Hello Paul

I originally wrote a reply to the Roger Sabin's chapter in the book 'Punk Rock So What' that you can read at Sabin- My Reply . So imagine my suprise when Roger emailed me and politely too !!! I kinda regret the aggressive thrust of my piece now because I remember now the the sort of hysterical witch burning lunatic one becomes as soon as someone says fascist. Now objective criticism goes out of the window here. Its your either for us or you're against us and I'm not really a supporter of this. At the same time Roger emailed me Ian Goodyear emailed me on the same subject and I present both emails below just to show you what a political minefield the subject is !!. Ian's emails represent quite a current thinking ie the militant brothers in arms scenario. No offence Ian but I'm not really a believer in your vision. You can see why bands like the Stranglers were suspicious of RAR... a political subplot ??? what the f**k has that got to with rock 'n' roll. F***ing hell we ended up with that twat Billy Bragg and for that all Labour's supporters should be shot. Long live militant anarchism and death to the capitalist third empire. Roger went out on a limb and said his piece; we may not all like it but he was brave enough to stick his head over the parapet and so respect to him. Anyway heavy political shit coming your way so if you like this sort of thing read on ...if not... go look at the women in punk section

My comments are in blue.

Just seen your essay on punk and racism from last year, and wanted to write a quick reply. You make a lot of sense, but I don't think you've been fair to my original piece. If I didn't make my viewpoint clear, then that's my fault for not communicating properly. But I have to point out that I don't bandy the word 'racist' around lightly, and that the whole point of the piece was to put those bands and lyrics in the context of their time - which is what you also try to do in your piece. So, for starters, I DON'T say anti-racism was 'a pose'. I say the RAR/ANL carnivals were the 'biggest anti-fascist actions since the war'. And that 'there was certainly a lot of genuine commitment' among punk bands. (The contributions of Tom Robinson - never really a punk - The Ruts, etc have been very well documented elsewhere.)

One theme is that punk was reflecting the everyday racism in society - which you also echo. I mention 'The Comedians' on tv, 'Best Jokes' books, etc. It was inevitable that bands would pick up some of this language. Fair enough. But fascism was on the rise, and some bands picked up on this too. I try carefully to differentiate between those that flirted - e.g., in my opinion, Siouxsie and Joy Division - and those for whom it was something more serious - e.g. those poxy Leeds bands. (I say quite clearly that Siouxsie and Joy Division later worked for the anti-racist cause.) As for Skrewdriver, I went to Searchlight about this because I didn't know enough about them, and was told that Ian Stuart had been a youth organsier for the NF since 1977. (I didn't put this in the piece because I couldn't verify it from another source.) But in his particular case I think it's fair to speculate that sometimes 'a swastika can be a swastika'.

On Asians, I think you're wrong. Surely it has to be a valid point to say that punk ignored them? It was not 'irrelevant' in the context of the time, with Asians being beaten up every day. In that context, wearing swastikas, making 'controversial' statements, etc, was bloody stupid. It's too easy to say Blacks equalled cool, Asians equalled uncool, but I think there was some of that feeling around. They just didn't 'matter', and that was a tragedy. (I think this subject is what drove me to write the piece - I saw it happening at the time, and my anger about it spewed out 20 or so years later). I did make some mistakes in the piece, and if I was writing it again I'd do it differently - use different examples, etc (the Art Attacks were never in the same bracket as the bands above, and that 'Arabs in 'arrads' lyric was pretty harmless - even if, again, it reflected its time - i.e. after the 1973 oil crisis Arabs were demonised in the media in a racist way). I'd also cite more evidence - I looked at hundreds of zines and dug out many more quotes: the ones I used weren't meant to be 'selective' but to highlight bigger themes (oh, and in the original Ripped and Torn, that piece isn't signed by Tony D).

>Many thanks for your reply and its very welcome and if you don't mind I would like to post it next update and this reply.

>I have had a few emails on the subject of your book and they do follow my line of reasoning.

Yes, a couple of other people have been annoyed about it, but interestingly for completely different reasons. Stewart Home disagreed and stuck up for the Art Attacks, though he was totally anti- the idea that RAR was in tune with punk and ripped into them for what he saw as patronising punk and using it in the 'class war'. Meanwhile, the left wing designer of the book took issue with me for not giving RAR/ANL more credit (which I should have done,really, but I thought Widgery had already done that) and for not taking the line that RAR were sympatico with punk (he talked about Lucy Toothpaste and Temporary Hoarding too - but I always felt that was a mag that sold to politicos and students rather than being a zine at the grassroots). But in general, folk who've commented on that particular piece have been positive - that goes for maybe ten reviews. To be honest, I had no idea it'd cause that much fuss (I was down to do the comics chapter originally). However I only go so far and would never make any extravagant claims for punks anti racism. Yes, it sounds like you have some doubts - you're right that punk wasn't coherent, but to me that logically means it could stray to the right sometimes. I think it's important to discuss the issue - even if we happen to be fans of the bands/people involved, which of course makes it much harder to be objective.

>I do still dis-agree with you over the subject of Asians. Punk was rock'n'roll not political and as such allied itself with a similar rebel music that had a recording history, image and clubs based in London/UK. There was no Asian tradition ( until fairly recently) so there was no point at which the two cultures met. As such RAR probably alienated Asians who would have had no music to participate with. Punk cannot be blamed for not standing up for Asians and then again why should it ?? It was not supposed to be the righter of wrongs and slayer of giants !!!

Ha! I don't think we're ever going to agree on that one... All I'd say is that I think there were some double standards at work for some - and I emphasise 'some' - punk personalities. (A book appeared recently called 'Disorienting Rhythms' that discusses how let down the Asian youth felt -.it's worth a look.)

>As to the Ripped and Torn Article I got my image from the Julie Davis book that was a compilation from 1977 of fanzine articles and it has Tony D signing it. I would be interested in any other Zines that might offer a fascist slant as to be honest I haven't come across any.

Well, there was one famous one called The Punk Front, which I've never seen, and several more apparently in the Leeds area. A lot of the zines I looked at weren't fascist as such, but were sceptical of RAR/ANL - they just didn't want to be 'manipulated' by anyone. (Others, of course, were all for RAR/ANL.)

>I hope you didn't take anything I said personally. Any discourse on the subject is always welcome and its always good to see different sides of the argument.

Agreed. But it's ALL personal in a way. I wrote from the heart, and your reply was from the heart too - no doubt so were the e-mails you got. But I suppose I shouldn't admit that - not very 'punk rock'!

I think it's terrific, actually - even if you hate my stuff! That's the lowdown...

>Its a thankless task discussing anything to with racism and the one thing I hated and still do is its misuse as an instant slur.

You're absolutely right - a minefield! (I wish I hadn't written that piece, to be honest.)

>Whole bands from that time were destroyed by alleged racism from right on music papers etc. Bands like The Cortinas had doubt cast on them because they wrote a song called 'Fascist Dictator' which was about sod all to do with fascism....I hated the politics that punk became because it became an unsmiling pc ordered beast it was never meant to be.

I agree (though I also used to be a fan of the more pc bands like Gang of Four). Politics was always there, I suppose, but the whole thing got much too serious. 'Fascist Dictator' is a good example of a band just picking up on the language of the time - they didn't deserve to be hammered for it. But in your previous reply you defend Adam too in terms of racism, but 'Puerto Rican' was pretty sick. I know it was done for a laugh, and I know that the Ants were in no way fascist sympathisers (I've seen a few pieces that've called them fascists - they should've sued!), but a gaff like 'Puerto Rican' needs some sort of comment.

>Ahh well. I'm going to modify my book entry 'So What' because at least it provokes thought.

I have just seen your website and read your response to Roger Sabin’s essay on punk and racism. I did so in the course of researching a dissertation I am writing, on the subject of Rock Against Racism.

Have you read David Widgery's book - Beating Time, or Paul Gilroy - There ain't no black in the Union Jack? Both books (and almost anything else from the time) contradict Sabin's claim that there is a dominant myth concerning punk's inherent anti-racism. Widgery in particular, stresses that RAR was engaged in a struggle to win punk bands and fans to an anti-racist position, and he maintains that a developing affinity between punk and reggae gave campaigners a toe-hold to exploit. The whole point of RAR was not to adapt itself to a pre-existing state of harmony between punks and anti-racists, but to fight to establish the connection.

Lloyd Bradley's history of reggae - Bass Culture - is also very interesting, for the light it casts on the relationship between punk and black music. One of the things that emerges from his account, is that the commercial success of many reggae bands during the 70s and 80s would not have been possible without the crossover to a white record buying public. He also points out that many of the punks who were buying reggae records had a very sophisticated grasp of the genre. These observations cut against Sabin's notion that there was no real taste for reggae beyond the confines of a small punk elite.

Sabin's closing remarks, about his wanting to do justice to those who were fighting racism in the 70s ring a little hollow, since he seems to be filled with contempt for anyone who actually took up the cause. His essay is, I think, a prime example of academic discourse that is dissociated from any grasp of practical politics. At one point he claims that the left-wing affiliations of RAR, and its determination to create an organised response to racism, pushed many punks into an identification with the 'other side'. In effect, he is arguing that it was wrong to organise, because some anarchistic punk rockers were alienated in the process. Which leaves what, exactly? Presumably, a retreat into academia and the ability to write crude smears, 20 years after the rest of us had got our hands dirty doing the fighting.

I am just glad that there are other people who have seen through Sabin's ignorant opinions. If you have any further comments, I would be glad to have them. As you will gather, I am coming from a position that is sympathetic to RAR and to the idea that something positive was achieved by the (sometimes bizarre) coalition that got itself together to counter racism in the 70s.

Thanks for getting back to me. I agree with your point about the prior existence of a rebellious musical tradition, in punk rock (and reggae), which made it possible for anti-racists to connect with a wider audience. Paul Gilroy writes that punk provided 'the social circuitry' for the RAR project, which seems to sum up the relationship quite succinctly.

I was very interested in Roger's email, but I still think he misses the point of a body like RAR and he is mistaken on a number of factual issues. It is worthwhile looking at 'Beating Time', by the way, just to check out the number of pictures of Asian kids (and elders) at RAR/ANL events. Widgery takes great pains to stress the amount of work being done in places like Brick Lane, where anti-racists stood shoulder to shoulder with Asian people in opposition to BM and NF intimidation. Although Asian music was not a feature of RAR gigs, solidarity with Asians under racial attack was very much a part of the organisation's remit. To cite a single instance, RAR was part of the coalition that built the 1979 Southall demo against the NF, at which Blair Peach was murdered. This was a mass mobilisation in an area with a large Asian community. Following the police attack on the demo, at which RAR supporters were beaten and arrested, by the way, RAR put on a series of concerts to raise money towards the legal costs of the anti-nazi defendants in the subsequent trials. Roger should also be aware that one of the ANL's sponsors was the Indian Workers Association.

In short, I am not sure how organising political solidarity with Asian people, taking part in the physical defence of Asian communities, having your members beaten and even killed on anti-nazi demos, and working alongside prominent Asian activists to build the ANL can be squared with Roger's claim that 'punk and RAR/etc ignored them'.

I would love to correspond with Roger directly on this, because some at least of his argument seems to rest on a lack of awareness of the work being done at the time. Would you be able to give me his email address, so I can drop him a line?