Skip to main content

Is British Classism Anti-English Racism?

We now live in a postmodern age in which politics has been re-described as the oppression and opposition of racial groups.  The "Left" in politics no longer supports the working class to attain revolution but polarises society by race. The upper class "Right" no longer praises its nation state but extols the virtues of all market places and customers.  

The English have been the victims of racism since the Norman conquest.  After the conquest everything English was destroyed.  It was several hundred years after the conquest before the English language was used in government.  A small, French speaking, governing class preserved its separateness. Even today the upper classes go for a francophone "amble" whilst the English "walk".

It is customary to regard the governing class as the same as the "English" because now they largely consist of people born in England.  However, after centuries of governing an empire this group is composed of people who regard themselves as "other".  Postmodern philosophy has provided a rationalisation for this attitude of being "other" because the postmodernist sits in judgement of all other groups, including the English.  According to a postmodern analysis the "other" are no longer part of the English racial category but are a category all of their own.  According to the English they are "posh gits who don't give a toss about us" no matter whether they are left or right wing.

This can come as a shock to people who think they are both "English" and "other".  You cannot be both.  It is the imperial "otherness" of the British upper classes that has been the source of the intensity of the Class War in England.  In a postmodern analysis the English Class War verges on racism and now that the governing class are largely postmodernists belonging to the group that identifies as "other" it probably is racist in intent.

In the twentieth century the UK was left with an imperial government but no Empire.  The imperial government could dispose of the English, Irish, Welsh and Scottish races as they saw fit and this inevitably resulted in the same outcome as it did for the rest of the old Empire: independence.  The races of the UK were all, except for the English, granted near independence through devolution.

The only substantial possession left in the British Empire is England.  The governing upper classes in England have always exploited the English.  They worked them to death in their fields, mines and factories.  They housed them in slums.  They used them up in their millions in wars.  The governing upper classes have a special hatred and fear of the English that has its roots with the Normans a millennium ago.  Jack Straw expressed this perfectly when he said the English are: "potentially very aggressive, very violent" and will "increasingly articulate their Englishness following devolution." (BBC: English nationalism 'threat to UK').  Notice that he said this from the viewpoint of the postmodern "other" rather than as an Englishman.  Straw was prepared to treat the Scots and Northern Irish as racial groups that he was anxious to "free" from imperial domination but determined to oppress the English.

Straw's fear of what postmodernists call the "English race" is the imperial overlord's fear of revolt.  The postmodern left and right attempted to deal with this problem by terminating England as a nation.  Will Straw, Jack Straw's son, became the administrative leader of the pro-EU, anti-English faction before the Referendum in a last ditch attempt at transferring the governing class to the safe haven of a multi-national, imperial government in Brussels where once again they could be comfortably "other".

Having lost the battle to transfer imperial power the upper classes are using every means at their disposal to control the idea of being English.  The BBC is their primary tool and the upper class BBC Radio 4 provides a clear view of how they think. Its programming now consists of endless coverage of how other races were victims of the "English" in an attempt to revile this racial group and decrease its cohesion and power.   This postmodern analysis, using race as the linchpin of politics, confuses migrants to England who don't realise that much of their adverse experience is actually due to a deep seated class divide rather than race.  Britain is afflicted by a class war masquerading as a race war.  

Of course, a moment's inspection shows that it is the imperial governing classes who are really responsible for all the alleged racist ills that are promoted by the BBC.  In the past the governing classes victimised the English as much as any other racial group.  The governing class have always been "other".  The BBC suppress the history to be found in documents such as the 1842 Chadwick Report  which describes how the English were oppressed.  The shockingly low life expectancy of English labourers in towns fifteen years after the end of slavery in the rest of the Empire shows the effect of this oppression:

The English do not bear any responsibility for Empire. It is the group that identifies as "other", such as are today represented by BBC presenters and journalists, who are to blame if blame is to be apportioned  (See BBC presenters and journalists must be changed).

The use by the upper and governing classes of the postmodern polarisation by race and its execration of the ordinary English may well backfire.  Discrimination must be corrected by law but race should not be used as a tool in political struggle.  When race has become the focus of politics it has, from Rwanda to Germany and India to China had horrific results.  Something must be done about the BBC so that it cares for the people of England rather than promoting the political interests of the "other".  The postmodern analysis must be defeated and the object of politics changed to the goal of providing a good life and home for all of the people of England, wherever they came from. 

6/2/2021

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Falklands have always been Argentine - Las Malvinas son Argentinas

"The Falklands have always been Argentine" is taught to every Argentine child as a matter of faith.  What was Argentina during the time when it "always" possessed Las Malvinas?  In this article I will trace the history of Argentina in the context of its physical and political relationship with "Las Malvinas", the Falkland Islands.  The Argentine claim to the Falkland Islands dates from a brief episode in 1831-32 so it is like Canada claiming the USA despite two centuries of separate development. This might sound like ancient history but Argentina has gone to war for this ancient claim so the following article is well worth reading. For a summary of the legal case see: Las Malvinas: The Legal Case Argentina traces its origins to Spanish South America when it was part of the Viceroyalty of the Rio del Plata.  The Falklands lay off the Viceroyalty of Peru, controlled by the Captain General of Chile.  In 1810 the Falklands were far from the geographical b...

Do Muslim women want to wear the Burka (Burqua)?

Do all islamic women want to wear burka?  Can a woman's freedom to wear what she wants oppress other women?  Are western feminists aiding a cult that is dedicated to the destruction of feminism?  I hope to answer these questions in this article.  I would much appreciate any comments you might have if you disagree with the article, especially if you have a feminist viewpoint. Here is a description of the problems of wearing burka by a woman of Asian origin: "Of course, many veiled Muslim women argue that, far from being forced to wear burkas by ruthless husbands, they do so out of choice. And I have to take them at their word. But it is also very apparent that many women are forced behind the veil. A number of them have turned up at my door seeking refuge from their fathers, mothers, brothers and in-laws - men brain-washed by religious leaders who use physical and mental abuse to compel the girls to cover up. It started with the headscarf, then went to th...

The Roots of New Labour

This article was written in 2009 but is still useful to understand the motivation behind New Labour - from the global financial crisis through the over-regulated, surveillance society to the break up of the UK into nationalities. The past lives of Labour Ministers have long been sanitised and many biographies that include their shady communist and Marxist pasts are inaccessible or removed from the net. The truth about these guys is similar to discovering that leading Tories were members of the Nazi Party. If you are a British voter and do not think that this is important then I despair for British politics.  Had these people taken jobs in industry their past might be forgotten and forgiven but they continued in left wing politics and even today boast of being "Stalinist" or International Socialist (or in Blair's case, Trotskyist ). Peter Mandelson (first Secretary of State and Labour Supremo): "Mr Mandelson was born into a Labour family - his grandfather wa...