Tendance Coatesy

Left Socialist Blog

Posts Tagged ‘far right

Farage Begins Hard Brexit Campaign with ‘Leave Means Leave’: The Real Fight over the European Union has Begun.

with 5 comments

Image result for Tendance coatesy People's Vote EU demo

Will This Bunch of Charmers Join Leave Means Leave’s ‘Battle for Britain’?

The far-right Daily Express says,

7.30am update: Battle for Britain campaign launched by Brexiteers

Leave Means Leave campaigners Richard Tice and John Longworth have spoken out in the strongest terms of the betrayal looming over Brexit talks.

They said: “Public anger is palpable. Among those most keen to support a new campaign are traditional Tory donors disillusioned by the handling of Brexit.

“A number are so angry about what is going on that they have told us they will stop donating to the Conservative Party unless there is a major change in approach.

“Should the party leadership stick doggedly to the flawed Chequers proposal, it should be prepared to haemorrhage funds.”

Mr Tice and Mr Longworth said they set up Leave Means Leave as a six-month project in the belief the Government could be trusted to do the job they had been instructed to do by the British people.

They told the Daily Telegraph: “People knew what they were voting for. They dismissed the ridiculous scaremongering of Project Fear and voted in the largest numbers ever to leave the EU.

“None of us imagined that, two years on, we would have to refight the battle. We never dreamt that we would have to attack some desperate ‘Chequers’ proposal from the Prime Minister, which led to the resignation of two of the most influential Brexit-supporting Cabinet ministers.

“None of us feared being let down by other Cabinet Brexiteers, who we thought we could trust. Today, they are trying to sell thin gruel to Brexit voters as if it were some sort of delicacy. It is a con, and must be exposed as such.”

The Arron Banks launched Westmonster brays:

Nigel Farage has announced that he’ll be hitting the road and campaigning across the country, hitting out at Project Fear and saying: “Our complacent MPs need to understand just how strongly people feel about being lied to while their wishes are blatantly ignored.”

Writing in The Telegraph, Nigel makes clear that he “will go back on the road to campaign once again” for the pro-Brexit group Leave Means Leave.

“Over the last few months, and particularly since the Chequers betrayal, scores of people have stopped me in the street to ask: ‘When are you coming back?’

“Well now you have your answer: I’m back.”

They post their ‘line’:

Support Westmonster

We stand with Nigel for a clean Brexit. Westmonster will always fight for Britain’s independence, but we need your help. If you support what we do, please donate so that we can go on countering the mainstream media’s Project Fear. Thank you!

The Independent reports,

Nigel Farage has announced he will once again begin actively campaigning in British politics against Theresa May’s “fraudulent” plans for Brexit.

The ex-Ukip leader said it was necessary as a result of the “deceit and treachery” of politicians and senior figures in British society in their approach to EU withdrawal.

In particular he singled out an exclusive report in The Independent on warnings from the British Medical Association that a no-deal Brexit would be a “catastrophe” for the NHS.

It comes as The Independent also drives forward with its Final Say campaign for a new referendum on the outcome of Brexit – with more than 650,000 people now having signed its petition.

Pressure is intensifying on the government ahead of Brexit day in March next year, with Theresa May’s own MPs even drawing up alternative proposals to the prime minister’s, and meagre public support for her approach.

Writing in the Daily Telegraph, Mr Farage claimed people had stopped him in the street to ask when he was returning, adding in his article: “Well, now you have your answer. I’m back.”  

He said: “It is now beyond doubt that the political class in Westminster and many of their media allies do not accept the EU referendum result.

“It is equally clear to me that, unless challenged, these anti-democrats will succeed in frustrating the result.

“Well, I’ve had enough of their lies, deceit and treachery. The time has come to teach them a lesson – one that they will never forget.”

He said he had decided to commit himself to the Leave Means Leave campaign, which is set for a relaunch, following discussions with its founders, businessmen Richard Tice and John Longworth.

In his piece, Mr Farage wrote: “To make matters worse we are subject to a daily stream of negative to beat us into submission.

“The latest example was the British Medical Association suggesting that a no-deal Brexit would lead to huge numbers of people dying.

“This baseless claim proves project fear is thriving. We need leadership.”

Mr Farage was referring to an article in The Independent in which the BMA said a failure to secure a deal could increase the risk of a Europe-wide pandemic.

The doctors union warned in a new briefing paper that the UK’s ability to coordinate responses to emerging threats, such as the current outbreak of measles or seasonal flu, will be seriously undermined, making it harder to stop infections spreading across borders.

Left campaigners against Brexit are attempting to get the issue onto the Autumn Labour  Conference agenda

In a counter move forces hostile to socialist internationalism are also organising inside the Labour movement.

 

Counterfire, which occupies leading positions in the Stop the War Coalitioon and the People’s Assembly, are hostile to the pro-EU motion.

In the run-up to the Labour Party conference in the period 23-26 September, all of this is a major threat to Corbyn. If the right succeed and change the party’s existing antisemitism code, and water down the party’s commitment to a People’s Brexit, this will sap away at the energies and hopes of left activists and voters, and breed wider discontent and distrust with the political system.

The consequences would be disastrous. The victory of the right in Labour would only do the Conservatives a favour by pushing Brexit voters in their direction, and it would embolden the real antisemites and the far right, the likes of Tommy Robinson, who feed on disillusion with the system.

Defend Jeremy Corbyn: time to fight back – Counterfire statement

Faced with the invisibility of a ‘People’s Brexit’ it is perhaps a sign of desperation to try to link the issue of the EU  to the Labour dispute about anti-semitism and to claim that to ‘defend’ Corbyn is to be against the call for a new People’s Vote.

There is no such confusion for the majority of the left.

UKIP and its former Leader Farage, are racist cheerleaders of the Carnival of Reaction, including the pro-Brexit Tommy Robinson crew,  that has followed Brexit.

Farage’s ‘Battle Bus’ and ‘Battle for Britain’ will no doubt receive the response they deserve.
Advertisements

City of Ghosts: from Syria to Europe and the fight against the far-right.

with 12 comments

 

Image result for City of Ghosts

City of Ghosts was shown on BBC 4 last night.

This moving documentary about a group of Syrian activists, Raqqa is Being Slaughtered Silently.  (RBSS)

The hopes of an Arab Spring resounded in their home, the city of Raqqa in the north of Syria. Protests against the Assad regime were countered by violent repression. The arrival of ISIL, in April 2014, the country’s branch of  Islamic State, was followed by the rule of their version of Islamic ‘law’. There were public beheadings, firing squad executions, mock crucifixions and  Volkish placard shaming.

At great risk to themselves RBSS opposed the take-over in the only way they could. They reported and filmed undercover the regime of what became the de facto capital of Daesh.

The documentary showed images of clandestine protests against Daesh and the slaughters the jihadists committed. Perhaps the most disturbing moments were when the new rulers tried to bring the young into their fold. “Children are Isis’s firewood” they said, and we saw a band of joyful babes and youngsters following a bearded fighter chanting their hate. A near-infant was filmed being trained to stab and behead on a large teddy bear.

This backdrop confirmed the worst scenes in Peter Kosminsky’s The State.

Many RBSS activists left the city, though they kept a core group of courageous witness inside Raqqa.

They used social media and the Net to broadcast their message. ISIL devoted a great deal of time to trying to search their supporters out.

In May 2014, Al-Moutaz Bellah Ibrahim was kidnapped by ISIL and murdered. In July 2015, ISIL released a video showing two men being strung up on trees and shot. Though ISIL claimed the two murdered men had worked with RBSS, one of the founders of RBSS denied they were members. Another friend of the group was similarly executed. Hamoud al-Mousa, the father of one of the group’s founders, was killed in ISIL custody. On October 30, 2015, RBSS activist Ibrahim Abdul Qadir (age 20) and his friend Fares Hamadi were found stabbed and beheaded in Urfa Turkey. It was the first acknowledged assassination outside of ISIL controlled territory. (Raqqa Is Being Slaughtered Silently)

The sight of Hamoud al-Mousa’s execution, followed by that of the same RBSS activist’s brother’s murder, being watched in a safehouse in Germany was harrowing.

City of Ghosts deserved the highest awards.

But above all the activists of RBSS, merit the greatest respect we can possible give to other human beings.

Avoiding fruitless debate about the essential nature of ‘Islam’ one of them says,

“It is not my Islam”.

Europe.

Towards the end of the documentary there were scenes in which the Syrians were  confronted by  the German far-right Pegida calling for the removal of refugees.

There was also  commentary on the actions of Daesh in Europe, including the Bataclan massacre.

This opens up the issue of how we should both support the fight of groups of democrats like RBSS and combat the racist far-right.

With the Tommy Robinson campaign in Britain this has become an issue of burning importance.

People have noted that the groups Stand up to Racism and Unite against Fascism are dominated by the Socialist Workers Party (SWP) (“Both these groups are front organisations of the Socialist Workers Party (SWP) and receive their political direction from its leadership.”  Socialist Resistance)

In 2014, as Raqqa fell to the genociders Socialist Worker published this article by Hassan Mahamdallie, co-director of the Muslim Institute.

There is resistance to this frenzy of Islamophobia

The beheading of US journalist James Foley by the Islamic State, formerly known as Isis, was horrific. But is the Nigerian military slitting the throats of 16 young men and boys any less horrific?

Or last week’s Israeli air strike that blew to smithereens the wife and seven month old son of Hamas military leader Mohammed Deif? Surely that was horrific and disturbing too?

..

In the 1930s radicalised young men from the same mining communities illegally made their way into Spain to take up arms against general Franco’s fascist army.

It must have been the fault of their Welsh Methodist upbringing.

But Howells’ drivel was modest fare compared to the truly millennial frenzy that was gathering pace.

In authentic End of Days tones, US secretary of defence Chuck Hagel said Isis represents “an imminent threat to every interest we have, whether it’s in Iraq or anywhere else.

“They’re beyond just a terrorist group. This is beyond anything we’ve seen, so we must prepare for everything.”

I much preferred the response of the spokesperson from south east London’s Lewisham Mosque.

The press asked him to condemn a tweet from a woman “Jihadi” in Syria who might have once attended the mosque.

He retorted, “The young woman’s desire to travel to Syria has nothing to do with the Centre. Unfortunately, the Muslim community are being subjected to a burden of proof based on a ‘guilty by association’ standard”.

He rightly attacked the press’s demand, as “loaded with an Islamophobic assumption that Muslims by default condone such brutality”.

It was good to see someone refusing to bow to the frenzy, a spark of resistance in a very dark week.

There was much in a similar vein, from the SWP and groups such as Counterfire, understanding the ‘radicalisation’ of those who volunteered to be part of Einsatzgruppen and concentrating their fire on the prospect of Western intervention in the civil war.

Unlike RBSS their criticisms of the Assad regime was fairly muted.

This ambiguity continued.

When Charlie Hebdo (12 deaths) and the Porte de Vincennes Hypercacher (5 deaths)  attacks took place  in 2015, the same forces took it upon themselves to understand why this “blowback” against France in general and the ‘Islamophobic” satirical weekly took place. Charlie “had it coming to them”. Counterfire railed against ” a crude and absolutist fetish of free speech”.

These people are unable to confront violent Islamism.

With such a tainted history these groups have no moral authority whatsoever.

There are many many people on the lest who do not back groups which fail to take a resolute stand against the jihadist Islamism, and against Assad.

The fight against Robinson’s supporters, many (from the Clarion to Socialist Resistance) suggest, should come from the mass organisations of the labour movement and the Labour Party.

We cannot unite around  “defeating fascism” as Lindsey German puts it, until we have a clear view that the violent jihadists and the mouvance around them, with roots in Europe as well as the Middle East and the Maghreb,  are also enemies of the far right.

And we need to back the Syrian democrats, whose heroism is so powerfully illustrated in City of Ghosts.

 

 

 

Written by Andrew Coates

June 12, 2018 at 10:37 am

Arron Banks, Hard Right Donator to Trade Unionists Against the EU, Embroiled in Cambridge Analytica Scandal.

with one comment

Sharing the stage: Brittany Kaiser, circled, sits alongside Arron Banks, the Leave.EU boss, at a press conference in 2015. She has now left Cambridge Analytica.

Brittany Kaiser, circled, sits alongside Arron Banks, the Leave.EU boss, at a press conference in 2015. She has now left Cambridge Analytica.

Arron Banks’ is one of the best-known Brexiteers.

His hard right wing Westmonster site (A full, clean Brexit, defeating radical Islam, ending the scourge of violent crime. These are our priorities. If they are yours as well, please support Westmonster and help us grow), is a conduit for the frequent articles by George Galloway.

As in,

Galloway: The project is subvert Brexit democracy is succeeding

Banks also donated to Trade Unionists Against the EU, a Brexit campaign backed by, amongst others, the Morning Star and the Socialist Party.

Now Arron Banks is in the news for some more skullduggery.

Cambridge Analytica bragged: We have vast data for Brexit vote

Evening Standard.

The founder of Leave.EU, Arron Banks, referred in his book The Bad Boys Of Brexit to CA being “hired” in October 2015. But he told the committee this simply referred to an early meeting and an intention to work together if Leave.EU won lead status, entitling it to spend up to £7 million, get a free mailshot, TV broadcasts and £600,000 public funds, in the referendum campaign. He insisted the group “devised and implemented its own social media strategy … without any input from Cambridge Analytica”.

Confusingly, a CA staffer, Brittany Kaiser, appeared on the platform of a Leave.EU press conference in November 2015 alongside Mr Banks, seemingly to present their campaign plans. She has since left the data company.

But…..

The Guardian leads with this story today,

Cambridge Analytica misled MPs over work for Leave.EU, says ex-director

Exclusive: Brittany Kaiser contradicts CEO, who told MPs the data firm did not work with Brexit campaign group.

Cambridge Analytica conducted data research for one of the leading Brexit campaign groups and then misled the public and MPs over the work the company had undertaken, according to a former employee who has spoken to the Guardian.

In an exclusive interview, Brittany Kaiser, Cambridge Analytica’s business development director until two weeks ago, said the work with Leave.EU involved analysis of data provided by Ukip.

Emails and other documents, seen by the Guardian, show the company was worried about whether it could speak openly about the “interesting findings” and the origins of the data that had been analysed. It decided against doing so.

Kaiser, 30, said the work took a number of weeks and involved “at least six or seven meetings” with senior officials from Leave.EU, which was co-founded by Arron Banks, a Ukip donor. She said the work took place as part of an effort to secure formal business with the campaign group.

Kaiser said she felt she had lied by supporting Cambridge Analytica’s company line that it had done “no paid or unpaid work” for Leave.EU. “In my opinion, I was lying,” she said. “In my opinion I felt like we should say, ‘this is exactly what we did’.”

As Front National changes its Name, Trump Former Adviser Steve Bannon tells French Far-right, “History is on our side”.

with 2 comments

La poignée de mains entre l'ex-conseiller de Donald Trump, Steve Bannon et la présidente du FN Marine Le Pen lors du 16e congrès du parti, le 10 mars 2018 à Lille

US Trump Far-Right Meets French Far-Right.

Steve Bannon populist roadshow hits Europe

After a number of other shows Bannon hit France, where his speech at the Front National Conference was a major event. (Politico)

Steve Bannon, the former Trump strategist and “alt-right” publisher, capped a European tour this week by urging a gathering of France’s struggling National Front party to stand by their populist guns.

“Let them call you racists,” Bannon told a party congress in Lille on Saturday, according to a video of the speech. “Let them call you xenophobes. Let them call you nativists. Wear it as a badge of honor.”

Steve Bannon tells far-right Front National party in France ‘history is on our side’

Independent.

President Donald Trump’s former adviser tells them they are ‘part of a worldwide movement bigger than France, bigger than Italy’

Steve Bannon, US President Donald Trump‘s one-time trusted adviser, addressed the far-right Front National party in France and said “history is on our side”.

The former editor of right-leaning Breitbart News had helped the President shape his “America First” agenda and met with National Front leader Marine Le Pen, known for her controversial anti-immigration views.

“You’re part of a worldwide movement bigger than France, bigger than Italy,” he told a cheering crowd in Lille, France for the party’s convention. Ms Le Pen said inviting Mr Bannon to speak was important because he was “the architect of Donald Trump’s victory”. She also cited his views on giving regular people “power, which in his mind and mine, too, has been practically illegally captured by the elite”.

Much of the French media focused on Bannon’s praise, not for Marine Le Pen, but for her niece,  Marion Maréchal-Le Pen who had spoken at the end of February in the USA at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) (Front National: dans la famille Le Pen, Steve Bannon préfère la nièce)

Le Monde cites the far-right Party’s spokesman Sébastien Chenu praising Trump, the “incarnation of the rejection of the Establishment, the European Union and the “political-media system”.

le porte-parole du FN, Sébastien Chenu a de son côté estimé samedi matin sur France Inter que l’ex-conseiller de Donald Trump « incarne pour nous le rejet de l’establishment, de l’Union européenne [UE], du système politico-médiatique ».

As a measure of the gauge Bannon’s organ, Breitbart, has on French politics their strapline on the meeting was the following.

Stephen K. Bannon To Speak At Major Front National Conference Rumoured To Rebrand Party

Rumoured, as in their publicly announced official intention for months and months and months.

Wear ‘racist’ like a badge of honour, Bannon tells French far-right summit

France 24.

The fanfare over Bannon is a distraction from the glaring paradox of this otherwise largely technical party convention, one poised to reinstate Marine Le Pen as leader even as faith in her leadership has indisputably waned.

She has looked to stir up excitement for the party name change she will suggest on stage Sunday, a rebranding set to put the 49-year-old’s indelible stamp on a party she took over in 2011 from her rabble-rousing father, Jean-Marie Le Pen, who founded it in 1972.

Hellbent on “de-demonising” the National Front in the public eye, Marine Le Pen made a show of snubbing the shaved-head and bomber-jacket types fond of her father and touting an economic programme that vilified the Euro currency and advocated a state that protects the vulnerable (or at least the ones who hold French passports). Reaping the rewards of nascent respectability in one election after another, she built a stable of elected officials at nearly every level of government. Advocates claim that changing the ostensibly sulphurous name is a necessary next step, the last obstacle to political alliances that would finally carry the FN to power.

But members seem sceptical. According to the party’s own unverifiable numbers, only 52 percent of members who bothered to return a questionnaire approve of calling the party anything else.

 As Le Monde reported a few days ago Marine Le Pen’s popularity is in steep decline, “Une image en chute libre”.

Volontaire pour 80 % des sondés en février 2017, elle ne l’est plus que pour 66 %. Sa capacité à prendre des décisions s’est effondrée de 69 % à 49 %. Les Français ne sont plus que 40 % (en baisse de 9 points depuis un an) à estimer qu’elle comprend leurs problèmes. Déjà érodée depuis 2016, sa capacité à rassembler au-delà de son camp ne lui est plus reconnue que par 30 % des sondés (en baisse de 12 points). Elle n’était déjà jugée sympathique et chaleureuse, il y a un an, que par 35 % des personnes interrogées ; elles ne sont plus que 25 %. Enfin, 16 % seulement des sondés (contre 24 % il y a un an) considèrent qu’elle ferait une bonne présidente de la République.

From being considered “Decisive” by 80% of those polled in February 2017, she has dropped to 66%. The assessment of her ability to take decisions has fallen from 69% to  49%. There is a drop of 9 points, to 40% who consider she grasps their problems. Eroding from 2016 downwards, the cap to appeal beyond her own side has gone down 12 points to 30%/ She was  judged warm and kind a year ago by 30% of the respondents,  this stands now at 25%. Finally, only 16% (as opposed to 24% a year back) think she would make a good |President of the Republic.

Some might consider this a good score for an acerbic apprentice dictator, but it is unlikely to please her party activists.

More reporting (Libération):  Steve Bannon, un air de populisme américain au congrès du Front national.

This notes the surprise at the invitation, and the not entirely happy reaction of some party activists, who rushed to declare (in view one imagines of Trump’s popularity in France) that there was no formal “alliance” between the FN and Breitbart.

Meanwhile the UK far-right is also building links with Bannon.

Written by Andrew Coates

March 11, 2018 at 12:36 pm

Cable Street and Anti Fascism in the US Today.

with 10 comments

https://i1.wp.com/www.socialist.net/images/new-stories/History/CableStreet/cable_streetthe-daily-worker.gif

No, Antifa, This is Not the 1930s and We Don’t Need to Punch a Nazi

It is not often, indeed it has not been never, when I commend an article in Counterpunch, but this is important, if contentious, contribution to what is a very divisive debate in the US today.

The author draws on Daniel Tilles, “The Myth of Cable Street.” History Today, and does not refer to other critical sources well-known to the British and Irish left such as Out of the Ghetto  by Joe Jacobs. His account of his involvement in the famous defence of the East End against an attempted march by Mosley’s fascists is important and a different version to that published by Communist leading figure on the day, Phil Piratin (Our Flag Stays Red, 1948).

Joe describes events leading up to the march, including the changes in the CP leadership’s tactics as they finally realised their calls for a peaceful demonstration elsewhere would be ignored. His account “corrects false impressions later created by official Communist versions of the events”. The Battle of Cable St, 1936 – Joe Jacobs.

The “Battle of Cable Street” is a key event in the “creation myth” of the anti-fascist movement. It goes like this:

On Sunday, October 4, 1936, about 5,000 members of the British Union of Fascists (BUF), led by Sir Oswald Mosley, planned to march in full Blackshirt regalia through several Jewish neighborhoods in London’s East End. Six thousand police were assigned to protect them from about 100,000 anti-fascist protesters. The anti-fascists fought the police and erected barricades to block the marchers. When the fascists saw there was no possibility of moving beyond the barricades, they abandoned the march and dispersed. [1]

Some accounts of the battle claim that the fascists and anti-fascists fought hand-to-hand, but Reg Weston, a journalist who was in his early twenties when he actually participated in the battle, makes it clear that the two sides never clashed. The police and barricades kept them apart. It’s a myth, Weston says, “that the ‘battle’ was between the protesters and the Blackshirts. It was not — it was a battle with the police.” [2]

Nevertheless, the crowd celebrated that day. The “Battle of Cable Street” went down in history as a victory for anti-fascist forces and to this day is part of the heroic mythology of the ultra-left: “For many members of contemporary anti-Fascist groups, the incident remains central to their mythology, a kind of North Star in the fight against Fascism and white supremacy across Europe and, increasingly, the United States.” [3]

I am less than sure that European leftists outside of the Isles are aware if Cable Street (see this very small Wikipedia reference in French. The German Wiki entry signals the passing of the Public Order Act as the main result). Anybody familiar with the violent clashes that took place in France in the 1930s, which led to dissolution in 1936 of the far-right, Croix de Feu, Ligue d’Action française, Parti Franciste, and the Camelots du roi, would be tempted to  consider it a sideshow, above all since those groups would be part of the reigning power a few years later under Vichy.  If “white supremacy” enters into accounts of the Battle against Nazism and Fascism, in the shape of the British Union of Fascists (BUF), I have only just heard of it. Finally, if the British Left considers Cable Street, for all its importance, does not generally consider it something of a significance on a par with, say, the International Brigades, or the Resistance.

Yet Contursi asks a relevant question.

But was it really a victory?

After the battle the fascists grew stronger 

Unfortunately, the anti-fascists celebrating their victory in 1936 couldn’t have known that their actions would ultimately do nothing to stop either the Nazi juggernaut that descended upon Europe three years later, or the immediate popularity of the BUF. In fact, the BUF benefitted from the violence and became even stronger over the next four years, until 1940, when it was banned by the government.

What the anti-fascist forces did achieve at Cable Street was a singular victory in stopping a single march. But at what price? In the aftermath of that action, membership in the BUF grew. Rather than smashing fascism, the battle turned out to be a recruitment tool for the BUF. The organization gained an additional 2,000 members immediately, and its membership continued to climb steadily. Seven months before the battle, BUF membership was around 10,000; one month after the battle, it rose to 15,500. It continued to rise until, by 1939, the BUF had about 22,500 members. [4]

The anti-fascist actions didn’t dampen the peoples’ enthusiasm for Mosely’s message. In the weeks after the battle, pro-fascist crowds in the thousands turned out for BUF meetings, listened to Mosley’s fascist proselytizing, and marched through London without much opposition. [1] An intelligence report on the battle noted that afterwards, “A definite pro-Fascist feeling has manifested itself. The alleged Fascist defeat is in reality a Fascist advance.” [1]

Violence, it seems, provided free publicity for the fascists. The BUF “thrived off the publicity that violent opposition produced. The national media, under pressure from the government, largely avoided reporting on Fascist activity other than when disorder occurred. A leading Mosleyite lamented the ‘total silence’ in the press when BUF events passed without incident, complaining that only after disruption by opponents did newspapers show any interest.” [1]

So,

The lesson from Cable Street is clear—the anti-fascists succeeded in shutting down one march. But in the aftermath of that action, fascist membership grew and, within a few weeks, the BUF was marching again—with little or no opposition.

It is a long piece and the rest has to be read in full.

There is discussion of  the experience of Nazism, but no reference is made to early battles with Mussolini’s squadristi, (we used to call street fighting antifafs ‘squadists’) of the importance, in the context of Cable Street of the start of the defence of the Spanish Republic.

We learn that the 1930s were a different time……where Nazism and Fascism were in power  in Europe.

That said, it is easy to sympathise with those making a stand against the ‘anti-fascist’  hysteria which apparently has gripped sections of the US left.

Whether ” Nonviolent direct action” is the answer is open for them to answer.

Janet Contursi makes her case clear:

1) Violence is not an effective long-term tactic against Nazi hate groups. When Mosley’s fascists were perceived to be the victims of violence, their membership grew; but when they were perceived to be the perpetrators of violence, it dropped.

2) What does work, but is more difficult for peace groups to achieve, is applying economic pressure to the fascists’ financial base and swamping their propaganda with truth. This requires a long-term organizing strategy beyond the occasional demonstration or peace march (a good example of a long-term nonviolent strategy is the BDS movement).

To repeat, it is hard to disagree with the view that the US far-right, fragmented and marginalised, is not about to be a major threat that needs the kind of violent tactics that some indicate.

But others believe that they must be confronted. 

Nevertheless, since Contursi  draws parallels between our very different societies and politics (to say the least: there is no equivalent of the Labour Party or the socialist inclined trade unions in the US), can one say that mass street action has always been ineffective against the British far-right?

What of the conflicts between the British far-right and left  in the 1970s and later?

Contursi neglects any discussion of the British experience of fighting the National Front in the 1970s, not to mention subsequent battles withe British Movement, the BNP and, more recently, the English Defence League.

There is a good case that the street activism of the 1970s, which was centred on the goal of confronting the far-right,  helped, in the context of a much wider cultural anti-fascism and a grass-roots movement, the ANL, local anti-racist and anti-racist committees,  and Rock Against Racism, had it place in preventing a ‘break through’ of the far-right into national politics at the time, for all that people will cite Thatcher as the ultimate benefactor of the racist undercurrents at work.

Since that time European far-right groups have grown in a number of countries.

Nobody could have prevented the rise of UKIP – which is clearly far-right – by street battles, nor would this have been desirable for democratic socialists intent on challenging their ideas, not physically standing up to their  members.

It would equally be ridiculous to imagine that any large-scale street fighting could have defeated the French Front National.

When their first electoral successes happened in the mid-1980s I was met with laughter by my French left-wing comrades when I suggested similar tactics to the ANL and anti-fascists, anti-racist street campaigning groups. In fact what happened in France was SOS-racisme which – with something like Rock Against Racism’s cultural approach, moblised people against racialist ideology.

The legacy of SOS racisme has been contested, involving a whole series of cultural issues which we, and others, have taken up (La Fabrique du Musulman. Nedjib Sidi Moussa: ‘Manufacturing Muslims’.).

Clearly the very  the possibility of the far-right winning substantive political power in France, and elsewhere in Continental Europe, is of a different degree and nature to the problems US anti-fascists face.

But anybody interested in more than “myths” about the extreme right and their opponents should be more concerned with looking at these developments than backwards to the 1930s.

 

 

Written by Andrew Coates

September 19, 2017 at 12:33 pm

Nigel Farage Boosts German Far-right AfD.

with 3 comments

Die Berliner AfD-Landesvorsitzende Beatrix von Storch und der Euroskeptiker Nigel Farage aus Großbritannien sprechen am 8. September 2017 in Berlin auf einer Pressekonferenz zu den Medienvertretern (picture alliance / dpa / Kay Nietfeld)

Farage with Beatrix von Storch.

Image result for farage and galloway

Farage with another Friend, George Galloway.

Sky has just reported,

Nigel Farage given standing ovation at German far-right AfD election rally

Ahead of the German election on 24 September, Mr Farage said: “(I’m trying) to get a proper debate going in the biggest, richest and most important, powerful country in Europe about not just the shape of Brexit but perhaps even the shape of the European project to come.”

He urged Germans to “say to Brussels: look, the reason the Brits left is because you’re behaving so badly, you’re taking away so much of people’s freedom, liberty and democracy”.

Mr Farage said: “We managed to break it in the United Kingdom. At the moment Germany is at a point where it is very, very tough to break through.”

However he added: “I predict, in Germany, it will probably start in Bavaria.”

He said he was at the rally at the “personal invitation” of his fellow European Parliament member, the AfD’s Beatrix von Storch, the granddaughter of Hitler’s finance minister Lutz von Krosigk.

Polls currently put the Eurosceptic AfD on up to 11% of the vote, which would make it the largest opposition party if Mrs Merkel wins as expected and renews her coalition with the Social Democratic Party (SPD).

Ms Von Storch – whose party is calling for a referendum on Germany’s EU membership – praised Mr Farage for “showing that doing the impossible is possible”.

The leaders of the anti-Islam have provoked controversy in the past by saying German border guards should open fire on illegal immigrants “if necessary”.

They have also dubbed Berlin’s Holocaust memorial a “monument of shame”.

The visit, to give support to fellow extreme-right Sovereigentists, has been widely reported in Germany.

Nigel Farage in BerlinMister Brexit besucht die AfD.

Deutschlandfunk (radio).

Nigel Farage sieht „eine große Verantwortung“ für die AfD  die Welt.

Farage says, the AfD has a great responsibility.

Europa-Skeptiker treffen sich in Berlin  Taz.

AfD-Frau Beatrix von Storch hat Nigel Farage nach Berlin eingeladen – um ein paar Gemeinsamkeiten zur Schau zu stellen. Taz.

That is, a few double act shows with the AfD leader have taken place.

The visit has not only been noticed in Germany.

Le Monde has just reported that Farage was strangely ‘indulgent’ towards Merkel, which raised a few eyebrows amongst his far-right friends.

Devant l’AfD, « Mr Brexit » dit trop de bien de Merkel

Invité à participer à un rassemblement de l’extrême droite allemande, Nigel Farage a tenu des propos indulgents vis-à-vis de la chancelière.

Invited to a meeting of the Gemran far right, Nigel Farage showed signs of understanding  toward the Chancellor.

 

Written by Andrew Coates

September 9, 2017 at 12:32 pm

Jacques Cheminade: LaRouche Candidate in French Presidential Elections.

leave a comment »

LaRouche’s targets.

It’s not all serious politics in the French Presidential election.

A serious quester for truth, Jacques Cheminade is also standing.

He calls for ” libération de l’occupation financière »  leaving the European Union, the Euro, and NATO. He is also denounced “«sionisme» (Zionism – more on this here). Cheminade is an admirer of the film, The Great Global Warming Swindle

Jacques Cheminade wants to colonise Mars and industrialise the moon, has likened Barack Obama to Hitler and accused Queen Elizabeth of being involved in international drug trafficking. His party, Solidarité et Progrès, is the French branch of the US’s far-right LaRouche movement. In 2005, his party was listed as a “political sect”.

On the Moon, Robotic exploration, industrial and scientific centres, and a Lunar Village.”LANCER UNE EXPLORATION ROBOTIQUE LUNAIRE DE GRANDE AMPLEUR SUIVIE DE L’IMPLANTATION DE CENTRES INDUSTRIELS ET SCIENTIFIQUES SUR LA LUNE. SOUTENIR LE PROJET DE « VILLAGE LUNAIRE » DE L’ESA.” (L’espace, impératif économique et culturel).

What is the LaRouche Movement?

Wikipedia begins what could turn into a long, a very long, trail on the Net:

Lyndon LaRouche began his political career as a Trotskyist and praised Marxism, He and the National Caucus of Labor Committees abandoned this view in the 1970s. LaRouche no longer opposes capitalism as an economic system, and his analysis of political events is no longer phrased in terms of class.

According to Tim Wohlforth, during and after his break with Trotskyism, LaRouche’s theory was influenced by what he called his “Theory of Hegemony” derived from Vladimir Lenin‘s view of the role of intellectuals in being a vanguard helping workers develop their consciousness and realize their leading role in society. He was influenced by Antonio Gramsci‘s concept of a hegemon as an intellectual and cultural elite which directs social thought. LaRouche’s theory saw himself and his followers as becoming such a hegemonic force. He rejected Gramsci’s notion of “organic intellectuals” being developed by the working class itself. Rather, the working class would be led by elite intellectuals such as himself

This is also interesting,

LaRouche’s critics have said he is a “disguised anti-Semite”, in that he takes the classical antisemitic conspiracy theory and substitutes the word “Zionist” for the word “Jew”, and ascribes the classical antisemitic caricature of the “scheming Jew” to particular Jewish individuals and groups of Jews, rather than to the Jews as a whole.[37][38][39][150] “Modern Zionism was not created by Jews, but was a project developed chiefly by Oxford University“, LaRouche says. He says “Zionism is not Judaism.”[151] In 1978, the same year LaRouche’s article cited The Protocols, the LaRouche group published Dope, Inc.: Britain’s Opium War against the U.S., which cited the Protocols and defended its authenticity, likening the “Elders of Zion” to the Rothschild banking family, the British Royal family, and the Italian Mafia, and the Israeli Mossad, General Pike, and the B’nai B’rith. (Dope, Inc.) Later editions left out cites to The Protocols. This is the genesis of the claim that LaRouche has said Queen Elizabeth runs drugs. When asked by an NBC reporter in 1984 about the Queen and drug running, LaRouche replied, “Of course she’s pushing drugs…that is in a sense of responsibility: the head of a gang that is pushing drugs; she knows it’s happening and she isn’t stopping it.”[152]

Chip Berlet argues that LaRouche indirectly expresses antisemitism through the use of “coded language” and by attacking neoconservatives.[150] Dennis King maintains, for example, that words like “British” were really code words for ‘Jew.'”[153] Other critics of LaRouche believe that LaRouche’s anti-British statements disparage the British system rather than the Jewish religion. Laird Wilcox and John George write that “Dennis King goes to considerable lengths to paint LaRouche as a neo-Nazi, even engaging in a little conspiracy-mongering of his own.”

More on  Jacques Cheminade FrenchEnglish.

When he last stood for the Presidency (1995)  he got  0.27% of the votes.

Written by Andrew Coates

April 6, 2017 at 1:42 pm