53 years ago today, May 3rd 1968, following conflict between students & University of Paris authorities, students protested the closure of the Sorbonne, setting off a wave of civil unrest by MILLIONS of students & workers.
In the late 60s, French youth assumed they were living under a quasi-benign dictatorship.
The main opposition parties, Radicals & Socialists, had essentially collapsed, which meant that progressive political change via conventional parliamentary channels was all but ruled out.
In 1967, students at the University of Paris had staged protests against restrictions on dormitory visits that prevented male & female students from sleeping with each other. In January 1968, student leader Daniel Cohn-Bendit verbally attacked France’s Minister of Youth & Sports.
Cohn-Bendit complained the Minister had failed to address the students’ sexual frustrations. The Minister suggested he cool off his ardour by jumping into the pool, whereupon Cohn-Bendit replied that the Ministers remark was just what one would expect from a fascist regime.
The exchange earned Cohn-Bendit a reputation as an antiauthoritarian provocateur, and he soon acquired an almost cultlike following among French youth.
In March an attack on the American Express office in central Paris resulted in the arrest of several students.
At a protest a few days later in support of the students, more students were arrested, including Cohn-Bendit himself, who, it was rumoured, was threatened with deportation.
The March 22 Movement, which lobbied for the arrested students’ release, emerged in response.
Fearing an escalation of the protests, the dean of Nanterre shut down the campus, & since the students were barred from protesting at Nanterre, they decided to take their grievances to the Sorbonne, in the heart of Paris’s Latin Quarter.
On May 3, the police clear the university’s courtyard, where 300 students had assembled. The mass arrests that followed, with help from the national riot police, sparked violent resistance from bystanders, who began pelting the police with cobblestones & erecting barricades.
The police responded with tear gas, clubbings, & more arrests. The University was closed & student leaders proposed a rally for May 10 to demand its reopening, the release of students who were still being held by the police, & an end to the intimidating police presence on campus.
On May 10th, 40,000 student protesters gathered. Police blocked the marchers’ path, so some students began removing cobblestones & erecting barricades for protection.
At around 2 a.m. May 11, the police attacked, firing tear gas & beating students & bystanders with truncheons.
The confrontation continued until dawn. By the time the dust had cleared, nearly 500 students had been arrested & hundreds hospitalized, including more than 250 police officers. The Latin Quarter lay in ruins, & public sympathy for the students, already considerable, increased.
The protest movement came to engulf the whole of France, opening up new possibilities for radical change: the dismantling of authoritarian political structures; the democratization of social & cultural institutions ranging from education to the news media & beyond.
The next several days witnessed the largest wildcat general strike in French history: MILLIONS of workers poured into the streets in support of the students as well as to set forth their own demands. Scores of factories - including those of Renault - were seized by workers.
The French state was badly shaken, yet it weathered the crisis. Charles de Gaulle delivered a dramatic May 30 radio address in which he raised the spectre of a communist takeover, but the French Communist Party had long ago abandoned the dream of a revolutionary seizure of power.
The strikes continued but de Gaulle also announced an election for June 23, assuming that the French people were ready for a return to stability.
He also implicitly threatened to use the army to impose order if the forces of “intimidation” & “tyranny” did not back down.
Hundreds of thousands of people throughout the country marched in counterdemonstrations in support of de Gaulle.
Although strikes & student demonstrations continued into June, the student movement gradually lost momentum, & de Gaulle’s party won a resounding victory.
French society did undergo profound changes in the aftermath, but were more measured & incremental than many wanted.
The May revolt initiated a transformation of “everyday life”, a phrase crucial to understanding the cultural-political implications of #May68, in France & beyond.
The critique of everyday life encouraged activists to focus attention on a variety of qualitative issues & concerns that transcended the narrowly economic orientation of orthodox Marxism: the “sixty-eighters” sought to unmask new forms of ideological coercion & social control.
They realized that with the advent of consumer society, the scope of commodification had transcended the workplace & encompassed almost every aspect of social life, opening up critique of new areas of social emancipation, including feminism, environmentalism, racism & gay rights.
50 years later & we STILL need to confront the underlying problems: political authoritarianism & corruption; media control; structural & institutional disadvantage; consumerism; insecure work; nationalism & levels of wealth inequality not seen since the 1930s; & climate change.
#May68 has its critics, who see it as a childish chaotic outburst, achieving little & substituting economic justice for 'identity politics'. Others see it as the Left at its best: critiquing an authoritarian elite while fighting for both economic equality AND social emancipation.
One of the most significant problems the Left must confront is ubiquitous corporate #propaganda.
The Left is mistaken in thinking that simply 'speaking truth to power', or countering propaganda with truth, is an effective strategy. On it's own, it isn't:
A #THREAD about how forty years of uninterrupted neoliberal ideology has facilitated an elite who have hoarded at least $30 TRILLION offshore, & who fund political parties & free-market #propaganda which legitimate environmental & human exploitation:
Robert Jenrick’s attendance at the Epping anti-refugee protest on August 18, 2025, represents a grave error of judgment, dangerously irresponsible behaviour, and a morally indefensible decision, particularly given his role as Shadow Justice Secretary.
Jenrick posted photos showing himself at the protest outside the Bell hotel in Epping, where police have been attacked.
A Stand Up to Racism spokesman said “Jenrick is fanning the flames of the far-right by chasing Reform UK votes, and he’s giving confidence to known fascists.”
The rally, organised by the neo-Nazi Homeland Party provided a platform for extremists. Jenrick shared a photo of himslef next to Eddy Butler, former Combat 18 founder and ex-BNP organiser.
A coordinated political project is reshaping Britain in the image of Trump’s MAGA movement.
Reform UK—fuelled by wealthy donors, ideologically aligned think tanks, and a network of right-wing media—has ambitions unlike anything in modern UK politics.
The goal is clear: install Farage as PM, backed by policies and rhetoric that mirror America’s populist right.
Recent events, including JD Vance’s high-profile visit, reveal a deliberate and potentially transformational transatlantic political strategy.
Richard Tice's shameful rhetoric is dangerously irresponsible, and has clear historical parallels with Nazi propaganda, which depicted Jewish men as threats to German women, stoking fear and justifying persecution.
No civilised democracy effectively encourages vigilantism.
The Nazi tabloid Der Stürmer often portrayed Jewish men as sexual predators targeting German women.
A 1935 piece titled "Jews as Sexual Predators," claimed Jewish men committed heinous sexual crimes against Christian women and girls, citing fabricated or exaggerated cases.
The 1935 story described a Jewish man, Kurt Meyer, allegedly murdering a pregnant Christian housemaid, and another, Louis Schloß, supposedly drugging and abusing non-Jewish girls. There is no credible evidence to support these specific claims.
Politicians, right-wing news media and far-right extremists opportunistically exploit public concern over asylum seekers in hotels, inciting protests and potential violence.
How did we get here? And why the gulf between public perception and reality?
The government spent nearly a third less on hotels to house asylum seekers between April 2024 and March 2025.
The Home Office's annual accounts show £2.1bn was spent on hotel accommodation - an average of about £5.77m per day, down from £3bn or £8.3m per day, the previous year.
GB "News", which employs 75% of Reform UK MPs, is not a news channel - it's Reform's propaganda wing, co-funded by billionaire Paul Marshall and Dubai-based investment firm Legatum, who see it as an investment opportunity to help protect their wealth and interests.
@Ofcom
In the UK, since 1990, 'due impartiality' and 'due accuracy' have been fundamental components of broadcasting - especially for news and current affairs - and imho are essential for a well-informed citizenry and a fair-minded functional democracy.
GB "News" appears to disagree.
The first broadcasting standards in the UK emerged with the BBC in 1922.
Formal standards took shape with the Royal Charter in 1927, which mandated that the BBC provide information, education, and entertainment while maintaining impartiality and serving the public interest.
Voters need to know how right-wing populist nationalist politicians and radical/far-right nativist extremists construct their divisive discourse and rhetoric to exploit the anti-elite climate and fuel violence and division - and what to do about it.
So what can be done to counter divisive narratives and framing and to help Britain to become a more open, inclusive, fairer, less polarised and better multicultural society?
I make several suggestions in the above article, but make more below,
Countering the extreme right’s narrative of feeling "attacked" and needing to "defend" national identity requires a strategic, multi-faceted approach that challenges their framing while addressing underlying concerns and emotions.