Jon Mulhall (Hope not Hate) on the claims that the weekend's riots were an expression of 'legitimate concerns':
'There is nothing “legitimate” about trying to burn down a hotel with asylum seekers inside. There is nothing “legitimate” about hurling bricks at mosques or attacking people of colour. This is far-right violence, motivated by a climate of hate and prejudice, and all of those responsible must be held accountable'!
Absolutely right!!!
Hmmm..... I'd agree on the political context, but Mulhall's point is their manifestation in violence against migrants & minorities is illegitimate.
But I *do* get your point which is making the case for explanation of the drivers of violence rather than offering a mitigation for such violence.
This is what is behind a lot of commentary about addressing the problems where such violence can be presented as a response.
(which is a long way of saying: fair comment)
@ChrisMayLA6 @pedestrians1st
I'm going to challenge this line of thinking.
Millions have been seriously hurt by 14 years of #ToryAusterity (or longer nroliberalism). That may be a source of pain, but IMO it is *not* the cause of the violence.
IMO, the violence is caused by rightwing hatemongering towards immigrants accelerated by years of #Tory normalisation of violence (eg "go home" vans, Royal Navy patrolling the channel, Rwanda policy, etc). Also, a bit of anger over GE loss
@TCatInReality @pedestrians1st
Of course this may not be either/or but both.... one compunds the other
@TCatInReality @ChrisMayLA6 @pedestrians1st
The violence is an organised attempt to get groundswell support for the far right onto the streets. SO far the opposing groups have vastly outnumbered the nazis, and they have not got the rising numbers of supporters they were hoping for through fear, intimidation and media support.
@TCatInReality @ChrisMayLA6 @pedestrians1st
A lot of it is also driven by the rush to acquire notoriety within the fascist movement. That comes with many perks, not least of which is money. In the UK, if you get arrested and get your photo all over the papers as a fascist street fighter, then fascist sympathisers who're too old to fight will throw cash at you.
It's a profitable grift but it's competitive, so a lot of fascists are out there trying to one-up each other.
@pedestrians1st @TCatInReality @ChrisMayLA6
Yeah, it's been true for years. It's why figures like Tommy Robinson and Danny Tommo came to prominence, and there has been a constellation of lesser-known fascist agitators trying the same grift for ages. Within fascist circles, it's so well known that they have a term, "paypal patriot", to disparage people who're transparent about doing it.
The thing is that using carceral solutions is counterproductive. Robinson has been to prison multiple times. It helps him in his grift - indeed, he may not have had anything like the profile (and therefore income) had he remained at liberty. I like to think of it in biology terms: fascists exist in an environment where cops and capitalism exist, and they've adapted to that environment to be able to turn hazards into benefits.
There are fash out there just hoping to be sent to prison for decades because of what a powerful symbol it'll make them. Some want money, but a lot of them genuinely believe in their cause and are willing to self-sacrifice to achieve it.
I've been wondering about a related thing: not the money aspect, but the extent to which the underlying motivation of each of them is status with the other fighty blokes. I suspect quite a lot.
(I'm part way through reading the book "The Status Game"!)
@unchartedworlds @TCatInReality @ChrisMayLA6 @pedestrians1st
That's a good question and I think the answer will vary from fascist to fascist, but it's likely to always be at least a part of the answer because fascists love hierarchy.
Is the book good? Should I add it to my already huge reading list?
@unchartedworlds @TCatInReality @ChrisMayLA6 @pedestrians1st
Actually, a better answer might be:
A lot of fascists are chasing a hollow promise of status, in a sort of Fight Club way. They feel a lack of respect in their lives (which most of us feel, under late capitalism and austerity) and they think that if they go out and act like Real Men they'll get the respect and adultation they think they deserve. No matter how prominent they become, however, they never get what they want, because it was never there for them to get, and this makes them angry.
I'm not a psychologist but I feel there's something Jungian here: they can never assimilate to the archetype, which causes them anxiety, which they project onto others.
So this is an interesting point too.
In our society, we don't really differentiate between status and money. A person who's rich gets status, and a person who's high status is expected to use that status to get money. We're not really surprised when people pay Tony Blair £100k for a speech at their investment company's private function, or when a list of millionaires in Parliament has both Keir Starmer and Jeremy Corbyn on it. We're not surprised when hyperwealthy musicians, sportsfolk and childrens'-book authors get to speak as if they were authorities.
An important aspect of fascism is that it's an attempt to violently defend the current world order, or at least what its adherents perceive as the current world order. As Silvione put it, fascism is the counter-revolution against the revolution which never took place. This means that fascists tend to buy into the idea that status and money are one and the same.
This means that:
- Fascist followers will give money to prominent fascists, and approve of their splashing money around, because they feel that their leaders should be rich.
- Fascists who have attained prominence feel they deserve money, and don't feel shy about using their prestige to get it.
- Fascists who don't have money (because most people in the UK are broke) experience it not only as financial anxiety but as status anxiety, and react accordingly.
- Fascists get really annoyed when wannabe fascist leaders ask for donations when they feel it hasn't been earned.
- If you ever meet a UK fascist called James Boothby, he is extremely touchy about his income and it's a really good way to piss him off.
@TCatInReality @pedestrians1st
I have no idea about Trump. I haven't met him and don't really want to.
I'd say the book is interesting food for thought without necessarily being entirely correct.
I'm about a third of the way through so far, and my overall impression so far is that status probably is underrated, under-theorised and a useful angle. Not sorry to be reading it.
I'm not 100% convinced by all his details though!
For example, he gives as an example of a status display someone, I think it was Tom Cruise, hiring a whole restaurant for himself.
whereas I see that as likely more about _managing the consequences_ of unwieldy excessive high status. (e.g. how do you get to eat yr dinner while dozens of people want to bother you.) So yes it's the kind of thing that extremely-famous people do, but I think on that one, the causality runs mostly the other way.
Emeritus Prof Christopher May
Pedestriansfirst
TC Won't Give In To Lies
Estarriol, Terrorist Dragon
Passenger
Jennifer Moore 😷
PirateRo
StuartB