Showing posts with label BNP. Show all posts
Showing posts with label BNP. Show all posts
Friday, 16 January 2015
#AFa an idiots guide to the far right
To welcome in 2015, the Anti-Fascist Network has put together an idiots’ guide to the idiots on Britain’s far right. No need to thank us, it’s a public service.
British National Party
Introducing the man who will definitely revive the fortunes of the BNP… Adam Walker
Formerly known as Britain’s most successful and ambitious fascist group since the 1930s, recent years have not been kind to the BNP. Membership and electoral support for the party has plummeted after a disappointing performance in the 2010 local and general elections. This unleashed a series of bitter internal disputes culminating in longstanding party leader Nick Griffin being unceremoniously booted out during 2014.
Alongside Griffin, most prominent party members who were at least semi-competent and kept the show on the road have either resigned or been expelled. This has left the BNP bereft of people with the kind of basic skills necessary to do organise election campaigns or community work. Adam Walker, Griffin’s replacement, is uniquely poorly placed to lead the party. Although he lacks political skill, charisma or any observable talents, he does have a conviction for chasing children in his car and threatening them with a knife.
The BNP thrived by occupying a political vacuum in working-class communities through community campaigning and hoovering up protest votes. The party’s patent inability to deliver what they promised to voters damaged their image as a viable opposition force while UKIP have stolen their thunder as the protest vote most likely to annoy the three main political parties. Once, the party had two MEPs, a member in the London Assembly and over 50 local councillors around the country. Now, they have been reduced to a solitary local councillor: Brian Parker in Pendle.
Happily, the future looks gloomy for the BNP. The party has collapsed across much of the country and the party’s leadership is widely detested across the rest of the far right. The time is ripe to put the group out of business permanently.
Do say: The BNP is one of the only household names among Britain’s crowded far-right scene.
Don’t say: Oi Walker, leave those kids alone!
Britain First
Britain First deputy leader Jayda Fransen burns her own picture
During 2014, Britain First briefly transformed their image from a money-making scheme operated by former BNP fundraising chief Jim Dowson into the media’s number one scary Nazi bogeyman. Such publicity, however, did not translate into political success and following dismal results in the European elections, Dowson flounced out of the group.
The group’s origins are in the BNP. Along with many other people, Dowson had a falling out with Nick Griffin and joined forces with ex-BNP councillor Paul Golding to form another venture to suck cash from gullible racists. Dowson has a keen eye for publicity and the group carried out several headline-grabbing stunts, including launching ‘Christian Patrols’ in East London.
Paul Golding in earlier years with underpants on his head at the Cenotaph on Remembrance Sunday
Dowson’s departure left the group in the incapable hands of Golding, who has tried to promote Britain First both as a respectable political party and as a militant street movement. Both of these strategies met with embarrassing failure in the Rochester and Strood by-election, when the party won a grand total of 56 votes and had their demonstrations in the town halted by anti-fascists.
Having lots of ‘likes’ on Facebook doesn’t mean much on the streets Paul.
Do say: Organising ourselves into “battalions” is even more fun than going paintballing.
Don’t say: Would you buy a used car from this man?
British Democratic Party
The British Democratic Party functions as a retirement home for ageing fascists who have fallen out with Nick Griffin in recent years and either been booted out of the BNP, or left in a huff. The BDP emerged as a faction in the BNP desperate to find someone to challenge Nick Griffin for the party leadership and rallied around Andrew Brons, a man less charismatic than a cardboard cut-out of himself. Brons unsurprisingly lost the contest and made sure that his campaign had lost all momentum before launching his own party.
The BDP do little apart from operate a website and it’s hard to avoid the welcome conclusion that its leading members are demoralised and exhausted after watching the BNP they worked so hard to build collapse very rapidly. The party managed to field only a handful of candidates in the 2014 and Brons did not even try to defend his seat in the European Parliament. With Brons out of the picture, this bunch of disgruntled no-hopers will likely sink without trace.
Do say: We’ve done well to avoid a BNP-style cult of personality…
Don’t say: …by electing the most boring man on the far right as our leader.
British Unity
Griffin in happier days
After being chucked out of the BNP and falling out with virtually everyone else on the far right, only Nick Griffin could launch could launch a group called ‘British Unity’ without any hint of contradiction or embarrassment. Hilariously, British Unity was hampered by infighting before it even officially launched as some of its supporters preferred the name ‘British Voice’ and so established a group called that instead.
Griffin hopes to imitate the strategy of Britain First by encouraging supporters to share pictures on Facebook and Twitter. He thinks he has spotted an untapped market for promoting his more hardline politics among UKIP supporters and, naturally, imagines he is the leader able to turn them from pub bores into fascist cadres. Radicalise the moderates Nick! Now, where have we heard that one before?
A man who once believed he had a good chance of becoming Britain’s first fascist MP now spends his days bothering people on Twitter. Anti-fascists could not have asked for a better outcome.
Do say: Well done Nick, you’ve always had a keen eye for emerging political developments.
Don’t say: Why do you only have one eye again, Nick?
English Democrats
The EDP, like Batman, have their own special vehicle
Not so long ago, the English Democrats persistently claimed they were simply a group of people who really liked England and would sue anyone who even hinted that they were far right or racist. Then they spotted the opportunity presented by the disintegration of the BNP and decided to drop any pretence of principles to try and hoover up their remnants.
The party has welcomed former leading BNP members and veteran fascists like Eddy Butler and Christ Beverely into their ranks and have tried to continue where the BNP left off on the far right road of respectability. This approach has yet to yield any successful results and the party has struggled to distinguish itself in a crowded right-wing field.
Do say: We’re not racist, but…
Don’t say: … loads of members used to be in the BNP.
Democratic Nationalists
Like many other small far right groups, Jim Lewthwaite and his supporters were once members of the BNP. The Democratic Nationalists emerged from a split within Bradford BNP when Lewthwaite, who was previously a BNP councillor in the city, fell out with other local members. Since then, Lewthwaite and his small band of followers have been consistently unable to persuade the voters of Bradford that they can be trusted to tie their own shoelaces, never mind run Bradford City Council. Although they have relatively moderate politics on paper (i.e. they are not as openly racist as others on this list), they have recently banded together with the British Democratic Party, another group of BNP rejects.
Do say: We’re keeping the flag flying behind enemy lines.
Don’t say: White nationalist electoral politics are not really viable in areas where the majority of the population is non-white.
England First Party
Anti-fascists have long wondered why Mark Cotterill and his Lancashire-based England First Party even bother. Aside from publishing Heritage and Destiny – a fascist gossip sheet – the EFP keep busy by organising the annual John Tyndall memorial meeting, which every year brings together a collection of people Tyndall mostly despised when he was alive. This appears to be the sum total of their activity.
Other leading members include the snivelling inadequate Peter Rushton and, er, that’s it.
Do say: I’m glad we stopped standing in elections so we can concentrate on… what is it we do again?
Don’t say: Have you finished copying articles from Searchlight for the next Heritage and Destiny yet Pete?
Patria
Andrew Emmerson is a sad, obsessive individual who, if his life had taken a different turn, would be spending all his day writing letters to the local paper in ALL CAPS about the dangers of water fluoridation. Instead, he joined the BNP but found that this was not enough to satisfy his delusions of grandeur and left in a huff. Now, in the same way that some middle-aged men have model train sets in their attics, or immaculately preserved collections of stamps, Emmerson has a political party: Patria. What a complete waste of time.
Do say: ENGLAND NEEDS THE STRONG GRIP OF A DECISIVE LEADER TO REGAIN ITS GREATNESS
Don’t say: NO-ONE SHOULD ASK QUESTIONS ABOUT MY GRIP ON REALITY
Liberty GB
Paul Weston surveyed the far right scene in 2013 and was disappointed that there was no party that catered to his particular brand of racist insanity. So, after flirting with the English Defence League and Andrew Brons, Weston did what any self-respecting, self-important racist blowhard would do, and founded his own group.
Liberty GB managed to stand three candidates at the European elections in 2014 and achieved a dismal vote. The group will likely disband when Weston’s attention span wanes.
Do say: Paul Weston is the only man who can save Britain from the Muslamic invasion.
Don’t say: Paul Weston is our only member.
English Defence League
Since the English Defence League’s formation in 2009, the group has been determined to walk through town centres all across the country because the Muslims. Able to carry out their slogan of ‘we go where we want’ when accompanied by several hundred police officers, the EDL are noticeably less confident when encountered without large numbers of police around.
The group’s fortunes have fluctuated between a dangerous fascist street force and a band of travelling pissheads. In the past, the EDL has been capable of mobilising thousands on the streets and even outnumbering the opposition. However, they have run into the same problem that protest movements across the political spectrum have encountered: having the same A to B march while penned in by legions of police will eventually demoralise even the most fervent supporter.
Numbers turning out on demos have dropped considerably as opposition to the EDL got larger and better organised. The EDL’s dwindling numbers were dealt a further blow in 2013 when leader ‘Tommy Robinson’ had a sudden public conversion that Muslims weren’t all that bad shortly before he was imprisoned for mortgage fraud. No surrender, eh Tommy?
Off the streets, the EDL maintains a large army of permanently offended keyboard warriors primed and ready to express outrage on Facebook when they hear stuff like Christmas has been cancelled because of the Muslims. This group is even more determined to ‘go where they want’ as long as they are sat safely behind a keyboard.
However, even in its current weakened state, the EDL represents the most significant far right street presence for many years and anti-fascists should not be complacent about it. The reaction to murder of Lee Rigby shows that the EDL can act as a lightning rod for anger on the far right. Any general upsurge in hostility towards Asians could swell its ranks again.
Do say: DEFINITELY HONESTLY NO FUCKING SURRENDER EVER TO ANYTHING (DHNFSETA)!
Don’t say: Having marches every now and again isn’t really working is it?
Scottish Defence League
The definitely not at all fascist SDL
Tedious racist pricks whose idea of a good idea is to spend their Saturday’s walking round town centres across Scotland shouting acronyms.
Welsh Defence League
The equally not at all fascist WDL
A pale imitation of their English cousin. Amazingly, a group whose main chant is ‘you’re not English anymore’ did not go down well in Wales. Who could have guessed?
March For England
MfE receive their traditional welcome in Brighton
Confusingly, not a march but a group, led by Portsmouth resident and flat-cap aficionado Dave Smeeton. One of the groups involved in founding the EDL in 2009 after organising a protest in Luton against Islamists picketing homecoming troops. The protest ended in violence and damage to local Muslim-owned businesses. Smeeton attempted to disown the disorder, but by that time the ball was rolling and the EDL was formed. March for England banners and flags have been a regular on EDL protests since then.
Most anti-fascists will have heard of MfE due to their annual shit-shower in Brighton. Every year since 2008, MfE have attempted to drag their racist crap festival through the city, and every year since 2010 they have faced concerted local opposition, resulting in some spectacular successes for the anti-fascists. Due to this opposition, they have now re-located 2015’s event to “a sea-side town in the North”.
Do Say: Going up north isn’t surrendering!
Don’t Say: Maybe Brighton’s just got us beat.
English Volunteer Force
They took the pants straight off the line you know…
Another far-right splinter groupsicle from the EDL, most notable for being named after murderous terrorist group the Ulster Volunteer Force. Founded by ex-EDL and BNP wanker Chris Renton from Weston-Super-Mare, and headed up by another ex-EDL member, Jason Lock, who’s mates with notorious Nazis like Eddie Stampton and John “Snowy” Shaw. The EVF was envisioned as a tight “cadre” organisation, with local well-disciplined cells taking orders from a secretive “command group”. In reality, they are a drunken mess, similar to the EDL but much smaller. Their last few demos, in Croyden, Whitehall and Cardiff have been tiny and hampered by effective anti-fascist resistance.
Do Say: We’re a peaceful group with no link to the UVF, honest.
Don’t Say: Perhaps these white balaclavas weren’t the best idea…
Bristol Defence League
A drastic narrowing of political ambitions has led one group of EDL supporters to give up on the national group and focus on holding onto one small corner of the South-West. You can’t defend England, and you can’t defend Bristol either lads. Give it up.
Do say: We may not be able to defend England, but we can hold Bristol against the commies and Muslims.
Don’t say: Have you even been to Bristol recently?
South East Alliance
The massed ranks of the SEA in Cricklewood
Another one of the swastika-soup of far-right acronym groups to emerge from the EDL. Lead by ego-tripping snaggle-tooth Paul Prodromou (who calls himself Paul Pitt to sound more English), who has a history of violence and intimidation against left wing campaigners.
SEA leader Paul ‘Pitt’ tries to hit an anti-fascist but gets his son!
Based around South Essex and North Kent, they were recently to be found “doing a MfE” by banging their heads against a brick wall in Cricklewood, North London. On the first of their three marches, several “white pride” and Golden Dawn flags were flown. Since then, they’ve wound their necks in a bit, but several known Nazis, like ex-BNP babyface Kevin Layzell and old-school fascist Eddie Stampton have attended.
Do Say: We haven’t been to Cricklewood in a while…
Don’t say: England for the English. That means fuck off Paul.
Infidels
North East Infidels leader Warren Faulkner has a problem with a stiff right arm
The various Infidels groups started off as a radical faction within the EDL. They soon split off, however, when it became apparent the EDL wasn’t racist enough for them, and became their own group under the leadership of notorious fascist John “Snowy” Shaw. Snowy once managed to get himself convicted of animal cruelty after buying up a bunch of llamas and then letting them starve, apparently under the impression they just ate wotsits or something.
Since then they have split into two factions, the North West Infidels and the North East Infidels. Both groups consist of the worst of the worst – those people who were rejected from the EDL for being too fascist. Infidels demos are characterised by a mix of anti-Muslim chanting and neo-nazi symbols. Mainly confined to the north of England, rarely seen south of the Midlands.
Do Say: Seriously mate, a llama farm is a great idea.
Don’t Say: Snowy, mate, those llamas look a bit peckish…
Englisc Resistance
Yes it really is spelt like that. And I’m sure the swastika is just coincidence.
A tiny group consisting of slightly nutty men who like medieval re-enactments a bit too much. They believe they are the defenders of the Anglo-Saxon people against the “immigrant invasion”, and if that means recalling the fyrd and forming a shield-wall at the cliffs of Dover, then by Wotan they’ll do it! They’re a few centuries out of date, to put it lightly. Occasionally their flags (white dragon rampant on a red field, if you wanna get technical) can be seen on EDL or other nationalist demos, but most often they’re found touring the country taking photos of obscure Saxon monuments, commemorating forgotten battles with mead or burning the occasional cross in a forest for the benefit of Vice journalists.
Do Say: I would have stood with Godwinson in the shield-wall!
Don’t Say: Isn’t all this leather and sword-play a bit homo-erotic?
Casuals United
Small group with a website pretending to be football hooligans. The group’s founder Jeff Marsh was a football hooligan but he has since decided that he loves Britain and hates immigrants so much that he moved to Spain. Casuals United now divide their time between posting news stories about something bad some Asians did and writing fictional accounts of incidents where two unnamed casuals battered 50 commies, which they mysteriously never have any pictures or film of and no-one else seems to have witnessed.
The group declared in 2014 that they were ‘going underground’ with the new name of the ‘Pie and Mash Brigade’. Does ‘going underground’ mean you’re dead and buried?
Do say: The reds were quaking in their boots when some of our lads infiltrated the Antifa bloc and nicked their banner.
Don’t say: That never actually happened, did it?
National Front
This was the evening entertainment at an NF event in South Wales
The NF is one of Britain’s oldest far right political groups and trades on past glories. Outshone for most of the 2000s by the BNP’s electoral success – which ensured that anyone with half a brain left the group to join the BNP – the NF has proved unable to capitalise on the BNP’s misfortunes.
The party’s failures are obvious to even the most dim-witted fascist and this has provoked fierce internal bickering. Currently, personal disagreements have split the NF into two rival factions, broadly speaking a northern and a southern faction. The northern faction appear to have taken the majority of the remaining membership, but the southern faction have kept the right to use the official ‘National Front’ name in elections and managed to stand a handful of candidates in 2014.
The larger southern faction has thankfully torpedoed their chances of any progress in the near future by readmitting the serial group wrecker and alcoholic thief Eddy Morrison, a man who is notorious for flogging far right membership lists to anti-fascists when he runs low on beer money. Not that we’d know anything about that. If you are short of a couple of quid though Eddy, you know where to find us, although the membership list is probably not worth more than a couple of cans of Special Brew these days.
Do say: It’s great that the National Front is attracting support from veteran nationalists like Eddy Morrison.
Don’t say: I gave the collection tin from the meeting to Eddy Morrison. I’m sure we’ll see that money again.
Nationalist Action
A small activist group populated entirely by the kind of kids who are bullied relentlessly at school. There is some crossover with the Young BNP, who cater to a similar demographic. Nationalist Action members want to dress like black bloc anarchists, graffiti stuff and wave banners with aggressive logos because they think it’s cool but they can’t join the anarchist movement because they are racist obsessives.
The group has successfully attracted some media publicity by having really scary, uncompromising political rhetoric, but do not have any semblance of street presence to back this up. They have also successfully attracted the attention of the police by harassing a Jewish MP online. This resulted in one of their members, Garron Helm, doing a short stint in prison and the group has been noticeably quieter since then.
Hopefully they’ll grow out of it before they come to serious harm.
Do say: The youth of Britain will flock to our ranks when they see how cool I look wearing this bandana.
Don’t say: I can’t come and graffiti the flyover because my Mum says I’ve got to be in by nine.
Blood & Honour
Blood & Honour was founded in 1987 by Ian Stuart Donaldson (Skrewdriver singer and bad driver) as a way to popularise ‘white power’ music and raise money for other fascist groups. In Britain, it has failed at both of these aims and the group has been very quiet in recent years. Elsewhere in Europe, Blood & Honour have gone onto bigger and better things and have been important in the spread of far right ideas. At home, they struggle to do more than have the occasional gig in the sticks as they are unable to advertise their events openly for fear of the opposition.
The group also struggle with the fact that their music is unbelievably shit.
Do say: Ian Stewart’s name will certainly live on with you guys about
Don’t say: Of course all the original Skinheads only listened to Jamaican music.
Combat 18
Combat 18’s unrepentant neo-Nazi politics and violent image were like a wet dream for the media and the group are still wheeled out occasionally in the press as the ultimate terrifying, psycho Nazi bogeyman to scare the gullible. This group has been rarely sighted in recent years and is believed by most observers to be effectively extinct. Members sometimes meet up at gigs but any wider political ambitions were (literally) knocked out of them many years ago.
C18 had a smaller, less effective offspring in the form of the Racial Volunteer Force who came a cropper for trying to publish the most racist magazine in history: Stormer. Following a round of prison sentences for the would-be publishers, the group is seldom heard from.
Do say: At least journalists are still scared of us.
Don’t say: Do you lot do anything, ever?
British Movement
Once a dangerous neo-Nazi street movement, the British Movement never really recovered from revelations in the 1980s that one leading member, Ray Hill, worked for the police and Searchlight magazine and the decision of another leading member, Michael McLaughlin, to retire from politics to run an army surplus store. The group occasionally crawls back into the daylight every few years for a MASSIVE STREET VICTORY AGAINST THE REDS where they hand leaflets to bored shoppers in a provincial town centre. Still publish the unreadable Broadsword, which no-one reads.
Do say: Going underground is really important.
Don’t say: Didn’t you lot disband in 1982?
Redwatch
If the website Redwatch did not exist, then Searchlight and Hope not Hate would have to invent it. Redwatch purports to be a far right hit list and intelligence gathering operation on anti-fascist and left-wing groups. In reality, it is the product of several years obsessive trawling through photos on websites like Indymedia and then reposting them on Redwatch, complete with the claim that this represents an intelligence breakthrough. These people are total fantasists.
The website’s proprietor Kevin Watmough is notorious in far right circles for co-operating with the police. Hilariously, one of the other main figures behind the site, Stephen Whittle, tried to dodge an incitement to racial hatred charge by skipping bail and flying to US as an asylum seeker!
You are more likely to be struck on the head by a coconut than come to harm after featuring on Redwatch.
Do say: Know your enemy.
Don’t say: Has your cheque from Gerry Gable arrived yet?
British Peoples Party
This party once operated as a kind of holding pen for all the misfits, alcoholics, career criminals, grasses and agent provocateurs thrown out of other fascist groups for various misdemeanours. The political home for such individuals is now the National Front.
The BPP’s main claim to fame was holding a demo against hip-hop in Leeds. Following that disaster and other embarrassments, plus the usual bout of infighting, the group appears to be defunct.
Do say: Well you are definitely more radical than the BNP!
Don’t say: Behead those who insult hip-hop.
New British Union
British Nazi obsessives have long run up against this country’s legal ban on political uniforms. For a couple of years now, former Scotland BNP organiser Gary Raikes has been advancing the fascist cause by testing the logical limits of this legislation. Can your regalia really be called a uniform if there’s only one person wearing it? Isn’t that just a costume? And can you really be a threat to public order if you’re too frightened to leave the house?
Whatever consenting adults what to get up to in the privacy of their own homes is their own business, the problem is that these uniform-fetishists (assuming there is more than one of them) want to take their particularly bizarre brand of far right politics onto the streets, where they are likely come unstuck.
Do say: Hurrah for the Blackshirts!
Don’t say: The last time I saw one of those uniforms was at a fetish night.
International Third Position
Cryptic weirdoes with baffling and boring politics. Avoid.
Don’t say: Anything.
Foreign fascists
Anti-fascists prevent Hungarian fascist leader Vona Gábor holding a meeting in London
One unhappy by-product of recent immigration to London is that the city has become home to significant numbers of foreign fascists who love their own countries so much that they have moved to the UK. The capital’s appearance as a multi-cultural melting-pot disguises the fact that there are probably more active foreign fascists in the city than the home-grown variety.
In recent times, neo-Nazis from Greece, Poland and Hungary have all tried to make a nuisance of themselves in London and have come unstuck after robust encounters with anti-fascists.
Do say: It’s so great that British nationalists are finally welcoming immigrants to our shores.
Don’t say: Can you lot just please fuck off back home.
with thanks to the Anti fascist network over at
http://antifascistnetwork.org/2015/01/15/idiots-guide-to-the-idiot-far-right-2/#more-2517
Labels:
AFN,
Anti fascist,
Anti fascist network,
Anti semitic,
BNP,
EDL,
extremists,
far right,
Nazi scum,
Nick Griffin,
racism
Monday, 31 March 2014
BNP gathering support via food banks
An interesting development which many who keep a keen eye on the far right have seen as their next development looks to becoming reality.
"British National Party activists are going door to door with mobile food banks in a bid to win support ahead of the local and European elections, The Independent can reveal.
The far-right party has even produced a YouTube instruction video to teach volunteers how to build trust with voters in deprived areas by offering soup, teabags and washing powder on the doorstep.
The BNP said the scheme had been “pioneered” in London last year and others had been set up in the Midlands and the North-West. Food stalls have also been set up in places such as Havering in east London.
The tactics echo those used by the Greek far-right group Golden Dawn, which distributed food to the public at the height of the country’s economic crisis. The BNP leader Nick Griffin visited Athens in January at the movement’s invitation, as part of efforts to set up a Europe-wide coalition.
ked about the tactic, BNP spokesman Simon Darby said the bedroom tax and the high cost of energy was driving the need for free food.
“It’s beyond belief. People are really, really struggling to make ends meet. It’s no joke. It really is a genuine need for people,” he said.
“It [giving out free food] is a very, very practical way to express sympathy with people. So many people are cynical about politics now.
“It’s a way of getting people to trust you and bringing real meaning to politics … a way of embedding yourself in the community.”
Mr Darby denied the food was a bribe and said it would be given to non-BNP supporters. The BNP wasn’t making a profit and he did not think it was against election law.
The demonstration video uploaded to YouTube last week shows a BNP London organiser delivering food in Union Jack bags to an elderly woman. He encourages other activists across the country to engage in “door-to-door food bank activism”, saying all that’s needed is a “trolley and an assortment of tinned products”.
An Electoral Commission spokeswoman said she had not heard of political parties giving out food in this way in the UK. “I assume if we knew it was going on, we would want to consider the matter and see whether anything needed to happen with it.”
She said any donations of food worth more than £1,500 to local branches would have to be reported to the commission. There is a criminal offence called “treating” which specifically relates to giving food, but this requires “a corrupt intent” to influence voters.
"
From
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/bnp-accused-of-using-food-bank-handouts-to-win-support-9224780.html
all this is a concern which we must be wary of. The far right will always use tactics like this to build support in working class areas. We must tackle them head on to root them out of our communities where we can.
Labels:
anti imigrant parties,
BNP,
communities,
far right,
fascism,
food banks,
Golden Dawn,
independent,
Nick Griffin,
welfare
Wednesday, 19 February 2014
The left and its complacency with the far right
Just last week the widely written off BNP gained a fair few votes in a by election in Wythenshawe and Sale East
Michael Kane won with 13,261 votes, beating UKIP's John Bickley, with 4,301, in second.
Rev Daniel Critchlow, for the Tories, came third on 3,479 votes, and Lib Dem Mary Di Mauro, came fourth on 1,176.
Labour leader Ed Miliband said he was "delighted" by the result while David Cameron said he would listen to voters.
The full results were:
• Mike Kane (Labour): 13,261
• John Bickley (UKIP): 4,301
• Reverend Daniel Critchlow (Conservatives): 3,479
• Mary Di Mauro (Lib Dem): 1,176
• Nigel Woodcock (Green Party): 748
• Eddy O'Sullivan (BNP): 708
• Captain Chaplington-Smythe (Monster Raving Loony): 288
• Turnout: 28%
With a low turnout smaller parties can get more of a look in on a smaller turnout as they don’t need such a big vote to get a decent vote. This is clear with the BNP in this case who many on the left have all but written off claiming they are in disarray and are no longer the party to be aware of instead focusing their attacks and exposures of the likes of UKIP now.
But a 708 vote for the BNP shows even in big labour strongholds the fascist vote is still there bubbling under the surface.
This is also the North West where Nick Griffin of the BNP holds his MEP seat for this year anyway.
For me it shows that the right and especially far right is not gone away and does need confronting at all times. This 708 could tip over a thousand next times and who knows if the BNP were to ever get properly organised and with a good financial backer like UKIP now have then they would quite easily become a force again.
So why does the left not seem to be taking the BNP seriously anymore.
Well I think it stems from the fact the BNP lost a lot of their seats and votes in last years local elections and this was seen widely to be the final nail in its coffin. But if I’ve learnt anything about fascists is that they will always com back if an alternative is not posed for people.
After the walking out of Tommy Robinson from the EDL the far right is without a figure head to rally around. But do they even need one in an area where labour takes for granted will always win and win well is a grave concern for me as the far right will see this as a chance to put down roots in such areas of greater Manchester and so on.
Whilst I do not think UKIP are ea out and out racist or fascist party it is clear in their rank-and-file there is many nutters with some very archaic views on society and particular on immigrants to this country.
I do think we should be aware a new found modern idea of fascism could come in the form of a euro sceptic disguise. Not all forms of fascism are the same and to think fascists only come in one form and one form only is a dangerous mistake to make.
I do think the left needs to be aware of the right at all times and look to provide alternatives and not alienate people.
The truth is many people are concerned about immigration in this country but are not always found to be racist at all but are buying into the media’s myths whipped up by polititians to blame immigrants for a lack of jobs, homes and low wages.
In reality we need to unite together and fight for all to have the rate of the job and good levels of benefits if not.
The right is on the rise across Europe I sense with Greece’s Golden Dawn the national front in France and various neo Nazi’s in Hungary and beyond. It is a worrying time but it is also something we can’t take our eye off the ball about in my opinion.
Labels:
alternatives,
BNP,
elections,
far right,
fascism,
imigration,
jobs and homes,
Nick Griffin,
opposing the far right,
the left,
UKIP
Thursday, 10 October 2013
Examining the UAF
The UAF is the SWP’s flagship front a anti racist and anti fascist organisation which has been around on many demonstrations against the far right for some time now I thought it might be useful to look at its pro’s and con’s and what we do need as a anti fascist movement as far right idea are on the rise right across Europe today and will at some point gain more support here in Britain once again.
In the week Tommy Robinson’s high profile resignation from the EDL the UAF have been prominent in opposing the EDL for sometime now and do a lot of good but also do a lot of damage to the movement too I would suggest.
Since the last time the EDL was in Tower Hamlets in 2011 many things have changed. They suffered a general decline in their fortunes and early this year we were all getting ready to write their epitaph. Then everything changed in May when the EDL managed to swiftly exploit the murder of a British army soldier in London. Suddenly there were 2000 of them on demos again, Stephen Yaxley-Lennon was being interviewed on TV all the time, their Facebook likes went from under 24,000 to over 100,000 within a day and they seemed to have leapfrogged further ahead than they ever were before. The last few months have in general been a frightening time when the far-right has looked like they were winning.
More recently, the effect of their exploitation of Lee Rigby’s death seems to be wearing off a little, but the support and sympathisers that they have gained in this period will not go away so easily, even if they are not always willing to turn out on the streets.
In addition, since May, there has been a huge spike in anti-Muslim attacks both on people and mosques, including nailbomb and firebomb attacks. Many of these attacks have been directly linked to the EDL through EDL graffiti left at the scene or EDL members convicted for the attacks. Even without these direct links it is clear that a general rise in far-right activity creates a climate where such attacks happen.
It feels like the clock is rapidly rolling back to the racist murders of the early ‘90s associated with an increase in support for the BNP (of which Stephen Lawrence was to become the most high profile victim), or possibly to the murderous violence of the late ‘70s rise of the NF, which claimed the life of Altab Ali among others. The EDL have not been alone in this effort to drag us back into the racist violence of the past. A whole alphabet soup of splinter groups to the right of the EDL now hold their own marches and rallies across the country, mostly in limited numbers, but making up for that in more overt traditional racism than the EDL is willing to openly espouse. The rise of UKIP and the phenomenon of ‘Woolwich Strong’ both indicated a large passive basis of support for nationalistic, racist and anti-immigrant politics. And all along official state racism has been providing the grounding context for this, slowly shifting the middle ground of politics to the right with its normalising of ‘go home’ rhetoric. The government not-so-subtly borrowed the idea of the BNP’s ‘truth truck’, turning it into the UK Border Agency’s notorious ‘racist van’ and has introduced squads of Border Agency staff illegally stopping and demanding papers from foreign-looking people on the street like we were living in pass-law era South Africa.
There has been a general failure to adequately deal with the change represented by the rise of the EDL in the last 4 years.
The anti-fascist and anti-racist movements have been found wanting in the swift change from combating the electoral politics of the BNP to the sudden re-emergence of far-right street gangs with the EDL.
The ‘official’ anti-fascist movement represented by Hope Not Hate and UAF, for all the good work they do, are hamstrung by their close ties to the authorities – they are not willing to risk breaking the law in order to effectively confront the fascists on the streets. Politically they are tied to Labour politicians, union bureaucrats and conservative religious leaders which means their proclaimed politics can only be a fairly shallow liberal celebration of ‘multicultural Britain’, which is fine as far as it goes, but leaves them struggling to combat the EDL either ideologically or physically.
Additionally anti-fascism has been hit by the fall-out from the SWP’s ‘Comrade Delta’ scandal. For those that haven’t been following all the Trot gossip – the SWP is Britain’s largest far-left group and the main driving force behind UAF, but earlier this year the party was thrown into disarray by allegations of rape and sexual abuse against a senior party member. As a consequence of the party leadership’s flawed handling of this, significant numbers of SWP members have left the party and there are many disaffected Swappies in the ranks. The effect of this on UAF is hard to precisely judge for those not involved themselves, but it certainly seems to have had an impact on their organisational capacity.
The UAF have always been good in getting ood numbers out for anti racist and anti fascist demonstrations and this has been a positive thing. Big numbers opposing the racists on the street is a sign of strength of feeling but simply isn’t enough in my opinion.
The point is not to get complacent. If they seem to be in some slight period of decline, that’s the time for us to organise. Better to redouble our efforts when they are in decline and try and finish them off, rather than relax and wait for the next opportunity for them to blame something on Muslims and increase their support. And if this does happen then we need to be ready to confront it, rather than being taken by surprise.
Certainly UAF are not all bad and do act as a beacon for drawing in support on demonstrations for example In Tower Hamlets, UAF held a rally in the park and did not brave the police to go and confront the EDL directly. That is not the worst thing in the world. I am sure we all believe in using a diversity of tactics in combating fascism, including those that are non-confrontational. If UAF had not organised a rally, we would have had to have done it ourselves to give an option to people who did not want to risk arrest or confrontation.
I disagree with much that UAF do and how they do it but we would be really screwed if they didn’t exist. They have opposed the EDL across the country and sometimes been the only ones to do so so you have to hand it to them for that. I just think an open democratic debate on tactics and strategy is needed for future attempts to oppose the far right.
The EDL are eminently beatable. They are not huge. They have a lot of fair weather support that fizzles away to nothing when conditions do not favour them. They had dwindled down to next to nothing before Rigby’s death. The far-right has been chased off the streets before – they can be again.
Saturday, 1 June 2013
solidarity with all those opposing racist and fascist views today
Up and down the country today there will be protests and counter protests involving the BNP and the EDL. We must mobilise to oppose racism, fascism and all forms of division in our society the best we can. A clear class position must be taken to oppose these groups.
A WOOLWICH demonstration by the BNP over the death of soldier Lee Rigby has moved to central London after police banned the original event.
Members had planned to meet near Woolwich Barracks where the soldier died, before moving on to Lewisham Islamic Centre.
But yesterday the Met Police ordered that the march should move to central London and could not take place in Woolwich, saying anybody taking part in the area could be arrested.
Leader Nick Griffin initially threatened to defy the ban but has now announced his supporters will meet near Westminster instead.
A counter protest by Unite Against Fascism, which had been due to meet at midday in General Gordon Square, will also now move to Downing Street.
Asked if Mr Griffin might still come to Woolwich, Simon Darby from the BNP said: "If you know Nick like I know Nick, you wouldn't rule against it."
Lewisham NUT had planned to meet at the Islamic centre but have now also cancelled their event.
Secretary Martin Powell-Davies said: "Lewisham NUT understands that there is likely to be a counter-protest against the BNP/EDL march in Central London that those that were intending to rally in Lewisham may wish to attend.
The trade union movement also needs to urgently organise against the increased racism in the wake of the Woolwich killing. A number of racist attacks on mosques have taken place in the last few days.
The racist hooligan English Defence League (EDL) were previously in complete disarray after they were prevented from marching in Walthamstow, north east London, last year by a mobilisation of the local community (in which the Socialist Party played an important role). Woolwich, however, has given them a new lease of life.
Up to 1,000 EDL supporters protested by Downing Street on 27 May. The far right racist British National Party (BNP) is also attempting to use the killing to resuscitate itself and has called a demonstration in Woolwich for Saturday 1 June.
There is a danger that some white youth - also facing the nightmare of unemployment and poverty - can turn to the racism of the far right. It is absolutely correct that the local Greenwich Unite branch is initiating a counter-mobilisation to the BNP, calling for working class unity against terror, racism and war.
It is important that whatever you’re doing in some shape or form opposition to the racists and those who seek o divide us must be opposed. I send my full and undivided solidarity to all protests taking place against these up and down the country. We cannot allow for racist and fascist ideas to take a hold in this country. We have already seen UKIP pick up big votes and the BNP in 2009 let’s put a stop to it now and organise a real alternative to the misery of austerity and privatisation for good.
Labels:
BNP,
division in society,
Downing st,
EDL,
fascism,
Lewisham,
NUT,
opposing racism,
opposing the far right,
socialist party,
trade unions,
UAF,
Woolwich
Tuesday, 28 May 2013
Taking on the far right, why we must get serious
Over the weekend and last week there has been a upsurge in racist attacks and the likes of the EDL seem to have seen a increase in their numbers whilst this may be a temporary increase we still must be rigorous in our opposition to all forms of racism and any form of fascism be that on the streets with the likes of the EDL or through the state.
Racism is something we cannot take lightly and we must look to confront it wherever and whenever it rears its ugly head.
I thought I’d re cap on the socialist party and formally Militants attitude to fighting the far right and our strategies we look to push for.
There is the popular front model the likes of the SWP and the UAF look to push with tries to unite everyone whether you’re a labour party MP or councillor who has just made cuts or religious figures celebrities the lot unity for the UAF is something which just means getting everyone together then we can all stop the fascists they tell us. For the SWP fascism is always on the verge of taking over they have to up hold this line as UAF would cease to exist if they actually told us that fascism isn’t about to take over but we must be on our guard against it and any forms of racism.
Looking back to last year’s EDL demonstration in Walthamstow which I think is a good place to look at and how the community organised and how the socialist party saw things at the time and our disagreements with the UAF and the SWP.
The first was the political basis of the campaign. We all agreed on the need to mobilize the biggest opposition possible to the EDL, and we were all prepared to link arms with anyone on the day to oppose them.
However, Socialist Party members argued that the most important force to mobilise is the working class, and in particular the organised working class in the trade unions.
Deepening austerity means that there is the potential for the EDL, or a force like it, to grow, unless the campaign against them is united with the campaign to stop the cuts.
Hundreds of thousands of workers have lost their jobs; millions more are hit by attacks on their pensions and the public sector pay freeze.
Benefits are being stripped away, while essential services are slashed. Yet 85% of the cuts are still to be implemented. We are told that the cuts will continue until at least 2020.
When fighting the EDL we need maximum unity. All sections of our communities have an important part to play.
But it is a massive, united campaign of working class people that has the power not only to marginalise and smash groupings like the EDL, but to hold out hope in a real future to those small layers of people who might be attracted by them.
The big events of 2011(the 26 March TUC demo, 30 June and 30 November public sector strikes) and the 10 May strike in 2012, all show that the organised working class in the trade unions has the power to mobilise masses of people in decisive action.
The trade unions should be at the heart of any fight against the EDL, making it clear that they stand firmly in the interests of defending all sections of our communities against austerity attacks.
Yet under the SWP leadership of 'We are Waltham Forest' the trade unions only played a peripheral role.
It would take preparation, but the serious mobilisation of firefighters, bin workers and so on in the borough would have had an even greater impact on the ability of the EDL to march.
In fact the SWP insisted throughout that the campaign could not take up these class issues against cuts.
But it’s the SWP’s welcoming of pro cuts labour representatives which isn’t helpful we find.
The Socialist Workers Party argued that in order to achieve maximum unity against the EDL the campaign should not introduce issues that might alienate some people, and 'not everyone is against the cuts'.
In particular this referred to Labour councillors who implement cuts and Labour MPs who do not oppose cuts.
The argument went that many people have joined the Labour Party recently and still vote Labour, and so Labour's involvement would draw more people into activity.
If the campaign against the EDL was also against cuts, Labour leaders would not get involved, so the campaign could not oppose cuts.
While of course we had no opposition to Labour Party members being involved in the campaign and mobilising on the day, we argued that it was a mistake to uncritically put up politicians such as New Labour MP Stella Creasy and local Labour councillors as speakers and leaders of this campaign.
The reality is that those working class people who vote Labour and the few who have joined Labour are seeking protection against the cuts.
It is the policies of the main political parties - the Tory-Lib Dem government and the Labour councillors who pass on their cuts in our borough - that create the despair and division in which the EDL thrives.
It is Labour's betrayal of the hopes of masses of working class people that led to nearly 70% of the electorate not voting for anyone in the 2012 council elections.
Labour politicians' uncriticised involvement could put off many workers whose jobs and livelihoods have been torn away.
In fact, the Labour council encouraged people not to take part in the counter-demonstration. They even failed to put up any real opposition to the EDL planning its rally in front of the Town Hall, claiming they had no powers to stop them - despite having previously tried to stop anti-cuts campaigners holding stalls in the town square!
But the growth of the far-right in some European countries is a clear warning as to what could develop in Britain.
In Greece the lives of millions of working and middle-class people have been shattered and the social consequences have been devastating.
Public sector workers have seen wages slashed by 40%. Many workers are paid starvation wages of €400 per month.
The number of hospital beds is being slashed by 50%. Thousands of schools have been closed down. Many thousands have become homeless. Unemployment is over 21%, - 51% amongst youth.
In these conditions the neo-fascist Golden Dawn has achieved 7% of the vote in the general elections in May and June.
This is despite their violent terror tactics: attacking left-wing MPs on television and attacking left-wing campaign stalls; hospitalising and murdering immigrants in pogroms while the police stand by.
In France, for the first time in 24 years, the far-right Front National won two seats in June's elections to the national assembly, with 13.6% of the vote.
In Hungary the right wing government allows the "Garda" bands of neo-fascist Jobbik to rampage the streets terrorising people and driving Jews out of villages.
Of course, in Britain the development of the far-right has not reached such proportions. The British National Party (BNP) made some electoral inroads up to 2010 but since then has lost those positions, having been riven with internal strife and successfully opposed in local communities.
But we think there is a need for an honest and democratic debate in the trade unions and anti-racist movement about the ideas and methods necessary, not just to defeat them one protest at a time, but to defeat them long term.
Labels:
BNP,
EDL,
far right,
fascism,
Labour cuts,
popular fronts,
racism,
socialist party,
SWP,
trade unions,
UAF,
united front,
working class
Sunday, 26 February 2012
How socialists view imigration
This week in Harlow socialist party we will be discussing immigration and what view should we take on the matter.
It is something which is creeping back into the news with a break down of the financial system and capitalism in crisis some are looking to blame the current economic crisis on al sorts of crazy ideas. One is the fact that Britain is over run with immigrants and is latched on to by the far right groups such as the BNP and the EDL. As socialists we must take up these claims and look to oppose them at every opportunity.
In the socialist party we are not like others on the left who call for open borders now we recognise that that sort of call would create more problems than it would solve. Although we do not see the working class as a nationality as the workers know no nationality as Marx said the popular ideas of the bourgeois need to be understood for what they are. To set worker against worker. The classic divide and rule tactic if you like.
Britain has throughout history been affected by waves of immigrants coming to these shores. The influxes in the last 200 years of Irish, Jews, Afro-Caribbean’s, South Asians, Africans and, latterly, Eastern Europeans have all led to racial and ethnic conflict to one degree or another.
Any clashes were the product of the 'heritage' of the British Empire - initial suspicions of different cultures - inflamed and exaggerated in the post-1945 situation by the right-wing Tories like Enoch Powell, and latterly by 'Migration Watch' and racist and neo-fascist organisations.
These conflicts, however, tended to recede - even when racism and racial suspicions lingered - as the 'newcomers' became integrated into communities but especially into industry and the trade unions.
Contrary to popular misconceptions, immigrants from the Caribbean and South Asia came from a largely rural background yet they developed a higher density of trade union membership than the 'native' population.
An economic boom tended to lessen open racial or ethnic clashes, but racism continues as part of the 'fabric' of capitalism and heavy-handed policing of immigrant or ethnic communities provoked clashes and upheavals: the Notting Hill riots, stop and search clashes, the riots of the 1980, etc.
) But the issue of immigration has come sharply to the fore in recent years as 5 million immigrants have arrived in Britain in a decade; the biggest influx in history.
The hostility to these new 'incomers' has grown - sometimes from 'second generation' immigrants from the Caribbean and South Asia. This was the case even before the onset of the crisis and this view has been reinforced, if anything, as workers has been severely affected economically and, in the absence of any explanation or solution to their problems, look for scapegoats.
Sometimes workers simply say: 'We are full up'. Neither New Labour nor the trade union leadership have really answered the avalanche of anti-immigrant, racist lies, particularly from the gutter press.
On the contrary, sometimes New Labour figures like Margaret Hodge and the discredited Phil Woolas, have reinforced some of these prejudices.
The neo-fascist British National Party (BNP) and, following the BNP's internal splits, the English Defence League (EDL) have attempted to whip up an anti-Muslim mood, especially amongst layers of discontented - sometimes lumpenised - youth.
This has met with little success, not least because anti-fascists - including us - have confronted them. The ruling class is at a quandary over immigration.
Politically, they need to echo opposition to immigration in order to secure their base in the conservative strata of the population. But they required an influx of cheap labour to take up jobs, which, previously, British workers were unable or unwilling to do.
This also furthered their aim of a race to the bottom in cutting wages. In this crisis, they need this even more, especially if it allows them to pursue a policy of divide and rule.
) The BNP is stagnant or has declined in effectiveness recently, partly because the 'electoral' strategy of Nick Griffin failed in Barking. The ruling class in any case needs them more as an auxiliary to the Tories rather than a serious force in its own right.
At the moment, the 'reborn' Thatcherite Cameron is 'doing the job' with promise to 'cap immigration'. This, in turn, has led to opposition from the City and big business which needs cheap labour, particularly skilled labour, from Eastern Europe and Asia.
It is possible, even likely, that the issue of immigration will feature more prominently in the next period as the cuts bite and workers are thrown out of jobs.
The neo-fascist right could make a comeback if we fail to develop a powerful left alternative.
We have to approach this issue skilfully from a propaganda point of view. We totally reject the ultra-left's dismissal - or even the adoption of an initially hostile approach - to workers who blame immigrants for their economic woes.
In fact, many Eastern European workers, tempted by the prospect of jobs in Britain, have also been made unemployed. Some have returned to their native countries but homelessness and rough sleeping now afflicts many migrant workers.
We need to explain - as we do - the reality of immigration: what causes the shortage of housing, jobs, schools, etc. We must point out that there are no fences big enough or rivers wide enough, which can stop the desperate from searching for a 'better life'.
We can create that new life only through socialism. This, in turn, is only possible if we fight to integrate all those workers - immigrants included - on the programme of trade union rights for all and the rate for the job.
Only with a mass movement of the labour movement attracting workers to a working class socialist alternative we will be able to defeat the ideas of turning worker against worker and creating a better world for us all.
It is something which is creeping back into the news with a break down of the financial system and capitalism in crisis some are looking to blame the current economic crisis on al sorts of crazy ideas. One is the fact that Britain is over run with immigrants and is latched on to by the far right groups such as the BNP and the EDL. As socialists we must take up these claims and look to oppose them at every opportunity.
In the socialist party we are not like others on the left who call for open borders now we recognise that that sort of call would create more problems than it would solve. Although we do not see the working class as a nationality as the workers know no nationality as Marx said the popular ideas of the bourgeois need to be understood for what they are. To set worker against worker. The classic divide and rule tactic if you like.
Britain has throughout history been affected by waves of immigrants coming to these shores. The influxes in the last 200 years of Irish, Jews, Afro-Caribbean’s, South Asians, Africans and, latterly, Eastern Europeans have all led to racial and ethnic conflict to one degree or another.
Any clashes were the product of the 'heritage' of the British Empire - initial suspicions of different cultures - inflamed and exaggerated in the post-1945 situation by the right-wing Tories like Enoch Powell, and latterly by 'Migration Watch' and racist and neo-fascist organisations.
These conflicts, however, tended to recede - even when racism and racial suspicions lingered - as the 'newcomers' became integrated into communities but especially into industry and the trade unions.
Contrary to popular misconceptions, immigrants from the Caribbean and South Asia came from a largely rural background yet they developed a higher density of trade union membership than the 'native' population.
An economic boom tended to lessen open racial or ethnic clashes, but racism continues as part of the 'fabric' of capitalism and heavy-handed policing of immigrant or ethnic communities provoked clashes and upheavals: the Notting Hill riots, stop and search clashes, the riots of the 1980, etc.
) But the issue of immigration has come sharply to the fore in recent years as 5 million immigrants have arrived in Britain in a decade; the biggest influx in history.
The hostility to these new 'incomers' has grown - sometimes from 'second generation' immigrants from the Caribbean and South Asia. This was the case even before the onset of the crisis and this view has been reinforced, if anything, as workers has been severely affected economically and, in the absence of any explanation or solution to their problems, look for scapegoats.
Sometimes workers simply say: 'We are full up'. Neither New Labour nor the trade union leadership have really answered the avalanche of anti-immigrant, racist lies, particularly from the gutter press.
On the contrary, sometimes New Labour figures like Margaret Hodge and the discredited Phil Woolas, have reinforced some of these prejudices.
The neo-fascist British National Party (BNP) and, following the BNP's internal splits, the English Defence League (EDL) have attempted to whip up an anti-Muslim mood, especially amongst layers of discontented - sometimes lumpenised - youth.
This has met with little success, not least because anti-fascists - including us - have confronted them. The ruling class is at a quandary over immigration.
Politically, they need to echo opposition to immigration in order to secure their base in the conservative strata of the population. But they required an influx of cheap labour to take up jobs, which, previously, British workers were unable or unwilling to do.
This also furthered their aim of a race to the bottom in cutting wages. In this crisis, they need this even more, especially if it allows them to pursue a policy of divide and rule.
) The BNP is stagnant or has declined in effectiveness recently, partly because the 'electoral' strategy of Nick Griffin failed in Barking. The ruling class in any case needs them more as an auxiliary to the Tories rather than a serious force in its own right.
At the moment, the 'reborn' Thatcherite Cameron is 'doing the job' with promise to 'cap immigration'. This, in turn, has led to opposition from the City and big business which needs cheap labour, particularly skilled labour, from Eastern Europe and Asia.
It is possible, even likely, that the issue of immigration will feature more prominently in the next period as the cuts bite and workers are thrown out of jobs.
The neo-fascist right could make a comeback if we fail to develop a powerful left alternative.
We have to approach this issue skilfully from a propaganda point of view. We totally reject the ultra-left's dismissal - or even the adoption of an initially hostile approach - to workers who blame immigrants for their economic woes.
In fact, many Eastern European workers, tempted by the prospect of jobs in Britain, have also been made unemployed. Some have returned to their native countries but homelessness and rough sleeping now afflicts many migrant workers.
We need to explain - as we do - the reality of immigration: what causes the shortage of housing, jobs, schools, etc. We must point out that there are no fences big enough or rivers wide enough, which can stop the desperate from searching for a 'better life'.
We can create that new life only through socialism. This, in turn, is only possible if we fight to integrate all those workers - immigrants included - on the programme of trade union rights for all and the rate for the job.
Only with a mass movement of the labour movement attracting workers to a working class socialist alternative we will be able to defeat the ideas of turning worker against worker and creating a better world for us all.
Labels:
BNP,
cheap labour,
divide and rule,
EDL,
far right groups,
imigration,
nationality,
racism,
ruling class,
working class
Tuesday, 24 May 2011
Building a new electoral base for socialism will have to be done, but will take time, patience and ingenunity
This excellent post i found on the Trade Union and Socialist Coalition website highlights the tasks for a new socialist electoral base which does need to be built and the need for it is greater than ever i feel. I talk to people on the internet alot who feel no party truely represents them. Well TUSC is what is missing i think. A true new workers party with socialist roots and appeals. Under neath i have posted a excellent article that many may or may not find interesting. I know i certainly did.
This article comes from Will Mcmahon a TUSC representitive helping to promote its message.
Over the last decade or so many socialists living in Britain who come from a variety of different political traditions have reached the conclusion that the route for socialism has been cut-off through the Labour Party and we have to begin again by building a new socialist party.
Electoral battles are but one front in an on-going battle with the ruling-class and will for a period involve many more electoral defeats than successes. Ultimately, electoral outcomes will be governed by waves of class struggle, union strength and working class confidence. However, irrespective of the ongoing level of class struggle, working people are asked, and are asking themselves, on an almost annual basis, which party are they going to vote for?
In England, the Walsall Democratic Labour Party and the Socialist Alternative in Coventry have demonstrated that local bases for socialism can be built and sustained for a number of years. While a local vote for a local socialist is a good answer to some local political questions, most political questions in the electoral field are, in the end, answered by voting for national governmental alternatives.
The long run survival of these bases ultimately depend on a national political formation to replicate their success in other areas. The question for socialists is how do we build this national political alternative and what vote is a good enough indication that the project is making headway?
Some argue that the target of five per cent (the percentage vote needed to retain your deposit in a constituency election) is the threshold by which success and failure can be measured. This is not a view I share. Nor is this view shared by those who have built minority parties that have had an impact on national politics over the last two decades.
The tables below show how these parties have developed their presence as national force. Note the low votes that they have had to endure while they have been building their electoral machines for future challenges. Rather than taking the view that it is not worth standing if the vote is likely to be less than five per cent, they have stood ever further and wider into what sometimes seem completely hopeless areas. They have adopted this strategy for one simple reason: it has enabled them to spread and deepen their roots and consequently to develop their national organizational strength.
In less than two decades, UKIP (with a constituency mainly based on and to the right of the Conservative Party) have broadened their base by standing more and more candidates across the country. Rather than being troubled by the five per cent threshold, or even some much lower votes, (eg 0.53 per cent in seats targeted in 1992 and 1.06 per cent in 1997 when UKIP saved just one deposit out of 194 candidates) they have pressed on in the belief that their core political message has political resonance. After 20 years and five general elections UKIP have built an electoral base that has begun to alter the electoral arithmetic and are now close to a million votes.
UKIP
Year Candidates Number of Votes Seats Deposits Saved % Total Vote % Vote in Contested Seats
1992 17 4,383 0 0 0.01 0.53
1997 194 106,028 0 1 0.34 1.06
2001 428 390,563 0 6 1.48 2.16
2005 496 605,973 0 38 2.20 2.80
2010 572 920,334 0 99 3.10 3.45
The Green Party has followed a similar strategy. According to the five per cent rule, the Green Party should have stopped standing a wide numbers of candidates in elections long ago and simply concentrated on their heartlands. But they didn’t; once again, convinced that they had a national political constituency constituency, they stood widely. Note that the experiment they conducted in 1997 of standing fewer candidates was quickly abandoned.
GREEN PARTY
Year Candidates Total votes Average votes per candidate % of total vote Average % of vote per candidate Saved Deposits Number of MPs
1979 53 39,918 753 0.13 1.46 0 0
1983 109 54,299 498 0.17 1.04 0 0
1987 133 89,753 675 0.28 1.35 0 0
1992 253 170,037 672 0.51 1.27 0 0
1997 89 61,731 694 0.21 1.34 0 0
2001 145 166,477 1148 0.63 2.75 10 0
2005 182 257,758 1416 1.04 3.29 22 0
2010 310 265,187 855 0.96 1.81 6 1
Finally, look at the votes of the BNP, built on a growing economic crisis that has impacted on some of the most depressed areas abandoned by Labour in its search for the hallowed middle ground of politics:
BNP
Year Number of candidates Total votes Average votes per candidate Percentage of vote Change (percentage points) Saved deposits Number of MPs
1983 53 14,621 276 0.0 N/A 0 0
1987 2 553 277 0.0 0.0 0 0
1992 13 7,631 587 0.1 +0.1 0 0
1997 56 35,832 640 0.1 0.0 3 0
2001 33 47,129 1,428 0.2 +0.1 7 0
2005 119 192,746 1,620 0.7 +0.5 34 0
2010 338 563,743 1,668 1.9 +1.2 73 0
It took the BNP a bit longer to work out that by focusing on a few areas in the hope of maximizing a local vote the party had cut itself off from all those whom might vote for it nationally. By 2005 the penny had dropped in the Griffin bunker and by 2010, in the space of just three general elections, the BNP had gone from 47,129 votes to over half a million.
As suggested above, there are political, social and economic reasons for the rise of the fascist vote, but the determining electoral factor was that the BNP stood widely across the country so that they could collect up as many votes as possible from their core constituency and develop roots in those areas. Fortunately, the BNP’s response to almost tripling its candidates and votes between 2005 and 2010 has been to implode into internecine strife. However, the far right will regroup and continue to exploit the vacuum left by the absence of a socialist alternative in areas abandoned by Labour. The fascists understand that 1.9 percent nationally – or half a million votes, is not to be abandoned without a fight.
The tables above show that a small national party can make enough inroads to create an electoral block that begin to change the terms of the national political debate if it stands widely enough to express a level of political strength. The lesson is don’t stand in just the few seats where it is possible to get above five per cent – this will only serve to cut you off from the overwhelming majority of your core support; and don’t let low votes limit your electoral ambitions – to build a national party stand as far and wide as possible. What we all know is that building a new electoral base for socialism will have to be done – but it will take time, patience and ingenuity.
Building a political home for your core support to live in
By standing as widely as possible TUSC would be able to advertise its presence to as wide a layer of its core support as possible and invite them to join. The most reliable estimates suggest that despite the growth in their aggregate electoral vote, all three parties discussed above have quite small party memberships. UKIP has about 10,000 to 14,000 members (depending on how you count); the Greens have around 10,000 members and the BNP have between 6,000 and 8,000 members. In rough terms this means that at the last general election the Greens have one member for every 25 votes received and the BNP and UKIP one member for every 60 votes. (Labour was one member for every 50 votes).
If TUSC were to make a broad challenge at the 2012 and 2013 local elections and 2014/15 general election then merely by advertising its presence and presenting itself as a national political party it could draw more potential members into its orbit and build the platform for a core membership organization. If TUSC was ambitious and aimed for two per cent average vote in core seats in England at the next general election then, assuming TUSC actually built a membership campaign and structure alongside the election campaign, the number of people joining would increase and bring more resources and people for the future battles to come.
By core seats I am thinking of those seats that Labour won in 2010 in England (191) – although TUSC could stand much wider than that number. For example, if TUSC were to average 1000 votes across 200 constituency seats it would win 200,000 votes. To put this in perspective, TUSC and allies stood 180 candidates in about 170 council wards in 2011 and got 25,000 votes. This was, proportionally, about six times more than the 12,000 votes that TUSC got in around 500 average council wards it stood in as part of the 2010 General election. (Incidentally, even though TUSC was late off the blocks for the 2010 General Election, you will see if you revisit the tables at the start of this article, even that vote is comparable to UKIP/Greens/BNP when they first stood.)
General Election England 2011
Party Seats Seats
change Votes % %
change
Conservative 297 +92 9,908,169 39.5 +3.8
Labour 191 -87 7,042,398 28.1 -7.4
Liberal Democrat 43 -4 6,076,189 24.2 +1.3
Green 1 +1 258,954 1.0 -0.1
Speaker 1 0 22,860 0.09 -
Turnout: 25,047,355 65.5
So 200,000 votes in England is not beyond the realms of the possible if it was decided as a plan of action to stand 200 general election candidates. (The Greens stood 200 candidates, almost half in the more prosperous South East and got over a quarter of a million votes.) It is out of such results that a national party can be built. At a Labour Party votes to membership ratio (1/50) this would produce a possible membership of 4,000, or the Green party ratio (1/25) it would be 8,000.
It is for this reason that it is the aggregate vote (rather than the low vote in particular areas) makes a difference over the long run. A national presence, even on a low percentage vote, can translate into a party membership that in itself can build a local election campaign presence in areas where they did not previously exist. Rather than shun the low votes TUSC should stand widely to accumulate more of them – because they are the raw material out of which a nationwide socialist presence will be built. Put simply, in order to rally to a flag you have to be able to see it in your locality.
The aim would be to create a virtuous circle of standing widely, and out of the contacts made building a national membership and resource base, then using this national membership and resource to build a local electoral interventions to reach more people. Out of this strategy, combined with an ongoing presence in working class communities and trade union campaigns, some local strongholds would emerge and be sustained. Then rather than being embattled out posts these areas would be the advance guard of a growing nationwide electoral challenge. This is the lesson of the Green Party and, unfortunately, even UKIP and the fascists.
Electoral politics can be brutal.
The count can feel quite an uncomfortable place to be when you know that you are going to come last (as I have done twice since February this year). Especially after you have trod the streets week in and week out leafleting and knocking on doors trying to winkle out the socialist vote, when your party is new and the potential voter may not have heard of it or your candidate. As can standing next to Labour Party members who may have won, many of them councillors who have recently voted to cut local services to working class communities.
If the thought of a low vote feels like a rebuff from the class then it is perhaps worth considering the 33, 45 or 96 working class people who saw the election name ‘Trade Unionist and Socialist Coalition – against the cuts’ and in the ballot box decided to vote for you or the candidate you have worked for. They were sending a message: ‘I am a trade unionist and a socialist and I agree with you’. This is the kindling of a new socialist party and alone is a reason to stand and to begin the process of building a new party that can represent the working class; but this will only be worthwhile if it done as part of a national project that those voters they might later consider joining.
In 2011 for every Sheffield, Coventry or Preston there were other TUSC votes that were just below or above one per cent. It is important to get all votes into perspective. For new small national parties this range of votes is normal, especially with small financial resources and finite numbers of people to call upon and, it has to be said, a relatively late election campaign. However, what is important about the TUSC results was not those at the top or the bottom of the range of votes, but those in the middle two quarters – the middle 50 per cent. The voting range in the middle is between 2.2 and 5.4 per cent (perhaps a welcome surprise to some of those who stood for the first time) and more than respectable for a new party standing it is first local elections. Not at all disappointing, but in fact something to build upon and comparable with other new parties in Europe who have the benefit of a much more proportional system. For example, The United Left Alliance in Ireland received a mid range vote of between 1.5 and 9.2 per cent.
We have a base – but we have yet to reach them
Between 1997 and 2010 the Labour Party lost over two million working class votes. While some of these voters decamped to other parties, the majority have simply stopped voting because they have no party to vote for. Then there are those left wing voters who do vote Labour because there is no other credible left alternative available. These are the millions that TUSC can reach but only if it has a strategy bold enough and wide enough to reach them.
Will McMahon, a member of the TUSC Independent Socialist Network 24 May 2011
This article comes from Will Mcmahon a TUSC representitive helping to promote its message.
Over the last decade or so many socialists living in Britain who come from a variety of different political traditions have reached the conclusion that the route for socialism has been cut-off through the Labour Party and we have to begin again by building a new socialist party.
Electoral battles are but one front in an on-going battle with the ruling-class and will for a period involve many more electoral defeats than successes. Ultimately, electoral outcomes will be governed by waves of class struggle, union strength and working class confidence. However, irrespective of the ongoing level of class struggle, working people are asked, and are asking themselves, on an almost annual basis, which party are they going to vote for?
In England, the Walsall Democratic Labour Party and the Socialist Alternative in Coventry have demonstrated that local bases for socialism can be built and sustained for a number of years. While a local vote for a local socialist is a good answer to some local political questions, most political questions in the electoral field are, in the end, answered by voting for national governmental alternatives.
The long run survival of these bases ultimately depend on a national political formation to replicate their success in other areas. The question for socialists is how do we build this national political alternative and what vote is a good enough indication that the project is making headway?
Some argue that the target of five per cent (the percentage vote needed to retain your deposit in a constituency election) is the threshold by which success and failure can be measured. This is not a view I share. Nor is this view shared by those who have built minority parties that have had an impact on national politics over the last two decades.
The tables below show how these parties have developed their presence as national force. Note the low votes that they have had to endure while they have been building their electoral machines for future challenges. Rather than taking the view that it is not worth standing if the vote is likely to be less than five per cent, they have stood ever further and wider into what sometimes seem completely hopeless areas. They have adopted this strategy for one simple reason: it has enabled them to spread and deepen their roots and consequently to develop their national organizational strength.
In less than two decades, UKIP (with a constituency mainly based on and to the right of the Conservative Party) have broadened their base by standing more and more candidates across the country. Rather than being troubled by the five per cent threshold, or even some much lower votes, (eg 0.53 per cent in seats targeted in 1992 and 1.06 per cent in 1997 when UKIP saved just one deposit out of 194 candidates) they have pressed on in the belief that their core political message has political resonance. After 20 years and five general elections UKIP have built an electoral base that has begun to alter the electoral arithmetic and are now close to a million votes.
UKIP
Year Candidates Number of Votes Seats Deposits Saved % Total Vote % Vote in Contested Seats
1992 17 4,383 0 0 0.01 0.53
1997 194 106,028 0 1 0.34 1.06
2001 428 390,563 0 6 1.48 2.16
2005 496 605,973 0 38 2.20 2.80
2010 572 920,334 0 99 3.10 3.45
The Green Party has followed a similar strategy. According to the five per cent rule, the Green Party should have stopped standing a wide numbers of candidates in elections long ago and simply concentrated on their heartlands. But they didn’t; once again, convinced that they had a national political constituency constituency, they stood widely. Note that the experiment they conducted in 1997 of standing fewer candidates was quickly abandoned.
GREEN PARTY
Year Candidates Total votes Average votes per candidate % of total vote Average % of vote per candidate Saved Deposits Number of MPs
1979 53 39,918 753 0.13 1.46 0 0
1983 109 54,299 498 0.17 1.04 0 0
1987 133 89,753 675 0.28 1.35 0 0
1992 253 170,037 672 0.51 1.27 0 0
1997 89 61,731 694 0.21 1.34 0 0
2001 145 166,477 1148 0.63 2.75 10 0
2005 182 257,758 1416 1.04 3.29 22 0
2010 310 265,187 855 0.96 1.81 6 1
Finally, look at the votes of the BNP, built on a growing economic crisis that has impacted on some of the most depressed areas abandoned by Labour in its search for the hallowed middle ground of politics:
BNP
Year Number of candidates Total votes Average votes per candidate Percentage of vote Change (percentage points) Saved deposits Number of MPs
1983 53 14,621 276 0.0 N/A 0 0
1987 2 553 277 0.0 0.0 0 0
1992 13 7,631 587 0.1 +0.1 0 0
1997 56 35,832 640 0.1 0.0 3 0
2001 33 47,129 1,428 0.2 +0.1 7 0
2005 119 192,746 1,620 0.7 +0.5 34 0
2010 338 563,743 1,668 1.9 +1.2 73 0
It took the BNP a bit longer to work out that by focusing on a few areas in the hope of maximizing a local vote the party had cut itself off from all those whom might vote for it nationally. By 2005 the penny had dropped in the Griffin bunker and by 2010, in the space of just three general elections, the BNP had gone from 47,129 votes to over half a million.
As suggested above, there are political, social and economic reasons for the rise of the fascist vote, but the determining electoral factor was that the BNP stood widely across the country so that they could collect up as many votes as possible from their core constituency and develop roots in those areas. Fortunately, the BNP’s response to almost tripling its candidates and votes between 2005 and 2010 has been to implode into internecine strife. However, the far right will regroup and continue to exploit the vacuum left by the absence of a socialist alternative in areas abandoned by Labour. The fascists understand that 1.9 percent nationally – or half a million votes, is not to be abandoned without a fight.
The tables above show that a small national party can make enough inroads to create an electoral block that begin to change the terms of the national political debate if it stands widely enough to express a level of political strength. The lesson is don’t stand in just the few seats where it is possible to get above five per cent – this will only serve to cut you off from the overwhelming majority of your core support; and don’t let low votes limit your electoral ambitions – to build a national party stand as far and wide as possible. What we all know is that building a new electoral base for socialism will have to be done – but it will take time, patience and ingenuity.
Building a political home for your core support to live in
By standing as widely as possible TUSC would be able to advertise its presence to as wide a layer of its core support as possible and invite them to join. The most reliable estimates suggest that despite the growth in their aggregate electoral vote, all three parties discussed above have quite small party memberships. UKIP has about 10,000 to 14,000 members (depending on how you count); the Greens have around 10,000 members and the BNP have between 6,000 and 8,000 members. In rough terms this means that at the last general election the Greens have one member for every 25 votes received and the BNP and UKIP one member for every 60 votes. (Labour was one member for every 50 votes).
If TUSC were to make a broad challenge at the 2012 and 2013 local elections and 2014/15 general election then merely by advertising its presence and presenting itself as a national political party it could draw more potential members into its orbit and build the platform for a core membership organization. If TUSC was ambitious and aimed for two per cent average vote in core seats in England at the next general election then, assuming TUSC actually built a membership campaign and structure alongside the election campaign, the number of people joining would increase and bring more resources and people for the future battles to come.
By core seats I am thinking of those seats that Labour won in 2010 in England (191) – although TUSC could stand much wider than that number. For example, if TUSC were to average 1000 votes across 200 constituency seats it would win 200,000 votes. To put this in perspective, TUSC and allies stood 180 candidates in about 170 council wards in 2011 and got 25,000 votes. This was, proportionally, about six times more than the 12,000 votes that TUSC got in around 500 average council wards it stood in as part of the 2010 General election. (Incidentally, even though TUSC was late off the blocks for the 2010 General Election, you will see if you revisit the tables at the start of this article, even that vote is comparable to UKIP/Greens/BNP when they first stood.)
General Election England 2011
Party Seats Seats
change Votes % %
change
Conservative 297 +92 9,908,169 39.5 +3.8
Labour 191 -87 7,042,398 28.1 -7.4
Liberal Democrat 43 -4 6,076,189 24.2 +1.3
Green 1 +1 258,954 1.0 -0.1
Speaker 1 0 22,860 0.09 -
Turnout: 25,047,355 65.5
So 200,000 votes in England is not beyond the realms of the possible if it was decided as a plan of action to stand 200 general election candidates. (The Greens stood 200 candidates, almost half in the more prosperous South East and got over a quarter of a million votes.) It is out of such results that a national party can be built. At a Labour Party votes to membership ratio (1/50) this would produce a possible membership of 4,000, or the Green party ratio (1/25) it would be 8,000.
It is for this reason that it is the aggregate vote (rather than the low vote in particular areas) makes a difference over the long run. A national presence, even on a low percentage vote, can translate into a party membership that in itself can build a local election campaign presence in areas where they did not previously exist. Rather than shun the low votes TUSC should stand widely to accumulate more of them – because they are the raw material out of which a nationwide socialist presence will be built. Put simply, in order to rally to a flag you have to be able to see it in your locality.
The aim would be to create a virtuous circle of standing widely, and out of the contacts made building a national membership and resource base, then using this national membership and resource to build a local electoral interventions to reach more people. Out of this strategy, combined with an ongoing presence in working class communities and trade union campaigns, some local strongholds would emerge and be sustained. Then rather than being embattled out posts these areas would be the advance guard of a growing nationwide electoral challenge. This is the lesson of the Green Party and, unfortunately, even UKIP and the fascists.
Electoral politics can be brutal.
The count can feel quite an uncomfortable place to be when you know that you are going to come last (as I have done twice since February this year). Especially after you have trod the streets week in and week out leafleting and knocking on doors trying to winkle out the socialist vote, when your party is new and the potential voter may not have heard of it or your candidate. As can standing next to Labour Party members who may have won, many of them councillors who have recently voted to cut local services to working class communities.
If the thought of a low vote feels like a rebuff from the class then it is perhaps worth considering the 33, 45 or 96 working class people who saw the election name ‘Trade Unionist and Socialist Coalition – against the cuts’ and in the ballot box decided to vote for you or the candidate you have worked for. They were sending a message: ‘I am a trade unionist and a socialist and I agree with you’. This is the kindling of a new socialist party and alone is a reason to stand and to begin the process of building a new party that can represent the working class; but this will only be worthwhile if it done as part of a national project that those voters they might later consider joining.
In 2011 for every Sheffield, Coventry or Preston there were other TUSC votes that were just below or above one per cent. It is important to get all votes into perspective. For new small national parties this range of votes is normal, especially with small financial resources and finite numbers of people to call upon and, it has to be said, a relatively late election campaign. However, what is important about the TUSC results was not those at the top or the bottom of the range of votes, but those in the middle two quarters – the middle 50 per cent. The voting range in the middle is between 2.2 and 5.4 per cent (perhaps a welcome surprise to some of those who stood for the first time) and more than respectable for a new party standing it is first local elections. Not at all disappointing, but in fact something to build upon and comparable with other new parties in Europe who have the benefit of a much more proportional system. For example, The United Left Alliance in Ireland received a mid range vote of between 1.5 and 9.2 per cent.
We have a base – but we have yet to reach them
Between 1997 and 2010 the Labour Party lost over two million working class votes. While some of these voters decamped to other parties, the majority have simply stopped voting because they have no party to vote for. Then there are those left wing voters who do vote Labour because there is no other credible left alternative available. These are the millions that TUSC can reach but only if it has a strategy bold enough and wide enough to reach them.
Will McMahon, a member of the TUSC Independent Socialist Network 24 May 2011
Monday, 11 April 2011
Why france is wrong to ban the burka
In britain we pride ourselves on being open and tolerate people. We are a wide diverse nation with so many different cultures living alongside eachother in somewhat harmony.
The news that France is this week to bring in a law banning the muslim garmant the burka saddens me persoanlly. I am not french of course and their laws are their laws to see fit to do waht they like with but i do feel this is a sad bit of news.
The arguement is over safety and security ever since 9/11 and the Madrid and London bombings muslim garments have been slammed for being too secretive and a security risk.
French polititians argue that we need to be able to see peoples faces at all times. This is to identify people i think this is all well and good but this is their religion and something which is very personal to many women.
In the muslim culture women are not forced to wear a burka but it is their choice they if they do. Due to the predatory nature of men and the lure of the se xual desire wearing a burka can ease their fears of being attacked due to the way they are dresing.
In the UK many young women dress very provocatively which is their choice but there is a arguement that due to the way they dress this attracts men and those sorts of men who will take advantage of their innocence which is of course is wrong. I can see both sides of this arguement myself but feel a all out ban on the burka more than being unforceable and unworkable is the law bordering on telling a religion and its people how they should live.
I think we should be careful to not go down this road in Britain too as this will anger many in the muslim communities who feel very proud of their traditions and their lifestyle. We do not want to give rise to far right groups like the EDL or the BNP and try to drive these people out of our country so whilst i feel that banning the burka in France is wrong and the law goes too far in trying to enforce what people wear i feel in Britain we will not go down this road due to our liberal nature of the country.
We should embrace all our various cultures in this country and celebrate them for their each eindividual uniqueness. That is why i love Britain so much the way we are so tolerant to other faiths, religions and cultures. We of course have our own and that must never leave or be abandoned but we can add to our own by appreciating others.
The news that France is this week to bring in a law banning the muslim garmant the burka saddens me persoanlly. I am not french of course and their laws are their laws to see fit to do waht they like with but i do feel this is a sad bit of news.
The arguement is over safety and security ever since 9/11 and the Madrid and London bombings muslim garments have been slammed for being too secretive and a security risk.
French polititians argue that we need to be able to see peoples faces at all times. This is to identify people i think this is all well and good but this is their religion and something which is very personal to many women.
In the muslim culture women are not forced to wear a burka but it is their choice they if they do. Due to the predatory nature of men and the lure of the se xual desire wearing a burka can ease their fears of being attacked due to the way they are dresing.
In the UK many young women dress very provocatively which is their choice but there is a arguement that due to the way they dress this attracts men and those sorts of men who will take advantage of their innocence which is of course is wrong. I can see both sides of this arguement myself but feel a all out ban on the burka more than being unforceable and unworkable is the law bordering on telling a religion and its people how they should live.
I think we should be careful to not go down this road in Britain too as this will anger many in the muslim communities who feel very proud of their traditions and their lifestyle. We do not want to give rise to far right groups like the EDL or the BNP and try to drive these people out of our country so whilst i feel that banning the burka in France is wrong and the law goes too far in trying to enforce what people wear i feel in Britain we will not go down this road due to our liberal nature of the country.
We should embrace all our various cultures in this country and celebrate them for their each eindividual uniqueness. That is why i love Britain so much the way we are so tolerant to other faiths, religions and cultures. We of course have our own and that must never leave or be abandoned but we can add to our own by appreciating others.
Labels:
BNP,
britain,
EDL,
far right groups,
France,
laws,
multi cultural society,
muslim culture,
the burka
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)