Totalitarian liberalism

The following comes from issue no 92 (Summer 2007) of "Class War" the British Anarchist Journal. The article was reprinted by way of A-infos. As in previous "re" postings I have edited slightly for length and clarity (some of the people to which CW refers are probably not know outside of the UK). What they are talking about is, in a more aggressive tone, what other anarchists call the theory of the "New Class". I would prefer such terminology to the more global term "multiculturalist" but that is a relatively small point. The Labour Party government has tried to exploit guilt in order to get the British people to accept an influx of religious chauvinism from the middle east. Of course if the same ruling groups decided to just leave that part of the world then it might be a little harder to play these liberal games; you know the one which says we're supposed to "tolerant everything and everybody except the person who doesn't tolerant everything and everybody".


The lefty and liberal press have embraced multiculturalism and denounce any who question its tenets as racist and reactionaries lower than amoeba. Who then would argue against it? Surely these visions of a contented multiracial society in which the ideas and beliefs of all are respected are so clearly positive and good that no one but the reddest necked boneheaded
tosser could object?

Actually, multiculturalism is not about ending oppression and building a fairer society. It is a police ideology, in its design and in its practice it seeks to divides working class communities against themselves and foists state approved `community leaders' upon us who scramble against each other for the chance to win the approval of the middle class do-gooder professionals who decide which `community' is most deserving of the largest share of the limited resources available.

Borrowing a hodgepodge of ideas from feminism, 1980s political correctness, and academic anthropology the supporters of multiculturalism argue that human beings are defined not by their individual personalities or membership of a particular social class but instead as members of distinct `cultures'. Instead of looking for what unites us all - local community, class or even our common humanity what is of prime importance is the one thing that divides us whether that is our race, gender, sexual identity or whatever. To criticise these 'values' from the vantage point of another `cultural grouping' is to indulge in an act of `cultural imperialism' -a definite sin in the eyes of the multiculturalists and one for which you will be likely to get your collar felt for when the Religious Hatred Act becomes law.


DESPITE the support multiculturalism gets from both lefties and liberals it is in fact a highly conservative ideology. By its insistence that all differing cultures are of equal value multiculturalism denies the most fundamental of liberal assumptions dating right back to the French and American Revolutions, the universality of human rights. To condemn the hanging of gays in Iran or the mutilation of the vagina's of young girls in sub-Saharan Africa is failing to account for "the legitimacy of their cultural experience and exposes our inherent racism" and is again culturally imperialist. Not only does multiculturalism deny that class has any role but neither does it allow any room for progress or change in society as this would involve the challenging or changing of cultural values. The multiculturalists have an idealised view of modern society - seeing it as the best that can be achieved, needing only the slightest of tweaks to remove the `privileges' from which white working class people allegedly benefit, which in multiculturalist eyes form the basis of racism. (however they seem to believe that non-western societies are only to be judged by "their own" standards. That seems to contradict the idea that "our" world is the best available. I think I see what CW is trying to say ... just I would have put it a little differently)

Multiculturalism claims that it is against hierarchies and yet it is intrinsically elitist, it demands that all cultures and groups be represented by `community leaders' to `speak for' and embody that community. Government promotion of `moderates' within communities along with the fact that those who are most vocal are those who identify themselves most closely with the defining feature of their `culture' leads to the most conservative elements tending to take a leading role and their reactionary interpretations of what embodies `their culture' becoming the mainstream.

The promotion of the most reactionary community leaders simply exacerbates a glaring contradiction at the heart of the multiculturalist dream of a society of separate and distinct cultures and groups; what to do when the beliefs and tenets of one culture directly impinge on the rights of another? How does a society satisfy (for example) the needs and aspirations of a career woman, a gay man, an evangelical Christian and an Imam? But all is not lost! Into the breach boldly step the `highly trained' professionals of the cultural diversity units and social services departments who can arbitrate between the competing claims and negotiate solutions and distribute funding and resources to those community leaders who can keep their respective communities quiet and suitably respectful.

WHILST the police have always been in the front line in the class war against us, our rulers wouldn't survive long without the army of auxiliary cops dedicated to convincing us through persuasion and coercion that the system in which we live is the best possible and that our position within it is natural and unchangeable. These auxiliary cops are the teachers, social workers, probation officers, etc., who try to con us that whilst they have the power to punish us; fine us, take away our benefits, our homes, our kids, our liberty or our future, they are in reality on our side. They are recruited from the university educated middle classes - the very people upon whom the Leninist vampire parties prey for their cannon fodder and they all share that same Guardianista `concerned' radicalism that wishes to bring enlightenment to the poor misguided proles whether we want it or not. Multiculturalism masquerades as being the means of putting an end to racism forever and yet it has provided new life and opportunities for the Fascists.

No fascist party in Britain's history has been as strong as the BNP is today. GRIFFIN and his cronies have pursued a successful twin pronged strategy; firstly, feeding upon the bitterness felt within white working class areas at the effects of both the real and imagined passing over of those communities in favour of other more `deserving' more `oppressed' cultural communities and, secondly, presenting themselves within `the community of distinct cultures' as community leaders and the `genuine' voice of the white community.

Criticism of multiculturalism is not received well and is usually dismissed as attacks upon minority groups and evidence of the critic's racism. The multiculturalists reserve their bile however for those who refuse to remain within the confines of their respective cultural groupings; the breakers of the rules.

Women, such as the Iranian communist Maryam Namazie, from muslim communities who refuse the veil and argue for secular concepts of women's equality are denounced as the tools of imperialism and peddlers of islamophobia.

TREVOR PHILIPS, who has made a good living as one of the prime architects of multiculturalism, and is head of the newly unified The Commission for Equality and Human Rights made some minor criticisms of its effects and how it aided segregation in some northern cities and found himself condemned by London Mayor ken Livingstone as "well on the way to joining the BNP"!! You could not make it up!

If critics in Britain get abuse it is far more serious for those who deviate from community values abroad. However the multiculturalists commitment to `diversity' never stretches to defend their rights; when gays were murdered in Jamaica, protests against the killings were attacked as racist and showing `insufficient understanding of Jamaican culture'. Similarly, protests against the state murder of young gays in Iran were condemned as pandering to American imperialism, just as opposing the killing of gays in palestine was supporting the zionist occupier.

Although multiculturalism is most associated with the `soft police' it has also made its presence felt in the regular force - the Black Police Association and Gay Police Association's have both been given official recognition and have made high profile political statements and interventions in support of laws and initiatives of which they approve. This has been part and parcel of a explicit politicisation of the police as a whole over the last decade (previously in Class War we exposed the links between senior police officers and fundamentalist christian groups, see issue 91.) Formerly police officers went on 24 hour news channels to talk about crime­ in the last year in particular figures like Ali Dizaei of the National Black Police Association have been readily discussing Jack Straw's view on the veil, or Ken Livingstone's outburst about Jewish businessmen in Stratford. Dizaei may be a slick media operator, but these issues have got nothing to do with the police at all. To understand the `Promised land' that the adherents of multiculturalism are aiming toward it is only necessary to look at the situation in Northern Ireland. The Good Friday Agreement and the `peace process' are a sort of year zero for the multi-culturalist project. Sectarian divisions have been institutionalised and become state policy with the two communities treated as `equal and separate'. OLD ATTEMPTS to break down `community divisions are abandoned as grants and access to resources are allocated on a sectarian basis as a new middle class of `community leaders' flourish often as barely concealed fronts for the old gun gangs. The recent `historic coming together of Paisley and Adams coincided with an tsunami of government grants flooding the coffers of the `community' projects, including £400,000 going directly to the UDA! The old joke about Jews in Northern Ireland being interrogated as whether they are Catholic or Protestant Jews has become state policy, in the Census, atheists are given the option of declaring themselves as Protestant or Catholic atheists!!! The elections for the NI assembly are designed to perpetuate this state of affairs - every candidate must declare themselves as either Republican or Unionist so that their preference votes can be counted toward the major sectarian parties.