The Reality of Right-Wing Nationalism Hits Norway

75 years ago this October, my grandfather, the son of Jewish immigrants to London's poor East End, took to the streets with thousands of others to stop the ultra-nationalist British Union of Fascists from marching through a largely Jewish area.
The event turned into a pitched battle, with Oswald Mosley's fascists and the Metropolitan Police on one side, and locals, Jews, Irish, socialists and communists on the other. The fight (which became known as the Battle of Cable Street) ended with victory for the anti-fascist side, with the fascists and police beaten off the streets.

Following the Holocaust, Fascism became a dirty word, but Nationalists have continually tried to detoxify their brand and reinstate themselves into the mainstream. Mosley returned in the 1950s, this time labelling black immigrants, rather than Jews and Irish, as the main "threat" to the "British way of life". In the late-60s, Conservative MP Enoch Powell became famous for predicting that mass immigration would lead to "rivers of blood". Through the 70s, right-wing nationalism and street-thuggery rose in the form of the National Front, but the movement was resisted on the streets, and finally dissolved in the early-80s as a new, multicultural music scene brought young black and white people together socially. By the 90s, nationalism seemed to be a thing of the past, but the 9/11 attacks gave the racist right a chance to re-brand as an anti-Islam force. Nearly ten years on, and we can see that the "Islam is a threat" message has worked its way from fascist meeting rooms into the political mainstream-right in Europe and the US.

Gradually, the anti-Islam message has morphed back into a more traditional anti-immigration message, being amplified by the right-wing tabloid press here (and Fox News in the US). The nationalist, anti-immigration message isn't easy to sell; it relies on persuading people that the past (or rather, an imaginary, idyllic past) is being replaced by a more dangerous future as immigrants join their society. Prior to 9/11 it seemed that the Western World had moved beyond irrational fear of foreigners, and that society's liberal tendencies had prevailed; but we soon learned that race hate and xenophobia weren't far beneath the surface; that US and European society had changed less since the 1940s than we'd convinced ourselves.

When the drum of fear and hate is being pounded consistently, the infection will naturally spread. For most fear-infected morons, the outlet of Twitter or a blog is enough. But it's inevitable that angry or mentally-disturbed individuals like Anders Behring Breivik will become infected too, and violence will follow, as it did last Friday in Norway. Breivik's choice of target, the mainstream, liberal Norwegian Labour Party, was a natural one for anyone understanding the history of European nationalism. He chose a multicultural youth camp, something designed to ease racial tensions in Norway, but also proof (in Breivik's confused world view) that evil forces were trying to dilute Norway's racial and cultural past into something new and alien.

Whether Breivik acted alone, it can be stated with certainty that he was influenced by master-manipulators of the nationalist movement. It's already been established from his own blog (English translation provided by @Dilmunite) that he admired the far-right English Defence League; according to many EDL Facebook posts, Breivik had many EDL Facebook friends, and attended an EDL rally in the UK in 2010. I'd recommend following @BanTheEDL and @EverythingEDL on Twitter for a collection of evidence linking group members with Breivik.

Another key Breivik influencer was someone I've often mentioned: Pamela Geller, a self-appointed "defender" of America against "creeping Islamification". Pamela spent the weekend tweeting new myths distancing herself from the terrorist, for her army of moron followers to disseminate.

In my Twitter feed, I've long watched morons large and small disseminate misinformation about Islam, Muslims and immigration. Their purpose was to spread enough hatred widely enough that sooner or later someone would take action, and set a chain of violence underway. It looks as though they found a new disciple (though not their first - right-wing terror plots have long been of concern, especially in the US), and no doubt other "white heroes" are watching and contemplating whether to follow Breivik's example (as was clearly his intention).

Western governments now need to decide whether Islamaphobic lies and smears equate to hate speech, and whether to prosecute the most virulent of these liars. The shock following the Norway attacks will quickly pass, and lack of action against armchair-nationalist morons by governments will result in more confidence in the nationalist movements, and inevitably more violence.

Many thanks to Moron Watch for this article.

BNP Legal Director praises arson attack

A French centre for immigrants has been attacked by arsonists. Proving yet again that the BNP are nothing more than thugs in suits, the party’s Legal Director, Lee Barnes, has praised this criminal act in a post entitled ‘The French Rise Up‘. Barnes writes:

'When governments do not listen to the people, then the people will rise up against the government.

This is not a crime, this is an act of National Liberation.'

Not only does the Legal Director of the BNP praise the actions of criminals, he also issues a veiled threat (and not for the first time) of an uprising against the Government. This comes very close to sedition. So much for the BNP as a ‘mainstream’ party of Law and Order.

Another well known far-right group in the UK uses the slogan ‘Whatever it takes’. No doubt they’ll be pleased to see there are still ‘no nonsense’ men like Barnes in the BNP; men who have no respect for the law and justify the actions of terrorists in the name of ‘nationalism’.

Edmund Standing

Recession swings politics right

The threat of political nationalism as a result of the economic crisis

Last month The Economist warned that the world recession was leading to a new wave of economic nationalism. It claimed that countries were rejecting global solutions and free trade, and turning inwards, trying to protect their own financial systems, markets and jobs. The USA had initially inserted a “Buy America” clause into its stimulus package, the French and British governments were trying to force banks to lend to the home markets, which in turn would result in the repatriation of cash, and the Chinese were accused of manipulating their currency for their own economic interests.

The article warned that the mistakes of the 1930s could potentially be made again. “Economic nationalism – the urge to keep jobs and capital at home – is both turning the economic crisis into a political one and threatening the world with depression,” the magazine noted.

“If it is not buried again forthwith, the consequences will be dire.”

But political nationalism is already emerging as a consequence of our economic downturn. Thousands of people, backed by the majority of the public and large swathes of the national press, backed construction workers in the power industry who protested against foreign labour.

The dispute flared up in response to the use of foreign labour on construction projects at oil refineries and power stations. What began at Lindsay Oil Refinery soon spread to almost 20 other plants where similar issues had emerged.

The unions were quick to distance themselves from a nationalist approach. “We are not against Italian or Spanish workers working over here but we just want a level playing field,” said Dave Smeeton, a Unite branch secretary at Staythorpe power station. “We actually want to work alongside them, just as we work in Spain and Italy. But we are not being given the chance.”

Dave was one of 50 people who had gathered outside the power station last month in protest at the use of exclusively foreign labour on a new power station being built.

For Dave and others at the protest this is a problem that has been brewing for some time. They say European workers have been here for a while, often on worse pay and conditions, but this changed over time as they interacted with unionised British workers. They say that the decision to refuse to employ any British workers can only be because hiring from abroad is cheaper (i.e. they are cutting corners on pay and conditions) and/or so they can’t interact with British workers who might be able to unionise them.

With many workers using Gordon Brown’s slogan of British jobs for British workers against him, the BNP saw an opportunity. It quickly produced downloadable leaflets, a Wildcats website and short online videos explaining how this was the consequence of membership of the EU, mass immigration and a Labour government that no longer cared about the white working class.

There was little sign however that the BNP made any impact amongst the protesters. At Lindsay Oil Refinery BNP members from Wakefield tried to leaflet the pickets but were quickly told they were not welcome. There was a similar hostile reaction to the BNP at Staythorpe.

While the BNP appears to have made little headway in winning support from union activists it is bound to be more successful among the wider population. Recent council by-elections have shown a surge in support for the BNP, helped in no small part by a daily diet of incendiary headlines from the Daily Mail, Daily Express and Daily Star.

The BNP won a council by-election in Swanley well ahead of the other candidates and it is now predicting successes in the European election.

European unrest

Britain is not alone in experiencing unrest. In France, more than one million people marched for jobs and wages, while 350,000 marched in Dublin. Riot police were used in Greece to quell protests by farmers demanding more assistance, and in Bulgaria windows were smashed and shops attacked after demonstrations calling for economic and social reform. Latvian farmers blocked roads in the capital and laid siege to the Agricultural Ministry, while in Lithuania 80 people were arrested and 20 injured after protesters pelted the parliament building in anger over spending cuts. In Russia there have been demonstrations in almost every city against the government’s handling of the economic crisis.

And the situation is only likely to get worse as the recession deepens and economic insecurity grows. This will play out differently in each country but nationalism is likely to be a major winner.

Britain has escaped the rise in the far right that has been experienced by many other western European countries over the past decade, but this could well change this summer. The BNP poses a serious threat in three regions in the European election and a more moderate threat in a further three. The nationalist tone under which the elections will be contested, again fuelled by Eurosceptic media, will benefit the BNP.

In countries such as France the leftwing parties will attract a substantial proportion of the disgruntled working-class vote, but in Britain, without such an option, the BNP could benefit by positioning itself to the left of Labour on some issues and to the right of the Conservatives on others.

“The BNP has been steadily growing over the last few years during a period of benign economic conditions,” Jon Cruddas MP noted recently. “Now the economy is going into recession we are really going to face some problems.”

The question is how we respond to these threats. Part of the answer will be to challenge the nationalist responses to the recession, particularly exploding the myth of the British jobs for British workers approach. The slogan might be a catchy sound bite but it is no political solution. Over 300 of the largest 800 companies in the UK are foreign owned and hundreds of thousands of other UK jobs are reliant on foreign contracts.

If the BNP and the rightwing media support a British jobs for British workers approach then they must logically support a US jobs for US workers line, even if that means companies such as Rolls Royce and British Aerospace lose contracts to US firms.

It is also vital that we stand up for the rights of migrant workers and prevent one group being pitted against another. What is needed is to improve workers’ rights and conditions throughout Europe, including full rights for temporary and agency workers and paying the right rate for the job in the country where the work is undertaken. By doing this we can reduce the exploitation of vulnerable migrant workers, reduce the likelihood of unscrupulous employers using foreign workers to undercut their UK counterparts and so hopefully reduce the friction between groups of workers.

We must also stand in defence of immigration, particularly at a time when immigrants are under such attack. Just as we should remember the contribution foreign-born workers have made to the UK economy we should also think about the 5.5 million Britons who work and live abroad.

Can you imagine the nationalist outrage from the BNP and rightwing press if hundreds of thousands of British migrant workers working across Europe or in the Middle East were ordered out?

It is this sort of hypocrisy that needs to be exposed.

The BNP also needs to be taken on politically, not just morally. Over recent weeks Searchlight has been approached by representatives of all three major political parties wanting to know our assessment of the BNP threat and how they can get involved in the campaign against them. Our answer to them all has been simple. Bland and empty rhetoric about BNP extremism is at best ineffectual and at worst counter-productive. A political party needs to say more than don’t vote BNP because they racist – it needs to offer a political reason why people should vote for it rather than the BNP.

Simply moralising, particularly at a time of such economic problems, will be seen as political bankruptcy.

Over the next year we are likely to see growing social unrest. Unless the political parties, the trade unions and anti-fascists develop a more combative approach to dealing with the BNP – based on issues – then we are going to face a really difficult time. The Economist warned of a return to the failed protectionist remedies of the 1930s. We should equally be very wary of a retreat into political nationalism.

Searchlight

Solidarity with anti-fascists in Russia

“International support is vital and valued” explains St Petersburg anti-fascist activist Bruno Garmson

It is not easy being an anti-fascist in Russia at the moment. We are under constant attack from racists and fascists and we receive little or no protection from the authorities. Several of our activists have been murdered in recent years and even when the attackers are caught they often walk free with suspended sentences.

The rapid decline of Russia’s fledgling democracy, marked by gross violations of human rights during the government’s Chechen campaigns, the granting by parliament of unprecedented powers to the secret service, the abolition of elected executives (governors, mayors etc), the introduction of censorship and political show-trials and murders have changed the political atmosphere. This has enabled nazis and their extreme-rightist allies to stage campaigns as well as using nationalism as an alibi to commit murders, many of which go unpunished.

Outside Russia, this is not always easy to grasp.

In the heroic stories about the Great Patriotic War of 1941-1945 against the Nazis that flicker almost nightly on Russian television screens, it is nowadays hard to find any other motives described than “defending the motherland”.

Unfortunately, there are few eyewitnesses left who can describe the genuine anti-fascist enthusiasm they felt for the Republican cause in the Spanish Civil War or spell out the common conviction, held during the Second World War, that the Nazis intended to enslave and exterminate Russian citizens as subhumans and explain how, therefore, the anti-fascist struggle was above all a battle of humanity against fascist barbarism.

Today’s Russian nazis use official nationalist myths about the war both as proof of Russia’s superiority and as an example of how the Stalin regime misled the whole Russian people, sacrificing millions of soldiers and civilians against Hitler’s anti-Bolshevik crusade to “liberate” the Russians. Ignorance about Soviet history, lack of a proper analysis of the theory and practice of fascism and the reduction of the term “anti-fascism” to mean simply a nationalistic fight against the enemies of Russia make it difficult to oppose such obvious lies.

Real anti-fascism, challenging nationalism and facing down nazism, is a risky course of action. Such “dissident” behaviour is viewed as “suspicious opposition” to the policies of President Vladimir Putin and the state. Any person displaying such behaviour is regarded as an “extremist”, like the nazis. Openly opposing fascism means being targeted by the violent gangs of nazis who patrol the streets of Russia’s cities looking for victims to attack in broad daylight.

Young anti-fascists have started to fight back. The courageous stance of young Russian anti-fascists against the growing street violence by nazi gangs is often the subject of court proceedings, which have proved inconsistent. The outcome of trials of nazi killers tends to depend on what charges are brought by the public prosecutors: almost always hooliganism (violently disrupting public order) or being involved in hooliganism.

There is no real pressure from the Kremlin or Duma (parliament) on public prosecutors to use hate crime charges and there is a widespread practice of negotiation between judges, prosecutors and defence lawyers to achieve cooperation in trials. Finally and crucially, there is a lack of pressure from anti-fascists who, because there is no deeply rooted democratic culture, rarely get involved with investigations or court proceedings.

Here in St Petersburg, anti-fascists have actively helped the public prosecutors as expert witnesses since the early 1990s and have run some successful campaigns. The nazis reacted by murdering Nikolai Girenko in 2004, then the most visible anti-fascist specialist supporting the public prosecutors in cases against fascists.

Now a younger generation of anti-fascists is emerging to oppose the nazis in the courts and on the streets. Their battles are essential – the alternative is capitulation – but expensive. It costs a great deal of money to participate in court proceedings even when the lawyers act pro bono. In the case against the murderers of Timur Kacharava, anti-fascist funding enabled his family and friends to help put away his killers.

In Russia, there are no big trade unions, labour movements or long-standing anti-racist structures with democratic anti-fascist traditions that we can turn to for help. As a result, we depend on ourselves and the anti-fascist movement internationally.

Support from our brothers, sisters, comrades and friends abroad is ever more vital and valued.

Searchlight

Far-right given election boost by Greek fires

Concerns are mounting that the political fallout from devastating wildfires in Greece could open the door to far-right extremists in elections to be held a week on Sunday. Public anger at the response to the fires is fuelling discontent within the country's two main political parties and pushing many voters into the arms of fringe groups who could enter parliament for the first time.

Among those seeing a significant bounce in opinion polls is the extreme-right Orthodox Rally (Laos) party who are expected to break the 3 per cent threshold needed to gain seats at the 16 September elections.

"These fires have seen the popularity of the smaller parties rise," said Dimitris Sotiropoulos, a senior analyst at the regional think-tank Eliamep. "This is as a result of the incapability of the state to prevent the fires, then to deal with them and finally to resolve the situation."

Greece is set for one of its tightest elections in recent memory with as many as 20 per cent of voters undecided and a legal blackout on opinion polling in the closing fortnight of the campaign. The final surveys before the blackout gave Laos 4 per cent of the projected vote, narrowly ahead of the left-wing Syriza party. The two main parties, conservative New Democracy and socialist Pasok, both polled less than 40 per cent, with neither claiming a substantial advantage. The uncertainty has raised the prospect of a coalition government, which could hand a key role to a minority party able to gain even a few parliamentary seats.

The far right has traditionally struggled to get an electoral foothold in a country that has suffered under a military dictatorship as recently as the 1970s. But Laos with its mix of xenophobia, nationalism and Orthodox Christianity, may have struck a chord with a country shocked both by the scale of the destruction and the torpid response of mainstream parties.

In the past fortnight, Greece has been plunged into a state of emergency as the worst wildfires for a century decimated forests and farmland, consumed villages and killed more than 60 people. Several smaller fires were still burning yesterday when the first rain fell in after a scorching summer of record-breaking temperatures.

The ruling conservatives have been roundly condemned for their lethargic response to the crisis but Pasok, their perennial opponents, do not appear to be attracting disgruntled voters either.

In a bid to avoid accusations of profiting from the fires, both parties suspended campaigning during the crisis but that has afforded precious breathing space to the fringe parties who have festooned Athens with aggressive election posters.

Taking centre stage in the battle of the minnows has been the Laos party leader George Karatzaferis who is to be seen all over the city wielding a boxing glove and calling for all Greece to become "one fist".

The country has been gripped by conspiracy theories and Mr Karatzaferis' aggressive and simplistic campaign featuring a scantily-clad bleach blonde nightclub performer, Effi Sarri, singing a party anthem about Christ and country has gained unexpected traction. The increasingly rattled government has sought to deflect critics by placing the blame for the wildfires on arsonists but it has done little to help its own cause by making confusing statements about "asymmetrical terrorist threats" and an "organised plan" to destabilise the country.

Independent

Le Pen's mask slips as he plays the race card against Sarkozy

The candidate who claims to be closest to the people rarely leaves his office, except to go to the radio or TV studio. The candidate who promises never to lie to the electorate refuses to say what he would do if elected.

Jean-Marie Le Pen, 78, is the "invisible man" of the French presidential campaign: invisible but ever-present, like a virus. He began the campaign pretending to be a more mellow, and more tolerant, man. But in his latest broadcast appearance - he seldom appears in public - the veteran far-right leader reverted to his favourite theme: xenophobia.

The front-running, centre-right candidate, Nicolas Sarkozy, "comes from an immigrant background," Mr Le Pen told a radio interviewer on Sunday. By comparison, he, Mr Le Pen, was a candidate of the terroir: literally, a candidate rooted in the native earth.

"It's obvious, there's a difference," Mr Le Pen said. "There is a choice there which might be considered fundamental by a certain number of French people".

This is Jean-Marie Le Pen at his most poisonous and his most plausible - and also his most effective.

Mr Sarkozy, 52, the man who is favourite to be the next President of France, is indeed half-Hungarian and a quarter-jewish on his maternal, French side. He does not look particularly French; his name does not sound French. Ask almost anyone in France if this will make a difference to their choice in the presidential election on 22 April and 6 May and they will say "no". Mr Le Pen knows, however, that it does make a difference, for a significant minority of French people, especially people on the hard right, tempted to vote for Mr Sarkozy.

Mr Le Pen, and he alone, has been prepared to break the taboo and make a public issue of Mr Sarkozy's Hungarian and Jewish blood. When challenged - as he knew he would be - he immediately pointed out that Mr Sarkozy had himself boasted of his immigrant background during the campaign. If Mr Sarkozy had not mentioned his family, Mr Le Pen said, he would not have mentioned it either.

At 78, fighting his fifth - and presumably last - presidential campaign, Mr Le Pen has lost none of his tactical brilliance or his moral cynicism. He knows, better than anyone, how to touch the buttons of inchoate anger and xenophobia.

Although placed fourth by the polls, Mr Le Pen insists that a "tsunami" of "rejection of the system" will carry him into the crucial top two places in the first round on 22 April. Can he repeat his extraordinary coup of 2002 and reach the second round?

Mr Le Pen has been creeping up in the opinion polls, to around 13 or 14 per cent. Last time he knocked out the Socialist prime minister, Lionel Jospin, with just under 17 per cent. There are two candidates ahead of him this year: the unconvincing Socialist, Ségolène Royal, and the likeable but undynamic centrist François Bayrou.

Mr Le Pen predicts that they will cancel one another out, and he will dart between them, with about 20 per cent of the vote, and reach the second round.

There are a number of reasons to believe that Mr Le Pen will fail. First, he has never scored more than 18 per cent in a national election. Second, he is an old man and beginning to look his age. (His decision barely to go on the road is partly strategic but may also be intended to conserve his flagging energy.)

Finally, he has a candidate running against him this time - Mr Sarkozy - who has stolen and moderated many of his favourite issues: immigration, insecurity, excessive taxation and nationalism.

Another shock cannot not be ruled out, however. Mr Le Pen predicts that somewhere around 5 per cent of the 30 per cent of voters now supporting Mr Sarkozy will return to the far right on 22 April. Hence his decision to make Mr Sarkozy's Hungarian - and implicitly his Jewish - blood an election issue.

And there is a further complication. Pollsters in France have never managed accurately to gauge Mr Le Pen's support. Le Pen voters systematically lie. This year his electorate is even harder to plumb than ever.

An unknown but significant minority of far left voters - and even Arab and African - voters say they are tempted to vote Le Pen this time out of bloody-mindedness, frustration or determination to "make the system explode". Last fling or not, Mr Le Pen may have one shot left in his locker.

Independent