Harry's Place

Mikey, what do you think of the tactics of the 43 group then- they were pretty physical.

I like the idea of a bunch of nazis and communists beating the living shit out of one another, frankly.

ami

The situation in post War Britain was very different to today.

The BNP has strength, and is a concern, but it is not close to 1950s fascism. It isn’t militized, although it has its thugs and bombers on the fringes. It does not engage in civil disobedience. It is largely kept behind an unbreached political cordon sanitaire. No party even goes into coalition with it. (I believe!). Opposition to the politics which it espouses is the shibboleth of the political mainstream.

That was not the case in the 1950s. There, we saw uniformed fascists, engaged in paramilitary activity. Racism was also commonplace, and accepted.

The one thing that doesn’t worry me about the BNP, is that they’re going to coup. Or that they’re going to shift political discourse towards xenophobia. I worry that they’ll get European Parliament seats, that’s what.

will be appreciated by football fans

Fuck you

So what’s new?

There have been thuggish organisations on the left for years. And I mean here in the UK. I suspect they started up in the season of mellow strikefullness of the Callaghan government. At that time their main assignment was stirring up trouble on picket lines.

In Europe they are even worse. I think one outfit is called the Autonomen. If there is a protest against sharia law, they will attack it, violently, in broad daylight.

Turns out, we aren’t angels either.

If it is true that (as is said on the SU blog:)

A gang of BNP Nazi storm troopers armed with baseball bats, hammers, and other offensive weapons piled out of the Landrover and proceeded to attack the peaceful and unarmed demonstrators.

What exactly do you expect to happen? People will fight back in that situation – it is not a debating room or a civilised blog – when you threaten people like that their instincts take over.

exactly, Graham.

unless some are suggesting that the BNP can be defeated by singing “Kum ba yah, my Lord” or weighty articles in the Guardian?

I think we might do well to reflect on what previous examples of the neo-fascists being defeated tell us? what happened and how?

Also ponder on why and when they suceeded (France is one example), and what mistakes were made?

Well no-one attacks peaceful demonstrators, including children, with baseball bats without leaving graphic evidence. I can’t see any evidence on that site, and I can see some repudiation of this story.

And the other aspect of this, is that if you want to appeal to the finer sentiments of the electorate, you don’t do it by using a claw hammer on the opposition.

But most of all Graham, you are missing something important.

They are on the upswing. They are gaining fast in electoral terms, we are falling even faster. They know the last thing they need is to attack us with violence. And we are beginning to demonstrate that we just might be desperate enough to set our attack dogs on them. Giving them photographic evidence was confirmation.

Well done that dork!

I have a feeling that what happened here is that the BNP tried (as they often used to in Bermondsey) one of their tactical provocation “appearances” in a multi-racial area (though I don’t know Leigh) and having decided to intimidate the unarmed protestors – who probably had a few locals in their number- they were then set upon by a large group of people who came out of the local pubs etc “tooled up” with whatever they could grab.

So all the talk over at SU about “Squadism” and “how socialists should behave” is just empty blather (although it probably makes a few people feel better to think they are in control of “anti-fascism” even as ordinary folks deal with bullies the way ordinary folks always have.)

And we are beginning to demonstrate that we just might be desperate enough to set our attack dogs on them. Giving them photographic evidence was confirmation.

I don’t think you are even in control to the level that you could either set attacks dogs on anybody or stop them Monty.

Lets get things straight. The remnants of anti-fascist groups (as represented at SU right now) reflect nobody but a few ancient Trots and nerdy students. If you want a real broad-based “anti-fascist” movement as existed in the past – and even more importantly you want to be able to have some control over it – then you will have to tap into the ordinary people who I suspect undertook this attack, gain their respect and move forward from there.

Alternatively you could just sit online (or in years gone by in the pub – because such people have always existed) and whine about what happens when fascists come to town and get battered by the locals….

David T – “The situation in post War Britain was very different to today.”

I don’t see how. Illegal acts were illegal. It was as wrong then to deny someone their rights as it is now.

“The BNP has strength, and is a concern, but it is not close to 1950s fascism. It isn’t militized, although it has its thugs and bombers on the fringes. It does not engage in civil disobedience. It is largely kept behind an unbreached political cordon sanitaire. No party even goes into coalition with it. (I believe!). Opposition to the politics which it espouses is the shibboleth of the political mainstream.”

And in the 1950s Fascists like dressing up in silly shirts. So what? Since when is civil disobedience a crime worthy of a summary beating? And in the 1950s no one in their right mind would touch the Fascists either. So what was different?

“That was not the case in the 1950s. There, we saw uniformed fascists, engaged in paramilitary activity. Racism was also commonplace, and accepted.”

Racism may have been more common, but the BNP is as rejected as the BUF was. British people do not like their racism. So you seem to come down to the idea that wearing silly baggy shorts is a reason to have the living day lights kicked out of you. This is an odd approach.

By the way, Muslims might well claim that Islamophobia is more rampant now than it was then. To which my response is so what? What is yours? That they have a right to beat people up?

“The one thing that doesn’t worry me about the BNP, is that they’re going to coup. Or that they’re going to shift political discourse towards xenophobia. I worry that they’ll get European Parliament seats, that’s what.”

And the BUF and all its splinter groups were hardly going to carry out a coup either. More to the point, if beating up the BNP causes popular support then beating up the BUF and the NF presumably did too. So the 43 Group made that unlikely coup slightly more likely, no?

Street battles to suppress political opinions you do not like – and which do not harm anyone in any way – are morally and legally wrong. We should never ever support them. It is this politics that leads to the Islamists of today.

Well no-one attacks peaceful demonstrators, including children, with baseball bats without leaving graphic evidence. I can’t see any evidence on that site, and I can see some repudiation of this story.

Threatening would be enough. But more to the point everybody on the anti-fascist left at the moment knows each other so a large group of anti-fascists appearing tooled up would be immediately recognisible to someone. So either there is a “squad” out there and people know who they are but are keeping quiet because “Da left don’t grass” or (much more likely) this was a group of locals who didn’t take kindly to Griffin’s mob arriving on their manor. SU can’t decide between whether it actually wants to get involved with nasty working-class types (In which case they may object to any “leadership” imposed upon them) or whether it is safer just pretending there is a mob of “tooled-up anti-fascists” out there and making disaproving noises whilst hoping they are around if your next counter-demo is attacked – a tactic which kind of worked in the late seventiesas I recall.

Graham:

“I don’t think you are even in control to the level that you could either set attacks dogs on anybody or stop them Monty.

Lets get things straight. The remnants of anti-fascist groups (as represented at SU right now) reflect nobody but a few ancient Trots and nerdy students. If you want a real broad-based “anti-fascist” movement as existed in the past – and even more importantly you want to be able to have some control over it – then you will have to tap into the ordinary people who I suspect undertook this attack, gain their respect and move forward from there.”
—————–

Oh well that’s just great.

Vote for us!

We have no control over our own thugs. But we did have some thugs somewhere, honest….

… is not an electoral strategy. You don’t win people over like this.

And do not insult our intelligence by inferring that attack was a spontaneous over-reaction by offended citizens who just happened to have bought a nice new clawhammer.

Ami,

Morris Beckman, in his book, The 43 Group, (London, Centerprise Publications, 2006) of which I am proud to own a signed copy, discusses the formation of the group in 1946. Comprising the group were a number of Jewish ex-servicemen who had just returned from a war where millions had died as a result of fascism, with Jews being a special target. Oswald Mosley, who had modelled his own group on the Nazi Germany model had been released from his internment and his supporters were openly selling their titles outside selected tube stations including Whitechapel, Edgware and others with known Jewish populations in the local vicinity.

I was not alive in 1946 but it seems to me clear that the situation between the BNP now and fascists then are startlingly different.

In the event that I felt that BNP or other racist thugs were beating people of a different race on the streets up and the police seemed to be not bothered about it, I may think differently, but in Britain in modern day, whilst there are obviously still racist attacks that occur, I have faith in the police force to do their best to stop any violence and make suitable arrests of anyone who is violent.

If a bunch of racists walked into an immigrant area and starting randomly beating people up and before the police could get there, in self defence some fought back and ended up seeing the fascists off I would have less of a problem with the violence and I assume that a judge would also see it as an act of self defence. This is entirely different from turning up to a rally organised by fascists complete with a claw hammer fully expecting a fight.

Please do not forget Ami, we are a democratic country and everyone has full rights to be protected by the law. I do not really see an excuse for the behaviour of the so called anti-fascists in Britain in 2009.

And do not insult our intelligence by inferring that attack was a spontaneous over-reaction by offended citizens who just happened to have bought a nice new clawhammer.

I didn’t (can’t you read?)

We have no control over our own thugs. But we did have some thugs somewhere, honest….

I rather suspect old chap that you don’t have any thugs (and that you don’t have very many people with the slightest connection to what happens in the real world when the BNP turn up either!)

What’s all this about appealing to the “finer sentiments of the electorate” by the way? Do you think someone who is being threatened with a baseball bat is thinking about going out canvassing? Weird!

Have you ever been threatened by a large gang of BNP/NFers I wonder?

again, how do people propose that the BNP is stopped?

“again, how do people propose that the BNP is stopped?”

In America, we ignore the Klan. Works marvelously.

yeah, righto, mesquito but that doesn’t work in Europe, as Le Pen’s NF show (in the 1970s they were very small too), now they can occasionally put up a candidate for the French Presidency

but mesquito, you forget that the US use to have anti-KKK laws too, and there was a time when the Klan used to firebomb Churches, etc so the US has not always ignore the Klan (nor should they)

“We shouldn’t be providing the BNP with martyrs.”

Or more simply, one shouldn’t attack someone with a hammer unless its in self-defense. The utilitarian argument is irrelevant.

“How could you turn up with a claw hammer to a counter demo, and not be looking for a fight?

We shouldn’t be providing the BNP with martyrs.”

– David T.

Hear, hear!

See: Horst Wessel, Horst-Wessel-Lied

I admit I know little about Le Pen, but perhaps part of his success was the willingness of the Left to play their assigned role in his productions.

When the Klan firebombed churches, it was not “anti-racists” or “anti-fascists” who shut them down. It was J. Edgar Hoover.

mesquito,

er, no, Le Pen’s success was, partly, due to the fact that the French Left (the neo-fascists natural opponents in the past) were complaisant (along with French liberals) and effectively argued “we are big, they are small, it won’t happen”, but it did.

Mikey – “Oswald Mosley, who had modelled his own group on the Nazi Germany model had been released from his internment and his supporters were openly selling their titles outside selected tube stations including Whitechapel, Edgware and others with known Jewish populations in the local vicinity.”

“I was not alive in 1946 but it seems to me clear that the situation between the BNP now and fascists then are startlingly different.”

So the threat that was so imminent that normal democratic legal and moral norms had to be set aside, was that Oswald Mosley’s supporters were peacefully presenting their ideas to people who did not have to read them, or buy their books, but who might have been offended by the contents of said books?

Tell Inayat. I am sure he would love to think of a justification for fire bombing any bookshop that sold the Jewel of Medina.

The fact is World War Two was about protecting the right of everyone, even scum like Mosley, to spout their nonsense. It was about making sure thugs did not beat people up in the street merely for expressing an opinion.

The direct descendents of Group 43 are with us today – shutting down plays they do not like and burning the Satanic Verses.

Graham has a tragic fantasy about “workers and peasants” from Leigh pouring out of the pubs to attack the BNP.

Unfortunately, the leader of the hammer brigade let the cat out the bag when he described his crew as being composed of “students from Salford University and the Salford Left Forum, United Against Fascism, the AFA and from local anti-fascists, including members of the Socialist Workers’ Party, Socialist Party, Community Action Party, Labour Party and Respect”

So just your average bunch of Lancashire lads defending the honour of the town then?

Unfortunately, the leader of the hammer brigade let the cat out the bag when he described his crew as being composed of “students from Salford University and the Salford Left Forum, United Against Fascism, the AFA and from local anti-fascists, including members of the Socialist Workers’ Party, Socialist Party, Community Action Party, Labour Party and Respect”

Really? And yet Steve H on the SU blog (a former Respect candidate) does not know who they were? (Pull the other one “Colin” it has bells on.)

Sounds to me like you are indulging a bit of “a tragic fantasy” yourself mate!

“I would be willing to join in, but that extreme would be if the fascists got in power”

Wouldn’t that be rather late?

As for writing that we live in “a democratic country that has a police force that exist to keep the peace” — that was precisely the case in Germany in 1932-3 when Social Democrats and Communists counted on the police to stop Nazi thuggery, instead of defeating the Nazis themselves in the streets.

The BNP is going to win seats in the European Parliament this year. They’re going to gain more seats on local councils. Some day, they may even win a by-election and get a seat in the Commons.

At what point does it become appropriate to take them seriously, and to defeat them on every front – electoral, in the media, and in the streets?

Vigilantism is part of the problem: it is NOT part of the solution.

So-called anti-fascists adopting fascist techniques degrade our society, undermine the rule of law, and really are very contemptible. And special pleading saying, oh in these circumstances….please give it a break. Rule of law is rule of law.

One of our members, a regular electoral candidate, had a fascist father, hard-core Moseleyite. he recalls his dad sitting him down and showing him fash press depictions of the weapons used to break up their meetings, clubs with nails through them and the like. Whether that was true, it certainly helped prop up fash propaganda.

It’s also part of SPGB folklore that, because we didn’t join in with no-platformism and criticised the Soviet union, the old CP used to try and no-platform us and break up our meetings…

I’ll be voting BNP after reading this blog, it’s obvious to me who the real facists are.

“When facism returns it will come under the guise of ant-facism”

in that extreme I would be willing to join in, but that extreme would be if the fascists got in power and used that power to make the country undemocratic and the fascist government turned against the people.

I reckon you might want to get involved a bit before that. Or would you really not have fought against the Nazis pre-1933?

I’ll be voting BNP after reading this blog

And to think that people accuse fascists of being thick as shit.

We really do seem to have the exact same discussions here, again and again and again.

So I’m just going to copypasta my response Ven’s charges of vigilantism from the post on the 43 Group from one month ago, all of which still applies to the BNP despite them keeping their “thugs and bombers on the fringes” for most of the time (as anyone who has tried leafletting in a bye-election where they’re running knows)…

One of the principle strategies of fascism has always been to control the streets – to use demonstrations and marches to establish a visible presence that will rally supporters and intimidate opponents, to take control of territory from the street up. In white areas, they make sure their opponents are unable to organise and campaign; in multi-racial areas they pursue a strategy of creating inter-racial tension and then crowding out alternatives to deal with the conflicts they have created. The police have frequently been unable or unwilling to do anything about such tactics. The 43 Group was part of a long tradition of militant anti-fascism which prevented a myriad of fascists establishing that presence, that street control – up to and including the BNP, who only abandoned the strategy of the street after repeatedly getting their arses kicked by Red Action. It’s not gangsterism – it is a legitimate, necessary and measured response to gangsterism.

If the anti-fascists had used more hammers earlier—in 1932, for instance, and possibly even at the cost of diverting attention away from a number of highly amusing slogans—then quite a bit of trouble might have been averted.

I love the sacual racism in describing British people in the 1950s as racist. Don’t you think that just as not all Muslims are not suicide-belt wearing nutters, some British people may not have been frothing at the mouth racists? Isn’t that called essentializing?

The police have frequently been unable or unwilling to do anything about such tactics.
Come on, leafletting, talking and staging demonstrations is legal and not something with which the police may interfere unless the action is violent.

The 43 Group was part of a long
tradition of militant anti-fascism which prevented a myriad of fascists establishing that presence, that street control – up to and including the BNP,
who only abandoned the strategy of the street after repeatedly getting their arses kicked by Red Action. It’s not gangsterism – it is a legitimate, necessary
and measured response to gangsterism.

The fascists had every right to use the streets as long they did not break the law. So either what you are arguing is that free speech and freedom of assembly is not a right enjoyed by everyone or that the right itself may be curtailed by private violence if the law does not shut down fascist agitation.
The fact that some fascists used violence and unlawful intimidation in conjunction with lawful use of speech and assembly does not g´rant private actors a license to use violence against every manifestations by the fascist movement, more than violence by anarchists would grant police the right to beat up all demonstrators at anarchist event, or is it just anot^her leftist double standard?

Dave

If the anti-fascists had used more hammers earlier—in 1932, for instance, and possibly even at the cost of diverting attention away from a number of highly amusing slogans—then quite a bit of trouble might have been averted.

Well then perhaps I should rightly take a hammer to the faces of some members of the “Socialist Workers’ Party, Socialist Party, Community Action Party, Labour Party and Respect” in order to prevent a recurrence of the crimes of Stalin or Mao, or could there be a flaw in the argument?

Yes, Tentacle, there is a flaw in the argument: they are mostly Trotskyists.

Venichka

Vigilantism is part of the problem: it is NOT part of the solution.

You do a disservice to your argument by calling it vigilantism. Vigilantism is punishing criminals outside the law. As far as anyone has stated the BNP were going about lawful business.

Dave

Yes, Tentacle, there is a flaw in the argument: they are mostly Trotskyists.

Being the good communism that has been tried yet? No thank you, I prefer liberal democracy. Putting the hammer wielders in power would be about equal to a BNP government from where I’m standing.

Just to be absolutely clear, Right not Racist condemns this violence out of hand.

We had nothing to do with Saturday’s activities, and the events which took place make it unlikely that we would join any such demonstration in future until it can be guaranteed there will be no violence.

We are a peaceful organisation who believe the BNP should be defeated on the political battlefield.

This is the comment I just posted on SU:

I was a rank and file member of AFA in a very different corner of the country in the late 1990s. AFA was wound up, not because it saw “militant anti-fascism” as a dead end (as one commenter claims) but because it saw physical confrontation as a lower priority in the current climate. The comrades described in Steve H’s mailing as “the AFA” are not, therefore, formally AFA. I don’t know if they are Antifa (”Continuity AFA” as some people call them), as some commenters suggest, or simply AFA veterans.

For militant anti-fascists, physical confrontation and ideological struggle are not an either/or. The priority now is clearly a political battle with the BNP in the communities where they operate. But that does not rule out physical confrontation when it is appropriate, such as when BNP thugs think they can operate with impunity in our neighbourhoods, when they walk around tooled up round leftist demonstrations, when they are launching physical attacks on us.

They try and portray themselves as respectable nationalists, but the old thuggery is not far below the surface and it doesn’t hurt to remind people of that every now and again.

The comrades described in Steve H’s mailing as “the AFA” are not, therefore, formally AFA. I don’t know if they are Antifa (”Continuity AFA” as some people call them), as some commenters suggest, or simply AFA veterans.
Or, as Graham suggests, simply ordinary folks who can’t stand the BNP strutting their stuff in their neighbourhood.

I’ve been thinking about how now differs from 1946. It seems to me Dave T is wrong to suggest that the fash then were on the verge of a victory they are not close to now: they were in no position to initiate a coup then, most ordinary people had a strong anti-Nazi consciousness due to WW2 and would not have allowed it, and Beckman and his colleagues have never claimed that stopping a coup was their motivation. True, the BNP are hardly close to power now; it is not Germany in 1932. But they are a lot closer to power than Mosley was after the war.

Of course times have changed, but all the reasons the 43 Group had for organising then are still valid now.

Well, speaking as a bit of a Trotskyist myself, I have to say that I agree with you, Tentacle—ie I would prefer liberal democracy to the kind of rule one might be tempted to expect those whose propaganda wilfully succours Iraqi fascists and terrorists, for example. That is, I wouldn’t want to accept anything that is worse that liberal democracy (and, call me fanciful if you like, I still think that something significantly better is possible). I’m just saying that, in certain circumstances, it might be unwise to rule out the hammers.

Just a note on the 43 group, as some commentators are misappropriating their actions and the ethical implications.

The founders responded to the physical violence of ‘BUF cells’. It was anti-fascist certainly, but the personal motivation came first for members. Jewish families were physically molested by thugs, under a banner of fascism/nationalism. The Palestine situation created a great British animosity to Jewish communities (’48 boycott). The police, generally, were disinterested in the plight of Anglo-Jewry as it was unpopular to support them. Home Secretary, Chuter Ede, championed this ‘political’ approach. Only 2 European countries allowed the post-war, frustrated fascists a platform; Franco’s Spain & UK. License to free speech spilled over to free action for many of those fascists.

The 43 Group didn’t glorify violence, as some have it here, they (as returning, decorated, war veterans) resorted to it.

I do not glorify violence, but I think it is at times necessary and at other times not necessary but perhaps useful. Today too, hate attacks are at high levels, against Jews, against migrants, against Muslims. They are highest in places where fascists are active (and by fascists, I include the Islamist clerical fascists who incite violence against Jews). The BNP have carefully crafted a respectable image in the last decade, distancing themselves from antisemitism and violence. But the new look is skin deep. Their members, apparently including Tony Ward, the victim of the claw hammer attack, have a record of violence against people of different ethnicities.

Dave

Well, speaking as a bit of a Trotskyist myself, I have to say that I agree with you, Tentacle—ie I would prefer liberal democracy to the kind of rule one might be tempted to expect those whose propaganda wilfully succours Iraqi fascists and terrorists, for example. That is, I wouldn’t want to accept anything that is worse that liberal democracy (and, call me fanciful if you like, I still think that something significantly better is possible). I’m just saying that, in certain circumstances, it might be unwise to rule out the hammers.

You see this is the thing. The BNP are a political party and this was a rally / leafleting campaign. You may tell me that the BNP oppose liberal democracy, and that may be true and for me to decide, but I know that the people who did that oppose liberal democracy because they they were doing it AT THAT VERY MOMENT, whether they were Trotskyists or Maoists or whatever the hell they were. Merely threatening the BNP from leafleting is opposing democracy there and then.

They are highest in places where fascists are active (and by fascists, I include the Islamist clerical fascists who incite violence against Jews).

And what would you say was going on here? AFA, at least in Sweden, seems to take the side of the Islamist clerical fascists. Most people who comment on this blog would seem to qualify for the attentions of the AFA. If you really think this is such a good idea, can you just let me know this: when are you going to come for us?

AFA “seems to take the side of the Islamist clerical fascists”. No, one group called Antifa, in Sweden, does so. (And there have been other instances too, in other parts of Northern Europe.) Other groups called Antifa are utterly opposed. Antifa is not a single organisation, but a loose network.

AFA, as previous comments note, was wound up in 2001, and never supported any kind of Islamism.

For the complexities of Antifa, see these posts:
http://antigerman.wordpress.com/category/antifa/

The analogies with the 43 group and the 70s aren’t helpful.The remants of the no platform crew are like a stopoped clock waiting for the veneer of ‘patriotism’ to melt and reveal some well old nazi machine. The BNP don’t march, have by and large pushed the Hitler was right lot to the margins, aren’t involved in controlling the streets but by and large are performing well as a fourth party in council elections.In fact they are politically maginalising the far left. The latter would suggest that either the political fight therefore is more important or the game is up for a political alternative to the BNP.
The no platform proffesionals are even divided on whether a polical project is required even in the face of the reality that the opportunities and the capacity for the no platform lot are well and truly limited to only the very occasional set piece.
The self styled antifa abstain on politics, the SWP ask for the working class to vote for the same parties that have created the conditions for the rise of the BNP and the micro Trots think the correct slogan from Trotsky regarding Germany or Spain in the 1930s is where it is at.

There are some questions about the Leigh incident which are worth asking as there are a number of competing and contradictory claims:

One website claims that the BNP were tooled up and threatening people in the town centre earlier, another that they were tooled up and threatening the small UAF led demo outside the pub, Ward claims that they were filming UAF, Wigan BNP say that their members had gone to collect anyone who might have turned up to take them to the new meeting place.

So what were Liverpool BNP actually doing in the area? They are supposed to be a cutting edge branch nationally , Griffin loyal. So in what circumstances would those BNP members be threatening/filming/harrasing anti fash and why? It certaintly would be convenient to a number of interested parties if there was a feeling of ‘returning to the streets’ inseatd of sticking to the script

Why would a select audience who had to give a contact number who would have read the BNP site and the local paper stating that the meeting was cancelled turn up?

And how organised was the anti fascist attack? UAF and just about everybody who advocates no platform has tried to take the credit .But neither UAF or the micro Trots have any form or previous for violence and in the film Mike K and them are too busy holding UAF placards.

What I would advise is that if the incident is read as a tactical turn by the anti fascists then watch out for the neo nazi activists outside of the BNP for retaliation. Then antifa et al could get what they really want some justification for no platform with an equally politically irrelevant set of individuals. Wrong end of the pantomine horse.

Meanwhile back at the bar we could start thinking why the BNP are politically more relevant in some working class areas than the left?

I do feel this is an interesting discussion. I have quite a romantic view of the 43 Group and that may be unfair. I guess that I have heard Vidal Sassoon, the Group’s most famous, if not most important, member talk about the group and I guess when you hear such a talk and combine it with other interesting stories from people of sufficient age and recollection commenting on the Battle of Cable Street, I have not really spent time considering whether there actions were appropriate at the time. I guess I would like to retain my romantic view, but I accept this may be hypocritical given the views I have expressed in my main post. I guess I should consider the 43 Group in a more detached way.

I want to come back to Eric Lee’s point. He suggests that if we wait until fascists got into power to resort to violence then we may be waiting too late. He asks:

At what point does it become appropriate to take them [the BNP] seriously, and to defeat them on every front – electoral, in the media, and in the streets?

This is a difficult question and I hope it only becomes of academic interest and not a decision I will, or anyone else will, ever face having to make. I certainly feel that Britain in 2009 despite the rise in support for the BNP is not the time.

I am very concious however that there is a time when such actions are necessary. For anyone who has studied the tragic case of the Holocaust in Hungary in 1944, it becomes very clear that mistakes were made by the Jewish leadership. There becomes a point for potential victims of racism and fascism and for other anti-fascists when keeping faith in the government is the wrong thing to do. That specific point may be difficult to determine, but as I said I hope the question for any of us is one that is only ever of academic interest.

I think that point is reached when they attack you with baseball bats.

I don’t think opposing violent fascists violently contradicts democracy, Tentacle (although it may well contradict the principles liberal democracy), any more than overthrowing Saddam Hussein contradicts the principles of justice (even though it may well contradict international law). But that is so much the worse for liberal democracy and international law, in my opinion.

I echo Bob’s sentiments and Mikey highlights Eric’s difficult question, which I think people should ponder:

“At what point does it become appropriate to take them [the BNP] seriously, and to defeat them on every front – electoral, in the media, and in the streets?”

many of the answers above seem to be along the lines of:

Never, can’t be arsed, why bother, not me, etc

hardly satisfactory, eh?

Just to be absolutely clear, Right not Racist condemns this violence out of hand.

We are a peaceful organisation who believe the BNP should be defeated on the political battlefield.

How do you propose to engage with those people who are tired of living in Somalia, Bangladesh or Pakistan and will be voting in the next parliamentary elections? When did it become racist to resist uncontrolled immigration?

Unfortunately, the leader of the hammer brigade let the cat out the bag when he described his crew as being composed of “students from Salford University and the Salford Left Forum, United Against Fascism, the AFA and from local anti-fascists, including members of the Socialist Workers’ Party, Socialist Party, Community Action Party, Labour Party and Respect”

This is where everything goes off the rails.

You can bet that most of the leftwing groups cited above have had, have, or will have, alliances and associations with radical campus Muslim groups.

That’s the case in many America universities these days, and it was also the case during the anti-sharia demos in Belgium last fall.

And where were these brave “anti-fascists” during the anti-Israel demos last Janurary, demos in which radical islamists openly called for the death of Jews?

Never have I ever seen such public displays of chauvinism hatred and antisemitism, and yet where were the”anti-fascists?

I’m not trying to downplay the danger of the BNP nor take the heat off of them in any way, but I really wish someone could sort this out for me because I’m no longer sure what constitutes fascist and anti-fascist anymore.

There is a total lack of consistency on the part of these anti-fascist groups; so much so, in fact, that it puts their credentials, at least for me, are now in doubt.

Like, what totalitarian ideology are they battling, exactly?

And Graham, as usual, is blinkered.

“At what point does it become appropriate to take them [the BNP] seriously, and to defeat them on every front – electoral, in the media, and in the streets?”

I think the answer to that is something along the lines of “in wartime, or general social anarchy”. (Thinking of more recent events and general history in places like Northern Ireland and Bosnia).

Most decidedly NOT when there is a functioning legal system and state and police force, etc – - – yes, even if in the short term they are not taking the action that they ought, in certain areas or on behalf of certain people.

Because if that point is reached earlier…it would seem to be promoting exactly the break down of law and order which would benefit those most prepared to be ruthless and extreme in the use of violence.

Frankly it seems to me that a lot of the muscular force “anti fascists” are keen to combat the “race war” desired by those they oppose by imposition of their own “class war”: which, ultimately, as with the former, comes down to “might is right”.

The “far left” are no solution to the “far right”

Grahams attitude is that fascist thugs aren’t really fascists, or thugs, so long as they are on our side.

Meanwhile, a Harris poll sponsored by the FT, shows significant support across the EU, and in the US, for repatriating unemployed immigrants. In the UK, 78% strongly or somewhat support it, in Italy even higher.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/48a5c55a-11b5-11de-87b1-0000779fd2ac.html?nclick_check=1#

This is the wave of public support that the BNP and like minded parties are riding. And they have the entire playing field to themselves, because they are the only people even prepared to address the issues the public most care about.

Sorry, to clarify, my response was specifically to the on the streets part of the question.

Grahams attitude is that fascist thugs aren’t really fascists, or thugs, so long as they are on our side.

Er nope. Graham’s attitude is that this Ward bloke was lucky to escape a mob (not romantic “workers and peasants” with only one hammer blow.)

And Graham, as usual, is blinkered.

And John P having as usual picked up one piece of propaganda from one poster with no basis in any of the news reports has built an entire (King James’ ) bible out of it….

I’m not trying to downplay the danger of the BNP nor take the heat off of them in any way, but I really wish someone could sort this out for me because I’m no longer sure what constitutes fascist and anti-fascist anymore.

Oh come now, don’t be so modest. After your nose up the arse support for Milosevic I think we all know that you completely understand perfectly what constitutes a fascist and an anti-fascist.

As regards whether the mob which attacked Ward were: students from Salford University and the Salford Left Forum, United Against Fascism, etc etc or (as I have said all along) locals. I see that my old acquaintance ” TerryFitz” has just posted this on the SU site:

Just had a call about what actually happened, it seems to be firming up. It seems that Liverpool gangster, drug dealer and Griffin minder Joey Owens wound up some BNP people that the protesters were a bunch of spotty students. However when they got down there a lot of other people came out of the pub and they got hammered.

It almost hurts to be so right sometimes ;-)

Clearly what we need is a full-scale forum – perhaps a separate thread would be necessary – on counter-demonstrating. It’s no good either being completely legalistic about it, or encouraging a lot of testosterone-charged belligerency. The key should be flexible response.

I wasn’t in Leigh at the weekend, because I was in China. But, living in Lancashire, I normally would have been. I don’t want the BNP on the streets unopposed – equally I don’t want to get down to streetfighting unless really necessary. So I wouldn’t have gone tooled up, but I might have gone expecting a ruck. The best “tool” is a small but perfectly formed camera.

If the BNP limit themselves to marching, chanting and leafletting, then we have to recognise that we have to do the same. If, though, as usually happens, some of them decide that’s a bit lame and active intimidation is required, then a response is needed, but it needn’t be an inflammatory one. Bigger blokes to the fore, protecting whichever lot of poor sods are being intimidated, auxiliaries in the rear with the cameras. Making sure every bit of recorded aggression is clearly the work of the fash. The media will do the rest.

Yes, OK, one or two of us unarmed bigger blokes may get a punch in the face. But you don’t have to be a Christian to agree that that is probably better than a rap for using a knife or a clawhammer.

Counter-demoing the Islamofash is a bit different, as you aren’t allowed to say or write or sing anything that might possibly offend the Muz, but that’s another matter.

By the way, I have said nothing about supporting violence in the present instance, but it may be worth reminding those who are arguing that it is never justified about what the BNP themselves are capable of (in fact having watched this you would not put it past them having organised the “hammer attack” themselves):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fova-pr61sE

Er…Graham, just because some of the anti-fascist protesters were in the pub getting bladdered, doesn’t mean they were locals. Still, even Yvonne Ridley is claiming to be proud to be British these days, and wrapping herself in the Union flag. I’ve just read the Viva Palestina website, and she says that it’s a marvellous feeling to know that the people know that the aid they are receiving is from Britain. Even the few members of the convoy, trapped between Tunisia and Libya say they are British and want to be treated as such. By the way, didn’t some old Greek (Heraclitis) say that you can’t step in the same river twice? Rivers and History flow on inexorably.

Graham, just because some of the anti-fascist protesters were in the pub getting bladdered, doesn’t mean they were locals.

Strange sort of protest that would be – going to jeer the BNP and sitting in the pub while the BNP were outside threatening your fellow protestors with baseball bats….and then only appearing (unrecognised by any of the “great and good” of the anti-fascist movement) when the BNP start threatening people.

I think on the balance of evidence it is about as safe to assume these were local people as it is to assume that Martin Bormann is now dead.

This is Joey Owens by the way.

Nice eh?

http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-life/liverpool-lifestyle/2007/08/07/bromley-had-upset-a-lot-of-people-in-his-time-but-i-didn-t-kill-him-100252-19582700/

And John P having as usual picked up one piece of propaganda from one poster with no basis in any of the news reports has built an entire (King James’ ) bible out of it….

Well, remember the parable about Jesus feeding an entire crow with just a few loaves and fishes!

And i shall repeat the fact that during those viscious anti-semitic demos againsty Israel in Jan. I saw no evidence whatsoever of anti-fascist campaigners.

Such a penchant for selectivity means that they can’t be taken seriously nor even relied upon in the smallest ways.

People with brown skins who drape their hatred and bigotry in the mantle of ‘religion’ evidently get a pass, don’t they?

Such a penchant for selectivity means that they can’t be taken seriously nor even relied upon in the smallest ways.

I think you might find that if you read what I said above that I actually have little respect for the remnents of the anti-fascist organisations and have been arguing that they are not broad-based enough to stop this sort of thing even if they wanted to.

Anyway JP I think you and the church could do your bit to prevent violence in these situations by organising “ratlines” to save the BNP from untowards punishment. It isn’t an area where the Holy See are exactly inexperienced is it?

Anyway JP I think you and the church could do your bit to prevent violence in these situations by organising “ratlines” to save the BNP from untowards punishment. It isn’t an area where the Holy See are exactly inexperienced is it?

Well, Graham, it’s not as though the Holy See would stoop to bombing your subway.

The various anti-fascist groups have a similar orientation and outlook as well as similar alliances as the current “anti-war” crowd.

“I see that my old acquaintance ” TerryFitz” has just posted this on the SU site:

Just had a call about what actually happened, it seems to be firming up. It seems that Liverpool gangster, drug dealer and Griffin minder Joey Owens wound up some BNP people that the protesters were a bunch of spotty students. However when they got down there a lot of other people came out of the pub and they got hammered.”

Interesting as if TerryFitz had been contacted by anyone in ‘the know’ he would be aware that Owens in fact claims that two of Liverpool BNP are involved with SB.

Who wins out of this confrontation? Will their vote be affected in the Euroelections?
Will there be more ‘hammer’ attacks and if so by whom on whom?

Well, Graham, it’s not as though the Holy See would stoop to bombing your subway.

But it is nice to know that if anyone did they would stand a good chance of being whisked away to S America with the Popes blessing!

Will there be more ‘hammer’ attacks and if so by whom on whom?

There will undoubtedly be more hammer attacks as that is the kind of society we live in (who wins? Depends how the press decides to spin things) – as to who will attack who you are now projecting a desire for a prediction that even Mystic Meg could not satisfy.

Dave

I don’t think opposing violent fascists violently contradicts democracy, Tentacle (although it may well contradict the principles liberal democracy), any more than overthrowing Saddam Hussein contradicts the principles of justice (even though it may well contradict international law). But that is so much the worse for liberal democracy and international law, in my opinion.

You put in all kinds of qualifiers and rhetoric. If you believe that, for example, Simone Clarke, or Richard Barnbrook or whoever else, should have her face smashed in for being a member of the BNP, then quite frankly YOU deserve to be held down and have your face smashed in, though thankfully we have the law of the land to make such justice unnecessary. Try any of your immoral acts and you rightfully belong in a prison cell.

I say exactly the same about any member of the BNP who would do the same to members of the listed organisations above, however I do not have such scum in front of me, whereas I do have you at the other end of the keyboard, the opposite type of scum, or at the very least an apologist for them.

Graham

By the way, I have said nothing about supporting violence in the present instance, but it may be worth reminding those who are arguing that it is never justified about what the BNP themselves are capable of (in fact having watched this you would not put it past them having organised the “hammer attack” themselves):

You miss the point. Sometimes violence, pepper spray, whatever, is necessary to control a hen night gone out of hand. It certainly might be needed in order to control a group of members of the BNP. But if the BNP are breaking the law then that is the business of the police. Frankly you’re no different than a UVF man going out to shoot a Sinn Fein coincillor in 1989 EVEN IF your argument is correct. But your argument isn’t even correct. The BNP aren’t even Sinn Fein circa 1989. That UVF man is a paragon of moral virtue in comparison to what you’re apologising for.

“Themmuns is evil”. FFS Even the BNP has members who are just somebodies granny who doesn’t like that her grandson can’t get a job as a bricky without speaking Polish and get’s annoyed at seeing Andy Choudhry on GMTV. Have a bit of human insight FFS. Have a bit of wit. You wouldn’t accept people advocated beating the shit out of members of UAF on the grounds of showing that hammer attack. The logic just doesn’t hold. A lot of members of UAF are just students going along with a particular notion, not hammer wielding hate filled monsters. Be a human being. Put yourself in others shoes.

Frankly you’re no different than a UVF man going out to shoot a Sinn Fein coincillor in 1989 EVEN IF your argument is correct.

So lets get this straight. If I say that I have said nothing about supporting violence on this thread then I am “no different to a UVF man going out to shoot a Sinn Fein councillor in 1989?”

That’s some weird “logic” boy! Are you sure that you can read and have been reading anything I have posted because it sure looks to me like you are making up fantasies about what others have said and “putting yourself in others shoes” before they have even opened their mouths.

That UVF man is a paragon of moral virtue in comparison to what you’re apologising for.

Wtf? Cut and paste one instance of me “apologising” for anything on this thread you dishonest cunt. Satan himself would be a paragon of virtue compared to deluded liars like you.

If you believe that, for example, Simone Clarke, or Richard Barnbrook or whoever else, should have her face smashed in for being a member of the BNP, then quite frankly YOU deserve to be held down and have your face smashed in

So thinking something means that you should be punished by actually having what you are thinking done to you should it?

Fucking hell you are some confused weirdo.

“quite frankly YOU deserve to be held down and have your face smashed in, though thankfully we have the law of the land to make such justice unnecessary”

Well, if I’m to look for some minimimal common ground, Tentacle, I would have to say that I’m pleased to see that you have at least conceded the possibility of there sometimes being a distinction between justice and the law.