What does the BNP’s gaining seats in the European Elections mean for British politics? How did this happen in liberal England? There is certainly a lot of disappointment and blame around. Would this demise serve as a blessing in disguise – a sort of wake up call for white (and some Black) British liberals to the fact that racism is real, alive and will kick you where the sun does not shine when you least expect it?
There is the view that racism is no longer an issue in Britain as there are enough in place and enacted by law to “catch it”, “bin it” and “kill it”. Instead, what needs addressing is equality or equal access across the board and social integration, as the real culprit is multiculturalism and the “ghettosiation” of ethnic groups. Hence, the mantra of government and experts – assimilate so that we can find that fleeting cohesive British national identity.
Consequently, as Arun Kundnani writes on the dismantling of significant bodies: “the Commission for Racial Equality has been subsumed into a more nebulous Equality and Human Rights Commission, local racial equality councils have been pressured into reinventing themselves as promoters of assimilation and community-based anti-racist organisations have had their funding removed on the grounds that they cater exclusively to the needs of minority groups.” [IRR, June 2009]
Even some churches with their long involvement of anti-racism work have closed down their racial justice office or have integrated it under a diversity umbrella. Some ecumenical bodies with a long history of strong involvement in anti-racism work have also been affected. While funding may be a reality, one cannot deny that people are still uncomfortable to talk about and explore the evil of racism. The reality is that racism has not disappear - it has simply reinvented itself.
The question should be asked as to the ways the media and government policies played into the hands of the BNP – a threat to the very democracy that is purported to allow them to bethere in the first place. Whatever happened to responsibility in our conversation about democracy? It may be that the disillusionment of the electorate with the state of present day politics meant that Bloody Nativistic Politics got through the back-door.
One wonders, however, whether there are deeper issues here at play. What happens to a national psyche, for instance, bombarded daily by the media and politicians with anti-immigrant/Muslim rhetoric? How different is the BNP call for “Britain for Caucasian British” and the ruling party’s mantra of “British jobs for British Workers”. As Kundnani writes: “Years of New Labour borrowing from BNP nationalism has simply fuelled its steady rise, as New Labour's message and the BNP's have converged ever closer and issues of nationality, multiculturalism and immigration have dominated the political agenda.”
It is nonsense to suggest that BNP’s success is a mere result of plebiscite protests. It is even more rubbish for some voters to argue that they are not racist or fascist but that they voted for BNP to send a message to their parties (Labour and Conservative). Why did they not vote for a party other than the BNP? Such reasonings make me wonder whether we have before us an electorate who are unable to distinguish between right and wrong or a body of citizens trying to camouflage racist views .This may be why one lay commentator in responding to why BNP won seats observed: “There are a lot of racists around”!
New labour, New Conservative or New Liberal Democrats (or new whatever) will do well to interrogate and remember a few things: how middle and upper-class their politics are; how un-interrogated liberalism can serve to cover-up one’s own racist tendencies in current discourses; and that “racism” is around though the garb may be “new”!
June 12, 2009
