It’s an even year, so as always the English socialist is put in an awkward position: who to support for the Worldcup? Supporting England is out of the question, because, as Snowball puts it:
As if the corporate takeover isn’t bad enough (many firms have produced ‘I love England’ badges for their employees), then the political consequences don’t bear worth thinking about. All of the main three capitalist political parties are doubtless gearing up already to associate themselves with supporting England – and it is likely that Blair will try to use a good Cup run and the associating ‘feel good factor’ to hang onto power – though one suspects the hapless croquet playing fuckwit Prescott will not be used in too many New Labour photoshoots playing football.
This sort of feeling is quite widespread amongst English socialists, but I’ve never seen its like in other countries. Certainly Dutch socialists are content enough to support the Dutch team, rather than coming up with convoluted reasons to not support it. That is not to say the Engerland-haters don’t have a point: the Worldcup is commercialised, politicised and will be used by quite disgusting people to bask in its reflected glory. But I still think you’re making a category error if you take your disgust about
the circus surrounding the cup as a reason to not support England. Your support of Trinibad and Tobago instead of Engerland will not stop the abuse, only boycotting the Worldcup might do it.
Even worse is being anti-England out of a misplaced sense of anti-imperialism: Blair’s policies will not change because the SWP does not support England! It just seems like yet another form of identify politics, a way to show how socialist you are without, you know, doing anything about it. As the Dead Kennedys said quite a while back “Play ethnicky jazz to parade your snazz On your five grand stereo / Braggin that you know how the niggers feel cold And the slums got so much soul“.
