The growth of anti-normative political expression…

“There was contact!” The ‘latest’ news, and apparently the most ‘important’, that yes, the protesters had contact with Camila, yes, contact! Oh, what a surprise, after all, the Royals were only travelling with their window down, through a protest symbolic of the growing frustration and sense of betrayal so many are feeling, closely after students had been told they will have to pay up to £9,000 a year for an education in one of the richest countries. It’s not a lie that many within the growing movement are/will be republicans; it’s hardly a surprise, as it represents the need to construct alternative power structures.

The Establishment bias (borrowed from the NS – see below) is similar to the cardassian juridical system (off Star Trek) where guilt is decided before the trial, instead, the trial is a way to reinforce moral and social structures and ties so that no one defies the central command/state. There’s no fair trial, consider the reporting of the student protests for example; there is only sensationalised and disproportionate coverage, featuring conflation of political praxis such as anarchism, which some politicians and journalists clearly haven’t read much about.

There is an interesting but pathetic article in the Express attempting to slander Clare Soleman, the likely successor to Aaron Porter who seems more comfortable supporting the establishment than defending those he is supposed to be representing. Apparently, Soleman is an ‘extremist’ because she was outlawed from the SWP. ’nuff said about the political reality the Express operate in. Soleman however, does look like an attractive alternative to Soleman, especially with news that a counter movement to the NUS is forming.

What is anti-normative political expression? By this, I relate to the increasing tensions with the traditional political establishment/system – people are becoming fed up of not being listened to, but unlike the Iraq protests, ‘defeats’ to the Fawcett Society’s bid and the student movements protests are framed within a larger political context. This, I have talked about previously in terms of Bookchin’s work regarding the civil communal context of revolutionary movements. Furthermore, by ‘defeats’, again, this must be understood in relative terms to ‘traditional’ political definitions of ‘success’.

So, even though the Fawcett Society’s bid failed and the educational cuts/rises and academy bills – as well as the cuts programme in general –  are well on their way, this doesn’t stop the progression of political expression contra to the normative. There is a growing revelation that system related ways of protest (so, legal challenges etc) are failing, and only through the growth of counter power structures will we see change.

The New Statesman have an interesting article regarding Jeremy Hunt’s comments re BBC supposedly being supportive of the left (you could have fooled me) regarding the power and defensive mechanised systems/processes the Establishment deploy at times of hegemonic crisis, and certainly in ‘normality’ as well:

The BBC’s bias is thus an Establishment bias, a bias towards power and privilege, tradition and orthodoxy.

I once tried to maintain a romantic view of the current political system, that somehow the LibDems would rise to power and make everything better (yes, I was one of those idiots who voted LibDems last election, how my politics has changed). Whilst romanticism and idealism isn’t misplaced politically, it is better placed envisaging the workings of a future system that provides for real political expression and self-development, whilst allowing for true democracy – instead of the warped liberal democracy – where face to face politics ensures representative decisions. A counter movement needs to be framed within power relations and the wider struggle for a better way of doing politics. Only through alternative political power relations and structures will we challenge the Establishment bias.

P.S. Someone has just enlightened me to the news that disabled people are set to lose their Independent Living Fund – this is what I call news, not Camila being poked. End of.


5 thoughts on “The growth of anti-normative political expression…

  1. The Disability Living Allowance is going to be changed to something called the Personal Independence Premium (I think the language is based on Arbeit Mach Frei/ War Is Peace). The Government intends to get 20% of those on DLA made ineligible for PIP allegedly to force them back into work. This betrays a breathtaking ignorance that DLA is paid to help disabled people with the additional costs they face – it is paid to many who are already in work; removing it may make it harder for them to do things like pay to travel to work, and make it more likely they stop work. The Government Ministers seem to be confusing it with Incapacity benefit, but that just goes to show that they are not only bad, they are also stupid.

  2. What is this Personal Independence Premium when it’s at home? Is it any better? Or is it, and I am guessing it is, worse?

    And totally agree; it is infuriating. What is also very annoying is that mainstream news don’t cover these sorts of stories; they are just put on the back burner whilst we have to listen about bloody Camilla for three days – who cares!

    Thanks for letting me know, fill me in on any more information if you have it please – i haven’t heard about this.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s