Chapman UniversityChapman University Digital Commons

Education Faculty Articles and Research College of Educational Studies

Spring 2001

Class, Cultism, and Multiculturalism: A Notebookon Forging a Revolutionary PoliticsPeter McLarenChapman University, mclaren@chapman.edu

Ramin FarahmandpurUniversity of California, Los Angeles

Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.chapman.edu/education_articles

Part of the Curriculum and Social Inquiry Commons

This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the College of Educational Studies at Chapman University Digital Commons. It has beenaccepted for inclusion in Education Faculty Articles and Research by an authorized administrator of Chapman University Digital Commons. For moreinformation, please contact laughtin@chapman.edu.

Recommended CitationMcLaren, P., & Farahmandpur, R. (2001). Class, cultism, & multiculturalism: a notebook on forging a revolutionary politics.Multicultural Education, 8(3), 2-14.

Class, Cultism, and Multiculturalism: A Notebook on Forging aRevolutionary Politics

CommentsThis article was originally published in Multicultural Education, volume 8, issue 3, in 2001.

CopyrightCaddo Gap Press. This material may not be reproduced, distributed, or sold without specific permission ofCaddo Gap Press.

This article is available at Chapman University Digital Commons: http://digitalcommons.chapman.edu/education_articles/149

I- f

` >7 t iV

-_,:, i£ t_ .X _

-I-

-a--ti Ap .LI I kI RBy PeterTMcLaren

Ramin Farahmandpur

If this were a dictatorship it'd be aheck of a lot easier.

-George W. Bush

Who Wants to be a Miillionaire?

The new millennium has finally ar-rived withBourbon Street reverie. But theunsettling triumph represented by ticker

Peter McLaren is a professorand Ramin Farahmandpur

is a graduate studentat the Graduate School of Education

and Information Studiesof the University of California,

Los Angeles.The text of this article was first presented

at the Annual Meetingof the American Educational

Research Association,New Orleans, Louisiana, April 26, 2000.

A version of this article will appearin an Australian volume

edited by Bill Cope and Mary Kazantatisand sections of this article will also

appear in the following articles: PeterMcLaren, Aimee M. Carillo-Rowe, Rebecca

L. Clark, and Philip A. Craft (in press),"Decentering strategies of white racial

domination," in Glenn Hudak and PaulKihn (Eds), Labelling: Politics, Identity,

and Pedagogy, New York: Routledge; Peter.McLaren and Jill Pinkney-Pastrana (in

press), "Cuba, Yanquizacion, and the cultof Elidn Gonzalez: A view from the'Enlightened States,"' International

Journal of Qualitative Studies inEducation (a special issue on Cuba, edited

by Denise Blum and Peter McLaren).

tape parades and local beer hail celebra-tions only serves to momentarily deflectattention from the millions of exploitedmen, women, and children aroundthe world.The challenge of turning the country intoone giant theme park to entertain the rul-ing class has not been met in all corners ofthe globe, and the opposition is witheringaway by the minute. More and more coun-tries are donning what William Greiderhas called globalization's "golden straight-jacket" of "follow our orders, and we willmake you rich (someday)"-forced auster-ity programs orchestrated by institutionssuch as the International Monetary Fundthat dictates what foreign governmentsmay or may not do (2000, p, 14).

Despite all the fanfare surroundingthe promises of free trade, it remains thecase that both advanced and developedcountries have been hurt by globalization.Only a few metropolitan centers and selectsocial strata have benefited, and it is nosecret who these select occupants are. It'snot the case that the poor are next in line tobecome millionaires. That's not part of theoverall scheme. The success of Regis hasbrought with it his repressed double, theunemployed worker who returns to visit thescene of his firing to do some 'firing' of hisown, only this time through the barrel of anautomatic rifle as he guns down his ex-bossand fellow workers. No, the poor are notnext in line to enter free market heaven.

In fact, the poor are completely writtenout of the script; they serve as permanentextras for the background shots for larger

millionaire novelas offame for theluckyfew,andmiseryandpovertyfortheunluckymany.The functional integration among produc-tion, trade, global financial markets, andtransport and speed technologies thatmakefinancial transactions instantaneous, havefacilitated the re-deployment of capital to"least-cost" locations that enable exploita-tion on the basis of advantages it will bringto those, wishing to become part of the"Millionaires R Us Club."

As global assembly lines increase, andas speculative and financial capital strikesacross national borders in commando-likeassaults ("move in, take the goods, andmove out"), the state continues to experi-ence difficultyinmanaging economic trans-actions but has not yet detached itself fromthe infrastructure of corporate imperial-ism. Transnational corporations and pri-vate financial institutions-Gold Cardmembers of the leading worldwide bour-geoisie-have formed what Robinson andHarris (2000) call a "transnational capi-talist clan." And while the emergent globalcapitalist historic bloc is marked by contra-dictions in terms of how to achieve regula-tory order in the current global economy,national capitals and nation states con-tinue to reproduce themselves. Home mar-kets have not disappeared from the scenesince they continue to provide ballast forthe imperialist state through ensuring thegeneral conditions for international pro-duction and exchange.

Liberal democracies like to pretendthat the state is a separate and autono-

MULIICULTURAL EDUCATION2

I'" 1, -I _"i " �, � �-, ; , -, 1�1 1�t� t-1 --, �4 1W�4� 1�

grOr

mous sphere of activity because that waythey can set up convenient smokescreensagainst the internal workings of the capi-talist production process. They can alsoprevent the staggering exposure of capital-ism's zero-sum game andhinder our under-standing of the indivious ways in which thestate actually functions to sustain and pro-mote the capitalist system. Not to mentionthe ways in which the state locates blamewithin individuals (they are too lazy, igno-rant, unskilled) rather than within theirconditions of existence (i.e., the value formof wealth that is historically specific tocapitalism). Within liberal democracies,individuals are conveniently held respon-sible for their own poverty as blame isshifted away from the capitalist race to thebottom to see who can prosper with theminimum or lowest standards of social andeconomic justice as well as environmentalprotection and sustainability. The blameis always shifted away from the means bywhich surplus-value is created through theinternal or dialectical relation that existsbetween labor and capital-that is, awayfrom the way workers are locked into aninternal and antagonistic relation to capitalin the most alienating and dehumanizing ofways-and awayfromthefactthat exploita-tionis a constitutive feature ofthe capitalistproduction process (Allman, in press).

The globalization of capitalism is not inanyway accountable to democratic interest,yet its cheerleaders have bidden its diaboli-cal nature behind the non-sequitur claimthat the free market promotes democracy.

In fact, self-determining governments onlyget in the way of the goal of transnationalcorporations, which is "to open all domesticmarkets, natural resources, builtinfrastruc-tures, and labor pools of all societies of theworld to foreign transnational control with-out the barrier of self-determining govern-ment and people in the way" (McMurtry,1999, p.58). The real agenda oftransnationalcorporations is, in other words, to create ananti-welfare capitalism with a human facewhile drawingattentionawayfromthepara-doxical congeniality of capitalism and itsrepressed underside.

The current mind-set of global capital-ism can, in fact, be traced to the TrilateralCommission of 1973 (composed of theworld's leading corporate CEOs, academ-ics, government officials, etc.), who arguedthat there existed "an excess of democracy"in the Western world and who advocatedthe legitimacy of hierarchy, coercion, disci-pline, secrecy, and deception, as well as thenon-involvement of a governable democ-racy (McMurtry, 1999). Mutagenic capital-ist values have transmogrified into a socialethos, making it easier for flim-flam finan-cial ventures to proliferate, breaking thetenuous accord that has long existed be-tween labor and capital. Adam Smith'snotion of the market as a servant of thepublic good through the shared 'wealth ofnations' has achieved the status of a goodjoke in bad taste. Arching over the blan-dishments of the value program of the glo-bal market is the aerosol figure of George'Dubya' Bush, who is not merely content to

have stolen the electiontbrough voter cleans-ingin his brother Jeb's state of Florida, butis determined to realize his potential formanifest delusion and to exercise a stub-born willingness to give away billions ofdollars of tax cuts to the wealthiest onepercent of the population. Bush not onlylacks moral intelligence, but he serves asan understudy for such a lack. He's alreadyupstaged Dan Quayle in the 'wasted mind'department, but it remains to be seen whathis boss, Dick Cheney, has in mind for him.

How has the globalization of capitalfared? The economic performance ofindus-trial countries under globalization in the1980s and 1990s is much poorer than dur-ing the 1950s and 1960s when they oper-ated under a more regulated social-marketeconomy (Singh, 2000). Economic growthas well as GDP growth has been loweredand productivity has been cut in half; inaddition, unemployment has risen dramati-callyin the OECD countries.

That the United States has fared bet-ter on the issue of unemployment thanWestern European countries cannot be at-tributed to the less flexible labor marketsof the latter, nor on the information tech-nologies revolution. In the case of Japanand Korea, their periods of fast economicgrowth, povertyreduction, and raises in thestandard oflivingwas undermanagedtradeand capital controls, not laissez-faire evan-gelism. When Korea, Malaysia, and Indo-nesia, for example, liberalized their exter-nal capital flows they suffered economicmeltdowns (Singh, 2000).

SPRING 20013

0

A Notebook on Forginga Revolut'ionary Poll't'ics

Latin American countries that haveliberalized their trading and external capi-tal regimes have suffered from fall outs andfrom severe financial crises, including thepeso crisis of 1994-95 in Mexico and the"Samba effect" of 1999 in Brasil. LatinAmerican countries following the Washing-ton consensus have, since the late 1980s,experienced a long-term growth rate reduc-tion from 6 percent per annum to 3 percentper annum (Singh, 2000).

The battle over free trade is not onlyabout profits. It's also about manufacturingideology. Globalization has been a dismalfailure for the vast majority of the world'scapitalist nations. And yet the corporateelite refuse to concede defeat. In fact, theyare boldly claimingvictory and, furthermore,that history is on their side. In a sense theyare correct. But we have to understand thatthey are speakingfor themselves. Theyhavebeen victorious. In fact, they've made mil-lions. The question remains: At whose ex-pense?

Global capitalism has won the battleover ideology hands down. Global capital-ist monocracy has declared itselfvictoriousover socialist and communist ideologies.The latter are being auctioned off atSotheby's as relics of class struggle frombygone eras, to be archived in museumsdedicated to democracy's victory over theevil empires spawned byMr. Marx. For now,capitalism has succeeded in steering thewheels of history to the far right, to a head-on collision with the reigning neoliberalbloc, where postmodernized signposts onthe streets declare the triumph of privati-zation over socialization, individualismover collectivism, life-style identity poli-tics over class politics, cynicism over hope,and barbarism over civilization.

Capitalism has become our ticket tothe gaudy world of tinsel dreams and chlo-roformed hope, to a subterranean publicspherewhereAmericanPsycho replaces CheGuevara as the icon of the postmodernrevolution. Under the beguiling eye of "highstakes" financial investors, a two-tieredlaboring class has been created, with low-skill, low-paid service workers toiling along-side a small segment of highly skilled andwell-paid workers. For the millions ofpeoplewhose lives remain commodified and regu-lated in the charnel house of "fast-track"capital accumulation andits seductive com-panion, consumer ideology, the clearly vis-ible contradictions within capitalist socialand economic relations of production havebecome too obvious to be recognized. Theyhave been naturalized as common sense.After all, the buying and selling of humanlives as commodities-the creation ofwhatMarx called "wage slaves"-must be guar-

anteed as a constitutive factor of our de-mocracy, so this condition is carefully dis-guised as a "voluntary contractual agree-ment," even though the only alternatives toshaking the sweaty palm of the market'sinvisible hand are starvation, disease, anddeath. Liberals and conservatives alikelove to heap fulsome praise on the UnitedStates as the world's bastion of freedomwhile ignoring the abysmal disparitiesbetween effort and reward. Marxists knowotherwise. The only "free" cheese is in themousetrap.

Postmodern theorists recognize thesecontradictions but are largely unable todevelop a counter-hegemonic politics ex-cept by restructing their observations tothe culture plane and thereby obfuscatingthe political economy of real existing capi-talism. Neil Larsen warns that

at best, the culturalist account ofglobalizationresults inmere descrip-tivism-e.g., the work of GarciaCanelini.Atworst-e.g.,Baudrillardor Bhabha-it results in the kind ofpseudo-theory that simply reads offcertain ofthe lateral effects of global-ization (e.g., the hybridization ofna-tional cultures or the manipulationof global opinion through the massdissemination of CNN-type 'news'simulacra) as the fantasmagoricalsites for its subversion or its eternalreplication. This is reified thinkingtaken to the extreme of mistakingthe empty shell of a globalized com--modity form for the social, humancontent that it progressively fails tocontain. (2000, p. 4)

The social and political antagonismshaunting capitalism today are manifoldand can be discerned by utilizing the opticof historical materialist critique. On theone hand, we witness firsthand the vastprofusion of material resources able to sus-tain the livelihood of the six billion inhab-itants of the earth, and provide basic neces-sities including full employment, housing,and heath care. On the other hand, the grow-ing bipolarization and the over-accumula-tion of capital by the new breed of opulentgangster capitalists from reigning globalmaflacracies has reducedthe odds of surviv-ing hunger, poverty, malnutrition, famine,and disease for a growing segment of work-ing-class men, women, and childrenwho arenow joining the ranks of the urban ghettosand global slum dwellers in their casas decarton all over the world. We are not talkingonly about Calcutta and Rio de Janeiro, butour own-urban communities fromNewYorkto Los Angeles.

Insteadofcelebratinggrowingeconomicdemocracyworldwide, we are facinggrowing

inequality the proportions of which staggerthe imagination. AsWillieThompsonnotes:"The trend is precisely in the opposite direc-tion, towards intensffied polarization, theconcentration of misery, suffering, depriva-tion andhopelessness at the lower end ofthescale, mirroredbyexorbitant andunceasingaccumulation [of capital] at the otherpole..."(1997, pp. 224-225). Whether by in-creasing the extortion of absolute surplus-value through the proliferation of maquil-adoras along the U.S.-Mexicanfrontera, orincreasing relative surplus value extortionthrough increasing the productivity of laborand reducing the value of labor power, capi-talism continues to hold living human la-bor hostage, fetishizing its own commoditylogic and valorization process, and recast-ing the world into its own image. Value-the medium and the outcome of abstractlabor-binds individuals to its law of mo-tion. Like Ahab, lifelessly thrashing abouton the body ofMobyDick as theNWhite Beastsubmerges itself into the icy fathoms ofeternity, we are carried into the future onthe backs of our worst nightmare, in aghoulish parody of life. Spawned in thesocial universe of capital, our nightmareschart the course of civilization, illuminatedby the dark ldmp of history.

According to James Petras, "The boomin the U.S. is fueled in part by an exagger-ated speculative bubble that is unsustain-able. Stocks are vastly overvalued; savingsare negative and the performance of theproductive economy has no relation to thepaper economy" (2000, p. 16). He furthernotes that it is clear "that one quarter of thecapitalist world cannot prosper when threequarters are in deep crisis-the laws ofcapitalist accumulation cannot operate insuch restricted circumstances" (2000, p. 16).

Is History Having Fun Yet?Are WeAlreadyTired ofthe Future?

The fall of the Berlin Wall and thecataclysmic social and political implosionsin Russia and Eastern European countriescoincides with the premature "end-of-ide-ology" proclamations and correlative self-canceling pronouncements about the end ofhistory hailed by conservative social theo-rists such as Francis Fukuyama. In classicred-bating style, Fukuyamahas announcedthe end of revolutionary movements andthe demise of socialism altogether. How-ever, in their mad dash towards capitalistutopia, the growinglumpen-proletariats inex-socialist European countries, drunk onthe prospect of get-rich-quick schemes andof reaping enormous windfalls, are stum-bling over the corpse of Lenin and learningthe lessons of privatization and the empty

MULflCULTURAL EDUCAflON4

promises of market socialism the hard way.Of course, Russia is not the only countrybeing deceived by capitalism's promises ofprosperity. Thousands of workers in coun-tries whose dictators borrowed from theWorld Trade Organization-and whostealthily pocketed most of the profits-are suffering through imposed austerityprograms in which they have been made toassume repayment of international loans.If the postmodernists want to brag aboutthe disappearance ofthe U.S. working classand celebrate the new culture of lifestyleconsumption, then they need to acknowl-edge that the so-called disappearing work-ing class in the U.S. is reappearing again inthe assembly lines of China, Brasil, Indo-nesia, and elsewhere, where there existfewer impediments to U.S. profit-making(Zizek, 2000).

The world's greatest exponent of classstruggle, Karl Marx, still remains underattack(initselfnot such a surprisingobser-vation). The opponent grabbing the head-lines this time is a prominent spokesper-son for evolutionary psychology. Maintain-ing that the Talmud and Tanakh has, overthe centuries, ordered Jews to adopt anunconscious eugenics program byinsistingthat they practice endogamy in order toremain racially pure, California StateUniversity, Long Beach professor KevinMacDonald has recently and infamouslyargued that Jewish emphasis on group co-operation has resulted in Jews having sig-nificantly higher IQs than other ethnicgroups (Ortega, 2000).

Used by publicity-hungry British his-torian David Irving as an expert witness ina libel lawsuit against Professor DeborahLipstadt andPenguinbooks (a case in whichIrving claimedthatthere were no gas cham-bers at Auschwitz, and, fortunately, a casethat he lost), MacDonald not only arguedthat Judaism is an evolutionary group strat-egy used to discipline genes as part of asocial program of increasing Jewish intel-ligence beyond other groups and thus en-suring group survival (a strategy that heclaims was copied by the Nazis in theirphilosophy of Aryan superiority developedas a defense against the Jews), he alsoaccused Marxism of being a subversiveJewish-controlled intellectual movementresponsible for untold deaths: "In the 20thcentury many millions of people have beenkilled in the attempt [by Jews] to establishMarxist societies based on the ideal ofcomplete economic and social leveling, andmillions of people have been killed as aresult of the failure of Jewish assimilationintoEuropean societies" (MacDonald, citedin Ortega, 2000, p. 14).

Here we see both bad science and racist

logic taken to the nauseating heights ofactually blaming the Holocaust on the Jewsthemselves and blaming the victims of so-called Marxist regimes on Jewish politicaltheory. The Cold War may be over, but sci-ence has a way of returning, time and timeagain, tothe sceneofhistory's greatestcrimesand persecuting its victims all over again.

TechnologyasSnakeOil

Despite the collapse of any significantopposition movements to neo-liberal capi-talism, educators have been encouraged tobe optimistic as they navigate their waythrough the first precarious stage of the

comet comes crashing from its heavenlyheights, smack into the swirling ocean ofeconomic uncertainty.

Teachers are told that they are enter-ing a new post-industrial, high-tech infor-mation era that will usher in a gilded age ofprosperity for themselves and their stu-dents. As James Petras (2000) notes, how-ever, this characterization of current eco-nomic conditions is patently false, sincecomputer industries represent less thanthree percent ofthe economy. The electronicsuperhighway permits financial capital tomove with the speed of greased lightning.As capitalism strives to "annihilate ...spacewith time" (Marx, [1858]1993, p. 539), it

we are saying certainly is no longer a secret.What is new is the stage-managed resignation that hasaccompanied the news. When we learn that Latinostudents are twice as likely as African-Americans andthree times as likely as whites to drop out of highschool...the information registers but somehow

ib* . ^t- .

new millennium. Even though the contra-dictions of capitalism abound, as the home-less stand shoulder-to-shoulder with theaffluent on the crowded streets of our urbanmegalopolises, teachers still cling to theMalthusian dream of living in the best of allpossible worlds. Such engineered optimismand its accompanying incapacity for dissenthas helped capitalism to survive for decadesthrough a low-intensity democracy, drivenby pitiless bureaucrats who provide justenough equality to keep people from takingto the streets in acts of civil disobedience.

But even this unstated alliance amongrulinginterests is breaking down, as recentanti-WTO events in Seattle and Washing-ton D.C. attest. While Jean-BertrandAristide can recently note that "historymoves in waves-we cannot always live onthe crests" (2000, p. 56), the planetremainsill-prepared for the impact that the crisis ofglobalization is currently having on thealready poverty-stricken. If the situationalready appears out of control, what willhappen when we face the Tsunami that willsmother vast populations when capital's

displaces labor in North America whileincreasing exploitation in Latin America.In this predominately financial-industrialeconomy, government leaders inleague withprivateers andlaissez-faire evangelists liketo hype the information age-era stuff, be-cause in doing so it is easier for them togenerate false optimism about the future,and to draw attention away from the factthat prosperityis largely confined to specu-lative-financial and real estate sectors ofthe capitalist class at a time when re-trenchment by the state is draining re-sources from the poor and redirecting themto already bulging pockets of the rich.

By creating a facade of information erautopianism through carnival-like huckster-ism that accompanies the corporate inva-sion of our classrooms, calls for educators tobe converted into McTeachers, and a com-puter technology millenarianism that as-sures salvation through Internet conscious-ness, potential criticism can be siphonedaway from the fact that we live in an eramarked by monopolistic giants, greedy con-glomerates, snake oil privateers, and selec-

SPRING 20015

tive protectionists who support massivestate subsidies, the selling-off of public en-terprises to private monopolies, welfare forthe rich, domestic and overseas multi-bil-lion-dollar money laundering, arms indus-try domination of the export sector, and theplacing of key state institutions under theinfluence of financial sectors of civil soci-ety-in short, an era populated by capital-ist Overworlders who support the creationof a social order in which class warfare runsamok (Petras, 2000).

Teachers are also taught that theInternet will "equalize" society. That is yetanother myth. Borders arenot transcendedbut reinscribed. The Internet is supposedto dissolve distance through simultaneity.Yet, as Randy Martin notes, informationand commurication technologyhas createda spatial unevenness "characterized bydensities of access and vast exclusions"(1999, p. 10). Such technology reinscribesboundaries-especiallywhen those bound-aries occur within those strata with "highregime status" (1999, p. 10). Martin notesimportantly that the "info-poor and hiddenmasses are a spatial effect of technologyand not merely-those next in the queue to.get on-line" (1999, p. 10).

Of course, the marketization, privatiz-ation, andneo-liberalization of schooling isfunctionallyadvantageous to the conditions -described above. Although it has beensmuggled in under cover of a revival of thedemocratic imperative of privatization,schooling has been reduced to a sub-sectorof the economy and continues to provideballast for existing discourses and prac-tices of class exploitation and white su-premacist heteronormative -patriarchy(Hill, 1999; Cole, 1998; Rikowski, 1997).

Whatwe are sayingcertainlyis nolongera secret. Whatis new is the stage-managedresignation thathas accompaniedthenews.When we learn that Latino students aretwice as likely as African-Americans andthree times as likely as whites to drop out ofhigh school, or that, in l997,25.3 percent ofLatinos aged 16 to 24 dropped out of highschool compared with 13.4 percent of Afri-can Americans and 7.6 percent of whites(McQueen; 2000), the informationregistersbut somehoweeases to enrageus. Part ofthereason for this is that exploitation -throughthe capitalistmarketplacehas been so natu-ralized and the pauperization-ofthe state sodehistoricizedanddepoliticizedtthatwehavelearned to accept a certain amount of exploi-tation and accompanying forms of racismand sexism and homophobia. We feel that itis aninevitable -part oflivingina developedcapitalist democracy;,

What.we fail to grasp is that capitalismand democracy actually work against each.

other and the familiar coupling of the twowords is really just a form of linguistic-hence ideological-mystification. We guessthat rationale is:lfwe keep hearingthe term"capitalist democracy" frequently enough,we will begin to believe that the two termsare inseparable and unconsciously strip theterms oftheir association with domination.

In fact, the two terms need to be tornapart, not yolked together. Maybe anotheradjective needs to precede the term "de-mocracy." Maybe "socialist democracy" is amore appropriate coupling for those whowish to make democracylive up to its egali-tarian ideals. But since we have beenenculturated throughout the Cold War toget a headache even at the mere mention ofthe word "socialism," it is unlikely we willever see the topic of "socialist democracy"appear with anymountingregularityin thejournals devoted to educational reform, atleast not anytime soon.

California is often a precursor to thedominant scenarios of U.S. futurity. It isthe state that passes propositions (i.e.,187, 209)227)thatroutinely are givenbirththrough a marriage of political Monday-morning-quarterbacks in -the form of richbusinessmen like Ron Unz, and manic,

-mean-spirited, right-wing populists, suchas Pat Buchanan, Peter Wilson, and theirilk, California's' political, initiatives oftenserve as political harbingers for a politicsthatwilleventuallyspreadthroughoutotherstates like a runaway contagion, mixingracism, sexism, bourgeois historical amne-sia, class arrogance, and homophobia intoa political cocktail as wickedly dangerousas any biological weapon invented by thePentagon.

California is a state that generates -alot of tension around educational reform-a tension that can be tracedlargely to mindnumbing ethnocentrism, Anglo elitism,iandsocial frameworks ofperception and classi-fication that are inextricably connected-tothe current climate ofLatinophobia. Thisisnot hard to understand in an antagonisticgeopolitical arena-where scapegoating im-migrants from Mexico is -a commonplaceand accepted practice. California is alsowhere the English Only movement is gain-ing momentum.

Donaldo Macedo captures the absur-dity of the English Only proponents whoargue that English is the most effectivelanguage for citizens of the United States,and that it is the language that will bestguarantee a successful-future:

First, if Englishis the most effective -

educational language, how can weexplain why over 60 million Ameri-cans are illiterate orfunctionallyillit-erate? Se6ond, if Ehglish Only edu-

cation can guarantee linguistic mi-norities abetterfuture, as educatorslike William Bennett promise, whydo the majority of Black Americans,whose ancestors have been speak-ing English for over two hundredyears, find themselves still relegatedto the ghettos? (2000, p. 2)

In the midst of the widening scenario ofimmigrant bashing, it is not difficult to makethe case that democracy has been discounte-nanced, its attempts at civic renewal andinvigoration of the publc sphere even ren-dered detumescent. Two types of reactionspredominate. The first is to engage in a half-revolutionthrough"reformist" efforts, under-written by a teleological belief in the evolu-tion of democracy through the free market.The second is to engage in political activismthat cuts to the heart ofneoliberalism, corpo--rate control of the schooling process, andcapitalistrelations of exploitation. While theformerbeggars the praxis of critical struggle,the latterlacks a coherent national andinter-national strategy.

Neo-liberalism lingers on with the le-thal stubborness ofspent uraniumin aU.S.military armor-piercing shell. With the ex-ception of the Seattle and Washingtonantiglobalization campaigns, opposition toneoliberalism has been muted, thanks tothe polished statecraft of Clinton and hissuccessful cheerleading for an unfetteredfree market, under cover, we might add, ofa Third Way detente between Keynesianeconomics and ultra-capitalism. Opposi-tion has also been blunted through theefforts and cagey triumphalism of NewRight apologists of the -free market. Thecolonial apotheosis of New Right heroessuch as Pat Buchanan, Donald Trump,Jesse Ventura, and George W. Bush, and'the brain-stunting banality of their politi-cal platforms, has met with a lack of, anyreal spirited opposition among;the educa-tional left. But this is-partly due t6 lack ofaiy- rival oppositions to global capitalismeithernationally or on aworld scale. Fortheforeseeable future the left has-painted it-self into;a corner. But it can only truck-withpessimism for so long.

Capitalism as cultism

The recent custody battle surroundingElian Gonzalez, the young Cuban boy, re-sulted in a gaudy,Cold War side show thatamounted to little more than a continuousadvertising displayfor thevirtues of capital-ism. The protagonists in this case were theMiami Mafia, who argued vociferously thatElian should be.kept in the United Stateswithhis greatuncle, Lazaro, andJanetReno,whorepresented the U.S. government.

IMULMlCULTURAL EDUCATION

6

The Miami Mafia fumctioned collec-tively and cohesively as an integrated anti-Communist lobby, proselytizing againstFidel Castro and the Cuban revolution. Bycounter-posing capitalist values of free-dom and democracy to the evil empire ofCuba, the Miami Mafia functions as a cultof capitalism. Their temple of worship isthe high-tech retail mega-mall bathed inthe perfumedimages of Havana in the early1950s. In their fervent defense of the"American way of life" the Miami Mafiaparticipates in various "ideological" prac-tices that uncritically support the "furies ofprivate interest." In fact, its anti-commu-nist declarations constitutes a type of brain-washing that is awash in every corner ofUnited States society, from school assem-blies, to television programming, to maga-zine advertisements, to the local gossip atthe cornerstore. Suchvalues, democraticorotherwise, rarely stand alone.

In this instance, they are conditionedby worldwide corporations who exercisedominant control over what is believed bythe exiles to be a "free" and "open" marketwhere producers and sellers compete on anequal playing field. Lost in this equation isthe fact that these corporate oligopolies-also known as emergent supranationalinstitutions-are linked to a global socialstructure of accumulation that works toenforce economic, political, and culturalnorms. These "capitalist" norms have be-come the regulating mechanisms of whathas been called "the New World Order."Elite-based polyarchies operating as atransnationalized state work to consolidateideological-cultural practices-andit is thecombined effect ofthese practices thatis thereal wizard behind the glittering facade ofUncle Sam's OZ (see Robinson, 1998).

We would be deluded to think that themissionaries of the New World Order arelimited to business oligarchs or right-wingpugalists and their rhetorical ejaculations.In fact, the New World Order has an un-stated agreement with many liberal demo-crats who have been in bed with anti-com-munists and opponents of the far left sincethe early days ofthe ColdWarwhen numer-ous U.S. and-European writers were onlytoo eager to denounce socialism, commu-nism, or anything their pro-imperialistmasters considered "anti-American." Ap-pearingonthe CIApayroll, writingfor CIA-sponsoredjournals, orworkingforthe CIA-run Congress for Cultural Freedom weresuch notables as IsaiahBerlin,DanielBell,Czeslow Milosz, George Orwell, SidneyHook, HannahArendt,DwightMacDonald,Robert Lowell, Stephen Spender, MelvinLasky, MaryMcCarthy, and IrvingKristol,to name just a few (see Saunders, 1999;

Petras, 1999). Who do you think owns mostofthe U.S. mass media? Who are the Lordsof the Marketplace?

A question never asked by the Miami-based adherents of this market theodicy isthe price one pays to live in a truly "free andefficient market." In other words, what isthe price that one pays for not selling one'slabor to a master? For those who do notfollow this fundamentalist market theol-ogy and its accompanying declaration ofhuman freedom, misery, and starvationresult. The Miami Mafia fails to question aclaim made by philosopher JohnMcMurtry(1998), that "freedom" in capitalist democ-racy lies within the moral commandmentsof the market's rule, in particular the com-

V0-J,I.H

corporate revenues and profits, on the onehand, is perceived as good and to be ap-proved and what decreases corporate rev-enues and profits is bad and to be con-demned. He claims that this prescriptiveduality of Good and Bad is no less absoluteand binding than religious commandments.

Our argumentis thatthe "free market"decrees absolute commandments of non-intervention. The "invisible hand," to whichall alike must submit, that lies at thecenter of market command and that perme-ates the sociocultural orders in which weare nestled, is, in reality, the bloc fortunesof several hundred billionaires who own asmuch wealth as almost half the globe'spopulation put together, the interlocking

need to recognize...that there is no positivevalue that can be given to the social position knownas whiteness. The term cannot be recovered, or givena positive spin. White people need to disidentifyentirely with r4 9>>

mand that no one is to interfere with its directorates ofmultinational corporations,smooth, unfettered movement. and global intrafirm trading empires that

The anti-Castro cultists seek their dominate the market's base of supply andsalvation in capitalist.market doctrine and demand. These ruling positions of the glo-their undiminished and militant faith in bal market hierarchy participate in a regu-the frictionless character ofitsmarketlaws. lating paradigm of mind and reality inSuch a position removes the inconvenience which the ultimate value system support-of having to undress such laws so as to ing democracy is comprised by the laws ofrevealtheir inner workings and to evaluate the market, which seemingly exist prior tothe consequences ofsuchlaws in the lives of and independent of society. In other words,millions of poor and suffering children. It they ARE the laws of nature and of Godexcuses them from the burden of insight (McMurtry, 1998).into how the United States, as global The value system of the market doc-imperialism's alpha male, rapaciously en- trine before which Miami's anti-Castroforces those laws. The received doctrine of cultists kneelin slack-jawedreverence sup-the market with its principles of classical ports the efforts offree marketeers, oillion-market theory and its market value pro- aires, and global carpetbaggers to harass,gram are upheld at any price, even if it totorture,:andtomurderunionandcommu-means dismissing people as disposable nity organizers who fight for legislativeand, as McMurtry notes, even if it means protection of citizen rights. Do these Cult-accepting that people will starve to death if ists for Capital know that they are support-they are not hired for profitable use in an ingavaluesystemthatispurposivelyerod-oversupplied labor market. ing job security and protection from haz-

McMurtrydescribescapitalism'svalue ardous working conditions?program as informed by a totalitarian The. Miami Mafia has attempted tomaster discourse in which the ultimate inject its anti-Castro invective into a pro-vehicle of value is the corporate person, and American discourse without revealingthatthe ultimate measure of value is money thesource oftheir hatred towards Castro'sprofitability. In otherwords, whatincreases Cubais the factthat Castro took away their

SPRING 20017

class privileges, their property ownership,and their accompanying ability to exploitthe poverty-strickenwho labored under theiron fist of dictator Fulgencio Batista.Castro will never be forgiven for closingdown the casinos and brothels and nation-alizing all business, depriving the U.S.Mafia and U.S. based multinationals of aprofitable cash cow. They will never forgiveCastro for surviving the scores of assassi-nation attempts carried out by the CIA.

In their paeans directed at Elian, themiracle child, the anti-Castro cultists de-flect attention from the 40 year economicwar waged against the people of Cuba. Theembargo imposed by the United Statesdenies food, medicine and other supplieswhose lack the cultists rejoice in pointingout in their tirades against the conditionsof poverty in Cuba. We find it interestingthat Senators such as TrentLott andLonnieMack protested the Immigration andNatu-ralization Service (INS) raid to reuniteElian with his father yet supported effortsto triple the size of the INS police forces.Surely they know that INS raids occur allthe time-especially against undocu-mented immigrants.

What is clear is that the Miami Mafiadoes not want a normalization of relationsbetween the U.S. and the Cuban govern-ment since the future of Cuba must, in theirview, be liiiked to their right-wing organiza-tions in Miami. The U.S. left has largelyabandoned the Elian saga to a Manicheanstruggle betweenthosewho argue for familyvalues (e.g., return Eliin to his father) ver-sus those who vehemently oppose commu-nism (Elian must remain in the U.S. be-cause in Cuba's supposedly totalitarian re-gime he will lose his autonomy and becomea member of the group mind). Lost in thepublic debate was the central role of capital-ism as a social relation of exploitation andan instrument of social control.

The Abolition of Whiteness

Spurred on by a lack of opposition tothe race, class, gender, and class exploita-tion that has been bolstered by neo-liberalpolicies worldwide, multicultural educa-tion continues to defang its most emanci-patory possibilities by calling for diversityin isolation from an interrogation of itscenter of samenessknown as thehegemonyofwhiteness. It is this sameness that is thedistillate of colonialism, and the ether ofwhitelies that spikes the very airwe breathe.

Slavoj Zizek has pointed out that in theLeft's call for new multiple politicalsubjectivities (e.g., race, class, feminist,religious), the Left asserts its exact oppo-site-"an underlying all-pervasive same-

ness-a non-antagonistic society in whichthere is room for all manner of culturalcommunities, lifestyles, religions, andsexual orientations" (2000, p. 39). Zizekreveals that this Sameness relies on anantagonistic split.

We believe that this split results fromthe labor-capital relation sustained bywhite supremacist capitalist patriarchy.This is why we need to join Noel Ignatiev,DavidRoediger, and others in callingfortheabolition of whiteness. We need to recog-nize (as we have tried to make clear in ourwork over the years) that there is no posi-tive value that can be given to the socialposition known as whiteness. The termcannot be recovered, or given a positivespin. White people need to disidentify en-tirely with the white race. To seek any kindof identity with a white race-or politicald6tente-is ill-conceived at best.

As Theodore Allen (1994,1997) notes,the social function of whiteness is socialcontrol, a practice which has colonial ori-gins that can be traced back to the assaultupon tribal affinities, customs, laws, andinstitutions ofAfricans, native Americans,and Irish by English/British and Anglo-American colonialism. Suchinsidious prac-tices of social control reduce all members ofoppressed groups to one undifferentiatedsocial status beneath that of any memberof the colonizing population. With the riseof the abolitionist movement, racialtypologies, classification systems, andcriteriologies favoring whiteness and de-monizing blackness as the lowest statuswithin humanity's "great chain of being"became widespread in order to justify andlegitimize the slavery of Africans and en-sure the contribution of lifetime chattelbond-servitude.

White racial identity found its wayinto Euro-American consciousness at theend of 17th century during a period whenthe Southern plantocracy recognized thatAfrican slaves were a more profitable ven-ture than indentured servants who wereprimarily from impoverished Europeanbackgrounds. Thus, by the beginning ofthe1700s, half of the labor force consisted ofslave labor.

While there existed two million slaveowners in the South by 1860, 75 percent ofslaves belonged to 8,000 plantation owners(representing 7 percent of the total slaveowners). Moreover, the economic power ofthe small yet powerful planter class en-abled them to wield political power overfive million Europeans who did not ownslaves.

In order to fracture intraclass con-sciousness between European indenturedservants andAfrican slaves, the plantocracy

offered the indentured servants a place.inthe corporate infrastructure of the planto-cracy where they were given the role ofpolicing the behavior of the Africans. Thisalso included the right to citizenship and a"white" identity. The theologian, Thandeka(1999), identifies this as a form of "whiteclassism." Offering white identity to inden-tured Europeans allowed them to identify"racially" with the plantation owners. Inaddition, it manufactured a class illusionby having poor whites identify with theclass interests of plantation owners with-out enjoying any of their economic privi-leges. Eventually, white racism allowedpoor whites to blame Africans for theireconomic hardships while harmonizing theclass conflict between plantation ownersand poor whites. While the African slaveswere fully aware that they were victims ofwhite racism, poor Europeans failed to rec-ognize that they were the victims of whiteclassism.

By granting racial/corporate member-ship to the European bond-laborer who hadthe responsibility of preventing rebellionagainst the dominant center, the corporatestate that emerged out of the plantocracywas able to survive and flourish. Poorwhitelaborers were offered membership in thecorporate plantocracyin order to controlthesubalterned non-white labor force. Whiteswere thus given a double role: as workersand as white people. White laborers weregiven membership at the center of the cor-porate plantation structure while still serv-ing as a marginalized labor force. By usingwhiteness as a means of guaranteeing alle-giance, the plantocracy secured its hege-mony through white solidarity and the in-tegration of labor relations (wage labor,prisonlabor, etc.)into the white confraternalsociety or what Martinot calls the"overarching white social machine" (2000,p. 50 ). Whiteness or white solidarity be-came an "administrative apparatus" of theslave/class economy that served as a "ma-trix of social cohesion" that located whites"in a structural relation to each other"(2000, p. 52).

Whiteness became such a powerfulsocial/corporate social position that classstruggle often fell short of actually chal-lenging the basis of the corporate structurebecause such a structure was synonymouswith profitability and allegiance. The whiteworking class-in order to become a class initself and for itself-had, tragically, to ex-ist in collaboration with white capital.White corporate society functioned as theruling class with respect to the nonwhitepeople that it exploited. Martinot furtherpoints out that because white workers inthe United States have a different relation

MUL11CULTURAL EDUCAflON8

to black workers (since the former belong tothe corporate state) and because the pri-mary relation between white workers andcapital is not mainly across the means ofproduction but though a social administra-tive hierarchy whose purpose is to admin-ister those 'Others' who exist outside thecorporate state, the idea of working-classstruggle aimed at the overthrow of classsociety "has never made sense to the whiteworking class in the United States" (2000,p. 56) whose resistance to class exploita-tion rarely attempted to undermine profit-ability or contested its legitimacy. Thishelps to explain why, in Martinot's words,"Marxism has never extendeditselfbeyondtrade union consciousness because it wasnever able to fathom the structure of whitesolidaritybywhichthe white working-classwas constructed" (2000, p. 56). AfricanAmericans today are sometimes grantedthe status ofrecognition ofblackworkerbutonly as "adjuncts to white hegemony" or as"white-by-association" (2000, p. 56).

The initial objective of white racismwas not to construct racial boundaries somuch as to maintain class relations. Rac-ism was instrumental in protectingVirginia's class structure by ensuring thatpoor whites and blacks would not recognizetheir common class interests. In short, rac-ism was an instrument for maintainingand reproducingthe plantocracy's propertyrelations. Of course, what transpiredthroughout the brutal history of Europeanand United States imperialism and colo-nialism was that African Americans be-came literally denounced and relegated tothe bottom tier of a social hierarchy thatfunctioned like a caste system withAfricanAmericans being positioned as "untouch-ables." The brutal torture and murder ofAfrican slaves and the history of racismagainstAfricanAmericans up to the presentday constitutes one of the world's mostshameful legacies. Another of the w'orld'smost shameful historical legacies involvesthe genocidal practices of Europeans andEuro-Americans in the massacre of NorthAmerica's indigenous peoples. While elimi-nating capitalism will not bring about theend of racism, it is certainly a necessarystep in that direction.

Today "whiteness" has become natu-ralized as part of our "commonsense" real-ity. Whiteness is not a unified, homoge-neous culture but a social position. AsIgnatiev comments:

There is nothing positive about whiteidentity. As James Baldwin said, "Aslong asyouthinkyou'rewhite, there'sno hope for you." Whiteness is not aculture. There is Irish culture andItalian culture and American cul-

ture; there is youth culture and drugculture and queer culture. There isno such thing as white culture.Shakespeare was not white; he wasEnglish. Mozart was not white; hewas Austrian. Whiteness has noth-ingto do with culture and everythingto do with socialposition. Withouttheprivileges attached to it, there wouldbe no white race, and fair skin wouldhave the same significance as bigfeet. (1998a, p. 199)

Ignatiev (1998b) also warns:

The white race is a club, in which

people arenormallyenrolled atbirth,without their consent. Most mem-bers go through life following the'rules and accepting the benefits ofmembership without thirikng aboutthe costs. Many times, they are notconscious ofits existence-untilitischallenged,whentheyrallymilitantlyto its defense. Immigrants to theUnited States, coming to the clublater inlife, are often more consciousthan natives of the white race as asocial rather than a natural forma-tion. The club works like any exclu-sive club, in that membership doesnot require that all members be ac-tive participants, merely that theydefer to the prejudices of others.

The United States, like everycapitalist society, is composed ofmasters and slaves. The problem isthat many of the slaves thinik theyare part of the master class becausethey partake of the privileges of thewhite skin. The abolitionists' aim isnot racial harmony but the abolitionof the white race, as part of themobilization of our side for class war.There are many poor whites in theUnited States. Infact, themajorityofthe poor are white. Whiteness doesnot exempt them from exploitation,itreconciles them to it. Itholds downmore whites than blacks, because itmakes them feel part of a system that

exploits and degrades them. Forthosepeople, whiteness doesnotbringfree-dom and dignity. It is a substitute forfreedom and dignity. It is for thosewho have nothing else. Its abolitionis in the interests of all those whowantto be free, "whites"no less thanothers.

Ignatiev (1998a) writes that identifi-cation with white privilege reconnectswhites to relations of exploitation. Theanswer to this plight, notes Ignatiev, is forwhites to cease to exist as whites. Whites"must commit suicide as whites to come

alive as workers or youth or women or art-ists or whatever other identity will let themstop being the miserable, petulant, subor-dinated creatures theynow are and becomefreely associated, developing human be-ings" (1998a, p. 200). He goes on to say:

The task at hand is not to convincemore whites to oppose "racism"; thereare already enough "antiracists" todo the job. The task is to make itimpossible for anyone tq be white.Whatwouldwhite people have to doto accomplish this? They would haveto break the laws of whiteness soflagrantly as to destroy the myth ofwhite unanimity. They would haveto respond to every manifestation ofwhite supremacy as if it were di-rected against them. (1998a, p.202)

Althoughtheideologyofwhitenessneedsto be vigorously critiqued, this task onlypartially fulfills the requirements for anti-capitalist and anti-racist struggles. Whatis needed further is an acute recognition ofhow the ideology of whiteness contributes tothe reproduction of class divisions.-par-ticularly divisions between working-classAnglo-Americans and ethnic minorities-in order to reinforce existing property rela-tions.

Along with efforts to abolish the whiterace (not white people, there is, of course,a distinct difference) we must support ef-

SPRING 20019

XJt tI.w~ " - 'iW multiculturalism remains

permeated by the capitalist mode of productionthrough structures of class, race, gender, and sexual

kv_ a Xe

forts to abolish capital. While it may betrue that the globalization of capital bringsin its wake the trappings of democracy, itis important not to mistake these seduc-tive trappings for the real thing. As PerryAnderson notes:

Democracyis indeed nowmore wide-spread than ever before. But it isalso thinner-as if the more univer-sally available it becomes, the lessactivemeaningitretains. TheUnitedStates itselfis the paradigmatic ex-ample: a societywhichless than halfof the citizens vote, 90 percent ofcongressmen are re-elected, and theprice of office is cash by the million.(1992,p. 356) I

At this point we would like to mentionthat we don't want those who advocate theabolition of,whiteness or who engage incriticism of white social, cultural, and po-litical practices to be acknowledged as partof a "white movement." We don'twantto seeacademic departments dedicated to whitestudies, nor do we wish the burgeoningliterature on whiteness to serve as yet an-other vehicle used by white scholars todominate the academic scene. At the sametime, we believe that scholarship that fo-cuses on the intricacies of white hegemonyis exceedinglyimportant, providedthatsuchstudies also are part of a larger anti-racistand anti-capitalist project dedicated to theabolition of the white race. If white educa-tors wish to transform themselves intoagents of social justice (and we would en-courage them to do so) then we suggest thatthey accomplish this as Polish, Irish, Cana-dian, English, or French, etc., and not byidentifying themselves with the vile his-torical fiction known as the white race.

Radical educators are becomingfed upwith white lies. They see through them.They are beginning to attach a language tothem and are starting to theorize the issuesmore completely, and more deeply. Aredecorous shifts towards decentralization,rigorous academic standards, multicul-turalism, teacher accountability, and-pa-rental choice supposed to fool anyone? Haverecent attempts to camouflage the deepassumptions of terms such as "account-ability" so frequently bruited about by neo-liberal pundits these days, effectivelyblinded teachers to the protofascist ele-ments of theNewRight gospellers and freemarket evangelists? Are teachers fooled bysuch aerosol terms as "empowerment" thatare shouted as much in the board rooms ofcorporations as they are in teacher educa-tion programs? Teachers are no fools, andthey are not to be fooled with. While wemight inhabit a period of_political defeat attheballotbox, we find ourselves onthe cusp

of a moral victory as teachers begin toexercise their voices of dissent (Kincheloe &Steinberg, 1997).

Wiainstream iViulticulturalismLiberals Who Champion Difference

Byfocusingonthemargins ratherthanthe hegemonic center of white suprenmacistcapitalist patriarchy, mainstream multi-culturalists have airbrushed the most vex-ing dilemmas in the liberal humanist callfor diversity and have left uncontested theever-present discourses of liberal democ-racy and the workability of capital-dis-courses that naturalize events so that theiroutcome no longer seems open to debate. Bychampioning the values of a well-tempereddemocracy, liberal multiculturalists havealso left unchallenged the social relationsof production.

Latentin the spectralitythat has beendisclosed by the discursive and representa-tional practices of mainstream multicul-turalism is the continuing advance ofwhitesupremacist logic and social practices.Ghosted into the ideas of mainstreammulticulturalists is a promiscuous fasci-nation with difference and epistemologicalexoticisms and the return of the erstwhileeclipsed Other. Mainstream multicultur-alism remains permeated by the capitalistmode of production through structures ofclass,Tace, gender, and sexual domination.

Beyornd the ifWainstreamMarxist Multiculturalism

Marxist multiculturalists recognizethe political primacy of making structuralchanges in the larger social system whilefighting the ability of capital to re-absorbreform efforts within its own commoditylogic. Consequently, many Marxist multi-culturalists see the need for a direct actionpolitics centered around equality, anti-rac-ism, and a politics of difference. This isdecidedly not a politics of piecemeal incre-ments. It is a revolutionary praxis for thepresent that we refer to as "revolutionarymulticulturalism." For those who imperi-ously dismiss Marx as an irrelevant figureto the debate over thefuture ofmulticulturalsociety, or who are determined to believethat his vision of communism was similarto those gloomy gray photos of robotizedfactory workers in the plants of the formerSovietUnion, theyshouldtryreadingMarx.Marx believed that it was possible to createa society based on social relations thatwould not only help to meet one another'sneeds, but that would foster a desire to doso. Furthermore, Marx believed that we canonly fully realize our individual potential

ashumanbeings throughmeetingthe needsof others, and therefore the greater thediversity of our sbciety, the more fulfillingthe society would be for all (Allman, inpress). Marx believed that diversity in-creases our potential to enrich the qualityof ourlives. (Through September 1999, BBCNews Online ran a cyberpoll to discover"the thinker ofthe millennium." Thousandsof people worldwide participated and KarlMarx was ranked number one, followed byAlbert Einstein.)

Revolutionary multiculturalism em-phasizes the collective experiences ofmarginalized pebple in the context of theirpolitical activism and social mobilization.We distinguish revolutionary multi-culturalism from the dominant ideologiesof multiculturalism which seek to legiti-mize the social order through racial har-mony and a national identity based on the"Americanization" of marginalized cul-tures. As a framework for developing apedagogical praxis, revolutionary multi-culturalism opens up social and politicalspaces for the oppressed to challenge thevarious forms of class, race, and genderoppression that are produced and repro-duced by dominant social relations.

We believe that by using their livedexperiences, histories, and narratives astools for social struggle (McLaren, 1995),subaltern groups can interpret and recon-struct their oppressive social conditionsinto meaningful social and political action(McLaren, 1995; 1997). Revolutionarymulticultural pedagogy encourages mar-ginalized groups and conimunities to forgepolitical alliances, and in so doing to eradi-cate cultural homogeneity by interpretingand (re)constructing their own history(McLaren, 1995). As part of a concertedeffort of anti-capitalist struggle, revolu-tionary multiculturalism seeks to estab-lish social and economic equality in con-trast to the conservative and liberal ideol-ogy of "equal opportunity" that masks theexisting unequal distribution of power andwealth at the heart of capitalist society.

A revolutionary multicultural curricu-lum in the classroom encourages studentsto interrogate the multiple meanings ofrace, class, gender, and sexuality in apostmodern society which playfully andseductively inverts and reverses the truemeaning of social equality. In our view,revolutionary multiculturalism has the po-tential of pressuring democracy to live up toits name by putting bourgeois liberal egali-tarianism on the wvitness stand of history.Cruz (1996) argues that we must refuse theentrapment of the empty promises of bour-geois democracy by

MUL11CULTURAL EDUCATIONI 0

.. bringing into political discourse thepromises dangled in the ideology of alonger equality enshrined at the coreof bourgeois liberal democracy, bygiving groups a sense of place insociety and in history, by offering thecomfort that comes (tendentiously)in being able to say something aboutwho they are, by attempting to re-think morally and reconstruct insti-tutionallythe meanings behind egali-tarianism, andbyinsistingthat socialpower be truly empowering, enhanc-ing, andprotectingforall. (pp. 32-33)

Here, we followJoelKovelin strugglingnot only against economic conditions butalso against the delimiting of the self bycapital's conversion of labor power into acommodity. Steadfastness must be exer-cised while challengingbureaucratic ratio-nalization, possessive individualism, andconsumerist desire. As Kovel notes: "It fol-lows that capital must be fought and over-come, not simply at the micro level but asitinhabits and infests everydaylife throughthe structures of bureaucratic rationaliza-tion and consumerist desire. However, capi-tal cannot be overcome unless it is replaced,at the level of the subject, with an alterna-tive notion" (1998, p. 109).

It is important to note here that'revo-lutionary multiculturalism does not privi-lege class oppression over race, gender, orsexual oppression. We believe that by link-ing anti-racist, anti-sexist, and anti-ho-mophobic struggles to local andinternation-alist anti-capitalist struggle, such struggleswillbebetter equipped to succeedinthe longrun. We are not arguing that race, gender, orsexual oppression be reduced to economicissues, nor do we wish to marginalize ordisplace the important work that continuesto be done in anti-racist and feminist schol-arship. To suggest that revolutionary peda-gogy is an alternative to work being done incultural studies is to fall into the "divide andrule" traps of bourgeois capitalist scholar-ship which fears the establishment ofworld-wide efforts at alliance building againstcapital relations of exploitation.

We acknowledge that we live in a het-erogeneous society that is constituted byconflicting and contradictory social forma-tions and the diversity of social and cul-tural life. Yet we also acknowledge thatsuch diversity is a contested one. The ques-tion we raise is: Diversity for whom? We donot subscribe to a politics in which specificand disparate social movements arecobbled into a form of artificial, mechanicalunification or totality. There has to be someestablishment of priorities, a leadership ofsome kind, although we don't envision re-turning to the Bolshevik model here.

Neither do we support front organiza-tions of specialized movements but foreseea model in which various groups indepen-dently' address issues and create new dis-courses and forms of mobilization. Thiswould take place within: an overall form ofinter-group and inter-ethnic solidarity. Butthis would not be a mechanical coalition ofdiverse groups brought together as a broad-basedhistorical bloc, with each group's goalrepresenting an equal strategic priority.We follow Boris Kagarlitsky in advocatingfor a "hierarchy of strategic priorities bhut atthe same time a real equality of people inthe movement" (2000, p. 71). He articu-lates the struggle as follows:

Wemustrealize our ecological project,

under conditions not of their own making.We must continue to attack the re-

stricted Western bourgeois character ofEn-lightenmentuniversalismbutto attackuni-versalism itself is not only foolish but politi-cally dangerous. Bruce Robbins is correctwhen he asserts that all universal stan-dards are in somne way provisional. In otherwords, they deal with "provisional agree-ments arrived by particular agents" (1999,p. 74). Hegoes ontomaintainthatuniversalstandards "are provided in a situation ofunequal power, and they are applied in asituation of unequal power" (1999, p. 74).There is no such thing as a clean universal-ismthatis not tainted by power and interestof some sort. Robbins concludes that "all

a critical pedagogy is clearlya necessary yet insufficient condition for

' ,' C i X >' '. +,

we must affirm women's rights andminorities' rights through and in theprocess of anti-capitalist struggle, notas a substitution or alternative to it.Finally, this does notmeanthatothermovements, not addressing the cen-tral issues of the system, must neces-sarily be seen as enemies or rivals ofsocialists. These movements are justas legitimate. Everyonehas the samerights. Itmeansimplythatnoonemustexpectthe socialistleftto drop its ownculture, tradition and, lastbutnotleast,its identity for the sake of 'democraticequivalence.' (2000, pp. 71-72)

We must move beyond the.liberal so-cialism ofthose who espouse radical democ-racyin orderto embrace auunified struggle inwhich a collective political consciousness isnot only possible but necessary. Such aconsciouness would involve, afterMarx, notonly understanding how capital producessocial relations, but how capital itself isproduced. We don'tneedto scrap universal-ism, as the postmodernists would advocate,but rather to assiduously struggle for whatKagarlitsky refers to as an "open universal-ism" based on a dialogue of cultures (2000,p. 75). After all, universals are not static,they are rooted (routed) in movement. Theyare nomadically grounded in living, breath-ing subjects oflhistorywho toil and who labor

universalisms are dirty. And it is only dirtyuniversalism that will help us against thepowers and agents ofstill dirtierones" (1999,p. 75).

Although we support the Enlighten-ment's project of universalism, we also rec-ognize its limitations. This is in sharpcontrast to those postmodern educatorswho frequently .associate Enlightenmentuniversalism with Eurocentrism's empha-sis on objectivity and rationality. While weresist efforts-to police the expression of non-European viewpoints, we find the politics ofpostmodern pluralism-i.e., providingvoiceto those marginalized social groups whohave been denied political participation-to be problematic. The belief that an in-creased diversity of marginalized voiceswill autoniatically ensure that margin-alized social groups will gain social, politi-cal, and economic demands and interests ispolitically naive. We argue that the strugglefor diversity must be accompanied by arevolutionary socialist politics.

Kenan Malik (1996) asserts convinc-ingly that postmodernismr's refutation ofuniversalism is, for the most part, similarto the crude 19th century racial theorieswhich rejected universal categories andinstead emphasized relativism. Malik fur-ther adds that "in its hostility to universal-ism and in its embrace ofthe particular and

SPRING 2001Eu9

the relative, poststructuralism embodiesthe sameromanticnotions ofhuman differ-ence as are contained in racial theory" (p. 4).Malik asserts that "while difference canarise from equality, equalityeanxiever arisefrom difference" (p. 4).

We believe that it is important to re-ject a politics where the left is implicated inthe "divide and rule" tactics of the rulingelite. A. Sivanandan describes how such apolitics plays out in Britain:

Government funding of self-helpgroups undermined the self-reliance,the self-created social and economicbase, of [groups].... Multiculturalismdeflected the political concerns oftheblack community into the culturalconcern;s of different communities,the struggle against racism into thestruggle for culture.... (cited inKagarlitsky, 2000, p. 84)

Atthe currenthistoricaljuncture, whenthe workers' movement has been demoral-ized, supporters of postmodern radicalismhave, in effect, strengthened the bourgeoi-sie.' Kagarlitsky writes:

The supporters of identity politicsmake an assiduous pretence of notknowing a simple, obvious fact: thatthe quantity of resources and activ-ists at the disposal of the left is ex-tremelylimited. This means that IN X

conditions when neo-liberalismthreatens the very bases of people's

- normal human existence, these re-sources and strengths should iiotbedispersed over a range of "different,but equal struggles," but should beconcentrated as far as possible on themain lines of resistance. Neo-liberalpoliticians KNOW this, and do notsquander their energies on trifles.They turned their fire against sup-porters of identity politics only afterdealing with the labor movement,and they concern themselves withidentity politics only to the extent towhich it hinders them in carrying outspecific tasks. (2000, p. 96)

Towardsa RevolutiornaryMulticultural Pedagogy

In our view, a critical pedagogyis clearlya necessary yet insufficient condition forrevolutionary praxis. A critical pedagogymust be able to endorse the culturalstruggles of'workers and coordinate suchstruggle as part of a broader 'cross-border'social movement unionism aimed at orga-nizing and supporting the working-classesand marginalized cultural workers in theirefforts to build new international anti-capi-talist struggles. -

Recognizing that global capitalismhasushered in a period marked by acceleratingclass polarization along with the upwardredistribution of wealth, Edna Bonacichand-Richard Appelbauim (2000) propose astrategic deployment of workers' centers asa way of building political movements thatwould directly address the rights of work-ers. Such workers' centers would be instru-mental in providing basic social servicesand assisting workers in a number of cru-cial ways. For instance, they could helpworkers to fight for higher wages and backpay, in addition to providing legal assis-tance on issues related to immigration.

In our opinion, political education playsa crucial role in raising workers' revolution-ary consciousiness and promoting an in-depth understanding of political economy,particularly with respect to the existingantagonisms between capital and labor.Workers' self-education canbringinto criti-cal relief the contradictions between de-mocracy and capitalism. In the larger so-cial arena, political education can helpworkers recognize how imperialism islinked with the rhetoric of "hiumanitarianaid." Finally, workers' centers can assist inorganizing workers to participate in politi-cal struggles so crucial to demonstratingthe power of the working-class to resist therule of capital.

A revolutionary multicultural peda-gogy recognizes the necessity of a worker-centered pedagogy that is empowering,democratic, participatory, and is also ableto address the material conditions of theworkers. Thus, the revolutionary multi-cultural pedagogywe are advocatinghere isone which stresses worker participationand worker self-organization on the basisof collective economic and political inter-ests. As a consequence, a central practice ofa revolutionary multicultural pedagogy isan examination of how identities of work-ers are lived conjuncturally, particularlyinterms of class, race, and gender relations.

The corporate-sponsored multicultur-alism that we witness today in school class-rooms maintains class and racial divisionsby articulating a liberal version of equalitythat is grounded in equal recognition ofcultural practic6s. While this is a goodthing as far as it goes, it overlooks theexploitation ofwagelaborbyfocusingfor themost part on cultural practices,which main-stream multiculturalists frequently divorcefrom the social relations of production. Inthis instance, the social identities ofmarginaLized minorities become articulatedaround consumption practices rather thatproduction or labor practices. In the samemanner,identitypolitics effectivelydetachescultural practices from labor practices.

Multicultural capitalism acknowl-edges social groups primarily as consum-ers in the global market. We ignore at ourperil capitalism's ability to accommodatedifferences by linking them to its own glo-bal market operations that encompass flex-ible methodsofproduction andthe personi-fication of services and goods for diverseethnic, cultural, and linguistic minorities.Capitalism gives recognition to ethnic andracial minorities who possess capital, whileminorities without sufficient disposableincome are systematically marginalized(LaFeber, 1999).

We believe that a pre-condition for a"globalized borderless capital" is "crossborder cooperation" of ethnic, cultural, andlinguistic communities of people (LaFeber,1999). But such cooperation is double-edged.While border-crossing facilitates capital-ist flows, it also consolidates the advan-tage of the capitalist class. Thus, it is im-perative that a border pedagogy move be-yond the celebration of hybridized identi-ties and pluralism and encompass an analy-sis of political economy and class exploita-tion. That is, border pedagogy should en-gage in a critique of the existing contradic-tions between capital and labor, the exploi-tation of labor, and profiteerism. It is apedagogical struggle that addresses theimportance of unity and difference not onlyas a sense of political mobilization, butalso as a practice of cultural authenticitythat neither fetishizes tradition nor fore-closes its allegiance to traditional know-ledges (Grande, 2000). It is a revolutionaryproject that seeks alliances with diversegroups, while respecting andlearningfromcompeting moral visions and a reimagin-ation of the political space surroundingidentity (Grande, 2000).

Equal representation does not neces-sarily guarantee social and economic equal-ity under capitalism. Thus, a revolutionarymulticultural pedagogy must refocus onthe issue of redistribution of wealth byrecognizingthat equalitymust be struggledfor within the social relations of produc-tion-particularly property relations(McLaren &Farahmandpur, 1999a, 1999b,2000). A revolutionary multiculturalismundresses capitalism as a pernicious sys-tem and exposes regimes of exploitationhitherto silenced or undeclared. It attemptsto reveal how relations of exploitation areinsinuated into the warp and woof of "em-bodied" everyday life. As Morris Suzuki.notes, "the contemporary world of globalcapital is not a universe where the non-material has conquered or subordinatedthe material: it is one where matter andsymbol increasingly interpenetrate. Wemust therefore find ways of looking at po-

MUL1CULTURAL EDUCA-lON1 2

litical agency which unite the material andsymbolic dimensions of life rather thancounterposing them" (2000, p. 70). A revo-lutionary multiculturalism seeks to mapthe fault lines of agency, where discoursesand social relations converge in the activi-ties of everyday life.

We need nothing short of a social revo-lution. This mandates not only the trans-formation of our social and economic condi-

frequently polarizes differences insteadof uniting them around the common eco-nomic and political interests of margin-alized social groups.

We have witnessed the developmentof crude forms of identity politics where"critical pedagogy" is discussed-oftenderisively-as an approach reserved forwhite activists only because it is focusedmainly on issues of social class, This posi-

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~. 4

of today are those who are nof afraid to recognize the

type of social evil that we see all around us

i ', i nt & t " # h ir

tions but also the transformation of ourrelationship to the 'Other.' This also meansabolishing the contradictions or the inter-nal relation between capital and labor aswell as the value form of wealth that ishistorically specific to capitalism (Allmnan,in press). This is necessaryin ordertobreakthe self-replicatingcycle ofpovertybroughtabout by money exchange. Here we recog-nize that manyreaders might find ourplat-form to be naive, impractical or hopelesslyutopian. We wish to remind these readersthat such a turn to socialism in no waydiminishes the importance of industrial,post-industrial or technological develop-ment, whichwe believe must continue. How-ever, inour socialistvision, individualswouldcontribute labor according to ability, and thematerial means of life would be distributedaccording to need. Ideally, a redistributivesocialism would be followed bythe managed6bsolescence of the money exchange.

A revolutionary multicultural peda-gogy links the social identities ofmargin-alized and oppressed groups-particu-larly the working-class, indigenousgroups, and marginalized populations-with their reproduction within capitalistrelations of production. It also examineshow the reproduction of social, ethnic,racial and sexual identities, as particu-lar social and cultural constructs, as wellas shared histories of struggle, are linkedwith the reproduction of the social divi-sion of labor- It therefore moves beyondthe oftentimes fragmented and atomizedentrapments of identity politics, which

tion does a disservice to scholars and activ-ists of color who historically have been atthe forefront of struggles against class op-pression. Furthermore, it artificially trun-cates the scope and depth of critical peda-gogy which-at least in the revolutionarytradition that we are advocating here-isstrongly anti-racist, anti-sexist, and anti-homophobic. To pit, for example, criticalrace theory (for scholars of color) againstcritical pedagogy (for white scholars) is toset up a false opposition. It does graveinjustice to both educators of color andwhite educators who critically appropri-ate from the best of both traditions ofscholarship and activism. Such an rendi-tion of identity politics is more concernedwith who is more 'authentically" Asian,Latino/a, African-American, Canadian,Irish, etc., than with understanding therelationship among class oppression, sex-ism, and racism, or with building activeworking-class coalitions against multipleforms of exploitation. We are not arguingagainst cultural authentidity but ratheragainst practices that reduce authenticityto the laws of genetics. We view authentic-ity in the context of a shared history ofstruggle and survival. By underscoring theimportance of "diversity" without inter-rogating how capitalist social relationsset limits to what passes as diversity andwhat forms of diversity will be "accepted,"these crude forms of identity politics alsomask the important connections amongthe capitalist law of value, the exploita-tion of human labor, and gender-and-race-

specific forms of exploitation. The unwit-ting outcome of such an identity politicsis a strengthening of the rule of capital.This works to the detriment of all work-ing-class groups. As Linda Gordon notes:

Indeed, while callingattentionto theneed to acknowledge that others havedifferent experiences, "difference"has had a chilling effect on thestruggle to recognize connection. Atits worst it suggests that communica-tionis impossible, and maythus makeactual communicative experiencesuspect. It may even deter effort tocommunicate, which require askingdirect questions, risking expressionsof ignorance, rej ecting the discourseof personal guilt. Just as seriously,difference talk leads us away fromspecifyingthe relationships that giverise to gender, racial, class, and manyother inequalities and alienations.We need to ask for much, much morethan merely respecting difference.(1999, p.47)

It bears repeating that our aim hereis not to ignore the cultural and ethnicidentities of marginalized social groups,to relegate anti-racist struggles to a dis-tant sideshow, nor elevate the centralityof capitalist exploitation over racializedsocial practices, but to argue that one ofthe most insidious aspects of capitalismis precisely that its relations of exploita-tion hurt people of color in particularlyinvidious-and disproportionately dis-abling-ways. We wish to bring intodeeper focus than one often finds in criti-cal race theory or multicultural educa-tion, the relationships that obtain among.race, gender, ethnic, and class identitieswiththe purpose of articulating a politicalframework that moves towards trans-national ethnic alliances. Our central aimis the abolition of the rule of capital and theforms of exploitation and violence that flour-ish under capital's watch.

Faced with the uncertainty of thepresent, some look to religion to save usfrom ourselves. It has been said thatreligion is for those who fear hell; but itcould also be said that educational activ-ism is for those of us who have alreadybeen there. The educational activists oftoday are those who are not afraid torecognize the type of social evil that wesee all around us and to name it as such.And they are committed to fighting theracist, sexist, and corporate evil that stillenvelopes us even as we move with confi-dence to face the challenge of the newmillennium.

SPRING 20013

l'lote

1. It is interesting to observe that in countrieswhere 'traditional' workers' movementsare stronger, the position of women alsoimproved quite dramatically in the 1980sand 1990s (Kagarlitsky, 2000).

References

Allen, T. (1994). The invention of the whiterace, Volume One: Racial oppression andsocial control. London & New York: Verso.

AUen, T. (1997). The invention of the whiterace, Volume Two: The origins of racialoppression in Anglo-America. London &New York: Verso.

Allman, P. (in press). Critical education againstglobal capital: Karl Marx and revolution-ary critical education. Westport, CT &London, UK: Bergin & Garvey.

Anderson, P. (1992). A zone of engagement.London: Verso.

Aristide, J.B. (2000). Eyes of the heart: Seekinga path for the poor in the age ofglobalization. Monroe, ME: CommonCourage Press.

Bonacich, E. &Appelbaum, R.P. (2000).Behindthe label: Inequality in the Los Angelesapparel industry. Berkeley, CA: Uni-versity of California Press.

Cole, M. (1998). Globalization, modernisation,and competitiveness: A critique of theLabor -project in education. InternationalStudies in the Sociology of Education,8(3), 315-332.

Cruz, J. (1996). From farce to tragedy: Reflectionson the reification of race at century's end.In A.F. Gordon & C. Newfield (Eds.).Mapping Multiculturalism (19-39). Minne-apolis, MN & London, UK: University ofMinnesota Press.

Gordon, L. (1999). The trouble with difference.Dissent, 46(2), 41-47.

Grande, S.M.A., (2000). American Indianidentity and power: At the crossroads ofIndigena and Mestizaje. Harvard Educa-tional Review, 70(4), 467-498.

Greider, W. (2000). Time to rein in globalfinance. The Nation, 270(16), 13-20.

Hill, D. (1999). New Labor and education:Policy, ideology, and the Third Way. AHillCole Pamphlet. London, UK: TufnellPress.

Ignatiev, N. (1998a). The new abolitionists.Transition, no. 73, 199-203.

Ignatiev. N. (1998b). Abolitionism and "whitestudies." [onlinel IniRace Traitor. Availableat: http://www.postfun.com/racetraitor/features/whitestudies.html

Kagarlitsky, B. (2000). The return of radical-ism: Reshaping the left institutions (trans.Renfrey Clark). London & Sterling, VA:Pluto Press.

Kincheloe, J.L.,, & Steinberg, S.R. (1997).Changing multiculturalisms. MiltonKeynes, UK: Open University Press.

Kovel, J. (1998). The specter redefined. Social-ism and democracy, 12(1/2), 105-114.

LaFeber, W. (1999). Michael Jordan and thenew global capitalism. New York: W.WE.

Norton & Company.Larsen, N. (2000).Dialectics and "globalization":

The problem of how (not) to think abouta new internationalism. Working Papersin Cultural Studies, 22. Pullman, WA:Department of Comparative AmericanCultures, Washington State University,6-16.

Macedo, D. (2000). The colonialism of theEnglish only movement. EducationalResearcher, 29(3), 15-24.

Malik, K. (1996). Universalism and difference:Race andthepostmodernists.Race & Class,37(3), 1-16.

Martin,R. (1999). Globalization? The dependen-cies of a question. Social Text,. 17(3), 1-14.

Martinot, S. (2000). The racialized constructionof class in the United States. Social Justice,27(1), 43-60.

Marx, K. (1993). Grundrisse. London, UK &New York: Pengiun.

McLaren, P. (1995). Critical pedagogy andpredatory culture: Oppositional politicsin a postmodern era. London & New York:Routledge.

McLaren, P. (1997). Revolutionary multicul-turalism: Pedagogies of dissent for thenew millennium. Boulder, CO: WestviewPress.

McLaren, P. & Farahmandpur, R. (1999a).Critical pedagogy, postmodernism, and theretreat from class: Towards a contrabandpedagogy. Theoria, no. 93, 83-115.

McLaren, P. & Farahmandpur, R. (1999b).Critical multiculturalism and globalization:Some implications for a politics ofresistance. Journal of CurriculumTheorizing, 15(3), 27-46.

McLaren, P. & Farahmandpur, R. (2000).Reconsidering Marx in post-MarxistTimes: A requiem for postmoddernism?Educational Researcher,.29(3),.25-33.

McLaren, P. (2000). Che Guevara, Paulo Freire,and the pedagogy of revolution. Boulder,CO: Roman & Littlefield.

McMurtry, J. (1998). Unequal freedoms: Theglobal market as an ethical system. WestHartford, CT: Kumarian Press.

McMurtry, J. (1999). The cancer stage ofcapitalism. London, UTK: Pluto Press.

McQueen, A. (2000). Dropout rate of Latinostudents rises. Daily Bruin News,Thursday March 16, 8, 14.

Morris-Suzuki, T. (2000). For and againstNGOs. New Left Review, no. 2 (secondseries), 63-84.

Ortega, T. (2000, May 25). In the hot seat.[Onlinel InNew Times Los Angeles. Avail-able at: <http://www.newtimesla.com/issues/2000-05-25/faultlines.html>

Petras, J. (1999). The CIA and the culturalCold War revisited. Monthly Review, 51(6), 47-56.

Petras, J. (2000). The Third Way: Myth andreality. Monthly Review, 51 (10), 19-35.

Petras, J. (2000a). Globalization and citizenship:Social and political dimensions. WorkingPapers in Cultural Studies, 22. Pullman,WA: Department of Comparative Ameri-can Cultures, Washington State Univer-sity, 1-5.

Rikowski, G. (1997). Scorched earth: Preludein rebuilding Marxist educational theory.British Journal of Sociology of Education,17(4), 415-451.

Robbins, B. (1999). Feeling global: Inter-nationalism in distress. New York &London: New York University Press.

Robinson, W.I. (1998). Beyond. nation stateparadigms: Globalization, sociology, andthe challenge of transnational studies.Sociological Forum, 13(4), 561-594.

Robinson, W. & Harris, J. (2000). Towards aglobal ruling class? Globalization and thetransnational capitalist class. Science &Society, 64(1), 11-54.

Saunders, F.S. (1999). Who paid the piper:.TheCIA and the cultural Cold War. London,UK: Grahta Books.

Singh, A. (2000). Free trade and the 'starvingchild' defense: A forum. The Nation,270(16), 24-26.

Thandeka (2000). Learning to be white: Money,race, and God in America. New York:Continuum.

Thompson. W. (1997). The Left in history:Revolution and reform in twentieth-century politics. London: Pluto Press,

Zizek, S. (2000). Whywe all love to hate Haider.NewLeft Review, no. 2 (second series), 37-46.

MULTICULTURAL EDUCAflON1 4