Stephen Bailey: Macphersonism and the United Kingdom in the age of the cultural-Marxist hegemony

"Of course, cultural-Marxist teachers have already programmed the young with their left-liberal ideas, so doing this will ensure the victory of the left in the future and traditional values will eventually be lost" says Stephen Bailey.

By Stephen Bailey.

The publication of the Macpherson Report in February 1999 has provided the cultural-Marxists of the ‘liberal’ left (a misnomer as they are in fact authoritarian and not liberal or tolerant of other people’s views at all) with another powerful excuse and weapon to pursue their campaign against the traditional U.K. and its values and substantially aid their march through the institutions of this country as they strive for dominance.

This campaign has adopted several facets in order to achieve its aim and can be labelled ‘Macphersonism’ as, whilst its origins lie in the 1960s many of its current facets stem from the Macpherson Report.

The Macpherson Report has had wide ranging ramifications throughout U.K. society.

Although this concept has been around for much longer (it was first suggested by the Frankfurt School of thought during the interwar years of the early Twentieth Century and the initial stirrings of its march through the institutions of most Western countries began in the 1960s), cultural-Marxism was given massive impetus by the Macpherson Report of 1999 and since that time has rapidly captured the commanding heights of many important sectors of U.K. society such as politics, education, the media, policing and the judiciary for example.

As a result, they are in a position to direct public policy in the direction of their agenda and consequently there has been the fairly rapid transformation of U.K. society from its traditional basis and values to one ruled by politically correct ideas and rules. 

Both politics and education are vital to current and future conditions in a society and the liberal-left know this only too well.

As with other sectors mentioned, the cultural-Marxist left have been slowly but surely entering the education system and gaining control of the management structure so they can influence and shape its future development in a way that suits their agenda.

In this they have been spectacularly successful and education is now a powerhouse of politically correct thought churning out ever more students who have been programmed to think of the world in cultural-Marxist terms.

Thus, traditional ideas are slowly fading into the background as fewer and fewer people are educated in genuine U.K. history, ideas and traditions. These pupils will go on to populate the power structures of U.K. society in the future and unless this trend is reversed, future U.K. society will be dominated and governed by the ideas of the liberal-left and traditional values will be lost.

The liberal establishment never left power.

There has been a left-liberal government in the U.K. since 1997. First, Blair’s New Labour left-liberals came to power in 1997, then David Cameron’s left-liberal New Labour aping Conservative coalition followed them into power in 2010.

After Michael Howard’s Conservative Party lost the 2005 General Election, they drew the erroneous conclusion that they had been defeated because they had ran a too traditionally conservative right-wing campaign and that the electorate had rejected this because they had a left-liberal outlook.

Cameron ditched traditional conservatism and tried to gain electoral popularity by aping Blair’s left-liberal policies. Cameron was followed by May, Johnson, Gove, Hammond, Clarke, et al., all liberals from the Cameron era who continued the conversion of the ‘nasty’ Conservative Party (as Theresa May labelled her own party) from real conservative values to Blairite cultural-Marxism.

The ‘Conservative’ Party has now completely embraced Blairite cultural-Marxism and eschewed traditional Conservative values.

So, there is a line of continuity – from Blair to Johnson over the last twenty four years of governments of both ‘Conservative’ and Labour parties advancing the left-liberal agenda and aiding the destruction of genuine British conservative values.

Theresa May, when she was Prime Minister (2016 – 2019), wished to ensure the continuation of the left-liberal ascendency in the Conservative Party by staying on as Prime Minister until 2021, in order to ‘finish off the old guard’ and ensconce younger left-liberals in power within the party so they could perpetuate her left-liberal legacy. Boris Johnson is continuing these leftward trends and the cultural-Marxist left are still firmly entrenched in positions of power and influence in the ‘Conservative’ Party.

So, the cultural-Marxist left have consolidated their grip on the political establishment across the political spectrum, as laid out above, which means that they can control and dictate the direction of travel that the U.K. takes politically. There is currently no such thing as a genuinely conservative party in the U.K., least of all the ‘Conservative’ Party, which has now completely embraced Blairite cultural-Marxist dogma.

Another of the most significant areas of cultural-Marxist influence has been in policing. For decades now, the U.K. has been inexorably creeping towards an authoritarian cultural–Marxist theocracy in which the Police Force are little more than the paramilitary wing of the left–liberal state whose job is to enforce the left–wing orthodoxy of that state on the population, rather than the prevention and detection of crime.

There has been an incremental agenda of eroding the traditional foundations of the U.K.’s justice system. One facet of this is the gradual wearing down of the principle of the presumption of innocence, one of the major cornerstones of the U.K.’s criminal justice system.

This process began in the Macpherson era of policing (1999 onwards) and continues to this very day.

The concept that an accused person is innocent until proven guilty has been gradually abandoned and replaced with various left–liberal notions.

In many areas of criminal activitity there is an obvious need to employ the maximum effort to investigate thoroughly and take the appropriate action. But this is not the method employed by today’s police. They have accepted the assertions of the cultural–Marxist lobby that it’s safe to presume that the accuser is telling the truth and the accused is guilty and it’s now standard police and Crown Prosecution Service operating procedure to assume that all people accused of certain crimes are guilty and their accusers are telling the truth.

Rather than the presumption by the court that the accused is innocent and the prosecution having to prove his/her guilt, it’s automatically presumed that person is guilty and it’s his/her defence counsel’s job to prove his/her innocence. This assertion is just one facet of a deeply sinister campaign by cultural–Marxists to weaponise and politicise prosecutions to advance their agenda.

What’s more there has been several reported cases of left–wing policemen conspiring to frame an accused person by employing various tactics (withholding relevant evidence that points to the defendant’s innocence from his/her defence team, for example).

Nowadays, the police operate in the following way. An accusation of misconduct is made against somebody. This accusation is automatically believed, irrespective of the provenance of the evidence presented. Indeed, no actual evidence at all is required. Once an accusation is made, the police are duty bound, under law, to investigate. They do not look into the veracity of the evidence before proceeding with an investigation. The standard operating procedure is that an accusation is made and then the police are mandatorily compelled under U.K. law to proceed straight to an investigation. If the case goes to court, it is automatically assumed the accused’s guilty and they have to prove their innocence.

Such a system is also open to gross abuse in other ways. It is a troublemaker’s charter. People with an axe to grind or a political agenda to advance, or both, can manipulate it to make trouble for somebody they don’t like, or want to discredit (or both). They know that they can make up an accusation (there’s even a book published on Amazon that tells them how to make up believable accusations), will be automatically believed and that there is a good chance their target will go to court.

Even if their target is found innocent, they know that ‘there is no smoke without fire’ and a cloud of suspicion will hang over them for the rest of their life and so their reputation will be damaged to some degree and this serves their purpose of discrediting them.

It’s little more than a tool for left-wing troublemakers to ‘sort out’ individuals they don’t like and wish to make trouble for.

Justice in the U.K. is being politicised and suborned by the cultural–Marxist left. It is being transformed into a Continentalised, adversarial system whose purpose is to advance the cultural–Marxist agenda of the elite.

Macphersonism has had a very similar effect on the judiciary. It has been very substantially penetrated by cultural-Marxist elements over the last 25 years. The liberal-left has entered this profession and slowly risen to capture command of several key positions of influence so that they can steer national policy in their direction.

A good example of this is current Labour leader, Keir Starmer. He’s a lawyer who became head of the Crown Prosecution Service in the New Labour era.

Starmer ISN’T a moderate. When he worked at the C.P.S. he presided over an extensive programme of the cultural-Marxist politicisation of prosecution.

He introduced an extremely politically correct culture that largely ignored many crimes and very strongly pursued other types that had a political aspect to them, such as pursuing celebrities like Cliff Richard because of their status. During his tenure, most ‘lower’ level crime (which means crimes that affect ordinary citizens, burglary, mugging, anti-social behaviour, even many sorts of violent crime) was simply ignored and prevention was all but abandoned.

The cultural-Marxists’ control of the judiciary (and police) has led to a Marxist view of crime and criminals as being due to social deprivation, rather than the choice of people with bad characters.

Consequently, there has been a strong trend towards judges being very lenient on crime with the resultant lawlessness we see everyday now in be U.K., especially in large cities like London, but increasingly also in traditionally more crime free suburban areas.

In society generally younger people (those under 40) have been encouraged by the concept of Macphersonism to demand something, always get it and not expect any contradiction whatsoever. They have been encouraged by the cultural-Marxist left that now control the education sector into a mentality in which ‘they say and it becomes true’, irrespective of the merits of their arguments.

Several specious Marxist arguments are employed to justify this attitude, including the assertion that as the younger generation have the longest time to live so their ideas should simply be allowed to prevail without opposition and older values should be ignored. In other words, the younger generations should have a veto on what happens in society.

Of course, cultural-Marxist teachers have already programmed the young with their left-liberal ideas, so doing this will ensure the victory of the left in the future and traditional values will eventually be lost.

This is compounded by an increasing number of older people (50s upwards) who feel dissatisfied with their lot in life and who are using the young and Macphersonism to overcome the normal rules governing their generation to get what they want. They are running around helping the young achieve their leftist aims in order to get what they themselves want. This has had the affect of rapidly destroying exiting societal norms and advancing the left-liberal cause far quicker than it would have done without their help.

Another section of society that has been heavily influenced by the ascendency of cultural-Marxism is the Arts sector (i.e. the film industry and literary world , actors and celebrities, film producers, scriptwriters and others who work in the industry, writers and authors).

The bulk of these types of people is nearly entirely younger (below 40) and so have been similarly almost entirely influenced by cultural-Marxist ideas and Macphersonism in particular.

As a consequence, their output (films, T.V. programmes and articles and books) reflect this very left-wing perspective. This is invidious because such people and their work very strongly influence public perception as it’s viewed many times (often everyday) by large sectors of the population and whilst many people will judge for themselves the material’s merits or deficiencies, there will also be significant numbers of the population that will accept this as the truth, irrespective of its merits or deficiencies.

It is only natural that if something, even an untruth, is repeated often enough it will eventually be believed. The liberal-left know this and use it to their advantage.

Since 1999, Macphersonism has only got worse, year in, year out. It has been a major factor in assisting the left dismantle the structures of the U.K.’s traditional institutions and values.

The response of conservatism, both at the political and societal level has been cowed, apathetic and complacent and its response has been to try to appease the left rather than develop effective answers to counter their ideas.

Consequently, the cultural-Marxists have enjoyed a virtually unchallenged ascendancy and their march through the institutions of the U.K. has progressed rapidly so that they now have captured the commanding heights of many important sectors of society that they can use to control the political direction of the U.K., such as politics, education, the media, policing, the judiciary and the arts, for example.

It’s simply naive foolishness for those that wish to preserve traditional structures to continue with a supine attitude to Macphersonism when it’s red in tooth and claw and aggressively manipulating such a weak approach for its own ends. A much more robust approach is called for if we are to help traditional values revive and flourish into the future.

For more from Stephen Bailey please visit:

© 2021 Stephen Bailey


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here