Vladimir Innit Lenin
13th August 2011, 08:00
It strikes me, as I sit here and try to make sense of what the rioting and looting of many of the UKs inner cities means, that whilst this of course is an economic issue, it is a social one as well.
What I mean by this, is that whilst there were many lumpen, criminal elements in the riots - people turning up for a loot in BMWs, Mercedes, people dousing others in petrol, people mugging a guy with a broken jaw etc. - there were certainly a many great genuine members of the working class that participated. In areas like Tottenham, Brixton, Walthamstow and Croydon, it is undeniable that the neo-liberal policies of the past 30-40 years have led to a race to the bottom for the lower elements in society, social and economic division and alienation and, in terms of the peoples' attitudes to the police (And perhaps vice versa!) a definite 'us and them' attitude, that has permeated many of North, North-East and South/South-East London's inner cities since the 1980s and the Broadwater Farm, Brixton and Toxteth riots.
Now, the reaction of the British left to the riots has been limp at best, criminal (no pun intended) at worst. Amongst the problems the left faced is that the biggest, most well organised sections of the working class either have no interest in supporting them (the Trade Unions), or are too top-down, cumbersome and introverted (SWP, SPEW) to be able to make an effective tactical decision within the timeframe of the riots. Much of this is down to the fact that, were you to place someone like Alex Callicinos (sp?) on the ground with the rioters, he would struggle to find a common language, a common understanding with them. If you were to place a worker like myself with them, I would have the same problem.
In short, what i'm getting at is that, whilst the UK working class, now more than ever, is an economic class that, when looking at the statistics, when looking from afar, when looking on paper, in theory, should be united, is a pretty distinct section of society, the reality is that the working class in the UK is a dis-united, ragged band of fellow travellers at best, opposing factions at worst.
Why is this? Well, in the previous paragraph I referred to the working class as an economic group, rather than a socioeconomic one as is the norm. The reason for this is that, whilst on paper an Economist can theorise about how Marx's definiton of 'working class', in terms of their relation to the MoP, means that ABC are the bourgeoisie and XYZ are the clearly defined working class, each group with defined self-interests and characteristics, the reality is that (for the working class I speak) our group is dis-united precisely because this hypothesis does not always transcend the theory-reality barrier.
Having thought about the subject at some length, it has become clear to me that there is more, in social terms, that can segment (not quite divide) the working class than we previously incorporated into our very much theoretical considerations:
The Ghetto-isation of many of the UKs inner cities have led to something of a 'postcode lottery'. Should one worker (Marxist defined) have grown up somewhere like Holborn or Tottenham in London 20 years ago, it's likely that their children will grow up with different social values to the children of someone who grew up down the road in Stoke Newington, a thriving community now, despite both being proverbial 'shitholes' 20-30 years ago.
Education, to our country's shame, is also a massive lottery. I was lucky enough to receive a (free) state grammar education. Only a few people go to grammar schools. Many of my peers were very much working class, growing up in areas such as Wood Green, Edmonton, Tottenham and Peckham, yet for the rest of their lives will move in Oxbridge, LSE, Briston, Durham and York social circles, and for the rest of their lives will be as alien to the working class as the wealthiest Capitalist, even though they may never become ruling class members or 'shopkeepers' themselves.
And it seems that these factors cross generational barriers. Just as the vicious cycle of poverty is so inescapable to the children, grand-children and even great-grand-children of those who are now poor, so it is that often the section of the working class that 'makes good' seems to have a lasting positive social effect on their children and grand-children.
My hypothesis: in order to realise the potential of the working class as an economic group, we need to understand that with this theoretically-united group, there are many different social segments, and that this is in many ways a legacy of the modern age: of neo-liberal social division and propaganda, of the ability of a few working class stragglers to become 'upwardly mobile', to an extent, and the legacy of poor government performance in house and community building and education, which has led to a 'lottery' effect in both areas.
Would appreciate any comments.
What I mean by this, is that whilst there were many lumpen, criminal elements in the riots - people turning up for a loot in BMWs, Mercedes, people dousing others in petrol, people mugging a guy with a broken jaw etc. - there were certainly a many great genuine members of the working class that participated. In areas like Tottenham, Brixton, Walthamstow and Croydon, it is undeniable that the neo-liberal policies of the past 30-40 years have led to a race to the bottom for the lower elements in society, social and economic division and alienation and, in terms of the peoples' attitudes to the police (And perhaps vice versa!) a definite 'us and them' attitude, that has permeated many of North, North-East and South/South-East London's inner cities since the 1980s and the Broadwater Farm, Brixton and Toxteth riots.
Now, the reaction of the British left to the riots has been limp at best, criminal (no pun intended) at worst. Amongst the problems the left faced is that the biggest, most well organised sections of the working class either have no interest in supporting them (the Trade Unions), or are too top-down, cumbersome and introverted (SWP, SPEW) to be able to make an effective tactical decision within the timeframe of the riots. Much of this is down to the fact that, were you to place someone like Alex Callicinos (sp?) on the ground with the rioters, he would struggle to find a common language, a common understanding with them. If you were to place a worker like myself with them, I would have the same problem.
In short, what i'm getting at is that, whilst the UK working class, now more than ever, is an economic class that, when looking at the statistics, when looking from afar, when looking on paper, in theory, should be united, is a pretty distinct section of society, the reality is that the working class in the UK is a dis-united, ragged band of fellow travellers at best, opposing factions at worst.
Why is this? Well, in the previous paragraph I referred to the working class as an economic group, rather than a socioeconomic one as is the norm. The reason for this is that, whilst on paper an Economist can theorise about how Marx's definiton of 'working class', in terms of their relation to the MoP, means that ABC are the bourgeoisie and XYZ are the clearly defined working class, each group with defined self-interests and characteristics, the reality is that (for the working class I speak) our group is dis-united precisely because this hypothesis does not always transcend the theory-reality barrier.
Having thought about the subject at some length, it has become clear to me that there is more, in social terms, that can segment (not quite divide) the working class than we previously incorporated into our very much theoretical considerations:
The Ghetto-isation of many of the UKs inner cities have led to something of a 'postcode lottery'. Should one worker (Marxist defined) have grown up somewhere like Holborn or Tottenham in London 20 years ago, it's likely that their children will grow up with different social values to the children of someone who grew up down the road in Stoke Newington, a thriving community now, despite both being proverbial 'shitholes' 20-30 years ago.
Education, to our country's shame, is also a massive lottery. I was lucky enough to receive a (free) state grammar education. Only a few people go to grammar schools. Many of my peers were very much working class, growing up in areas such as Wood Green, Edmonton, Tottenham and Peckham, yet for the rest of their lives will move in Oxbridge, LSE, Briston, Durham and York social circles, and for the rest of their lives will be as alien to the working class as the wealthiest Capitalist, even though they may never become ruling class members or 'shopkeepers' themselves.
And it seems that these factors cross generational barriers. Just as the vicious cycle of poverty is so inescapable to the children, grand-children and even great-grand-children of those who are now poor, so it is that often the section of the working class that 'makes good' seems to have a lasting positive social effect on their children and grand-children.
My hypothesis: in order to realise the potential of the working class as an economic group, we need to understand that with this theoretically-united group, there are many different social segments, and that this is in many ways a legacy of the modern age: of neo-liberal social division and propaganda, of the ability of a few working class stragglers to become 'upwardly mobile', to an extent, and the legacy of poor government performance in house and community building and education, which has led to a 'lottery' effect in both areas.
Would appreciate any comments.