money in the form of benefits, beds in hospitals, housing and so on. Often foreign cultures are considered to be backward and even barbaric. (White) British culture is supposed to be more enlightened. British people are expected to support the nation at sport and at war - you are allowed to disagree with foreign policy but have to support the troops that carry it out.

Obviously the racists pick on particular groups (as racists before them picked on particular 'races'). Scapegoats for racists at this time include Muslims (backward un-British culture), migrants from poor countries (taking our jobs, taxpayer's money, etc.) and black youths (violent criminals).

Anti-racist movements tend to focus on the most extreme examples of racism like far right parties and movements (e.g. the BNP and EDL). But there are much more powerful and influential forces at work creating and spreading racist ideas and actions.

Recent governments, by aiming 'anti-terror' laws and policing at Muslim communities and by attacking Muslim countries, have helped to spread the idea that all Muslims are potential terrorists and we should be suspicious of them. The Home Office, through its policy of suspicion of asylum seekers encourages the idea that most are 'bogus'. The police, by concentrating use of stop and search, patrols and surveillance on areas black people live in, encourage the idea that they are criminals to be feared. The state has a very important role in giving legitimacy to racist ideas and attitudes.

The British media also play a major part in creating and spreading racist ideas. Whether it is because their rich bosses have right wing political agendas or simply because stories that tap into existing prejudices sell more papers, the mainstream media help to increase the volume and intensity of racist ideas.

The militant racists, groups like the BNP and EDL, try to make existing racist attitudes more extreme and shift politics further to the right. They can only do this because other forces have built society on racist ideas to begin with.

The EDL are quite an interesting example of the new racism. They are eager to show off the fact that they have non-white members as proof that they aren't racist (in the older, cruder sense). However, only non-whites who take on traditional 'English' culture are accepted, such as the legendary 'Muslim' member Abdul, a Glasgow Rangers fan who freely admits he has no attachment to Muslim culture or religion. Whilst the EDL certainly have a lot of old school racists within their ranks, many members just seem to be militants for the English values that are created in the tabloid media day in and day out - anti-Muslim, anti-migrant and pro-military. The 'War on Terror', attempts to tighten border patrols and increased police surveillance of ethnic minority communities have created an environment in which the EDL can get large numbers of militant racists onto the streets.

Anti-racists often don't seem to understand the way that racism is expressed today. They also seem to be divided across a lot of different areas of activity that have not linked up to make a broader movement.

Firstly there are the anti-fascists. They focus on extreme right wing movements like the BNP and EDL. The more mainstream groups like the UAF and Hope Not Hate attack the racism of the extreme right whilst making allies within the government and mainstream political parties. They seem to have no understanding of the role these politicians play in creating the racist society that the far right feeds on. There are more militant groups like Antifa and the Asian and black youths who stand up to the likes of the EDL in their areas. They have a better understanding of racism but are too small in number and too isolated to make a serious difference.

There are also people working to undermine racism against migrants. Unfortunately their energies often get drawn into trying to support all of those who fall victim to Britain's discriminatory immigration policies. They seem to have little time left to challege the racism that underlies those policies. Again, those that take a more militant stance, such as No Borders, are too few and too disconnected to other anti-racist movements to have much effect.

In the past anti-racists have tried to unite politically conscious subcultures, such as punks and reggae fans, against the racists. Rock Against Racism was relatively successful in bringing together a wide range of people in a movement that was anti-fascist and attacked state racism. Groups like Love Music Hate Racism (LMHR) continue to try this tactic but don't seem capable of connecting with new anti-racist cultures. A recent LMHR festival was headlined by UB40 which hardly makes them seem cutting edge! There is no doubt though, that there are plenty of more subversive anti-racist cultural movements out there and trying to form links of solidarity between them seems like something that anti-racists should be trying to do.

In conclusion, racism has moved on from widespread prejudice about skin colour to a more complex set of values that evolve around an idea of Britishness. This is rooted in white European culture and is hostile to 'foreign' ideas and expression. This is stifling and restrictive to many of us who have broader ideas of freedom. It is a danger to those who do not fit the narrow definition of a good citizen that is imposed. We need an anti-racist movement that can take on this racism and promote greater freedom in society. Whilst there are already many promising elements of resistance to racist attitudes and values these need to come together and make links as part of a stronger movement. Autonomous communities, anti-racist culture, anti-fascism and migrant solidarity are all important aspects of the anti-racist movement that is needed.

Anti-racist

Comments

Hide the following 10 comments

Wherefore art thou racism?

29.07.2010 19:26

"Racism in the UK has moved on from simple prejudice about skin colour to a system rooted in ideas about Britishness...."

Isn't what you REALLY mean to say is that the British hate movements have moved from racism to xenphobia?

Xenophobia isn't the "new racism", it's xenophobia. There are LOTS of reasons people can find to hate other people. Skin color/race (actually "imagined race") is just ONE possibility. These different expressions of hatred all have names.

MDN


Good Article

30.07.2010 06:31

Lot of common sense in this article. Whatever you wish to call the various strains of bigotry raising its ugly head at the moment we do need a better approach to tackling it, less division and more unity among anti-racists/facists, a better understanding of what is going on and how best to stop it.

IHTF


What are your new ideas of Britishness exactly?

30.07.2010 16:30

I do not believe in British values ... I believe that there are such things as universal values: freedom, equality, democracy, as well freedom to choose your religion and leave your religion and to criticise religion which billions of people in this world do not have. Many non- western countries have adopted ideas of liberty, equality, humanity as their own and do not see them as particularly western. They do not believe that you have to be "greek", to follow the ideas of Plato/Aristotle or "french" to approve of JJ Rousseau.

However, many oppressive regimes (many located in the muslim world) criticize our liberal value systems because they challenge their own opressive laws, so they like to label such ideas as "western" so that it looks like we are imposing our "imperialist" culture on them. They fail to look at their own attitudes towards their own people and are quite happy to suppress (sometimes through extreme means) their own populations to make sure they do not deviate from their rules (be they religious or cultural). Sharia system comes to mind in the case of Muslim countries, and caste system in Hindu societies for example. I therefore ask you, should we be supporting their "cultural traditions" even if they oppress billions of their own people, or should we promote freedom, equality, fraternity of all humankind?


No to Cultural Relativism


@No to cultural relativism

31.07.2010 09:31

I think the (racist) problem with your stance is that you assume that "non-western" (your words, not mine) countries only "adopt" liberty, equality and humanity, as though they have to see enlightened (western?) people practising these values first. Many indigenous societies have much more advanced ideas and practice on these themes than we do in the capitalist world. Westerners no more discovered these ideas than Colombus discovered America!

You say that "many oppressive regimes (many located in the muslim world) criticize our liberal value systems because they challenge their own opressive laws" but forget that many Muslim people also criticise oppressive western regimes for occupying, killing, maiming and torturing people in their countries. It's not whether you are western or Muslim that's important here. I find it suspicious when people try to lay the blame with un-British cultures and forget about the effects of their own.

"I therefore ask you, should we be supporting their "cultural traditions" even if they oppress billions of their own people, or should we promote freedom, equality, fraternity of all humankind?"

So - let's get this straight - You've jumped from oppressive regimes (i.e. states) which I think we'll agree are a bad thing, to cultural traditions now. I can only assume you mean sharia and the caste system as those are the only things you mention.

First, where does this question come from? Where in my article did I show support for either of these religious constructs? My article is about combating racism in Britain through the formation of an anti-racist movement. What is the relevance of this question?

Second, your question is a false choice. Why do people have to choose between supporting religious law and the values of the bourgeois French revolution? I'd say that that motto became a bit of a 'religious' mantra in itself - excusing all manner of terror and oppression and ultimately leading to the rise of dictator Napoleon.

I think, unlike yourself, most anti-racists see the world as rather more complex than the western values=enlightened, non-western=barbarians divide that you seem to think is important.

Anti-racist


I agree with MDN, this is xenophobia, not racism

31.07.2010 14:47

MDN is talking sense here. The EDL is fundamentally about conflict between cultures, not races (even if many people involved also have an underlying racism as well).

Thus we don't need a "new anti-racist movement", we need a n"anti-xenophobia movement".

anon


@Anti-racist

31.07.2010 20:32

You write:
I think the (racist) problem with your stance is that you assume that "non-western" (your words, not mine) countries only "adopt" liberty, equality and humanity, as though they have to see enlightened (western?) people practising these values first. Many indigenous societies have much more advanced ideas and practice on these themes than we do in the capitalist world. Westerners no more discovered these ideas than Colombus discovered America!

Actually I tried to state that what are often perceived as western values, are not western values, they are universal because they are about protecting the individual against oppression. Why should it matter where they come from - if from "the west" or whichever part of the world. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights sets out what our rights as humans are, and these are the ones I believe every human deserves to have protected.

I stated that "many oppressive regimes (many located in the muslim world) criticize our liberal value systems because they challenge their own opressive laws" but forget that many Muslim people also criticise oppressive western regimes for occupying, killing, maiming and torturing people in their countries.

Our governments deserve to be criticised for killing, maiming and torturing people as you rightly state. Those things go against ideas of protecting the human.

You state:
It's not whether you are western or Muslim that's important here. I find it suspicious when people try to lay the blame with un-British cultures and forget about the effects of their own.

Why should I have to show respect for values that go against the Declaration of human rights, just because they are "foreign"? Do they have any respect for mine? I am not against people criticizing what is wrong in western culture (don't worry I do it myself all the time), but it doesn't mean that their culture is necessarily ideal either and beyond criticism. I have great respect for traditions from Asia, south America etc. but if they are oppressive traditions which are harmful to people then we should be able to state that we are against them and even campaign against them. It's not about being against all foreign traditions, it's about criticising those that need changing. Cultural traditions are cultural traditions. They are not some things set in stone that cannot be challenged and changed. Cultures change all the time, so why can we not change things that we don't like about them too?

"I therefore ask you, should we be supporting their "cultural traditions" even if they oppress billions of their own people, or should we promote freedom, equality, fraternity of all humankind?"

So - let's get this straight - You've jumped from oppressive regimes (i.e. states) which I think we'll agree are a bad thing, to cultural traditions now. I can only assume you mean sharia and the caste system as those are the only things you mention.

First, where does this question come from? Where in my article did I show support for either of these religious constructs? My article is about combating racism in Britain through the formation of an anti-racist movement. What is the relevance of this question?

The relevance is that any anti-racist movement is about deciding what groups one will support and how far that support should go. I do believe that for example muslims need protecting against racism as they are often discriminated against by people, but what of islamist ideas? Should we accept them too? I believe islamist ideas are fascist - they are about imposing very rigid ideas (religious/cultural ideas) on other muslims - often done in stages: firstly more subtly ie, telling people it's not proper to do/dress etc. like so and so, and then more openly through threats and intimidation as is occuring in some suburbs of France (don't know about the UK). Islamists do not accept that people should be allowed to choose what faith they follow and threats is how they keep control over people. Even in the UK, people who want to leave islam are scared to do so openly, because of this islamo-fascism. Islamists for example don't want muslim women to date or marry non-muslim men, which is their right. So it's about deciding if one will choose to protect rights of individuals or rights of cultures. I am with protecting individual rights over communal rights as communal rights are more often than not about imposing rules on people rather than supporting free expression of human beings. I am against combating racism but not at cost of giving up on ideas of universal human rights.

Second, your question is a false choice. Why do people have to choose between supporting religious law and the values of the bourgeois French revolution? I'd say that that motto became a bit of a 'religious' mantra in itself - excusing all manner of terror and oppression and ultimately leading to the rise of dictator Napoleon.

Liberty, equality, fraternity are not French ideas. They are universal - thus why many have adopted them as their own. I mentioned JJ Rousseau only to show that you can be "non-french" yet like his ideas. People around the world respect ideas of Che, Ghandi, Dalai Lama, Mandela, King, Chavez etc. Nobody talks of them bringing "non-western" imperialism to the world.

I think, unlike yourself, most anti-racists see the world as rather more complex than the western values=enlightened, non-western=barbarians divide that you seem to think is important.
Anti-racist

I am sorry if you feel that I see the world like that. Actually I don't believe I do. :-)

No to cultural relativism


Enlightenment fundamentalism

01.08.2010 10:44

I'd give a more in-depth answer but I reckon we'll just go round in circles. A few points I'd like to make:

I think you're guilty of enlightenment fundamentalism:  http://qlipoth.blogspot.com/2006/09/enlightenment-fundamentalism.html

I don't see why you think anti-racists need to support particular (ethnic?) groups rather than cultural movements of anti-racism which is what I was writing about.

I think the fact that you talk about Islamists and Muslims as though they were the same thing speaks volumes.

You seem to accuse me of being a knee-jerk anti-imperialist even though I haven't mentioned imperialism once. Why do you think this?

Anti-racist


@anti-racist

01.08.2010 12:42

you said:

I think you're guilty of enlightenment fundamentalism:  http://qlipoth.blogspot.com/2006/09/enlightenment-fundamentalism.html

I am not aware of being a fundamentalist - if being against sexism, homophobia, anti-semitism, barbaric laws/cultural traditions makes me an enlightened fundamentalist in your eyes, then what can I say? I'd rather be labelled "an enlightened" fundamentalist rather than "a primitive one" I guess ;-) Human rights are fundamental to me I guess, yes (not western rights, human rights for all).

I don't see why you think anti-racists need to support particular (ethnic?) groups rather than cultural movements of anti-racism which is what I was writing about.

The reason why I mentioned this is because last month supporters of United Against facism showed obvious support for pro-Sharia Al-Muhajiroun when walking past them - see June 20th One Law For All protests against sharia on youtube. I was quite shocked by this obvious support for an islamo-fascist organisation. Unite Against Fascism should clarify their stance on Islamism.

I think the fact that you talk about Islamists and Muslims as though they were the same thing speaks volumes.

It's true that this is not always an easy distinction. Islamists usually want both Hadith religious books and the Koran followed. Non-Islamists usually follow the Koran (or parts of it they like) but usually ignore Hadiths (as far as they can). Many imams are therefore Islamists, as they have studied all the religious books and feel they should be followed. Many muslims however are not islamists, and do not want to be ruled by sharia rules. Many muslims are in a difficult position on this: on the one hand they feel they should follow religious teachings, on the other these teachings conflict with their human instincts. But because islamists do not allow people to criticize the koran and hadiths openly, they don't get to hear counter-arguments to islamist preachings. As preachers have become islamised since 9-11 (as they get taught abroad in islamic countries), so have some mosque goers. As I believe that Islamism is fascist, I am against it. However that does not mean that I am against ordinary muslims. I believe that on a human level all muslims need protection from thuggery (even islamist terrorists from torture), but it doesn't mean that organisations such as Unite Against Fascism should tolerate obvious islamo-fascist views. In France muslim women are far more fearful of islamo-facists forcing them to wear the headscarf than they are of French people attacking them for wearing it. If they were so frightened of attacks by non-muslims, they would not put it on. This has clearly not happened. Islamists can go round giving out free islamo-fascist propaganda curtesy of Saudi Wahabbists, whilst ex-muslims fear even to show their face to the world, let alone distribute anti-islamic books. There are probably less than 50 muslims worldwide who have stated openly that they are ex-muslims, and they have all received death threats - if people knew where they actually lived, they would probably be killed. Where is the anti-Fascist brigade to defend their rights not to follow Islam anymore? How many millions have to keep quiet against a faith that is suppressing their human rights in all muslim countries worldwide. Islam till now, unlike christianity, has undergone not even a bit of an enlightenment (islamists allow no questioning of teachings, even on evolution and science) . In Islamic countries, it is even anti-Islamic to show interest in psychology as it goes against Islamic teachings! Where is the interest of the anti-fascist brigade against such totalitarianism. In this country you cannot say anything against islam, without being labelled a fascist, even if you believe that Mohammed was anything but a prophet of God. Viva Religious Fascism in the UK! Viva to the Islamic Republic of Britain!


You seem to accuse me of being a knee-jerk anti-imperialist even though I haven't mentioned imperialism once. Why do you think this?

Sorry, but I thought you did.




No to Cultural Relativism


Final thoughts

02.08.2010 13:33

"against sexism, homophobia, anti-semitism, barbaric laws/cultural traditions"

I'm with you as far as barbarianism. Barbarian just means foreign, basically. I'm not against otherness.

My article is critical of the UAF. I think their actions are counter-productive and I do not support them.

I think that by talking about Muslims as though they are outside of the anti-racist movement and are a group that anti-racists need to protect reveals a lot about your views on them. I think Muslims will be an integral part of the anti-racist movement that I envisage and will take the lead in their own self-defence.

"In France muslim women are far more fearful of islamo-facists forcing them to wear the headscarf than they are of French people attacking them for wearing it. If they were so frightened of attacks by non-muslims, they would not put it on. "

I think this shows a total lack of understanding of the situation in France, a country I used to live in. Wearing the hijab has become a symbol of defiance against the racist French state. Muslims are frequently abused by the police in the banlieus. But because you seem to assume that Muslims have no agency your theory puts it all down to fear rather than an active resistance to state repression.

"In this country you cannot say anything against islam, without being labelled a fascist"

This is arrant nonsense. This country is full of, not just anti-Islam, but anti-Muslim prejudice. That is why the tabloids sell so well and groups like the EDL and BNP enjoy the support they do.

I do not defend Islam (I am opposed to all religions) but I do defend people's freedom to choose a religious path if they wish.

Anti-racist


Good debate anyway...

02.08.2010 20:46

I just want to make the point that we have a tendency to label people muslim as if that had to be their prime identity. I would like there to be more liberal thinking in regards to this issue, which is not happening at the moment as far as I'm concerned. Many muslims are turning to an Islamist identity instead of embracing a western one as no-one is challenging them on that and trying to bridge the gap. Unfortunately islamism makes them not want to mix with us, unless we are up for conversion (as this is what islamism is about). How accommodating should we be to this trend. Should we not be encouraging them to be broader minded and less sectarian/ segregated in outlook? I believe leaving islamists to their own devices is not a good tactic in the long run. It will only sew more divisions between groupings over time, likely to cause more racism and not less on both sides.

This shift in attitudes cannot happen in my opinion unless we are willing to challenge muslims on what they believe regarding Sharia, including about their beliefs about God and the Koran etc. even about their views on us. This has not yet happened to date. Anti-fascist groups feel it's not our place to debate such issues with them. Why not? They are people, not some kind of aliens from another planet. Unless we are willing to engage with them and discuss ideas ie. even why they should believe in x,y or z, then we will not progress and resolve these issues. You talk as if there we no differences between us - there are. We need to be able to discuss them openly. Why should they be allowed to convert me to their religious thinking, but I cannot do so the other way round too or at least debate things. This shift requires us to be less politically correct than we are, and to stop seeing them as muslims first, human beings second. Being a muslim is an identity they have chosen for themselves or which has been thrust upon them by their families or communities. But we should be able to have a debate with them over issues of religion, identity etc. without feeling it is not our place to have these debates. Why not? Better this than keeping quiet and seeing divisions between us grow larger. It is obvious that when two communities are made to steer clear of each other (be it because of religion or prejudice), they will eventually clash and it will not be pretty.

No to cultural relativism


Upcoming Coverage
View and post events
Upcoming Events UK
24th October, London: 2015 London Anarchist Bookfair
2nd - 8th November: Wrexham, Wales, UK & Everywhere: Week of Action Against the North Wales Prison & the Prison Industrial Complex. Cymraeg: Wythnos o Weithredu yn Erbyn Carchar Gogledd Cymru

Ongoing UK
Every Tuesday 6pm-8pm, Yorkshire: Demo/vigil at NSA/NRO Menwith Hill US Spy Base More info: CAAB.

Every Tuesday, UK & worldwide: Counter Terror Tuesdays. Call the US Embassy nearest to you to protest Obama's Terror Tuesdays. More info here

Every day, London: Vigil for Julian Assange outside Ecuadorian Embassy

Parliament Sq Protest: see topic page
Ongoing Global
Rossport, Ireland: see topic page
Israel-Palestine: Israel Indymedia | Palestine Indymedia
Oaxaca: Chiapas Indymedia
Regions
All Regions
Birmingham
Cambridge
Liverpool
London
Oxford
Sheffield
South Coast
Wales
World
Other Local IMCs
Bristol/South West
Nottingham
Scotland
Social Media
You can follow @ukindymedia on indy.im and Twitter. We are working on a Twitter policy. We do not use Facebook, and advise you not to either.
Support Us
We need help paying the bills for hosting this site, please consider supporting us financially.
Other Media Projects
Schnews
Dissident Island Radio
Corporate Watch
Media Lens
VisionOnTV
Earth First! Action Update
Earth First! Action Reports
Topics
All Topics
Afghanistan
Analysis
Animal Liberation
Anti-Nuclear
Anti-militarism
Anti-racism
Bio-technology
Climate Chaos
Culture
Ecology
Education
Energy Crisis
Fracking
Free Spaces
Gender
Globalisation
Health
History
Indymedia
Iraq
Migration
Ocean Defence
Other Press
Palestine
Policing
Public sector cuts
Repression
Social Struggles
Technology
Terror War
Workers' Movements
Zapatista
Major Reports
NATO 2014
G8 2013
Workfare
2011 Census Resistance
Occupy Everywhere
August Riots
Dale Farm
J30 Strike
Flotilla to Gaza
Mayday 2010
Tar Sands
G20 London Summit
University Occupations for Gaza
Guantanamo
Indymedia Server Seizure
COP15 Climate Summit 2009
Carmel Agrexco
G8 Japan 2008
SHAC
Stop Sequani
Stop RWB
Climate Camp 2008
Oaxaca Uprising
Rossport Solidarity
Smash EDO
SOCPA
Past Major Reports
Encrypted Page
You are viewing this page using an encrypted connection. If you bookmark this page or send its address in an email you might want to use the un-encrypted address of this page.
If you recieved a warning about an untrusted root certificate please install the CAcert root certificate, for more information see the security page.

Global IMC Network


www.indymedia.org

Projects
print
radio
satellite tv
video

Africa

Europe
antwerpen
armenia
athens
austria
barcelona
belarus
belgium
belgrade
brussels
bulgaria
calabria
croatia
cyprus
emilia-romagna
estrecho / madiaq
galiza
germany
grenoble
hungary
ireland
istanbul
italy
la plana
liege
liguria
lille
linksunten
lombardia
madrid
malta
marseille
nantes
napoli
netherlands
northern england
nottingham imc
paris/île-de-france
patras
piemonte
poland
portugal
roma
romania
russia
sardegna
scotland
sverige
switzerland
torun
toscana
ukraine
united kingdom
valencia

Latin America
argentina
bolivia
chiapas
chile
chile sur
cmi brasil
cmi sucre
colombia
ecuador
mexico
peru
puerto rico
qollasuyu
rosario
santiago
tijuana
uruguay
valparaiso
venezuela

Oceania
aotearoa
brisbane
burma
darwin
jakarta
manila
melbourne
perth
qc
sydney

South Asia
india


United States
arizona
arkansas
asheville
atlanta
Austin
binghamton
boston
buffalo
chicago
cleveland
colorado
columbus
dc
hawaii
houston
hudson mohawk
kansas city
la
madison
maine
miami
michigan
milwaukee
minneapolis/st. paul
new hampshire
new jersey
new mexico
new orleans
north carolina
north texas
nyc
oklahoma
philadelphia
pittsburgh
portland
richmond
rochester
rogue valley
saint louis
san diego
san francisco
san francisco bay area
santa barbara
santa cruz, ca
sarasota
seattle
tampa bay
united states
urbana-champaign
vermont
western mass
worcester

West Asia
Armenia
Beirut
Israel
Palestine

Topics
biotech

Process
fbi/legal updates
mailing lists
process & imc docs
tech