I would have
been highly delighted had my prediction that Britain would vote to
leave the EU been proven wrong. But, as I wrote yesterday, I never
thought it would be proved wrong, despite the belief of the opinion
polls, and financial markets that Remain would win.
As I pointed
out some time ago, the British electorate is made up of around 5% who
are fascists or hard core racists, and a further 25% who are bigots.
That was born out by this referendum. The turnout was 72%, and the
leave vote was 52%. In other words, 37.5% of the population voted
for Leave, whose campaign by general consent became not about the EU,
but purely about immigration, and which descended further and further
into the swamp of racism and xenophobia as time went on. That 37.5%
was comprised of the 30% mentioned above, plus a further 7% plus who
opposed the EU on other conservative, nationalist grounds, and
between 0.2 – 0.5% who voted on the national socialist arguments
put forward by so called Lexit.
In a blog
post today, Paul Mason has argued that its wrong to claim that 50% of the population are
racists or bigots. True, but as stated above, around 30% of the
population are. That doesn't mean that the majority of such people
want to put all foreigners into the gas chamber, or that they are
going to go out and abuse or attack them – though a small
proportion of them will.
It is not
necessarily racist to be concerned about immigration per se. Many
people are, as paul also says, concerned about persistent levels of
deprivation, about insecure employment, about lack of housing,
schools, and hospitals What is racist, by definition, is to blame
all of those deficiencies on immigration, to reach for that as an
easy scapegoat, despite all of the facts, and despite the most
obvious fact that all of those problems are the direct result of the
austerity policis introduced by the Liberal-Tories after 2010,
continued by Cameron after 2015, and in large part not challenged by
the Blair-right wing of the Labour Party.
If anyone
wants to know who to blame for this result it is those conservative
politicians, including the Blair-rights, and the EU counterparts, who
for the last 30 years have followed a policy of protecting th
fictitious paper wealth of the owners of money-capital, at the
expense of real productive-capital, and who, when the consequences of
that bubble burst in 2008, responded by again protecting that paper
wealth, whilst inflicting austerity and recession on to everyone
else, the most graphic illustration of which was the treatment of
Greece.
But the
blame also lies with all those, who for decades were prepared to use
immigration, and the EU, as an easy scapegoat. That applies most
notably to the Tories and the gutter press, but it applies also to
those Labour politicians who used weasel words to talk about
“non-racist immigration controls” or managed migration. It
unfortunately also applies to Paul Mason himself, who more recently
has proposed limits on the free movement of labour. If you lie down
with dogs, you catch fleas.
I have
written many times, in the past, about this huge reservoir of bigotry
that exists out there. If you move in enlightened middle-class
circles, or think that the activists at your union branch and so on
represent the wider public, you will not see it. If you are a
journalist or politician who thinks that making regular visits to
deprived areas you get to understand, then again you will not see it.
You may hear
the oft repeated “We're not racists, but ...”, and you may link
this to all of those concerns, and conclude that those people are not
racists, but you'd be wrong. Its not when people are being
interviewed by journalists, or questioned by politicians that their
true opinions come out, but when they are talking amongst themselves,
and freely expressing their views, that the ingrained bigotry
emerges. Its only when you hear that, as part of this milieu, in the
workplace, in the sports centre, the gym, the pub and so on that the
extent becomes clear.
And, because
there has been decades of middle class journalists, politicians and
clergy and others, not recognising that reality, even when it became
manifest in support fort he BNP and UKIP, and instead insisted on
telling us what a tolerant place Britain was, this cancer has never
been addressed, but has been allowed to metastasise.
The last
thing that Corbyn and the Labour Party should do now is to respond by
following Paul Mason's advice to make even further concessions to
that racism and bigotry. We need the Labour Party to be built on
solid foundations. As I wrote yesterday, “Remain or Leave – The
Fight Goes On”. The Labour Party still needs to forge links across
the EU to oppose austerity, and that cannot done at the same time as
trying to put the blame for that austerity on to foreign workers by
talk of restrictions on free movement etc.
That becomes
all the more important as the first effects of the Brexit vote has
been to send the Pound and stock markets into a tailspin. The
Brexiters have spoken about the Pound's fall in typically facile
tones. They have tried to make a virtue out of a necessity, by
claiming a lower Pound is good for exports. Let's examine what that
means. It means that where previously, say one UK car exchanged for
one German car, if the Pound halves in value, then two UK cars
exchange for one German car. That certainly does mean the UK built
car is then cheaper, and should be easier to sell. But, now its
necessary to build and sell two UK cars, simply to get one German car
in exchange for it, and that applies to any other German, EU, or
other foreign produced commodity.
It means to
import the same amount of food, energy and other commodities that
workers require, British workers have to work twice as hard, produce
twice as much as they previously did! No wonder the Tories and
Ukippers like that option. But, its precisely for that reason that
Labour and British workers need to build unity across Europe and to
build an EU wide solution.
In fact,
responsibility resides with the Blair-rights who failed to build such
a perspective, and even during this campaign stood shoulder to
shoulder with the Tories and their austerity policies. Rather than
tackling the real problems, over the last twenty years, they ran away
from them, and devolution was a case in point. It only acted to
encourage fragmentation, nationalism and division.
In the
aftermath of the vote, the SNP is raising the call for a new Scottish
referendum. It is, of course, quite rational. If England and Wales
votes to leave the EU, but Scotland and Northern Ireland have voted
decisively to remain, it is logical that these areas should leave the
UK and remain in the EU. In fact, as John Bruton pointed out, the
logical thing would be for Northern Ireland to become part of a
United Ireland, inside the EU. That would also deal with the issue
of the border.
London too
voted decisively to remain, and as London has a population and GDP
comparable to Norway, it would be rational to declare itself an
independent city-state and to remain in the EU. That would leave
Wales and the rump of England to sink into the sunset. Would I
propose such a course of action? Absolutely not, for the same reason
that I opposed Scotland leaving the UK, and the UK leaving the EU.
Our task is to build the greatest possible unity of the working-class
and that starts from where we are.
2 comments:
When you from where we are, do you mean going into a quick general election on a Leave platform? Or do you think there's still the option to make the election a second 'double lock' referendum? I see the LibDems have come out as a pro EU party, which could be a threat to Labour's minority vote.
I wasn't talking in electoral terms. I was talking about the strategic task of socialists of building maximum working class unity. I can well understand why someone who voted to Remain, would feel cheated by this Referendum, I do myself. But, the last thing to do in those circumstances is to respond out of spite.
The EU is not yet a state, but a state in the process of becoming. But Britain is a state, and the starting point is to maintain the greatest unity of workers within it. We can still orientate to workers in Europe, whilst doing so, and from there move to the reintegration of Britain into the EU, or preferably a United States of Europe. So, I see no basis for arguing for Scottish independence, or the creation of London as an independent city-state.
I do see the basis for a United Ireland. The North of Ireland is an artificial state created only under duress by British armed force. The majority in the North voted to remain, and the unity of the Irish working-class would be strengthened by re-uniting the North with the South, within the context of the protections provided by the EU.
Labour should continue to strongly make the case for Britian to remain in the EU, and for an extended struggle for the reform of the existing EU, and creation of a United States of Europe. That is a struggle that only someone like Corbyn can lead. The Blair-rights are tainted by the conservative policies of austerity that have weakened the EU, and led to this anti-EU vote in the first place. Ed Miliband pointed that out in a speech yesterday. The Labour Party would be strengthened if those Blair-right MP's left or were expelled.
The Labour In Campaign was led by Alan Johnson who was politically weak, and never seen. Hillary Benn was Shadow Foreign Secretary with responsibility for the EU, and again was politically weak and muddled in his message, and again hardly seen. On top of that we had various Blair-right MP's like Harman, and Saddiq Khan appearing on platforms with Cameron as the most right-wing Prime Minister for years. No wonder a third of Labour voters voting against the confused message they were putting out.
The party needs to coalesce around the clear, principled message that Corbyn was putting, and if that means a bunch of Blair-right MP's who have tried to organise a coup against the vast majority of Labour Party members have to be expelled, or decide to leave, that will be a good thing. We have half a million members who can easily replace those MP's come a General Election, and the ability to put a clear message without the Leader having to look over his shoulder will make us much stronger.
Post a Comment