and liberal solutions The last Red Mole examined how racist education works in schools, However, one of the vital tasks with respect to most education is to distinguish the revolutionary from the liberal solution. This is because, on the one hand, most of the existing revolutionary groups with their usual rotten chauvinism ignore both racism generally anc racist education, and, on the other hand, the liberals both acknowledge the existence of racist education and also talk about it in a pseudo-socialist rhetoric. Thus there is a heap of liberal literature which points out the existence of racist education. For Instance, in the last couple of months there have been liberal books on blacks in ES.N. schools (Bernard Coard) and on racist literature (Janet Hill). Again the very first edition of Children's Rightsa schools magazine by "radical' educationalists-actually begins with an article about racism in schools. Moreover, a large amount of this literature does not only acknowledge the existence of racist education, it also argues that it is the result of 'imperialism' and even "capitalism'. Coard in particular emphasises the role of the Imperialist expansion of Capitalism in laying the foundations for racism.
However, the difference between liberals and evolutionaries has never been that the former do not and the latter do make a close analysis of society. Many liberals recognised, well before Marx, that the capitalist system was based on a property owning class and a working class. What distinguishes Marxists from liberals is precisely seeing that this labour/capital con- / tradiction can never be resolved within capitalism, and that the vicious circle can only be smashed by smashing capitalism. Thus the distinguishing mark of liberal writings on racist education is that it belie ves this racism can be 'solved' by reforms within the system. For instance, Coard's answer to I.Q. tests (which he himself admits are based on 'white middle class values' as a way of deliberately herding black students into ESN schools) is that in future these tests should be administered by black psychologists. Again, one answer to black youth unemployment which is put forward is to have black Youth Employment Officers.1 Now these are manifest non-solutions to racism in schools. The reason why they are non-sblutions is precisely because capitalism needs to perpetuate racism in order to divide the class. In other words, no solution lies within capitalism itself.
Of course this does not mean that it is sufficient for revolutionaries just to proclaim that racist education can only end with the end of capitalism-with an invocation to "build the revolutionary party'. For instance, revolutionaries should be helping to organise those most oppressed by bourgeois education-namely the students-to fight back. However, what this does mean is that such School Students Unions will fail to come to grips with racism in schools if they consider that bourgeois schools can be democratically run on a non-racist basis. Instead, such Unions like any Union in a period of imperialist decline, need to have an explicit revolutionary perspective.
THE ROLE OF THE LIBERAL INTELLECTUALS Liberal intellectuals do not just acknowledge the existence of racism and racist educationrather they are totally obsessed and pre-occupied because of the bourgeoisie's present need with them. Thus whole institutions, eg. the Institute of Race Relations-and whole journals, The Red Mole 13 March 1972 Page 10 e.g. Ra ce Today-are run by liberals to discuss and investigate racism. Moreover, within all this, by far the most discussed aspect of racism is in regard to education. For instance, virtually every issue of Race Today has an article on racism in the schools.
This emphasis on racism and racist education by the liberals might seem paradoxicalespecially compared with the chauvinistic disdain of racism by most of the revolutionary groups. However, this emphasis is in fact a classic example of the political role of liberal intellectuals as the lackeys of the bourgeois state. This can be seen in various ways.
Thus the (hopeless) effort of liberal intellectuals to 'rationalise" all the contradictions within capitalism and suggest reforms' within the system is precisely their usefulness for the bourgeoisie. They both act as a safety valve for the capitalists and are themselves co-opted into the system. This is especially important as regards racism to intensify antagonisms between black and white workers. material base in the petit-bourgeoisie. Moreover, it is precisely this material base which black militancy, like all proletarian militancy, threatens. This is why it is no coincidence that the recent rise in black militancy has been met by a rise in liberal "concern' for racism. The liberals have a material interest in pre-empting such militancy. One example of the way they do this is by attempting to co-opt black militants into the whole liberal machinery, for instance by getting one or two of them to write for Race Today. Again it is no coincidence that liberals concentrate most on racist education-for this is just the field that black militants attack most. THE MYSTIFYING ROLE OF THE STATE However the bourgeoisie does not employ only liberals to act as a safety valve. Instead it has also set up its own actual State machinery precisely to play this role. Hence the Race Relations Board, hence the Community* many reactionaries' are against dispersal and Relations Officers, etc. etc. Moreover within this Race Relations Industry, the State has devoted a large amount of its resources to documenting the "disadvantages' of black children. Thus there have been at least four government sponsored reports into the problems blacks cause at school-and there was also the I.L.E.A. report of 1967.
Again it is nothing new for the State to set up inquiries into itself-and then sometimes even institute reforms. For instance there were the great nineteenth century Royal Commission reports on health and housing. Of course these reports and any reforms following were not the result of abstract humanitarian motives. Rather they had concrete class motives-namely to buy off discontent amongst the workers the world is no longer capitalist-and the rest is offering an ever decreasing rate of profit. The implications of this are twofold: 1. The bourgeoisie has to resort to racism to divide the workers; 2. The options in terms of offering even token reforms are no longer present. Thus as regards racist education in schools the bourgeoisie and its intellectual lackeys are not able to offer any long-term reforms at all. For instance, the notion of black psychologists, black youth employment officers etc. as a 'solution' to racist education is just a farce and a patent farce. Moreover not only has the state no option open to it in terms of reform, it also, even on its very own liberal criteria, has to resort to utter deceit and hypocrisy to conceal its racism whilst purporting to reform it. Thus Royal Commissions in the last century were, at least on a liberal basis "honest" in that they were at least able to admit there were 'defects in the system' (though without admitting their causes). However, whatever reports the state produces on racism today are full of blatant lies. For instance, as we have seen, the figures for black unemployment are just bent. Again the ILEA report on blacks in ESN schools says that even though blacks might be shown to be wrongly placed in ESN schools yet such schools still fulfil their 'educational needs". The classic example of this double-think deceit is of course in respect to racism towards the Irish and the Compton Report where "brutality' towards the Irish was distinguished from 'torture.
In fact one of the marks of the crisis of capitalism is not only that it screws up capitalism always screws up workers. Instead it also screws up the bourgeoisie in its capacity to rule by reform and by buying off discontent. (Of course the problem for revolutionaries is that it also tends to screw them up as well-for instance, by rendering them chauvinistic).
LIBERALS AND REACTIONARIES Finally, because in the period of decline of capitalism there are manifestly no liberal answers to anything, and so the bourgeoisie have no room to manoeuvre-then the whole difference between "liberals' and reactionaries which is illusory at the best of times becomes totally meaningless. They both end up using the same arguments-posing the same non-'solutions'. This is seen clearly as regards racism in education-and in particular the question of blacks in the ghetto areas being placed into the loc! ghetto schools and being de facto segregated from whites in other schools. Now, lots of "liberals' do not like this de facto segregation and want black students to be dispersed into the white schools. Likewise many reactionari: are against black students being in a numerically dominant position in any school and are therefore in favour of dispersia. Conversely, because dispersal in effect often means forced dispersal through bussing students miles away from where they live, then other liberals' are against it. Again are in favour of ghettoisation of blacks into certain schools as a way of keeping them from whites as much as possible. Another identical position between liberals" and'reactionaries' is that both see racism and racist education as producing a 'problem' which has to be 'solved'. Likewise immigration is seen as a 'problem'. However, the reason why racism produces problems is that always under capitalism, and especially in its period of decline, everything produces problems. In the period of decline of capitalism the choice can never be between liberal progress and reaction. It can only be between socialist revolution and barbarism. Steve Cohen 1 Race Today, February 1971.