BNP leader faces jail!!

[The Black Hand]

A) If you're really not giving up any cherished beliefs, then why do you keep going on and on about ultra leftism and purity?

B) And in the most random fashion. You're clearly not trying to convince anybody of anything because you don't make any sense.

C) You're trying to convince yourself.

A) Ultra leftism spoils for a small fight cos there is no alliance. I spoil for a bigger fight that Alliances could deliver

B) I say it where I see fit, it makes sense from my standpoint, I do not expect everyone to fall into line

C). No. I came to these beliefs through a moment of epiphany, but observations before and after have shown me the value of the approach. It did begin something like, 'it's not is it'. i can see that that those deeply immersed in such things may not have the critical faculties left, or indeed want to see, and like the 3 wise monkeys are not want to open their eyes.

 

[Knotted]

A) Ultra leftism spoils for a small fight cos there is no alliance. I spoil for a bigger fight that Alliances could deliver

That's sectarianism not ultra leftism. Two very different things.

B) I say it where I see fit, it makes sense from my standpoint, I do not expect everyone to fall into line

Do you expect anyone to fall into line?

C). No. I came to these beliefs through a moment of epiphany, but observations before and after have shown me the value of the approach. It did begin something like, 'it's not is it'. i can see that that those deeply immersed in such things may not have the critical faculties left, or indeed want to see, and like the 3 wise monkeys are not want to open their eyes.

You shouldn't be afraid to learn from others. It's not plagiarism to repeat someone else's analysis. Ignore your sense of epiphany.

 

[Y_I_Otter]

You mean something like this

Thanks for that article. Turns out I scanned it a little while back and made a desktop link of it but never got around to reading it in detail. It has the subtext of being a bit of an anti-Labour tract (for which I don't blame it), but it does make some sense. There are one or two things, though...

1 Community unions

[...]

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.

It would be naiive in the extreme to believe such a union could exist without representatives of various parties vying for control of it.

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.

I think going after the patent impossibility of some of the BNP's policies being implemented is a very good tactic; one that certainly bears expanding. What I don't buy is the 'instead of' bit. Despite what's been said about its supposed ineffectuality earlier in the article, there isn't any reason it can't be 'in addition to'. I don't believe that the Searchlight/UAF approach needs to be jettisoned altogether because all that naming and shaming hasn't been completely in vain. I believe it's one of several factors that's forced the BNP to water their policies down to the point that, save for their lingering racial emphasis, they're hardly distinguisable from any other conservative populist movement. What needs to be made most of-- and here, the orginisations being slagged in this article excell-- is the disconnect between the party's official policies and the statements and actions of so many of its members at large. Examples of blatant hypocrisy by people whose aim it is to make decisions for their fellow citizens is always newsworthy and news of it does influence the vote.

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.)

Where does the bulk of their operating capital come from? I don't actually know, so fill me in, if you can. I suspect it's about funding: 'dancing with the one wot brung ya' and not biting the hand that feeds you. I'd rather see Searchlight out there doing what they do than being reduced to doing nothing at all for want of funds.

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.

Quick, get that message off to the EDL at once. They can spend all the money they'll save on trainfare on ale.

It seems as though the author of the article is of the mind that letting a couple of hundred or so assorted football hooligans, super-annuated skins, neo-nazis and Stormfront UK types have their racist day in the sun, on a junket to a British town center, absolutely unopposed, is okay. I can't see how that's productive.

Incidently, I've never thought much of the 'no platform' approach mentioned in the Red Pepper article. If there's one thing the BNP can be counted on, it's that, apart from a few of their better orators, their candidates will deliver own goals aplenty if they're given the opportunity to debate in public against better informed and more politically savvy opponants. Their talent pool is quite small and that's a weakness could be better taken advantage of than it is.

you couldn't put the argument in that article in words of one syllable for MrA and his little echo?

Oh, please do that if you have the time. I promise to return the favour if you ever have use of an overview of Canadian far-right movements and their opposition even an idiot could understand.

 

[Pickman's model]

I promise to return the favour if you ever have use of an overview of Canadian far-right movements and their opposition even an idiot could understand.

when i find one you could comprehend i'll let you know.

 

[butchersapron]

Thanks for that article. Turns out I scanned it a little while back and made a desktop link of it but never got around to reading it in detail. It has the subtext of being a bit of an anti-Labour tract (for which I don't blame it), but it does make some sense. There are one or two things, though...

It would be naiive in the extreme to believe such a union could exist without representatives of various parties vying for control of it.

Of course - who though otherwise. But as start up capital for local groups who else it left? There's many an example of union supported groups spinning of an pursuing other interests.

I think going after the patent impossibility of some of the BNP's policies being implemented is a very good tactic; one that certainly bears expanding. What I don't buy is the 'instead of' bit. Despite what's been said about its supposed ineffectuality earlier in the article, there isn't any reason it can't be 'in addition to'. I don't believe that the Searchlight/UAF approach needs to be jettisoned altogether because all that naming and shaming hasn't been completely in vain. I believe it's one of several factors that's forced the BNP to water their policies down to the point that, save for their lingering racial emphasis, they're hardly distinguisable from any other conservative populist movement. What needs to be made most of-- and here, the orginisations being slagged in this article excell-- is the disconnect between the party's official policies and the statements and actions of so many of its members at large. Examples of blatant hypocrisy by people whose aim it is to make decisions for their fellow citizens is always newsworthy and news of it does influence the vote.

The whole point of the article is that the old approaches have failed. Nailing them to the back of the new approaches won't work. They haven't succeeded in anything at all - the watering down hasn't come from pressure from anti-fascists - it's came from common sense. Your response fucks up here.

Where does the bulk of their operating capital come from? I don't actually know, so fill me in, if you can. I suspect it's about funding: 'dancing with the one wot brung ya' and not biting the hand that feeds you. I'd rather see Searchlight out there doing what they do than being reduced to doing nothing at all for want of funds.

This is just the old Russian gold stuff in a mirror. It's meaningless. Where their money comes from is not the question and hasn't been for many years.

Quick, get that message off to the EDL at once. They can spend all the money they'll save on trainfare on ale.

It seems as though the author of the article is of the mind that letting a couple of hundred or so assorted football hooligans, super-annuated skins, neo-nazis and Stormfront UK types have their racist day in the sun, on a junket to a British town center, absolutely unopposed, is okay. I can't see how that's productive.

Why, what in that article gave you that impression?

What country are you in y i otter?

 

[The Black Hand]

A) The whole point of the article is that the old approaches have failed. Nailing them to the back of the old approaches won't work. They haven't succeeded in anything at all - the watering down hasn't come from pressure from anti-fascists - it's came from common sense. Your response fucks up here.

It seems as though the author of the article is of the mind that letting a couple of hundred or so assorted football hooligans, super-annuated skins, neo-nazis and Stormfront UK types have their racist day in the sun, on a junket to a British town center, absolutely unopposed, is okay. I can't see how that's productive.

B) Why, what in that article gave you that impression?

A) This issue has been tackled here, without evidence that traditional anti fascism is failing it is just assertion, an academic exercise. The reasoning behind this is that it is not enough to assert that Searchlight et al obviously are failing, as the situation could be far worse without them;
http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=10048743&postcount=44

B) The fetishisation of the BNP as respectable and street confrontation/activity is not the answer could easily lead to such a pov.

 

[The Black Hand]

A) That's sectarianism not ultra leftism. Two very different things.

B) Do you expect anyone to fall into line?

C) You shouldn't be afraid to learn from others. It's not plagiarism to repeat someone else's analysis. Ignore your sense of epiphany.

A) Sectarianism and ultra leftism are 2 very different things, that is true. Traditional Leftist parties have been and can be sectarian. Where they overlap is that ultra leftists are de facto sectarian and pure, that is the nature of ultra left politics. Show me alliances beyond class struggle anarchism, beyond ultra leftism? They do not exist.

B) I do not view politics like that.

C) I am not afraid of learning from others, I have done and will do it frequently. What I am deeply unhappy with is the formulation encouraged By Larry O'Hara/ Butchers that takes what the BNP says as worth repeating without critique. I do not agree with that 'all powerful' BNP policy and practice line because it does not accord with reality.

 

[MrA]

No i didn't. And nor did i keep whining day after day about it.

Is it any wonder why newcomers like me doubt your motives and are confused by the impression you leave regarding your views on the BNP when a little digging produces http:// www. storm front .org/ forum/showpost.php?p=2753139&postcount=2 this from Stormfront.

It's clear that you are anto BNP, but you do disguise it. Maybe you should have linked your resources which would have been much more informative and helpful then goading me into a bun fight.

(*editor: link removed)

 

[Pickman's model]

Is it any wonder why newcomers like me doubt your motives and are confused by the impression you leave regarding your views on the BNP when a little digging produces ht tp://w ww.stormfront.org /forum/showp ost.php ?p= 275313 9&postcount=2from Stormfront.

It's clear that you are anto BNP, but you do disguise it. Maybe you should have linked your resources which would have been much more informative and helpful then goading me into a bun fight.

are you utterly fuckwitted? have you bothered reading the forum rules (and i note you claim to be a mod elsewhere)?

 

[butchersapron]

Is it any wonder why newcomers like me doubt your motives and are confused by the impression you leave regarding your views on the BNP when a little digging produces ht tp://www.storm front.org/forum/sho wpost.php?p=2753139&po stcount=2 from Stormfront.

It's clear that you are anto BNP, but you do disguise it. Maybe you should have linked your resources which would have been much more informative and helpful then goading me into a bun fight.

A little digging by you produces a post on stormfront by a fascist about Larry O' hara? You what?

No one is confused but you. Stop whining for the love of God. Please, just move on.

edit: and do yourself a favour -stop obsessing over stormfront. It's irrelevant.

 

[Louis MacNeice]

Is it any wonder why newcomers like me doubt your motives and are confused by the impression you leave regarding your views on the BNP when a little digging produces htt p://w ww.storm front.org/forum/ showpost.php?p=2753139 &postcount=2 from Stormfront.

What do you think the post on Stormfront shows?

Louis MacNeice

 

[Pickman's model]

Is it any wonder why newcomers like me doubt your motives and are confused by the impression you leave regarding your views on the BNP when a little digging produces thisfrom Stormfront.

It's clear that you are anto BNP, but you do disguise it. Maybe you should have linked your resources which would have been much more informative and helpful then goading me into a bun fight.

fyi:

4. Trolling/direct linking. Do not directly link to 'hostile' websites (leave gaps in the URL if you wish to refer to them). Anyone found posting up malicious links on other sites and/or trying to stir up 'board wars' will be banned.

 

[Pickman's model]

Maybe you should have linked your resources which would have been much more informative and helpful then goading me into a bun fight.

it's interesting to see you're not fussed about being goaded into a 'bun fight', you just want butchers to do it after linking to resources.

in either case it looks to me like you're less interested in the debate you claim to want than being disruptive

 

[MrA]

What do you think the post on Stormfront shows?

Louis MacNeice

That misinterpretation of a persons motives is easily made unless clarification is given.

 

[Louis MacNeice]

That misinterpretation of a persons motives is easily made unless clarification is given.

However, the stormfromt poster is not misinterpreting O'Hara's motives ('he [O'Hara] is an "anti-fascist" and certainly doesn't support our ideas'); rather they are seeking to use O'Hara's work for their own purposes. The misinterpretation of motives was your's earlier in this thread; it's a misinterpretation that would personally hack me off, so I can understand others reacting sharply to it.

Louis MacNeice

 

[MrA]

However, the stormfromt poster is not misinterpreting O'Hara's motives ('he [O'Hara] is an "anti-fascist" and certainly doesn't support our ideas'); rather they are seeking to use O'Hara's work for their own purposes. The misinterpretation of motives was your's earlier in this thread; it's a misinterpretation that would personally hack me off, so I can understand others reacting sharply to it.

Louis MacNeice

Read the whole thread up to the point where I realised there was a misrepresentation by me and why I made an arse of myself . Things aren't always one sided.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Typing error


Sorry VP meant to type PM. I actually find your exchanges with TBH informative.





Maybe he isn't attempting to impress, does it really take hard data and analysis? How many ordinary folk with only a passing interest in the BNP will be influenced by this approach?

You mean influenced by fact rather than tabloid myth and Chinese whispers? I don't know, but I've always found that being armed with fact to counter the bullshit pays dividends.

The BNP have made their gains by playing to peoples fears, portraying themselves as pro British as opposed to pro white and championing causes and issues of the working class.

I don't agree.
The BNP have made their gains first and foremost by altering the basis on which they operate. They've removed the vast majority of their "political soldier"-types from the party. They've shifted from a classic "seizure of power" strategy to an electoral one. They've also shifted their rhetoric away from neo-fascist toward "democratic new right" lines. All of this is what has made their electoral gains possible. Measure their (thankfully limited so far) success any way you wish, but the "new" BNP has made itself a party that "ordinary people" are willing to vote for because the above strategies have put them in "the right place at the right time", not because there's been a relatively recent surge in the number of points of tension between communities. Those have always been there, and have arguably been far worse in the 80s and 90s than they are now.

The BNP aren't trying to intellectualise their approach, that would just turn people off...

I suspect that what you mean is they don't try to sell their intellectualisation to the voting public, because it's certainly the case that they've "updated" a lot of the ideological and philosophical premises of their position. In fact they've been doing so even pre-Griffin. Some of us even used to have bets back before the internet was common currency on how often the latest BNP newsletter would mention certain European "new right" philosophers.

...but it seems that elements of the left don't have a consolidated approach.

I'd (and this is my opinion, based on 30 years of observation, rather than academic enquiry) say that there's a few reasons for there being little cohesion between different parts of the left, the first being that "the left" is pretty much an inaccurate (but handy) label that covers everyone from vanguardists to Christian Socialists, the second being that in terms of organised "left" groupings, there's deep suspicion about the lust for control displayed by one particular organisation which has done more to destroy cohesion on "the left" than anything since Kinnock's attempt to play the tough guy at the '85 Labour conference.

If Butchers and PM are indicative of the left then people like me are going to be put off by them.

Why?

 

[MrA]

it's interesting to see you're not fussed about being goaded into a 'bun fight', you just want butchers to do it after linking to resources.

in either case it looks to me like you're less interested in the debate you claim to want than being disruptive

Pot and kettle spring to mind. I've held my hands up, just wish you could do the same.

I, like many others in real life, don't thoerise, intellectualise or analyse in infinitesimal detail anti fascism or the many facets of left wing ideology. To most people it isn't a priority and has no baring on their thoughts or motivations. Do you think a BNP waiverer is going to listen to the differing leftist postions and who or what ideology is relevent, right or accurate? Of course not. Nick Griffin knows this already and he takes every opportunity to talk about, job creation, immigration and community programs.
This strikes a cord with people who given that they don't see themselves as racist do not truly believe that the BNP are a racist party any longer. But you can keep telling yourself that's not the case and stick to your own persepctive.

When this thread kicked off it was because Iwas wrong, looking back I made a bit of a numpty of myself. But you and butch wouldn't let it go and as much whinning that I've done, you've done your level best to stoke it up and then plead victim. If it was just me then I can accept the critisism but there's example after example of both of you doing this over and over again on this topic and others.

You're both vague as fuck, if you'd made your positions clear when I asked for it then I would have acquiesced alot sooner. If it wasn;t for VP I'd still be defending an impossible position now, all because I thought you were supporting BNP stances.

Anyway, I've apologised enough and it isn't good enough. Your problem not mine.

 

[ViolentPanda]

If nothing else, this thread had brought home to me the fact that elements of the left are every bit as fractious and prone to petty internecine squabbles over ideological purity as the various elements of the right.

Shame on you for not being aware of that already!

 

[butchersapron]

Pot and kettle spring to mind. I've held my hands up, just wish you could do the same.

I, like many others in real life, don't thoerise, intellectualise or analyse in infinitesimal detail anti fascism or the many facets of left wing ideology. To most people it isn't a priority and has no baring on their thoughts or motivations. Do you think a BNP waiverer is going to listen to the differing leftist postions and who or what ideology is relevent, right or accurate? Of course not. Nick Griffin knows this already and he takes every opportunity to talk about, job creation, immigration and community programs.
This strikes a cord with people who given that they don't see themselves as racist do not truly believe that the BNP are a racist party any longer. But you can keep telling yourself that's not the case and stick to your own persepctive.

When this thread kicked off it was because Iwas wrong, looking back I made a bit of a numpty of myself. But you and butch wouldn't let it go and as much whinning that I've done, you've done your level best to stoke it up and then plead victim. If it was just me then I can accept the critisism but there's example after example of both of you doing this over and over again on this topic and others.

You're both vague as fuck, if you'd made your positions clear when I asked for it then I would have acquiesced alot sooner. If it wasn;t for VP I'd still be defending an impossible position now, all because I thought you were supporting BNP stances.

Anyway, I've apologised enough and it isn't good enough. Your problem not mine.

Madness, i let it go the very next day. It's not me that's kept this going. I've barely posted on this thread since you 'made a numpty of yourself'. It's rmp3, and TBH that have jumped on this and you allowed them to. Break the power of the manipulators and move the fuck on.

edit: and i still don't get what that link to a fascist talking about Larry O' hara is supposed to mean in relation to me. I'm not Larry O' Hara if that's what you think.

 

[Louis MacNeice]

Read the whole thread up to the point where I realised there was a misrepresentation by me and why I made an arse of myself . Things aren't always one sided.

I have read the whole thread. Firstly, I was pointing out that the post on stormfront didn't do what you said it did; i.e. it didn't highlight the ease of misinterpretation. Secondly, I was trying, albeit rather gently, to get you to place yourself in BA's shoes; how would the accusation of being a BNP fellow traveller, for want of a better phrase, make you feel?

Louis MacNeice

 

[MrA]

I don't agree.
The BNP have made their gains first and foremost by altering the basis on which they operate. They've removed the vast majority of their "political soldier"-types from the party. They've shifted from a classic "seizure of power" strategy to an electoral one. They've also shifted their rhetoric away from neo-fascist toward "democratic new right" lines. All of this is what has made their electoral gains possible. Measure their (thankfully limited so far) success any way you wish, but the "new" BNP has made itself a party that "ordinary people" are willing to vote for because the above strategies have put them in "the right place at the right time", not because there's been a relatively recent surge in the number of points of tension between communities. Those have always been there, and have arguably been far worse in the 80s and 90s than they are now.

I don't believe I have said anything different, well, between whinning and pissing about with PM.
As you stated, as soon as the BNP changed their strategy, we can disagree on the detail of exactly what it is or means, and I don't have the benefit of 30years of being close to the subject, the left don't appear to have changed their strategy. I would have thought it would be better to have a consolodated approach where resources, expertise and drive could be utilsed to thier maximum potential.

I'd (and this is my opinion, based on 30 years of observation, rather than academic enquiry) say that there's a few reasons for there being little cohesion between different parts of the left, the first being that "the left" is pretty much an inaccurate (but handy) label that covers everyone from vanguardists to Christian Socialists, the second being that in terms of organised "left" groupings, there's deep suspicion about the lust for control displayed by one particular organisation which has done more to destroy cohesion on "the left" than anything since Kinnock's attempt to play the tough guy at the '85 Labour conference.

From the exchanges I've read between you and TBH which have been, amusing, informative and civil, in the main, so I can't see why any differences can't be overcome, you're both on the same side of the river so to speak, but crossing on different bridges.

Why?

I don't want to go there anymore.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Bullshit backslapping is pathetic. I and probably we have abandoned nothing, we just don't fall for simplistic ultra left shite.

Or at least for stuff that you classify as "simplistic ultra-left shite" because you're too lazy to articulate yourself (despite your many references to your own intellectual acuity and perspicacity).

Butch has done nothing intellectually challenging, virtually jack shit. As I said, repeating what the BNP say ad infinitum is not useful.

See what I mean about "many references to your own intellectual acuity and perspicacity"?

All there is pathetic and second hand, derived shite about 'how good the bnp are and how well they are doing'. There is nothing radical, new or original in the formulation.

Because "New anti-fascism, new praxis" is the sort of slogan you envision, I suspect.
Anything that you can't control, you're not interested in.
It becomes increasingly obvious, as some would claim it has for years (but of course, they're all "simplistic ultra-lefts", aren't they?) that for you this may not be primarily about anti-fascism, about class struggle politics or event about politics at all, anymore, but about you, power and your attempt at immortality.

 

[ViolentPanda]

This says so much about you and what motivates you. I'm not going to be paying you much attention, I'm afraid, even if you are very intellectually challenging.

Neu anti-fascismus! Neu Praxis!

 

[MrA]

I have read the whole thread. Firstly, I was pointing out that the post on stormfront didn't do what you said it did; i.e. it didn't highlight the ease of misinterpretation. Secondly, I was trying, albeit rather gently, to get you to place yourself in BA's shoes; how would the accusation of being a BNP fellow traveller, for want of a better phrase, make you feel?

Louis MacNeice

OK I accept what you are saying, I did allude to Butch being sympathetic to the BNP early in the thread only because at the time I thought he was being vague and obtuse and when I asked him for clarification he wouldn't give it, like I said I did subsuquently apologise due to VP's intervention.
I believe it was an easy mistake to make as a newcomer, if a stormfronter can misinterpret his actions a newbie certainly could also.

 

[butchersapron]

OK I accept what you are saying, I did allude to Butch being sympathetic to the BNP early in the thread only because at the time I thought he was being vague and obtuse and when I asked him for clarification he wouldn't give it, like I said I did subsuquently apologise due to VP's intervention.
I believe it was an easy mistake to make as a newcomer, if a stormfronter can misinterpret his actions a newbie certainly could also.

I'm not Larry O' Hara. And as Louis pointed out, the stormfronter didn't misinterpret anything.

 

[ViolentPanda]

I'm not Larry O' Hara.

Not abrasive enough, for a start. You're a fackin' lightweight when it comes to abrasiveness!!

 

[Davo1]

One of the only good things about this website is the debates on antifascism and the IWCA etc. Only reason I log in, and the reason I came here in the first place.

Keep it up innit!

 

[TremulousTetra]

Madness, i let it go the very next day. It's not me that's kept this going. I've barely posted on this thread since you 'made a numpty of yourself'. It's rmp3, and TBH that have jumped on this and you allowed them to. Break the power of the manipulators and move the fuck on.

Napolean, do you actual realise what a control freek you are?
http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=295431

Just chill out. Smoke a spliff. This shit, U75, is not fucking serious.

 

[JimW]

One of the only good things about this website is the debates on antifascism and the IWCA etc. Only reason I log in, and the reason I came here in the first place.

Keep it up innit!

Voice of reason!