Johnson’s government believes its culture wars against movements like Black Lives Matter or those defending gay or trans rights can boost its electoral support, including with Labour voters. Consequently, Tory ministers like Pritti Patel have refused to condemn those ‘fans’ who have booed the English team when it took the knee just before kick-off in solidarity with anti-racist campaigns. Lee Anderson, a Tory MP went so far as launching a one-person boycott of all England’s games until they stopped doing it. The local Labour Party showed some of the flair missing at the top of their party by organising an advertising van to tour the constituency with the slogan – ‘He’s staying home’. As the England team has gone from strength to strength and reached the final while maintaining taking the knee in every match it seems the Tory offensive has floundered. While there are still some racist fans booing when they make the symbolic protest it has diminished and a perception that the team represents tolerance, diversity and progressive attitudes have begun to take hold.
When the English manager, Gareth Southgate, writes a letter to England where he openly defends a new progressive, tolerant form of ‘Englishness’ the media can hardly avoid covering it. It is worth quoting some extracts just to realise how different it is from anything Alf Ramsey said in 1966. The World Cup-winning manager then called the Argentinean animals and refused to shake hands with them.
It’s their duty to continue to interact with the public on matters such as equality, inclusivity and racial injustice while using the power of their voices to help put debates on the table, raise awareness and educate. (…)
It’s clear to me that we are heading for a much more tolerant and understanding society, and I know our lads will be a big part of that. (…)
It might not feel like it at times, but it’s true. The awareness around inequality and the discussions on race have gone to a different level in the last 12 months alone.
I am confident that young kids of today will grow up baffled by old attitudes and ways of thinking.
(…) In a funny way, I see the same Englishness represented by the fans who protested against the Super League. We are independent thinkers. We speak out on the issues that matter to us and we are proud of that.
Gareth southgate
Southgate even references the fans’ protest against the ultra-corporate European Super League. Anti-racist campaigners have picked up a mood change. Shaista Aziz is an anti-racism campaigner and a member of the FA’s Refugee and Asylum Seekers Football Network. She wrote an article for the Guardian making these points.
The England team are taking a stand against bigotry, and people like my friends and me feel they’re playing for all of us. (…)
People of colour and marginalised people know we are a tiptoe away from racism and bigotry, which is why Gareth Southgate’s inclusive England team is winning so many hearts. By taking the knee, by standing against homophobia and bigotry, this team is playing for all of us.
shaista aziz
Some progress?
Campaigning against racism and homophobia can make breakthroughs that are reflected at institutional levels. Official European promotions and corporate advertising have talked a lot about respect for diversity and showing racism the red card. Football is the number one sport in terms of participation and audience both here and internationally. It is often the easiest means of communication when people meet from different countries and cultures. As internationalists, we encourage people to communicate at every level across ethnicities and nations. Clubs are increasingly international in the major European leagues. A fan of Manchester City or Arsenal will be knowledgeable about many great players from different countries. This leads to a more open, less prejudiced response to other national teams in tournaments like the Euros. It is one of the few upsides to the corporate erosion of club links with local communities. We see this with the players too. In the tunnel before the game and afterwards you see the hugs. To the extent that the English player Mount had to self isolate after giving an embrace to a fellow Chelsea player who plays for Scotland.
Some of the major national teams such as France, Switzerland and England look completely different from the teams of 30 years ago. It is harder for the far right or fascists to define Englishness with whiteness when you look at the England team today. This reinforces the ideology of multiculturalism and diversity. When France won the World Cup with their multi-racial team the leader of the racist Front National at the time, Jean Marie le Pen refused to accept it as a French team.
Does this mean all is sweetness and light? Of course not, look at the way the British press treated Euros’ star Raheem Sterling for a long time – he was seen as the well paid uppity black with a chip on his shoulder. The press ventilated the racist trope of young black men and violence because he had a rifle tattooed on his right leg. In fact, it was a reference to him opposing the violence that took his own father by ‘shooting goals’. Even after a recent win in which Raheem scored the decisive first goal nearly all the front pages featured Harry Kane, a white player (though also from an Irish immigrant family). Benzema, the French striker of North African Arab heritage was left out of the squad for a long time because he had raised issues about the treatment of minority ethnic players. After Mbappe missed the vital penalty in the decisive shootout against Switzerland last week the mother of Rabiot a white French teammate, went on a tirade against him and Pogba (another black power).
How should the Left respond?
Of course, the left needs to be careful how it presents this process. We do not defend migrants rights or open borders just because there are some great black footballers, athletes or others with great talents. Even racists will sometimes say there are ‘good’ and ‘bad’ immigrants. We defend the ordinary, the average migrant that the Home Secretary wants to lock up in some awful offshore holding station or in a badly run detention centre. People can simultaneously be in favour of lots of black footballers in the England team but for ending free movement in Europe and cutting back on all immigration. It is a bit like club fans supporting their own black player but booing or racist catcalling black players from other clubs.
Nevertheless, it is both ultra-left and ignoring reality to see nothing positive or different about the impact of this England team. An article in this week’s Socialist Worker just sees the whole Euros being recuperated by Boris Johnson’s government.
It’s a diverse team, they say. Its players take the knee. We can all unite behind this progressive patriotism.
It’s plastic rubbish. There’s a reason why Boris Johnson looks more comfortable in front of a flag than Starmer or Jones.
National unity—no matter how twee and fluffy—unites us with those at the top and sets us against those from “outside”.
If football comes home, it’s going to Johnson’s house. Let’s not stand at the front door begging to be let in.
socialist worker article
The writer fails to see any change from previous teams, no shift in attitudes and no new political space. Like those on the left who supported Brexit and saw no point in defending the gain of free movement in Europe because it was not the full socialist solution of completely open borders. Everything or nothing is the order of the day here. It assumes all people waving the English flag are ‘uniting’ with Johnson. True most racists will be enthusiastic flag wavers but not all flag wavers will be racists. Waving a flag at a football match is not the same as social democracy capitulating to the inter-imperialist First World War effort. It is a bit like the contradiction of striking miners back in the 80s fighting police on picket lines with copies of the anti-worker Sun or Express in their back pockets. Things are a bit more contradictory than Socialist Worker suggests. Ideological cultural institutions do ultimately help to reproduce the capitalist order but they are also structured by class divisions and a contingent ideological conflict. As we saw with the furore over the European Superleague. Players like Rashford, the leader of the opposition who has forced the government into a U-turn on food poverty or Kane wearing a Gay Pride armband opens up space for socialists to talk to lots of people about these issues. It opens some doors nothing more, nothing less.
Against progressive patriotism
However, some on the left go a bit far and actually try hard to construct a rather artificial ‘progressive’ English patriotism. Martin Fletcher in the New Statesman attempts to do this. It is one thing for the left not to exaggerate the significance of the flag-waving, it is quite another for the left to actually start handing out the flags. We can celebrate diversity, anti-racism and support for LBGT rights without defining some national limits. It is even more ridiculous to do this if at the same time you deny the national realities of Scotland or Wales. Inevitably progressive patriotism will come into conflict with the reality of class exploitation and class struggle which breaks up any idea of national unity. Indeed a worker in England has more in common with a worker in France, India or China than his English boss. Nobody is suggesting we ignore the complex cultural realities of the society we live in. Our action as socialists needs to take that into account in how we speak and act. Nevertheless, if we want to build an eco-socialism to replace this broken system you have to lock in internationalism from the start otherwise you go down the dead-end of building ‘socialism in one country’. You cannot build some progressive English patriotism and then add in some internationalism later on.
One of the problems with the ubiquitous ‘It’s Coming Home’ anthem is that it reinforces the myth of English exceptionalism and the almost colonial ownership of a truly international game. Even historically it is not strictly accurate as there is evidence of an analogous ball game in China called cuju during the Han dynasty from 206 BC to 220 AD. The Ancient Greeks also played a game called episkyros. Although as the leading imperialist power in 1863 it was Britain that drew up the rules and founded football institutions Scotland played a key role in changing the tactics of the game, basically developing passing as we know it today. Just because Britain played a significant role historically in its institutionalisation does not mean it is a ‘home’ for football today.
So the left should not get wound up about Johnson gaining an electoral bounce from the football success. Even his vaccine bounce was shown to be fragile in the Amersham by-election. It is hard as an Eton Wall Gamer and a ‘rugger’ man for him to adopt a soccer fan persona. Victory (a tempting fate I know) against Italy on Sunday will have a contradictory impact. Sure it will inspire some nationalists and racists but it will also be a victory for a team that has stood up for diversity and anti-racism. Bill Shankly, the legendary Liverpool manager, might once have said football was more important than life or death but like most managers, he was exaggerating. At the end of the day, it’s just a game and it is not entirely reducible to politics.
Here is our Euros list of heroes/heroines and villains:
Heroes/Heroines
Ronaldo – for dumping the Coca-Cola bottles in the press conference and wiping a billion off the company’s shares
Rashford – been a bit on the bench but still the leader of the opposition and ready to stop the Universal Credit cut
Harry Kane – for wearing the rainbow armband during pride month
Southgate – for defending team diversity and taking the knee as well as not being like all the previous England managers
Emma Hayes – best analyst and the other women now on all the pundit’s panels
Mayor of Munich and other German clubs who put on rainbow colours to respond to Orban’s hatred
Joel Hughes of Caerleon, Newport who raised £36,000 to show the little German girl crying after the England victory that not everyone in the UK is horrible. The photo had been shared on social media with the most appalling racist comments.
The anonymous gay rights protester with the flag who ran onto the pitch at the beginning of the Germany vs Hungary match.
Mark Perryman – the daddy of the left as regards Football, his deep entry work with the English fans is paying off.
Villains
UEFA for blocking the mayor of Munich lighting up the match stadium in rainbow colours and generally being reluctant to allow too much politics to disrupt the game
Lee Anderson, the Tory MP who is still boycotting the England games
The Times newspapers and most of the Tory press who opposed taking the knee
Priti Patel – I know she goes on all the villain lists but she refused to condemn English fans booing the team taking the knee
Laurence Fox – same as Patel
Art Book Review Books Capitalism China Climate Emergency Conservative Government Conservative Party COVID-19 Creeping Fascism Economics EcoSocialism Elections Europe Event Video Far-Right Fascism Film Film Review France Gaza History Imperialism Israel Italy Keir Starmer Labour Party London Long Read Marxism Marxist Theory Migrants NATO Palestine pandemic Police Protest Russia Solidarity Statement Trade Unionism Trans*Mission Ukraine United States of America War
One point I have since thought of which explains and reflects the differences between say the 1966 English team and today’s is the general level of education and culture of the players. Today if you are with a club or an academy while of school age you have to continue your schoolwork. Some of the English players have good grades at GCSE and their access to the internet today means they can be much better informed. Back in the day players did not follow as much education. Another difference between this team an the semi-finalists of
1996 is their general demeanour. What do we remember from then? It was the Gazza goal andthe celebration that glorified the drunken antics in the Hong Kong ‘dentist’s chair’. These guys have not been involved in such escapades (yet?) which would not in any case receive any leniency from someone like Southgate (unlike Terry Venables at the time). They are being remembered for taking the knee or welcoming diversity.
I agree with much of Dave’s article and his additional comment but we have to recognise that the important changes in the multi-racial composition of the team, the willingness of some of the players as well as the manager to make a stand (or take a knee) on important social issues, the higher levels of education among the players and their generally better behaviour off the field only have a limited impact on the way a sizeable minority of England supporters behave.
It was entirely predictable that Marcus Rashford, Jadon Sancho and Abukayo Saka would be subject to vile racist abuse on social media, which began almost immediately after England lost to Italy.
It was also entirely predictable that some England supporters would attack Italian fans at the end of the game. And this can’t just be dismissed as a reaction to the disappointment of losing the final. Even when England were winning the Italian players were subjected to near constant booing, their national anthem was booed before the game began. Just as the Danish anthem had been booed in the semi-final. And just as Danish supporters, including a ten year old boy, had also been threatened with violence by England supporters even after a game England won. But that was consistent with the online abuse received by the German girl pictured crying after Germany lost. And contrary to the claim in the Sun it was not England supporters but, as Dave intimates, a supporter of Wales who started a crowdfunder for the girl’s family, money which the family subsequently donated to a local German charity.
Dave mentions that the French multi-national world cup team was snubbed by Jean-Marie Le Pen because he didn’t consider them representative of France. That is certainly true and at the time Le Pen lost support because of it. At the time the Blacks, Blancs, Beurs were hailed as showing there was a new France – strangely one that included the English term Blacks rather than the French Noirs (though Noirs would have ruined the alliteration). Sadly this new found racial harmony didn’t last very long in France and, as Dave points out, no longer even extends to the football team with Black players being singled out for abuse.
Dave is right about the relatively progressive nature of much of the England team and their manager and in many ways I feel sad that they lost, especially in such a manner. However I fear that if England had won then the anti-racist, gay pride, campaigning for free school meals aspects of the team would have been drowned out in a sea of xenophobia which would have strengthened the ‘No Surrender to the IRA’, ‘Ten German Bombers’, ‘Two World Wars and One World Cup’ (which would, no doubt, have to be rewritten to include the Euros) and all the other racist and xenophobic chants and songs beloved of this wing of Engerland supporters.
Finally not a single commentator pointed out that England had, by far, the easiest passage to the final. They played 6 out of 7 games at Wembley, with increasing numbers of fans being allowed in to cheer their team on. Their only game away from home was the relatively short journey to Rome where, despite covid restrictions, England supporters still outnumbered those of Ukraine. By contrast Wales didn’t have a single home game and travelled over 5,000 miles for their games in Baku, Rome And Amsterdam where they were cheered on by my a small handful of fans. And apart from Germany, who reached the last 16 from the most difficult of the qualifying groups (France, current world cup holders; Portugal, reigning Euros champions and Hungary) England avoided all the other strong sides until playing Italy in the final. If football was going to come home (a ridiculous notion as Dave points out) them this was its best chance.
Should be Bukayo Saka. Auto correct keeps ‘correcting’ things that are already correct.
So I can comment as somebody who was at both the semi-final, and the final, all the England games in 1996, and the World Cup in Germany, and many more besides. In the early days there were large numbers of open fascists, and particularly the Orange Order, I saw those in Charleroi, from Leeds physically attacking somebody for moving one of their banners that blocked his view, this was followed by an all-out battle in the stands. After many physical battles at games, often because of reputation attacks by the police e.g. in Madrid, attempts were made by the authorities, and particularly anti-campaigners, to change things. In English grounds, due to cctv, people were picked up and banned. Fighting changed to outside, and then lessened. Similarly the Englandfans organisation started to ban people, thus stopping them from getting tickets (my son was banned because he got arrested at a music festival). So things were quieter in England Games, alongside a very strong anti-racism campaign, including when racists acted in other countries against English black players, but it was the players themselves particularly Sterling who had to initiate this. Notice for example at the final(nobody has commented on this) that when English players took the knee, so did all the officials, and the Italian players, which they did not do in the semi-final against Spain.
As to ten German Bombers, this was prevalent in every england Game until the membership changes, similarly no surrender. The No surrender, reappeared in recent times. (Brexit?) The latter is ironic as the area British troops had controlled in Afghanistan had just been vacated and the Taliban had taken over.
In the worst periods, I was threatened for staying seated during the national anthems, but in these two games because I was nearly the only person wearing a mask I think they thought I was mad.
I am tempted to think that many of the people inside the ground were not representative of football fans, there was rampant racism, booing the Italian National anthem, No surrender etc. There was a constant air of violence I saw two occasions where people were pulled off each other.
But like others I think that the players and manager have been exemplars, making sure Johnson couldn’t take advantage. I think it was an error taking off their losers medals, thus saying that unless you win its not worth playing. I think that the fact that they got the Italian team, with only 2 Brazilian origin players in the team to take the knee hopefully goes back to Italian football.
As far as the authorities of football are concerned things are pretty much hopeless, they put conditions on taking the knee (two days notice) they refused the rainbow lighting in games etc. The travesty of the final organisation was beyond belief. When England Games are played at Wembley no alcohol is allowed in competitive games, but because these were ‘away’games people were trapped in the stadium up to 2 hours beforehand, just drinking. Englandfans unable to get tickets (8,000 went to the official club out of over 60,000) Mps given £3,000 seats by betting companies. No wonder there was anger, Police used to do security, but to save money private companies were brought in. A shoulder high barrier got people past the Covid test, and I saw people rushing through any turnstile that they cracked. You would think there would be space to accommodate them in a 2/3rds full stadium but apart from the corporate areas it was rammed, so one has to guess they oversold. consequently in some areas the people who broke through were sitting in the safety isles. If there had been a fire or a crush what would have happened.
You might ask why I go to football, because I love the game, and if you hear 60,000 people chanting ‘Stirlings on Fire’ you realise things have changed at least a little.
You listen to U2 singing ‘We are the people we have been waiting for’ then you go back to reality, at least all the fans were wearing masks on the train, maybe they wouldn’t have if England won.