Friday, July 23, 2010

That Brilliant Critique of Self-Flagellating Politically Correct Liberal Multiculturalism

In Slovenia, around a year ago, a big problem with a Roma (Gipsy) family which camped close to a small town. When a man was killed in the camp, the people in the town started to protest against the Roma, demanding that they be moved from the camp (which they occupied illegally) to another location, organizing vigilante groups, etc. As expected, all liberals condemned them as racists, locating racism into this isolated small village, while none of the liberals, living comfortably in the big cities, had any everyday contact with the Roma (except for meeting their representatives in front of the TV cameras when they supported them). When the TV interviewed the “racists” from the town, they were clearly seen to be a group of people frightened by the constant fighting and shooting in the Roma camp, by the constant theft of animals from their farms, and by other forms of small harassments from the Roma. It is all too easy to say (as the liberals did) that the Roma way of life is (also) a consequence of the centuries of their exclusion and mistreatment, that the people in the nearby town should also open themselves more to the Roma, etc. – nobody clearly answered the local “racists” what they should concretely do to solve the very real problems the Roma camp evidently was for them.

The purported facts here (the illegal Roma 'camp', the man killed, the shooting and fighting, the chicken stealing and baby snatching) are all racist lies but many people believe them. This tale, warning a UK audience already disposed to violent abuse of Roma*, of the mortal dangers Roma really pose to them and of how hypocritical the rich multiculturalist politically correct self-flagellating liberals are to try to stop the decent English indigenous from taking pre-emptive measures of self-defence, comes from a major leftist thinker reporting from his own country. Its fallaciousness does not impair its authority with the fanbase, and its flagrant incitement to racist violence only won the greater loyalty and devotion of the author's white acolytes.

Not one colleague or student has ever publicly objected to this version of events Zizek offers even though it is neoNazi propaganda in the service of the justification of specific racist crimes. The belief in this story, (or its acceptance as a good and useful story despite its unfactuality), illustrates the framework that consumers of this vein of propaganda accept. This framework, which establishes the dilemmas of a peaceloving white native majority faced with a violent harassing and disruptive outsider foisted on them by you wealthy and guilty liberals, is also in use with the majority sympathetic to UK fascism who worry not so much about Muslims taking their jobs or competing for housing but about their evil and alien nature, their unChristian oriental logic, their violent and terrorist "way of life" which you liberals out of politically correct guilt will seek to excuse as the consequence of imperialism. (To prove that you liberals and leftists do make these kinds of excuses for their violence and criminality, the author himself routinely fills the pages of progressive papers with a declaration, speaking as a true Marxist and old fashioned communist, that 'we cannot condemn their atrocities!')

One of the achievements of this propaganda which goes nearly unnoticed (the most powerful and significant propaganda) because of course unrelated to the seeming central subject of this propaganda (immigrants, indigenous) is to establish the ruling class as the referent of "the Left" and the working class as the referent of "the Right". The sabotage of language and its replacement by images going in disguise as language is a key task brevetted intellectuals perform for their patrons and their class.

That you so-called "anti-racists" are privileged and act out of guilt and self-hatred induced by slave morality, you who exhibit the "excessive Political Correctness of the Western white male who questions his own right to assert his cultural identity, while celebrating the exotic identity of others," that you have contempt for the "white working class" and scapegoat them for your racism while forcing them to live with the violent bastard others you made and now out of guilt favour over your legitimate white children, that Muslims are indeed terrorists and intolerant, homophobic and self-segregating, rejecting the objectively superior culture and values of the generous enlightened white liberal nations who have warmly welcomed them and spurning our offered love, are all propositions accepted by large numbers of people, left, centre and right alike, as incontestable facts rather than as incoherent, manipulative narrative and gibberish punditry.

*A report by the Information Centre About Asylum and Refugees in the UK (ICAR), Media Images, Community Impact, (2004) affirmed that, while it is notoriously difficult to establish causal relations between news items or television programmes and audience actions,“inaccurate and unbalanced reporting is commonly suspected by refugee support agencies, community groups, local authorities, the police and researchers to contribute to racist attacks on asylum seekers and refugees and to being a barrier to integration because of the feelings of insecurity and isolation which it engenders” in new arrivals. “We have been told,” one refugee agency worker said, “that a negative article one day equates to a fist in the face the following day."

No comments:

Post a Comment