Sorry to hog this, but I've just looked again at your post, and others, on the,in your view, apparently irresistable rise of the Far Right across Europe. Question. I genuinely don't know what you will answer. Are you suggesting that to oppose the rise of the Far Right with their "anti multicultural" propaganda and policies that the "Left" also needs to reject "multiculturalism" in favour of some sort of alternative "working class platform ? Eg. Against free access by EC workers to jobs in the UK. On the basis that this dilutes/undermines the ability of "indigenous" workers to defend their wage rates,and is often a good fit with ideas met in White working class communites.ie, A touch of "Blue labour" ideas on the radical Left ? I only ask because of a hint of this position in BtF when denouncing "multiculturalism" ,and by ex RA posters on this and other threads.
Filling the Vacuum 1995
- Thread starter durruti02
- Start date
Joe Reilly
Well-Known Member
it's not pessimism but realism. The Left 'from Anarchists to Trots, to Social Democrats of the old school' have, let's be honest, helped create the situation we are now in. The 20th century is littered with catastrophic errors. From the Bolshevik experiment, through the rise of fascism, through to post war pre-eminence of Social Democracy (no talk of the grisly record of pre-war Social Democracy, of course) up until the 1970's and then roughly mid way through that decade when the entire enterprise went straight over a cliff. None of this is admitted.
A couple of years ago I attended a 'resistance' meeting after the Euro-elections led by the Socialist Party, at which repeated speakers expected applause for the their front group of the time, taking a fraction of the vote of the BNP. 'Something to build on' etc. Of course within a matter of months the whole thing was wound up. History as farce. None of this is faced up to. A calling to account is still being avoided. Until there is wide acceptance of some form over-arching analysis, there can be no real renaissance.
The neo-liberal right has come up with all the ideas and won all the major arguments since the mid -70's - whereas the Left has come up with - nothing. Not a single original idea of note. And inevitably and increasingly this void is being filled by the far-right. What to do? Think before acting.
OKaaaaay, I accept that the Left is "Life of Brian" personified, and most of the Left have never come to grips with the rather large "elephant in the room" of Stalinism...BUT surely the fundamental problem for the Left andthe trades union movement Left in particular was that , certainly from the 80's onwards Capitalism seemed to promise an endless vista of ever growing personal prosperity for most people in the advanced capitalist states. So the Ideology of individualism and free enterprise capitalism was an apparent true fit with most people's life experiences.
The Far Right , seems to me, to have merely ridden on the back of popular resentments at the growing influx of ethnic minorities across Europe, needed to service the long boom. NOW, post 2008, it is obvious to most people that capitalism is still a chaotic casino system and not the opportunity for all system it appeared to be.. OK, the Left is in a poor state, but growing struggle I think will bring out the class fighters, and requires real struggles against the bosses at so many levels, that the simplistic racist policies of the Right will not offer real solutions to enough people to enable then to take off to the level of governing parties.
I accept that the Left has been a shambles, but the opportunity for class struggle in a long capitalist boom is limited. Today the arena of struggle is opening up for the Left. I don't see the European Right as the ultra sophisticated phenomena that you do. I dont see anything amazing about their ideology - Neo Liberalism certaily dominated the ideological space during the long boom from the 1980's, but it is now in tatters. Only the NULABOURITES seem unable to recognise that unfettered free market economics have spectacularly failed.
In the UK the electoral base of the BNP has been looked at in depth - it's the old, the poorly educated, the ununionised, the marginalised. I don't yet see anything unstoppable or hugely sophisticated about the UK Right. It can yet be take on and beaten. I think you are too gloomy. However, events and time will tell.
The Far Right , seems to me, to have merely ridden on the back of popular resentments at the growing influx of ethnic minorities across Europe, needed to service the long boom. NOW, post 2008, it is obvious to most people that capitalism is still a chaotic casino system and not the opportunity for all system it appeared to be.. OK, the Left is in a poor state, but growing struggle I think will bring out the class fighters, and requires real struggles against the bosses at so many levels, that the simplistic racist policies of the Right will not offer real solutions to enough people to enable then to take off to the level of governing parties.
I accept that the Left has been a shambles, but the opportunity for class struggle in a long capitalist boom is limited. Today the arena of struggle is opening up for the Left. I don't see the European Right as the ultra sophisticated phenomena that you do. I dont see anything amazing about their ideology - Neo Liberalism certaily dominated the ideological space during the long boom from the 1980's, but it is now in tatters. Only the NULABOURITES seem unable to recognise that unfettered free market economics have spectacularly failed.
In the UK the electoral base of the BNP has been looked at in depth - it's the old, the poorly educated, the ununionised, the marginalised. I don't yet see anything unstoppable or hugely sophisticated about the UK Right. It can yet be take on and beaten. I think you are too gloomy. However, events and time will tell.
The Black Hand
Unclean
Yes, and in some places it is larger & in a considerably more healthy state than the UK left.
Joe Reilly
Well-Known Member
I don't see the 'European Right as as ultra sophisticated' either,but they are being rewarded for doing the basics, which the Left sneer at, they are being rewarded for orientating to the working class, which the Left also sneer at. They are in a sense kicking at an open goal, which makes the indolenece of the opposition even more criminal not less.
And while it is true to say that the credibility of neo-liberalism has been damaged, it is still the obly game in town again due to the absence of a credible alternative. And again currently the only tangible response to globalisation comes from the nationalist right.
As regards the electoral base of the BNP, I'm not at all convinced by the data. Previous surveys have reached the opposite conclusions. But even if it is accurate, the old, the badly educated, the marginalised, is again where the Left not the right ought to be seen as their natural champions. Also by throwing in the old, it is suggestive that somehow once we lose this generation of Powellite bigots then everything will be just jake. (In actual fact the 'old' probably figure high in every party's figures due to the fact that the younger generation have to a large extent abandoned voting altogether.) In the real world instead of assimilating, the Muslim community in particular, is actually disassimilating.
You only have to look at Bradford, where an imaginary NF march led to widespread rioting, or more recently in Birmingham, (due to the genuine heroism of the father of one those mowed down) to see what a potential tinderbox intercommunial relations are actually like.
As for the 'ununionised' argument, don't for a moment believe that the unionsed working class are any more in thrall to the notion of 'open borders' espoused by the Left and the CBI, that the non-unionised section. As for the idea that the non-unionised can be somehow be dismissed as a marginalised minority, I don't have the figures to hand but I would guess that overwhelmingly it is the blue collar workers, the core proleteriat, who are now un-unionised. And the only people attempting to reach them? The 'unsophisticated' fascists.
I really don't see why, now that the debt fueled economic bubble has definitely burst for the forseeable future, and therefore all but the top 5% or so will see their living standards do anything but massively decline, you think that neo-Liberal ideology has got any mileage left in it. Who but the top managers, hedge fund managers and bankers, stands to gain now from unfettered liberal capitalism ?
I also still can't see the potential mass appeal of the Far Right, not in the UK anyway. They are still a one trick pony, Nationalism and Racism.. that's it. It's a solid proposition of course, and underlying the current emphasis on anti extreme Islam is of course all the old anti semitism amongst the leading circles of the Far Right - but as I've repeatedly said I can't see the Far Right building a solid base amongst workers struggling against the bosses' offensive across the board. Maybe they can mobilize against a local hospital closure or two, but fight day in and out against the whole gamut of the attacks on workers' living standards, I don't think so. That is the natural arena for the Left and Trades Union Movement - and it IS happening all over the country.
You didn't answer the question I put up before though. Do you think the answer to the rise of the Far Right is to concede, or adopt, some ground in some key policy areas which would undoubtedly be approved of by large numbers of White Working Class people . eg. Opposing further immigration ? Opposing the free entry of EU workers to take jobs in the UK ? Opposing "multiculturalism" - whatever that is taken to mean - but it is a theme stated but not explained in BtF ?
I also still can't see the potential mass appeal of the Far Right, not in the UK anyway. They are still a one trick pony, Nationalism and Racism.. that's it. It's a solid proposition of course, and underlying the current emphasis on anti extreme Islam is of course all the old anti semitism amongst the leading circles of the Far Right - but as I've repeatedly said I can't see the Far Right building a solid base amongst workers struggling against the bosses' offensive across the board. Maybe they can mobilize against a local hospital closure or two, but fight day in and out against the whole gamut of the attacks on workers' living standards, I don't think so. That is the natural arena for the Left and Trades Union Movement - and it IS happening all over the country.
You didn't answer the question I put up before though. Do you think the answer to the rise of the Far Right is to concede, or adopt, some ground in some key policy areas which would undoubtedly be approved of by large numbers of White Working Class people . eg. Opposing further immigration ? Opposing the free entry of EU workers to take jobs in the UK ? Opposing "multiculturalism" - whatever that is taken to mean - but it is a theme stated but not explained in BtF ?
audiotech
wav, aiff, mp3, ogg, flac
Sneering apart, as writer Chris Hedges, speaking from Wall Street in the US just the other day pointed out, 'anyone raising issues about a living wage, health-care and good public education is going to be given a hearing'. What does that tell you?
My emphasis.
My emphasis.
The39thStep
Urban critical thinker
Pity that the far left aren't as good as the far right in raising the issues then.When all has been said and done its not the spectre of communism that is haunting Europe but the far right
The Black Hand
Unclean
I agree largely, the fascists have no (or extremely limited) cadre (and by this I mean capable activists), certainly they have difficulties running anything coherent. Thus you get the EDL which is just chaotic. In the NE at a large meeting of sparks there was only one EDL present who said the usual general anti migrant crap, nothing constructive, or anything else. They are incapable of operating politically and the working class can see this, this doesn't mean that the political situation is not dangerous, but the main problem is capitalism and that is where the left/@ should orientate itself. BTW Joe, its clearly wrong to say that the left sneer at the wwc, you overplay what evidence there is and underplay/ignorore contradictory evidence (familiar theme this).
The Black Hand
Unclean
Yes, and also the spectre of anarchism.
Joe Reilly
Well-Known Member
I wasn't ducking it, just that it has been done to death on here, in FT, by the IWCA at an empirical level, particulalry in Oxford, in Red Action and so on for the best part of two decades.
So i'm a surprised your aren't familiar with the general trust. But anyway here is a summary. Multiculturalism/identity politics is a thoroughly reactionary philosophy in thought and outcome. It divides the working class against itself. Instead of socialising racial problems it racialises social issues, education, housing etc. It ultimately replaces class as the core identity. It is top down. It encourages people to think on tribal lines: 'my tribe first, my tribe only.' It is sold to and by liberal as egalatarian and multicultural but in reality what it sets out to do is create completing blocs of mono cultures.
Speaking of tribes, the Cherokee Nation recently voted to expel former black slaves from the tribe because they lack 'a true bloodline'. Not only have they lost, voting rights, but also health care and the right to education. In doing so the have breached an agreement with the federal government that stretches back to 1866. This may be an extreme example, but it is where the application of the multicultural ethos ends, when carried to it's logical conclusion.
Cherokee runs into constitutional hot water over voting ban (The Independent)
In the meantime, because it argues that 'culture makes man' and not the other way round, all cultures must be regarded as equal. So a blind liberal eye is inevitably turned to forced marriage, honour killings, the sexual grooming of youngsters, sexual mutilation, you get the drift.
Incientally as just an interim measure naturally, the BNP quiet likes the idea of mono cultures. Segregation and seperatism are far better than integration. It also provides their supporters with a focus. The BNP magazine is not called Identity by chance.
audiotech
wav, aiff, mp3, ogg, flac
Clearly there is a problem, but one that the far-left, or any progressive movement can overcome. It will be a long, hard, drawn-out struggle though, but there is still the possibility of doing this.
The far-right here, as even they admit, have had a 'perfect storm' for some time now and you by implicitly putting forward the obvious, that they've done well and as a consequence have done better than the far-left (a tiny proportion of any opposition to the far-right), doesn't really add much. Afterall, how could they not do well given the circumstances they find themselves in?
That said, I disagree with the explicit point you make, that the far-right are "good" on raising issues. On the contrary, the far-right are a one trick pony. Class division is what they're about. This can be put to their disadvantage, to be turned into an advantage by a far-left - emphasising working class unity.
I recognise that it ain't gonna be easy, far from it. Even if the prospect is a loser, future circumstances may dictate a response that denies any choice in the matter. It would be "good" not to be in that position.
I was actually aware of the generality of the criticism of "multiculturalism" , versus "class identity". Not sure I buy into it all though ... Cultural/ethnic differences are simply a reality between such diverse communities as have for centuries made up the British social mix, and not all of these cultural differences can simply be displaced entirely by "class" as an everyday reality.
Interestingly , in attacking the "Liberal blind eye shortcoming on "multiculturalism" you choose to cite examples from traditionalist muslim cultural practices which most western socialists would find completely unacceptable (though the "grooming" of youngsters for sex is real tabloid demonisation of an entire religious community for the deeds of a few surely). However many features of "traditional" White Working Class Communities in the UK are pretty unacceptable too to the progressive socialist , eg, wife-beating, rampant child abuse, heavy drinking, addiction to gambling, dog fighting, failure to keep control of their children, failure to look after aged relatives, etc, etc. In many of these areas the Muslim community is vastly superior in its everyday practices. So I think its important to avoid the "I'm White Working Class" so I'm Ok, you are a "a multicultural" minority with an inferior culture, attitude developing - because it's politically bankrupt and VERY reactionary., even though it plays well on the doorstep in White Working Class Communities
Be that as it may, my question was more specifically about policy specific rejections of "multiculturalism" which would undoubtedly be popular with sections of the White Working Class, eg, an advocacy of an end to further immigration, an end to open access to the UK job market for all EU citizens, suppression of religious/cultural practices like the wearing of the full hajib, etc. I thought I was detecting an underlying suggestion in some posts, and perhaps in part of the BtF analytical sections trhat any radical political movement which wishes to compete with the rampant rise of the Far Right would have to make an accommodation to/ adopt, some of these policies. Have I read/interpreted that wrong ?
past caring
The Cathars were right
Not only that, it seems you're still not properly understanding the thrust of RA or IWCA criticisms of multiculturalism.
Properly understood, multiculturalism has to be understood as a policy initiative (one, incidentally, that iirc has its routes in CIA attempts to undermine the Panthers in the 60s) - it is all that Joe said and could be summarised as an attempt to get the working class to compete on racial/cultural lines for scarce resources (housing, jobs, community funding), rather than to question on a class basis whether those resources really are/should be scarce.
Part of the con has been the success with which the promoters of multiculturalism as policy have managed to obscure this true meaning of the word - so that multiculturalism (or rather multicultural) is now frequently understood solely as a word that simply describes the UK's multi-ethnic society - with the result that anyone who criticises multiculturalism as policy will appear to also be opposed to a multi-racial/ethnic society - i.e. anti-immigrant.
And it seems that little bit of smoke and mirrors has had its part to play in your misunderstanding of the IWCA's position.
OK I think I see where you are coming from, and the terms of the brief outline of this issue in BTF
.
However I don't actually accept that "multiculturalism" can simply be seen in conspiratorial, divide and rule terms ,as it operates in policy and resource allocation terms in the multi ethnic context of the UK. But from a RA/IWCA perspective I can see how this analysis works as a means of emphasising the primacy of class politics over the wide range of other community, religious and cultural sub-groupings by which people in society identify themselves.
Tricky though, as you say, to distinguish "on the doorstep" as it were between your specific stated, closely argued, RA/IWCA objection to "multiculturalism" and the hostility of a bigot to the more widely understood current meaning of the term - as simply synonomous with "tolerance and acceptance of each other in a diverse multiethnic society".
.
However I don't actually accept that "multiculturalism" can simply be seen in conspiratorial, divide and rule terms ,as it operates in policy and resource allocation terms in the multi ethnic context of the UK. But from a RA/IWCA perspective I can see how this analysis works as a means of emphasising the primacy of class politics over the wide range of other community, religious and cultural sub-groupings by which people in society identify themselves.
Tricky though, as you say, to distinguish "on the doorstep" as it were between your specific stated, closely argued, RA/IWCA objection to "multiculturalism" and the hostility of a bigot to the more widely understood current meaning of the term - as simply synonomous with "tolerance and acceptance of each other in a diverse multiethnic society".
Joe Reilly
Well-Known Member
Perhaps the far-right aren't that sophisticated but the architects of the multicultural idelogy/strategem certainly are. For instance you would be hard-pressed these days to see any mention of the working class per se in political discourse, what you get 'is the middle class and the poor'.
When you do get reference to to the working class it inevitably comes attached to the prefix 'white'. So to even employ this term is to enter an entirely different ball game. Apart from racialising the argument (whatever it maybe) the essential function is to present a disorientating image of the working class back to itself of being just another minority. In direct competition with its darker skinned neighbours.
Not only is it an effective form of emasculation, but at the same time there is zero reference to the black working class, or indeed Muslim working class for that matter. Why? Because from the multiculatural mindset they are homogenous. And if the white working class were just a little less backward and reactionary they could be homogenised too is the subliminal message.
Your suggestion that multicultural ideology merely reflects extant reality is surprisingly naive. It actively promotes; indeed funds 'diversity'. In doing so it sets the poor against the poor. Unwittingly? After 30 years - I don't think so.
audiotech
wav, aiff, mp3, ogg, flac
Joe, have you been reading, or perhaps listening to Owen Jones, or perhaps he's been doing likewise, re; the IWCA?.
This bit I referenced from the video of a talk he gave recently, linked on here somewhere. I have his book "Chavs" The Demonisation of the Working-Class, not read it yet.
Unity in action!
This bit I referenced from the video of a talk he gave recently, linked on here somewhere. I have his book "Chavs" The Demonisation of the Working-Class, not read it yet.
Unity in action!
We obviously aren't going to agree about the role of "Multiculturalism" in the advanced capitalist economies since huge numbers of culturally diverse new workers were drawn from the colonial hinterland to service the growing capitalist boom from the 1960's onwards. Naïve I may be, but I see the MAJOR purpose of the "Race Relations Act" and the huge range of initiatives by the state within and between ethnic groups to promote racial/ethnic harmony as PRIMARILY about trying to undo centuries of white racial superiority brainwashing which had secured support for imperial domination of the peoples of the Empire from white workers during the colonial era, to be replaced with an acceptance by white workers that they should work harmoniously directly alongside the new (black) immigrant workers in the new post war economic reality – purely in the interests of capitalism obviously..
OK, we disagree. But what are the real world POLITICAL POLICY implications and political demands, flowing from the particular IWCA view of "Multiculturalism" ? As I asked before, just as examples, does the IWCA therefore support a restriction on the current unfettered entry of all EU workers to compete with British workers for jobs ? Does the IWCA support legal restrictions on certain cultural aspects of the newer arrival communities, such as.. the wearing of the hajib, or arranged marriages ? Or Would the IWCA support an amnesty for all illegal immigrants as has been proposed by many on both the Liberal Left and the London Mayor ?.
Joe Reilly
Well-Known Member
No. Mr Jones is apparently far to grand to talk to the likes of the IWCA. Even when he was studying in Oxford, he just couldn't find the time to meet Independent Working Class Councillors in the City. But as the IWCA/AFA concerns about identity politics predates him by more than 15 years I guess we know where he did his research though.
Joe Reilly
Well-Known Member
You have. In fact BTF says exactly the opposite. "it is surely now evident that Euro-nationalism will not be stopped by consensus friendly, cross class, and all importantly apolitical half measures. If the battle for working class hearts and minds is to be won, Euro-nationalism will need to be challenged head-on by just as compelling and grand a narrative." (Page 401)
Smokeandsteam
Working Class First
I've just read Chavs and he's ripped off loads of IWCA stuff (and also material from Michael Collins book 'The Likes of Us'). Where he differs is a) he thinks it's all the Tories fault and whilst lamely critical of New Labour remains firmly wedded to the Party and the task of continuing to flog a horse that's been dead for years and b) he completely overlooks the impact of 30 years of neo-liberalism and the impact it's had on working class communities. He clearly didn't learn/notice much from his 'research' on the estates of Birmingham/ex minining towns that he references.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
To be fair though Joe, if they only ever see the workers as a means to an end it may be hard for them to view them with anything but disrespect and sneering.
You make a good point, though, with respect to the right bothering with "work on the ground" as a vehicle for the promotion/acceptance of their politics, when so much of the left (at least in the UK) eschews such action except on the limited occasions that stirring their arses benefits them (for example the B & D election last year).
And even though that response isn't coherent (hell, it can't be coherent given the nature of the respondents), it's still a response per se, however poorly it actually addresses issues of economy and society.
Obviously, within current economic schema there isn't much room for any meaningful change that can/will benefit the masses, all there is are amelioratives, which in the long run will act to perpetuate the problem they ameliorate anyway, so I can see why the Left might be wary of putting their oar in when there's little hope (to their thinking) of change outwith an economic collapse (as opposed to the near-collapse that climaxed in 2008, and whose post-coital spasms we're still feeling), but does that means they shouldn't at least try? Of course it doesn't!
Mmm, as regards the data, I agree. The raw demography (ACORN and the like) showed that those areas that have elected councillors tended (and I stress the word) to lower-middle class with reasonable educational achievement, which isn't quite the same as "the old, the badly educated, the marginalised".
Which makes me thank G-d that historically the working classes have had far less time for hard right politics than the middle classes have. None of which would, of course, "save us" if there is a continuing abandonment of the working classes and their needs by the mainstream political parties. With no credible alternative "on the streets", the left will see even greater political disengagement or, if we're really unlucky, a very sharp right turn.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
Can you support this opinion of yours, please?
I lived with Muslim foster parents for a couple of years, and heard of most of those things happening locally in Muslim families, except dog-fighting and neglecting the elderly.
Don't confuse the prescriptions for behaviour in the sacred texts with the actual behaviour of people engaging in human relations.
it's not reactionary, it's "racist" or, more accurately, ethno-culturally prejudiced.
This can only happen if the UK leaves the European Union, as the "open access" is multilateral: They can enter our job market just as we can (and do) enter theirs. Last time I checked (2009) the UK had about 1.8 million declared workers employed in other EU states.
Joe Reilly
Well-Known Member
I don't know what 'white door-steps' you've been on recently but it's never come up on any I've been on
Errrmm, That's a strange supposed "Quote" with my name above it there "Joe" -- but some of the stuff is my stuff and some isn't - is it some sort of "my quote" interleaved/combined with someone else's (ie your) "riposte" we actually have there ? It makes it a tad confusing.
Well Okay "Joe" I read that, but:
a) What is the "Grand Narrative" ? For me it is still the narrative of Revolutionary Socialism, a Democratic Workers State, and a Planned Economy. Corny, heard it before. Problem of Stalinism. But nevertheless it's the only "Grand Narrative" in town that I know of - other than the slippery "Grand Narrative " of Fascism. There is no "Grand Narrative " on the IWCA website , Sorry there just isn't. Mondragon Co-ops and the like , and a specifically avowed non-socialist "Working Class Rule in Working Class Areas strategy aim , etc . Nope , I just don't see it as a sufficiently Grand Narrative for the crisis ridden times we are now in.
b) You reject the implication in my query as to whether you think some policy accommodations have to be made on the "left" to sieze back support from (white) workers concerned at some of the features of your particular definition of "multiculturalism. Fair enough. Yet without you providing actual real world policy examples and political demands - arising from the particular IWCA understanding of "multiculturalism" , it is hard to get to grips with the concept as it would impact on competition for support between the Far Right and political groupings on the Left in the white working class community.
Issues based around race, immigration, inter community cultural conflicts, incomer workers, etc, never come up on the doorstep ? OK. But it appeared to me that a large part of the attraction of the Far Right to the white working class is that they DO take up issues like this and have their own set of "solutions" on offer. I thought this was a central issue which you felt the "Liberal Left" was failing to "deliver" on in white working class communities vis a vis the BNP for instance. So the question remains... How would/does IWCA policy/political demands specifically aim to tackle this "failure" by the "Liberal" Left ? I picked some sample issues , but you haven't said where the IWCA would stand on any. Such is your right, but it means I can't therefore get to grips with the implications of your "take" on "multiculturalism".
The39thStep
Urban critical thinker
I thoroughly enjoyed that book
audiotech
wav, aiff, mp3, ogg, flac
I wouldn't look too deeply into it, as It seems to me a book he's written for the middle-class, Labour party, chattering dinner party types. Taking some material from the IWCA and knowing some of the above will have read it is satisfying enough surely? I noticed Jones quoted Johann Hari quite a bit, which will give some extra delight, as Hari will have no doubt read it over and over again.
Louis MacNeice
Autumn Journalist
What about a grand narrative that starts by saying it is up to us; we are responsible. We can choose:
to treat each other as equals;
to look after one another.
If we do this, then we can produce and provide the things that we all need.
If we do this, then we can guarantee the care and freedom that we all deserve.
If we do this, then we can carry on.
Now that took a couple of minutes to set down; it doesn't exclude any of your 'corny' categories but it isn't limited to bickering over the suffocating historical baggage that those categories come so heavy-ladened with.
Louis MacNeice
Divisive Cotton
Now I just have my toy soldiers
Where does that quote above come from Louis?
Similar threads
