I have to take issue with Jim D's post over at Shiraz Socialist on the so-called "Plebgate".
Although it is less shallow than the common wisdom at the time which subjected the incident to a crude class analysis, it still missed what this incident demonstrates about the deeper structures of our society.
The crude class analysis went:- Mitchell is a toff, toffs are arrogant sods and therefore Mitchell must have called the boys in blue livery (sudden class victims) "plebs". Many of these commentators have now withdrawn this, and have seen the event instead as an indication of corruption in the police force. Chris Mullin took this line from the very first.
Those who suspected right from the beginning that Mitchell's treatment had been unjust and unreasonable were the cyclists. as shown in this discussion:-
The cyclists recognised an act of oppression for what it was and nailed the role of the police, who are always the Praetorian guard for the ruling establishment. As anyone with half an eye and a quarter of a raised consciousness can see, the ruling establishment of our societies are drivers and their automobiles, whose control is shown in every aspect from the shape of our cities to conflicts about oil. They dominate our world, not just with their aggressive presence in our streets but also with their collateral - the parking buildings and supermarkets with vast parking spaces, the motorways and the commuting sprawl in the countryside. They are overwhelmingly there, in full tarmac and asphalt.
You can tell a ruling class by its reaction to anything that encroaches on its privilege. A painted cycle route, permission to join taxis and buses in lanes closed to the private car , more money spent on cycling infrastructure are met with the same howls of indignation and thwarted entitlement that capitalists have always greeted a tax increase or Factory Acts. The police saw Mitchell as a cycling upstart, asking for the right to use a route designated to his superiors and were as ready to suspect him as a bunch of black guys in a leafy neighbourhood. Then they fitted him up.
It is no coincidence that most of the commenting classes disbelieved Mitchell since most of the commenting classes go about in cars, and there is an overwhelming hostility towards cyclists. Their anti-cyclist bigotry was glaringly obvious - and like all bigotries, led to blindness about an individual case.
A sane society would appoint Andrew Mitchell as Minister for Transport. Instead it questions his integrity and harries him from his job.
Although it is less shallow than the common wisdom at the time which subjected the incident to a crude class analysis, it still missed what this incident demonstrates about the deeper structures of our society.
The crude class analysis went:- Mitchell is a toff, toffs are arrogant sods and therefore Mitchell must have called the boys in blue livery (sudden class victims) "plebs". Many of these commentators have now withdrawn this, and have seen the event instead as an indication of corruption in the police force. Chris Mullin took this line from the very first.
Those who suspected right from the beginning that Mitchell's treatment had been unjust and unreasonable were the cyclists. as shown in this discussion:-
"Why couldn't he ride his bike through this gate when other ministers can drive their cars through it?"
"I would also be most put out to have to dismount and use a stretch of pavement instead of a perfectly good road, considering that if I'd arrived by car I could have driven in."
"The claim is that he has previously cycled in and out of the downing street road entrance and on this occasion he was directed to the pavement gate and blew his top.
Thinking of older footage of Dave C etc cycling into downing street showed them continuing along the road with an open gate."
"If my reading of the reports is correct, he'd been in and out of the main gate on his bike previously several times that day, and was only on that occasion told to dismount and go through the pedestrian gate.
While I do not for a moment condone abusing a police officer, I think I understand the reaction of being pissed off with someone who one perceives as acting as a "jobsworth".
"Bad news on this one. Jeremy Vine has just announced that this will be one of the 4 stories on his Radio 2 show this lunchtime - from the angle "is this story about how everyone, including the police, hates cyclists?"."
The cyclists recognised an act of oppression for what it was and nailed the role of the police, who are always the Praetorian guard for the ruling establishment. As anyone with half an eye and a quarter of a raised consciousness can see, the ruling establishment of our societies are drivers and their automobiles, whose control is shown in every aspect from the shape of our cities to conflicts about oil. They dominate our world, not just with their aggressive presence in our streets but also with their collateral - the parking buildings and supermarkets with vast parking spaces, the motorways and the commuting sprawl in the countryside. They are overwhelmingly there, in full tarmac and asphalt.
You can tell a ruling class by its reaction to anything that encroaches on its privilege. A painted cycle route, permission to join taxis and buses in lanes closed to the private car , more money spent on cycling infrastructure are met with the same howls of indignation and thwarted entitlement that capitalists have always greeted a tax increase or Factory Acts. The police saw Mitchell as a cycling upstart, asking for the right to use a route designated to his superiors and were as ready to suspect him as a bunch of black guys in a leafy neighbourhood. Then they fitted him up.
It is no coincidence that most of the commenting classes disbelieved Mitchell since most of the commenting classes go about in cars, and there is an overwhelming hostility towards cyclists. Their anti-cyclist bigotry was glaringly obvious - and like all bigotries, led to blindness about an individual case.
A sane society would appoint Andrew Mitchell as Minister for Transport. Instead it questions his integrity and harries him from his job.
Comments