Comrade Klein when discussing the fight against fascism asks “Just what have we got to be scared of, comrades?” [1] Well I think fascist death squads, the holocaust and the wholesale massacre of the European left should be a warning from history that we should all be scared of. Comrade Klein gets it wrong when he derides the Socialist Workers Party (SWP) for calling for united mass action to defeat fascism. Whilst the SWP fail to realise the logic of there own slogans comrade Klein also misses the point, that it is only through united mass action that fascism and the system which breeds fascism can be defeated. This means we must break out of the liberal political framework were all views however reactionary can be pursued in open public debate. To give the British National Party (BNP) regardless of their suits and new found love of the word ‘democracy’ a platform or to not challenge a fascists to a platform is a betrayal of our movement.
Its not much of a surprise to find out that the rich students at Oxford are “not consistent democrats and do not uphold the standards of radical democracy and free speech that the working class movement must aspire to if it is to become the hegemonic force in society.”
Whilst the SWP have called for state involvement against fascism, it is worrying to think that demonstrators outside the Oxford union were calling for a state ban. Thankfully no protestors as far as I could see or hear were calling for any such thing. Laws passed against far right organisation would be quickly and more widely used against the workers movement as we have seen with anti terrorist legislation.
Is it “militant posturing” to talk about smashing up BNP events? Anti Fascist Action (AFA) and some sections of the British left have done it on a regularly basis since fascism reared its ugly head. Physical direct action must also be coupled with a movement which can effectively organise “to counter the fear and lies spread by such groups and fight a ‘hearts and minds’ struggle with them. Countering their policies and taking away the basis of their support.” [2]
The tactic of No platform must be coupled with a coherent political struggle that goes beyond the UAF and its pathetic ‘vote anyone but the BNP.’ What is needed is a political force that can be a centre for anti fascist resistance but also an organisation which is armed with a programme of a socialist alternative.
Comrade Klein writes “Calls to deny the extreme right a platform on each and every occasion betray a political weakness and lack of confidence both in the working class and in the explanatory power of Marxism.” It is not through lack of confidence in the working class, but an understanding of the realities of far right in Britain today. Firstly when our communities elect or have a high presence of fascists we see a massive increase in racist attacks. Would it not be better if we kicked them out of our communities and denied them access to platforms and spaces. It is the lives and safety of working class people that are at stake in the fight against fascism. It is essential for communists to stamp out the far right wherever they try to root themselves.
Secondly the BNP and the far right are a marginalised and fractured force. Why should we be legitimising such views by sharing a platform with them, however nasty the discussions may get? They are off in the political wilderness, lets not give allow them any opportunities to come out of it. Lets stamp them out now. You wouldn’t throw petrol on some embers, so why allow the BNP space to grow and get a hearing?
Comrade Klein selects a minor part of anti fascist history which supports his argument that we can debate the fascists. What the comrade ignores is the history of the fight against fascism as a whole, the comrade ignores the failures of our movement to take decisive and violent action, in Italy and in Germany. During the Spanish revolution Stalinists were arguing against the revolution, the workers were waging a revolutionary war and the left communists were running around confused offering support to no one. History shows us that it is essential that we do not flinch from the task of utterly destroying fascism and the system which gives it life; capitalism. If the tactic of debating with the fascists and winning their supporters over to socialist was so successful, how come fascists came it was not used more to stop the fascist rise to power across Europe? It is obvious that our ideas and argument can crush the lies and poison of the far right, but what is also obvious is that the sword is mightier that the pen when confronting fascism.
It is not through lack of faith in the working class to draw their own conclusions. The reality is that in capitalism working class people can often be drawn to far right ideas as they give what can seem obvious answers to unemployment, low pay, crisis in the NHS, lack of social housing etc.
Do we fight for our politics in every arena? The Oxford debating club is a society for the training of the next generation of bourgeois politicians whose class interests would be clearly be more important than the arguments anyone from our movement could give. We should not make it an “Iron law” that we should fight for our politics in every arena. There are times when there is no point such as the Oxford union debate and other times when it would be clearly wrong to do so such as the peace pact the Partito Socialista Italiano (PSI) signed with the fascists for the 1921 elections, so that the socialists could beat the fascists at the ballot box. Obviously fighting for socialist politics in 1921 Italy could never have been done in the arena of elections.
Comrade Klein writes on the moves to ban the BNP from University of Manchester’s students union: “Discrimination on the basis of race, colour or gender and the advocacy of discrimination on the basis of race, colour or gender are not the same thing.” Whilst the comrade is absolutely correct that they are not the same thing, the reason that the BNP are only able to advocate such policies is down to them being kept off campus by students organising through there own unions.
Comrade Klein is absolutely right in seeing BNP as a symptom of capitalist decline and it is obvious we will not see the BNP organising a British equivalent to the SS. Comrade Klein is also correct when he writes “the left, the real left, has no interest in legitimising the mainstream bourgeoisie in the eyes of militant workers by giving it anti-fascist, or even democratic, credentials that it does not deserve.” And it should be this ‘real left’ that should not give an ounce of legitimacy to the BNP in the eyes of our class. That means we do not welcome them to a debate, or allow them to be seen as an organisation and political movement which can be debated like you would see the labour party debate the liberal democrats.
What is essential for the fight against fascism is for our movement to rid itself of the baggage of pre-Marxian and Stalinist methods of operating. No one should be gagged or expelled because they oppose a certain line or question a certain tactic. It is through open, honest and ruthless debate that our movement will be able to unite and not just react to the growth of the BNP but to put forward our own programme to overcome capitalism and institute workers power.
[1] http://www.cpgb.org.uk/worker/703/freespeech.htm
[2] http://www.antifa.org.uk/statement.html
Posts
5 comments:
Hope you don't mind me replying to your polemic with someone else but I think you raise some interesting ideas.
However:
Is it “militant posturing” to talk about smashing up BNP events? Anti Fascist Action (AFA) and some sections of the British left have done it on a regularly basis since fascism reared its ugly head.
Yes it is 'militant posturing'. The era of physical force anti-fascism is largely over. These days BNP events are more likely to be patriotic family fun days, with women and kids present, than marches of skinhead’s sieg-heiling down the local high street.
You mention AFA; you may have noticed they’re not around anymore. After the far right abandoned a policy of territorial control in the mid 1990's they, correctly, realised the struggle is now political and ideological, hearts and minds not boots and fists.
Furthermore no platform is largely over. It's been made redundant by the internet and the election of the BNP as councillors.
For example, at the last GLA elections the BNP got 12% of the vote in the London City East constituency, almost 25% of the white vote, in an area where they did not canvass or leaflet and haven't held a public event there in years.
What is there to no platform there?
While it remains useful to argue that organisations of which we are a member of, like unions, should not provide a platform for fascists but it is no longer a question of refusing them a platform at all times, it is not something we can carry out.
Let's examine a hypothetical situation. On a council estate, the local BNP organise a meeting on the privatisation of council housing and how to oppose it.
Do you:
A: Stand outside waving placards?
B: Pile in with your mates, smash the place up and batter the people inside?
C: Go inside to try and argue for a socialist alternative?
Is the era of "no platform" over?
Not by a long way.
The most notable recent example of no platform, was not the Oxford Union debate, excellent as that was, but the Euro election launch of the BNPs platform in Altrincham South Manchester a few years ago.
This was supposed to be a big celebration by the Nazis, with Le Pen of the French FN in attendance, launching the BNP's national election campaign.
Instead because of the militant actions of a couple of hundred anti-fa it was an embarrassment and disaster for them.
Their humiliation splashed across the media that day and the next. In France the papers were positively joyous.
What's more the leader of the Nazi hit squad, a scouse gangster, convicted for manslaughter, who's car was destroyed in the event, was publically embarrassed on local Liverpool radio the next day and resigned from the Nazis shortly afterwards.
Was that the reason the BNP didn't win a much expected electoral victory in those elections?
I like to think so.
That and the committed campaign of anti-fascists to take the argument to the heart of the Nazi strongholds throughout Lancashire.
So physical force anti-fascism is neither over or posturing. What would we do if the BNP wanted to hold a debate on a council estate?
Undoubtedly if we were able we would smash it up. Rallying the mass of anti-racists locals and trade unionists behind us, just as we have done countless times before.
That would send the clearest political argument possible to their supporters on the streets.
That is the socialist alternative to fascism.
Hiya,
I wanted to email the person whose blog this is (I'm a member of Permanent Revolution). Is there an email on the blog or any other way I can email?
Cheers
Dan
bill j,
You're ignoring my main point.
The nature of the beast has changed. I'm not denying that there may still be some areas where physical force is an appropriate response but the struggle today is an ideological and political one.
The Euro election campaign victory didn't stop the BNP gaining the highest ever vote for a fascist party every in Britain, almost a million votes.
If that's a victory, I'd hate to witness a defeat.
The resignation of Joey Owens was, I believe, unrelated to the debacle with Le Pen. His book goes into more detail why he left.
So physical force anti-fascism is neither over or posturing.
You named one incident in the last 5 years. Since then literally thousands of BNP meetings have occurred with no hint of disruption. We don't have the numbers to implement the physical force strategy you advocate.
On the posturing side of things, I have yet to hear a report of a fascist meeting being broken up by Workers Power or Permanent Revolution and I do keep an eye out for that kind of thing.
Anyway, you ignored my main example of why the era of physical force is largely over. I'll repeat it.
At the last GLA elections the BNP got 12% of the vote in the London City East constituency, almost 25% of the white vote, in an area where they did not canvass or leaflet and haven't held a public event there in years.
What is there to no platform there?
Should anti-fascists like yourself storm into the area looking for voters to beat up? What is the physical response to that?
What would we do if the BNP wanted to hold a debate on a council estate?
Undoubtedly if we were able we would smash it up. Rallying the mass of anti-racists locals and trade unionists behind us, just as we have done countless times before.
Times change Bill. In a lot of areas that mass of trade unionists and anti-racists no longer exists.
The last meeting our local BNP held was largely attended by locals pissed off at the Labour Party, not racists, fascists or Nazis. It wasn't skinheads with swastikas in there; it was local men and women, with their kids.
It would have been an act of monumental stupidity to pile in there and smash up the meeting.
The BNP hold patriotic family fun days for crying out loud, if you really think it's an appropriate response to attack these then you're a nutcase.
That would send the clearest political argument possible to their supporters on the streets.
The BNP don't aim to control the streets anymore. Not since 1994 in fact.
You're living in the past and that's why they keep winning.
my email is chris_strafford@hotmail.com
ill respond more to these points soon.
Post a Comment