Griffin and BNP strategy

[Random]

I'm interested in building an electoral movement that is anti-capitalist and will try to address the lack of working class political representation. However, as you observe, not all people who are anti-racist are anti-capitalist, Fine. These people should still look to build in communities and offer a political challenge if they are serious about challenging the far right because that is the only way it will be done. That I may choose to pursue building a political alternative that advocates a world beyond capitalism is neither here nor there in this regard.

Shouldn't work in comunities be part of offering a challenge to capitalism, rather than something that you do separate from the 'bread and butter' stuff? You're still basically accepting the UAF's distinction between the political party that knows the score, and the vague reformist work (whether an alliance or not) that stops the BNP.

 

[Proper Tidy]

Shouldn't work in comunities be part of offering a challenge to capitalism, rather than something that you do separate from the 'bread and butter' stuff? You're still basically accepting the UAF's distinction between the political party that knows the score, and the vague reformist work (whether an alliance or not) that stops the BNP.

I'm really not. I am answering the specific question posed, which is what the liberals etc that UAF contains should be doing. They are not interesting in challenging capitalism, fine. If they want to defeat the far right then they should still adopt the same strategy of community work and engagement. I'm not arguing that the far left should jump into bed with these people - just making the point that anti-racism isn't pop concerts, face-painting and placard waving.

 

[Random]

I'm really not. I am answering the specific question posed, which is what the liberals etc that UAF contains should be doing. They are not interesting in challenging capitalism, fine. If they want to defeat the far right then they should still adopt the same strategy of community work and engagement.

But where are you and your 'political alternative' while these liberals are doing the do?

 

[Proper Tidy]

But where are you and your 'political alternative' while these liberals are doing the do?

Well, it wouldn't be 'my' political alternative. We would be looking to build the political alternative, obviously. Look - nobody is ever going to build a political alternative that can challenge capitalism whilst trying to co-opt liberals. If those liberals still want to play a role in anti-racism then fine, but broad anti-fascist alliances like UAF don't work as the message gets so watered down and ends up the essentially apolitical mess with no analysis beyond 'don't be racist' that we see with UAF - so those liberals should crack on by themselves. In terms of how they try and connect with the disaffacted voters liable to turn to the far right, they would still need to adopt more or less the same campaigning strategy - but clearly not as some sort of far left/liberal/religious lash-up.

Those of us who want to build a platform capable of providing working class political representation and ultimately challenging capitalism should go our own way, the liberals theirs. The lash-up is doomed to failure.

 

[Random]

Maybe I'm not really sure here what is meant by 'liberal'. 'Everyone who's not a hardened lefty' will include lots of people who are, tbh more anticapitalist in their day to day attitudes than lots of left politicoes.

 

[Proper Tidy]

Maybe I'm not really sure here what is meant by 'liberal'. 'Everyone who's not a hardened lefty' will include lots of people who are, tbh more anticapitalist in their day to day attitudes than lots of left politicoes.

Well, what has that got to do with it?

I think you are on about something entirely different than I am.

UAF and their likes are attempts to form cross-class cross-tradition anti-racist organisations. Such organisations are singularly unable to put forward any sort of coherent political arguments because there is no consensus and their politics is confused and contradictory.

Anybody serious about challenging the far right should be more concerned with offering political alternatives. A cross-class cross-tradition political alternative would be just as ham-strung as UAF.

If people are opposed to capitalism then you would assume they would gravitate towards a political challenger that is similarly anti-capitalist. Those who aren't, won't.

Spending so much energy and resources on the likes of UAF is wasted when it could be put towards providing genuine challenges to the far right.

 

[Gingerman]

What's the difference between the BNP and a bus?

A bus has seats

 

[ViolentPanda]

So what should those opposed to fascism do about it?

That depends on how tied you are to not contravening the law.

 

[Kaye]

BNP "wiped out" in Barking council elections, apparently.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Perhaps building in communities and engaging with working class voters on working class issues might be a start, as opposed to saying Nazi a lot and flitting around with pop concerts.

I don't think that the two have to be opposed.
What should happen is that all means to hand are used, from community organisation and engagement to pop concerts and students saying "Nazi" and "fascist" a lot (and not just to their lecturers), but we also need to remember that allied to that is the occasional need to physically confront fascists; to remind them that they never have and never will rule the streets.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Do you think, then that it's possible for a movement that is not anticapitalist to actually stop the BNP?

Depends what you mean by "stop".
If you're following the usual Trot lexicon of taking "stop" to mean "smash the political organisation of", then it's not going to happen, whether attempted by capitalist or anti-capitalist.
If you what you mean by "stop" is "prevent them advancing politically", then a non anti-capitalist movement could do so, although extent would depend on the mode of capitalism favoured. The more "free market", the less likely IMO.

 

[Proper Tidy]

Depends what you mean by "stop".
If you're following the usual Trot lexicon of taking "stop" to mean "smash the political organisation of", then it's not going to happen, whether attempted by capitalist or anti-capitalist.
If you what you mean by "stop" is "prevent them advancing politically", then a non anti-capitalist movement could do so, although extent would depend on the mode of capitalism favoured. The more "free market", the less likely IMO.

I think you are correct here, although I do think you conflate 'trot' with 'a certain brand of trot'!

 

[TremulousTetra]

I'm interested in building an electoral movement that is anti-capitalist and will try to address the lack of working class political representation. However, as you observe, not all people who are anti-racist are anti-capitalist, Fine. These people should still look to build in communities and offer a political challenge if they are serious about challenging the far right because that is the only way it will be done. That I may choose to pursue building a political alternative that advocates a world beyond capitalism is neither here nor there in this regard.

That capitalism causes racism, nationalism etc is irrelevant as to whether people will choose to vote BNP or AN Other party that they feel is at least representing their interests.

I can see the UAF/SWP logic going on in your post, which is that UAF must be abroad alliance against fascism yadda yadda - to what end? What has this achieved? UAF takes up a lot of the energy and activity of (particularly) young activists with little end product.

The aim of anti-fascism the UAF searchlight etc. Is to mobilize as many people, mass action, opposed to fascism as possible, wherever and whenever the fascists raise their heads. Why 1. Because mass action is progressive, an area we can beat the fascist, who historically have always needed the state to carry out their aims. 2. The anti-fascists are the majority. The vote for the fascists in barking stayed the same but mobilising the vast majority, did deliver a blow to the their building. (Acknowledged by Griffin)
Anti-fascism is a defensive action, not meant to win the hearts and minds of those voting BNP's, however. Whilst working with the most progressive people in the anti-fascist movement, there is no reason you cannot make the argument you're making, that deals with the problem properly, and literally smash the BNP's, racism, etc. You need to build the real political alternative such as you are describing as well. It is not either or, it is both at the same time.

Like VP says;

I don't think that the two have to be opposed.
What should happen is that all means to hand are used, from community organisation and engagement to pop concerts and students saying "Nazi" and "fascist" a lot (and not just to their lecturers), but we also need to remember that allied to that is the occasional need to physically confront fascists; to remind them that they never have and never will rule the streets.

 

[Proper Tidy]

The aim of anti-fascism the UAF searchlight etc. Is to mobilize as many people, mass action, opposed to fascism as possible, wherever and whenever the fascists raise their heads. Why 1. Because mass action is progressive, an area we can beat the fascist, who historically have always needed the state to carry out their aims. 2. The anti-fascists are the majority. The vote for the fascists in barking stayed the same but mobilising the vast majority, did deliver a blow to the their building. (Acknowledged by Griffin)
Anti-fascism is a defensive action, not meant to win the hearts and minds of those voting BNP's, however. Whilst working with the most progressive people in the anti-fascist movement, there is no reason you cannot make the argument you're making, that deals with the problem properly, and literally smash the BNP's, racism, etc. You need to build the real political alternative such as you are describing as well. It is not either or, it is both at the same time.

Like VP says;

But doesn't the constant 'energy' required by UAF and Searchlight, often to little effect, detract from the actual politics? Isn't it also the case that popular frontism with liberals and faith-based groups with essentially conservative values blunts any opportunities to advocate working-class orientated politics?

To get a little bit reductive, don't slogans like 'vote anybody but the BNP' completely undermine the objective of working-class political representation? And why talk about 'smashing' the BNP or the EDL when evidently UAF are not equipped to do either? Does this not give a false impression of UAF which ultimately acts counter-productively?

And if it is the aim of UAF to 'mobilise as many people' as possible, why do they behave in such a sectarian manner to the rest of the af movement? I have personal experience of this by the way, more than once - unless UAF are allowed to take the lead role and put their branding at the forefront, what you get is either very little mobilisation from the UAF or all too often a counter-mobilisation, and they will then proceed to either a) offer up formulaic criticisms after the event that take no account of events and are clearly designed to undermine what UAF no doubt see as 'competitors', or to b) take credit when they have not played any organisational role, or in some perplexing cases, both.

It is difficult not to come to the conclusion that UAF are primarily motivated by self-promotion and obtaining as large a market share of the movement as possible; which in turn leads to their attitude towards popular-frontism, rather than any honest conviction about the need to mobilise all sections of society opposed to fascism. As for why UAF are obsessed with their brand dominating the movement, often to the expense of the movement - well, it can only be assumed that they are motivated by access to trade union funding and/or promotion of SWP.

 

[TremulousTetra]

1. But doesn't the constant 'energy' required by UAF and Searchlight, often to little effect, detract from the actual politics? 2Isn't it also the case that popular frontism with liberals and faith-based groups with essentially conservative values blunts any opportunities to advocate working-class orientated politics?

3.To get a little bit reductive, don't slogans like 'vote anybody but the BNP' completely undermine the objective of working-class political representation? 4 And why talk about 'smashing' the BNP or the EDL when evidently UAF are not equipped to do either? Does this not give a false impression of UAF which ultimately acts counter-productively?

5.And if it is the aim of UAF to 'mobilise as many people' as possible, why do they behave in such a sectarian manner to the rest of the af movement? I have personal experience of this by the way, more than once - unless UAF are allowed to take the lead role and put their branding at the forefront, what you get is either very little mobilisation from the UAF or all too often a counter-mobilisation, and they will then proceed to either a) offer up formulaic criticisms after the event that take no account of events and are clearly designed to undermine what UAF no doubt see as 'competitors', or to b) take credit when they have not played any organisational role, or in some perplexing cases, both.

6.It is difficult not to come to the conclusion that UAF are primarily motivated by self-promotion and obtaining as large a market share of the movement as possible; which in turn leads to their attitude towards popular-frontism, rather than any honest conviction about the need to mobilise all sections of society opposed to fascism. As for why UAF are obsessed with their brand dominating the movement, often to the expense of the movement - well, it can only be assumed that they are motivated by access to trade union funding and/or promotion of SWP.

1. Given the particularly bad circumstances why are the fascists in Britain much smaller than they are in Europe? Did not barking stoke etc 'mobilize' [see below] the anti fascist majority and win a battle? And SWP, respect, tusc suggests you can try to do both. [PS. Personally I am not sure U and the SWP are correct about building and electoral alternative.]
2. No. The necessity for MASS activity is more limiting imo. It means you cannot just run off attacking fascsist individuals. [Hammer attack was a lie, but propganda for the fascists.]
3. No, people are far more intelligent, and thinking everything is black and white. They are quite aware of the difference between offensive and defensive political organization.
4. No, I think people are more aware of nuance than you give them credit for. And secondly, MASS activity opposition is the aim, not yet achieved. If you want to legitimately attack the UAF, you need to ask why there aren't masses involved [except on the low level 'activity' of mass vote against the fascists.]
5. Yes I've never experienced any sectarianism, except from the SWP. The 'movement' is blameless. You see, the SWP, IWCA, @ists etc etc all think they're right. So they all do it.
6. Ah yes, the inevitable apolitical conspiracy theory. Again, the SWP, IWCA, @ists etc etc all think they're right. So they all do it, jump to false conclusions that is.

 

[Proper Tidy]

1. Given the particularly bad circumstances why are the fascists in Britain much smaller than they are in Europe? Did not barking stoke etc 'mobilize' [see below] the anti fascist majority and win a battle? And SWP, respect, tusc suggests you can try to do both. [PS. Personally I am not sure U and the SWP are correct about building and electoral alternative.]
2. No. The necessity for MASS activity is more limiting imo. It means you cannot just run off attacking fascsist individuals. [Hammer attack was a lie, but propganda for the fascists.]
3. No, people are far more intelligent, and thinking everything is black and white. They are quite aware of the difference between offensive and defensive political organization.
4. No, I think people are more aware of nuance than you give them credit for. And secondly, MASS activity opposition is the aim, not yet achieved. If you want to legitimately attack the UAF, you need to ask why there aren't masses involved [except on the low level 'activity' of mass vote against the fascists.]
5. Yes I've never experienced any sectarianism, except from the SWP. The 'movement' is blameless. You see, the SWP, IWCA, @ists etc etc all think they're right. So they all do it.
6. Ah yes, the inevitable apolitical conspiracy theory.

Some very poor responses there.

1 - there are lots of reasons why political movements take shape in different ways in different countries - but then this one set fits all mentality is prevalent amongst the UAF so I'm not surprised. Firthermore, are the BNP significantly behind most European ultra-nationalist movements? No, they're not. Two MEP's, remember.

2 - I don't even know what you're rambling about there, or what the youtube video is supposed to illustrate. Trying to mobilise people with entirely different political convictions and therefore contradictory analyses of the causes of division and the far right into one movement is plain stupid. Mobilising different groups & individuals opposed to the far right for an event; fine. Bringing everybody in to one group together is doomed. How can you provide any coherent political argument? You can't, which is why everything gets reduced to 'racism bad' and 'Vote anybody but the BNP', which brings me on to...

3 - again, what? None of what you say has anything to do with the complete idiocy of the slogan 'Vote anybody but the BNP'. Why people fucked off enough with the political mainstream and with the economic consensus of the parties to vote BNP would ever be won over by being commanded to 'Vote anybody but the BNP' by some funny speakers at a pop concert, I'll never understand.

4 - what you appear to be saying here and for number 3 is - people aren't stupid enough to take what we're saying at face value. So why fucking say it?

5 - Yes, people and organisations can be sectarian. UAF are particularly and commonly regarded as particularly venomous and hostile towards, well, everybody. If you're involved with UAF then you will be all too aware of plenty of examples, as we all are. Answer the point instead of deflecting the charge because it won't fool anybody.

6 - it isn't a conspiracy theory, and again you are trying to dismiss criticism without actually answering it. Many unions do indeed out-source anti-fascism to the UAF, because it abdicates them actually doing anything themselves; and UAF very aggressively look to maintain their market share. If you come to a different conclusion as to why UAF do this then by all means spit it out.

 

[butchersapron]

There's a reason other commentators on the BNP largely ignore this poster PT.

 

[Proper Tidy]

There's a reason other commentators on the BNP largely ignore this poster PT.

Yeah I think I'll take your advice there

 

[ViolentPanda]

I think you are correct here, although I do think you conflate 'trot' with 'a certain brand of trot'!

You're right. I should say "Swappie" for clarity's sake.

 

[TremulousTetra]

Trying to mobilise people with entirely different political convictions and therefore contradictory analyses of the causes of division and the far right into one movement is plain stupid. Mobilising different groups & individuals opposed to the far right for an event; fine. Bringing everybody in to one group together is doomed. How can you provide any coherent political argument? You can't, which is why everything gets reduced to 'racism bad' and 'Vote anybody but the BNP', which brings me on to...

[irony>] I know how do the facsists mobilise people with entirely different political convictions and therefore contradictory analyses of the causes of 'sick Britain' into one movement with the single slogan 'It's All the immigrants fault'? Just look at their politics and support, labour supporters, conservatives, ukip,,,,,, etc.

UAF doesn’t need a coherent political message, because it isn’t a political movement. the UAF is a single issue campaign to,,,,>

3 - again, what? None of what you say has anything to do with the complete idiocy of the slogan 'Vote anybody but the BNP'. Why people fucked off enough with the political mainstream and with the economic consensus of the parties to vote BNP would ever be won over by being commanded to 'Vote anybody but the BNP' by some funny speakers at a pop concert, I'll never understand.

I don’t know how many times I have to explain this to people.
The vote in barking for the fascist remained the same. What changed was those who are opposed to fascism did something. The target audience/aim of the UAF,,, IS NOT, IS NOT, IS NOT to convince the racsist, the nationalist’s, the people fucked off enough with the political mainstream and with the economic consensus of the parties to vote BNP, etc. The target is the anti fascist majority, the aim is to get the anti fascist majority to be an active mass physical barrier by any means necessary, to everything that fascists do.
This anti fascist movement theUAF, is about winning battles with the fascists, not the war. The war, and winning of the people fucked off enough with the political mainstream and with the economic consensus of the parties, can ONLY be won by producing an alternative to the political mainstream and the economic consensus. An alternative which puts the destiny of the people fucked off enough with the political mainstream and with the economic consensus of the parties, in their hands.

4 - what you appear to be saying here and for number 3 is - people aren't stupid enough to take what we're saying at face value. So why fucking say it?

I said nothing of the sort. You don’t even understand the logic of that you are attacking.

5 - Yes, people and organisations can be sectarian. UAF are particularly and commonly regarded as particularly venomous and hostile towards, well, everybody. If you're involved with UAF then you will be all too aware of plenty of examples, as we all are. Answer the point instead of deflecting the charge because it won't fool anybody.

couldn’t give a fook about fooling anybody. I say why I think.

6 - it isn't a conspiracy theory, and again you are trying to dismiss criticism without actually answering it. Many unions do indeed out-source anti-fascism to the UAF, because it abdicates them actually doing anything themselves; and UAF very aggressively look to maintain their market share. If you come to a different conclusion as to why UAF do this then by all means spit it out.

this isn’t criticism

It is difficult not to come to the conclusion that UAF are primarily motivated by self-promotion and obtaining as large a market share of the movement as possible; which in turn leads to their attitude towards popular-frontism, rather than any honest conviction about the need to mobilise all sections of society opposed to fascism. As for why UAF are obsessed with their brand dominating the movement, often to the expense of the movement - well, it can only be assumed that they are motivated by access to trade union funding and/or promotion of SWP.

it is apolitical stupidity. It is obvious the SWP is genuinely interested in creating socialism, and opposing fascism, the genuine debate is about whether they apply the correct tactics to achieve this aim. The debate your clearly not interested in, preferring your partisan Puritanism.

 

[AKA pseudonym]

plenty of shits n giggles over at scumfront re simon bennett...

ouch


I hope others are taking screenshots.......

 

[AKA pseudonym]

plenty of shits n giggles over at scumfront re simon bennett...

ouch


I hope others are taking screenshots....

just in case from simon:

I.. intended to, but Griffin and Dowson made a move to seize control of it on May 4th / 5th and also download all my work from my server rather than pay for it. The domain name and main website SQL were never an issue, they were offered up on a plate several times. Arthur Kemp threatened me and then started downloading the lot so I booted him off.

They did grab control of the domain by force (even though I was offering it on a plate with salad garnish) and proceeded to **** up the DNS and new server. They pointed the domain to the new server that did not have a bloody website on it. They made such a mess of the DNS the domain didn't know where to point and ended up pointing between their server and mine at random!

Laurel and Hardy struck again. It was unbelievable. I did offer a seamless switch / hand over before or after the election, but they wanted it all for free and they wanted it now. Yes, I may have made mistakes, but this is a £40,000 per month BNP asset that they want to turn into another Dowson Ltd Company enterprise. I just wanted and tried to protect it for the sake of its rightful owners - the members!

One other thing...

The BNP website was COMPLETELY out of my control after they took control of the domain on the 5th May.

doncha just love nazis squabbling with handbags

 

[The39thStep]

just in case from simon:




doncha just love nazis squabbling with handbags

Providing you remember that Stormfront contributers are mainly fantasists outside of the BNP or antifascists posing as fantasists outside of the BNP

 

[audiotech]

I'm interested...

'Ger orf your arse'.

 

[The Black Hand]

More Autonomous Anti Fascism here, this time Nottingham activities;

http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2010/05/451072.html

 

[The Black Hand]

Conviction of Liverpool BNP activist;

http://www.permanentrevolution.net/entry/3070

 

[The39thStep]

More Autonomous Anti Fascism here, this time Nottingham activities;

http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2010/05/451072.html

lets do the time warp again

 

[Pickman's model]

More Autonomous Anti Fascism here, this time Nottingham activities;

http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2010/05/451072.html

i see your production skills are improving

 

[The Black Hand]

lets do the time warp again

Quite - it took you over a month to reply to that post.

 

[The Black Hand]

i see your production skills are improving

It is nothing to do with me, although I appreciate attempts at authentic independence, or in short, autonomy...

Although I think I do know who is doing it