Ash Sarkar has long been a refreshing, no-holds-barred voice in the often-stifling world of political commentary. From her sharp wit on Novara Media to her incisive takedowns on Question Time, she consistently delivers thought-provoking critiques that leave many smug politicos reeling. So, when Minority Rule hit the shelves, I, like many others, was eagerly anticipating her deeper dive into the issues she so eloquently dissects on screen. And I can say, with conviction, that she delivers.
Introduction - Sarkar starts her book with a whirlwind overview of the worlds ills and how there is a purposeful atomisation of the public through reality manipulation by those in positions of power and authority. The minority are blamed to distract from the real cause by an elite few who have more than enough but demand ever more - be it money, power or influence.
She discusses her interest in politics from a young age and her draw to Communism and especially the control of means of production. The Neo-liberal project, instigated by Reagan and Thatcher, removed the public services into private hands and the whole 'Greed is Good' mantra took over and has rarely faltered for those with money but for the average person, it has been devastating as inequality has grown sharply. Identity politics takes the oxygen out of the room and so those in power can carry on without being disturbed too much at all as people are distracted.
How the 'I' Took Over Identity Politics Part 1 - She starts with Roger Hallam, Founder of Extinction Rebellion, calling the left "A bunch of cunts" at the beginning of a forum and how that introspective, yet coarse observation, led to the whole evening falling apart as various factions and groups formed to say how they had been affected by this violence. Sarkar argues that this has been appropriated by the Right and so there is no collective response but rather the left eating itself in a hideous ouroboros of nonsense and sensitivities. This whataboutism leaves the left struggling to get its shit together but does allow specific people to have social capital, which doesn't amount to much. 'My truth' and 'Lived Experience' have taken the place of 'The Truth' but this entitlement is subjective and not useful to instigate change in the actual material world where there is 'Actual Truth' with empirical data, facts etc (and no, don't go quoting me Churchill's 'Lies. Damn lies and statistics' crap). Thus, this personal ambition for individuality makes it hard to create a mass movement and instigate any real change - instead, we have paralysis. Bregman talks about this very issue in his book Moral Ambition and said there has to be a singular purpose with circles supporting one another for that one thing without distractions or asides.
How the 'I' Took Over Identity Politics Part 2 - Sarkar then looks at the DEI Industrial Complex (which is a term I love as it captures my pessimism about how the whole industry paid lipservice but didnt actually instigate change hearts or minds. Just look at how many corporations removed it as it was no longer financially, politically or socially expedient when Trump came in). She continues that identity politics is now taught in institutions rather than at grassroots and so is missing the real human social element where life is messy- it's too cut and dried and many people are ready to cancel at a moments notice by shaming.
Outrage culture is mentioned and the idea that whatever you say, there is always someone ready to dunk on you saying that you are an -ist or have an -ism. This leads to people self-censoring and policing themselves and others, even when what is said is not intended in the least to be provocative or controversial but rather a discussion with a variety of viewpoints. This is exhausting and the Right have seized this to say, ‘We can't say anything anymore' whilst being on politics and news shows on the telly, X née Twitter, Tiktok, GBNews, newspapers and so on. This is called ‘Majority Identity’ politics- those in positions of power claiming they are not e.g. Farage hilariously insisting that he's just a regular lad who loves a good old pint at a regular pub rather than a guy who banks at Coutts.
Sarkar's engagement with David Baddiel's work on the Jewish experience sparks a crucial discussion on the "weaponization of victimhood." While acknowledging Baddiel's lived experience, Sarkar questions the notion that acknowledging other atrocities, such as the Bengal Famine (which killed between 2.1 and 2.8 million people under Churchill's watch) or the horrific reign of King Leopold II in the Congo (resulting in an estimated 10 million deaths), somehow diminishes the Jewish Holocaust. She powerfully argues against a "Highlander Syndrome" where only one group can claim ultimate victimhood, urging readers to recognize multiple instances of genocide and to call out ongoing atrocities, such as the one in Palestine, without fear of being labeled antisemitic. The fact that the immense suffering in the Congo is rarely brought into mainstream discourse underscores her point about a hierarchy of harm, implicitly questioning why the lives of Black people might appear to matter less in global narratives.
Talk is Cheap - The state of play in the media is considered here, particularly the parlous state of legacy news where there have been extensive job cuts. This has meant that there is less fact checking and more circling the drain of the same stories that everyone else seems to cover. To mitigate this many have taken the combative talking heads approach where nuance and knowledge is replaced by angry opinions, often without facts but personal 'lived experience'. This odd-couples approach seems to work as angry tirades seems to draw interest in our attention economy which is algorithmically led. This has meant that the discourse is sour and, rather than a thoughtful debate, we have people haranguing each other trying to pwn with little academic rigour.
I've seen this as the YouTube algorithm favours those videos with pictures of people's face looking angry/ upset etc with the title written in bold ALLCAPS. 'REMOANER REGRETS STARTING AN ARGUMENT WITH BREXITEER', `KAREN GET COMEUPPANCE'. With the decline in television watching and more people, especially the youth, getting their news online this situation will only get worse.
Sarkar states that the five trends of less original news, more opinion, the explosion of social media, declining standards of newsworthiness and the primary of reaction have led to storms in a tea cup or micro-events. The Internet, once considered a way to unite humanity, has created antagonistic filter bubble groups where everyone thinks they are right. This favours the Right who don't need to unite disperate groups in order to enact change but rather a singular narrative where there is a feeling of hauntology of 'it was better in the old days' (even though it blatantly wasn't for many people including for BAME, LGBTQ, many women etc) but how can you compete against misremembered nostalgia and rose-tinted glasses?
She ends with examples of violent unrest and roots where BAME communities were blamed for civil unrest, often without any evidence or selective incidences, including the Liverpool Football Club victory parade hit and run incident.
The Lobby - Sarkar scathingly refers to some politicians as having a runny egg where a brain should be, saying that they are reactionary and beholden to the commentariat rather than visionary or able in their own right. She states that with the attention economy being so flooded, politicians will often repeat small soundbites rather than speak in a coherent and cohesive way. This means that pundit politics, rather than leading change, is reacting to the newspapers, social media algorithms and reactions. It's all very unedifying and presents a race to the bottom for attention with the rise of Nigel Farage, Lee Anderson, Priti Patel etc.
The lobby, that is journalists with positions of authority within their respective newspapers, are now nothing more than mouthpieces for their 'contacts' and 'sources' who often feed them the party line which is then shared as gospel fact without fact-checking... speed is considered more important than accuracy.
There is a revolving door between journalists and political roles and, even when disgraced, they often just swap over to the other industry. We have weird situations where politicians are interviewed by their own spouse but pretend like they don't know each other or are unacquainted.
One of the weirdest interviews I saw was on Good Morning Britain in ITV when Ed Balls, a former MP, talked to his wife about something the 2024 race riots at the time but was acting like he didn't know know her - this was surely a conflict of interests! Meanwhile, Allegra Stratton was fired after her Covid Party admission video leaked but she was parachuted into a plum journalistic role where her husband and colleague have links. This is a self-serving oeroboros of narcissism and ambition where people fail upwards with no consequence and there is an omerta that prevents people in journalism and politics from speaking out for fear of career reprisals.
Economics Are the Method - Identitarian Politics looks at how categorisation and class structures have been ruthlessly manipulated for political gains. Now its mostly to do with vibes but between 1945 and 79 it was to do with union membership, the working men's club and social cohesion. With neo-libralism this was broken with individualism taking hold and home, asset and business ownership anindicator of how people would vote. The more you had, the more you would veer towards the Right as they declared themselves the party of fiscal responsibility. But, this was not black and white as aspe ts such as education, thoughts about human and LGBTQ rights were important too.
Sarkar talks to Dominic Cummings who candidly speaks about his strategy for Brexit; highlight fears of immigrants whilst also saying you would lower taxes and give money to public services. This would entice Labour and Tory voters and, in focus groups, was very successful - it was in real life too.
Sarkar compellingly argues that in societies experiencing 'managed decline' like Britain, immigration becomes a convenient scapegoat for a myriad of ills. Issues such as raw sewage polluting rivers, which are unequivocally the result of corporate greed and mismanagement, are nonetheless laid at the doorstep of refugees and asylum seekers. This deflection thrives in a media and political landscape saturated with negativity towards the 'Other.'
The nuanced realities of systemic failures are ignored, instead lumped in with simplistic, fear-mongering narratives like "foreigners coming in and taking our jobs". This pervasive rhetoric fosters deep-seated animosity, disproportionately impacting BAME/ POC who become the targets of misplaced blame and prejudice. Opportunists are now looking to blame immigrants etc for crimes they had no hand in, leading to the police having to state the colour and background of the person arrested to stop rioting. Sarkar ends the chapter by stating that by splintering the working class along cultural rather than economic lines, those in power have weakened the power of the real working class.
One Big Gang - Sarkar connects the 2011 London riots directly to the prevailing socio-economic climate: austerity, police violence, institutional racism, poverty, and economic inequality. She argues that these conditions fueled a deliberate strategy to fragment the working class, recognizing their collective power as a formidable force. This fragmentation, she contends, explains why the media largely converged to attribute blame to Black culture, including elements like hoodies, music, and the "Get rich or die tryin'" ethos – concepts they clearly misunderstood. It was easier to blame an underground music scene like drill and clothes likes hoodies than admit economic and social failings were a cause. Caricatures like Ali G and Vicky Pollard made the idea of mixed race and interracial relationships seem like a contaminant in early 00s media, with the white working class (who were salt of the Earth) degenerate into feckless, lazy, single parent stereotypes. This is all stuff and nonsense couched in miscegenation and Enoch Powell-esque racism but it bled into the mainstream.
It's striking to observe the contrast the commentary surrounding the 2011 (everyone's invited?) riots with the 2024 riots across England, which primarily involved white individuals targeting BAME communities in the wake of the Southport killings. These incidents did not face the same harsh condemnation; instead, they were often excused by commentators as reactions from "scared and hurt communities" or "culturally contaminated communities" where Black popular culture had supposedly influenced the youth. This disparity, Sarkar concludes, reveals clear and undeniable racism.
This whole chapter really resonated with me. It brought to mind the French government's palpable fear of its own populace, echoing V's powerful line in V for Vendetta: "People shouldn't be afraid of their government. Governments should be afraid of their people." I remember watching the riots unfold whilst teaching in Cambodia and thinking it had taken far too long for things to escalate. After all, the banks had been bailed out at the expense of public services, leaving the poorest in society with virtually no safety net, save for the patronizing "We are all in it together" mantra – a sentiment no one in any real position of power or financial freedom actually believed. For further proof, see the Tory Covid parties that occured when everyone was in lockdown, unable to see dying loved ones in hospital or attend funerals.
Following 2011, a significant shift occurred in the discourse surrounding working-class communities. What was once broadly understood through the pejorative term 'chavs' rapidly morphed into a focus on the 'white working class' (WWC). This change, arguably a deliberate tactic by those in authority, served to fracture the burgeoning solidarity between marginalized Black and White communities who felt increasingly disenfranchised.
Suddenly, the WWC was rebranded as law-abiding, hardworking, Conservative-voting, and inherently 'good honest folk' whose concerns were supposedly ignored. This dramatic volte-face was executed at breakneck speed by both tabloid and broadsheet newspapers, seemingly without a trace of guilt or introspection. Yet, it proved remarkably effective in swaying public opinion.
Terms like 'Red Wall,' 'Woke,' and 'Culture Wars,' alongside 'WWC,' have now become ingrained in our political and social lexicon. This new vocabulary is frequently deployed to undermine previously hard-won successes in Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) by falsely claiming that anti-racism somehow disadvantages the white working class."
Demographic Panic - Sarkar observes a growing "transgender panic" with some portraying the mere existence of transgender individuals as a threat to the traditional way of life for "normal men and women". This highly politicized issue, she notes, has intensified in recent years, seemingly imported from American evangelical and far-right movements. Sarkar also delves into the "Great Replacement Theory," which posits that the "wrong" demographic groups are out-reproducing "normal (white) men and women," leading to an eventual demographic shift. This idea of an ethnostate is a problematic one, especially if it comes after hundreds of years of colonial rule and empire building for obvious reasons.
This analysis feels particularly relevant given Nigel Farage's recent announcement about removing the two-child benefit cap for British citizens. While it remains to be seen whether he intends this to apply to all "hard-working Brits" or a more specific segment of the "working-class Brits," his past statements have certainly hinted at an affinity for the "Great Replacement Theory."
Sarkar speaks out about her "Yes lads, we're winning" comment, which she made while presenting statistics on childbirth among different racial groups. She apologises for the remark, explaining it was meant as a flippant and sarcastic joke that she believes has been intentionally twisted by people with bad intentions. The fallout was severe, including death threats and even police involvement due to plausible pipe bomb threats.
She also argues that while some are quick to blame certain groups, like Muslims, for supposedly limiting women's rights, it has actually been the judges in America who rolled back Roe v. Wade, stripping millions of women of their abortion rights whilst emboldening the Christian fundamentalist on the Right.
Sarkar then gives a quick rundown of how the concept of race was created in science and social sciences. It started in the 16th century, and by the 17th and 18th centuries, various scientific and pseudoscientific groups jumped in to explain why things were the way they were. The 19th century saw the rise of Social Darwinism, with phrenology and eugenics gaining traction. These ideas ultimately served to justify terrible things like slavery, colonial rule, segregation, and eventually Nazism.
She also touches on the post-war movement of people from former empires to Western countries and how this immigration changed the face of the West. She specifically brings up Enoch Powell's 'Rivers of Blood' speech and how its influence still lingers in politics and society today.
Finally, Sarkar emphasizes that while race is a social construct, it's often treated as a scientific truth. She believes that it is constantly manipulated and altered to suit what the political right sees as a threat. This leads to what is called 'post-racial' politics—which is still racist, but now with a veneer of respectability. The 'I'm just saying' crowd love this cloak of respectability, especially when riots they helped cause are happening.
Sarkar ends with the stark choice facing societies: multi-racial democracy or the myth of Identitarian Supremacy.
I liked this as it was brief but outlined the main points of race and race theory. I also liked the calling out of Identitarian Supremacy, especially in Modi's India where apparently Love Jihad has been pushed as a concept. Anyone who has been in a relationship or marriage knows that it's hard to keep a relationship going even when you like the person (especially during time like Covid which led to many of my friends divorcing and breaking up with long term partners they did like), let alone for some weird concept like slowly and intentionally diluting the 'pure' race and religion of Hinduism. I mean, that's some commitment!
Planet Landlord - Sarkar plays a thought experiment with privitising air and goes through the processes and then reveals this is what had happened to water in the UK. She says rather than these things happening in isolation, there has been a coordinated plan with systems working together for the benefit of individuals and corporations. It's not pizza paedophile cabal but it's not random events just happening either, it's a middle ground.
Renteer Capitalism is the idea of not really doing much in terms of creation or production but extracting wealth upwards into the hands of the few. Look at Thames Water, a monopoly that is supposed to provide a key utility but is on the verge of collapse... I mean, how?! Easy. Take the money out of the company in terms of dividends and bonuses but don't update infrastructure or improve services- that's asset stripping.
This has happened in Britain across train, bus, gas, electric and other such integral companies and services as well as football clubs. That's why the country is going to the dogs but blaming the 'Other' helps to obfuscate this and the political parties and media are complicit in this.
Sarkar argues that we now live in an age of digital Fiefdoms (run by Techno Feudalists like Amazon, Microsoft, Google etc) with giant corporations having more GDP than most countries.
Epilogue - Sarkar ends with the summer riots that rocked England after the stabbing and killing of young girls was wrongly attributed to a Muslim refugee or asylum seeker. This dehumanisation of those seeking safety and dispersal to poorer areas meant 7 out of 10 most deprived towns witnessed rioting. Those convicted often had the same pattern; were of no fixed abode, were jobless, had had a difficult and often broken family background, and often did not finish their schooling.
The failure of the social safety net is not a pass to be racist or commit crimes but it is emblematic of where we are as a country. However, there were plenty of people who were not in difficult circumstances who used the horrific events to carry out heinous racist acts, like the wife of an MP who said, “Set fire to all the fucking hotels full of the bastards for all I care... if that makes me racist so be it”.
Since then, a profound moral urgency has swept across the world, manifesting in widespread protests against the genocide in Gaza. Sarkar argues that rather than ending on a despairing note, sustained persistence, focused effort, and collaborative action—instead of individual isolation—offer a path to meaningful change. This transformation, however, will be hard-fought, as existing systems of power and authority will deploy all their resources and influence to maintain their positions.
I really enjoyed the book as it brought together a lot of the different opinions and stands I've been collecting over the past several years. Greta Thunberg realised this a while ago too and so she is fighting to break the oppressive capitalist system that has caused a lot of the problems we are seeing including the climate catastrophe.
Last summer, as the riots were going on, I wrote the following on Facebook and I think it still stands:
The 'Condition of England' question, where the Industrial Revolution created massive inequalities in British society that led to a huge wealth disparity, has echoed through time and been perpetuated and maintained through political choices. Most recently, the UN Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights, Philip Alston stated in 2018 that the years of government led austerity had led to the "systematic immiseration of millions across Great Britain” which damaged the fabric of society and led to an increase in populism. The safety nets that were supposed to protect us were systematically underfunded, asset stripped and sold for spare parts to the private sector, creating a break in the usual fabric of social cohesion.
As a British Pakistani, I was always warned that the lives of peoples of colour was conditional in this country. Growing up, it was easy to see the peaks and troughs of dehumanising language used against whatever bogeyman was decided upon for all the percieved ills of the world, although it was almost always immigrants, asylum seekers or any people of colour.
Many politicians, as well as the right wing and mainstream media, have been complicit in this for decades and now pretend to act surprised that their words and actions have stoked this fire. I hope there are real consequences for those who wish to tear apart our society. In the meantime, protect and support those in need.
LINK: Japan: My Journey to the East
LINK: Please Save My Earth - Cult Manga Review
LINK: Thomas Was Alone Video Game Vinyl Soundtrack Review
LINK: Akira Soundtrack Vinyl Review
LINK: The Power of Stories and How They Are Manipulated
LINK: The Message by Ta-Nahisi Coates - Book Review (and Some Thoughts)
LINK: The Anxious Generation: Book Review (and Some Thoughts)
LINK: Utopia for Realists- Book Review
LINK: Toxic: Women, Fame and the Noughties- Book Review (and Some Thoughts)