Photo credit: www.theguardian.com
In an intriguing revelation, Ash Sarkar describes herself as “conflict-averse,” though many would find it hard to reconcile this with her outspoken public persona. Over the last ten years, Sarkar has earned a reputation for her fierce and articulate defense of her viewpoints, actively engaging in contentious debates across television, social media, and journalism roles, including her contributions as an editor at Novara Media. Her ability to express the concerns of everyday people has made her a notable figure in discussions about politics and social issues, particularly among those on the left, while simultaneously courting criticism from right-leaning commentators.
In her latest book, Minority Rule, Sarkar brings her critiques to light, suggesting that an overemphasis on identity politics and culture wars has not benefitted the working class. “By making a virtue of marginalisation and subdividing ourselves into increasingly hostile groups, we hinder the formation of a cohesive movement that could effectively challenge prevailing wealth and power dynamics,” she argues. Her critiques extend to the way language is policed and ideas like “lived experience” and “white privilege” can alienate potential allies, impeding solidarity among the left.
The claims made in Minority Rule have created a stir not only among conservatives but within her own ideological camp. Sarkar’s observations have prompted backlash, sparking headlines that accuse her of betraying her past advocacy for identity politics, with some outlets suggesting that she is undermining her own side. For instance, a recent piece in the Daily Telegraph admonished her for exposing what it termed the “hypocrisy of the virtue-signalling left.”
Sarkar maintains that her viewpoint is not a betrayal but rather an evolution rooted in a more profound understanding of material conditions. “In my early 20s, I definitely went through a phase where I overemphasized concepts like ‘white privilege’ and ‘neocolonialism,’” she acknowledges during our discussion. Sarkar believes that her academic background, particularly in the arts and humanities, initially shaped her interpretation of societal issues through a lens that may have skewed her discourse.
What she advocates for is a return to foundational principles in analyzing contemporary issues. Sarkar wants to apply a materialist perspective, examining the economic structures that underpin society rather than solely focusing on identity politics. This approach, she argues, will allow for a more constructive discourse about race, class, and power without negating the importance of anti-racism.
Critics of Sarkar have seized on her critique of the “woke” movement, yet they often overlook her analysis of how the right has manipulated identity politics for their purposes. Sarkar highlights a historical shift where right-wing media previously vilified the same demographics they now claim to champion, illustrating a double standard in their narratives.
Furthermore, she believes that identity politics can inadvertently sow division within groups that should be united. Sarkar notes that the working class, when mobilized, has often faced significant backlash throughout history, pointing to shifts in the political landscape that have historically isolated workers rather than bringing them together.
At 32, Sarkar finds herself reflecting on her own journey through this turbulent political landscape. Born in north London to a single mother and educated at University College London, she initially planned on pursuing an academic career. However, her involvement with Novara Media, which began as a community radio project alongside friends who later became her colleagues, redirected her path into journalism.
As the momentum of left-wing activism surged during Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership of the Labour Party, particularly noted during the 2017 general election, Sarkar emerged as a compelling voice amidst a landscape desperate for progressive representation. The optimism of that time, marked by the celebration of grassroots movements, stands in stark contrast to the ensuing political climate after the 2019 election, where the Labour Party faced significant setbacks.
Sarkar reflects on the vibrancy of 2017, characterizing it as a period filled with hope, unity, and a collective spirit. However, she admits that many in the movement were blind to the internal fractures and external challenges that would follow. “We overlooked who was being excluded from the conversation,” she admits, emphasizing the need for introspection within progressive movements.
As discussions about the future of the Labour Party unfold, Sarkar expresses skepticism regarding the leadership of Keir Starmer. She contends that the nature of effective leadership in today’s political landscape leans towards those who embrace conflict and challenge the status quo, traits she feels are not present in Starmer’s approach.
Despite her impactful presence in media and activism, Sarkar dismisses any ambitions for her own political career, citing the disconnect between journalism and effective political strategy. Yet she leaves the door open to future possibilities, acknowledging the unpredictability of personal aspirations.
Throughout her career, Sarkar maintains a complex relationship with media engagement, often at odds with the very platforms she critiques. Even as she faces significant backlash on social media, she admits to a compulsive need to engage and advocate for her views.
Whether Minority Rule signals a transformative period for Sarkar, it undeniably reflects the broader political currents of recent years. As she contemplates her next steps, Sarkar remains committed to following her instincts, open to new opportunities that may arise without a formal roadmap.
Minority Rule: Adventures in the Culture War by Ash Sarkar is published by Bloomsbury.
Source
www.theguardian.com