Liberal capitalism, originating from the Anglo-American sphere, serves as a model for the world order. However, its multi-racist ideology functions as a meta-narrative, or «privileged signifier» as per Jacques Derrida, within modern culture. Its adherents, proclaiming themselves as bearers of «universal» definitions, assert their role as custodians of the entire scope of world civilization and history.
However, the religious veneration of the «titular» Anglo-American culture is beginning to wane. Therefore, in the very near future, modern liberal racism will become the subject not only of sociological and political-ideological analysis but also of cultural and ethnocultural studies. In the course of this study, we will need to acknowledge, rather than overlook as has been done previously, the undeniable fact: the racist ideologies of the 19th and 20th centuries, along with modern multi-racism and neo-Nazism, originated in Britain.
An early and highly significant source of the Nazi-racist core within modernist ideologies stems from the characteristics of the mentality exhibited by the English Puritans of the 17th century. During this period, the British exclusivity complex began to take shape1 . It's important to distinguish between the concepts of civilizational exclusivity and civilizational uniqueness: while everyone is unique in their own right, exclusivity presupposes a sense of superiority. From a worldview perspective, this Puritanical idea bears resemblance to the previously described Calvinist doctrine of double predestination. But on English soil, this motif takes on its own configuration, incorporating the idea of the exceptional role of England and the English people in the history of the church2 . The interpretation of the Anglo-Saxon Puritans as the «new chosen people» and America as the new «Promised Land» continued the development of this idea in 1610 – 1620. Thus, it can be stated that the growth of the ideas of messianism and religious superiority in the collective consciousness of a certain part of the British was accompanied by an increase in Old Testament motives and interpretations.
Historians from 17th-century New England (Edward Johnson, William Hubbard, Cotton Mather and others) portray the colonists as a kind of new chosen people who, by the will of God, made their «exodus» from England in order to protect the true religion from the encroachment of the Antichrist.
It's intriguing that the Puritans did not view the concept of being the «second chosen people» as either absurd or parodic. And yet, it was the combination of the motif of new chosenness with the conventional Christian ideological complex that allowed the idea of British exclusivity and their special mission in the Christian world to flourish on British soil. Initially, the mission was designated as the purification of Christianity from the influence of the Antichrist's ideas. The Puritans frequently tended to liken their religious opponents to Satan.
A group of so-called separatists, even more radical than ordinary Puritans, emphasized the unity of the «true Reformed churches» and sought to distance themselves and their children from the «false churches». The term «separatism» is derived from the concept of «separation» (separatio).
It is notable that the motifs of the «Exodus», the «Promised Land», and the «City on the Hill» were used both as metaphors for the inner «path to salvation» and, simultaneously, as justification for the British expropriation of Indigenous lands. This can be seen as the beginning of the religious foundation of colonialism.
The 17th-century Puritans believed that the Lord had signed a «Covenant» with the British people, thereby distinguishing them among the European peoples as His favorites. This exclusivity, coupled with the power bestowed by God, was simultaneously viewed as a burden of responsibility toward other nations. It's difficult to avoid drawing parallels with 20th-century American radical Protestantism, particularly the Dispensationalist movement, which once again bestowed upon Anglo-American Protestants the status of the «second chosen people» and attributed to America the concept of «Manifest Destiny».
Strictly speaking, after their «exodus» to America, the English idea became the Anglo-American idea.
Around the same time, we saw the first signs of the secularization of Puritan doctrine. For example, the historian George George Bancroft, the founder of the «romantic» school of American historiography, describes Puritanism in the 17th century as the «forerunner of democracy», as it relies not on the clergy but on the «Christian people». Ultimately, this equates political sovereignty with the highest religious value, linking it specifically to the Old Testament social ideal. Meanwhile, an expansionist attitude was forming. As historians of the 17th – 18th centuries used to joke, «a Puritan who does not meddle in other people's affairs is an oxymoron».
As it is easy to see, the religious prerequisites of racist thinking are intertwined with the rapid and radical development of global capitalism and the liberal ideology that supports it – phenomena that manifested most vividly in England, the leading colonial power. Gradually, the standards of British thinking, which included myths of national superiority, messianism, social Darwinism, and progressive universalism, became the ideological background and environment in which European and American public and political consciousness came to be formed. This is particularly evident in the context of colonialist policy.
Another important source for analyzing the European origins of racism and liberalism is the well-known book «The English Roots of German Fascism. From the British to the Austro-Bavarian ”Race of Masters”» by historian Manuel Sarkisyanz3 . The materials in this book allow us to discuss Nazism and racism of the twentieth century as phenomena with British roots, yet inherent in the broader Western culture of the modern era.
For example, in Imperial Germany, imitation of British strategies formed the basis of its own policy. This influence extended beyond administrative and military measures in the colonies; it permeated deeply, fostering multidimensional thinking in a racist spirit. Carl Peters, one of the first German statesmen responsible for the colonial course in Africa, stated: «I have always regarded British colonial policy as the most significant influence»4 . He admired the fact that «many hundreds of thousands of people in England can enjoy their leisure time because they have millions of representatives of other races working for them» <...> «what is happening in the British Empire is always of primary interest to us: because they are... our mentors...» This worldview, he said, was shaped during his stay in England and contributed to his emergence as a prominent politician: «Every day of my stay in the City of London ... provided me with a new practical lesson in colonial politics»5 .
One of the unquestionable successes of Sarkisyanz's book is that the author has identified in the liberal worldview precisely that semantic layer which serves as a transitional zone between ethnic and social racism. Back in 1850, Sarkisyants wrote: «Edinburgh professor of anatomy Robert Knox... began attributing to the Irish a variety of characteristics incompatible with those of the middle class», thereby categorizing the Irish (and Celts more broadly) as an economically inferior race. According to Knox, «the Celtic race of Ireland was the root cause of all the country’s issues... This race should have been banished from the land... they had to go. This action was deemed necessary for the safety of England»6 .
Manuel Sarkisyanz emphasizes that «only in England did racist ideology directly emerge from the national tradition: not only was the latter Puritanical and based on Old Testament, but the perception of social inequality as part of English cultural heritage exacerbated the situation (the lower classes felt awe and respect for the upper classes, while the upper classes treated them with contempt)»7 . Referring to the opinion of Hannah Arendt, he argues that class inequality was perceived almost as an integral characteristic of the English national character. «It was social inequality that was the basis and characteristic feature of a specifically English society, making the idea of human rights perhaps nowhere more irritating than there»8 .
Of particular interest is the role of «human rights» and «anti-discrimination» rhetoric in liberal racism. This element was also introduced into the liberal-racist colonialist discourse by representatives of the English and, later, the American establishment. During the Anglo-Boer War, it became necessary to classify the actual colonialist practices – Boer and British – into «bad» and «good». For this purpose, the discourse of «protection of rights and freedoms» was used for the first time, combined not only with military but also purely punitive measures. During the Anglo-Boer War, the British were the first in history to use the practice of creating concentration camps.
Thus, it can be argued that since at least the 19th century, the racist ideology of the West has operated as a two-tier system: the British standard and a set of its European, continental, and American variations. Therefore, we should not only discuss individual racism or Nazism (which Germany specialized in during the 1930s and 40s), but also the multidimensional multi-racism of the British model, which includes national (Nazism), cultural, and civilizational aspects.
The multi-racist ideology, rooted in British foundations since the 19th century, constitutes a unified pan-European system. The ideology of the Third Reich of the 1930s and 40s is prominent within it, but it remains a distinct instance of an anglocentric pan-European phenomenon. Today, this phenomenon manifests as English and American Transatlanticism.
The neoliberal Atlanticist social doctrine includes several components:
● The idea of cultural and civilizational superiority of «politically developed» nations and countries, supposedly forming a «civilized world»;
● Utilitarianism, which asserts that the public good arises from selfish total competition;
● Progressivist fatalism, which believes in total universal Progress and «progress in general»;
● The Protestant idea of being chosen for salvation, which in its secular form has turned into a justification for social and cultural inequality;
● Social Darwinism and Malthusianism, asserting the benefits of natural selection in human society and the uselessness of «superfluous» people;
● The principle of status consumption, forming the type of personality specified as the «ego machine» or «desire factory».
This set of ideologies allegedly grants the Atlanticist elite sanction for the unlimited, extraterritorial use of force.
An important feature of Atlanticist political models based on pan-Anglism and pan-Americanism is the principle of extraterritorial cratocracy, or the application of the laws and regulations (legal, political, and so on) of the dominant country outside its own territory. Such practices include attempted coups in Turkey (2016), attempts to appoint a new president in Venezuela, support for terrorism (Syria), and a coup in Ukraine.
The principle of extraterritorial cratocracy is reflected in provisions of the American military-political strategy such as «global domination» or «global control».
For example, in 2011, the United States and NATO carried out a «humanitarian intervention» in Libya, resulting in the killing of the country's leader, Muammar Gaddafi, and transforming the region's richest country, with a high level of social rights, into a fragmented territory plagued by crime and the slave trade.
The Atlanticist criteria also dominate the interpretation of the concepts of «standards of democracy» and «human rights». Similarly, the priorities of professional human rights defenders from other countries always «happen» to coincide with the positions of the US and UK foreign ministries.
It is characteristic that the Anglo-American elites generally do not insist on the legality of many such operations. For example, the speech by former US Secretary of State Colin Powell, in which he presented a test tube containing the causative agent of «anthrax» as a reason for the attack on Iraq, was officially recognized as erroneous.
It is evident that Atlanticist discourse continually reproduces the racist matrix in the process of cultural communication. Thus, while its historical forms may change, the content remains unchanged.
In a moral and ethical sense, this phenomenon is the complete, mirror-image opposite of Christian morality. It turns to the value-ritual complex associated with the pagan institution of sacrifice instead of Christian self-sacrifice.
2024 ãîä