Skip to main content

The British Establishment Fuels Anti-Migrant Pogroms

Richard Seymour pictures what the BBC cannot picture.

– Once again, Ulster’s peace-loving bampots determined that such violence could only have been brought to Northern Ireland by brown-skinned interlopers. Never mind that the province has its own gory history of knife violence. Never mind that Ogilvie himself had previously been tortured by a gang linked to the Ulster Volunteer Force, the loyalist paramilitaries that murdered Catholics with the collusion of the British state during the “Troubles.”

– To an extent, as Séamas O’Reilly argues in the New Statesman, this is a new expression of old violence: loyalists in Northern Ireland have decades of experience in burning people out of their homes and violently policing community purity.

– Among all demographics in Northern Ireland, Catholic or Protestant, young or old, anti-immigrant racism is pervasive.

– Far from “two tier policing” disadvantaging whites, the evidence is that the same Hampshire constabulary that mistreated Henry Nowak has a very recent history of institutional racism

– Such pogroms are neither wholly coordinated nor entirely spontaneous. They are a form of distributed violence, with elements of top-down control and spontaneous social contagion. The pattern is that of the armed shitstorm, wherein the frenzies and loose associations of online contagions are transported into meatspace.

– In general, income inequalityregional neglect, and personal trajectories of decline are strongly linked to support for ethnic nationalism. If one wants to find “material conditions” conducive to aimless frustration and resentment, waiting to be orchestrated into violent cleansings, they are there.

– Yet there is an argument missing here. If the cause is deprivation and state failure, why are we not witnessing violent riots against austerity, stagnant wages, rising bills, and failed governments? Why are all of these riots precipitated by violent crime, and only violent crime committed by someone with brown skin?  Why is the preoccupation with moral threat and why, when asked what they want, do rioters invariably say things like “immigrants out” rather than “wages and housing”? Why is ethnic purification the answer to social malaise? Why support an ethnonationalist project that is a conservative obstacle to the improvement of those material conditions? And if migration has become a cipher for social decay and disorder, how did that happen? On the other hand, why have millions of people whose lives were wrecked by capitalism, never joined or justified a pogrom? Why are those at the bottom often the leastsusceptible to ethnonationalist ideology?

– This racism, though justified as a response to “legitimate concerns” rising from the grassroots, is organized top down as part of a suite of authoritarian measures through which bourgeois politics manages the collapse of its legitimacy.

– While governments bend over backward to patronize and accommodate the racists, it encourages them to demand more. Suddenly it is no longer about numbers, but about “Islamists” running the country, or about a supposed “two tier state” said to be “against white people.”

– Even the way in which the state revises the meaning of racism, to include opposition to genocide, but not anti-migrant bigotry, clears a path for neonate fascism. Dystopia breeds dystopia.

– There is something else. For perpetrators, these pogroms are recreational. They offer an exciting, if transient, experience of being part of something bigger than oneself, and of political efficacy.

Pogromism is dangerously addictive for those it attracts: it offers short bursts of adventure and felt achievement, but it can’t satisfy. It could no more be placated with more racist violence or state sadism than a phobia about spiders could be soothed by the killing of more spiders. To keep going, it must escalate.

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...
"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...

UK

"We are all in it together" A letter from a doctor to Boris Johnson published a few months ago: ' Johnson has contributed to thousands of deaths ' Related 'The greatest global science failure for a generation' 'Herd immunity' or lockdown

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...