LONDON LETTER OCTOBER 2018
CRUDE AND TASTELESS IS THE NEW COOL
Many illusions have been stripped away during, what must now be called the populist Trump/Brexit era,[1] however the greatest of these must surely be that expressing yourself crudely in political debate is a voter turn-off. Misogyny, blatant antisemitism racism and bigotry, are the new cool. Words like Yid, slut, and worse have all found a way back into the political discourse along with expressions of the crudest xenophobic sentiments. Anti-Irish slurs and stereotypes seem to be making a comeback, all without any political cost.
Jeremy Corbyn can make sneering remarks about Jews still not assimilated enough to get British irony, Donald Trump can talk about grabbing pussy, Boris Johnson can talk about walking pillboxes, the voters couldn’t care less, in fact in for the most part they lap it up. Every remark, every opinion, no matter how gross or repulsive will find a host of defenders.[2] The idea that political discourse must abide by certain rules of civility, a code that frowned on name calling and the ad hominem attack is now the preserve of a few namby-pamby liberals.
Whilst bringing up past statements is described as a ‘smear.’ Thus, if two years ago I said that Israel was a racist project, or that women do like a little force when it comes to sex, and people are reminded of these remarks, then I am being smeared by the mainstream media, or these statements on the record are fake news. Statements that are provably false are uttered, lies uttered unblinkingly to the camera, who cares? What was said was ‘truthy’ i.e. if not actually true it sounds true, indeed ought to be true.
The roots of this development lie in the American culture wars that exploded in the 1990s with the election of Bill Clinton whom the Republican right considered to be illegitimate, and the ascendancy of Newt Gingrich and birth of Fox News. Civility was thrown off the top of Republican HQ, politics was now to be conducted as a war to the death, either the Democrats would be destroyed or the Democrats will destroy the United States.
The single greatest problem with this state of mind is that it is incompatible with pluralism and democracy. Its final consequence is the creation of monsters like Trump and Steve Bannon, who in a healthier society would be confined to swapping conspiracy theories on Facebook and Twitter. Unless the tide can be turned then we will witness the death of democratic pluralism and its replacement by a mix of populist demagoguery and ruthless authoritarianism.
OCTOBER CAME AND THE PEOPLE
TOOK TO THE STREETS
Just as Brexit was never just about leaving the EU but part of a wider attack on the regulation of capitalism and civil and workplace rights and protections, the fight against Brexit is about this wider struggle.
And so, with at least a half million other people I took to the streets of London on Saturday. To call it a March is something of a misnomer since the numbers were so great that for the most part, I was standing still until finally I broke free and taking to the park took in the scale of the protest. I took part in the March to protest the Iraq war, - something I later came to regret, as I have addressed elsewhere, - but this felt very different, passionate, yes, but without that edge of pure bile that the hard left always brings to the party. There was not a single SWP placard in sight.
 |
| Not a single SWP placard in sight |
The question of whether it will do any ‘good’ must, of course, be addressed. On one level marches by themselves, no matter how large, ought not to change political decisions, since, -as with fox hunting, a pro-hunt protest can be very well attended, - they may only represent a highly vocal and well-organised minority. And there are times when a government should not be swayed by violent or deeply passionate protests, no matter how representative, as with the Powellite demonstrations of the late sixties. Nor should elected politicians be swayed by protest to enact legislation they believe morally abhorrent like capital or corporal punishment. , like capital or corporal punishment. Demonstrations should form part of a spectrum of political pressure, not be the sole arbiters of change. Thus, like the poll tax the events of Saturday represent not just the demands of those who marched but signalled a much wider shift in the public mood.
Which brings me back to Saturday. Will the march change the government’s position? This is looking unlikely; however, it does apply considerable pressure, representing a major shift in how the pro-Remain camp must be viewed, votes are now clearly at stake. Whilst in terms of a psychological and morale boost the demonstration provided a vital injection for the coming battle. However, the real impact of Saturday's march, and why the pro- Brexit crowd are now out in force seeking to belittle and diminish the event, has not been here but across Europe, sending a foghorn signal that the Brexiteers do not represent the sole British position. This is what makes the Brexiteers so fearful and why they loathe the People’s Vote movement so much, and why the sneering has already started.
 |
| Tweet from Peter Mair German Minister for The Economy. Brexiteers worst fears |
Corbyn, of course, was nowhere to be seen, as so often on such occasions he suddenly finds he has urgent business to attend to overseas. Now my criticism of him is not that he did not attend or support the march, he is pro-Brexit and did not, does not support the People’s Vote movement. my criticism is of his cowardice. He was not in Stoke on Trent, or Sunderland or anywhere where he would be exposed but safely tucked away in Geneva.
It has been a glorious October, and Saturday was a glorious day for the march. Today looks like it could be the last of the Indian summer, so I am now off in the general direction of Hyde Park to make the most of it.
