Red Pepper magazine is running a debate on the future of anti-fascism, one we'd like to bring to the Lancaster Unity community. With Red Pepper's agreement we have republished two of the three articles here and here, each with a different take on the way forward. Belatedly, here is the third and (for the moment) final article...
There is certainly a need for new ways of taking on the BNP, says Paul White, but that doesn’t mean ditching the old ways as well
In the build up to the recent elections in Barnsley, we distributed both UAF and Hope Not Hate leaflets to a much larger section of the electorate. These were the standard-issue ‘Vote Anyone but Nazi’ literature, highlighting the Nazi backgrounds and criminal activities of the BNP’s leading members and candidates. In addition, we held two rallies in the town centre as part of our ‘Reclaim our Town for Democrats’ campaign. This was a response to the BNP having had a regular presence in the main shopping precinct for the past few years on a Saturday, with a stall distributing literature and selling their newspaper. On top of all this, we had established a regular Love Music Hate Racism event at a local club in an attempt to bring young people into the campaign, and to raise awareness.
Despite our best efforts, Barnsley has found itself labelled the fascist capital of Britain, with the BNP achieving its highest percentage of the vote here. Disregarding the factor of the collapse of the Labour vote, it became obvious that simply saying ‘don’t vote BNP/they’re Nazis’ plainly hadn’t worked – again!
There is certainly a need for new ways of taking on the BNP as they become an increasingly more serious threat to everything we have been fighting for all these years. We’ve begun this reflection in Barnsley.
First, while in the past we were just active around elections, we will be active all year round, in the market place, on the streets, on Facebook, in the local press, around football matches – really involving the people of Barnsley. We’ve set up a Barnsley FC supporters group against the BNP, and we are reclaiming the market place.
Second, we are becoming much more deeply engaged with local campaigns addressing the root causes of the many social issues and problems in Barnsley that allow the BNP to capitalise on people’s disaffection. This means defending the health service, campaigning for affordable/social housing, defending jobs. We marched through the city centre last month against job cuts. The BNP had nothing to say.
It would obviously be great if we had candidates standing in the next elections who could offer an alternative, but this is something that will no doubt be discussed in the future.
However, for those of us in localities like Barnsley where the BNP is active and visible, we cannot afford to completely ditch our existing structures, contacts and networks in order to start afresh. We need to maintain our relationship with local trade unions, regardless of what we feel about the Labour Party (I, for one, would not be actively encouraging people to vote for them). The unions provide a vital link to organised workers within the area – significantly, this is something the BNP does not like. We need to learn from what hasn’t (and what has) worked, and develop new strategies and methods, hopefully involving a wider layer of campaigners. We need to be realistic about what works, and what doesn’t. The stakes are far too high to be dogmatic.
Paul White is a trade unionist, socialist and Green Party member
Red Pepper
Showing posts with label anti-fascism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label anti-fascism. Show all posts
September 16, 2009
September 01, 2009
Which way for anti-fascism?
Red Pepper magazine is currently running a debate on the future of anti-fascism, one we'd like to bring to the Lancaster Unity community. With Red Pepper's agreement we will be republishing three articles over the next few days, each with a different take on the way forward. Read on...
Anti-fascism isn’t working
The British National Party’s continuing electoral advances have propelled the party onto the national stage and initiated a debate about why it is achieving historically unprecedented results for the far right in Britain. What is driving its recent successes, how might it be stopped and what is the role of the left in this effort? This debate is essentially over strategy: about our relation to anti-fascism and what it ought to be in today’s conditions. There is one question that is not being asked, though: is ‘anti-fascism’ the answer to the BNP? Keiron Farrow says it isn’t
The statistics are telling. The BNP now has 60 local councillors and a similar number of parish councillors. By comparison, previous fascist groups had managed three councillors in total in the previous 80 years (this is without counting the seats won and subsequently lost by the BNP). The party has one member on the London Assembly, and now two MEPs in Europe.
Its overall vote has risen in successive local, general and European elections. At locals it has risen to an average of around 15 per cent, while in the European elections the party polled 943,598 votes nationally, 6.2 per cent of the total (up 1.3 per cent on 2004). At Westminster level there are three constituencies where the aggregate ward votes at the 2008 local elections put it in first place.
The BNP had 10,000 members at the end of 2007 – a figure that is likely to have risen since – providing it with a large and expanding activist base. It is not, by national standards, a huge organisation; it is a ‘large small party’ – at best the sixth biggest in the country. Nor, despite its advances, does it pose any immediate threat of gaining serious power. The real danger lies elsewhere, as will be outlined later.
Nonetheless, if the BNP’s absolute vote is giving pause for concern, it is its trajectory that is truly worrying. The European elections saw its national vote rise by almost a fifth against a background of falling turnout. The small falls in its absolute vote in some areas, including the North West and Yorkshire and Humber, where it won its seats, are misleading as they ignore the lower turnout and factors such as the impact of moving from an all-postal ballot to a traditional election. To exaggerate the significance of these absolute figures risks obscuring the party’s continued increase in its vote nationwide and breakthrough successes in county council level.
Failed approaches
Contemporary anti-fascism is represented by two main groups, with broadly similar approaches. First, there is Hope not Hate, an umbrella group for unions and individuals within the broad labour movement but open to all. This group was formed by the Searchlight Network. Second, Unite Against Fascism (UAF), an organisation set up by the Socialist Workers Party (SWP) and National Assembly Against Racism, which also has some union and other backing. For the SWP, UAF is clearly designed to continue in a similar vein to the Anti-Nazi League, and is not shy of drawing on the ANL’s reputation and experience.
Both groups concentrate their activities on two main approaches: first, exposing the criminal records, past activities and political beliefs of leading BNP members, candidates and activists; and second, calling on people not to ‘vote Nazi’. Instead electors are urged to vote anyone but BNP (with slight differences in how this is interpreted by each group), in an attempt to raise turnout and block the BNP electorally. This approach formed the basis of both groups’ failed interventions into the London mayoral and European elections.
What is wrong with these two approaches? The most obvious objection is that they don’t work. They don’t work today and they haven’t worked for some time. This isn’t to say that they haven’t worked in the past, just that they cannot form the central core of an anti-BNP strategy in today’s conditions.
Exposing the BNP’s various criminal and political records has had no discernible impact. In a country in which more than 40 per cent of all men can expect to have some form of criminal conviction during their lifetime, pointing out to voters in the sort of areas the BNP targets that a candidate has a conviction for assault or theft is likely to have a limited impact. If this were not the case we would today be seeing declining BNP votes and councillors not being returned post-exposure. But we’re not. We’re seeing a steadily rising vote and increasing re-elections.
This tactic has been pursued over the past decade on a scale never seen before. Every section of the media has got in on the game, every candidate has been hammering home their BNP opponents’ convictions. If this strategy was ever to make an impact it would have done so in these almost ideal conditions; instead the far right vote continues to rise. We have to conclude that this approach is ineffective.
Exposing past political views – for instance, BNP leader Nick Griffin’s association with Holocaust denial in the 1990s and earlier – has suffered a similar fate. Griffin has proved adept at moderating his most extreme opinions for the benefit of the media. He will now acknowledge the Holocaust as a historical ‘fact’ and, as he put it to the Observer in 2002, he claims that the only reason ‘people like me’ are not always ‘polite and reasonable’ on the subject is ‘frustration with how it is used to prevent any genuine debate on questions to do with immigration, ethnicity and the cultural survival of the western nations’.
In doing so, he can effectively neutralise the issue. If, despite his denial of Holocaust denial, an interviewer presses on regardless, it permits Griffin to turn the tables and ask if he or she wants to talk about politics. The same thing happens on a larger scale electorally
As with the exposure of BNP candidates’ criminal convictions, if this approach of bringing up the death camps and Nazi Germany was going to have any impact it would have done so in the especially favourable conditions of recent fevered mass media scrutiny of the BNP. This approach did find success in the three or four decades after the second world war, when a real folk memory of the sacrifices made by millions was still alive. Today, in different conditions, it cannot, has not and will not make the same inroads on BNP support.
Appealing to the status quo
These, though, are merely tactical problems, bred by past success and turned into conservative substitutes for effective intervention. Far more damaging on a strategic level is the second approach, calling on the electorate to ‘vote anyone but BNP’.
This position is a de facto appeal to support the status quo. It effectively calls on people to support the social conditions that have given rise to their radical discontent – to support the very same parties that have introduced and are pledged to maintain those conditions. In the bluntest terms, people will simply not vote for the parties they now blame for their situation and no amount of cajoling or mentions of the Holocaust will change that. The collapse in the Labour vote over the past few years makes this patently clear. The ‘anyone but BNP’ approach helps ensure that the conditions that are producing the BNP are going to remain in place. So we’re back at square one. And it allows the BNP to make all the running as the anti-establishment party during a once-in-a-lifetime time opportunity for anti-establishment parties to make a real breakthrough.
The way to undercut this is to work towards dealing with the root causes of the BNP support: in particular, the political abandonment of much of the working class in pursuit of the narrow section of the electorate classified as ‘swing voters’. Parties have privileged the interests of a section of the electorate that rarely shares the same interests as ‘core’ Labour voters in working-class areas. And this has led to the setting of parts of the same communities at each other’s throats in the fight for resources under the name of multiculturalism; the closing down of schools and hospitals; wages being driven down; debt; sub-standard housing; rising rents; under-funded services – all the conditions of our social life being attacked and commercialised by a class that has shown itself incapable, in the most basic terms, of being able to run the system for the benefit of all. This is what needs to be challenged as a priority, not people’s reactions to those planned and deliberate failures known as neoliberalism.
And this is where pro-status quo anti-fascism is falling down and demonstrating both a misunderstanding of where we are today and a real lack of political courage. A call to ‘vote to stop the BNP’ is, in most areas where it is raised, a barely-disguised call to vote Labour. That is why the unions are funding the millions of leaflets delivered by Hope Not Hate. (We can dismiss the suggestion that this slogan is also a call to vote Green. The BNP and Greens are not competing for the same vote. Nor need we dwell on those areas where the slogan translates into voting Tory or Lib Dem beyond imagining how an implied call to ‘Vote Thatcher to stop the National Front!’ would have been met.) An anti-fascism tied to support for the parties that have imposed the conditions people are protesting against is a failing anti-fascism. It is sacrificing all credibility by joining hands with the very establishment that people are so fed up with.
The combined party membership of mainstream parties has dropped from more than three million in the 1960s to barely half a million today and it is still falling. In conditions where large sections of the electorate are abandoning all the mainstream parties, for anti-fascists not to be supporting or initiating local projects that are prepared to confront rather than support the Labour Party is to politically abandon those communities to the BNP.
No platform?
Other aspects of current anti-fascist activism should also be questioned. This includes the widespread policy of ‘no platform for fascists’. Following the egging of Nick Griffin on College Green, at Westminster, the day after his election as an MEP, it has become evident that – beyond the confines of those who are already politically opposed to the BNP – ‘no platform’ has very little popular support.
In a country where the myths of democracy and freedom have a great hold over the public political imagination, a ‘no platform’ approach to the BNP is dangerous in a number of ways. First, via the functioning of that democratic myth, it associates the left with authoritarianism, violence and telling people what they can and cannot hear or read – exactly the sort of high-handed arrogance that is leading many people to reject the mainstream parties. Second, it acts as cover and support for top-down or state-led manoeuvres such as the closure of the BNP’s bank accounts by Barclays, which led to a Palestinian solidarity account being closed as well, or the plans by the Equality and Human Rights Commission to investigate the party’s constitution and membership rules.
How easy would it be to turn these initiatives against us? Already there are calls for a Berufsverbot for public sector workers, banning BNP members from those professions. This plays directly into the hands of the establishment. Of course, a community-led and supported refusal to allow the BNP to operate in their area is a very different matter, but we’re currently seeing a top-down version of ‘no platform’ substituted for this effective grass-roots one.
On a related note, Love Music Hate Racism (LMHR) is an attempt to continue the cultural fight of the Anti-Nazi League and Rock Against Racism by holding music festivals and similar events. Again, questions need to be asked. The problem is that today they simply attract those who are already against the BNP. In the past they were real arenas of conflict, battlegrounds for the hearts of young people. Today that context no longer exists and the far right has no hold over the young – it lost that battle years ago. Energy and resources channelled into LMHR would be better off directed at helping to deal with the problems working-class communities face as part and parcel of squeezing the BNP.
Missing the real danger
What all the current anti-fascist approaches have in common is that they miss the real danger. This doesn’t lie in the BNP taking power, in the possibility of concentration camps or any of the other scare stories we’ve been hearing recently. It lies more immediately in the far right colonising the anti-mainstream vote and developing party loyalty, thereby blocking the development of an independent working-class politics capable of defending our conditions and challenging neoliberalism.
The BNP’s politics is being normalised, with the consequent racialisation of social issues and a massive shift to the right. Each step they take forwards knocks the ‘left’ backwards. This represents an immense defeat for the left – one that could take us decades to recover from and leave us as outsiders (even more so than today) in working-class communities, the very places that we all recognise as being key to real social change. That is what will happen unless the job of defending the needs of those communities is seriously taken on and our counter-productive, outdated ‘anti-fascism’ is discarded.
I offer a few positive suggestions towards a new approach.
1 Community unions
We could form ‘community unions’, unconnected to Labour, possibly funded by trade unions but with organisational independence assured, that would work directly on helping to meet the needs of those politically abandoned working-class communities where conditions are deteriorating by the day. These would be based around the self-identified needs and plans of those communities – which can only pit them head-to-head against the BNP and the political mainstream.
The types of small victories that can be won on this terrain should be viewed not only as being worthwhile in themselves, but also as contributing to the re-emergence of community confidence in political self-assertion, the necessary first steps towards achieving further-reaching change. There are already existing groups engaged in this sort of practical activity, such as the London Coalition Against Poverty, Haringey Solidarity and the Oxford and Islington Working Class Associations (see Red Pepper Oct/Nov 2007).
The need for these to be open membership union-type organisations rather than party membership-type groups is a simple practical one. People will join unions at work as they recognise collective needs that exist over and above the heads of political disagreements, and the same is true of community needs. And once there is widespread identification (even passive) of the needs of an area/workplace with the existence of a union it becomes very hard to shift; that identification becomes a power in itself. Parties are too narrow to play this role under today’s conditions – they exist on a different level – but there is no reason why they cannot play a role within these broader open groups.
2 Focus on policy
We should develop the ‘expose them’ model into one that, instead of revealing ineffective details about individuals, concentrates on why their polices will not deal with the social problems driving people into their arms. If we cannot make this clear to those already intensely concerned with these issues then our propaganda is failing and is at best talking to those who would never vote BNP anyway. This will require a direct challenge to Searchlight/UAF and other mainstream anti-fascists as they continue to empty their publications of all but the most inane type of content criticised above. This, of course, needs to be linked to the activity of the ‘community union’ type groups mentioned above.
3 Abandon Labour
Searchlight need to abandon their default pro-Labour position and use their existing networks and resources to get behind local campaigns, actively challenging the conditions that are breeding support for the far right. (This seems unlikely to happen.)
4 End the marches
Stop the marches, labelling, shouting, and so on. Marching into an area that you do not know and have no continuing interest in and shouting what’s right for that area is alienating and counter-productive. People do not like being told what’s best for them and will kick back against or simply ignore this sort of activity.
All of this can be performed without capitulating to racism and without writing off vast swathes of the population. It has to be.
With thanks to Red Pepper
Anti-fascism isn’t working
The British National Party’s continuing electoral advances have propelled the party onto the national stage and initiated a debate about why it is achieving historically unprecedented results for the far right in Britain. What is driving its recent successes, how might it be stopped and what is the role of the left in this effort? This debate is essentially over strategy: about our relation to anti-fascism and what it ought to be in today’s conditions. There is one question that is not being asked, though: is ‘anti-fascism’ the answer to the BNP? Keiron Farrow says it isn’t
The statistics are telling. The BNP now has 60 local councillors and a similar number of parish councillors. By comparison, previous fascist groups had managed three councillors in total in the previous 80 years (this is without counting the seats won and subsequently lost by the BNP). The party has one member on the London Assembly, and now two MEPs in Europe.
Its overall vote has risen in successive local, general and European elections. At locals it has risen to an average of around 15 per cent, while in the European elections the party polled 943,598 votes nationally, 6.2 per cent of the total (up 1.3 per cent on 2004). At Westminster level there are three constituencies where the aggregate ward votes at the 2008 local elections put it in first place.
The BNP had 10,000 members at the end of 2007 – a figure that is likely to have risen since – providing it with a large and expanding activist base. It is not, by national standards, a huge organisation; it is a ‘large small party’ – at best the sixth biggest in the country. Nor, despite its advances, does it pose any immediate threat of gaining serious power. The real danger lies elsewhere, as will be outlined later.
Nonetheless, if the BNP’s absolute vote is giving pause for concern, it is its trajectory that is truly worrying. The European elections saw its national vote rise by almost a fifth against a background of falling turnout. The small falls in its absolute vote in some areas, including the North West and Yorkshire and Humber, where it won its seats, are misleading as they ignore the lower turnout and factors such as the impact of moving from an all-postal ballot to a traditional election. To exaggerate the significance of these absolute figures risks obscuring the party’s continued increase in its vote nationwide and breakthrough successes in county council level.
Failed approaches
Contemporary anti-fascism is represented by two main groups, with broadly similar approaches. First, there is Hope not Hate, an umbrella group for unions and individuals within the broad labour movement but open to all. This group was formed by the Searchlight Network. Second, Unite Against Fascism (UAF), an organisation set up by the Socialist Workers Party (SWP) and National Assembly Against Racism, which also has some union and other backing. For the SWP, UAF is clearly designed to continue in a similar vein to the Anti-Nazi League, and is not shy of drawing on the ANL’s reputation and experience.
Both groups concentrate their activities on two main approaches: first, exposing the criminal records, past activities and political beliefs of leading BNP members, candidates and activists; and second, calling on people not to ‘vote Nazi’. Instead electors are urged to vote anyone but BNP (with slight differences in how this is interpreted by each group), in an attempt to raise turnout and block the BNP electorally. This approach formed the basis of both groups’ failed interventions into the London mayoral and European elections.
What is wrong with these two approaches? The most obvious objection is that they don’t work. They don’t work today and they haven’t worked for some time. This isn’t to say that they haven’t worked in the past, just that they cannot form the central core of an anti-BNP strategy in today’s conditions.
Exposing the BNP’s various criminal and political records has had no discernible impact. In a country in which more than 40 per cent of all men can expect to have some form of criminal conviction during their lifetime, pointing out to voters in the sort of areas the BNP targets that a candidate has a conviction for assault or theft is likely to have a limited impact. If this were not the case we would today be seeing declining BNP votes and councillors not being returned post-exposure. But we’re not. We’re seeing a steadily rising vote and increasing re-elections.
This tactic has been pursued over the past decade on a scale never seen before. Every section of the media has got in on the game, every candidate has been hammering home their BNP opponents’ convictions. If this strategy was ever to make an impact it would have done so in these almost ideal conditions; instead the far right vote continues to rise. We have to conclude that this approach is ineffective.
Exposing past political views – for instance, BNP leader Nick Griffin’s association with Holocaust denial in the 1990s and earlier – has suffered a similar fate. Griffin has proved adept at moderating his most extreme opinions for the benefit of the media. He will now acknowledge the Holocaust as a historical ‘fact’ and, as he put it to the Observer in 2002, he claims that the only reason ‘people like me’ are not always ‘polite and reasonable’ on the subject is ‘frustration with how it is used to prevent any genuine debate on questions to do with immigration, ethnicity and the cultural survival of the western nations’.
In doing so, he can effectively neutralise the issue. If, despite his denial of Holocaust denial, an interviewer presses on regardless, it permits Griffin to turn the tables and ask if he or she wants to talk about politics. The same thing happens on a larger scale electorally
As with the exposure of BNP candidates’ criminal convictions, if this approach of bringing up the death camps and Nazi Germany was going to have any impact it would have done so in the especially favourable conditions of recent fevered mass media scrutiny of the BNP. This approach did find success in the three or four decades after the second world war, when a real folk memory of the sacrifices made by millions was still alive. Today, in different conditions, it cannot, has not and will not make the same inroads on BNP support.
Appealing to the status quo
These, though, are merely tactical problems, bred by past success and turned into conservative substitutes for effective intervention. Far more damaging on a strategic level is the second approach, calling on the electorate to ‘vote anyone but BNP’.
This position is a de facto appeal to support the status quo. It effectively calls on people to support the social conditions that have given rise to their radical discontent – to support the very same parties that have introduced and are pledged to maintain those conditions. In the bluntest terms, people will simply not vote for the parties they now blame for their situation and no amount of cajoling or mentions of the Holocaust will change that. The collapse in the Labour vote over the past few years makes this patently clear. The ‘anyone but BNP’ approach helps ensure that the conditions that are producing the BNP are going to remain in place. So we’re back at square one. And it allows the BNP to make all the running as the anti-establishment party during a once-in-a-lifetime time opportunity for anti-establishment parties to make a real breakthrough.
The way to undercut this is to work towards dealing with the root causes of the BNP support: in particular, the political abandonment of much of the working class in pursuit of the narrow section of the electorate classified as ‘swing voters’. Parties have privileged the interests of a section of the electorate that rarely shares the same interests as ‘core’ Labour voters in working-class areas. And this has led to the setting of parts of the same communities at each other’s throats in the fight for resources under the name of multiculturalism; the closing down of schools and hospitals; wages being driven down; debt; sub-standard housing; rising rents; under-funded services – all the conditions of our social life being attacked and commercialised by a class that has shown itself incapable, in the most basic terms, of being able to run the system for the benefit of all. This is what needs to be challenged as a priority, not people’s reactions to those planned and deliberate failures known as neoliberalism.
And this is where pro-status quo anti-fascism is falling down and demonstrating both a misunderstanding of where we are today and a real lack of political courage. A call to ‘vote to stop the BNP’ is, in most areas where it is raised, a barely-disguised call to vote Labour. That is why the unions are funding the millions of leaflets delivered by Hope Not Hate. (We can dismiss the suggestion that this slogan is also a call to vote Green. The BNP and Greens are not competing for the same vote. Nor need we dwell on those areas where the slogan translates into voting Tory or Lib Dem beyond imagining how an implied call to ‘Vote Thatcher to stop the National Front!’ would have been met.) An anti-fascism tied to support for the parties that have imposed the conditions people are protesting against is a failing anti-fascism. It is sacrificing all credibility by joining hands with the very establishment that people are so fed up with.
The combined party membership of mainstream parties has dropped from more than three million in the 1960s to barely half a million today and it is still falling. In conditions where large sections of the electorate are abandoning all the mainstream parties, for anti-fascists not to be supporting or initiating local projects that are prepared to confront rather than support the Labour Party is to politically abandon those communities to the BNP.
No platform?
Other aspects of current anti-fascist activism should also be questioned. This includes the widespread policy of ‘no platform for fascists’. Following the egging of Nick Griffin on College Green, at Westminster, the day after his election as an MEP, it has become evident that – beyond the confines of those who are already politically opposed to the BNP – ‘no platform’ has very little popular support.
In a country where the myths of democracy and freedom have a great hold over the public political imagination, a ‘no platform’ approach to the BNP is dangerous in a number of ways. First, via the functioning of that democratic myth, it associates the left with authoritarianism, violence and telling people what they can and cannot hear or read – exactly the sort of high-handed arrogance that is leading many people to reject the mainstream parties. Second, it acts as cover and support for top-down or state-led manoeuvres such as the closure of the BNP’s bank accounts by Barclays, which led to a Palestinian solidarity account being closed as well, or the plans by the Equality and Human Rights Commission to investigate the party’s constitution and membership rules.
How easy would it be to turn these initiatives against us? Already there are calls for a Berufsverbot for public sector workers, banning BNP members from those professions. This plays directly into the hands of the establishment. Of course, a community-led and supported refusal to allow the BNP to operate in their area is a very different matter, but we’re currently seeing a top-down version of ‘no platform’ substituted for this effective grass-roots one.
On a related note, Love Music Hate Racism (LMHR) is an attempt to continue the cultural fight of the Anti-Nazi League and Rock Against Racism by holding music festivals and similar events. Again, questions need to be asked. The problem is that today they simply attract those who are already against the BNP. In the past they were real arenas of conflict, battlegrounds for the hearts of young people. Today that context no longer exists and the far right has no hold over the young – it lost that battle years ago. Energy and resources channelled into LMHR would be better off directed at helping to deal with the problems working-class communities face as part and parcel of squeezing the BNP.
Missing the real danger
What all the current anti-fascist approaches have in common is that they miss the real danger. This doesn’t lie in the BNP taking power, in the possibility of concentration camps or any of the other scare stories we’ve been hearing recently. It lies more immediately in the far right colonising the anti-mainstream vote and developing party loyalty, thereby blocking the development of an independent working-class politics capable of defending our conditions and challenging neoliberalism.
The BNP’s politics is being normalised, with the consequent racialisation of social issues and a massive shift to the right. Each step they take forwards knocks the ‘left’ backwards. This represents an immense defeat for the left – one that could take us decades to recover from and leave us as outsiders (even more so than today) in working-class communities, the very places that we all recognise as being key to real social change. That is what will happen unless the job of defending the needs of those communities is seriously taken on and our counter-productive, outdated ‘anti-fascism’ is discarded.
I offer a few positive suggestions towards a new approach.
1 Community unions
We could form ‘community unions’, unconnected to Labour, possibly funded by trade unions but with organisational independence assured, that would work directly on helping to meet the needs of those politically abandoned working-class communities where conditions are deteriorating by the day. These would be based around the self-identified needs and plans of those communities – which can only pit them head-to-head against the BNP and the political mainstream.
The types of small victories that can be won on this terrain should be viewed not only as being worthwhile in themselves, but also as contributing to the re-emergence of community confidence in political self-assertion, the necessary first steps towards achieving further-reaching change. There are already existing groups engaged in this sort of practical activity, such as the London Coalition Against Poverty, Haringey Solidarity and the Oxford and Islington Working Class Associations (see Red Pepper Oct/Nov 2007).
The need for these to be open membership union-type organisations rather than party membership-type groups is a simple practical one. People will join unions at work as they recognise collective needs that exist over and above the heads of political disagreements, and the same is true of community needs. And once there is widespread identification (even passive) of the needs of an area/workplace with the existence of a union it becomes very hard to shift; that identification becomes a power in itself. Parties are too narrow to play this role under today’s conditions – they exist on a different level – but there is no reason why they cannot play a role within these broader open groups.
2 Focus on policy
We should develop the ‘expose them’ model into one that, instead of revealing ineffective details about individuals, concentrates on why their polices will not deal with the social problems driving people into their arms. If we cannot make this clear to those already intensely concerned with these issues then our propaganda is failing and is at best talking to those who would never vote BNP anyway. This will require a direct challenge to Searchlight/UAF and other mainstream anti-fascists as they continue to empty their publications of all but the most inane type of content criticised above. This, of course, needs to be linked to the activity of the ‘community union’ type groups mentioned above.
3 Abandon Labour
Searchlight need to abandon their default pro-Labour position and use their existing networks and resources to get behind local campaigns, actively challenging the conditions that are breeding support for the far right. (This seems unlikely to happen.)
4 End the marches
Stop the marches, labelling, shouting, and so on. Marching into an area that you do not know and have no continuing interest in and shouting what’s right for that area is alienating and counter-productive. People do not like being told what’s best for them and will kick back against or simply ignore this sort of activity.
All of this can be performed without capitulating to racism and without writing off vast swathes of the population. It has to be.
With thanks to Red Pepper
July 09, 2009
Demo against 'growing threat' of BNP
A wave of protest against the British National Party is to culminate in a protest march in Lincoln.
Lincoln and District Trades' Council organised the march following the election of two BNP members to the European Union. The group is keen to highlight what it feels are the real policies and background of the BNP.
Secretary of the Lincoln and District Trade Union Council Graham Peck said: "Lincoln and District Trades' Council is bitterly disappointed with the recent election of two British National Party members to the European Parliament. In the light of this growing threat in the county, and the election on our doorstep of Andrew Brons for Yorkshire and Humberside region, the Trades' Council has decided to call a demonstration to oppose the rise of the racist BNP."
The far right organisation had 23 candidates standing in the Lincolnshire County Council elections, but did not make any gains in the area. Boston is currently the only place in the county with a BNP councillor.
The rally is due to be held on Saturday, meeting outside the University of Lincoln at 11.30am before leaving at noon and heading up Wigford Way, along Guildhall Street and down High Street.
East Midlands regional organiser for the BNP Geoff Dickens said: "Irrespective of what people like to think, different communities do not get on well together. Some of the more established communities of immigrants from the 60s and 70s are as much in despair of the new groups and the state of the country as the BNP."
Lincolnshire Echo
Full details from L&DTUC:
The assembly point is in front of Lincoln uni, and we will be congregating at 11.30 to leave at 12, marching up Brayford Wharf East, along Wigford Way, turning left down Guildhall Street and right on to the High Street before stopping for a rally in front of the former Tourist Information centre
L&DTUC Facebook page
Lincoln and District Trades' Council organised the march following the election of two BNP members to the European Union. The group is keen to highlight what it feels are the real policies and background of the BNP.
Secretary of the Lincoln and District Trade Union Council Graham Peck said: "Lincoln and District Trades' Council is bitterly disappointed with the recent election of two British National Party members to the European Parliament. In the light of this growing threat in the county, and the election on our doorstep of Andrew Brons for Yorkshire and Humberside region, the Trades' Council has decided to call a demonstration to oppose the rise of the racist BNP."
The far right organisation had 23 candidates standing in the Lincolnshire County Council elections, but did not make any gains in the area. Boston is currently the only place in the county with a BNP councillor.
The rally is due to be held on Saturday, meeting outside the University of Lincoln at 11.30am before leaving at noon and heading up Wigford Way, along Guildhall Street and down High Street.
East Midlands regional organiser for the BNP Geoff Dickens said: "Irrespective of what people like to think, different communities do not get on well together. Some of the more established communities of immigrants from the 60s and 70s are as much in despair of the new groups and the state of the country as the BNP."
Lincolnshire Echo
Full details from L&DTUC:
The assembly point is in front of Lincoln uni, and we will be congregating at 11.30 to leave at 12, marching up Brayford Wharf East, along Wigford Way, turning left down Guildhall Street and right on to the High Street before stopping for a rally in front of the former Tourist Information centre
L&DTUC Facebook page
July 06, 2009
The BNP have given us a wake up call
We can't rely on others to beat the BNP
In June this year the fascist British National Party won the first seats in a national election for a fascist party in British history - with MEPs elected in the North West and Yorkshire regions. Those who have tried to downplay the significance of this breakthrough do a disservice to everyone threatened by the rise of the extreme right. It was wrong to promote complacency about the BNP's prospects before those elections and it is even more dangerous to underestimate the significance of these results.
In fact, the BNP have been steadily building electoral support over recent years, first gaining seats on local councils, then a seat last year on the London Assembly and now their first ever seats in a national election. That reality has to be faced up to and understood if the trend is to be reversed.
As we have already seen on television, radio and in the press, these results have enormously magnified the ability of the fascists to preach their doctrine of hate. There will be more racist attacks, more homophobic violence and more attacks on Muslims as a result. This has been borne out by the recent hate crime statistics which show that racist attacks have increased up to 27-fold in areas with an increased BNP presence.
Not only that, but Euro-MPs receive massive financial resources which will now be used by the BNP to target key seats in the next parliamentary and local elections. And mainstream parties will bend to the BNP's politics in the mistaken belief that this will stop their growth when it will, of course, only legitimise their ideology of division and hate.
The anti-fascist movement must review its strategy to deal with the increased fascist threat. There have been many debates in recent years and reality has now put them to the test.
First, we must understand what fascism is. It stands for the destruction of the trade unions, the left, democratic freedoms and rabid racism and homophobia, posing a mortal threat to those it targets. At any particular time its targets are selected to take advantage of the prejudices that exist in society and are promoted by the media and mainstream parties. In the 1930s, for example, a cutting edge of the Nazis was anti-Semitism.
Today's fascists are as anti-Semitic as ever, but the main prejudices they feed upon and promote are racism and Islamophobia. Any strategy which does not confront racism and Islamophobia head on will fail to defeat the fascists.
Equally, anyone who thinks you can have an anti-fascist movement in Britain today without Black, Asian and Muslim communities playing a central role, alongside the trade unions, the Left and the lesbian and gay communities is simply splitting the forces that need to unite to defeat the fascists.
A united strategy, which brings together all these social forces and challenges the racist myths which are the cutting edge of the BNP, is the key to success. It successfully stopped the BNP in Oldham when it was on course to make a breakthrough in 2001 and removed it from Tower Hamlets council in 1994.
The anti-fascist movement's strategy must be based on what works. Not wasting hundreds of thousands of pounds of trade union funds on a strategy that divides and weakens the anti-fascist majority.
The BNP vote was based on real racist hatred as shown in the yougov poll for Channel 4 on the European elections. The poll indicated that a third of BNP voters think there is a difference in intelligence between the black and white people (compared to 14% of general voters). 94% think that all further immigration should be halted. 44% disagree with gay and lesbian couples having civil partnerships equal to marriage. 79% think Islam is a serious danger to western civilization. The BNP courted these voters in the run up to the election, stating Black and Asian people in this country should be classified as 'racial foreigners' to be 'repatriated' - something which would only be possible through violence and destroying democracy. Their website also targeted 3 mps on a list of "Liars, buggers and thieves" - including Chris Bryant and Ron Davies, as part of a list of criminals, designed to whip up homophobia. Even with the option of voting UKIP, the BNP used the fears and prejudices fanned by the economic crisis to consolidate a racist vote.
The anti fascist majority has received a wake up call. We don't need puffed up claims of BNP crisis. We need an accurate assessment of what the BNP is and an effective strategy to unite the core forces who can lead the majority to defeat them.
Denis Fernando Lesbian and Gay Coalition Against Racism
In June this year the fascist British National Party won the first seats in a national election for a fascist party in British history - with MEPs elected in the North West and Yorkshire regions. Those who have tried to downplay the significance of this breakthrough do a disservice to everyone threatened by the rise of the extreme right. It was wrong to promote complacency about the BNP's prospects before those elections and it is even more dangerous to underestimate the significance of these results.
In fact, the BNP have been steadily building electoral support over recent years, first gaining seats on local councils, then a seat last year on the London Assembly and now their first ever seats in a national election. That reality has to be faced up to and understood if the trend is to be reversed.
As we have already seen on television, radio and in the press, these results have enormously magnified the ability of the fascists to preach their doctrine of hate. There will be more racist attacks, more homophobic violence and more attacks on Muslims as a result. This has been borne out by the recent hate crime statistics which show that racist attacks have increased up to 27-fold in areas with an increased BNP presence.
Not only that, but Euro-MPs receive massive financial resources which will now be used by the BNP to target key seats in the next parliamentary and local elections. And mainstream parties will bend to the BNP's politics in the mistaken belief that this will stop their growth when it will, of course, only legitimise their ideology of division and hate.
The anti-fascist movement must review its strategy to deal with the increased fascist threat. There have been many debates in recent years and reality has now put them to the test.
First, we must understand what fascism is. It stands for the destruction of the trade unions, the left, democratic freedoms and rabid racism and homophobia, posing a mortal threat to those it targets. At any particular time its targets are selected to take advantage of the prejudices that exist in society and are promoted by the media and mainstream parties. In the 1930s, for example, a cutting edge of the Nazis was anti-Semitism.
Today's fascists are as anti-Semitic as ever, but the main prejudices they feed upon and promote are racism and Islamophobia. Any strategy which does not confront racism and Islamophobia head on will fail to defeat the fascists.
Equally, anyone who thinks you can have an anti-fascist movement in Britain today without Black, Asian and Muslim communities playing a central role, alongside the trade unions, the Left and the lesbian and gay communities is simply splitting the forces that need to unite to defeat the fascists.
A united strategy, which brings together all these social forces and challenges the racist myths which are the cutting edge of the BNP, is the key to success. It successfully stopped the BNP in Oldham when it was on course to make a breakthrough in 2001 and removed it from Tower Hamlets council in 1994.
The anti-fascist movement's strategy must be based on what works. Not wasting hundreds of thousands of pounds of trade union funds on a strategy that divides and weakens the anti-fascist majority.
The BNP vote was based on real racist hatred as shown in the yougov poll for Channel 4 on the European elections. The poll indicated that a third of BNP voters think there is a difference in intelligence between the black and white people (compared to 14% of general voters). 94% think that all further immigration should be halted. 44% disagree with gay and lesbian couples having civil partnerships equal to marriage. 79% think Islam is a serious danger to western civilization. The BNP courted these voters in the run up to the election, stating Black and Asian people in this country should be classified as 'racial foreigners' to be 'repatriated' - something which would only be possible through violence and destroying democracy. Their website also targeted 3 mps on a list of "Liars, buggers and thieves" - including Chris Bryant and Ron Davies, as part of a list of criminals, designed to whip up homophobia. Even with the option of voting UKIP, the BNP used the fears and prejudices fanned by the economic crisis to consolidate a racist vote.
The anti fascist majority has received a wake up call. We don't need puffed up claims of BNP crisis. We need an accurate assessment of what the BNP is and an effective strategy to unite the core forces who can lead the majority to defeat them.
Denis Fernando Lesbian and Gay Coalition Against Racism
Labels:
anti-fascism,
BNP,
fascism,
LGBT,
Searchlight,
UAF
June 29, 2009
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.
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
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
Labels:
anti-fascism,
BNP,
Hope not Hate,
Nick Griffin,
Nick Lowles,
Searchlight
October 23, 2008
A band of brothers that fought for freedom
Sam (back row, centre) with other British volunteers, (clockwise from back row right) Peter Kerrigan, Ted Edwards, Bob Cooney, Alan Gilchrist, Paddy O’Daire and George Fletcher.THEY left their homes and families to risk their lives fighting for the freedom of a foreign land. Sixty-six working men from Manchester travelled to Spain in the 1930s to join the international brigades determined to stop the rise of Franco’s fascists.
Ultimately, their efforts were in vain but their sacrifice has never been forgotten. This week marks the 70th anniversary of the defeat of the republican forces in the Spanish Civil War. As Manchester prepares to remember the sacrifice made by those in the name of liberty, the Reporter spoke to the family of Sam Wild one of the heroes who fought for a better world ...
FOR many working men in Manchester it was a battle for the future of Europe.
In 1936, together with thousands of volunteers from all over the world, they travelled to Spain to join the International Brigades to fight against rebel Spanish Nationalist forces, led by General Francisco Franco and assisted by Nazi German and Fascist Italian forces.
Impassioned by the fight against fascism taking place in Spain, scores of Mancunians voluntarily joined a special international regiment in a quest to achieve worldwide democracy.
Along with many other ‘ordinary’ men from Manchester, Sam Wild, played a major role during the Spanish Civil War.
He received the highest accolade for his gallant efforts as the last commander of the British Battalion of the International Brigade and continued to fight - even while injured - until they were forced to lay down their weapons.
His daughter, Dolores Long, from Whalley Range, grew up inspired by the selfless involvement of her father and more than sixty other Manchester residents who fought side-by-side with the Spanish Republican Forces in the 1930s.
Her mother was also involved in the Aid to Spain movement, raising money to send food and provisions to the troops.
Named after Dolores Ibarruri, a revolutionary leader who made a passionate speech thanking the International Brigades as they withdrew from the battle, Dolores Long and her siblings have their parents’ story forever ingrained in their minds.
She said: "My father, like the other volunteers were proud and political men.
"It was their instinct to go and fight. They did so to stop the rise of fascism because they could see the way that things were going. I’ve always thought what a brave and heroic thing it was to go and volunteer."
Sam, born in Ardwick to an Irish Immigrant in 1908, had grown up attending rallies at Stephenson Square to listen to speakers calling for the home rule of Ireland.
It was injustice he felt when he later joined the Navy, and the extreme poverty he encountered in places like South Africa, coupled with his political passion he felt on his return from sea, which made him sign up to help the Spanish struggle.
More than 2,000 Brits joined the International Brigades and their fight was well documented by Ernest Hemingway and George Orwell, who fought on the Aragon Front in support of the Workers’ Party of Marxist Unification.
Teacher Dolores, 65, said: "My father was an unskilled worker who left school early. He joined the Navy because he was short of money and it was then where he noticed the differences in the way the officers were treated in comparison to the other recruits."
"The British Battalion wasn’t a conscripted army, those who went to Spain did so to stop the rise of fascism. It was very often working class people who signed up to fight and, in my father’s case, it was the principle he felt was at stake which made him stay for two years."
Sam, who lived in Longsight, fought in a number of battles, including the infamous Battle of Ebro in July 1938. He even continued to fight with an injured right hand and was rewarded with the Republic’s highest decoration for bravery, the Spanish Medal of Valour - the equivalent of the Victoria Cross. He was also on the frontline in Aragon and took part in the Battle of Jarama in between Madrid and Valencia.
A blue plaque commemorating his achievements is now mounted on the old family home on Birch Hall Lane, between Longsight and Fallowfield.
Before leaving, Sam Wild was quoted as saying "The British Battalion is prepared to carry on the work begun here to see to it that our 500 comrades who sleep for ever beneath Spanish soil shall serve as an example to the entire British people in the struggle against fascism."
To those who fought in the anti-fascist struggle - a precursor to World War II and the rise of Hitler - the Spanish Civil War was a social revolution that united workers, helped in the strengthening of trade unions and started powerful campaigns.
Dolores added: "My mother and father let me make up my own mind about things, they never forced their beliefs on me, but I was always aware of the things they had done which influenced me to become involved in various campaigns. It’s been a big part of my life. Growing up on a 1950s Manchester council estate with a name like Dolores was no easy thing!"
Poets, speakers and musicians will gather to pay homage to the anti-fascist international volunteers, on the anniversary of the withdrawal of the International Brigade from Spain 70 years ago.
Poet Jackie Kay, actress Maxine Peake, Celtic folk band The Wakes and playwright Eileen Murphy, will feature at the event in the Mechanics Institute, Princess Street, on Saturday, November 8.
Dolores, a passionate political campaigner, often reads the emotive speech made by her namesake at memorial events.
This week Dolores and her sister Hilary attended a special ceremony in Barcelona, where the surviving Brigaders and all the other men and women who assisted during the Civil War will be honoured by the Spanish Government.
She said: "It is far more than just being about my father, it is about all the other men and women who were involved in the Civil War.
"I have been fortunate to meet many of them over the years, it has been amazing - they were such an inspiring group of people."
Tickets for the Manchester commemorative concert can be paid for on the door, priced £10, £5 concessions. For details visit www.international-brigades.org.uk.
Labels:
anti-fascism,
Spanish Civil War
October 03, 2008
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
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
Labels:
anti-fascism,
BNP,
Nick Lowles,
racism,
Stoke-on-Trent
June 21, 2008
Join the fight - join the forum!
If you joined in our "live" blogging experiment on election night you'll remember that we had a lot of fun, and that we said we'd repeat the experience in the future.
Well, it set us thinking - elections and breaking news (like the BNP rebel expulsions) are real anti-fascist crowd-pullers, and while we can blog news and moderate comments in near real time, the process is cumbersome, especially for you as you need to constantly hit page refresh to keep up.
There is a better way, of course, and sometimes visitors have asked us to provide a regular forum for continued, more flowing discussion - so we have!
It's simply called Unity - because that says it all.
The forum is complementary to Lancaster Unity (and other Unity and anti-fascist websites), and we hope it becomes a major weapon in the fight against the far-Right.
We'll post the address of the Unity forum here at 10.00 a.m. on Sunday morning, and there will be a permanent link in the sidebar.
Self-registration is currently enabled, but we intend to move to Admin-approved registration soon after launch, so come early and get on board.
Labels:
anti-fascism,
BNP,
Lancaster Unity,
Unity forum
May 28, 2008
Nine years of vision and vermin
It's been nine long years since Nick Griffin unseated John Tyndall as BNP leader in what can fairly be described as the only relatively honest leadership election (in purely mechanical terms) the BNP ever held. And it's only ever held two.
Naturally, neither man was entirely honest in how they conducted their campaigns, and still less honest with their respective supporters as to their future intentions - but of the two only Nicholas Griffin was presented with the opportunity to demonstrate the fact, and upon winning lost very little time in giving the BNP a hefty dose of the control freakery and paranoia he had once administered to the National Front, the same which sent that organisation into terminal decline.
What is striking at this remove is John Tyndall's magnaminity in allowing the then recently arrived Griffin's 1999 challenge, to the point of permitting Griffin the full use of BNP structures and mechanisms even as the six-month campaign quickly descended into a long series of visceral dog-fights. It is, after all, John Tyndall who we see pictured in Nazi uniform, not the alleged "moderniser" Nick Griffin.
In 1999 Griffin claimed to be running an "open and honest" leadership challenge based on "positive ideas for the future", calling himself the candidate with "flair and vision". This certainly struck a chord with the BNP's newer members, and even appealed to some hardline BNP veterans all too aware of Tyndall's advancing years and of the tiredness of his leadership.
It did, however, obscure Griffin's woeful record in the National Front, where he spent much of his time engaged in factional activities, seemed to view political positions as expendable commodities, and was even then the subject of much disquiet in the matter of finance.
Griffin passed himself off as the BNP's "unity candidate", threatening that a Tyndall win would "lead inevitably to a most disastrous split" (presumably Griffin would be the leader of this putative split) - words that would earn anybody in today's Griffinite BNP instant expulsion. There were also dire warnings of purges ahead at the hands of Tyndall, while, "in happy contrast", Nick's "mature, level-headed and fundamentally decent approach" would restore unity and stability to the BNP. There would be "not one single expulsion" if Nick were to assume the leadership - "No cronysim, no favouritism, no grudges" he promised.
History tells a very different story.
One of Nick's first "positive ideas" as leader was to ensure that no challenger would ever again have the scope or freedom to campaign as he had done, and there began the first of a series of changes to the BNP constitution that should have rung loud alarm bells among those who had taken Griffin at his word
People like convinced Griffin supporters Steve and Sharron Edwards, who, within a year of Griffin's assumption of the leadership found themselves asking some searching questions about the new man's financial probity and as a result became victims of paranoic accusations that were the pretext for expelling them from the party.
They were among the first, and many legally dubious expulsions have passed under the BNP bridge since then.
That first proof that Griffin the BNP leader preserved exactly the same frame of mind as Griffin the National Front chairman (and author of the insane and infamous "Attempted Murder" pamphlet), gave wider currency to Tyndallite grumbling and opened the eyes of many early Griffin loyalists, few of whom have remained in place, due either to being cast aside as their usefulness to Griffin came to an end, were purged, or grew disillusioned.
The problem was that the only person capable of mounting a credible challenge against Griffin was John Tyndall, at the time subject to a campaign of vilification for that very reason - but Tyndall, with his Nazi past and barely reconstructed views, was anathema even to those Griffinites who had come to loath their leader.
Tyndall's death removed the biggest thorn in Griffin's side, and there has since been no other personality within the BNP who stands out even remotely as likely leadership material - not that a personality likely to present a future threat to Griffin will ever have the chance to stand out, as Jonathon Bowden discovered last summer.
Had the BNP not begun to experience its first real electoral successes as disaffection with Griffin began to rise then it quite likely that the party would have descended into vicious faction-fighting, which might have been the end of the extreme-Right for a decade or more. But election success - albeit localised - did come, and Griffin was quick to take the credit.
BNP members - more like the "sheeple" they despise than they care to believe - were happy to go along with him, and in so doing were prepared to overlook their leader's less savoury character traits and blind themselves to the stark evidence that the BNP was increasingly beginning to look like what Martin Webster christened "the Griffin Family Business".
Of course there are many reasons for the BNP's initial spurt of electoral success, none of them much at all to do with Nicholas Griffin.
It might be argued that the best election agent the BNP ever had was Blairism and its apparent (if not intentional) attempts to disconnect itself from its core electorate - an electorate unlikely, especially in the northern towns where the first BNP gains came, to find any merit in voting for the then divided and demoralised Tories, or the Liberal Democrats. We must add in to that the 2001 Oldham riots, and the fact (much as it grieves us to say it) that in certain areas of strength the BNP did have capable organisers who ran intelligent, competent local campaigns with which Nick Griffin had no connection at all.
Further gains followed, of course, and Nick identified himself with every success, to the point where many BNP members really did (and still do) believe that without the guiding hand of Griffin the BNP would have achieved nothing at all.
This is utter nonsense. If there were any truth to it at all then the BNP would have achieved comparable results to those it obtained in places like Oldham and Burnley over the remainder of the country. Save for some small pockets where the circumstances outlined above pertained, it did nothing of the kind - but Nick was never eager to take the credit for that.
The probable truth is that finding himself the leader of the most electorally successful British racist party to date came as of much as a surprise to Griffin as it did to anybody else. Even so, Griffin seemed fixed on undermining "his" achievement by continuing the ludicrous (and legally expensive) hunt for John Tyndall's scalp, the unending litany of expulsions and proscriptions, and was quite prepared to wreck the BNP in its strongest electoral areas (Burnley being the textbook case) if he smelled the least whiff of personal disloyalty.
To many, even the BNP's enemies, these seemed like the actions of a demagogue more interested in preserving his hide than those of a man possessed of "flair and vision" with "positive ideas for the future".
Tyndall died, and the BNP's then electoral high point came and went, Griffin and his leadership team reduced to promising breathroughs to come.
Last year, as we all remember, along with the BNP itself we expected the party to add to its tally of 49 sitting councillors at the 2007 local elections. Everything seemed set fair for them to do so. We gritted our teeth, the racists prepared to crow - but early into the election night results it was clear who would be doing the crowing, and it wasn't the BNP.
The next morning we wrote:
The BNP's march to power turned into a cul-de-sac of indifference yesterday, with the racist party failing to make any impression in the English local elections.
Predicting at least a doubling of their 49 councillors, a devastated BNP finds its tally (at the time of writing) remains 49. Though the BNP did pick up seats it lost the same number, making no net gains. Of the nine BNP councillors up for re-election only one successfully defended his seat.
Claiming "mixed results" in an attempt to hide an electoral calamity from its shell-shocked members, there was no real disguising of the BNP's utter failure over large swathes of the country. The party's fortunes stalled and went into reverse in areas where its hopes were high, notably Sandwell and Birmingham, where thousands of votes were lost. Votes in cities such as Coventry were barely improved over those obtained thirty years ago by the National Front. In an effort to distract attention from the Birmingham debacle, the BNP is focussing attention on the fact that it gained more votes than the renegade Sharon Ebanks and her tiny number of New Nationalist Party candidates.
Griffin did not rush to identify himself with this particular set of results, nor did he attempt to explain why, when - by its own assessment - conditions had never been better for the BNP, all that could be reported was abject failure.
Of course, Griffin had other concerns by then, the lacklustre leadership challenge of Chris Jackson assuming a new and threatening importance in the light of the appalling election results, which challenge had to be hamstrung (as it was) before any damage to Griffin's position was done.
The paranoid sequel to Jackson's challenge was well enough reported here and is fresh enough in our minds not to bear a full re-telling, save to recall Griffin's infamously insane "vermin", "thieves" and "liars" blog diatribe, backed up by an equally hysterical and inventive four page spread in the BNP's "Identity" magazine - and, naturally, the purging and proscribing quickly followed.
Post the 2007 locals, the BNP continued to fight in by-elections, where it could concentrate its resources in pursuit of the best possible showing. Their results were lamentable - though there were areas, the East Midlands and adjacent districts being salient cases, where the party could produce a good first-time vote. Unfortunately for them, where the party's performance could be measured against previous outings in the same ward, their vote invariably fell.
Seeking a crumb of comfort, the party was overjoyed to retain a seat in Loughton, making a great deal of fuss over this "achievement" - and going to great lengths to silence wiser voices which pointed out that the BNP vote had fallen by a notable 5% and that the seat had been retained by a margin of 20 votes against a candidate who did not belong to one of the major parties. To say, as some did, that this was no small cause for concern was to invite attack as a "troublemaker", a "splitter", an "anti-BNP Red" and all the usual epithets beloved of the Griffinite BNP.
All that mattered was that the seat had been retained, and to hell with any unwelcome analysis - thank you, Nick!
They were to pay for this self-deluding complacency.
Ignoring for now the damp squib of the BNP's Decembrist revolt, the BNP began mustering its electoral troops early for the 2008 locals. As was clear from their numerous blogs and their posts on their usual internet hang-outs, they had worked themselves up for a real breakthrough.
This was going to be their year - they could feel it in their bones.
We couldn't. Everything we'd seen and recorded of BNP performances over the past year told us that though some gains were likely, nothing much was going to change and the established picture of electoral stagnation and reverse would continue.
For once, the BNP leadership cultivated a healthy restraint in its predictions, even inventing the meaningless spin-phrase "quiet revolution" to explain the BNP's snail's pace growth (or lack thereof) to a potentially restive membership. And there was a distinct air of unreality in the lead up to election day.
What struck us was the idiotic claim made by BNP deputy chairman and Griffin cheerleader Simon Darby that he had made a "breakthrough" by sealing a deal with the Pensioners Party whereby that party would recommend its members and supporters to vote BNP. The only fly in the ointment was that the PP had a total of six members, was completely unknown and without influence, and its leadership seemed to be unaware of any deal with the BNP. Members of other parties might have resented this cynical attempt to con them, but, all too typically, the BNP sheeple seemed more outraged that the con had been exposed.
Unreality continued as virtually powerless parish councillors became equated in Griffinite BNP spin with district councillors, an exercise designed purely to push up the total number of BNP "councillors" gained and to prove to an all too gullible membership of how well things were progressing for the BNP - proof in itself that the BNP's leadership had no great expectations for the 2008 locals. Several non-political parish council seats fell unopposed into the hands of the BNP, each "gain" being proudly reported on the BNP website.
It was so much whistling in the dark.
The BNP gained a grand total of ten "real" councillors, and its vote in its own heartlands fell, frequently by considerable margins.
Nick Griffin did not rush to bask in the reflected glory of this particular success, and though many BNP members still regurgitate the Griffinite smoke-and-mirrors line that something remarkable happened on May 1st, it is apparent that hard reality is finally beginning to bite for some of their number.
The plain fact, which they cannot ignore, is that by its own lights electoral conditions were never better for the BNP than they were on May 1st. A long serious of immigration controversies preceded the elections, some in the same week, there was the 40th anniversary of Powell's "Rivers of Blood" speech, falling together with the BBC "White Season" series, and the party frequently received completely uncritical press coverage. They themselves were reporting on ecstatic doorstep receptions for their canvassers.
And still Nick Griffin could deliver only 10 extra councillors from the 612 seats fought by the BNP.
Following the locals we had to wait 24 hours for the results of the London Mayoral race and the GLA elections - 24 hours in which Griffin must have prayed for a miracle. At all events, the BNP's spinmeisters began to play down expectations (and with good reason), uncertain whether they would gain anything at all.
Disaster seemed to beckon for what party apparatchniks were calling the BNP's finest campaign, but finally the much-hyped Richard Barnbrook scraped a GLA seat with 5.4%.
In the wake of this apparent "landmark" victory, as they touted it, the BNP seemed oblivious to the fact that 30 years ago the more honestly racist National Front averaged pretty much the same vote and better over large swathes of London. The truth is that the BNP should have achieved election on 7-8% of the vote if there was to be any credibility to their claim of "progress". They did not.
Again Nick Griffin failed to deliver.
After nine years of Nick Griffin's "vision and flair", in the most favourable circumstances imaginable, the BNP still manages a miserable grand total of 55 (real) local councillors and one elected (just) member of the GLA.
This is not a record that would wash in any political party other than the BNP.
To sum up the nine years of Nick Griffin's leadership, then, there has been, from the beginning and ever since, a long series of legally challengable expulsions of those who either cast doubt on Griffin's financial management of the party or who were deemed a threat to his position. There has been a ruthless willingness to wreck the BNP in its own areas of strength for no better reason than that members in those areas felt their loyalties to the party over-rode any presumed loyalty to a man they did not trust or in who they lacked confidence. In short, there has been continual internal strife since 1999.
If the incessant amendments to the BNP's risible constitution were not enough to make Nick feel safe, then, as some of you will be aware, the party has issued "Activist Declaration" forms - the only case we know of in British politics where ordinary members of a political party are being forced to swear something not a million miles removed from the Nazi oath of allegiance, and at the same time to give themselves as hostage to fortune to whatever constitutional changes Griffin chooses to enact.
Clearly a trap is being loaded, since: "I agree to abide by the British National Party’s Constitution and any amendments made to it under the provisions of the Constitution".
Those signing this (Barnsian?) document, especially those closely allied with Griffin's internal opponents, may as well hand the man a loaded gun and wait to be shot the moment the inevitable constitutional amendments are made.
It can have no other purpose.
Perhaps the sudden appearance of this scurrilous document can be best explained by the fact that elections for the European parliament are now a year away, and if there is one thing we know Griffin longs to do it is to bag his ticket on the Euro gravy-train.
To that end he has already deposed Chris Jackson as North-west Regional Organiser in favour of himself, and parachuted himself in as the BNP's number one candidate in the region. We also saw, when a general election seemed but weeks away last autumn, that Griffin's overarching concern was to preserve BNP finances for the Euro elections - strange behaviour for a British "national" party.
You or I might think a good general election performance would be of more lasting benefit to the BNP than Griffin's flying off to Strasbourg and the riches of an MEP on the back of a tiny vote in north-west England, but the BNP have convinced themselves that this is the way forward - failing to notice that a similar exercise has done the UKIP no good at all, and never really asking themselves exactly what a lone BNP representative in Europe is going to achieve for the party.
However that may be, with the prize now in sight the Griffin Family Business must be protected from hostile takeover, and we can't help but to think that the "Activist Declaration" form is a large and sinister part of that protection.
In perspective, then: in nine years Nick Griffin has taken the BNP from nowhere to next to nowhere. In the most favourable conditions ever to exist in which a racialist and nationalist party could expect to grow, the BNP under Griffin has remained stunted, its membership numbering well under 10,000, despite the regular repetition of the lie that hundreds join every week.
It remains electorally moribund, and where it has met with success it has done so despite the turbulent Griffin, not because of him. His record is, by any measure, lamentable, nine years of effort and eye-watering expenditure on the part of the BNP producing a paltry crop of 55 local councillors who all too often are not up to the job and all too prone to find themselves confronted with past indiscretions.
That Griffin has managed for so long to pass off his leadership as a story of unparalleled success is an achievement of sorts, we suppose, but we on our side of the fence really do thank our stars that the BNP chose to land itself with the most divisive and incompetent leader ever to grace the stage of the far-Right in Britain.
"Flair and vision"? It seems more like stuff and nonsense to us.
October 19, 2007
BNP's near-miss in East Midland by-election a warning to anti-fascists
Our local by-election reports have regularly stressed that despite entering into a long period of electoral stagnation, the BNP is still capable of pulling off some nasty surprises, and this week we have to report a very nasty surprise.
The sole by-election contested by the BNP last night was at Church Gresley, Swadlincote, which elects to South Derbyshire District Council. South Derbyshire is currently controlled by the Conservatives, who have a majority of seven over Labour (there is one Independent and no Liberal Democrat representation).
Swadlincote sits squarely within an area of the Midlands noted for delivering high BNP votes, as we discussed in our report on the Charnwood District Council Shepshed by-election and for this reason we must take a particular interest in the Church Gresley contest.
The ward itself, on the south side of Swadlincote, is held by Labour. At the May elections two Labour candidates contested against two Conservatives in a straight fight. The combined voting percentages were a mathematically neat 66.6% Labour, 33.3% Conservative. There was, then, a danger of the intervening BNP candidate feeding off the Labour vote, and that some Conservative voters, knowing that the Tories could not win Church Gresley, might be tempted to switch to the BNP.
Though the BNP has never previously fought Church Gresley, in May the party fielded two candidates for South Derbyshire DC seats. Because he BNP stood single candidates in multiple vacancy wards where the other parties ran two or more candidates, their results are open to interpretation.
Contiguous to Church Gresley is Swadlincote, contested in May by last night's candidate Richard Fallows. The BNP averaged vote came in at 22.7%, placing Fallows fourth ahead of three Conservatives and three Liberal Democrats. In next door Newhall and Stanton, the BNP's Paula Bailey took an averaged vote of 23.4%, and despite coming seventh of seven (three Labour candidates convincingly beat the three Conservatives) obtained the better result of the two BNP candidates.
The closeness of the BNP's May votes and the linear contiguity of Church Gresley with Swadlincote and Newhall and Stanton gives us some idea of the yardstick by which last night's result can be judged. The BNP will have aimed at 23% of the vote or better in a three-cornered (Lab/Con/BNP) contest in a Labour-held ward.
There is, as we must concede, no avoiding the fact that the racist party did very much better than that.
South Derbyshire D.C. Church Gresley ward result:
Though the BNP clearly ate substantially into the Conservative vote, it was the Labour vote which suffered most from the BNP's intervention. Had the Liberal Democrats stood to further split the mainstream vote in Church Gresley we could very easily be reporting a BNP gain.
Exactly why the BNP in the East Midlands has been able to buck the trend of its own performances elsewhere is not readily obvious. The wards in which it has been doing well are little different demographically and socially from those in other parts of the country where it has failed to make headway. However that may be, there can be no doubt at all now that anti-fascists and the legitimate political parties have some serious work to do if the BNP is to be prevented from launching an East Midland-led revival.
One good result does not a summer make for the BNP - but we have been warned.
The sole by-election contested by the BNP last night was at Church Gresley, Swadlincote, which elects to South Derbyshire District Council. South Derbyshire is currently controlled by the Conservatives, who have a majority of seven over Labour (there is one Independent and no Liberal Democrat representation).
Swadlincote sits squarely within an area of the Midlands noted for delivering high BNP votes, as we discussed in our report on the Charnwood District Council Shepshed by-election and for this reason we must take a particular interest in the Church Gresley contest.
The ward itself, on the south side of Swadlincote, is held by Labour. At the May elections two Labour candidates contested against two Conservatives in a straight fight. The combined voting percentages were a mathematically neat 66.6% Labour, 33.3% Conservative. There was, then, a danger of the intervening BNP candidate feeding off the Labour vote, and that some Conservative voters, knowing that the Tories could not win Church Gresley, might be tempted to switch to the BNP.
Though the BNP has never previously fought Church Gresley, in May the party fielded two candidates for South Derbyshire DC seats. Because he BNP stood single candidates in multiple vacancy wards where the other parties ran two or more candidates, their results are open to interpretation.
Contiguous to Church Gresley is Swadlincote, contested in May by last night's candidate Richard Fallows. The BNP averaged vote came in at 22.7%, placing Fallows fourth ahead of three Conservatives and three Liberal Democrats. In next door Newhall and Stanton, the BNP's Paula Bailey took an averaged vote of 23.4%, and despite coming seventh of seven (three Labour candidates convincingly beat the three Conservatives) obtained the better result of the two BNP candidates.
The closeness of the BNP's May votes and the linear contiguity of Church Gresley with Swadlincote and Newhall and Stanton gives us some idea of the yardstick by which last night's result can be judged. The BNP will have aimed at 23% of the vote or better in a three-cornered (Lab/Con/BNP) contest in a Labour-held ward.
There is, as we must concede, no avoiding the fact that the racist party did very much better than that.
South Derbyshire D.C. Church Gresley ward result:
| Lab | 639 | 43.80 |
| Con | 304 | 20.84 |
| BNP | 516 | 35.37 |
| Total | 1459 |
Though the BNP clearly ate substantially into the Conservative vote, it was the Labour vote which suffered most from the BNP's intervention. Had the Liberal Democrats stood to further split the mainstream vote in Church Gresley we could very easily be reporting a BNP gain.
Exactly why the BNP in the East Midlands has been able to buck the trend of its own performances elsewhere is not readily obvious. The wards in which it has been doing well are little different demographically and socially from those in other parts of the country where it has failed to make headway. However that may be, there can be no doubt at all now that anti-fascists and the legitimate political parties have some serious work to do if the BNP is to be prevented from launching an East Midland-led revival.
One good result does not a summer make for the BNP - but we have been warned.
Labels:
anti-fascism,
anti-racism,
BNP,
by-election,
Church Gresley,
fascism,
racism
October 12, 2007
Horsham: BNP's luck still out
True-blue Horsham in West Sussex is the setting for this week's by-election report. Set in the South Downs, affluent Horsham is prime commuter country, enjoying low crime levels, high educational standards, and - according to a 2006 Channel 4 programme "The ten best and worst places to live in the UK" - came second only to Winchester as the most desirable place in which to make a home.
Horsham District Council is unassailably Tory, the Conservatives holding 30 of the 44 seats, the Liberal Democrats 11, and Independents 2, with one vacancy in Holbrook ward arising due to the resignation of the sitting Conservative. Though there is an active Labour Party in the area, its vote share is abysmal. In Horsham, the Liberal Democrats form the only credible opposition to Tory dominance.
On the face of it, Horsham does not appear to be promising territory for the BNP, which contested Holbrook ward for the first time last night, but they do have a history of standing in the area.
A by-election last December in Denne ward saw them take a 12.68% share of the vote, which fell back to 10.5% when the seat was refought in May. Also standing in May was last night's Holbrook ward candidate Donna Bailey, who took 11.7% of the vote in Roffey North ward.
Holbrook ward being virgin turf for the BNP, again we are left with the problem of having nothing by which to measure their performance. The Labour vote is so small that there is almost nothing for the BNP to draw off, as May's result in the ward shows (percentages on right):
The freed-up votes going to the Independent last time should have helped the BNP, as should a minor local controversy over the conversion of a disused church into a mosque. There was also the presentability of BNP candidate Donna Bailey herself, with her attractive looks and a message aimed directly at southern Conservative voters: "The primary cause [of council tax increases] is the Labour Government's re-allocation of central grants, from the South to the North to bribe its supporters." The racist core of the BNP's message was suitably muted: "Both the Tories and Lib Dems have assisted in the demographic changes being wrought in our ancestral homeland without any democratic consent or consultation. Since 2004, over 1.5million immigrants have arrived in the UK, placing unprecedented strains on our services and environment" - though there was a repeat of the BNP's pledge to deport illegal immigrants and asylum seekers.
There were also pledges of zero-tolerance towards Travellers, on helping the police to combat crime, bin collections, and the linking of immigration with green issues.
Donna Bailey, then, fought a campaign little different from that of any right-wing Tory, as perhaps she was obliged to do given the political demographic of Horsham.
Local anti-fascists reported that the BNP were actively canvassing Holbrook ward to maximise their vote in an expected low-turnout election - low turnouts tend to exaggerate the true extent of the base BNP vote when combined with a half-way serious campaign.
Opposing the BNP's attempt at plausibility was Wealden UAF and Holbrook ward Labour candidate Ray Chapman, who organised a small anti-BNP rally in Horsham and delivered anti-fascist leaflets in Holbrook.
Horsham DC Holbrook ward result:
The Liberal Democrats gained the seat on a swing of about 9% from the Conservatives. That Labour predictably failed to make any impression (though increasing their vote share) and came in behind the BNP is the only crumb of comfort the racist party can take from this election. Their 11.87% share is almost exactly in line with their previous comparable local results, and in all probability represents the average of what the BNP can expect in this district.
Several months on from May's disappointments the BNP's inability to put on a good electoral showing or to evince the slightest signs of a significant breakthrough continues. Whatever happened to Fuhrer Nick's winning ways?
Horsham District Council is unassailably Tory, the Conservatives holding 30 of the 44 seats, the Liberal Democrats 11, and Independents 2, with one vacancy in Holbrook ward arising due to the resignation of the sitting Conservative. Though there is an active Labour Party in the area, its vote share is abysmal. In Horsham, the Liberal Democrats form the only credible opposition to Tory dominance.
On the face of it, Horsham does not appear to be promising territory for the BNP, which contested Holbrook ward for the first time last night, but they do have a history of standing in the area.
A by-election last December in Denne ward saw them take a 12.68% share of the vote, which fell back to 10.5% when the seat was refought in May. Also standing in May was last night's Holbrook ward candidate Donna Bailey, who took 11.7% of the vote in Roffey North ward.
Holbrook ward being virgin turf for the BNP, again we are left with the problem of having nothing by which to measure their performance. The Labour vote is so small that there is almost nothing for the BNP to draw off, as May's result in the ward shows (percentages on right):
| Con | 1018 | 26.61 |
| Con | 959 | 25.07 |
| LibDem | 712 | 18.61 |
| LibDem | 698 | 18.24 |
| Lab | 78 | 2.04 |
| Ind | 361 | 9.44 |
| Total | 3826 |
The freed-up votes going to the Independent last time should have helped the BNP, as should a minor local controversy over the conversion of a disused church into a mosque. There was also the presentability of BNP candidate Donna Bailey herself, with her attractive looks and a message aimed directly at southern Conservative voters: "The primary cause [of council tax increases] is the Labour Government's re-allocation of central grants, from the South to the North to bribe its supporters." The racist core of the BNP's message was suitably muted: "Both the Tories and Lib Dems have assisted in the demographic changes being wrought in our ancestral homeland without any democratic consent or consultation. Since 2004, over 1.5million immigrants have arrived in the UK, placing unprecedented strains on our services and environment" - though there was a repeat of the BNP's pledge to deport illegal immigrants and asylum seekers.
There were also pledges of zero-tolerance towards Travellers, on helping the police to combat crime, bin collections, and the linking of immigration with green issues.
Donna Bailey, then, fought a campaign little different from that of any right-wing Tory, as perhaps she was obliged to do given the political demographic of Horsham.
Local anti-fascists reported that the BNP were actively canvassing Holbrook ward to maximise their vote in an expected low-turnout election - low turnouts tend to exaggerate the true extent of the base BNP vote when combined with a half-way serious campaign.
Opposing the BNP's attempt at plausibility was Wealden UAF and Holbrook ward Labour candidate Ray Chapman, who organised a small anti-BNP rally in Horsham and delivered anti-fascist leaflets in Holbrook.
Horsham DC Holbrook ward result:
| Con | 554 | 40.35 |
| LibDem | 602 | 43.85 |
| Lab | 54 | 3.93 |
| BNP | 163 | 11.87 |
| Total | 1373 |
The Liberal Democrats gained the seat on a swing of about 9% from the Conservatives. That Labour predictably failed to make any impression (though increasing their vote share) and came in behind the BNP is the only crumb of comfort the racist party can take from this election. Their 11.87% share is almost exactly in line with their previous comparable local results, and in all probability represents the average of what the BNP can expect in this district.
Several months on from May's disappointments the BNP's inability to put on a good electoral showing or to evince the slightest signs of a significant breakthrough continues. Whatever happened to Fuhrer Nick's winning ways?
Labels:
anti-fascism,
BNP,
fascism,
Horsham,
Nick Griffin,
raciism,
Wealden UAF
September 28, 2007
BNP thrives on hatred
The revelation that the British National Party (BNP) has identified Horley as its new outpost in the south east comes when local anger towards over-development is at an all-time high.
Residents are no longer content to sit back and see their wide open spaces turned into massive developments and are prepared to fight any new plans for extra housing.
The BNP has obviously witnessed this growing anger and now believes it can garner support in this crucial region by criticising Labour's plans for more housing in the south east.
Despite the moderate talk, residents will hopefully be able to realise what the BNP really stands for and always has: a extremist right-wing party which thrives on racial prejudice and hatred.
When the BNP ran for a seat in the Merstham ward in local elections last May, it once again pushed policies which were important to local residents, including affordable housing, welfare and employment.
Its candidate, Peter Phillips, got thrashed and ended any likelihood of the BNP posing any future threat in that area.
Ultimately, the same should happen in Horley.
While Labour's plan for more housing in the south east may be controversial, it is still much more preferable than a party which thrives on hate.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
