buruma152_Mark LeechGetty Images_footballhooligansriot

流氓精神

Oct 8, 2019 Ian Buruma

纽约—已故的英国撒切尔夫人时代政治家艾伦·克拉克（Alan Clark）主要以其风流和极右出名，他曾经向我哀叹，建造帝国、赢得战争的英国战斗精神江河日下。我半开玩笑地说，英国足球流氓仍旧保留着攻击倾向，他们经常将球场和外国城镇洗劫一空。他带着迷离的眼神回答说，这真的是“或许可以派上用场”的东西。

当时看上去有点离谱的这番对话，现在已经完全成了现实。因为流氓精神真的正被利用。右翼恐怖主义正在英国抬头——虽然（至少是眼下）伊斯兰主义暴力有所收敛。反对英国在无协议的情况下退出欧盟的英国政客收到了死亡威胁甚至更加糟糕。工党议员、公开的反脱欧派乔·考克斯（Jo Cox）在2016年被谋杀，凶手一边高喊“英国优先！”一边朝考克斯开枪，还捅了他好几下。

英国绝不是孤例。在美国，极右翼集团正在夏洛特维尔（Charlottesville）和比兹堡等地制造恐怖，“犹太人不会取代我们”（这其中的“我们”指的是白人基督徒）的战争口号此起彼伏。极权主义的巴西总统博尔索纳罗公开支持酷刑。甚至在德国，暴力极端主义也有抬头之势，特别是在前共产主义东德的一些地区。在印度，总理莫迪对于印度极端分子所发动的政治暴力（通常是针对穆斯林）无动于衷。

To continue reading, register now.

As a registered user, you can enjoy more PS content every month – for free.

Subscribe now for unlimited access to everything PS has to offer.

Already have an account? Log in

Subscribe to Project Syndicate

Enjoy unlimited access to the ideas and opinions of the world’s leading thinkers, including long reads, book reviews, topical collections, short-form analysis and predictions, and exclusive interviews; every new issue of the PS Quarterly magazine (print and digital); the complete PS archive; and more. Subscribe now to PS Premium.

new comment has been posted. new comments have been posted.

0 Comments on this paragraph, 15 Comments on this article

Jacques Huynen Oct 14, 2019

"It is hard to know whether violence will abate once the likes of Trump, Johnson, Modi, and Bolsonaro are gone. It will obviously depend on who comes next. But once people feel licensed to violate all norms of civilized behavior, because the highest political leaders have already done so, it will be difficult to reverse." writes Buruma. Let's rather put that line of thinking downside up : it is the number of dissatisfied people from the working and middle class that kept growing over the last three decades that created the Trump, Johnson, Modi and Bolsonaro... Not the reverse ... As long as people do not feel protected by the state and are sacrificed to the interests of the GAFAMs, they will continue electing the Trump etc. Will depend not on who, but on what comes next...
- P. Kamath Oct 20, 2019
  
  Even long after these leaders are gone, one can be certain in US at least, the “ basket of miserables “ will remain in the political scene drawing inspiration from Trump and the likes.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Peter Schaeffer Oct 14, 2019

As it turns out, Boris Johnson has never called his opponents, 'traitors'. However, his opponents have called him a 'traitor'. Given that Iam Buruma comes from the Netherlands where Theo van Gogh and Pim Fortuyn where both assassinated by leftists/immigrants, you would think he would know that the real danger comes mostly from the left. You would think...
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Peter Schaeffer Oct 13, 2019

Biden's son was taking $50K a month for basically nothing, Trump's request was hardly baseless or inappropriate. The prosecutor looking into Burisma claims that he was fired (because of pressure from Joe Biden, then the VP) because of his investigation. Once again, that's a highly legitimate thing for a president to be interested in.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Peter Schaeffer Oct 13, 2019

An article about political violence with no mention of antifa and the endless (frequently violent) suppression of free speech on college campuses. About what you would expect from Ian Buruma. Of course, we actually have statistics for anti-Semitic violence in New York City. Since the perpetrators aren't white males, no one wants to talk about it. More broadly we have plenty of statistics about hate crimes (in the USA). White males are underrepresented as perpetrators. Of course, that fact is not PC.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
j. von Hettlingen Oct 9, 2019

Ian Buruma deplores violence as a result of “tribal hatreds” in the UK and the UK – the two oldest democracies in the West. Worse, populist leaders adopt the divide-and-rule policy, exploit social rifts to deliberately sow discord and spread fear, in an effort to “whip up hostile emotions” and pit various groups against one another. This malign strategy breeds bigotry and hatred, doing “severe damage to liberal democracy.”
The author says even when Boris Johnson, Donald Trump, India’s Narendra Modi, Brazil’s Jair Bolsonaro are gone, it may be “difficult to reverse” the damage. These thuggish leaders – Johnson is “a smoother, more educated operator” – condone violence. Their unruly supporters “feel licensed” to break “all norms of civilzed behavior,” and emboldened by their “highest political leaders,” who, as responsible heads-of-state, should lead with a moral compass.
Sadly, “politics is now less about interests than about culture, identity,” which has gone from inclusion to division. And “furious emotions stirred up in the endless echo chambers of the Internet” could pose a threat to social cohesions. When incendiary rhetoric that “makes violent people feel free to act on their brutal impulses,” becomes normal, it does “immense harm to the institutions that guarantee people’s freedom and safety.”
The author says, “the ghastly irony of our times has been that the very people who promised to make their countries great again have done the most to destroy what made them great in the first place.” According to a research conducted by The Atlantic, populist governments have deepened corruption, eroded individual rights, and inflicted serious damage on democratic institutions. Trump, Modi and Bolsonaro love to inject violence into politics, evoking the “hooligan spirit” of their voters.
The author recalls a conversation with the late Alan Clark, a politician of the Margaret Thatcher era, who “once lamented…the decline of the British fighting spirit that built empires and won wars.” The author jested that “this aggressive disposition was still there among British soccer hooligans who ransack stadiums and foreign towns.” Clarke “replied with a dreamy look in his eyes that this was indeed something that ‘might be usefully tapped.’”
This reminds of Rudyard Kipling, the author of the “Jungle Book”, a “jingo imperialist”, who lacked moral insensitivity, according to George Orwell. In “The Voice of the Hooligan” in Contemporary Review 1899, published by “The critical Heritage,” Robert Buchanan wrote: “It will scarcely be denied, indeed it is frankly admitted by all parties, that the Hooligan spirit of patriotism, the fierce and quasi-savage militant spirit as expressed in many London newspapers and in such literature as the writings of Mr. Kipling has measurably lowered the affection and respect once felt for us among European nations……..”
It is worth reading Buchanan’s essay, because Boris Johnson and his cronies have torn a page from Kipling’s playbook.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Elizabeth Pula Oct 9, 2019

RE: your "What is particularly disturbing about the increase in political violence in countries like Britain and the US is that democratically elected leaders are actively encouraging it."

Propaganda techniques are being utilized to the max, perhaps due to certain strategic access to certain AI software applications that really allow strategizing sound-bites, and specific propaganda technique utilization immediately timely. It wouldn't matter significantly if there was still some focus on positive results within certain community, or state, or nation boundaries. However, the focus is only to gain, or sustain financial and political positioning for, by and of a few. So, that only leaves increasing debt and violent reactive behavioral response for, by and of the many. Great game for the few, during specific and varying certain time periods. A terrible game with horrendous losses for the many during the same specific and varying certain time periods.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
David Donald Oct 9, 2019

Send your hooligans to Hong Kong, where they can threaten and beat people for speaking Mandarin Chinese, trash their shops, set fires within them, and be cheered on in London and New York as "freedom fighters".

A neoliberal society that stresses jungle competition while reducing the need both for civic or social solidarity and education (see Mirek Fatyga's comment) sets up the tribal state of mind of intellectually impoverished victims. Then the coaching and cheerleading from powerful actors (whether Trump, Johnson or former colonial masters) harvests this blind anger and fans the flames.

Hong Kong is the archetypical neoliberal society (celebrated by Hayek and the Heritage Foundation, alike), and its economy centers on bringing capital and goods into and out of China (i.e., it has an economy completely dependent on mainland China). Nevertheless, people have been reduced to such a state that former colonial masters in the UK through mere cheerleading without promise of visas or tangible hope (indeed, while openly stating a preference to do business with Shanghai) can bring Hong Kong youth to destroy their own city and alienate their only meaningful economic partner.

First gut out humanity with a neoliberal jungle of a society then turn the violence toward an enemy of choice: a recipe perfect for today's social media tools. The violent ignorance of overstressed people with little education when subjected to the sophisticated algorithms of social media are a match made in heaven for today's demagogues.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Mirek Fatyga Oct 8, 2019

the greatest damage done by the so called neo-liberalism (or market fundamentalism) is not the loss of jobs but rather a systematic denigration of public education, systematic dismantling of any regulations of mass media, and a general promotion of money as the primary determinant of value of individuals and economic entities to the society.

There are two ways in which a society can be governed: through reason, or through emotion. Governing through reason is hard, because human mind is very prone to emotion. Homo Sapiens is actually an undeserved self-promotion. Something like Homo Vix Sapiens would be far more accurate.

We generally associate "Democracy" with elections. A true "Democracy" should be better defined as a commitment to governance through reason.

The opposite of Democracy is Fascism, which is governing through incitement of emotion.

Western Democracies were at least somewhat inoculated to Fascism, in the second half of the XXth Century, by the memory of WW2 and the Holocaust that it brought about. A continuing struggle against Red Fascism in Russia, aka the Soviet Union, kept reinforcing the message. This inoculation is now fading away because of generational amnesia. We are actually witnessing an experiment, as to how much of a personal experience can be passed to succeeding generations through education. The fact that neo-liberalism makes a point of denigrating education, except as a period of training for an obedient and disposable worker, is not helping.

Historically, Fascism led to societal decay with a high likelihood of war. The most potent human emotion is fear and all it's derivatives, like tribal and religious hatred. Inciting hatred for political purposes makes war and conflict the next logical step, particularly if the previously democratic country has the means to arm itself, or is armed already. Since we have nukes, the next major conflict can be the last for the industrial civilization.

What can be done? There are no miracle cures. One has to realize what is happening, and marshal people of good will, who understand this process, to speak out, educate and appeal to moral arguments. Expose political liars, and create the atmosphere of public intolerance for political lying, which is the primary currency of aspiring fascists. It may not work, but neither is there much other choice.

Finally, a re-examination of the role of education in the society, prudent regulation of mass media balanced against the freedom of speech is essential if this society is to survive. Not an easy path, and success is in no way assured.
- P. Kamath Oct 9, 2019
  
  MF: You say,"...There are two ways in which a society can be governed: through reason, or through emotion." You forgot! Societies can be governed and controlled by more than one means.
  by using one or instruments of terror and punishment - China in Tibet, in main land China, N.Korea. Military rulers are pretty sucessful in Mynmar, Pakistan, in former Cambodian regimes, Iraq, many Middle Eastern countries.
  
  -- Invoking religious laws on populace in Iran,
  -- Exploiting general ignorance of populace to various extent even as in
  India in many provinces using nationalistic feelings, religious taboo
  subjects,
  -- Deny people food , shelter, inflict pain and suffering as it happened in
  Somalia, Ethiopia, Haiti, S.American states
  -- Civil disturbances, Pogroms, genocidal tactics
  
  The list is very long. Very unfortunate indeed!
  - Mirek Fatyga Oct 10, 2019
    
    yes, a society can be ruled by shear terror. It does not get to this terror overnight, though. If fascism is allowed to grow, we could end up being ruled this way. Some of the examples that you give in your comment are actually examples of the politics of scapegoating, which is the essence of the rule by incitement of emotion. The emotion is the fear of, and the hatred towards the scapegoat.
    
    If you actually experience life in a highly repressive society, you realize that the reality of this life is very different than it would appear to those who have never had this experience. Many, if not most people, do not actually live in fear but rather consent to being ruled this way. Scapegoats and dissidents live in fear as they can be targeted at any moment, but the majority does not mind and is actually often supportive. Then there are cases of outright occupation for whatever political or military reasons. In these cases, the occupied may be a collective scapegoat, while the occupiers are taught to hate them and thus support the occupation.
    
    A real society is a mix of these two elements, reason and emotion, since individual people are a mix of the same. It is where the emphasis is placed, that makes the difference.
    - P. Kamath Oct 11, 2019
      
      MF: Sorry! I wasn’t implying, in my comment, that you were unaware of various governing modes of rulers😊! I was only pointing out that a clever, well focussed manipulating ruler(elite or party ) can exploit ignorance of people to achieve one’s goal. There have been so many cases in our life time after all! Regards.
      A new reply to this comment has been posted.
    A new reply to this comment has been posted.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.

https://prosyn.org/Yv1c1FRzh

流氓精神

Subscribe to Project Syndicate

New Comment

Email this piece to a friend

Contact us

Log in/Register

流氓精神

Subscribe to Project Syndicate

Edit Newsletter Preferences

Set up Notification