Skip to main content
Educating Britain

Suffragettes on the BBC: Omission/filtering/sanitisation: It is scary to know that prominent Suffragettes were socialists.

The BBC is celebrating 100 years since women over 30 and "who met minimum property qualifications" won the right to vote in Britain.
I have gone through these three pieces and I have noticed deliberate ommision of what is an integral part of some prominent Suffragettes and the Suffragettes movement: socialism, communism, the Independent Labour Party.

 Sylvia Pankhurst is described as "a vocal pacifist, anti-fascist and anti-colonialist activist." In this introduction (click "more"), and this one ( recommended to teachers!) claims to be tracing "the history of women's movement in Britain" and "how women won the right to vote.

Now, compare the above with

Emily Davison "was a staunch feminist and passionate Christian, and considered that socialism was a moral and political force for good."

Sylvia Pankhurst "was an English campaigner for the suffragette movement, a prominent left communist and, later, an activist in the cause of anti-fascism." She was the founder of the Workers Socialist Federation.

Emmeline Pankhurst, probably the most venerated in the mainstream British media, defended the presence and reach of the British Empire: "Some talk about the Empire and Imperialism as if it were something to decry and something to be ashamed of. [I]t is a great thing to be the inheritors of an Empire like ours ... great in territory, great in potential wealth...If we can only realise and use that potential wealth we can destroy thereby poverty, we can remove and destroy ignorance." For years she travelled around England and North America, rallying support for the British Empire and warning audiences about the dangers of Bolshevism."

Constance Markievicz "was an Irish Sinn Féin and Fianna Fáil politician, revolutionary nationalistsuffragette and socialist."


Harold L. Smith in his "The British Women's Suffrage Campaign 1866-128 (Longman 1998), does the same thing. In Part One of the book, under Origins and Ideology, he never mentions "left-wing" or "socialist" background and militancy of prominent Suffragettes. The word "socialism" does not appear in the Index, either. My question is: is it because he wanted to protect the public?

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Qarmatians (Al-Qaramita)

By Nadeem Mahjoub Documentary film-makers G. Troeller and M. C. Defarge once asked a cabinet minister in South Yemen, why socialistic ideas were so readily acceptable in that part of the Arab world. He replied: “Because we have been communists for a thousand years! My mother was Qarmatian.” Official Muslim scholars and clerics, and many so-called moderates (whether individuals or groups) oppose sedition ( fitna ). Tensions and contradictions in society should be solved peacefully and even if the ruler was unjust and impious, it is generally accepted he should still be obeyed, for any kind of order is better than anarchy and sedition. “The tyranny of a sultan for a hundred years causes less damage than one year’s tyranny exercised by the subjects against one another.” Revolt was justified only against a ruler who clearly went against the command of God and His prophet.” 1 Here we look at not what happened in the minds of people who call for calm, oppose dissent and preach the re...

Capitalism

Some of this reminds me of how five or six years ago in a class of seven students in a UK elite university three of them (two Germans and one British) were in favour of a "benevolent dictator" (in the Arab context). The bloody horrors of Pinochet showed how capitalism will react when it's threatened
"If you don't attack the economic power of the elite, soon or later it will attack you." That's what the Arab uprisings, for instance, were unable/failed to do. K for Karl – Revolution (episode 3)
"A second position argues against transition, which is transitology itself. It is well known—especially among economists—as the sudden mobilization of a considerable mass of experts who are generally foreigners,generally Western, who come to preach the good word and to propose ready-made models of democracy. The science of the transition has become a financial windfall, a market. And the word transition has of course become a reflex of language, a term of reference, a call for tenders ( appel d’offres ) to which the whole society was supposed to respond.  Consequently, the reticence that one can express is the following: our history is framed, transition is a heteronomy. Every democratic revolution is henceforth supposed to take a unique, imposed path, which is, at the same time, indistinctly democratic and liberal (or neoliberal). A more or less non-“negotiable” package.  It is necessary to highlight the imposed character (and imposed from the outside) of this coming to t...
"In the same way that Robinson [Crusoe] was able to ob­tain a sword, we can just as well suppose that [Man] Friday might appear one fine morning with a loaded revolver in his hand, and from then on the whole relationship of violence is reversed: Man Friday gives the orders and Crusoe is obliged  to work. . . . Thus, the revolver triumphs over the sword, and even the most childish believer in axioms will doubtless form the conclusion that violence is not a simple act of will, but needs for its realization certain very concrete preliminary con­ditions, and in particular the implements of violence; and the more highly developed of these implements will carry the day against primitive ones. Moreover, the very fact of the ability to produce such weapons signifies that the producer of highly developed weapons, in everyday speech the arms  manufac­turer, triumphs over the producer of primitive weapons. To put it briefly, the triumph of violence depends upon the pro­duction of a...
Varoufakis "speaks of how great it was to have the support of Larry Summers, Norman Lamont, and other figures on the Right, but it was support for whom, for what, and in whose class interests? Class analysis is far from the foreground of the picture sketched out here. Closed rooms and class war

US

 Written in June: The candidate who emerged from this jumble of discontent was the man who promised to do the least. His party is now preparing to give us a national election that will be little more than a referendum on the hated Donald Trump. Finally we have a climate in which the American public would unquestionably choose dramatic change were it offered to them, and the party of change has contrived to ensure that it will not be offered. Instead our choice is between two elderly and conservative white men, both with a history of stretching the truth, both with sexual harassment accusations hanging over them, and neither representing any possibility of energetic democratic reform. The old order has been miraculously rescued once again. Such is the climate of opinion in America that, with the right leader, remarkable things would be possible. Instead we are presented with Joe Biden, an affable DC veteran with a hand in many of the defining disasters of the last 30 years: worker-c...