Clarifying the story: a statement from the Dean of Bradford

There have been a lot of claims and counter-claims about the position of the Dean of Bradford in the Atzmon affair so I thought it was best to ask the Dean himself to make the last word. This is a statement he sent me last night and I hope it clarifies his position and answers those people, for their own political reasons, who have accused me of lying and falsifying documents:

Statement from the Dean of Bradford 26 November 2011:

"Mr Gilad Atzmon has posted a statement of mine on his website (http://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/hope-not-hate-is-caught-falsifying-documents-again.html) which he has used to accuse Mr Nick Lowles of falsifying documents and spreading lies. I do not support this accusation.

I want to make it clear that I do not regard Mr Lowles as a liar or someone who has falsified documents, and I apologise if in any way this impression has been given by me. I did not in my initial statement quoted on Mr Lowles' blog make a public call for Mr Atzmon's concert to be cancelled, and it was on this basis that I disagreed with the headline over my statement. However, I had indicated elsewhere in a mail seen by Mr Lowles that cancellation would be preferred, since (as I note in my statement quoted by Mr Atzmon) I would have had to have withdrawn the concert if it had been due to happen on church premises due to the controversy involved, and it is this indication which led Mr Lowles to write the headline as he did; although it did not represent my intention it was not an unreasonable action for him to take, and he was engaged in interpretation not falsification.

Mr Atzmon and his supporters believe in his sincerity, and those opposed to him do not. Assessing what Mr Atzmon actually believes is not easy owing to the contested nature of the evidence. What is uncontrovertible is the fact that a lot of people believe that he behaves in a way which is anti-Semitic, flirting with Holocaust denial, and racist: and this behaviour has caused a wide variety of groups to distance themselves from him. As a cathedral we believe in truth, peace and justice for Palestinians and Israelis, of whatever faith (or none); and we will continue to hold to that often uncomfortable position - a position which makes it impossible for us to offer a platform to Mr Atzmon."

Nick Lowles at Hope not hate

Thanks to NewsHound for the heads-up

Atzmon Quotes From BNP Website To Attack Hope Not Hate

Gilad Atzmon is a campaigning antisemite and a supporter and promulgator of Holocaust denial material. For this reason, Hope not Hate and Bradford TUC have said:

'We believe that Atzmon should be shunned by all decent people – just as we would shun David Irving and Nick Griffin.'

Atzmon is incensed.

He has penned a lying, self serving attack on Hope not Hate and Bradford TUC:

'This weekend, Bradford TUC (Trade Union Council) joined the Israeli lobby’s attempt to silence me. This sort of thing is no surprise since my book ‘The Wandering Who’ exposes the devastating continuum between Israel, Diaspora Sayanim, Anti-Zionist Zionists (AZZ) and the influential and varied communities of Shabbos Goyim(1). So, is it a coincidence that last Shabbos (Sabbath) eve Paul Meszaros Bradford TUC’s secretary and some of his fellow unionists got very busy indeed doing the Zionists’ bidding?'

Here’s part of Atzmon’s attack on Hope not Hate’s Nick Lowles:

Here is an extract from a recent expose of Nick Lowles:

“Until recently, as editor of Searchlight, Nick Lowles was very camera shy. Over the years, he also attempted to generate various false trails with regards to his true identity posing, at various times, as a member of the Union of Jewish Students, a trotskyite activist for a Workers’ Revolutionary Party splinter group keen on infiltrating the Labour Party and a supporter of the violent anarchist Anti-Fascist Action, whose members later planted bombs for the IRA in London. For those reasons, and his close association with the mainstream media, Lowles is distrusted amongst anarchist and other far-left activists who regard him as a tout.”

The inaccurate “expose” to which Gilad Atzmon links is that of an organisation called Civil Liberty:

'The civil rights organisation Liberty refused to represent the British National Party in 2003 when Barclays Bank closed down their bank accounts. As a result of this failure to defend the right of the BNP as a democratic and lawful political party to hold bank accounts in Britain and to operate as a lawful political party and abide by the accounting rules of the Electoral Commission, other bank accounts of Palestinian charities supporting victims of the conflict in Israel were also closed down. From this we learn that a failure by the civil rights organisation Liberty to defend the principle of a right to a bank account for the BNP and all other lawful political and charitable organisations with bank accounts in Britain resulted in the denial of that right to a bank account not just to the BNP, but other organisations the banks wanted to close down as well.'

If that sounds like the sort of thing a BNP front organisation would write: that’s because it is. From The Guardian:

'An investigation by the Guardian has revealed that the fundraising group Civil Liberty, which claims to be independent of any political party, is run by key BNP activists with all the money donated through its website going to the BNP’s regional headquarters in the north-east.

It has raised concerns that the party appears to be attempting to profit from anti-Islamic sentiment in the United States since the attacks of September 11 2001, by presenting itself as being at the forefront of a campaign to save the UK from being “overwhelmed” by Muslims.

Since 2001 it has been illegal for any political party to accept overseas donations of more than £200, and party officials breaking the law face a year’s imprisonment or a £5,000 fine. Both Civil Liberty and the BNP deny they are trying to bypass UK election law, insisting they are entirely separate organisations .

However, the Guardian has established a series of links, including an audio tape of the BNP chairman, Nick Griffin, speaking at a US conference organised by a former member of the Ku Klux Klan, in which he calls on sympathisers to support BNP members by giving money to Civil Liberty.

“Please throw money at the BNP, actually don’t throw money at the BNP. Quite seriously it’s against the law, but you can as my colleague will be telling you tomorrow, throw money at a group called Civil Liberty which helps members of the BNP and that is within the law.”'

The Guardian also found that:

· Civil Liberty was set up and is run by Kevin Scott, who until September was the BNP’s north-east regional organiser.

· Its PO box address is registered to Tyneside BNP at the home of Jonathan Keys, a former party candidate.

· The site’s domain name is registered at the home in Stirling of Steve Blake, the BNP’s website editor.

· The BNP’s head of administration, Kenny Smith, is named on the BNP website as the national treasurer of Civil Liberty and responds to emails sent to CL.

It is not clear how much money Civil Liberty has raised as its accounts are secret, but the American Friends of the British National party was estimated to have raised £80,000 to £100,000 for the BNP between 1998 and 2001 when it folded – money Mr Griffin said made a “significant contribution to the BNP’s [2001] general election campaign”.

Yesterday the BNP and Civil Liberty strenuously denied the allegations.

“Civil Liberty is completely independent of the party,” said BNP spokesman Phil Edwards. “The BNP receives absolutely no money at all from Civil Liberty and any allegation that [money is being diverted] to the BNP in order to circumvent election laws will be met by a libel writ.”

…

Civil Liberty regularly advertises in BNP publications and has appealed for funds on the BNP website. Mark Collett, who was last year acquitted with Mr Griffin on charges of inciting racial hatred, is alleged to have handed out Civil Liberty flyers at a far right event in the US. And at the BNP’s annual conference in November, senior BNP figures accused the leadership of using Civil Liberty to build a fighting fund they said was not declared to the Electoral Commission or the wider membership.

Mr Edwards said: “Civil Liberty is an organisation which was set up to assist nationalists fight legal cases and employment tribunals and other civil cases … The fact that it is Kevin Scott [who set up Civil Liberty] … why shouldn’t it be?”

Atzmon is coated, head to toe, in fascist mire.

UPDATE

Oh dear. Stupid Gilad Atzmon is now trying to hide the fact that he takes his information on anti-fascist campaigners from the British National Party, by rewriting the paragraph and removing the link.

Unfortunately for Atzmon, his fascist fanboys have already republished his article, with the BNP quote and link intact.

Here it is on the “Truthseeker“.

Here it is on the Nazi website, “Shoah“.

Here it is on the Pacific Free Press website.

Too late, you thick Nazi.

PS – I see Atzmon is now being carried by David Icke. Just about his level, I reckon.

Harry's Place

Thanks to NewsHound for the heads-up

The EDL marches in Luton today. Hold your breath

Today's EDL march in Luton has put the interests of a few extremists above the wishes of the majority

Several thousand supporters of the English Defence League are marching in Luton today in protest against Islam. What began as a street movement to oppose Islamic fundamentalism has broadened its target to the religion itself. A few hundred metres away, Unite Against Fascism has arranged a counter-demonstration and, separately, a group of local Muslims will be meeting in a park to act as a buttress between the EDL and their neighbourhood. The town centre will be in lockdown, with most roads closed and 2,000 police on duty. For most local people, of all races and religions, today is viewed with dread and fear. Tensions have been building over the last week, and there is a real fear of disorder on the streets.

For the EDL, the march is being billed as coming "back where it began". The group was formed in the town in the summer of 2009 as a response to a handful of Islamic extremists who protested against an army homecoming parade. The EDL considers Luton to be the frontline. It is home to al-Muhajiroun, now known as Islam4UK, and there has been a Luton link to many recent terror plots in Britain.

Since then the EDL has gone national, with 80,000 supporters on Facebook and local groups across the country. It has held over 30 demonstrations and protests across the country, many ending in violence. The police hope they have the resources to ensure a peaceful day. I certainly hope they are right, but I also have reason to be fearful. The whole policing operation has been dogged by inconsistent mixed messages, confusion, and divisions between the police and the local council. They appear to have accepted the EDL line that by allowing the march they are reducing the risk of trouble. The residents of High Town, the mixed area of Luton where the EDL march is due to starts, were only informed of this last Sunday. No wonder the EDL themselves are openly and publicly bragging that the "tide has turned" and the police are on their its side.

The apparent willingness of the police to accommodate the EDL has had an adverse affect on many locals, including the Muslim community. Many do not trust the police to protect them, and this has bolstered calls to mobilise to defend their neighbourhoods. Compare this with the police in Bradford and Leicester, who restricted EDL demands and went out of their way to reassure target communities – and as a result reduced tensions.

I am not advocating a ban on all marches, but with freedom of speech comes responsibility. The rights of one group have to be put against the affect it has on others. Whatever the outcome, Luton is a more divided town than it was a fortnight ago. The EDL is already feeling confident enough to demand a local shopping centre withdraw plans for a multifaith prayer room or face an EDL response. The march, and the police's acceptance of the EDL's wish to gather at a pub in one of the outlying estates, further reinforces the perception that certain areas of the town belong to the EDL.

More worryingly, the EDL protest is likely to further alienate the Muslim community. Many Muslims will be more nervous; others are likely to be attracted by the extremist message peddled by Anjem Choudary and his Islam4UK group.

Shortly before Christmas, the head of the West Midlands counter-terrorism unit claimed that EDL activities pushed young Muslims into the arms of extremist groups. I have argued this for a long time. There is a symbiotic relationship between the EDL and the very groups they claim to oppose. Each needs the other to justify their own existence, and their respective memberships are boosted by the activity of the other.

Bedfordshire police are following the line set down by the government and police chiefs at the Home Office. They do not consider the EDL to be an extreme rightwing group and they view the march as simply a law-and-order issue. It is the events on the day that matter, rather than the longer-term consequences of their actions. With cuts of up to 50% in the Department for Communities and Local Government, and the closing of its tension-monitoring groups, no one in the government is willing to look at the wider implications of EDL activities.

Only yesterday a building that had been earmarked for a Muslim cultural centre in north Wales was set alight, two weeks after an EDL protest was held there. Mosques in Kingston upon Thames and Stoke-on-Trent have been attacked following EDL protests. A Hindu temple was obviously mistaken for a mosque during an attack in Dudley on the day of an EDL protest.Everyone will be holding their breath that today passes off peacefully; but it seems strange that, at a time when the government advocates localism, the interests of an extremist few are put above the wishes of the majority.

Nick Lowles at Comment is free

EDL thugs 'help' terror groups

The EDL: defending the right of all Englishmen to piss wherever they please

Far-right groups such as the English Defence League are driving people into the hands of terrorists, police said yesterday.

EDL activists claim they are fighting the rise of radical Islamists. But anti-terror police say the group's violent tactics are convincing British Muslims to join fanatical organisations waging a holy war against the West. The EDL, which emerged in 2009, has held several highly-charged demos that ended in trouble. Its hooligans threw a smoke bomb at police and clashed with anti-fascist protesters at a rally in Leicester last month.

Det Supt John Larkin, from the West Midlands Counter Terrorism Unit, said the places where the EDL has been active have seen a worrying rise in Muslims joining radical groups.

Nick Lowles, of anti-racism group Hope Not Hate, said: "The time has come for the authorities to start taking the gloves off with the EDL. They are not a legitimate protest group. They are thugs bent on sowing division and hatred in communities across the country."

Mirror

Thanks to NewsHound for the heads-up

We must stand together on this

Last weekend 2,000 supporters of the English Defence League (EDL) invaded Leicester. They claimed to stand up for Englishness against Islamic extremism, but in truth they came for trouble. Almost as soon as they arrived they began fighting with police, putting four in hospital, and in the process throwing army issue smoke grenades, fire crackers and ball bearings at police horses and dogs

During one charge, which resulted in a police officer being repeatedly stamped on, others in the crowd chanted "let him die". As the event finished hundreds of EDL supporters rampaged through local streets indiscriminately attacking local Asians. These were not acts of patriotism but the destructive efforts of racist thugs and football hooligans.

On October 24 the EDL plan to hold a solidarity demonstration outside the Israeli embassy to which they have invited a little-known American rabbi, in a cynical ploy aimed at cultivating hatred between Jews and Muslims.

While many in the Jewish community have understandable concerns about the rise of Islamic fundamentalism, it is important to remember that the EDL are not our friends. Searchlight has been running local campaigns against the EDL, in the same way that we work to defeat the politics of hate espoused by the BNP. We seek to mobilise communities to stand together around common values which unite us. In Leicester this meant over 6,000 local residents standing together against the hatred of the EDL. One Leicester, United Together. Next week it is the turn of the Jewish community to stand united against this hatred.

Extremism is extremism, whatever form it comes in, and the EDL is a genuine threat to social cohesion and peaceful communities. And extremism only breeds extremism. The EDL set out to whip up trouble and tensions, hoping to provoke a violent reaction from young Muslims. In the short term this divides communities, in the longer term it only pushes people to more extreme groups.

But with the threat comes an opportunity and we must use the concern over the EDL to bring people together. One of the most moving movements of our peace vigil in Leicester last weekend was when the leader of the Muslim community read out a message of support from the local Jewish community. "A rock thrown at a mosque is a rock thrown at a synagogue," the message read. This produced a massive cheer and highlights what is possible when we stand together against hatred.

Nick Lowles is editor of Searchlight magazine

Jewish Chronicle

Crime and offence

Kieron Trent and Matt Tait, part of the BNP mob
that brought violence to the streets of Barking and Dagenham

The wheels of justice often grind very slowly. A few days before polling day, David Clarke, a thuggish BNP activist, failed election fraudster and would-be Croydon councillor, was convicted on four counts of assault on anti-fascist leafleters in May last year. He had repeatedly pushed and grabbed at two campaigners and then returned two days later to swear at two others, push them and grab their leaflets.

Released on bail awaiting sentencing, he made the local press again when a female companion allegedly performed a sex act on him in full view in The George pub in Croydon, a regular BNP watering hole.

An eyewitness also connected him to a threat by a gang of local BNP activists earlier this year to cut the throat of an anti-fascist campaigner.

Election fraud is a habitual weapon in the BNP armoury. The Sunday Telegraph revealed that a number of BNP candidates for Barking and Dagenham council had placed themselves on the Electoral Register at “front” addresses in the borough when they were really living elsewhere. They included Jeffrey Marshall, the BNP’s central London organiser, Eddy Butler, a key organiser of the party’s local campaign, and Chris Roberts, a paid aide to the BNP’s London Assembly member. All three also stood in the general election, Marshall in Bethnal Green and Bow, Butler in Harlow and Roberts in Basildon South and Thurrock East.

HOPE not hate has produced many leaflets quoting the vile remarks by Marshall, who welcomed the death of David Cameron’s disabled son. That did not stop Tony Gladwin, the BNP’s parliamentary candidate in Southend West and a council candidate in Basildon. Gladwin, a regular on the East of England BNP security team, posted offensive jokes on his Facebook page ridiculing victims of the thalidomide tragedy, who suffered severe birth defects as a result of the drug.

The election campaign brought reports from several parts of the country of BNP thugs trying to run off HOPE not hate activists. Mostly they failed either because of a police presence or because trade unionists and others on the HOPE not hate teams refused to be intimidated.

The most serious incident took place in Barking the day before the election. Nick Griffin, the BNP leader and Barking parliamentary candidate, protected by car loads of Essex “BNP Security” and other thugs from further afield, clashed with local people in front of a BBC film crew. Young black and white kids shouted down the would-be MP and some Asian lads were more explicit in their threats but limited their action to lobbing a few tomatoes in his direction.

The BNP heavies responded by bundling Griffin out of the line of fruity fire and then piling into two cars to hunt the Asian youths.

BBC video footage shows the well known foulmouthed drunk and failed BNP councillor Robert Bailey leading the confrontation. They tracked down the three Asian youngsters, called them over and shouted abuse. The smallest youth faced down Bailey at which point it is clear that Bailey’s touched him twice with his hands and the youth backed away. After more shouting and Bailey telling them to get on their fucking way, the smallest youth spat at Bailey.

At this Bailey went berserk, threw him to the ground and aimed a series of kicks at him. Bailey is a former Royal Marine commando, but has clearly lost his fighting skills, probably as a result of his predilection for strong drink. He fell backwards to the ground after tripping over his victim and the kerb and his BNP colleagues rushed into battle as the two other Asian youths tried to protect their friend.


(above) BNP former councillor Robert Bailey confronts Asian youths just before viciously assaulting one of the men. (below) Questioned by Searchlight editor Nick Lowles, Nick Griffin defends Bailey’s conduct


Among the BNP group were Matt Tait, the BNP’s rich brat parliamentary candidate in Milton Keynes South, and Kieron Trent, the BNP’s only candidate for Milton Keynes council and a keen kick boxer. Both had been imported for the rough stuff and Trent is clearly visible landing blows and kicks to someone on the ground joined by a fourth BNP heavy.

As Searchlight went to press two Asian youths have been charged with assault and affray and Bailey only with assault. All have been released on police bail. It is unclear why only the Asian youths attracted the more serious charge.

There were at least two independent witnesses on the BBC film, who could help identify Trent and Tait, whose photographs we reproduce here. We will be happy to pass on their addresses if the police ask us.

At the local election count, Searchlight’s editor Nick Lowles asked Griffin whether he was happy with Bailey kicking the lad in the head. Griffin, surrounded by some of his thugs including one of those who seriously assaulted a reporter from The Times in February, tried to evade the issue, saying the young man had threatened to kill him earlier in the day. Put on the spot and in front of the media, Griffin eventually admitted that in his view kicking a man in the head while on the ground was acceptable self-defence.

In south London Cormac Hollingsworth, a HOPE not hate activist and Labour Party council candidate was leafleting when he was assaulted by a man screaming “f***ing Labour bastard”. As the thug, well known from National Front marches, rained blows on Cormac and kicked him while on the ground, Cormac captured a photo of his attacker on his mobile phone, enabling us to find a better photo of the same man. The matter is in the hands of the police.

Like rats with their backs to the wall, BNP activists, in-between fighting each other, are likely to seek more revenge for their abject failure at the ballot box.

Searchlight

Anatomy of a party – what the BNP list says about its members

Typical member is named David or John, has a job, lives in East Midlands and, if married to a BNP member, has a wife called either Patricia, Joanne or Karen

The leak of a British National party membership database provides a detailed anatomy of an organisation whose growing public profile means that this week it will enjoy the most prominent platform in its history when Nick Griffin, its leader, appears on Question Time on BBC1.

The BNP's constitution states it is "committed to stemming and reversing the tide of non-white immigration and to restoring, by legal changes, negotiation and consent the overwhelmingly white makeup of the British population that existed in Britain prior to 1948". The party also proposes "firm but voluntary incentives for immigrants and their descendants to return home". Only last week did it agree to alter its overtly racist constitution which bans non-whites from joining. But who are the people who join such an organisation and who does Griffin represent?

This morning, BNP officials began scouring the document, but could not yet confirm or deny if it is genuine or not but according to the Guardian's analysis of the available data a typical supporter is likely to be called David or John, he is likely to have a "standard" membership which means he has a paying job, and he is most likely to lives in Charnwood, a Conservative-controlled East Midlands constituency. If he is married to a BNP member, she is most likely to be called Patricia, Joanne or Karen. His male friends in the BNP are likely to be called Paul, Michael, Peter and Robert, while Jane, Tracey, Valerie and Helen are popular names among the party's 2,034 women members.

If this picture makes the supporter base of the BNP sounds very normal, bland even for a party that concerns so many opponents of far right politics, then that impression will only be reinforced by the different types of membership available, including "family", "family plus", "old age pensioner" and "gold" – a £60 membership for members whom Griffin describes as "the elite of the party".

Not everyone who joins is quite as ordinary as these descriptions suggest. The latest list also reveals that the membership include dozens of doctors, majors, captains and corporals.

BNP spokesman Simon Darby, said today that at first glance the list includes some people who are no longer members and some who have moved abroad. Nick Griffin, the party's leader, said the list could contain people who have shown an interest in the party but have not become members.

The list does not show as many members as the BNP claims to have. Darby said membership had grown recently, partly as a result of anger at the MPs' expenses scandal, and has now reached around 14,000. But the data seen by the Guardian, which appears to be a snapshot at the end of April 2009, shows 11,811 members. It is not clear if it is comprehensive and when the list of the BNP's membership at the end of 2007 list was leaked in November 2008, it showed 12,802 names. Some of those were not full members and had only showed an interest in the party.

But it is the geographical spread of the BNP's members which is most revealing about where the far right's power base comes from. The greatest concentrations of BNP membership are in the East Midlands, in the urban areas around the Pennines and in Essex.

Charnwood in Leicestershire is the parliamentary constituency with the largest number of BNP members with 63. The area borders Leicester, one of the most ethnically diverse in the country. The BNP won 3.4% of the vote and came fourth at the 2005 general election more than trebling the party's share of the vote since 1997. It includes Loughborough's Soar Valley in the suburbs just north of Leicester, villages from the other bank of the Soar river, Thurmaston to the north-east of Leicester and to the city's west it covers Glenfield, Ratby and Leicester Forest East.

The BNP has one councillor on Charnwood borough council, Cathy Duffy, who represents the village of East Goscote. The neighbouring constituency of Loughborough is also home to BNP 46 members.

The next membership hotspot is the Pendle constituency in Lancashire, which includes mill towns and villages where many people of south Asian origin have settled. In 2008, the BNP councillor Brian Norton Parker distributed leaflets which alleged: "Muslims are exclusively responsible for the heroin trade."

Amber Valley in Derbyshire and Ashfield in Nottinghamshire each have 59 members. In a trend that suggests the party's influence is spreading, if not growing in absolute terms, the fastest growing membership – compared with the data leaked last year – are in areas outside the party's current heartlands. The number of members in Salisbury in Wiltshire has trebled to 36, while Barnsley Central in Yorkshire has 48, Hastings and Rye in East Sussex have 32, and Orpington in Kent has 25. There have been significant falls in Leeds and Keighly, in Yorkshire, and Carlisle in Cumbria.

The data also appears to shows a party in a constant state of flux with many supporters allowing their memberships to lapse each year.

"What happens is the membership flow acts like a bath with running water and the plug missing," said Nick Lowles, editor of Searchlight, a magazine which monitors far-right groups. "People join the party, because they're angry, agitated or curious, but they leave in equal numbers out of the bottom. We believe their turnover rate is far higher than any other political party."

He said that moles who operate inside the BNP on behalf of Searchlight have said the party's electoral success in the European elections in June, as well as the recent spurt in media coverage, have not resulted in a surge of support. "My understanding is that their membership hasn't changed in any great way over the last six to eight months," said Lowles.

Analysis after the last year's leak, he continued, showed that the BNP's membership consisted of mainly middle-aged white men who worked in semi-skilled jobs. Membership lists can, however, give a skewed impression of the BNP's supporters and voters. "The fact is a that a lot of BNP supporters wouldn't join a political party," he said.

Lowles said recent falls in the BNP's share of the vote at council byelections, including a seat in Barnsley last week, indicated that party's increased national profile in recent weeks as a result of Griffin's forthcoming appearance on Question Time was not translating into electoral success.

Guardian

Rightwing march ban over fear of violence

Masked-up and ready to riot - the English defence League

Rightwing groups have been banned from holding marches in Luton for three months in an attempt to prevent a repeat of the violence that has marred similar demonstrations across the country.

The English Defence League, which has been involved in violent clashes in Birmingham and Luton this year, had planned to hold a series of demonstrations against "Islamic extremism" over the coming weeks.

Anti-racism campaigners said the events were intended to whip up tension and more than 14,000 people had written to Alan Johnson, the home secretary, demanding action. Today police confirmed the Home Office had granted a banning order.

Nick Lowles of the Hope not Hate campaign said: "Our voices have been heard. Luton is a safer place because of it. This is just further proof of what we can achieve when we get organised."

Luton has seen a number of violent protests this year. In March a small group of Muslims staged a demonstration during a homecoming parade for soldiers from the Royal Anglian Regiment. Tonight Bedfordshire police charged seven men in connection with the incident. They will appear at Luton magistrates court on 16 September.

The March demonstration was followed by counter-demonstrations which led to Asian businesses and residents being attacked. In Birmingham this month members of the English Defence League and linked group Casuals United clashed with anti-racism campaigners, resulting in 34 arrests and one injury.

Bedfordshire police today said there had been growing concern about planned demonstrations by rightwing groups that had prompted a "robust unified response" by the police and the council. Chief Superintendent Andy Frost, divisional commander for Luton police, said: "The risk the proposed marches pose to public safety has left us with no alternative but to apply for a banning order."

Weyman Bennett, the joint secretary of Unite Against Fascism, welcomed the ban. "What we have proved is that where we, as a multiracial group, organise and stand up the EDL can be defeated."

The league denies it is racist, claiming it would march "alongside Muslims and Jews who are against militant Islam".

The announcement of the ban came as a man and a woman were charged under the Data Protection Act after a British National party (BNP) membership list was leaked on to the internet. Dyfed-Powys police said the man, aged 27, and woman, 30, were due to appear at Nottingham magistrates court on 1 September. The BNP called for a police investigation last November after the details of 10,000 of its members were published online.

Guardian

Luton anti-Islam EDL march banned

English Defence League march knocked on the head

Just yesterday, Hope not Hate sent out an email asking for people to contact the Home Secretary and the Chief Constable of Bedfordshire, calling for the anti-Islam English Defence League protest in Luton to be banned.

Within hours, a staggering 12,636 letters had been sent, a response that Nick Lowles of Searchlight/Hope not hate described as 'sending a resounding message to the authorities'. That figure has now gone up to 14,000+ and the Home Secretary has announced that the anti-Islam march in Luton will not be taking place. In fact, as a precautionary measure, all marches have been banned in the town for the next three months.

Thanks to everyone who sent off a letter. We have won and Luton is a safer place because of it. This is just further proof of what we can achieve when we get organised.

Hope not hate

The Way Forward

With the BNP winning two seats in the European Parliament Nick Lowles looks at where the anti-BNP campaign goes from here

There are three clear facts that need to be remembered at the outset of this article. The first is that the British National Party has won two seats in the European Parliament. This provides it with the platform, financial clout and semi-respectability from which it hopes to build future success at a local and even parliamentary level over the coming year. Secondly, their election is a game changer. Debates around no platform, access to the media and political representation will change whether we like it or not and we will need to adapt accordingly. Finally, and in terms of this article probably most importantly, anti-fascism can be successful particularly if it becomes more organised. While I will argue that only by addressing the public policy issues that give rise to the BNP and challenging the racism at the core of its support can the far right be properly defeated, anti-fascism, particularly at a local level, can halt and even reverse its growth.

It is also important to dispel two widely (though separately) held assumptions. Firstly, this is not the protest vote against mainstream parties and useless locally elected representatives that many politicians would like us to believe. It is an increasingly hard and loyal vote which is based on political and economic insecurities and moulded by deep-rooted racial prejudice. This in turn is linked with a second myth, that the way to beat the BNP is simply to tack left and offer more socialistic policies. While this might peel off some BNP supporters who feel economically marginalised, it will not in itself address the strongly held racist views of many BNP voters.

As the YouGov poll (see below) clearly shows, the racism of many BNP voters goes well beyond simple opposition to current immigration and eastern European migrant workers which one might expect if their support for the BNP was prompted simply by economic insecurity. Belief in the intellectual superiority of white people over non-whites, the view of nearly half of BNP voters that black and Asian people can never be British, the almost universal dislike of even moderate Islam and the contempt and suspicion many of their voters have towards a liberal and multicultural society show how hardline much of the BNP support is and how it will take more than a more progressive economic policy to win them back fully.

More importantly, and regularly overlooked by politicians, activists and commentators alike, are issues around identity. As I have discussed before, the BNP is emerging as the voice of a forgotten working class, which increasingly feels left behind and ignored by mainstream society. As the YouGov research confirms, the majority of BNP voters feel that the Labour Party, for many their traditional political home, has moved away from them and is now dominated by a middle-class London elite who care more for Middle England and the interests of minority groups than for them.

Class politics exists but not as we once knew it. The Labour Party, in line with many other centre-left parties across western European and Scandinavia, draws the bulk of its support from the middle class, public sector workers and minority communities, especially in the big cities. The BNP, on the other hand, is the voice of a section of the white working class, particularly in those areas of traditional industry that have experienced the greatest economic and social upheaval over the past twenty years.

Most of the local authorities with the biggest BNP vote are in areas once dominated by the car, steel, coal or ceramic industries. All have gone, and those people able to leave have left. While some new jobs have replaced those lost, the work is generally lower skilled, short-term and further away from their home. In addition to economic difficulties the identity of the areas has collapsed, leaving behind a confused, resentful and alienated minority. This is the cultural war that the BNP has cleverly exploited, particularly by tapping in to people’s paranoia that outside forces are deliberately conspiring against them and giving preferential treatment to others (viewed by most BNP voters as undeserving).

However, all is not lost. While the BNP vote edged up it did not make the sweeping gains it and others predicted. The vast majority of voters still reject the BNP and many of those equally disillusioned with the political process did not vote BNP but stayed at home.

Addressing the widespread economic insecurities, solving the democratic deficit and forging new progressive identities requires public policy changes that are beyond the remit of the HOPE not hate campaign and anti-fascism generally. We can mobilise the anti-BNP vote and even sometimes suppress the pro-BNP vote but we cannot build houses and reduce waiting lists; we cannot prevent undercutting of wages and the abuse of migrant workers. Local anti-fascist movements cannot get resources into communities, often the poorest, dealing with extraordinary levels of migration.

That is the job of politicians and political parties. It is their failure currently to do so that is resulting in the increasing tribalism of local politics along racial and religious lines.

Making a difference

What we can do, however, is make a difference on the ground. And we do. Results in several local authority areas in the European elections showed the BNP vote (both actual and share of the vote) down compared to 2004. Among these areas were Burnley, Pendle and Oldham in the North West, Bradford and Kirklees in West Yorkshire, and Sandwell and Dudley in the West Midlands.

A common factor in all these areas has been the intensity of local anti-BNP campaigns, which has been all year round and not just a leaflet at an election.

And this sets the model for the year ahead. We will go into the 2010 local elections with an emboldened and financially secure BNP and we believe the number of council wards at risk is now over 150 across the country. The BNP’s main target will be Barking and Dagenham where it will be looking to take control of the council.

To fight the BNP effectively we must move away from city and town centre events to focusing on the very communities where the BNP is drawing its support. We need to return to localised leaflets and newsletters, tapping into the local identities of neighbourhoods and addressing local issues to undermine the BNP’s message of hate.

Smaller, local events are more important than one-off larger ones. The recent anti-racist carnival in Stoke-on-Trent might have been attended by 15,000 people but was it really the best use of £300,000? Even the carnival the year before, in Hackney, might have been attracted 60,000, but what impact does it have on the London hotspots such as Barking and Dagenham and Havering?

The effort required to put on and build such an event drains and diverts activism away from local campaigning, which will be the priority in 2010. Of course in the ideal world we would like both big national events and smaller local events, but where funds and activism are limited this is not possible.

A proper local strategy requires us to localise our campaigning. What works in one area will not work in another. Talking to principally Conservative voters requires a quite different leaflet to what would be put out in a traditionally Labour area. Localising our approach allows us to deal with local issues and also to target our message depending on what we are trying to achieve. And mobilising the anti-BNP vote is sometimes quite different from trying to suppress the BNP vote.

That is why the HOPE not hate campaign will be encouraging and supporting local groups to begin their own local anti-BNP newsletters. We hope that by starting this summer and focusing on the key wards for 2010 the newsletters will become a crucial tool to defeating the BNP at the ballot box.

To begin to undermine local BNP support we also have to build alliances within the community. Local anti-BNP groups need to be accepted and even respected. Every community has key movers and shakers and spending a bit of time cultivating relationships with these people will open new opportunities, allow our message to be widened considerably, potentially increase our activist base and give us a regular flow of information to rebut BNP myths and lies.

We also need to be cleverer in how we present our arguments. The YouGov survey shows the complete lack of respect BNP voters have towards authority – way beyond those of other parties. That means dogmatic or one dimensional arguments on anti-fascist leaflets are likely to fail.

We have to recognise that we might not always be the best messenger to get over an argument. One of the most successful leaflets we have ever produced was in Halifax where we got quotes from local doctors and pensioners to dismiss BNP claims that asylum seekers were forcing old people off GP lists and causing hospital operations to be cancelled. The strength of getting other people to speak up for us, particularly those respected by local people, is also evident from the survey. Local GPs, at 82%, came out as the most trusted professionals among BNP voters.

A new reality

We also have to accept that the political landscape has shifted. Searchlight comes from a proud tradition of No Platform, a belief that fascism should not be allowed to air its politics of hate publicly. We have always opposed legitimising fascism through public debate and where fascists try to incite hatred within communities through provocative marches and actions, we have backed mobilisations against them.

While I still adhere to this in principle I also believe that we have to accept a new reality. Firstly the BNP has MEPs and whether we like it or not Nick Griffin and Andrew Brons will appear more regularly on television. No platform agreements between political parties were already breaking down before the election, with only Labour holding to them, and this process is likely to quicken now.

Likewise, we also have to change our tactics on the streets. The hammer attack on a BNP activist in Leigh, Greater Manchester, in March was an unmitigated disaster. When we learnt about the BNP’s intention to hold a fundraising event in a local nightclub we got almost 5,000 people, including 400 from the local area, to sign an open letter from a local vicar calling for the event to be cancelled. Our pressure proved successful but what should have been a great media story, showing the strength of people power against the BNP, became three days of appallingly negative local headlines after an anti-fascist struck a BNP member in the head with a hammer.

Our response to any BNP activity is a tactical issue. Just as we always consider what is possible, so we have to think about the possible outcomes. With large chunks of local people supporting the BNP something that gives the party media sympathy is often counter-productive. In a 24-hour-communica-tions world every small event that in the past would have gone unreported can be headline news on television, the radio and on the internet within minutes.

With the BNP leaders far more politically savvy than in the past it is not difficult for them to spin a story to their advantage.

There is also a need for an honest debate about the use of rallies, marches and pickets. While one could argue that it is important continually to oppose the BNP gaining any legitimacy, such protests are increasingly ineffective and, probably more importantly, a distraction from the real work required in the communities.

The reality is that most people other than a few highly motivated activists will not come out on a regular basis. Continually chasing the BNP uses up their time when there is more serious but perhaps less glamorous work to be done in local communities. Again, people might say that we should do both. That may be the ideal but it is not the reality and choices have to be made. We have to prioritise our agenda rather than continually react to the BNP’s. Obviously there will be times when mobilisations are important but this cannot be a distraction from the real work at hand.

Moving forward

Over the next few months our priority is to build anti-fascist groups in every community in the country. Over 115,000 people have engaged in some activity for the HOPE not hate campaign. That’s an incredible one in 470 adults in Britain. Over 80,000 people have signed our “Not in my name” petition since the election, of which over 60,000 were completely new to us.

This shows the level of anger at the BNP success, but now we need to harness it in a positive and constructive way that helps us build the necessary networks that can defeat the BNP in the community.

Our initial job is to turn our online supporters into activists on the ground. Hopefully some will emerge as local organisers, committed to the localised strategy ahead. Old hands must be encouraged to support new organisers and we will be providing an organising and leadership programme in every region of the country.

A series of one-day training events will be held to give key activists from local groups the basics in running a local campaign group, working in a target ward and building alliances within the community.

From there a handful of the most enthusiastic local organisers will be invited to a three-day residential programme, to be held in the late autumn, where they will develop leadership and organisational skills.

Developing a pool of local organisers is the way to ensure good quality campaigns. Whatever the enthusiasm of local activists a lack of organising skills and the ability to localise campaigns effectively will result in continued reliance on national help, which in turn reduces the effectiveness of a local campaign.

To support local groups, particularly in the run-up to next year’s local and probable general election, the HOPE not hate campaign will be seeking to put trained organisers on the ground in each region of the country.

The work of local groups will be further supported by an even bigger online effort than we achieved this year. Through online telephone canvassing, supporters across the country will be able to help in our key battlegrounds from their front rooms. Matching groups and activists in one part of country where there is no BNP threat to an area where there is one can help us raise money for local material.

Remaining focused

The BNP success has led some to argue that we need to politicise anti-fascism, even to offer a political alternative to the BNP. While there are clearly public policy failings and a democratic deficit, it is not our job to fill this void. We must leave that to the political parties, old or new.

We are about defeating the BNP, both by turning out those voters totally opposed to their racist politics and by dispelling myths and challenging the assumptions and ignorance that give rise to BNP support.

We have a big job to do but it can be done. The work on anti-BNP campaigns in East Lancashire, Oldham, the Black Country and West Yorkshire is testament to that.

However, for us to defeat the BNP over the coming year requires hard work, building local broad-based coalitions, adapting to the new realities and being a little bit smarter than we have been before. Get these components right and we can hold the BNP at bay.

A hard and alienated vote

Who votes BNP and why

A new survey into the attitudes of BNP voters has produced some startling revelations. Unsurprisingly BNP voters are overwhelmingly opposed to immigration and asylum seekers but a sizeable number also share the BNP’s hardline attitudes about citizenship and racial superiority.

It shows that BNP voters are predominantly working class, drawn from former Labour-voting households and feel more insecure about their economic prospects.

Conducted by YouGov from 29 May to 4 June, the survey questioned 985 BNP voters as part of a much bigger study of the political views of 32,268 people.

The study tells us that men are twice as likely to support the BNP as women, 44% of BNP voters are aged 35 to 54 and 61% are drawn from the social groups C2DE. One third of BNP voters read The Sun or the Daily Star, whereas only 13% read the Daily Mirror and those reading The Guardian and The Independent are statistically insignificant. One fifth claim to be members of trade unions or trade associations and 36% identify themselves as skilled or semi-skilled manual workers.

On one level the report tells us little new. More BNP supporters regard immigration as one of the key issues facing the country at the moment – 87% compared to 49% among all voters. Again unsurprisingly, 94% of BNP supporters believed that all further immigration should be halted. This compares with 87% of UK Independence Party voters, 68% of Conservative voters, 46% of Labour voters, 43% of Lib Dem voters and even 37% of Green voters.

Only 4% of BNP voters believed that recent immigration had benefited the country.

What is more startling is the strength of the racial attitudes of many BNP voters. In a result that gives the lie to the BNP vote simply being a protest, 44% (compared to 12% of all voters) disagreed with the statement: “non-white British citizens who were born in this country are just as ‘British’ as white citizens born in this country”.

Among BNP voters 21% strongly disagreed with the statement compared to just 1% of Greens and Lib Dems and 2% of Labour and 3% of Conservative voters.

More disturbingly, 31% of BNP voters believed there was a difference in intelligence between the average black Briton and the average white Briton.

Although only 2% of BNP voters deny that six million Jews, Gypsies and others died in the Holocaust, a further 18% accept that the Holocaust occurred but believe it has been exaggerated.

It is clear that the BNP receives support primarily on issues of race, immigration and identity but there is also a clear link with economic insecurity. Several of the questions probed respondents’ views on their current and future economic prospects. BNP voters repeatedly had the most gloomy outlook.

When asked whether they were satisfied that they had enough money to live on comfortably, 74% of BNP voters said no, compared to just 43% of Labour and 50% of Conservative voters.

On whether they were confident that their family would have the opportunities to prosper in the years ahead, 75% of BNP voters said no compared to just 35% of Labour voters.

Over half of BNP voters felt the financial situation of their house- hold would worsen over the next 12 months. In contrast only 29% of Labour voters agreed and 27% thought it would get better.

Again, more BNP voters thought someone in their family would lose their job in the current recession than supporters of other parties.

One of the most startling results was the response to the statement that “there is a major international conspiracy led by Jews and Communists to undermine traditional Christian values in Britain and other western countries”. Amazingly one third of BNP voters completely or partially agreed.

However, the significance of this response actually lies in the feeling of victimisation felt by many BNP supporters and cleverly exploited by the BNP itself. The view that they are losing out because of the conscious action of others is widespread among BNP supporters and it comes out clearly in this survey. Over three quarters of BNP voters believed that white people suffered unfair discrimination whereas only 3% thought Muslims did. Nine out of ten BNP supporters felt that councils allowed immigrant families to jump housing queues.

This feeling of victimisation coupled with a widespread belief that the Labour Party, which most once supported, at best no longer cares about them and at worst conspires against them makes these voters susceptible to the BNP’s big lie. It is hardly a surprise then that so many people in Barking and Dagenham were happy to believe the Africans for Essex myth.

Think of the balance of forces. On one side you have the Labour Party (which 57% of BNP voters think no longer cares about them), politicians (who 78% of BNP voters think are corrupt), senior officers in the council (who only 1% of BNP voters trust a great deal) and immigrants (who 87% of BNP supporters think are a problem and only 4% believe contribute anything positive). Then you have the BNP, the anti-establishment party speaking up for the forgotten white working class.

This survey is both predictable and disturbing. While immigration remains the dominant issue for BNP voters it is clear that they more than any other group feel economically insecure and politically abandoned. What is shocking is the depth of their racism and the alienation from mainstream politics. Support for the BNP goes far beyond being a protest, as some politicians would have us believe, and the racist attitudes will not disappear simply by improving economic conditions.

We should be under no illusion that a long and hard struggle lies ahead.

What do you think?

We are opening up the August issue of Searchlight to find out your views on the way forward. Please restrict articles to 500 words and get them to me nick@stopthebnp.org.uk by 10 July. (Please note that space is limited and we cannot guarantee to publish every article.)

Nick Lowles, Searchlight

Take down the BNP billboards

A couple of hours ago I sent out an email asking you to join me in complaining to Clear Channel for hosting BNP billboards.

In 90 minutes 1,000 people have sent messages of complaint to the company.

Our target is 2,000 so if you haven't sent a complaint please do so here.

Nick Lowles
Hope not hate

The target is about to be reached but let's see if LU readers can push the total up to 3000. :-)

Is a recession good news for the BNP?

As Britain slips into recession there is one political party that is gleeful. Nick Lowles assesses how the BNP will benefit from the unfolding economic crisis.

Conventional wisdom suggests that the British National Party will benefit politically from a recession. Government ministers certainly seem to think so. Journalists think so. And the BNP themselves certainly think so.

With unemployment likely to hit two million by the end of the year and house prices dropping 15% in the past 12 months, most people are feeling the pinch. The government’s response to the credit crunch might have boosted its poll ratings in the short term but it could be the far-right BNP that benefits when the recession really bites.

“Economic meltdowns are one of the drivers of political revolutions, and the BNP must be ready to take advantage of the mess all of the other parties have made of the economy,” David Hannam, the BNP deputy treasurer, told a party meeting recently.

He went on to explain the party’s line of attack. “Each immigrant who entered Britain decreased job prospects for native British workers. Our freedom is linked to the financial state of the country, and in a recession it is the workers who are first and hardest hit. The truth is that in an economically declining society, the worker is hit, but even in a so-called economically growing society, it is the worker who also gets hit. Successful monopolies are a by-product of globalism, and it is monopolies that decrease the demand for workers.”

His view is backed by party leader Nick Griffin who is confidently boasting that the BNP will benefit enormously from an economic downturn.

The belief of a far-right gain is supported by the Labour MP Jon Cruddas. “I’ve got a sense of foreboding about what lies ahead,” he told the BBC. “It will make a qualitative difference in terms of the context within which they’re allowed to perpetuate their scapegoating and myth-making.”

The government, meanwhile, is worried that an economic downturn would result in increased racial tension and violence between communities and even terrorism. In a 12-page internal memo, leaked to the Conservatives two months ago, Home Secretary Jacqui Smith relayed her concern over the consequences of an economic crisis. “There is a risk of a downturn increasing the appeal of far-right extremism and racism, which presents a threat as there is evidence that grievances based on experiencing racism are one of the factors that can lead to people becoming terrorists.”

The memo added that a downturn would affect the need for migrant workers, particularly in jobs such as construction where they make up a large proportion of the workforce. “Increased public hostility to migrants” was predicted to result from heightened competition for employment.

The government is so concerned that it has recently established a new police taskforce to monitor racist violence.

Controversy

Last month the new Immigration Minister controversially weighed into the debate. Phil Woolas told The Times that immigration became an “extremely thorny” subject if people were losing their jobs.

“It’s been too easy to get into this country in the past and it’s going to get harder,” he said.

Employers should, he believes, put British people first, or they will risk fuelling racism. “In times of economic difficulties, racial stereotyping becomes stronger but also if you’ve got skills shortages you should, as a government, attempt to fill those skills shortages with your indigenous population.”

Woolas was careful to include all British people in his British first policy, highlighting the high levels of unemployment affecting the British Bangladeshi community. He claimed that it was all too easy for an employer to hire a migrant to fill a job rather than to retrain British people of all races.

While Woolas was actually addressing some tough issues, including many which have wrongly been ignored for too long, he left himself open to attack with a series of incendiary quotes which he should have known would cause offence. He promised not to allow Britain’s population to rise above 70 million and attacked “health tourism”.

“It’s a national health service – it’s not an international health service,” he said.

Woolas has not been alone in raising difficult and controversial issues. Trevor Phillips, head of the Equality and Human Rights Commission, also weighed into the debate last month. Speaking ahead of an address to a CBI conference, Phillips said: “After forty years in which it was impolite to speak frankly about immigration policy, we now must be able to address this fundamental aspect of economic policy without embarrassment or without fear of being labelled closet racists or open-border fantasists.

“In what is to come, the best defence against prejudice against immigrants will be to make those who resent them competitive, to give them a place in society.

“We may need to do so with the sort of special measures we’ve previously targeted at ethnic minorities. But the name of the game today is to tackle inequality, not racial special pleading.”

This was not his first foray into this terrain. He had previously stressed the importance of positive action to help white working class communities through the economic crisis. “What we are seeing is that there is a whole group of people, a large proportion of whom are white, who are going to suffer from this crisis who are going to be the people we should want to help, particularly because they come from the wrong side of town,” he said.

“We are going to have to do something special for them. We are going to have to put extra resources where young people can’t compete with migrants’ skills.

“And in some parts of the country, it is clear that what defines disadvantage won’t be black or brown, it will be white. And we will have to take positive action to help some white groups, what we might call the white underclass.”

Nothing is certain

However, there are dissenting voices to the view that the far right will necessarily gain from an economic downturn. “Although there tends to be a bit of moral panic about it, it’s never really happened in a way that, in any sense, threatens the domination of the political scene by the main parties,” Professor Colin Rallings, from Plymouth University, says.

He went on to stress that previous economic downturns had been accompanied by only short-term boosts for the right and were often geographically patchy.

Is Rawlings right? Will any boost for the far right be patchy and short-lived? Certainly recent history is on his side. The 1970s economic crisis failed to give any long-lasting boost to the National Front. Indeed, if anything, the political fortunes of the NF were already on the wane at the height of the crisis and certainly by the early 1980s, when unemployment topped three million and bank base rate was in double figures and reached over 15%, the NF hardly existed.

During the recession of the early 1990s, and despite widespread media-fuelled concern over refugees, the BNP remained a largely inconsequential political force.

A different world

There is reason to believe that events might be different this time around. Britain of today is very different from that of the late 1970s. The Cold War overshadowed British and indeed world politics. There was a vibrant left in Britain and a strong and very active trade union movement. The Second World War was still strong in public consciousness and nationalism was a dirty word.

Since then the Soviet Union has collapsed and Europe fragmented. Nationalism has become the driving ideology of the past 20 years and socialism and social democracy are experiencing an identity crisis of huge proportions. In the past year alone eight out of ten social democratic parties have been driven from power in Europe, partly to the benefit of the far right. Fascist and rightwing populist parties have been rising across western Europe and there is no reason to suggest that the same cannot happen in Britain.

Additionally, the BNP of today is quite different from the NF of the 1970s. The NF contested elections, but only in a half-hearted manner. For the NF leaders John Tyndall and Martin Webster elections were simply an organising tool but real power was going to be gained through control of the streets and by positioning themselves as ready to answer society’s call to restore social order.

By contrast, the BNP has understood some political realities. It has publicly dropped some of its hardline policies, such as compulsory repatriation, which it knew would not be accepted by the vast majority of the population, and it has turned to local politics. As a result the BNP is positioning itself as a real and lasting challenge to the main political parties, particularly Labour.

More importantly, the political terrain has changed. Disillusionment with the mainstream parties is at an all-time high, voting at an all-time low and active participation in political parties is, in too many communities, seemingly non-existent.

It is into this disillusionment that the BNP message is resonating. Race remains the cornerstone of BNP politics but its appeal is far wider and deeper. It is precisely because of this that the BNP could benefit enormously from an economic downturn.

In Stoke-on-Trent the BNP believes it can take control of the council within two years. If there had been a mayoral contest next spring there were many, including some government ministers, who believed the BNP could win. At 6% of the local population the non-white community is tiny compared to many other towns and cities across the country. Immigration and race are not the causes of the city’s problems but simply the prism through which the BNP allows local people to understand their problems and anger.

The same is true for many other areas where the BNP is doing well. The former mining communities of Rotherham, Heanor and Nuneaton, three other areas of BNP success, have relatively small BME populations but deep-rooted structural economic problems.

Compare that to the NF of the 1970s, which drew the bulk of its support from towns and cities, such as Leicester and Bradford, which experienced the greatest influx of non-white immigrants.

There are two other issues that differentiate the present from the 1970s. The Cold War has been replaced by a world defined by the “war on terror” and just as a recession could boost the far right, so fundamentalist religious groups will prosper.

As unemployment rises and disillusionment with mainstream parties deepens, friction between new and old communities will grow. Winding this up will be the BNP and other fascist groups on one side and fundamentalist religious groups, bent on demonising other communities and religions, on the other. There is a symbiotic relationship between these extremes, with both needing the other to justify their own existence.

This could play out on the streets, as we saw so vividly in Oldham and Burnley in 2001, or through a rise in domestic terrorism. It is this fear that is gripping the Home Office. We are already beginning to see a rise in violent racism and this is only likely to accelerate as the economy nosedives.

There has also been a rise in terrorism in recent times. While every Muslim plot attracts massive media attention, less known has been the increase in attempted far-right terrorism, both in Britain and across the continent. In 2007, ten people were arrested in alleged rightwing plots in Britain. While all were stopped before they were executed, it does raise the likelihood that rightwing terrorism, be it by individuals or small groups, will continue to grow. One can only imagine the consequences of a fascist bombing campaign against Muslim targets in Britain. Likewise, while the feel good factor following the decision to award London the Olympics probably helped to defuse a backlash against the London bombs of 2005, a similar bombing campaign amid an economic downturn might have a different outcome.

In the 1970s the trade unions played a crucial role in defeating the NF and today they have once again indicated their willingness to take a lead. But today’s world, particularly in the workplace, is very different from that of 30 years ago. The unions are weaker, more workplaces are un-unionised and also fragmented.

“The workplace is different from the 1970s,” says Paul Meszaros, secretary of Bradford Trades Council. “Back then workplaces were bigger and more unionised so it was more common for Asian and white people to work alongside each other. We were able to debate, argue and eventually find common ground.

“Today, workplaces are smaller and with communities living more separate lives and in different neighbourhoods within the city there are fewer opportunities for people to come together.”

Recession might be a gift to the BNP but whether it will exploit the opportunity remains to be seen. Despite its growing sophistication the BNP still struggles to win first-past-the-post elections. It has even performed poorly in recent by-elections, including some in traditional strongholds.

How opponents of the BNP react will also determine the potential electoral boost for the far right and this is where things need to change. The criticism of Woolas and Phillips has been strong and sometimes correct but it has also highlighted two fundamental issues. Firstly, a common unwillingness to debate difficult but very real issues and secondly an acknowledgement that progressives have partly contributed to the problem.

The error of identity politics

It is easy to criticise Woolas for his comments and of course some of his remarks echo the disastrous “British jobs for British workers” approach adopted by Gordon Brown last year. However, he was trying to grapple with some difficult issues, which all too many people prefer to ignore.

Likewise, Phillips’s call for preferential treatment for white working class communities has been met by a barrage of criticism, some of it justified, some not. Phillips is totally correct in saying that a growing number of white working class people feel ignored, abandoned and unrepresented. As I myself have argued previously, the BNP is providing an identity for sections of this group.

However, accepting the existence of these sub-groups and calling for preferential treatment is part of the problem in the first place. We no longer talk of a working class without sub-dividing it along racial lines. Playing identity politics is a very dangerous game and it is now coming back to haunt us. Too much government policy and spending, locally and nationally, is directed through the prism of race, which is unwittingly helping to create this “white” identity, which is in turn being exploited by the BNP. Too many progressive people have been complicit in this, knowingly or unknowingly.

To prevent the BNP from exploiting our economic worries, class needs to replace race in popular discourse. We shouldn’t have white unemployed or black unemployed but just unemployed. We shouldn’t talk about white workers or black workers but just workers. That isn’t to say that we should ignore groups or not recognise particular hardships or discrimination, but we have to find a way to bring people along together, to get them to understand a common interest and shared future. If we don’t then how can we complain when communal groups, including the white working class, compete for scarce resources.

Similarly, we need to develop a more secular approach. One of the successes of the anti-fascist and anti-racist struggle in the late 1970s was its secularism. This was particularly found within the Asian Youth Movement, which brought together young Asian people of different religious backgrounds. While accepting the right to faith, we again need to find ways to bring people from different religious backgrounds together and this is no easy task. It is not just a question of differences between Christian and Muslim communities. In today’s Britain there is widespread suspicion and distrust between many religions, another issue that has too long been ignored.

We must bring more politics (with a small p) into anti-fascism. Just as we have been arguing for the past couple of years that simply shouting “nazi” at the BNP is no longer sufficient, so we must recognise that just calling for “Hope” over hate is also inadequate. When people are struggling economically and perhaps see little hope around them, we need to be able to address some of the underlying issues that might make them susceptible to the BNP and answer directly racist myths. Hope is a positive concept but will only resonate when people feel good about the community in which they live and positive about their own economic future.

Fairness

However, we also need to show fairness in our approach. We need to demonstrate that we are fighting for everyone, regardless of colour of skin or religious background. We must also be prepared to criticise and condemn when it is necessary. Wrong is wrong, from whichever angle or community it derives.

Trade unions are in an excellent position to take on the BNP and its economic scapegoating, but it needs a different approach. Unions need to find a more direct way to engage with their members and their families than they do at present. A letter through the post or an article in a union journal is no substitute for a workplace meeting and human dialogue.

The road ahead will not be easy. A recession will increase insecurity and so suspicion and hostility between communities. As the job market shrinks and local resources become increasingly scarce so racism and bitterness will grow. The BNP could make huge advances in the next couple of years. Whether it does will partly depend on how we – government, unions and anti-fascists – respond.

Searchlight

400 and not out - Searchlight celebrates its 400th edition (part two)

400 and still fighting - Nick Lowles looks at how Searchlight has changed in recent years

Searchlight magazine has evolved over the past 33 years and will no doubt do so again in the years to come. However the fundamentals will remain the same.

During the early 1990s Searchlight reflected the changing scene on the British far right. The traditional fascist parties, the National Front and British National Party, were small and politically irrelevant and much of our focus was on the extra-parliamentary right, especially the emergence of an anti-state and terrorist ideology that derived from the United States.

Issue 126: December 1985

Initially this was spread through a number of nazi book clubs but later it was crystallised through Combat 18 (C18), a violent nazi group that took its name from the first and eighth letters of the alphabet, 1 and 8 – AH – Adolf Hitler.

Searchlight followed the formation of C18, from its early days as a stewards’ group for the BNP to its attempted bombing campaigns in the late 1990s.

As always, Searchlight combined reportage with propaganda and we can take partial credit for C18’s demise in 1998, as the group descended into internal warfare and many of its leaders were imprisoned.

A particular success occurred in the 1996-8 period when a succession of Searchlight exclusives shut down the production of nazi music in this country. This cut off a very rich seam of money flowing into the movement, some of which went directly into funding terrorism.

It was also Searchlight, in March 1999, that broke the story of nazis serving in the British Army. This was just one of several stories that was taken up by the national press. It was Searchlight that first revealed that David Copeland, the London nailbomber who killed three people and injured hundreds more in 1999, was an active fascist.

Three investigations that really stick out for me were the three-part exclusive into attempts by British and European fascists to launch a race war in South Africa shortly before Nelson Mandela became President; the exposé that the BNP leader’s personal bodyguard was suspected of being a Liverpool gunman responsible for several murders; and a two-part story about human trafficking from North Africa.

All three stories were not without personal and organisational risk. Our investigation into the fascist mercenaries heading to South Africa caught the interest of South African intelligence and we spent several weeks dodging the attention of Cliff Saunders, one of the main apartheid intelligence operatives in Europe during the 1980s.

The revelations about gunman Joey Owens led the police to warn me personally that they had picked up intelligence that my life was in danger. The third story, the appalling tale of human misery and exploitation, led a journalist to put his life at risk in North Africa while posing as a people smuggler.

Issue 256: October 1996

However, the real heroes of our magazine are those who feed us the information in the first place. There have been dozens of people who have infiltrated nazi and racist organisations for Searchlight over the years, and many more who realised the errors of their ways and came to us with information. I would like to pay tribute to Matthew Collins, who provided information during the early C18 phase, and Darren Wells, whose inside information from within the leadership of C18 helped stop further disturbances in Oldham and at least one bombing campaign. Finally, I would like to mention Andy Sykes, whose role as Bradford BNP organiser helped oversee the demise of the party in that city. Both Collins and Sykes are now dedicating themselves to fighting fascism.

In more recent years Searchlight has taken on a more campaigning role and this has been reflected in the magazine. On the ground reports, campaigning tips and more strategic overviews are now commonplace in the magazine.

Searchlight is a terrific campaigner and the Daily Mirror’s delighted to work very closely with it to champion Hope not Hate. The rise of the far right and BNP underlines why Searchlight will be as important over the next 400 issues as it was in the last 400.
Richard Wallace, Editor, Daily Mirror

In 2006 the HOPE not hate campaign was launched and over the past two years our work has been supported by the Daily Mirror. Two national bus tours, campaign videos, localised leaflets and tabloid newspapers have all taken Searchlight’s expertise into the community.

The magazine has also changed. In 2007 we began producing a quarterly full-colour Extra and also raised several thousand pounds for our colleagues in Russia who are facing an unbelievably violent onslaught.

Issue 379: January 2007

In June 2008 Searchlight produced a seminal article about the future of anti-fascism. Entitled Where Now? it challenged many of the orthodoxies of traditional anti-fascist activity and called for a more localised strategy to defeating the BNP.

Nothing is static and Searchlight will continually change to adapt to the challenges we face. However, our basic approach will remain the same as those set out when Searchlight first appeared in 1975. Searchlight will remain dedicated to defeating fascism.

Searchlight

Far right rising

In order to defeat the BNP, we have to tackle the disillusionment and disaffection the party feeds off

Change appears to be political buzzword of the times. Labour MP Jon Cruddas ran on the slogan "Choose Change"; Barack Obama went with "The Change we Need", while this week even David Cameron finished his conference speech on the theme of change.

But there is another "change" taking place, at present below the mainstream political radar, but it is a change that could sweep through the political establishment if not quickly addressed. This change is reactionary – it is the rise of the British National party.

The BNP is a growing force in Britain. In May's local elections it averaged 13.9% in the 612 wards it contested across the country, while in London it polled 130,714 votes in the London assembly elections. Locally, its results have been even more startling. It averaged 41% in the wards it contested in Barking and Dagenham in 2006, and this year it averaged 28% in Rotherham and 27% in Stoke-on-Trent.

Next year the BNP could win the Stoke-on-Trent mayoral election and has a strong chance of gaining several MEPs in the European elections, particularly in the North West, West Midlands and Yorkshire and Humber constituencies. Victory here, with the respectability and finances the job carries, will transform the BNP into a major political force.

Why is this happening? The BNP is growing for several reasons, including the poor quality of some existing councillors and political parties taking voters for granted. Then there is concern among some over rising immigration and the changing face of Britain. The BNP itself has had a facelift. It has publicly diluted its policies to appear more moderate and mainstream and it has adopted increasingly sophisticated campaign techniques and in its internet operation it has the most visited party political website in Britain.

However, the BNP's growing appeal is more than simply a product of rising racism, though of course this remains at the heart of its politics. The BNP is tapping into political alienation and economic deprivation. It is providing a voice for those who increasingly feel ignored and cast aside by Labour as it chases the mythical "middle England". It is a consequence of a political system that concentrates resources and activism to a few key swing marginals.

The BNP is articulating the concerns, grievances and even prejudices of these forgotten voters. It provides them with a sense of belonging, an articulation of their own frustration – even a new white identity.

The emergence of the BNP is just one consequence of the change under way, and it is a change far more fundamental than many political commentators and politicians appear to register. It is also primarily an issue affecting the Labour party.

This is a phenomenon occurring across Europe and North America. In the United States, middle-American nationalism has emerged over the past 30 years, which despises the corporate elites above and the "undeserving" poor below. Across western Europe we have seen working-class voters turn towards far-right and populist parties at the expense of centre-left parties. Only a few days ago, two far right parties polled a combined 29% in the Austrian elections.

Antifascism has to change to meet this new threat. Unless we understand why the BNP is growing – and that entails accepting that its appeal is built on more than simple racism – we have little chance of defeating it.

A simple "Don't vote Nazi" slogan is no longer enough. Of course we need to expose the true politics of the BNP leaders but we also need to address the issues on which the BNP campaign.

There is a limit to what traditional antifascism can deliver. We can certainly organise a turnout campaign to defeat the BNP in an election and through focused and localised leaflets we can undermine and expose the racism and ineffectiveness of BNP councillors and candidates. We must also get involved in the very communities where the BNP is most active, something progressives have increasingly failed to do over recent years.

However, if we accept the BNP is filling a void in British politics then it is a political response to these underlying issues of disengagement and disillusionment that ultimately needs addressing.

The political climate is certainly changing, but unless we act now then the change might not be to our liking.

Nick Lowles
Comment is free

An apology from Nick Lowles

It is always embarrassing to have to admit you were wrong and even more so when one has to apologise in public, but yes, today I have to accept a mistake. Yesterday I derided the BNP claims that they had 250 activists out in London over the weekend and delivered 100,000 leaflets.

I stuck my neck on the line and suggested half this number of activists and only 35,000 leaflets. It now appears that I was too generous. The latest figures doing the rounds is just 90-100 and that comes from BNP election chief Eddie Butler.

As I mentioned yesterday the campaigning weekend was as much for internal party consumption as it was to kick-start the London campaign. It would appear that Griffin and friends deliberately sought to exaggerate their numbers so as to give the impression that the party was fully behind his leadership. You only have to read Richard Barnbrook’s account of the weekend to see how he was trying to ‘big’ up Collett, Darby et al to see the real agenda at play.

As reports were coming in of BNP activity it did indeed seem impressive. Small groups of BNP activists were out in a number of wards across East London. However, on closer inspection not all was what it seemed. It appears that BNP team were out but just doing the main routes through areas rather than the entire ward so as to give the impression that more was actually being done.

So, yes, I admit I was wrong, but my embarrassment isn’t anywhere near that of the party leadership. Given that this was a national turnout then a figure of only 100 is not too impressive. I was in Sandwell earlier this year when we had 221 people (yes, that is the number who signed in), virtually all from the Black Country and Birmingham area. On that particular day we managed to deliver 45,000 newspapers. Now that was impressive.

HOPE not Hate