This was
introduced by Brendan McGeever.
Brendan began by saying what a privilege it is to be asked
to speak before a RIC audience, since RIC is far and away one of the most
inspiring political movements of his life up to now.
In his opening remarks, Brendan noted that we are at a
critical moment: the 30 year neoliberal consensus has been profoundly unsettled
by the most sustained economic depression since the 1930s. The most striking
feature of this, politically, has been the rise of the right. Across Europe,
right-wing populist parties are demanding a return to a mythical golden age of
sovereign nation states defined by cultural and racial homogeneity. And they
have found traction: some 60 million voters in Europe have opted for parties of
policies that are openly xenophobic or authoritarian-leaning.
Brendan further noted that these developments are not
confined to Europe, but are global in their reverberations. From the white
supremacy of Trump’s America, to the proto-fascism of Modi’s India, to the
authoritarianism of Putin’s Russia, the rise of racism and the right is global
in its dimensions.
Brendan then went on to offer a discussion of the Brexit
vote as an exemplar of this emboldened, racist populism. He noted some
anecdotal observations. The air of post-Brexit Britain has become less
breathable for many, he suggested. “My black and brown colleagues now tell me
that once again, they have found themselves looking over their shoulder, just
to see who is behind them”. Life might more or less go on as normal for some,
but for others, there is a growing feeling that we are in a state of emergency.
The force of racism in Brexit was made clear in the wave of
racist hate that followed the result. In the four weeks following the result,
6000 racist attacks were reported to the National Police Chiefs Council. In the
4 days that followed the result, racist attacks rose by 57% on the previous
year.
We are confronted with a key question, then: how could it
come to pass that the first break from the thirty-year neoliberal consensus in
Britain was marbled through with such racism and violence?
Brendan then went on to discuss the role of English
nationalism in the Brexit vote. Brexit cannot be understood, he argued, without
accounting for the ‘invisible driver’ of Englishness. The rise of English nationalism,
he suggested, is deeply connected to two key developments:
i)
Decline: the decline of the British
Empire but also economic decline, and the marginal place that Britain now
occupies within the world economy
ii)
Defeat: defeat of the labour and anti-racist
movements of the 70s and 80s.
Brendan argued that in recent years, the prospect (and
reality) of downward mobility has produced class injuries and collective
experiences that have been recast through the politics of resentment. This kind
of resentment is no longer defined by imperial prowess or superiority, but by a
deep sense of loss of prestige; a retreat from the damaging impact of a
globalised world that is no longer recognisable, no longer ‘British’. A new
narrative has become prevalent: ‘we are under siege, it is time to pull up the
drawbridge’. Not coincidentally, this was also one of the defining features of
the discourse of the Leave campaign.
Finally, the talk ended with some observations on the
Scotland. Brendan argued that if in England, the problem for anti-racists is
that almost every social question comes to be defined by and through race, in
Scotland, the problem is seemingly the inverse, it is the difficulty of pushing
race on to the political agenda.
Brendan argued that amid the flowering of political
democracy during indyref, it is sobering to think how rarely the discussion
about racism actually featured, including within RIC itself. This is not new.
The kind of silence on questions of race has come to be interpreted as an indication
of racism’s absence by much of the Scottish population, including its political
parties. And what this has done is to help consolidate a now powerful myth that
there is ‘no problem here’ or that ‘We‘re a’ Jock Tamson’s bairns’.
While it is certainly true that the rhetoric from Holyrood
has been markedly different to that of Whitehall, anti-racists need to remain
alive to the often quite radical disjuncture between elite discourse on, say,
migration, and everyday life on the ground. For the fact remains that racism is
a deeply structuring force distorting the lives of ethnic minorities in
Scotland.
There is also a deep degree of historical amnesia about our
racist past. How often have we heard about the disproportionate role played by
Scotland in Atlantic slavery and colonial conquest? If we do talk about them,
frequently, these histories are projected onto a nasty, reactionary
British/English establishment. This suggests not only a degree of intellectual
dishonesty but also an unwillingness to confront the legacies of empire and
racism in which Scotland is implicated.
Brendan suggested that this is not simply some idle academic
exercise in correcting history; rather, if the Scottish population is to
challenge contemporary racisms that are structural and deep-rooted, we as
anti-racists need to bring into view this troubled past and show how it
connects with our present.
We need to remain vigilant, then, for the capacity of
Scottish nationalism to become racialized. Particularly when, unlike in 2014,
the politics of class and social justice are today in the retreat in Scotland.
For socialists and anti-racists, national questions don’t
remain static. As the Scottish national question continues to develop and
mutate in this post-2014 context, now, more than ever, we need to confront
Scotland’s racism problem, past and present.
______________
Questions
and Answers
Pete agreed
that the Unionism shown in the Brexit campaign could be considered a form of
English nationalism. He asked how this would impact more generally.
Geraldine asked
if anti-Irish racism was likely to reappear in Scotland as part of the drift
towards a wider racism?
Allan said
there was a widespread but often misleading equation between Unionism and
English nationalism. There was indeed an English or Greater English British
variant off Unionism. However, there were also Scottish-British, Welsh-British
and 'Ulster'-British versions, all united in their support for the most
reactionary features of the UK constitution - the Crown Powers, the Union and
an established religion. UKIP was the only party in the UK (since the
Conservatives broke their formal links with the Ulster Unionists) to organise
and have representation in all four component parts of the Union. UKIP had
provided the original impetus for the reactionary unionism that now dominates
the UK after the Brexit vote. Following in their footsteps, May's current
election campaign is designed to give her the full use of the British state's
anti-democratic powers and to impose a more reactionary Britishness throughout
the UK.
Allan also said that the SNP leadership had not ditched all
the reactionary aspects of Britishness, as shown in their support for monarchy,
the City of London, Scottish regiments and the British High Command.
Jamie
thought that Brendan had been soft on racism in Scotland. Beneath the official
veneer of civic nationalism there was still widespread everyday racism in
Scotland.
Shaben agreed
that there was widespread racism towards black people in Scotland, which
remained unacknowledged. She spoke of her experience of being treated by many
as if she was not being really British /Scottish because she was not white. She
was often asked where she came from, and when she replied Glasgow, was then
asked "but where do you really come from"?
Murid said
there was an absence of talk about the issue of race in Scotland. It was even
thought that raising the issue was in itself 'racist'. People hide behind the
myth, propagated especially by the SNP government, that Scotland is a
post-racial society. Thus the black experience of racism in Scotland is denied.
Brendan replied
by agreeing with the points made by Jamie, Shaben and Murid. What he was trying
to emphasise was that the official SNP government discourse in Scotland, which
expressed support for immigration, was different from the official discourse in
England, which had become toxically anti-migrant. However, beneath the level of
official politics he agreed there was still widespread racism in Scotland, and
a less active oppositional anti-racist culture. He also gave an example from
his youth when he had been active in 'Give Racism the Red Card' campaign and
had been invited to speak at North Berwick High School. The head had told him
racism was not really a problem in the school because there were no black
students!
Brendan agreed with Geraldine that anti-Irish racism could
return, especially now that the mainstream unionist parties were making
overtures to Loyalists. In reply to Allan he said that there were still
progressive versions of Britishsness, especially amongst older people who
remembered the legacy of the post-1945 British Welfare State. It could be
argued that Jeremy Corbyn represented an attempt to revive this.
Anne said
that she often asked people where they were from, not out of any racist
feelings, but because she was interested in communicating with others and
learning from them. She felt sad that this could be misunderstood. She linked
this with her recent trip to Serbia, where she had been often asked the same
question. On giving the reply "Scotland", this usually drew a
favourable response.
Shaben agreed
that not every person asking where you were from was racist. However, the
racist assumptions behind the majority who asked such questions had to be taken
into consideration.
Richard, from
Scotland Against Criminalising Communities, said it was really disturbing how
high a percentage of people in Europe when surveyed had declared their support
for a total ban on Muslims. Despite this the UK remained 3rd from the bottom in
the survey, highlighting how much further downhill things had gone in the rest
of Europe. Nevertheless, SACC had been conducting its own disturbing report
into Islamophobia in Edinburgh schools. This report would be launched on Friday
2nd June, 18.00-20.30 at the Annandale Mosque.
Richard agreed that although the official Scottish
government stance on migration is better than south of the border, Scottish
politicians refusal to recognise the existence of everyday racism in Scotland
is a real problem.
Brendan
argued
that the problem in England is that the discussion over racism is dominated by
the Right; but the problem in Scotland is that racism is not up for discussion.
The death of Sheku Bayoh in police custody in Kirkcaldy was an
example of the actions of individual racists, as in earlier cases, but of the
Scottish state. The SNP government response has been found wanting. This is
worrying.
Nick had said
that although it was clear from his accent that he came from England, only once
in the 13 years he had lived in Scotland had he experienced personal
anti-English racism.
Racism appeared to be stronger in Europe as the large votes
for the Right in Austria and France showed. However, so far the Right had been
defeated in the elections, most clearly in the Netherlands.
Pete said
that we should look at the history of racism in Britain. Labour in the 1960s
and 1970s was not some bastion of anti-racism.
We also have a different situation over any IndyRef2 than we
had during IndyRef1. We continue to face the growing problem of the impact of
neo-liberalism and the everyday experience of a working class living in
insecurity and fear. People are encouraged to think as individuals living in
competition with each other. This is true of the Curriculum for Excellence in
schools and most of the courses run in universities. This all creates the
conditions in which racism can flourish.
Luke, who
has worked in Alloa for some time, compared this with his experience working in
Birmingham. In Alloa there is little understanding of racism and people still
talk about 'coloured' people, without necessarily using this in a perjorative
sense. In Birmingham you knew that anyone using such a term was a racist.
However, such overt racism also led to an oppositional anti-racism, which doesn't
exist in Alloa. Anti-racist forces are
better organised in England.
Luke was also greatly encouraged by the response of the
people in Manchester to the bombing. The unity message had been far better than
the response to bombings in Paris, where Islamophobia was more prevalent.
Geraldine agreed
that although the official inclusive discourse and practice of Scottish
nationalism, highlighted in IndyRef1, was much better than the official
exclusive British nationalism of Brexit, highlighted by the restricted
franchise for that referendum. However, this was not the same as challenging
the everyday racism that still existed in Scotland.
Jamie said
that people could not understand Scotland properly unless they were fully aware
of Scotland's part in the UK history of imperialism and colonialism. This needs
to be highlighted before any IndyRef2.
In conclusion, Brendan
took up Luke's contribution by saying that, in contrast to England, Scotland's
stance on racism had not really been tested. As economic, social and political
conditions continued to deteriorate, then Scotland's everyday racism, lying
below the official radar, was likely to surface and take on a political
form. Would this lead to an effective
anti-racism in Scotland?
One example to counter the notion of us living in a
post-racist Scotland was his friend with an Asian background working in
Glasgow. He had said that if Scotland were to become independent he would move
to London, because London at least sustained an anti-racist culture.
In reply to Jamie, Brendan remembered Nicola Sturgeon's
response to the SDL. She claimed that Scotland had always been "a
welcoming country". This represented a shocking occlusion of Scotland's
imperial past. The annual anti-racist St Andrews Day demo in Glasgow is not
growing.
Although Brendan agreed with Nick that the recent electoral
setbacks for fascists in Europe provided some relief, this did not represent a
halting of a wider move to the Right. The mainstream parties had adopted much
of their racism and incorporated it into the operation of the state.
Furthermore, the fascists had grown in electoral strength and continued to
represent a real threat.
Brendan agreed with Pete that that the Left had not really
come to terms with the full impact of neo-liberalism. The old class
collectivism had been broken up and as yet nothing effective had been put in
place.
Brendan emphasised the importance of such dialogue. He had
really enjoyed the meeting and had learned a lot.
