Reflections on antifascism at the end of a long day

Today, or rather yesterday given that I'm writing this after midnight, has been a long day. It began with a visit to the City Centre to see if the BNP would show themselves after last week's drubbing, and ended with a few pints after two neo-Nazis shat themselves. In between, there was a fair bit of marching.

In the spirit of lazy blogging, I'm not going to repeat here what others have already covered far better than I could anyway.

You can find coverage of the James Larkin march and rally (including a couple of videos I uploaded to YouTube for their use) over at the Liverpool Solidarity Federation site. The story of a couple of fascists fleeing the Swan after antifascists went in for a pint is up on the Liverpool Antifascists website.

But what I would like to offer one thought on is what happened in Leicester today. Or, rather, Hope not Hate's interpretation of events;

One of the main positives of the day was that the overwhelming majority of locals heeded advice and stayed away. Yesterday 700 turned up at our HOPE not hate peace vigil and we are hoping for even greater numbers for our community event tomorrow. It would have been understandable for local people to take to the streets to demonstrate their anger but wisely people decided that this was precisely what the EDL wanted.

I'm sorry, but what the fuck?

In Bradford, it was pretty solidly established that physical opposition was a vital part of keeping the EDL at bay. Liverpool Antifascists members saw that first-hand, at the event. Hell, I saw it from all the way over here in Liverpool.

In Leicester, the same was true. Hope not Hate had a peace vigil, did the EDL's scaremongering for them, and pissed off. UAF had a party nearby.

Meanwhile, the EDL broke out of their pen, and fought with locals - who were luckily organised for self-defence. Had they not been, then those who "refused to get provoked into violence" (Hope not Hate) and held "an impressive display of unity" (UAF) would have been guilty of leaving the people of Leicester to a gang of violent fascists.

The level of ignorance and insular thinking on display from both groups is staggering.

Nick Lowles of HnH reports that the EDL "randomly attacked young Asian and black people." But there is no thought at any point that this the problem that needs to be confronted, rather than briefly lamented before hopping off to a "peace vigil" to "turn your back on" the war on the streets.

UAF are more honest and acknowledge that "large numbers of local people came out to defend their local areas." But the idea that antifascists should be part of that never crosses their minds.

Luckily, although they try to monopolise the movement, and succeed at hogging the media limelight, neither organisation is the be-all and end-all of antifascism.

There are people willing to get out there, physically confront the fascists, and defend their streets and communites. They are antifascists. Anybody who doesn't do that, especially if in an organisation claiming to oppose the far-right, is quite simply a coward.

On Liverpool BNP's response to last Saturday's events

The Liverpool branch of the BNP have taken their time offering a write-up of their being run out of town on Saturday. They have obviously taken their time putting just the right spin on events to serve their purposes ... and still come up with semi-coherent garbage.

The new Liverpool BNP blog is far better presented than the Merseyside BNP one now controlled by the party's dissident "reformer" faction. But it is still a mess, not least because whoever writes it often forgets how to use hyperlinks and the text becomes clunky as you try to wade through web addresses thrown, seemingly at random, into the middle of sentences and paragraphs. If their aim is readability, they're self-sabotaging.

But anyway, returning to the main point, they begin with what is now a common refrain;

My companions and I are members of a legal, democratic political party and in our opinion the only alternative to global politics and world domination. Our Leader and local MEP Mr Nick Griffin has a mandate from nearly a million to serve the people of Merseyside and the North West. In fact it has just been announced Nick is the 2nd best performing MEP. Of course this to us is common knowledge but, of course media bias avoided this!
http://www.nickgriffinmep.eu/content/nick-second-best-performing-north-west-mep

It goes almost without saying that nobody has ever claimed that the BNP are "illegal," since to qualify as such you have to be proscribed by the Home Secretary. And if they want to believe that the BNP is the only viable alternative to the status quo, that's up to them - though I and many others beg to differ.

But the idea that they are "democratic" needs to be challenged. The recent farce of their leadership challenge demonstrated just what a dictatorial stranglehold Nick Griffin has on power in the BNP. Though I'm no fan of them either, the Labour Party had an open and fair leadership election, and many of the failed contenders will now be part of Ed Miliband's shadow cabinet.

Not so the BNP. Those who supported Eddy Butler have been suspended or expelled. The other challenger, Richard Barnbrook, has been booted. High-profile critics of Griffin - such as Lee Barnes - have jumped ship. And Griffin's personality cult has been cleansed of "spies," "homosexuals," and "cranks."

As for Griffin's "mandate" to represent Liverpool - it was only that the vote was across the entire North West that he scraped in. Those million votes didn't come from this city.

I pointed this out at the time of his "victory;"

In the North West, the increase in BNP support was marginal. They barely upped their share of the vote to 7.96%, just ahead of the Greens' 7.63%. In Liverpool, meanwhile, the locale of the defining moments in their North West campaign - from the arrest of 12 activists for inciting racial hatred in distributing the Racism Cuts Both Ways leaflets to prominent Merseyside BNP members Peter Tierney and Steve Greenhalgh's vicious assault on local anti-fascists - they polled at just 6.4%.

Moreover, "an incredibly low overall turnout, contrasted with the generally high turnout the BNP pushes for amongst its supporters, suggests that 6% may be an overestimation of BNP support in the city."

The events of this Saturday, and the similar occurrence a fortnight before that, bear this point out.

But the BNP, as you might expect, tell that differently too. The fact that "the general public are in full support of this campaign and most flock to sign our petition" can be boiled down to the fact that the public - including antifascists - are overwhelmingly anti-war.

But whilst those on the left try to do something about it, from enormous marches and support of deserters to direct action such as that of the EDO decommissioners, the BNP use the issue to hide their politics.

To labour the point, the "petition" they're touting is not a petition at all. As Griffin admits on the BNP website, it is part of a recruitment campaign, and those who sign up will only succeed in lining themselves up for his begging letters and BNP postal votes. Not to mention that, per their election manifesto, they would happily still leave "our boys" to die in that war if they felt it "in the national interest."

But I often wonder whether the BNP activists involved in this are deliberately masking the truth or  if they are utterly delusional.

They consider the chants of antifascists to be "government induced." And, despite the disproportionate arrest and harassment of antifascists and youth, their post rails against "the (left-wing, common-purpose ordained) Police," "the baying ‘Sponsored Anarchist’ crowd," and "the obvious ‘State protected’ confidence, which has been bestowed on these Anarchists." [sic, ad infinitum]

Hyperbole and excessive use of randomly-aligned adverbs aside, this betrays the cultish, barnpot mentality of those deepest in the mire of the far-right.

For them, there are only two sides: themselves, and the student-liberal-hippy-ethnic-politically-correct-common-purpose-communist-Marxist-anarchist-unwashed-left. Who are, naturally, all sponsored by the state. And "middle class" - despite being "unwashed."

Liverpool BNP tried to articulate this reasoning in "Meditations on a Lefty Mob "Demo""[sic];

all the UAF and Socialist librarian gimps had concentrated at the Echo Arena to perform a demo for the public and Media against the ConDem ‘Government’ in No. 10. However, on hearing that the nefarious BNP had the audacity to hold a Day of Action in Liverpool Town Centre Comrade McFadden hastened into the town centre. Surely enough there was the BNP! How dare they confront this glorious regime! http://www.stopcp.com/index.php Comrade McFadden was on the phone immediately.

...

Now whilst most ordinary folk seem to agree with the sentiment ‘Bring Our Boys Home’ the elite had other ideas and by mid morning Comrade McFadden had arrived and was on the phone to his government rent-a-mob. ... Then lo and behold The Government cash funded UAF and Socialist Workers Party and a few of the old Hatton Militant hard-liners abandoned the [Liberal Democrat] Party Conference to perform a merry dance around the BNP table top instead!!! Thus exposing the public to a performance of what it really is-a Thespian parade for the controlled Tabloids and Media.

So, because left-wing activists had abandoned a protest against the Liberal Democrats to protest the BNP, we are all of course in the pay of David Cameron and Nick Clegg. And protesting against them as a show for the media.

In reality, the "demo" was actually a small gathering aimed at lobbying attendees of the conference, attended by 20-ish people. The main march and protest was the next day and attended by a throng of several thousand people. But the idea that somebody can oppose both the present government and a fascist party such as the BNP is apparently really far-fetched. Or something.

Likewise, it would seem that opposing the BNP makes you no longer a local to anywhere they happen to be. Unless you're a member of an ethnic minority.

According to the wisdom of the BNP;

only about 5% of them are actually from Liverpool, and that 5% are ethnics. The rest are students from outside so they can by no means speak on behalf of the people of Liverpool!

Except that I am a white, working class person who holds a full-time job, was born in Liverpool and has lived here all his life, and I was amongst the crowd opposing the BNP. Unless I and my fellow white, working class, antifascist Scousers imagined the whole thing, of course.

I'd also point out that, as an anarchist, I was no doubt in a minority amongst the antifascist crowd. But it would no doubt fall on deaf and wilfully ignorant ears.

I'm not going to Fisk the entire article, because I have better things to do with my time. But it should be pointed out that there were no "indiscriminate[?] members of the public standing in the crowd observing this situation and then fearlessly challenging this mob’s week[sic] argument."

The BNP themselves would only get in the faces of kids, whilst members of Liverpool Antifascists would engage with passers-by and could hold our own in debate easily enough. Far from "watch[ing] the agitators shrivel when confronted with common sense debate," all the BNP could do was shout "fuck off" and call us "paedophiles."

Likewise, when "one of the protesters was caught by one of our group, and by the Police, vandalising our equipment," it was actually a young lad who hooked his mp3 player up to their loud-hailer so that it played rap! Whether it should be classed as "vandalism" or music is entirely subjective, I guess.

Thus, the writer of this pathetic diatribe may "honestly believe the UAF are above the law and they know it," but I wouldn't take his word for it since I doubt his grip on reality.

He rounds of his semi-coherent rant thus;

Is this the price we pay for being a Patriot in Britain today? The true concept of ‘democracy’ has been lost. Anyone who supports an opinion different from the Government/State is demonised. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dx2YLFyp43Q&feature=player_embedded The media have aided the Government in the sanctioning of attacks on Nationalists/Patriots. There is and has always been a media bias against Nationalistic endeavours. http://www.nuj.org.uk/innerPagenuj.html?docid=1253

We are now, no-longer safe in our own land. Am I frightened? Yes, I am terrified for our Country’s future but I am awake and I cannot turn away from what is happening to my beautiful Land.

This ‘politically–correct’ Regime, is empowering alien cultures, at the expense of our’s. Are we not the Host-Nation ?

My Grandfather went to War for this Land and my Great Grandfather was in the trenches. I cannot stand by and let Traitors and fiends deliver this Land into the hands of foreigners. I will not apologise to Blacks for my Great British History. If I am to be condemned for loving my own culture, so be it! And if you want to call me names for trying to stop MY People becoming second class citizens in our own country, feel free. I don’t care.

In MY heart I am a Patriot-British till the end. The blood of the ethnic English runs through my veins. Onwards and upwards!

Well, he may be right about a couple of things. But the manifestation of the state demonising dissidents, i.e. left-wing activists being filmed, photographed, and documented as "domestic extremists," is utterly at odds with his view of us being "above the law."

If the BNP wants to think of us as "government-sponsored" and "traitors," that's their call. But the evidence doesn't bear it out.

We're not asking them to "apologise to Blacks for my Great British History," or "condemn[ing them] for loving [their] own culture." We're challenging their advancement of a fascist ideology rooted in bigotry and political violence.

From anarchism in Manchester to fighting fascism in Liverpool, reflections on an interesting day

As I mentioned in a previous post, today I went to the Anarchist Bookfair in Manchester, as well as a PCS anti-cuts demonstration nearby. Meanwhile, the BNP returned to Liverpool City Centre. Luckilly, I caught the end of that particular event - and it was little short of epic.

The Bookfair was a fairly laid-back event. Lots of groups and lots of comrades were present, the aim being to promote solidarity and the ideas of anarchism.

As well as stalls containing books, pamphlets, and merchandise from various organisations - Solidarity Federation, Anarchist Federation, Class War, The Commune, The IWW, Manchester Anti-Fascist Alliance, etc - there were a variety of interesting talks on. It also offered, as I mentioned in the week, a reprieve from activism whilst still being around people of like mind.

The only downer was that whilst there I learned of the BNP being in Liverpool. I rang around a few others to spread the word, but being so far away was frustrating to say the least.

The PCS demonstration was also something of a muted affair. There were a number of speakers including a rather interesting socialist rapper and (shamefully) a Labour councillor. But it was more about encouraging people to get involved and doing something than making a scene, which was good.

Taking a leaf from that book, I took the opportunity to hand out free copies of Catalyst, and make the argument to my fellow PCS members for a more radical, i.e. anarcho-syndicalist approach.

Though, in hindsight, referring to Mark Serwotka as a "bloated bureaucratic gasbag" may have been far too inflammatory a closing remark. I stand by the point within it, but occasionally passion (not to mention a couple of pints) numbs my sense of tact and diplomacy. Oh well.

I got off the train to Liverpool at quarter to six, and headed into town to see if the fascists were still around. What I saw was truly astounding to behold.

Two weeks ago, when the BNP tried to hold a stall in the City Centre, they were met with spontaneous resistance from over 200 people, more considering that people came and went during the day. As a result, last week they retreated to their comfort zone in Huyton, but today they tried once again to claim the streets of Liverpool for the far-right. What a mistake that was.

As two weeks before, phone calls and text messages saw local antifascists mobilise in opposition. And once again, their ranks were swelled by great swathes of the public, particularly young people.

However, today far eclipsed the events of a fortnight ago, and the police were unable to prevent the fascists from being entirely surrounded and blocked from public view.

Earlier on in the day, activists from Liverpool Antifascists gave out several thousand leaflets to largely receptive passers-by. Some people did angrily reject the leaflets - only to come back and apologise when they realised they weren't BNP!

They also received genuine thanks from people, especially those from ethnic minorities, for the work we were doing. 

There was some trouble later in the day when fireworks were thrown. One exploded on the BNP's stall table, collapsing it. Another exploded within the ranks of antifascists. Fortunately, nobody was seriously injured. BNP "super-activist" Peter Tierney hurt his foot, though given that he attacked an antifascist from behind with a camera tripod, we find sympathy difficult.

The thrower of the fireworks, a silly and incendiary act which I could have gotten any number of innocent people hurt, was not identified.

 

The BNP, however, were on top form.

Their activists got in the faces of teenagers and youngsters, with Andrew Tierney at one point breaking ranks to chase a young girl, only to be physically restrained. One fascist shoved a man holding his young daughter in has arms. And Jamie Luby was seen telling the same young girl to "find him in O'Neill's" if she wanted to fight him.

Most telling of all, however, was Andrew Tierney's threat that - because an unknown individual had thrown fireworks (one at antifascists, we hasten to add) everyone who opposed the BNP was now "fair game."

Organiser Mike Whitby also promised that when they took pictures of those opposing the BNP, they would end up "on a site far worse than Redwatch."

This shows that the BNP have far from outgrown their violent roots, and that they are still more than willing to intimidate and attack opponents. As Peter Tierney, of course, showed us when he picked up that camera tripod.

But the threats didn't work on local people. Even children, some no older than eleven, stood up to the thugs. At one point, they jumped on a raised podium to block Andrew Tierney's view of the girl he had been shouting at when he tried to take a picture of her.

Eventually, the BNP gave in, packed up and loaded their propaganda into two cars, to much jeering. But this time, people did not simply watch them go. Motivated by the success of the day, and antagonism from the fascists, people surrounded the police and the cars and literally ran them out of town.

This really was one of the best things I have ever seen, and it made my day. It also demonstrates without a shadow of a doubt that militant direct action is the greatest weapon against fascism.

Why having a pint with the EDL might not be a completely crazy idea

Yesterday, I reposted a report by Liverpool Antifascists on the English Defence League's brief and fruitless appearance in Liverpool. No longer feeling too tired to do so, I would like to articulate the thoughts I had about this particular event.

Once we knew that the EDL were contained in the Baltic Fleet, I headed to Slater's Bar with several comrades who - like me - had been marching all day. We needed to put our feet up and wet our lips. This also provided the opportunity for some discussion on the particular EDL brand of fascism. What follows is largely informed by that discussion.

The problem with the EDL, as opposed to more traditional fascists like the BNP or National Front, is that it is tricky to define. As I wrote over at Property is Theft, it is a fascist organisation,in the broader history of such movements, and its activities are certainly underpinned by a traditional fascist agenda.

But it is also not a homogenous organisation. Whilst the EDL may be fascist, with a leadership drawn from the ranks of the far-right, the majority of its ordinary members and supporters are not neo-Nazis.

The organisation is far from short of seig-heiling morons. But it also contains loyalists, civic nationalists, football hooligans just looking for a barney, and - most importantly - working class people looking for an outlet for their anger and a target for their grievances.

The problem is, in general, that much of the left has utterly detached itself from class struggle and made itself irrelevant, even oppositional, to such grievances. Thus the EDL, like the BNP et al, can twist them and distract from the real issue by offering a scapegoat.

This is why, while thousands marched in opposition to a cuts agenda threatening to devestate working class communities, they came out to protest a perceived "refusal to tackle the threat of Islamic Extremism."

It is also why the EDL's Merseyside Division have - without any acknowledgment that they are creating a lie - posted to their wall a picture of local trade union leader Alec McFadden. The signs he is holding, advertising the march against the cuts doctored to replace "cuts" with "troops." There can be no clearer proof that they exist to distract from genuine issues based in class by waving patriotic totems.

The problem is that responding to such propaganda, reinforced by a deep anger looking for a release, is hard to counter. You can reach the general public with leafletting, and as in Bradford provide a physical barrier to attempts at violence. But how do you reach those drawn into this web of bullshit?

To my mind, the fact that the EDL begin and end their events by congregating in pubs is something we have to sieze upon. Not by complaining to the landlord, but by going in for a pint.

The best way to make people think about the beliefs they hold is, quite simply, to challenge them. This is what I tried to do on Saturday by getting in the face of BNP members and arguing the toss. When it's ideas - rather than force - you want to challenge, you can't beat the word of mouth.

As one comrade suggested, there would be the potential for an antifascist "Philosophy in Pubs" to become a bar-room brawl. But this is something that could be taken into account based on the numbers present, on both sides, and how you approach the EDL. Obviously, if you don't want your head kicked in you don't stroll over and make a crack about their mums.

What I'm suggesting isn't a "solution" to the EDL. We will not convince the hardcore goons to turn over a new leaf. There will still be a need for physical opposition when they hold a demo.

But if we want to offer a way out for those who aren't hardcore fascists, or who simply haven't been offered any other viable alternative to the status quo, then there are far worse approaches to take than having a pint with them.

The Radical Workers’ Bloc makes its mark whilst an EDL flash demo fail to ignite Liverpool

As I said on Twitter today, "After a weekend of fighting fascists, promoting anarchism, and stomping across the city, I'm fucking knackered."

Thus, in the spirit of lazy blogging, I'll let the Liverpool Solidarity Federation tell the story of today's march;

Today, over 4,000 people braved wind and rain to march and protest against the Lib Dems and the cuts agenda. It was a demonstration of the level of anger people feel - but also the willingness of their "leaders" to merely act as a safety valve, defusing that anger before it reaches the ruling class.

People assembled by the Anglican cathedral to march down to the docks where the protest was held. There were a number of trade union banners, as well as the banners of the Solidarity Federation and Anarchist Federation, whose membership made up the Radical Workers' Bloc. Despite the rain, the huge turnout and musical accompaniments made it a lively atmosphere.

But whilst the spirit of the rank-and-file made the march vibrant, this was in spite the planning done by trade union leaders, not because of it.

The TUC simply accepted the police moving them away from the Echo Arena, though they later moaned about it to the Liverpool Echo. With the march. Rather than go through the main part of City Centre to the docks, the route may as well have been calculated to garner the smallest possible audience.

But we've seen this show before. Union leaders putting on the appearance of being oppositional to authority whilst following orders and acting as a conduit to get the working class to do the same.

It became farcical when the layout of the roads meant the march had to go past the point of protest and turn back upon itself to be able to feed into the rally. There was some laughter and cheering as the Radical Workers' Bloc simply bypassed this by crossing the road and ending up at the front of the demonstration, beyond even the police.

However, there were cries of "no anarchists" from the Liverpool Socialist Singers and the police rushed forward to overtake us. This protest against the government was going to do exactly as it was told by the state, every step of the way.

At the rally, where 4,000 trade unionists were all-but funneled into a protest pen, various cossetted union big-wigs took to the stage to offer a bark which is never matched with bite.

Merseyside's anarchists took this opportunity to hand out a pamphlet titled No War but Class War and make the argument for a self-organised workers' movement that could not be demobilised from above. The response was largely receptive, and we were able to distribute several hundred leaflets.

We then took the lead from many others who left the bureaucrats to their speeches and went to warm up in the pub. One thing that we have seen, time and again, is that ordinary trade unionists share our assesment of their leaders. But anarchists often consigned themselves to shouting from the sidelines and alienating those who would perhaps be most sympathetic. We wanted to break that mold.

All-in-all, bar a brief and largely pointless appearence from the English Defence League later on, the day was a good one. But it will only be a success if people are motivated to organise themselves against capitalism, and rid themselves of the chains of union bureaucracy.

You can download a PDF of the leaflet we distributed today here.

And, for more on the appearence of the EDL, Liverpool Antifascists;

Word reaches Liverpool Antifascists that the English Defence League made an appearance in Liverpool today.

Witnesses on the ground described the event as not up to much. Nonetheless, it presents a worrying precedent and a reminder to antifascists to remain vigilant.

In the early afternoon, thousands of trade unionists, socialists, and working class activists marched from the Anglican Cathedral to protest at the Liberal Democrat conference, against that party’s support for attacks on the working class. Liverpool Antifascists – as an autonomous group set up and run by ordinary people rather than politicians or bureaucrats – wholeheartedly supports this. Indeed, many of our members were present at the event under different banners.

What we do not support is the message the EDL offered in the same area, just hours later.

We are told that 20-30 EDL activists, including many from the EDL Merseyside Division, unfurled banners for what amounted to a photo op before retreating to the Baltic Fleet for a meeting. According to some who were present, one of the topics for discussion was the formation of a political party to contest elections. Though they didn’t seem optimistic about the political calibre of those present.

Soon enough, antifascists got wind of what was going on, and a few scouted the area to see that the police had them contained and under control. With that in mind, and better things to do, they left them to it.

It is clear that the EDL were just testing the waters today. They want to see if they can “conquer” Liverpool, but we’d advise against it. When they do it for real, so will we.

Whether that’s from the state, from Islamic extremism, or from fascists looking for a fight, Liverpool is a city that can defend itself.

All in all, an interesting day. Indeed, an interesting weekend. But, frankly, my legs are very glad it's over.

Spontaneous antifascist protest sends BNP packing in Liverpool

Today, members of the British National Party - including Nick Griffin - held a stall in Liverpool City Centre. They were, perhaps, hoping to show that they stood tall after their trouncing at the General and local elections. Instead, what it showed was the strength of antifascist sentiment in Liverpool.

Within minutes of the BNP setting up shop in town, word got out. The BNP were on Church Street and texts and phone calls went out across the city warning people and asking for them to turn out in opposition. I was walking the dog at the time, and so and hour elapsed between the time I was first told and the time I reached the crowds. And yes, I do mean crowds.

Nick Griffin had been there, but he fled with his minders the second opposition showed up. As Peter Tatchell opined when he confronted him, the BNP chairman is a gutless coward.

But the local branch of the BNP stayed behind in Griffin's stead, offering the members of the public a "petition" (PDF) to "Bring Our Boys Home" from Afghanistan. But as Griffin admits on the BNP website, this is not a petition that will be presented to anybody, or even a serious effort to raise the issue of the war in Afghanistan.

Although they will be "under the banner of “Support Our Troops — Bring Our Boys Home”" their true purpose is "the biggest co-ordinated nationalist recruitment campaign ever run outside of an election period." Hence who signatories "authorise the British National Party to contact" them or send "future promotional, electoral and fund-raising material."

As I have argued before, the BNP are not an anti-war party. In fact, their 2010 election manifesto explicitly stated that they opposed the Iraq war only on the grounds that "there were no strategic or commercial interests to defend" and "the same applies to the current war in Afghanistan."

Hence, if a BNP felt there were British strategic or commercial interests at stake (as Blair did in those two wars), then they would have no moral qualms about sending "Our Boys" to die. For the BNP, imperialism's only bad when you're not in the seat of command.Which is why the banner of the Stop the War Coalition could be found in the group opposing the BNP.

Unfortunately, their ruse was fooling a lot of people, the anti-war message drawing people away from the fact that this was a fascist recruitment drive, as they planned. Hence why opposition was vital.

Very quickly, a sizeable crowd had gathered, and the BNP found themselves closed off from public view by a semi-circle of very loud antifascists, some bearing banners and signs from various groups. This, in turn, drew members of the public - most notably young teenagers - into the impromptu demo.

While the police held the main demo back from the BNP, some antifascists took the opportunity to talk to people. The general public were receptive to the idea that the BNP were an anti-working class party, offering division at a time when we are facing huge attacks from those in power, and that any pretensions to the contrary (including on the war) were political opportunism.

That their (pre-recorded) chants echoed the Tory party line with calls to "Smash the TUC" certainly didn't help the fascists' case.

Arguing the point with the BNP themselves, for those listening in rather than with hope of converting die-hard BNPers, also went in our favour. People can tell the difference between a valid argument and rhetoric, and what Peter Tierney and his friends offered was certainly the latter.

With the rain pouring down, and some people who had arrived earlier on having to leave for other commitments, still the antifascist crowd continued to grow. The BNP struggled to pass out their leaflets or to get many people to sign their petition-cum-covert-recruitment-form. But still they tried to fight a war of attrition, making a show of themselves for a full six-and-a-half hours.

Ultimately, however, over 100 antifascists and local people watched and jeered as the fascists packed their gear into two cars and drove off, protected by a flank of police. No doubt they will try and sell it differently, but for British nationalism this was undoubtedly a failure.

Elsewhere, the BNP's dissident faction claims that "four teams of two" were "out in Liverpool, Sefton and Knowsley, handing out BNP literature to commuters and the General public." However, even on the basis of their own piss-poor website all they can prove is that Steve Greenhalgh appeared outside Orrell Park Station and Bootle Strand to give letters to ... err, nobody!

But they, like the Griffinites, are promising to be out every Saturday for the next few weeks. On which note, the promise from Liverpool Antifascists is that we will be watching when you turn up again.

EDL fail to ignite race war in Bradford, but Hope not Hate and UAF fail to impress

Much to my chagrin, I wasn't able to be in Bradford today. However, thankfully, many others were - and they were able to ensure that the English Defence League didn't get the all out riot that their members were spoiling for.

The event had the potential to be carnage. Not least with Hope not Hate and others not only crying out for the intervention of the state, but actively discouraging others from turning up and doing anything at all.

The argument for this active negligence was predicated on strawmen;

The UAF plan to hold a counter protest against the EDL. However how successful have UAF counter protests been so far? There have been many activists arrested for going too far at their demos and knowing that in 2001 the ANL were blamed as much as the National front for their counter demo whipping up tension in Bradford it will only take one spark to create the same dynamics that could cause a repeat. Luckily the police have positioned them well apart from each other, but since the EDL have been known to tear through barriers and barricades elsewhere is this going to be enough?

The main problem with this line of reasoning is that it equates UAF with the entire antifascist movement. It is not. (I'll come to UAF's "counter protest" momentarily.)

In fact, in Cardiff, Edinburgh, and Birmingham, the EDL were effectively demobilised as a result of being outnumbered by militant antifascist counter mobilisations. This left them unable to do very much at all and sent them packing with their tails between their legs.

It is when the antifascist presence has been small to non-existent, such as in Stoke, that the EDL are able to go on the kind of violent rampage that people feared in Bradford.

As such, Hope not Hate's message to antifascists "stay away" was a potentially dangerous one.

Unite Against Fascism, at least, saw the need for a physical presence opposed to the EDL. But, in a "unity event" which billed as "not a counter protest" but "a peaceful celebration of diversity," they kind of missed the point. You cannot effectively oppose violent fascists whilst avoiding them.

As I argued before the event, the only serious response to a potentially violent fascist street movement such as the EDL is physical opposition by a militant and self-organised working class.

Fortunately, I wasn't the only person making this argument and, on the day, it appears that that's what we got.

Members of Liverpool Antifascists, along with other comrades from the Stop Racism and Fascism Network, travelled up today to support the direct counter-demonstration called by Bradford United Against Racism. By all accounts, their efforts were succesful.

The police had around 500 EDL members kettled in Bradford Urban Gardens, in the city centre. However, about 30 of them climbed over the 8-ft tall temporary barricade in order to throw stones, missiles, and a smoke bomb at the police. Several times, members of the EDL also managed to escape from the main block by forcing themselves through the police barricades.

With UAF's event taking place half a mile away, and the even more absurd "Be Bradford – Peaceful Together" over a mile away, the mainstream antifascist movement had no response.

However, Bradford United Against Racism and the SRF Network gathered in opposition beyond the police lines. When EDL members broke free, they found themselves forced back into the police kettle as a result of being outnumbered by antifascists.

As The Alliance for Workers' Liberty reports;

When a group of one or two hundred broke out from the EDL demonstration to rampage around the city, they got a nasty shock. Most of the counter-demonstration chased them through town before trapping some of them in Forster Square railway station and giving a few a good kicking. 

Attempts to attack a local mosque were also beaten back, and some of the EDL coaches were stoned and had their tyres slashed.

Even as it was, with the dominant forces in the labour and anti-fascist movements working with community and religious leaders to prevent a counter-demo, we gave the racists a seriously hard time. We don’t care about the imams, police and Lib Dem councillors. But trade unionists and socialists who did not even join the counter-demonstration once it began should be deeply ashamed of themselves.

Clearly, a quite different story will be told by other antifascist groups.

UAF has, at the time of writing, not yet published coverage of the day. But Nick Lowles, on the Hope not Hate blog, has written it up as a victory for state bans and impotent police vigils. The vital direct opposition from hundreds of antifascists goes unmentioned.

As the AWL argue, this is why we need "to challenge UAF and Hope Not Hate’s stranglehold over anti-fascist activity, particularly in the labour movement." It is divisive and destructive.

This does not mean that SRF should emerge as the new antifascist monopoly. It certainly deosn't mean the AWL should replace the SWP as the Trots steering the single-issue front group. The strength of the SRF is in its decentralised and openly democratic nature, and it has to stay that way.

But, as long as UAF and HnH dominate the antifascist skyline, the movement will continue to decline. We already knew how ineffective and unconvincing their watered down politics were. But, in shirking all responsibility for the actions of the EDL by refusing to confront them and (in HnH's case) encouraging people to not turn up at all, they have actively betrayed those they claim to stand up for.

The EDL have now been ferried out of Bradford, without major incident or a repeat of the 2001 riots. But, with a larger fascist presence it could have been a very different story. Indeed, if several hundred locals and antifascists hadn't defied UAF and HnH it would have been a different story.

The time is long overdue for the antifascist movement to pull itself together. As we saw in Bradford today, working class militancy is the only way forward.

"Ground Zero Mosque" - the height of absurdity in America's "culture wars"

When the English Defence League descend upon Bradford tomorrow, many are worried that the event will ignite racial tensions in the city. In New York, in the controversy surrounding the so-called "ground zero mosque," they've already exploded.

Student Michael Enright allegedly slashed taxi driver Ahmed Sharif's throat after asking if he was having a good Ramadan. A disturbing incident in itself, it comes amid ever more heated rows.

On Monday, the city saw opposing groups of protesters face each other over the issue. Opponents chanted "No mosque, no way" as supporters responded with "Say no to racist fear". In the anti-mosque gathering, protesters rounded on a man they thought was Muslim because he was wearing a skull cap.

The backdrop to all this are the plans to turn a makeshift place of worship in lower Manhattan into an Islamic cultural centre. Upon completion it will be known as Park51.

The project, upon completion, will contain the following facilities;

• outstanding recreation spaces and fitness facilities (swimming pool, gym, basketball court)
• a 500-seat auditorium
• a restaurant and culinary school
• cultural amenities including exhibitions
• education programs
• a library, reading room and art studios
• childcare servicea mosque, intended to be run separately from Park51 but open to and accessible to all members, visitors and our New York community
• a September 11th memorial and quiet contemplation space, open to all

The mosque, as you can see, is only a part of the "ground zero mosque," and will in fact be run separately from the main project. Moreover, despite the inflammatory title it has earned, it is not at ground zero.

Charlie Brooker makes this point with more than a degree of relish;

To get to the Cordoba Centre from Ground Zero, you'd have to walk in the opposite direction for two blocks, before turning a corner and walking a bit more. The journey should take roughly two minutes, or possibly slightly longer if you're heading an angry mob who can't hear your directions over the sound of their own enraged bellowing.

Perhaps spatial reality functions differently on the other side of the Atlantic, but here in London, something that is "two minutes' walk and round a corner" from something else isn't actually "in" the same place at all. I once had a poo in a pub about two minutes' walk from Buckingham Palace. I was not subsequently arrested and charged with crapping directly onto the Queen's pillow. That's how "distance" works in Britain. It's also how distance works in America, of course, but some people are currently pretending it doesn't, for daft political ends.

And yet, still, "ground zero" gets tagged on as an identifier not only by the protesters and right-wing demagogues, but by the media. Even the BBC, deemed by complete fucking idiots to be biased to the left, talks of the "Ground Zero Islamic centre." Which just reinforces the nonsense.

As a result, the tenth anniversary of 9/11 will be marked by reactionary idiots opposing a "mega mosque" which is more a product of their imaginations than anything else.

It should come as little surprise that the key organiser of this event - Pamela Gellar - is an avowed supporter of the English Defence League. Her organisations, the Freedom Defence Initiative (FDI) and Stop Islamisation of America (SIOA), are the group's closest analogues stateside.

So, what to do about them? The problem is that, even more so than here in Britain, they are able to demonstrate and march without effective opposition.

As mentioned earlier, the recent anti-mosque protest which saw reactionaries turn on a man for his choice of attire was met with an opposition demo. However, this was organised at the last minute and paled in comparison to the enormous stage-show on offer from the other side.

At the same time, the politics of the counter-demonstration were vague at best. Class consciousness is nowhere near as prevalent in America, and as a result it is easier for people to become drawn into reactionary movements. Moreover, that reaction is far more likely to take a constitutionalist form than a white nationalist form.

Whilst fascism turns the working class against one another on the basis of race and nationality, American constitutionalism uses the rhetoric of freedom to turn working people directly against their own interests. The Tea Party movement is a case in point.

Events such as the anti-mosque protests, of course, are where the lines get blurred. However, whilst it would be safe to say that identity politics are being used to distract from more pressing realities, it would equally be safe to say that the vast majority of those amongst the crowds aren't racists, fascists, or white nationalists. Their flag-waving patriotism and belief in freedom as defined by the right is probably genuine.

As such, traditional antifascist tactics will need tweaking to meet the challenge. The stabbing of Ahmed Sharif and the recent protest chaos, as well as a wave of hate incidents around the country, mean that physical opposition remains important.

But alongside this a serious political challenge needs to be made to the reactionaries. Not by liberals defending Barack Obama, or by "anti-racists" whose views are little more than black-and-white slogan-repetition. It has to come from the perspective of ordinary people with a clear, intuitive understanding of the class tensions simmering below the surface of American life.

Otherwise, all we will be able to do is watch as the culture wars consume the politics of class war.

Hope not Hate declares victory as history threatens to repeat itself in Bradford

Earlier this month, I laid out the argument for militant working class resistance against the English Defence League in Bradford. Specifically, I explained why both a state ban and a "unity event" which refused to directly confront the fascists were the wrong approaches to take.

Nonetheless, Hope not Hate reports that its campaign for a ban on the EDL has been succesful;

The Home Secretary has today banned the EDL march in Bradford on 28 August. While there is still the probability of a static protest the fact that the EDL will not be allowed to march through predominantly Asian areas of the city, as they had intended, must be welcomed.

The ban comes after the HOPE not hate campaign, through it's Bradford Together initiative, collected 10,700 signatures from within the city in three weeks. This equates to almost 6% of all adults. The campaign has brought together people of all ages, races and religions in a determined bid to stop racist hooligans invading the city and provoking trouble.

In the event of the EDL holding a static protest, Bradford Together will organise a peace vigil in Bradford city centre on the Friday (27 August). This will give local people an opportunity to show their opposition to the EDL and celebrate modern Bradford without fear of a confrontation. This event is being supported by the Bradford Council of Mosques, other faith and community groups and Yorkshire & Humber TUC.

Thus the debate between Hope not Hate and Unite Against Fascism is resolved to the advantage of both. HnH's opposition to any counter demonstration at all has disappeared, they get their state ban, albeit only on the march, and UAF get their non-confrontational event.

Meanwhile, the EDL are insisting on Facebook that "bradford is still going ahead a 100 percent. we are doing a static demo which the police have agreed will be ok" [sic]. Thus, the city will still be invaded by several hundred fascists who, if past experience is anything to go by, will be boozed up and screaming racial epithets across a city torn apart by race riots nine years ago.

On which point, incidentally, it is worth noting that the National Front were banned from marching in Bradford back then. They still turned up in the city, as the EDL plan to do, and ignited tensions that had been building for weeks.

Thus, as the Stop Racism and Fascism network have reiterated, the only real defence lies in direct confrontation;

Leaving the EDL to march through Bradford without mass opposition does not guarantee the safety of the local Asian population. On other EDL demonstrations the police have at times been unable or unwilling to control these racist thugs. In Luton the EDL managed to smash up Asian owned shops and in Dudley they attacked a Hindu temple. In both of these cases the anti-racist counter demonstration was small or non-existent. Only a large, organised counter-demonstration that outnumbers the EDL several times over will be able to guarantee this kind of attack cannot happen.

The point of antifascism is not to give the state a mandate for repression. It is not to hold a big, colourful party at the same time as fascists are rampaging elsewhere and call it a "victory." It is to confront the far-right, both physically and ideologically, and defend our communities - our class - from them.

If we ignore that and grow complacent, especially now that a ban on marching has been issued, then we might as well watch history repeat itself before our eyes.

More on autonomous nationalism and class politics

Two months ago, I wrote a post titled "Autonomous nationalism and why antifascism needs a working class perspective," about Autonomous Nationalists UK (AnUk). Now, the Liverpool Front of AnUk has responded with "Autonomous nationalism and why the working class needs an ethnic perspective."

The basic overview is that I take "the usual condescending tone" and "parade the usual cliches" in an argument that is "empty," based on "flawed" reasoning.

The problem is that, in writing this, they are not actually responding to my argument. They have taken a couple of sentences (literally, two) from my post that fit into a more generalised rant about anti-fascists / Marxists which largely ignores the main thrust of what I was saying.

For example;

Anti-fascism has become the very thing it is supposed to protect people against. Anti-fascist groups generally use bullying tactics to silence those who offer an alternative point of view. Slander, violence and censorship are the main tools of the antifascist. Their tactics of violent confrontation only agrievate [sic] the situation, and their supercilious leaders and speakers alienate the very people who they claim to stand for.

Few on the "left-wing" have the same understanding of the working class that we - the people from the poorest areas, who work the lowest paid jobs and suffer form crime and poverty - have. In fact, most "left-wing" activists are well-paid and come form decent areas. Many of them are indeed very intelligent people, but their socio-economic conditioning has removed them from the realities of life that the working class face each day. This is why the Left-Wing and anti-fascist movements fail to bring about "the great revolution": the bourgoise [sic] anti-fascists are telling the proleteriat [sic] that THEY know what is best.

Which is precisely what I meant when I said that "members of the working class who are drawn to the far-right perceive the mainstream anti-fascist movement as dominated by the “right-on” middle classes and students." Having this perception, they have simply repeated the accusation.

Considering that, with my "flawed" reasoning, I could  still distinguish that "they are not detached from the working class, like the BNP's parachuted-in "super activists," but part of it," this is just intellectual laziness.

For them, the left are all aware of class issues only because "we heard somebody speak about them at an Anarchist meeting, or because we read about them in some second rate communist writers collection of glorious sentimentality and psychobabble nonsense!"

The rest of the article is a response to a single sentence. Specifically, my point that working class nationalists "perceive [antifascism] not as a movement against fascism but as an excuse to yell “racist” at the white working class for disagreeing with the status quo."

This offers them a springboard to expand upon their perceptions;

And the status quo is distinctly Marxist! It is the state that is promoting multiculturalism and it is the "Left-wing" who are defending it! These self-proclaimed revolutionaries are pushing the same totalitarian ideology as the government! The state and its supposed opposition are both pursuing the same social agenda, and this agenda is detrimental to the well-being of the indigenous population of these islands.

In the first instance, I would point out that the status quo is not "Marxist." It is corporate capitalist. The working class having to compete for scarce resources whilst the ruling class grow rich with the state as a safety net should the markets fail was not a tenet of Karl Marx's thought.

Throughout what follows, the Liverpool Front conflate anarchism and Marxism with liberalism, which is merely a more dovish trend within the parameters of the dominant socio-economic model.

For example, it might be true that liberals "dismiss any authentic grievances about such things as immigration as "base, vile and racist" without even addressing the relevant issues." But this can hardly be said of the entire left. The IWCA, to take one example, has addressed this in depth.

Liverpool Antifascists have also produced leaflets on immigration and housing (PDF), and jobs and migrant workers (PDF), untangling the issue and its capitalist roots from the propaganda.

Indeed, the Liverpool Front touch on the real problem;

Are English workers to support French workers when both are competing for the same company to build its new factory in their country? Surely the jobs will go to one or the other, and the workers of one of the countries are going to be without the jobs that the factory would have provided - leaving them poor!

Their conclusion is that "the practicalities of this vague and sentimental "international class consciousness" are quite unrealistic." For them, "the idea that people of the same class have more in common than those of the same ethnicity is flimsy at best."

However, in their analogy above, they touch on precisely why international class solidarity is vital.

Capitalism, as an economic system, is global. Capital flow is all-but unhindered by national borders, after over 150 years of imperialism "opening up markets" across the world.

Thus, industry and capital has a far greater pool of labour (not to mention resources) that it can exploit for profits. And, since lower initial costs add to the net gain, it wants that labour to be as cheap as possible. Workers find themselves pitted against one another in a race to the bottom.

Moving a factory from one country to another, or hiring cheap migrant labour over natives are only two examples. The competition does not need to stretch over any racial or national divide. Agency workers are used this way against permanent employees, and "casual" workers against full-timers, just as often. In the past, you also had slaves pitted against freemen and even women against men!

But nationalism sees the working class play into this competition. This is why the media plays up the same hysteria about migrants as the far-right, reinforcing the wedge which allows the weaker group of workers to be exploited and the stronger group undercut.

Liverpool Front ask "how is it fair for us, when we ourselves are in a hole, to start giving away our valuable resources to immigrants?" It is a legitimate question, and indeed it is not a fair situation.

But mass migration is driven by capitalism. The wage differential between countries, forcible "free market reforms" which grin people into poverty, and wars for the control of "strategic markets and resources." All of these things drive the movement of people across the globe.

At the same time, that "food, housing, education, healthcare and jobs are needed for OUR people" wouldn't change if there were no immigrants in the country at all.

As the Brighton Solidarity Federation point out, "these are people with the same very real problems that most of us face – lack of decent housing, no or terrible jobs, lack of community facilities and lack of security in the future." We shouldn't be "squabbling over who gets the biggest slice of the pie," when "the real issue is that ordinary people's slice of the pie continues to shrink as the rich-poor divide grows."

Most of the lads involved in the Liverpool Front will be aware of this on some level. Echoing my own contrast between them and the BNP, they state that they "are aware of class issues because we have experienced them firsthand."

But, as I stated last time, they "have had a substantive class consciousness distorted by the question of race." They insist on "the working class love of ethnicity," and that the bonds of "culture, history and heritage" are determined by genes. They are not going to be swayed from this by those "defending" multiculturalism and "pushing the same totalitarian ideology as the government."

But, as already stated, this is far from representative of "the left," and it is certainly a strawman when it comes to anarchist and socialist movements.

Liberals and the mainstream don't want to hear our perspectives on the question of race, or an opposition to multiculturalism not grounded in nationalist or racial politics. As a result, those such as the Liverpool Front don't hear them either. But that doesn't mean they don't exist.

As I said in relation to the English Defence League;

State and media propaganda, as well as an entirely out-of-touch left, allows [fascists] to drum up support by turning real grievances driven by capitalism into latent racism.

None of which is acknowledged by UAF, sticking rigidly to the "one society, many cultures" line in order to keep the state and ruling class supporters of their "popular front" on board.

This is entirely the wrong approach to take. Not only because it means antifascism's only success will be as a recruiting front for tiny sects on the authoritarian left, but because it adds to the Blairite spin that "the class war is over." Which, of course, leaves fascism as the only alternative to the status quo.

Which brings me back to the point that "if we are unable to argue against that using only the power of our own reason, then we cannot possibly hope to build a more viable alternative to the woes of the present."

On this, my Liverpool Front counterpart professes agreement. Perhaps, then, this signals an end to threatening to blow up bookshops, disrupting antifascist benefit gigs, and offering to settle these ideological differences with a "straightener"?

I hope so. With the most savage attacks on the working class since the 1930s in the pipeline, we could certainly do without the distraction.

Militant, working class self-organisation: a response to Hope not Hate and Unite Against Fascism

It is now three weeks until the English Defence League (EDL) descend upon Bradford, and the debate continues about how antifascists should oppose them.

Hope not Hate has led the call for a ban on the EDL marching at all, backed by local political parties, trade unions, Bradford University, faith leaders, the Chamber of Commerce. Unite Against Fascism (UAF) has organised a "unity event," which has received the backing of at least three trade unions.

The Stop Racism and Fascism (SRF) Network has also called for a demonstration, though they emphasise "working class unity, working class politics and secularism" over cross-class "unity in the community."

My own opinion on this has long been more in line with the SRF position. In relation to Bradford, last week I reiterated that antifascism needs to be "a non-hierarchical grassroots movement, based upon radical, working-class opposition to the state and capitalism" ready to engage in militant, physical resistance to fascism.

Since I wrote that, both UAF and Hope not Hate have set out the arguments in favour of their respective positions. Here, I would like to clarify why - in different ways - both positions are mistaken.

Nick Lowles tells us that "despite pretending to be opposed only to Islamic extremism, the EDL is going to Bradford to provoke the city’s large Muslim population." It is this which informs his thinking when explaining why "we are doing everything now to prevent the EDL protest from taking place;"

Almost a third of the people of Bradford are Muslim, the second highest proportion anywhere in England outside London. More signifi-cantly, the city experienced race riots in 2001 for which 200 people went to prison. The city’s reputation was destroyed, divisions between communities widened and deepened and the only beneficiary was the BNP, which began to make significant breakthroughs in council elections.

The scars of the 2001 riot run deep and the city cannot afford another.

This ignores the fact that the 2001 riots followed on from previous riots in Burnley and Oldham. All three followed from increased activity by the British National Party and the National Front, and in 2003 Judge Michael Mansfield emphasised that the Asian community at the time lived under a "matrix of fear."

As the Alliance for Workers' Liberty point out;

The riots erupted after weeks of tension fomented by the activities and threats of the National Front and the BNP, both assiduous in stoking the racial tensions that have developed in the economically deprived and politically neglected Northern cities of Bradford, Oldham and Burnley.

An NF march was threatened and so were counter demonstrations. Local Asian communities, who for years had expressed resentment at targeted policing and racism on the part of police officers were angry and frightened. When, that afternoon, an Asian youth was attacked by fascists leaving a pub and police apparently took no action, fear and anger gave way to violent rage and a bloody street battle that lasted through the night.

Indeed, the fact that then-Home Secretary David Blunkett banned all marches through Bradford only three days prior to this did not prevent the riot from happening.

This is aside from the fact that, given the public mandate to ban protests, the police will use it against working class people and the left far more than against reactionaries.

I have previously argued in-depth against collaboration with the state in any form, citing an appendix to Bash the Fash: Anti-fascists recollections, 1984-1993;

There are three main reasons why co-operating with the police against the fascists is a bad idea (i) the police demand or covertly obtain information about our side who they regard as a worse enemy anyway (ii) the police agenda is against ‘extremists’ left and right, which may account for Searchlight’s disgraceful smear campaign against some fine anti-fascists in the DAM and Class War (iii) as some hairy bloke once said “the emancipation of the working class is the task of the working class alone” ie we can fight our own battles thank you very much.

In the Guardian, Sunny Hundal gives some concrete examples of the police's conduct in this regard;

In 1995, following protests by a large group of Sikhs in Birmingham, the controversial play Behzti was shut down. The protestors weren't directly culpable – they had a right to protest after all – for that act of censorship; it was the police that informed Birmingham Rep that they could no longer guarantee the safety of their staff. A lot of pressure from local councillors was also alleged. Five years later, when the author of that play tried to put on her next production, the police initially demanded £10,000 a day to protect the theatre – without a single threat being issued. Eventually they were negotiated down to nothing and the excellent production went ahead.

In recent years the police have repeatedly unlawfully stopped protests or brutally intimidated environmentalists.

The problem isn't just the police, it's our political culture. The Conservatives and New Labour have never been particularly enamoured of protecting civil liberties (though the influence of the Lib Dems on the coalition may change this) and have fallen over themselves in the past to give the police carte blanche. The media has the same hypocritical attitude: the rightwing press will rail against protests or complain about the cost of policing on certain occasions, but take up the cause of free speech and the right to insult people at other times.

Like Hope not Hate, UAF have no problem with the fact that "section 12 and section 13 of the Public Order Act, allow the police to ban both marches and static demonstrations."

They agree that "the response to the EDL planned mobilisation in Bradford has to be to campaign for a ban," despite all the above. However, they cite the practical point that "to date, apart from one in Luton, the authorities have refused to ban EDL demonstrations."

As such, "it is also vital to develop a movement that comes to the defence of communities under attack, demonstrating to the fascists that these communities are not isolated and will not be left to stand alone."

The problem is that what UAF are organising is no such thing. They are keen to stress that "the event being organised is not a “counter demonstration”." It is a "peaceful, multicultural celebration of unity" which "is co-operating fully [with the police] to ensure that there is no confrontation with the EDL."

In which case, one might ask, how are they going to "defend" anybody from them?

This is why, in Hope not Hate's words, "no EDL protest has actually been stopped by a counter-demonstration" thus far. This is not the genuine radicalism that annihilated the National Front in the 1980s, it is a heavily watered-down version for middle class, liberal consumption.

Hence the analysis of the factors that gave rise to the EDL. It is simply "in the context of a rise of Islamophobia across society" that the group exists, "to whip up hatred, prejudice and fear," with "anti-Muslim prejudice as a focal point for racism." They are the street branch of the BNP and an attack on lovey-dovey multiculturalism, nothing more.

This ignores the fact that the "rise of Islamophobia" comes in the context of concerted attacks on the working class in the name of capitalism. We are being made to pay for the greatest economic crisis since the 1930s, with jobs, welfare, local infrastructure, and public services all in the firing line.

Meanwhile, the state and the media have offered external threats - immigrants and Muslims - as convenient scapegoats, glossing over reality.

Sections of the left have further muddied the waters by declaring "solidarity" with Muslim "communities," without any regard to the complex internal politicsthey were wading into. A clear example of this is the recent debacle at Tower Hamlets, where UAF offered support to the reactionary Islamic Forum of Europe, whilst those who aligned themselves "against fascism in all its colours" were branded as "racists."

The English Defence League is just one group which feeds off the discontent and confusion that this creates. State and media propaganda, as well as an entirely out-of-touch left, allows them to drum up support by turning real grievances driven by capitalism into latent racism.

None of which is acknowledged by UAF, sticking rigidly to the "one society, many cultures" line in order to keep the state and ruling class supporters of their "popular front" on board.

This is entirely the wrong approach to take. Not only because it means antifascism's only success will be as a recruiting front for tiny sects on the authoritarian left, but because it adds to the Blairite spin that "the class war is over." Which, of course, leaves fascism as the only alternative to the status quo.

If that's not what we want, then clearly neither UAF nor Hope not Hate offer the answer.

Although antifascism is an end in itself, it is also a part of the wider class struggle. If we want it to have any effect, we cannot gloss that over for the support of those who - when the fascists aren't around - will be attacking our livelihoods and bussing scabs across our picket lines.