BNP national demo in Keighley

[Larry O'Hara]

But they know they can never get into power that way - fascists will never win a majority of votes in any country - even more after the experience of the horrors of Nazi Germany. They can pick up some votes now - but for real power they have to try to build a street fighting force.

1) Fascists never won a majority of votes even in Nazi Germany FFS!

2) AS for all this hankering back to 1930s as a sole point of reference, to paraphrase Marx, if the German Left failure then was tragedy, the SWP/UAF strategy now is the ultimate farce.

3) Not even a logical farce--for if the UAF really believe the BNP are going to build a gang of street thugs a la SA by necessity, and the existing state will not sufficiently resist that, are the UAF in street-fighting mode (a la traditional AFA for example?). No! Please retreat back behind police lines & wave your yellow lollipops why don't you...

 

[rebel warrior]

Which two western european countries have fascists been in central govt (in coalitions) in since WW2 and how did they get there?

(Excluding Spain and Portugal).

Exactly - they have not got real power though - their own govt - which is what I said. They cannot do it by picking up votes alone - and they know it.

 

[butchersapron]

But they know they can never get into power that way - fascists will never win a majority of votes in any country - even more after the experience of the horrors of Nazi Germany. They can pick up some votes now - but for real power they have to try to build a street fighting force.

Does that analysis hold for the left as well then? For RESPECT or the SWP? If not, why not?

 

[butchersapron]

Exactly - they have not got real power though - their own govt - which is what I said. They cannot do it by picking up votes alone - and they know it.

What?

 

[hibee]

The electoral strategy is only part of their agenda. The far more electorally succesful far right parties in Europe also seek to harden up a street fighting element when the time is right. Much division in their ranks stems from arguing over when the time is right. Why is this a feature of Fascist politics?

What is their aim? It is not to be a right-wing anti-immigration Tory party in Government, though that is the surface impression their electoral turn gives. Their aim is to create a racially exclusive country with an authoritarian regime able to eliminate the opposition. This is why they HOPE for a 1930s style crisis. They ultimately need sections of the ruling class to turn to them in desperation. In the meantime they wish to build a 'resctable' racist party with a hardened fascist core.

The likes of Griffin believe that in times such as these they need to make steady progress electorally but this fails to keep many of their members satisfied (not just the Nazi fanatics and thugs who Griffin would rather be rid of). The BNP say cearly that they are a revolutionary party. They use military terms for their local organisation - 'Units.' They (both Griffin and the more impatient members) seek ultimately to build a movement thast can control the streets not just the council chambers. So far they have not come close to either.

Violence is always barely hidden beneeth the surface of these organisations. Wherever they build a presence racist attacks increase.

However, the 'respectable' turn to electoral politics and the (temporary) dropping of some key policies do require a different strategy than during their street marching, flag waving street violent periods.

Yet again you have to fall back on the 1930s because your conception of fascism has not moved on since then. If a "crisis" comes it will be substantially different to that decade, as indeed have several "crises" since then.

Any semi-sensible fascist will contrast the fortunes of the electoral BNP with the street-based NF, BPP etc. It won't take them into "power", I agree - but what does "power" mean for them? The brighter elements among them realise there is no way they are going to ever achieve their stated ambitions. They can, however, by the electoral route achieve some quite cuchy numbers for themselves. The Italian National Alliance, safely in coalition, have realised this very well.

The "nazi fanatics and thugs" are not the real threat becuase they have hived themselves off into irrelevant organisations which can in any case be kicked off the streets. Trots like yourself completely fail to accept the reality that times have changed and so has the nature of fascism. Your analysis completely ignores the rise of "euro-nationalism", which is a road this country has a lot further to travel down before it reaches the level of France, Holland, Austria, Italy etc. The BNP leadership know this and are biding their time.

None of this is to say that the BNP are not a threat. But the biggest danger they pose is not that they will somehow try to enact a final solution any time soon. They could, however, fill the vacuum for radical politics where the left fails to engange with rather than talk down to the working class.

 

[oisleep]

thank fuck for people like hibee and butchers existence on these boards (sorry and larry to), i'd never learn anything if i was subjected to this patent nonsense from rebel and co all the time

 

[hibee]

Ta my Mogwai-referencing friend, although to be honest it's a case that's been made far more eloquently on these boards by people other than me.

 

[LLETSA]

but which doesn't necessarily lead to the conclusion Lletsa is pushing.

I'll be seriously disappointed if that is his level of analysis.

Flimsier, when your own 'level of analysis' so far amounts to this:

Well I pretty much think that wherever they raise their heads we should stop them and expose them for what they are.

But we've had that conversation. I'm actually interested in knowing why you think a turn to the street would indicate their time on the rise is at an end. If that's the same as what you were saying.

then your disappointment could be said to be a little unjustified, I feel.

But there you go.

As it happens, much of what I would have said has already been covered in some excellent posts by L o' H, Butchersapron and Hibee. But keep tuned in for the next exciting episode, as I'm sure I'll find somewhere to chip in with my two pen'orth.

 

[grogwilton]

What?

its quite simple, rebel warrior said that the BNP would not be able to get enough votes and govern outright. you gave the example of fascists being in government, but only when they were in coalition. so you were supporting rather then undermining his point.

although i disagree with rebels analysis that the BNP will at some point have to have street armies, if the situation was right certain elements in britain im thinking the mail, and a whole load of business men who currently support ukip would go over to the BNP. then i can see the BNP getting into government and they wont need a street army, the plod'll do that for them, and lets face it a lot of filth would probably relish the opportunity. remember hitler destroyed the SA in the night of the long knives, most of the rounding up etc was done by the states muscle.

hibee is right

 

[oisleep]

Ta my Mogwai-referencing friend, although to be honest it's a case that's been made far more eloquently on these boards by people other than me.

perhaps so, you shining example of the east stand's finest, but at least it's one that i can understand and make use of

 

[hibee]

its quite simple, rebel warrior said that the BNP would not be able to get enough votes and govern outright. you gave the example of fascists being in government, but only when they were in coalition. so you were supporting rather then undermining his point.

although i disagree with rebels analysis that the BNP will at some point have to have street armies, if the situation was right certain elements in britain im thinking the mail, and a whole load of business men who currently support ukip would go over to the BNP. then i can see the BNP getting into government and they wont need a street army, the plod'll do that for them. remember hitler destroyed the SA in the night of the long knives, most of the rounding up etc was done by the states muscle.

Again, this is real 1930s stuff. The businessmen who support Ukip are marginal. Look at the mainstream of capital, ie the CBI - they do not want withdrawal from the EU and they actually argue for immigration.

The razor in their hands is not the BNP but new labour.

The BNP will look to the continent and realise that, sicne it will be impossible for them both to win majority support and put their stated aims into practice, their best case scenario would be control of councils, a number of MPs and perhaps even a coalition. Office without power, because "power" won't be any use to them.

 

[butchersapron]

its quite simple, rebel warrior said that the BNP would not be able to get enough votes and govern outright. you gave the example of fascists being in government, but only when they were in coalition. so you were supporting rather then undermining his point.

No, it's quite hopelessly confused. Look at this:

"Exactly - they have not got real power though - their own govt - which is what I said.They cannot do it by picking up votes alone - and they know it."

Aside from the fact that power that comes via a coalition with other parties is still power (and can and does mean real power in situations of federalism and local decentralisation) nonetheless - which in fact actively supports my argument and pulls the rug out from under his - this doesn't appear to say anything that even approches what you claim that it does. It doesn't explain who or what the series of vague and free floating they/their refer to or what 'it' is they can or cannot do - it doesn't say what 'excactly' refers to, or how real power is defined. All you've actually done is repeat his previous post on this question.

 

[mk12]

Come on butchers. You know Rebel meant that fascists throughout history (Spain, Italy, Germany) were not elected by the majority, but gained power through other means.

 

[LLETSA]

Violence is always barely hidden beneeth the surface of these organisations. Wherever they build a presence racist attacks increase.

Why is no staistical evidence ever offered for this claim? I'm not necessarily saying that it is not the case, but the way it gets trotted out as a matter of course by UAF types isn't particularly helpful.

Wouldn't it be more accurate to say that, in recent years, in many places where racial tension has a presence, BNP support increases?

 

[grogwilton]

Again, this is real 1930s stuff. The businessmen who support Ukip are marginal. Look at the mainstream of capital, ie the CBI - they do not want withdrawal from the EU and they actually argue for immigration.

The razor in their hands is not the BNP but new labour.

The BNP will look to the continent and realise that, sicne it will be impossible for them both to win majority support and put their stated aims into practice, their best case scenario would be control of councils, a number of MPs and perhaps even a coalition. Office without power, because "power" won't be any use to them.

well then what is the threat? if they cant have power they cant use the arms of the state. im pretty sure the streets could be kept safe from the boot boys as you correctly see thay have minimal support. if the allt the fascists would have is a few councils, mps but no street army, wheres the threat? those positions hold no real power. no power-no threat surely?

 

[butchersapron]

Come on butchers. You know Rebel meant that fascists throughout history (Spain, Italy, Germany) were not elected by the majority, but gained power through other means.

Do you think that's maybe why i presented the case of Austria and Italy where fascist parties have sine WW2 entered the national governments via the electoral path? Maybe in order to point out that set in stone approach such as adopted by RW inevitably leads to contemporary developments not only being ignored but actively dismissed as being of no importance?

 

[hibee]

On the subject of being razor in the hands of the bosses, which I realise is a slight derail, it's worth making the point that 30 years ago at a time of greater "crisis" than we have had since capital chose not to throw its lot in with the NF. This despite all sorts of fears being raised about an Allende-style left wing govt and subsequent coup.

Even then capital realised that an anti-immigrant, anti-europe party would act against their own interests. This explains why both the bosses backed Maggie and then New Labour.

 

[LLETSA]

The electoral strategy is only part of their agenda. The far more electorally succesful far right parties in Europe also seek to harden up a street fighting element when the time is right. Much division in their ranks stems from arguing over when the time is right. Why is this a feature of Fascist politics?

Well, in some parts of Europe the fascists have had so much electoral success that they have participated in government (without any noticable parallels to the 1930s occurring.) Has there been any corresponding 'hardening up of the street fighting element' in countries where their votes are counted in millions? (And I do not mean increases in attacks on immigrants that may or may not be carried out by fascist activists, but moves towards building serious 'street fighting wings' of the fascist parties, which have threatened immigrant and working class communities, the left and the labour movement?)

 

[mk12]

On the subject of being razor in the hands of the bosses, which I realise is a slight derail, it's worth making the point that 30 years ago at a time of greater "crisis" than we have had since capital chose not to throw its lot in with the NF. This despite all sorts of fears being raised about an Allende-style left wing govt and subsequent coup.

Even then capital realised that an anti-immigrant, anti-europe party would act against their own interests. This explains why both the bosses backed Maggie and then New Labour.

So what is your point? That the BNP are not really a threat? That their threat is over-exaggerated?

 

[hibee]

well then what is the threat? if they cant have power they cant use the arms of the state. im pretty sure the streets could be kept safe from the boot boys as you correctly see thay have minimal support. if the allt the fascists would have is a few councils, mps but no street army, wheres the threat? those positions hold no real power. no power-no threat surely?

On the contrary, I would see a mainstream (even if minority) fascist party as a huge threat. You don't have to be organising mass deporations of non-whites to be a threat, not that they could anyway.

But by drawing disillutioned working class support into the dead end of conspiracy theories and paranioa they would hamper the prosprect of a working class movement building momentum, and exacerbate the divisions they were built on.

 

[hibee]

So what is your point? That the BNP are not really a threat? That their threat is over-exaggerated?

No. See post number 80 for what kind of threat I think they pose, which is a serious enough one without fantasies about stormtroopers.

 

[rebel warrior]

The thing about fascists building up a street fighting force only really comes when the working class movement is taking over the streets and workplaces and the bosses need a counterweight to this.

 

[sihhi]

Which two western european countries have fascists been in central govt (in coalitions) in since WW2 and how did they get there?

(Excluding Spain and Portugal).

What do you count as Western Europe?

Austria: Freedom Party.

Switzerland: Swiss People's Party.

Italy: National Alliance.

All did well in general elections.

 

[LLETSA]

The likes of Griffin believe that in times such as these they need to make steady progress electorally but this fails to keep many of their members satisfied (not just the Nazi fanatics and thugs who Griffin would rather be rid of). The BNP say cearly that they are a revolutionary party. They use military terms for their local organisation - 'Units.' They (both Griffin and the more impatient members) seek ultimately to build a movement thast can control the streets not just the council chambers. So far they have not come close to either.

Isn't it the case that they call their local organisations branches, and only where they have too few activists to form a fully fledged branch use the term unit? (I could be wrong about this, so it's a genuine question.)

And if they have not yet even come close to controlling the council chambers, doesn't this contradict the notion that they are on the verge of 'returning to the streets'?

 

[butchersapron]

The thing about fascists building up a street fighting force only really comes when the working class movement is taking over the streets and workplaces and the bosses need a counterweight to this.

So you and Groucho presumably think we're in this position now following your above posts about the soon expected turn to the streets from the BNP?

(You do realise history doesn't follow a series of pre-determined infinite repititions don't you? I thought you claimed to be a marxist btw)

 

[mk12]

infinte repitions

Is that Latin?

 

[hibee]

The thing about fascists building up a street fighting force only really comes when the working class movement is taking over the streets and workplaces and the bosses need a counterweight to this.

This is not borne out by history. See post 77.

 

[butchersapron]

Is that Latin?

Yep, it means even the pope is laughing at RW's analysis.

 

[sihhi]

Has there been any corresponding 'hardening up of the street fighting element' in countries where their votes are counted in millions? (And I do not mean increases in attacks on immigrants that may or may not be carried out by fascist activists, but moves towards building serious 'street fighting wings' of the fascist parties, which have threatened immigrant and working class communities, the left and the labour movement?)

In general no not at all.

Although the League of Polish Families' youth movement- All-Polish Youth has certainly grown with its votes and it has I believe attacked gypsy/Roma districts and pro-gay rights activists but not "the labour movement" as such I don't think.

 

[rebel warrior]

So you and Groucho presumably think we're in this position now following your above posts about the soon expected turn to the streets from the BNP?

No - that is why I regard this national demo as a 'publicity stunt' that does not remark a return to the streets - see my first post on this thread.

Hibee - the depth of the capitalist crisis determines the extent the bosses look to private armies and fascists - so in the 1970s the crisis was not the same as the 1930s and today it is not as deep as the 1970s.

However, was capitalism to go into massive crisis today then of course the bosses would increasingly turn to fascists if their usual parties were not able to keep workers in line and profits up.