fascist infiltration of the left

[layabout]

Thanks for the post belboid.

Does anyone here think that after all these years Roger Roberts has suddenly joined the BNP because he hates blacks & asians or wants to see blacks and asians deported? I don't think so. He's joined because he's pissed with the Conservative party and he most probably doesn't even agree with a lot of the BNPs policies.

Does anyone here think that if they had been more physical or intimidating to the BNP, that Roger Roberts would not have joined them?

Does anyone think that if the BNP suddenly turned a corner a resorted to violence that members like Roger Roberts would hang about in the BNP?

I don't think so.

 

[danno_at_work]

Thanks for the post belboid.

Does anyone here think that after all these years Roger Roberts has suddenly joined the BNP because he hates blacks & asians or wants to see blacks and asians deported? I don't think so. He's joined because he's pissed with the Conservative party and he most probably doesn't even agree with a lot of the BNPs policies.

Does anyone here think that if they had been more physical or intimidating to the BNP, that Roger Roberts would not have joined them?

Does anyone think that if the BNP suddenly turned a corner a resorted to violence that members like Roger Roberts would hang about in the BNP?

I don't think so.

i they started to control the street then i think a lot more peolple would be pulled in,thats why we have to stop them wherever they raise their racist shit

 

[layabout]

i they started to control the street then i think a lot more peolple would be pulled in,thats why we have to stop them wherever they raise their racist shit

And how would they control the street? Would the new members in the BNP want that or have any part of it?

Please elaborate on what you mean by control of the street and how you see the BNP achieving such an aim.....assuming they want to.

 

[belboid]

Thanks for the post belboid.

Does anyone here think that after all these years Roger Roberts has suddenly joined the BNP because he hates blacks & asians or wants to see blacks and asians deported? I don't think so. He's joined because he's pissed with the Conservative party and he most probably doesn't even agree with a lot of the BNPs policies.

I think he's probably always held similar views, but there was never a succesful enough far right party for him to join.

Does anyone here think that if they had been more physical or intimidating to the BNP, that Roger Roberts would not have joined them?

mmm, well, yes - were open fascists being kicked the crap oput of whenever they walked the streets I think most people would think more than once bedfore joining. (not that I would advocate sauch a strategy obviously)

Does anyone think that if the BNP suddenly turned a corner a resorted to violence that members like Roger Roberts would hang about in the BNP?

I don't think so.

depends on how sucesful they had been up till then. If they were a really succesful organisation, then yes, he'd be happy to stay I'm sure, and blame al lthe violence on 'a tiny minority'

 

[layabout]

I think he's probably always held similar views, but there was never a succesful enough far right party for him to join.

Similar views? Please you can't afford to be vague with people about such matters. Honest! You have to be very factual. Your aim is to stop people from joining the BNP or getting people in it, out of it.

mmm, well, yes - were open fascists being kicked the crap oput of whenever they walked the streets I think most people would think more than once bedfore joining. (not that I would advocate sauch a strategy obviously)

Would you give up your beliefs through the threat of violence? Are you listening to yourself? Do you understand the conflicting messages you are sending out?

"Don't join the BNP, because they are just a bunch of thugs........btw.........anyone who kicks the shit out of you......isn't a thug!"

depends on how sucesful they had been up till then. If they were a really succesful organisation, then yes, he'd be happy to stay I'm sure, and blame al lthe violence on 'a tiny minority'

There is a difference between being sucessful and actually getting into power. There is no way anyone in this country can get into power through violence and most people know that. A few hundred or even a few thousand extremists can't get into power in such a way. The police and the army would have none of that and more to the point neither would the electorate.

 

[flimsier]

Both their addresses and DS's phone number have been published in several places on the web, including indiemedia.

 

[layabout]

Both their addresses and DS's phone number have been published in several places on the web, including indiemedia.

Yes. You can bet the idiot that done that, is quite confident the BNP doesn't have his/her details. How fucking stupid can someone get. That individual is goading the BNP to be just as stupid. Hopefully the BNP will see through the red mist.

 

[cockneyrebel]

I do have a problem when a probabionary period is offered and the 'Candidate' is stuck doing a petition out on a street stall and not allowed to sell the paper a la sparts.

The sparts also say they are socialists, does that mean socialism is wrong! Just because the Sparts have a twisted view of candidate membership that doesn't make it wrong.....as belboid says I think it is an honest way of going about things and democratics, especially in very small organisations like the SWP. But the SWP have instead an open membership where people join on no political basis whatsoever and I've across SWPers (both when I've been a member and non-member) telling people it doesn't matter if they say they're not a socialist they should join up anyway!

 

[Nigel Irritable]

CR asked me what I would do in Manchester:

The answer is very much dependent on the circumstances on the ground, something I'm in almost complete ignorance of. I don't know what the balance of forces is like in Manchester University, I don't know what the political situation is like there, I don't know if the SU has a no platform policy, I don't even know if these people plan to return to college.

There are some things that can be done regardless of those circumstances. The SWP and every group (UAF, Respect etc) these people were involved in should immediately launch an investigation into what damage these people could have caused and what information they could have access to. What tasks were they assigned, who did they work with, what lists did they have access too, who proposed them for any positions they held and why. Any campaign groups or individuals concerned should be contacted as soon as possible and the full situation explained.

Those groups can all learn lessons from this, whether its about promoting mindless enthusiasm rather than political understanding or whatever.

Then there needs to be a broad campaign built. Exactly what demands that campaign should raise will obviously be dependent on the situation on the ground. I would tend to assume that physical violence is a bad idea.

 

[cockneyrebel]

Hopefully the BNP will see through the red mist.

Why do you hope this then? Your posts still seem very defensive about the BNP.....

And your statement that the BNP fascism will be different from every other countries fascism, despite past history, is based on what exactly?

And you evidence that they could never come to power is based on what?

You seem to think that if you say something it makes it so. The fascist agenda and their violence has been exposed again and again. If you wanna ignore that go ahead....

 

[flimsier]

I've argued as an SWP member with people to join, and stop being a smart alec - then leave if they really find it's not for them.

Exactly the same sort of thing as WPs candidate membership, except not as formal. It's not unheard of for people to take leading roles in the first three months, but it's certainly rare (I don't know if it was in this case - when I was a member the only person I remember taking on a leading role early in their membership was Anna Chen).

 

[cockneyrebel]

I would tend to assume that physical violence is a bad idea.

Do you think the violence on the Le Pen demo was bad?

 

[cockneyrebel]

It's not unheard of for people to take leading roles in the first three months, but it's certainly rare

I think it would be stupid in any situation that I can think of.....

 

[belboid]

I've argued as an SWP member with people to join, and stop being a smart alec - then leave if they really find it's not for them.

Exactly the same sort of thing as WPs candidate membership, except not as formal. It's not unheard of for people to take leading roles in the first three months, but it's certainly rare (I don't know if it was in this case - when I was a member the only person I remember taking on a leading role early in their membership was Anna Chen).

I think there is a difference in that if you do decide not to take up 'full' membership, you are actually more likely to retain a more positive working relationship with them (should you want to) - which is surely a good thing.

And, you dont have subs to pay - always handy.

 

[past caring]

layabout - you possibly missed the question the first time I asked it.....

Do you work for Searchlight now?

 

[belboid]

I think it would be stupid in any situation that I can think of.....

unless its a 'star' recruit - if, I dunno, [insert name of revolutionary that your group respects a lot here] joined, would you make them wait until htey had proved themselves? Pretty unusual circumstance that tho.

 

[layabout]

Do you think the violence on the Le Pen demo was bad?

I do. I was a BNP member at the time. I cringed with embaressment when I heard Le Pen was invited over. Such confrontation only bolsters support for the BNP from people who were wavering and thinking of supporting them.

The demonstrators would have done a lot more good for their cause if the demo had been peaceful. Instead they looked like a bunch of thugs.

People need to stop thinking with their hearts and actually bother to think about what kind of message their actions is sending out to people who are thinking of joining the BNP, by being so confrontational.

 

[flimsier]

I think it would be stupid in any situation that I can think of.....

Trotsky?

 

[layabout]

layabout - you possibly missed the question the first time I asked it.....

Do you work for Searchlight now?

Yes I did miss the question! No I do not. I despise them. They are too full of personal hatred and I would not trust them as far as I could throw them.

I have deep resentment of any organisation, that is funded by unions and gets too involved in politics. Note the comments about UKIP on their site.

 

[Nigel Irritable]

Do you think the violence on the Le Pen demo was bad?

I don't know what it consisted of or what the circumstances were so I can't say. I'm not a pacifist, everything depends on concrete circumstances. The Fascists Out Campaign in the North of Ireland for instance makes no bones about the physical element of their strategy, something that makes sense in their particular situation.

 

[cockneyrebel]

I was a BNP member at the time. I cringed with embaressment when I heard Le Pen was invited over. Such confrontation only bolsters support for the BNP from people who were wavering and thinking of supporting them.

Wait a minute, if you were a BNP member at the time, why would you have not wanted, in your eyes, the left to look bad?!?!

All you posts are inconsistent and your justification of the BNP being moderate based on your say so and not much else. Your arguments have no substance whatsoever…..you say BNP fascism is different from all past fascism because, wait for it......you say so!

Are you a troll?

 

[Nigel Irritable]

unless its a 'star' recruit - if, I dunno, [insert name of revolutionary that your group respects a lot here] joined, would you make them wait until htey had proved themselves? Pretty unusual circumstance that tho.

That only happened once that I can think of in the Socialist Party or Militant. Phil Hearse was one of the central leaders of the IMG or whatever they were calling themselves at that time. He jumped ship to join Militant and went straight into some relatively minor positions of responsibility. I think there would be a fairly strong consensus in the SP that recruiting him at all was a mistake. The ease with which he went back to his old politics rather implies that he never really concurred with ours.

He is now with the unspeakably dire Socialist Resistance, although technically he isn't back in the USFI. He has his own closely associated micro-organisation.

 

[cockneyrebel]

If a world renowned socialist leader joined your group they might go in to a high up position. But we can take anything to the extreme. The SWP recruit people they don't know and then elevate them on how much activity they do and don't take into account their politics....that's the problem....

PS Did we ask belboid to join?! What's happening to our standards

 

[layabout]

Why do you hope this then? Your posts still seem very defensive about the BNP.....

And your statement that the BNP fascism will be different from every other countries fascism, despite past history, is based on what exactly?

And you evidence that they could never come to power is based on what?

You seem to think that if you say something it makes it so. The fascist agenda and their violence has been exposed again and again. If you wanna ignore that go ahead....

I'm not defensive about the BNP, but I have said in the past, that as an ex member, I'll try my best to give an insite into why people join the BNP. It's quite a tightrope I have to walk, it's very hard to justify why one would join the BNP, without justifying the BNP....which is why I also go to great lengths to explain why I left them.

There are people on this thread, you are saying that violence against the BNP is justfied, yet at the same time critisize the BNP for having a bunch of thugs in it's ranks. Do you see the hypocrisy? Even if YOU don't and even if YOU could pursaude me otherwise.......it's not about what WE think....it's about the army of people out there, who are wavering and thinking of joining the BNP think. Your objective is to stop such people from joining the BNP. You can't achieve that through any kind of physical intimidation.

Furthermore, I've explained in detail. At the end of the day, there is not enough far right extremists in this country that are prepared to use violence to take control of the country through force, or do something real sinister such as deport asians & blacks with British citizenship........it ain't gonna happen......whether NG wants it or not.

You have to look at the mindset of the people joining that party today. They ain't joining it because they want to kick the fuck out of immigrants and a few reds. They are joining it because they are fucked off with mainstream politics and polticians who really couldn't give a fuck about the needs of the working class in this country. It's no use talking to me about what the BNP is about. It's the BNP membership and the POTENTIAL BNP membership you want to be talking to as opposed to intimidating physically. Violence changes nothing. They can't be stopped using violence. If they go to an area to support working class whites and people just parachute in with a load of physical intimidation, you'll just win the BNP a load of votes from those working class whites. Sorry, but thats the way it is. Don't blame me, blame human nature.

 

[belboid]

PS Did we ask belboid to join?! What's happening to our standards

you ever had any? keith asked, but he was pissed....

 

[layabout]

Wait a minute, if you were a BNP member at the time, why would you have not wanted, in your eyes, the left to look bad?!?!

All you posts are inconsistent and your justification of the BNP being moderate based on your say so and not much else. Your arguments have no substance whatsoever…..you say BNP fascism is different from all past fascism because, wait for it......you say so!

Are you a troll?

No I am not a troll. You can go through my posts. Go to the dustbin and see what I had to say to a BNP troll.

You are trying to say that an entire movement is just a bunch of thugs. If that were the case, you wouldn't be so worried about them. Thugs can't get into power. It's got nothing to do with what the BNP is about, what you think they are about, or what I think the BNP is about. It's what the WAVERERS think the BNP is about and it's what THIS country is about. Insult the intelligence or the democratic freedoms of someone who takes the BNP seriously, they'll join the BNP and there ain't nothing you, I or anyone else can do about it.

There is nothing in my posts that is contradicting.

It's quite telling.

You want to resort to violence and intimidation, because YOU and I mean YOU are not good at debating your own message or are too lazy to. Now that you really haven't got the time, patience or the understanding of what I am talking about, you now ask me if I am a troll. Very telling indeed.

 

[STFC]

mmm, well, yes - were open fascists being kicked the crap oput of whenever they walked the streets I think most people would think more than once bedfore joining. (not that I would advocate sauch a strategy obviously)

Let's put it another way - say you had no political allegiances, but were interested in getting involved in politics. You might go along to a meeting held by a political party - the BNP for instance - to listen to what they had to say and make up your mind whether you a) agreed with some or all of their policies and felt like getting involved with them or b) disagreed totally and had nothing to do with them again. Do you think someone should be physically attacked and prevented from attending a meeting held by a legitimate party because people with a different political agenda deem them to be "Nazis"?

 

[cockneyrebel]

There are people on this thread, you are saying that violence against the BNP is justfied, yet at the same time critisize the BNP for having a bunch of thugs in it's ranks. Do you see the hypocrisy?

Would you say the violence of the Jews fighting back against the Nazis was comparable? Or a slave using violence against a slave master? Or the working class against the oppression of the ruling classes?

The BNP will use violence, if they get to any significance, just as every other fascist group has in the past. Their leadership and organisers have openly been shown that they will push for this. While this may alienate some of the membership, history has shown fascist can successfully do this. And as said I don’t believe Britain is somehow qualitively different from every other country in the history of fascism, stiff upper lip or not.

Also in terms of saying the BNP could never carry out their aim of removing all black and Asian people from the country (which isn’t hidden away but their openly stated aim!), well as said people have said many times in history that fascists would never succeed and their complacency led to disaster….

As said there is an argument about how no platform should be used, and obviously the main way to stop the BNP is to have a positive left wing alternative and by mobilising the workers movement. However using self defence against the inevitable violence of fascism is totally legitimate.

Thugs can't get into power

History, again and again, seems to suggest otherwise…..not thuggery alone, but a strong component part of all fascist regimes and many other regimes…..


PS As I said: Wait a minute, if you were a BNP member at the time, why would you have not wanted, in your eyes, the left to look bad?!?!

PPS Can you quote me where I said the entire BNP membership are thugs? Nothing like putting words in peoples mouths.....

 

[Nigel Irritable]

Do you think someone should be physically attacked and prevented from attending a meeting held by a legitimate party because people with a different political agenda deem them to be "Nazis"?

No. I think that "someone" should be unable to attend a fascist meeting in the first place as the BNP should be unable to organise them. The mistake you are making is in calling the BNP (or the White Nationalist Party or the National Front) a "legitimate party".

 

[layabout]

if you were a BNP member at the time, why would you have not wanted, in your eyes, the left to look bad?!?!

Also, where did I say that I wanted at the time for the left [EDIT!!!] NOT to look bad?

Where I see something illogical, I will post why I deem it to be illogical. Here and now, I'm saying that while you may look impressive to your like minded pals attempting to physically oppose the BNP, my point is that your objective is squash support for the BNP. Such actions don't, as a matter of fact it sends the waverers into the hands of the BNP as the left are seen as a bunch of anti-democratic thugs, in the eyes of someone who is on the verge of voting for or supporting the BNP.

It's madness.

"Yeah we'll expose the BNP for being a bunch of thugs by phyiscally attacking them right in front of the entire UK media!" - Yeah right.