k-punk
Spectres of Mark
White Magic (http://critcrim.org/redfeather/journal-pomocrim/vol-6-virtual/whitemagic.htm)'"Here," said Sir Christopher Stephens, Esteemed AOE Puppet Master, and First Secretary of the AxSys Secret Police (the Fuzz), " we encourage self-expression, personal pride, and the politics of difference. P’lice yourself, is our motto. Our goal is simple: Strategic Fuzzification.'
The Tories playing the race (sorry immigration) card comes as no surprise. In essence, this is because, post-Thatcher/Joseph, they have become the 'purest' party of Capitalism, embodying all its contradictory but complementary tendencies (deterritorialization and reterritorialization, archaism and futurism - at the same time). Thus free market rhetoric is always accompanied by a phobic nationalism that blatantly contradicts it (i.e. if a free market, why not a free market in labour?)
Possibly the most despicable aspect of Blair's despicable govt is its genuflection to the irrational and baseless populist hostility towards immigration. I would urge people to think again about my serious point about the relationship between the currently sacrosanct ideological status of the Family (if you want to justify anything, say you are doing it on behalf of 'hardworking families' - what about hardworking collectives? don't <I>they</I> count? ... silly me, of course not...) and xenophobic nationalism. Ask yourself this, if 'Britain is full' (as Howard was quoted as saying in a tabloid this morning), why is there an incessant and unseemly rush by all political parties to encourage breeding? (Don't the Lib Dems want to extend maternity leave to seven years or something.... ;-) ? )
The truth is that there is no economic argument against immigration. On the contrary, in fact: there is an economic argument FOR it. Immigration would immediately sort out the skills shortage and do something to rectify the pensions problem by instantly producing a young workforce that would pay taxes.
There is however a strong economic and ecological argument against more children (they are a drain on both natural and financial resources).
It is also imperative to recognize that there is no contradiction between Fortress Britain immigration policies and the 'obligatory cosmopolitan viewpoint' (MES) of 'respect for cultural differences'. On the contrary: the two go together and even require one another. The flattening out of all issues of racism into questions of representation is the sure and certain way to ensure that the exploitation of particular racial groups continues. The fact that 'we' whites now 'respect' 'Carribean culture' (check all those adverts on the tube for Carribean cake!) has done little or nothing to improve the economic and social position of immigrants and their descendants. This seems to be the ideological message: 'We' can exploit minorities and treat them as inferiors fit only for menial tasks, but we are not allowed to SAY that they are inferior, because that is racist.
The point is that insofar as you are ethnicized, you are either a victim of fascism or yourself a fascist. The other side of this can be seen in the master class outrage about British soldiers being involved in torture. The very idea! Think about what this means. It's no surprise, it would seem, if OTHER nationalities engage in torture and abuse; because, presumably, we can expect no more of them. Witness the ideological contortions - this particular incident should not distract from the basic purity of the race. In other words, the factual should not be allowed to contaminate the ideological.
Blair is capable of the Evil that he commits for a simple reason: his innate and unswerving belief in his own rectitude and essential goodness. He and 'his people' cannot be wrong. Any amount of killing of children is justified, in his case, because it is for the greater Good (not like when 'those people' kill children, which is in and of itself a proof of their essential Evil). This feeds into the structural delusion of Liberal Progressivism, which maintains that it is OK for the West to have nuclear weapons, because it is Essentially Good (after all, it has only been responsible for the Crusades, the Inquisition, Auschwitz, Dresden, Hiroshima, Nagasaki, the secret bombing of Cambodia...) whereas other 'unstable' nations must be stopped at all costs from developing them.
The point is that <I>there is no good ethnicity</I>. The only way a non-oppressive 'we' can be articulated is under concepts such as Truth and Justice, which can never have anything to do with an American - or any other ethnic - way.
The Tories playing the race (sorry immigration) card comes as no surprise. In essence, this is because, post-Thatcher/Joseph, they have become the 'purest' party of Capitalism, embodying all its contradictory but complementary tendencies (deterritorialization and reterritorialization, archaism and futurism - at the same time). Thus free market rhetoric is always accompanied by a phobic nationalism that blatantly contradicts it (i.e. if a free market, why not a free market in labour?)
Possibly the most despicable aspect of Blair's despicable govt is its genuflection to the irrational and baseless populist hostility towards immigration. I would urge people to think again about my serious point about the relationship between the currently sacrosanct ideological status of the Family (if you want to justify anything, say you are doing it on behalf of 'hardworking families' - what about hardworking collectives? don't <I>they</I> count? ... silly me, of course not...) and xenophobic nationalism. Ask yourself this, if 'Britain is full' (as Howard was quoted as saying in a tabloid this morning), why is there an incessant and unseemly rush by all political parties to encourage breeding? (Don't the Lib Dems want to extend maternity leave to seven years or something.... ;-) ? )
The truth is that there is no economic argument against immigration. On the contrary, in fact: there is an economic argument FOR it. Immigration would immediately sort out the skills shortage and do something to rectify the pensions problem by instantly producing a young workforce that would pay taxes.
There is however a strong economic and ecological argument against more children (they are a drain on both natural and financial resources).
It is also imperative to recognize that there is no contradiction between Fortress Britain immigration policies and the 'obligatory cosmopolitan viewpoint' (MES) of 'respect for cultural differences'. On the contrary: the two go together and even require one another. The flattening out of all issues of racism into questions of representation is the sure and certain way to ensure that the exploitation of particular racial groups continues. The fact that 'we' whites now 'respect' 'Carribean culture' (check all those adverts on the tube for Carribean cake!) has done little or nothing to improve the economic and social position of immigrants and their descendants. This seems to be the ideological message: 'We' can exploit minorities and treat them as inferiors fit only for menial tasks, but we are not allowed to SAY that they are inferior, because that is racist.
The point is that insofar as you are ethnicized, you are either a victim of fascism or yourself a fascist. The other side of this can be seen in the master class outrage about British soldiers being involved in torture. The very idea! Think about what this means. It's no surprise, it would seem, if OTHER nationalities engage in torture and abuse; because, presumably, we can expect no more of them. Witness the ideological contortions - this particular incident should not distract from the basic purity of the race. In other words, the factual should not be allowed to contaminate the ideological.
Blair is capable of the Evil that he commits for a simple reason: his innate and unswerving belief in his own rectitude and essential goodness. He and 'his people' cannot be wrong. Any amount of killing of children is justified, in his case, because it is for the greater Good (not like when 'those people' kill children, which is in and of itself a proof of their essential Evil). This feeds into the structural delusion of Liberal Progressivism, which maintains that it is OK for the West to have nuclear weapons, because it is Essentially Good (after all, it has only been responsible for the Crusades, the Inquisition, Auschwitz, Dresden, Hiroshima, Nagasaki, the secret bombing of Cambodia...) whereas other 'unstable' nations must be stopped at all costs from developing them.
The point is that <I>there is no good ethnicity</I>. The only way a non-oppressive 'we' can be articulated is under concepts such as Truth and Justice, which can never have anything to do with an American - or any other ethnic - way.
Last edited: