162.It concerns me that the Progressive Conservative Party has not addressed this topic in any meaningful way. 77.Ĭatherine Wihtol de Wenden, Les Immigrés et la politique (Paris: Presses de la FNSP, 1988), p. 73, 132.īill Smithies and Peter Fiddick, Enoch Powell on Immigration (London: Sphere Books, 1969), p. 68.Īnthony Howard (ed.), The Crossman Diaries: Selections from the Diaries of a Cabinet Minister 1964–1970 (London: Methuen, 1979), pp. 24.ĭennis Dean, ‘The Conservative government and the 1961 Commonwealth Immigration Act: the inside story’, Race and Class, vol. Robert Miles and Annie Phizacklea, White Man’s Country: Racism in British Politics (London: Pluto Press, 1984), p. 107–8.Īshley Montagu (ed.), Statement on Race: An Annotated Elaboration and Exposition of the Four Statements on Race Issued by UNESCO (London: Oxford University Press, 3rd edn 1972), pp. Carr-Saunders, We Europeans: A Survey of ‘Racial’ Problems (London: Jonathan Cape, 1935), pp. Thirdly, there was a widespread moral revulsion against genocide, the full horror of which was only gradually revealed to the public through film and print, which meant that any attempts to openly support racism immediately brought into play associations with the gas ovens and triggered a powerful, hostile response. Having recently sacrificed millions of lives in the war against fascism, a sacrifice of those who were only recently dead and who were mourned and commemorated on a large scale through new monuments, parades and ritual, the post-war political order could not readily tolerate a resurgence of racism. Secondly, there was a political break in that post-1945 European governments created a ‘post-hoc’ legitimation for the war against Nazism, on the grounds that it was necessary to defeat a regime capable of the horrors of the ‘Final Solution’. Firstly, the old science that was grounded in a belief in the concrete reality of absolutely distinct and separate races was fundamentally challenged by a majority consensus of anthropologists, sociologists and geneticists who demonstrated the radical flaws within earlier forms of race thinking. The 1945 break in the paradigm of race-science functioned at various, mutually reinforcing levels. After 1945 any debate on the issue of ‘race’ was informed, whether explicitly or implicitly, by the consciousness of the hideous reality of genocide, and this universal awareness meant that the kind of ‘innocence’ with which the validity of race-science had been taken for granted in the century before the Nazi phenomenon was no longer possible. This revisionism went hand-in-hand with a post-Holocaust awareness that the ‘myth’ of race had led, and could continue to lead, to inter-group hatred, discrimination, and large-scale violence and systematic murder. The biological theories of race that had been so widely shared in Europe for two centuries were exposed by mainstream science as lacking in validity. The Second World War, and the recognition of the appalling reality of the Holocaust, marked a major turning point in the history of racism.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |