Читать книгу Diversify: A fierce, accessible, empowering guide to why a more open society means a more successful one - June Sarpong, June Sarpong - Страница 13
Оглавление‘A working-class hero is something to be.’
John Lennon
The last of the ‘other’ men I am going to look at is by no means the least. They are probably the most powerful group politically and, unlike black and Muslim men, they are not a minority. In fact, they are a sizeable voting bloc who, when mobilized, have the ability to swing a referendum (as we saw with the Brexit vote in Britain) or take over a political party that is the bastion of the elite, as we saw with Trump’s triumph in the Republican primaries. This group has the potential, perhaps more than any ‘other’, to cause waves of social, political, and economic change: 72 per cent of non-college-educated white men voted for Trump*, and 70 per cent of those with only GCSEs or less voted to leave the EU.† Their status as ‘other’ comes not from their race or religion, but from that age-old British institution: class.
Both votes were an expression of white working-class men’s frustrations over globalization and the decline in their living standards. The winners on both sides of the pond were able to link this decline in living standards and employment opportunities to immigration. They successfully promoted fear of the ‘other’, inciting a revolt against the establishment by white working-class men in the UK and US – resulting, in some extreme cases, in violence.
Fear of the ‘other’ is not endemic or inevitable. The UK has not had the same history of segregation as the US, and ‘other’ ethnic groups in the UK have lived alongside the white working class for decades. White working-class men in the US even helped to elect the first African-American president in US history. So what’s changed?
White working-class men have been manipulated and discarded for political and economic expediency for longer than any of the other groups. They’ve been conscripted to colonize the Earth, to fight wars, and to fuel the industrialization of the West. And the reason they have endured these hardships and the exclusion from the full bounties enjoyed by the elites until recently is the unspoken agreement of entitlement – the idea that they, like the people who rule them, are the indigenous group, and are therefore entitled to a modest but credible standard of living, provided they are willing to work. It’s not an unreasonable expectation by any means, considering the contribution they and their predecessors have made to their nation’s prosperity, but somewhere along the way that unspoken agreement has been broken by the ruling class, and it’s left a lot of working-class white men behind. So how exactly did this happen, and what can we do to heal these wounds and regain the trust that has been lost?
The lost world
If you were lucky enough to grow up in a white working-class area in East London as I did, you will have experienced a real community. This area endured the Blitz during the Second World War, so I grew up among a community of elders for whom being a good neighbour was part of survival. If a bomb dropped on your home, it was one of your neighbours who would shelter you and your family. Britain survived the war, and this is a badge of pride among white working-class men, especially if your grandfather served. And this pride and strong sense of community, along with standing up for yourself and your country, doing a good day’s graft (usually manual work), and a willingness to appreciate your lot, were values instilled in white working-class males as standard.
And so they just got on with it. The blue-collar vocations laid out for them did not require higher education, focusing much more on practical and skills-based learning. Back then, the economy had a clear place for this group of men – there would be a job at a local factory where many of their mates worked, and there they would stay until retirement. A lack of social mobility was not a deal-breaker for white working-class men as long as they had employment and their way of life remained unchanged.
But change was in the air, whether they liked it or not. As soon as the elites in Europe and America came to realize that the movement of industry and people was required to maintain their margins as the rest of the world started to develop, the argument that the indigenous population should be entitled to work for a fair day’s pay became worthless. The need to meet the demand for labour after the war ushered in immigration, nearly always in working-class communities. Some working-class men did resent the newcomers, fearing change as many people do, but most welcomed migrants into their homes, local pubs, and families. Some even marched in solidarity with these new immigrants against far-right groups. It’s fair to say that the response to Windrush, the ship that brought one of the first groups of post-Second World War immigrants to the UK, and the subsequent waves of immigration that followed, was mixed across the country. But unlike in America, the overarching moral response was always ‘live and let live’, enabling Britain to claim the mantle of being a bastion of tolerance and diversity. However, this was based on the expectation that the ‘agreement’ between the working class and the elites would be upheld.
But as infrastructure in other parts of the world developed, it was no longer necessary to import labour and skills to the West, since we could just as easily export the working-class jobs to the rest of the world where costs (wages) were cheaper. Great for bosses and those with capital to invest; not so great for the white working-class male.
Fast-forward a few decades to the twenty-first century, and working-class neighbourhoods have experienced yet more dramatic change. The Thatcherite revolution in the UK, and Reaganomics in the US, oversaw deindustrialization of their respective industrial bases, resulting in the erosion of traditional white working-class jobs. Economically, the decline in manufacturing has hit the working-class male the hardest, demoting him in many cases from full-time breadwinner for his family and household. His jobs have been replaced by less well-paid and often part-time service sector jobs that (from a traditional male perspective) require skills aligned more with female workers. Many of these jobs are paid as zero hours contracts intended to supplement the family income, as opposed to replacing a bread-winner’s salary, yet in many cases this is exactly what has happened. The result is quite a come-down for the white working-class man: as a factory worker he took pride in the goods he made, which were shipped across the globe, but somehow making and serving lattes for a minimum wage doesn’t quite match up.
If white working-class males wanted to maintain their standard of living they would need to do what ‘foreign’ parents were demanding of their kids – work hard at school. But by now, white working-class males had the lowest levels of educational attainment and parents without a traditional reverence for higher education, and this trend continued.
A white working-class boy is less than half as likely to get five good GCSEs, including the core subjects, as the average student in England.*
At present, white working-class boys have the lowest literacy levels in British schools and are the least likely group to attend university. Throw in the free movement of higher-educated and skilled multilingual migrants from former communist Eastern Europe, with a couple of colourful demagogues who can spice up discontent with provocative statements, and we have ourselves a working-class populist revolt seasoned with an unfortunate taste of resentment. As an ardent pro-EU campaigner, I am disheartened to see the results of this shift to the right in Western democracies – but I also understand the legitimate concerns of those communities that have been failed by globalization. I have no criticism for the victims – they are the symptom, not the cause – and until we treat the cause, the symptoms will just get worse.
Toxic masculinity
A key exacerbating factor in the populist revolt we are now witnessing is the disenfranchised white working-class male’s notion of traditional masculinity. Within this subculture, authority tends to be spurned, and violence – often in the form of hooliganism – is deemed acceptable. Males in academia and office jobs are not viewed as ‘proper men’: they have soft hands, never break a sweat, and don’t build or make anything. They put on ‘airs and graces’ and work in offices where political correctness wins the day. The white working-class male prefers blunt straight-talking.
But what happens when the world moves on from this version of masculinity? Professor Michael Kimmel, a sociologist at Stony Brook University in New York, is one of the world’s leading authorities on masculinity. He examines the parallel phenomenon happening in the US in his book Angry White Men, and writes that many of the white working-class men from forgotten Rust Belt communities feel ‘betrayed by the country they love, discarded like trash on the side of the information superhighway’. In many ways the plight of the white working-class male may perhaps be the easiest to dissect in terms of understanding where the growing dissent comes from. According to Kimmel, the men he studied see positions that were once their birthright disappearing, and are no longer sure where they fit in the societal pecking order. They are white and male in a society that values those two attributes above all others – yet being white and male no longer has the same guarantees, at least not for white men who look and sound like them.
In adult men this state of confusion can lead to what Michael Kimmel describes as ‘aggrieved entitlement’, and the need for scapegoats in the form of ‘feminazis’ like Hillary Clinton or Mexican immigrants, who need to be ‘walled’ out of America in order to make the country ‘Great Again’.
This is not a new phenomenon: Kimmel’s book was written in 2013, long before the 2016 US election, and documentary filmmaker Michael Moore also tried to alert Liberals and Democrats about the anger that was building in rural communities up and down the country,* even predicting in his 2016 film, Michael Moore in Trumpland, that Trump would win. But it’s only now that the real scale of the problem is making itself apparent. Aside from the obvious political ramifications, in America it has also resulted in an alarming increase in early death rates among the middle-aged. This growing pandemic has been termed ‘deaths of despair’ by Princeton economists Anne Case and Angus Deaton.† They argue that there is a direct correlation between the economic decline of this group and a sharp rise in deaths caused by drugs, alcohol poisoning, and suicide.*
In part, the growing pushback against patriarchy and ‘toxic masculinity’ has made politicians reluctant to address the issues of white working-class boys in our education system. In a warped kind of way it’s easier to acknowledge inequality where women or people of colour are concerned, and harder to have that same level of concern for white males in a society that was designed to promote their dominance and progress. What we mustn’t forget is that not all white males have been beneficiaries of this system.
Daily Telegraph reporter Martin Daubney has been a passionate advocate for tackling this emergency. He believes the problem is in part due to a breakdown in the family structure in many of these communities, with high numbers of absent fathers and a serious lack of positive male role models.† Daubney also thinks that we need a larger number of male teachers from this background who can fill the void – currently 85 per cent of teachers are female. The general consensus is that ‘boisterous’ masculine energy is often viewed as ‘disruptive or destructive’ in the classroom, and cuts to physical activities in our schools mean we no longer have an adequate outlet for this energy. Daubney advocates a similar programme to the ‘Young Men’s Initiative’ in New York, designed to train and promote more black male teachers in New York schools. He believes it is vital that we encourage more white working-class men into teaching.
Indeed, had a concerted effort been made by governments through education and training to ensure that white working-class men (and in fact all ‘other’ groups) were adequately equipped and able to benefit from globalization rather than becoming victims of it, this erosion of faith in the system and anti-establishment rage in the West could have been averted. Had the impact of migration been more evenly distributed and integration more carefully managed in the UK, so that traditional white working-class areas had not changed beyond recognition, this could have addressed the resentment.
And lastly, if a genuine effort had been made to accommodate and accept working-class values and culture rather than neglecting them, we may have achieved a much higher degree of social mobility within this group. Instead, we have marginalized frustrated young white men, who have gone from being part of the national culture to a subculture wrapped up in a crumpled English flag, unfairly characterized as work-shy, nostalgic, and parochial.
The rise of extremism
The crisis that this subculture is in has reached fever pitch in recent years, and the urgency with which we must deal with it has become painfully apparent, not just because of the political ructions it’s caused with Trump and Brexit, but because of the alarming rise in far-right extremism that we’ve seen come with it. Who could forget the horror of 16 June 2016, when the MP Jo Cox was murdered by far-right extremist Thomas Mair, shouting ‘Britain first’? Before his wife was murdered, Brendan Cox had actually been studying this frightening trend. Speaking a year after Jo’s passing at the 2017 Amnesty International General Meeting, he warned of the grave challenge facing us and issued a clarion call to all those who believe in a fair and inclusive society:
We are facing a new threat today – one that we still haven’t fully appreciated. We have got into the absurd position of celebrating fascists coming second in national elections, rather than first, as if that is a great outcome.
I’m not suggesting that we become defeatist, but unless we are clear about the size and scale of the challenge, we will be defeated by it.
As well as understanding the scale of the problem – we must also call it what it is. Populism is too kind a term. In fact, in most countries these groups we refer to as populist are consistently unpopular.
More importantly, the people who lead these movements are not populists – they are racists, bigots, and xenophobes, intent on tearing our communities apart. And we should call them out for what they are.
The threat of rising far-right extremism is real and it isn’t going to go away quickly. But with resolution, a concerted attempt to reach out, and a focus on building closer communities, we can and we will defeat it.
These so-called ‘populist’ leaders have manipulated and exploited the genuine concerns of a group who are witnessing their traditional way of life evaporating in front of their eyes, and who haven’t been given the right tools to adapt to this change. Fuelled by a ‘Cause Conspiracy’ ignited by the dangerous rhetoric of a new breed of charismatic social-media-savvy demagogues, there has been an exponential increase in far-right membership and incidents. In the UK alone, the ‘suspected far-right extremists flagged to the Government’s key anti-terror programme soared by 30 per cent in the past year’.*
Having a cause to get behind is one of the most powerful of all callings, especially for men who are often lacking in words and therefore prefer action. Our ‘other’ young men who are excluded due to race, class or religion are all more vulnerable to radicalization and the rhetoric of causes, which will supposedly give their life greater significance while at the same time putting it in jeopardy.
America is facing its own issues with a rise in white supremacy movements. Having experienced first-hand the uplifting feeling of unity in Virginia during Obama’s 2008 election, watching the clashes between the far-right extremists and anti-racism protesters in Charlottesville on the news 10 years later filled me with dread; it felt like America had gone back in time, to racial tensions and the strife of the sixties. We had reverted to arguing over whether to celebrate Confederate generals who fought to keep slavery. We were, once again, seeing the KKK marching with lit torches – only this time the marchers were brazen enough to do so without hoods.
This against a background of the mass incarceration of African Americans and their falling victim to countless acts of police brutality and shootings. The one difference with the 1960s is that the then President Lyndon B. Johnson, when faced with the decision of whether to pander to his core base or lead the country to better tomorrow, chose the latter. He paid a price in losing the support of some Southern states, but he took an important step in America’s redemption and progression.
Unfortunately, the current President’s response to overt racism has been tentative at best. He took 48 hours to condemn the violence of the white supremacist protesters and the senseless murder of 32-year-old Heather Hayer, an anti-racism protester, at the suspected hands of James Alex Fields Jr, a far-right extremist and accused domestic terrorist.
Many of these far-right extremists were courted shamelessly by Trump during his campaign as they lapped up his rhetoric on Muslims and Mexicans. However, once in office, his chickens had come home to roost and he found himself in the difficult position of having to denounce them, albeit two days too late. Trump must now address the real issues affecting white working-class men in America: the fears from a changing world where their dominance is diminishing. What’s needed are realistic solutions that allow everyone to thrive in the modern world rather than return America to an older, more racist and less progressive nation. The country has come too far to turn back now.
And there are of course many correlations between radicalized Islamists and radicalized white supremacists. If you explore the lives of many of the perpetrators, it is clear that they were excluded men looking for deeper meaning in their lives, even if that meant ending it and hurting countless innocents in the process. Their lives, as they were, were clearly not worth much, and this was the only way to give them purpose. Radicalized men from opposing sides, ironically working towards the same aim.
A different script
If the Finsbury Park mosque attack (when, targeting a Mosque on 19 June 2017 in the ethnically diverse North London neighbourhood of Finsbury Park, which was over 300 miles away from his home in Wales, Darren Osborne acquired a van and drove it into Muslim worshippers during early-morning Ramadan prayers) showed us one thing, however, it’s that we can change the prescribed narrative surrounding this pattern of behaviour. According to the existing script, the enraged mob at the Finsbury Park mosque, fuelled by fear and a desire for revenge, should have then butchered this lone assailant, fuelling more fear and mistrust. But that’s not how it happened. Mohammed Mahmoud, the imam of the mosque, calmed and reasoned with the crowd and protected the terrorist from attack until the police arrived to make an arrest. Mahmoud was later dubbed a ‘hero’ by the British press and was personally thanked by Prince Charles when he visited the mosque days after the attack. Thousands of Londoners would also show their solidarity with the Muslim community by participating in a flower march the following evening and delivering thousands of bouquets to the mosque.
This is a prime example of how extremism can be fought. This was homegrown terrorism that failed to divide society because good Muslim men were prepared to stand up for compassion and the rule of law, and because the people of London came together in support of this ‘other’ community. Where radicalization is concerned, there is more than one side involved. The conspirators show no sign of quitting, so neither must we in fighting for the values we hold dear.
It’s clear that we can no longer sit back and ignore the disintegration that is brewing in white working-class communities both in the UK and US; it’s their values that for centuries have been the bedrock of British and American society, after all. The traditional values of the white working class are translatable into any setting: loyalty to a cause, hard work, and a grim determination; they are attributes that we want not only in our employees and citizens, but in our leaders and bosses, our friends and family. If we can harness these qualities, equip these men with the education and skills they need to contribute to this new globalized world, and show that they are valued, then the damage that is currently being wrought at every level can be prevented and reversed. Now that’s a cause worth pursuing.
ACTION POINT: Find out how many university degrees are open to applicants without A-levels.
DISCUSSION POINT: What job do you instinctively think of a white working-class man doing?
