« | Home | »

What happened on March 26?


Escalate, an anonymous ‘collective of writers and activists from around the University of London’, has just published a stimulating Marxist analysis of the TUC march against the cuts:

What happened on March 26? The official answer is clear: hundreds of thousands of ‘people from all walks of life’ marched for an ‘alternative’. Who in fact were they, and what are their interests? And what material recourse do they have against their managed impoverishment? Among all the cloddish asininities emblazoned in grim edible pinks across a million A6 flyers, not once does the TUC mention class. Its current agenda is one of banal inclusivity… ‘Unification’ will be useless so long as it involves the subordination of all political fractions to the ‘middle classes’. At bottom, the pre-eminence of middle-class ‘values’ is the pre-eminence of bourgeois property rights.

Comments on “What happened on March 26?”

  1. loxhore says:

    why does the prose here remind me of keston sutherland

  2. lostlit says:

    So…I think it’s pretty clear by now that if you want an order civil structure – that is, not a society in which people roam around and do whatever – then a class system naturally results. People are too self-interested and variously so to not fight for more than the other; and there will always be those who don’t struggle for as much and therefore don’t have it. We in America deny that there is a class system here; and, while there may not be much “class” in the higher classes here, there is a hierarchy of privilege and power no less. Until the day that all people are born with the interest to share themselves and our resources, and not hoard or obstruct then won’t we have an equal society! We all know that will happen no time soon. Do these Escalate kids really think their “Marxist” analysis is soooo insightful? Please.

  3. outofdate says:

    Imagine being these people. Just thinking about their socks is enough to break your heart. And the padded grey Oxfam anoraks they have to wear through the nine-month winter, and the grey sagging faces, and no skill, and no joy, and no wit, and no beauty to relieve the abject misery of the Seven Sisters Road, and the awful hair, and the damp flat, and the squealing ungainly child, with the snot and the diarrhoea, and the hangovers worse every day, and nothing to wake up to all their lives but their loathsome inescapable selves…. Yet they can no more stopper the flow of hopeless bullshit out of their mouths than a bird can cease to sing. Imagine.

  4. simonpawley says:

    Stimulating? It’s simply ludicrous. The fact is that most of UKUncut really are campaigning (‘only’) for an effective system of taxation (worth remembering that the inspiration came from articles in ‘Private Eye’, which is many things but never anti-capitalist). And that most students really are campaigning to preserve funding for university tuition and EMA.
    The clincher comes in section 7: “The protesters at Fortnum and Masons required heavy treatment because the economic damage done to that shop was greater than a smashed window (even if it took 100 people instead of one or two). The mass arrest shows that it is not the protest tactic of violence or non-violence that matters to capital, but the contours of economic damage.” This is nothing short of fantasy. Windows were being smashed, and arrests needed to be made. Those in Fortnum and Mason were easy to round up. Lazy journalists eagerly complied in equating their number with the window-smashers, which left their readers with the impression that the violent protesters were the ones who had been arrested (‘Scenes of violence… 200 arrests made’).
    It’s little wonder nobody is keen to put their name to this stuff…

Comment on this post

Log in or register to post a comment.

  • Recent Posts

    RSS – posts

  • Contributors

  • Recent Comments

    • andymartinink on Reacher v. Parker: Slayground definitely next on my agenda. But to be fair to Lee Child, as per the Forbes analysis, there is clearly a massive collective reader-writer ...
    • Robert Hanks on Reacher v. Parker: And in Breakout, Parker, in prison, teams up with a black guy to escape; another white con dislikes it but accepts the necessity; Parker is absolutely...
    • Robert Hanks on Reacher v. Parker: Parker may not have the integrity and honesty of Marlowe, but I'd argue that Richard Stark writes with far more of both than Raymond Chandler does: Ch...
    • Christopher Tayler on Reacher v. Parker: Good to see someone holding up standards. The explanation is that I had thoughts - or words - left over from writing about Lee Child. (For Chandler se...
    • Geoff Roberts on Reacher v. Parker: ..."praised in the London Review of Books" Just read the article on Lee Child in a certain literary review and was surprised to find this rave notice...

    RSS – comments

  • Contact

  • Blog Archive

  • From the LRB Archive

    Chris Lehmann: The Candidates
    18 June 2015

    ‘Every one of the Republican candidates can be described as a full-blown adult failure. These are people who, in most cases, have been granted virtually every imaginable advantage on the road to success, and managed nevertheless to foul things up along the way.’

    Hugh Pennington:
    The Problem with Biodiversity
    10 May 2007

    ‘As a medical microbiologist, for example, I have spent my career fighting biodiversity: my ultimate aim has been to cause the extinction of harmful microbes, an objective shared by veterinary and plant pathologists. But despite more than a hundred years of concentrated effort, supported by solid science, smallpox has been the only success.’

    Jeremy Harding: At the Mexican Border
    20 October 2011

    ‘The battle against illegal migration is a domestic version of America’s interventions overseas, with many of the same trappings: big manpower commitments, militarisation, pursuit, detection, rendition, loss of life. The Mexican border was already the focus of attention before 9/11; it is now a fixation that shows no signs of abating.’

    James Meek: When the Floods Came
    31 July 2008

    ‘Last July, a few days after the floods arrived, with 350,000 people still cut off from the first necessity of life, Severn Trent held its annual general meeting. It announced profits of £325 million, and confirmed a dividend for shareholders of £143 million. Not long afterwards the company, with the consent of the water regulator Ofwat, announced that it wouldn’t be compensating customers: all would be charged as if they had had running water, even when they hadn’t.’

Advertisement Advertisement