PARTY
ANIMALS: My Family and Other Communists
DAVID AARONOVITCH,
Jonathan Cape, 2015, 309 pages
Review by Phil Shannon
Party
Animals, a memoir by David Aaronovitch,
columnist with Britain’s establishment newspaper, The Times, seems, at first blush, to be a critical but sympathetic account
of the lives of the socialists, including Aaronovitch and his parents, in the
post-war Communist Party of Great Britain.
In Part Two of his book, however, Aaronovitch warms to the role of
bitter ex-Communist and gives us the “real story” of what he sees as a
monstrous, self-deluding ideology.
David’s father, Sam, a poor, atheist
Jew, became a Communist in 1934 to combat poverty and fascism, and spent 25
years as a leading Party official.
Soap-box, loudhailer and self-education were his tools of choice, and,
by all accounts, he was “charming, inspiring, a great teacher, a wonderful
public speaker …”. David’s mother, Lavender,
from an upper class family, was likewise a tireless Party stalwart. Whatever their illusions in the Soviet Union,
Sam and Lavender were not ridgy-didge Stalinists – they were, rather, “people
who cared about the downtrodden and the oppressed” and they devoted their lives
to building a better world.
David Aaronovitch followed in his
parents’ politically-outsized footsteps, as did many other baby-boomer ‘red
diaper babies’ (in the fifties, “a third of the membership of the Party still
had parents who were Communists”). Despite
regretting some “eccentricities” (no Beano
comics because the publisher was
non-union), Aaronovitch concludes that his Party upbringing was “not a poor
heritage, but an oddly rich one”.
Now, however, Aaronovitch is older and
wiser and he unpicks the “comfortable assumptions” he held in his younger years
about his parents and their politics. Like
a recovering alcoholic fervently severing all ties to the demon drink, Aaronovitch,
the recovering Marxist, renounces his socialist addiction, discovering that strikes
are awful, that his father led a campaign to censor lurid and violent US
comics, that the Party harboured spies, and that it is a slippery slope between
Stalin and a hypothetical British communist government which would eagerly “sentence
dissidents to slave labour in the Welsh salt mines”.
Rather than openly tub-thump his neo-conservative/neo-liberal
epiphany, however, Aaronovitch seeks to explain his political volte-face through
the mysteries of “the psyche” as they played out in his family’s relationship
pathologies and traumas. Sam’s energetic
adultery made his real family dysfunctional, says Aaronovitch, and it explains
Sam and Lavender’s steadfast commitment to their substitute, idealised
‘family’, the Party, despite all its communist wickedness.
Aaronovitch’s rejection of his parents’
transgressions of infidelity and wilfully blind party loyalty accounts, he
says, for his rightwards political trajectory.
Thus does Aaronovitch rationalise his anti-socialist spittle-flecked, ‘God-That-Failed’
anger as caused by psychology, not his political choice to go the full
Thatcher. In Party Animals, we get discount psychoanalysis not measured political
analysis.
No comments:
Post a Comment