Slimelight Campaigns: Some Clarifications and Questions

Note: This post was taken down by Blogger after they received a 'DCMA Takedown Notification' on the grounds that the post infringed copyright. According to the notification I received I should have been able to find out the details of the complaint in order to rectify the mistake by searching the site ChillingEffects.Org. In fact I could not find any reference there to the complaint, so I am reposting this, adding a credit to the photograph of Tony Wakeford on Brick Lane, as this could conceivably be the subject of copyright claim. Another image has been removed as I am not sure of its legal provenance. The authors of the complaint did not seek to contact me directly before registering their complaint. Therefore I currently have no way of knowing what the precise nature of their complaint was, and no way of addressing any concerns they might have had regarding copyright or anything else.

A recent article on this blog - Weather Warning: Shower of Shit Expected Over Islington, by James Cavanagh - briefly described the backgrounds of some of those playing at the Slimelight gig by Sol Invictus, 6 Comm and others, scheduled for Sat 25th June, arguing that "anti-fascists everywhere should be making their objections loudly", and (implicitly) calling for the gig to be called off. That post has received more comments than any other since the blog was launched, reflecting the anger and confusion on both sides about this issue.

Some time later the (newly formed) anarchist group Islington Alarm posted an article, Stop the Fascists in Islington, which also called for people to contact the venue to demand that the gig be cancelled - as did, for example, the journal Principia Dialectica. Then, Love Music Hate Racism (LMHR - probably the biggest UK group campaigning against fascism and racism in music, and associated with Unite Against Fascism, who have been heavily involved in campaigning against the BNP, EDL, etc.) called for the management at Slimelight to cancel the gig because of the racist & fascist connections and connotations of some of those involved. As the management have declined to do this, LMHR have called a protest at Slimelight on the evening of the gig. The intention of the protest, as far as I understand it, is to take the argument about far-right infiltration of their 'scene' to those attending the gig as well as those who use Slimelight generally (the venue has separate dance floors and gig areas, so the majority of those turning up on the night will not be going to the gig itself). I guess the idea is that they want to talk individuals into boycotting the gig, and probably also the club generally, on the grounds that this will put community pressure on Slimelight not to host such events in future. I am told that the LMHR campaign has the support of various local trade unions, anti-racist and anti-fascist campaigners, possibly the Trades Council, local political campaigners, etc. In other words, I believe that it has real roots in the local community.

At the same time, the Slimelight management have created a page on Facebook, None So Deaf as Those Who Will Not Hear, stating their case and encouraging fans of the club to air their views. Most of the comments there are solidly in favour of the gig going ahead. However, at least one supporter of Slimelight - 'Lilith Mort' - also voiced opposition to the gig (indeed, she called for people to contact the police with their concerns, leading a commentator on this blog to accuse us of doing the same. We didn't. Lilith has no connection with this blog, and has never posted or commented here, as far as I can see) on the grounds that it will give the club a bad reputation. She subsequently received a series of responses - primarily, but not exclusively, from Patrick Leagas - which she perceived to be threatening enough for her to say that she was taking legal action in response. Whether she will actually do so is anybody's guess, but she claims to be a barrister, so you never know. Leagas is also threatening people with legal action, though he doesn't specify precisely who. He says that "We as a group  are going to seek legal advise (sic) and will go to the highest places in law if we have to", adding that they will also be approaching "the authorities and the police". Lilith Mort's comments seem now to have disappeared from the site. The administrators say that they have not deleted them. Possibly Lilith deleted them herself after the way she was abused and intimidated.

Yesterday Islington Alarm posted a follow-up article, Love Slimelight, Hate Racism, affirming their opposition to the gig, but drawing back from any mass protest, arguing that "We do not seek to create a mass public campaign that is why we stated that individuals should voice their concerns... No anti-fascist lightly takes the decision to propose cancellation of a gig, or prevent artistic expression. However we feel that unfortunately seeing as the far-right has used art, in particular music over the past few years to engage younger audiences, it is necessary to oppose fascism in music, the best means being cancellation. We are not fascists or totalitarian, however we feel a need to oppose fascism wherever it may be and in whatever context... If Slimelight were to cancel the gig it should be and would be entirely their decision."

Islington Alarm wish to distance themselves from the LMHR campaign, but their arguments seem wrong-headed to me. Most anarchists I know would laugh at the idea that a mass campaign constitutes some sort of 'totalitarianism', and they would find it even stranger than an anarchist site should argue that, in dealing with these matters, the final decision should be entirely that of management (in this case, the management of Slimelight). I actually find it quite bizarre.

As is inevitable, different groups and individuals have different arguments about why the gig should not be held. Just as predictably, those defending the bands simply lump all of their opponents together into an amorphous mass despite the considerable disagreements that exist between the various groups and individuals who are concerned about the concert. Not only that, but the arguments in favour of stopping the concert are misrepresented entirely. And since, in the online commentary and in the press, this blog, LMHR, Islington Alarm, Lilith Mort and various other individuals and organisations are considered somehow to be working in concert, when in reality they all have their own beliefs and agendas and are largely working entirely separately, I thought it would be useful, as the administrator of this site, to lay out my own take on some of the issues.

It's Not Simply About Fascist Iconography

First, I'd like to address the argument that comes up most often from those who oppose any action at all; the idea that the entire campaign is inspired by the belief that anyone who wears or uses fascist - or even just militaristic - clothing and iconography, must be a fascist. This, the argument runs, would mean banning the Sex Pistols, the Banshees, the Skids (remember them? Probably not) and - perhaps more pertinently - Throbbing Gristle, and many other similar 'transgressive' bands who have used such imagery.

Now, the use of such imagery is fraught with dangers, and most people who use it do not deal with or take into account these problems, and probably shouldn't be using the imagery the way they do. But I also think it is trivially obvious that many of them are neither racist or fascist. This means that, contrary to what you will read elsewhere, the blog does not believe that anyone using such imagery must a fascist. Maybe they should be argued with on other grounds, but the goths, neo-folk fans and fetishists, etc., who use such imagery are not usually fascists. Indeed, many (most?) of them would consider themselves anti-fascist.

But the arguments about Sol Invictus and similar groups is much more sophisticated than that, and they hinge around the claim that certain strains of fascism (and revolutionary traditionalism, 'national anarchism', etc.)  have adopted a strategy by which they deny being fascists and concentrate instead, not on promoting fascism but on promoting cultural concepts, etc., that will help normalise and make acceptable key elements of fascist belief. The intention is not to recruit directly to fascist organisations but to create communities, sub-cultures, currents of opinion, etc., that are more conducive to fascism, thus preparing the ground for future fascist growth. I don't want to talk about this - admittedly, key - idea at length here, but will just refer to Anton Shekhovtsov's excellent essay on the issue, Neo-Folk, Martial Industrial and ‘Metapolitical Fascism’.

Now, you may reject these arguments entirely but, even if you do, the fact remains that, at least as far as this blog is concerned, the case against the Slimelight gig does not hinge on the bare fact that some of the musicians make heavy use of fascist iconography. Therefore it makes no sense at all to say - as one commentator on the Slimelight event page did - that stopping this gig will lead to actors being prevented from wearing Nazi uniforms in films. Such gross misrepresentations of the argument do nobody any favours; nobody apart from fascists, that is.

Note too, that apart from all that, the arguments against Sol, etc., also address matters that go beyond the use of imagery - discussing, for example, lyrics, essays, statements made by the musicians concerned, and so on. In some cases we are also talking about membership of, or support for, fascist organisations. In any case it is disingenuous to argue that this blog wants to stop the gig simply because the musicians use unpleasant imagery. I'd very much defend their right to do so, if that is all that was involved.

But Aesthetics are Important

On the other hand, I don't accept the defence which says that the use of fascist imagery is acceptable because it is simply a matter of aesthetics, and that aesthetics has nothing to do with politics. One of the defining ideas of this blog - which may well not be shared by many of its readers - is that fascist aesthetics are just as much a part of fascism as fascist ideas. The aesthetics express and articulate a fascistic, authoritarian sense of one's place in the world - as discussed, eg., in this article by Susan Sontag. As above, this doesn't mean that the use of such imagery should always be opposed on principle, nor does it mean that the people who use it are necessarily fascist, but it does mean that the aesthetics of these groups are part of a wider picture, and are not wholly neutral and unremarkable.

One thing the defenders of Slimelight have to get to understand that, while it is true that there are many people who use fascist imagery without being either racist or fascist, there is another group of people who may also be keen on this music and also keen on fascist imagery; namely... fascists. Does anyone seriously believe that, while there may be fascists in your workplace or your housing estate, and while fascists can get elected to local councils and even to parliament, it is inconceivable that they might also go to concerts or play in bands?

Fascists Not Necessarily Socially Conservative

And then there are those who imagine that being a fascist means being socially conservative, and therefore that fascists could not, by definition, be involved in anything even vaguely 'counter-cultural', and would not be seen within a mile of a place like Slimelight. Such a position is only possible if you ignore the history of fascist modernism - for example, the fact that some of the Italian futurists were enthusiastic fascists. It also ignores more recent developments in which fascists have tried to move precisely into 'counter-cultural' movements. For instance, Troy Southgate, of the martial industrial band H.E.R.R, happily manages to combine denying that he's a fascist with hosting meetings of the  New Right which feature notorious fascists and antisemites - see this article from Searchlight on The Men Who Are Creating a New BNP Ideology, and this article by Graham Macklin, Co-opting the Counter Culture: Troy Southgate and the National Revolutionary Faction, printed originally in the academic journal Patterns of Prejudice.

Beyond that there is the fact that fascists elsewhere have been able to build the beginnings of large-scale movements that have something of the tone and flavour of counter-cultural movements - see, for example, this article by Moyote Project on Casa Pound and the New Right in Italy. It is true that the fascists in this country have not been particularly successful in this regard - but that is only because they faced serious organised opposition from the likes of the Anti-Nazi League and Anti-Fascist Action. With regard specifically to fascist influence in culture, Rock Against Racism was crucial to helping defeat fascist influence in music when it was on the rise in the late 70s and early 80s. In calling for the Slimelight gig to be cancelled, this blog stands in the same traditions which have proved successful in the past in countering the growth and influence of fascism and racism.


Neo-Folk Itself is Not Fascist or Racist

I have no doubt that the vast majority of neo-folk fans are not fascists, and neither are they deliberately covering for fascists. Some people consider the genre itself as problematic, but I don't. As is made clear in the 'About' pages for the blog: "It is not a matter of condemning these subcultures [Neo-Folk, Industrial, Martial - AS], which in fact contain many non-fascist, liberal, socialist, anti-fascist, etc., supporters, but rather of drawing a clear line between the fascists and non-fascists within them by showing the latter the nature and extent of the problem, in the hope that they will themselves marginalise and ultimately reject fascist participation in their 'scene'."

Therefore it is my belief that we should be arguing with fans of the genre (and of related genres such as martial industrial) about the problem they have of neo-fascist, 'revolutionary traditionalist', 'national anarchist', etc., influence and infiltration. The fascists and racists believe that a culture with such an enthusiasm for transgression, and in which 'art' is seen as an end in itself, is a perfect place to spread their ideas and build alliances and contacts, and the best response to that is for the people within the culture to spew them out and refuse to have any truck with their ideas, refuse to play on the same bill, and to boycott their records.

However, that doesn't mean that other anti-racists and anti-fascists should simply sit back and wait for the fans to get their act together. It is the job of anti-racists, etc., to take the argument above to the fans - which is what LMHR will be doing at their demo.


Are They Really Fascists?

Tony Wakeford (left) with Ian Anderson (right) and
the NF on Brick Lane, London, 29th Aug 1982 
© David Hoffman, Hoffmanphotos

The problem with this question is that it is hard to work out what it really means, or rather that it means different things to different people. I personally doubt that any of the musicians playing the disputed gig are still card-carrying members of fascist organisations - although one at least has been, and, more than that, is documented as having been an activist rather than just a passive supporter (the image here shows Tony Wakeford of Sol Invictus - on the far left of the picture - on a National Front stall in Brick Lane in the 80s - close to the Slimelight venue. You can read more about the significance of the NF presence at Brick Lane in the article Tony Wakeford on Manouevres). However, this blog has not argued that the gig should be stopped simply because of, eg., Wakeford's past membership of the National Front, but rather because our main contributors believe there is a significant continuity between his beliefs then and his beliefs now.

It's well known that Wakeford - after coming under a lot of pressure - issued a statement in which he says: "Many years ago I was a (sic) once a member of the National Front. It was probably the worse decision of my life and one I very much regret. However, I have no connection with, sympathy for, or interest in those ideas nor have I had for around 20 years." Some people take this at face value to mean that he has had no connection with fascism in the last twenty years. But that is not true - he has collaborated with racists, fascists and anti-Semites in various ways, and he continued to sell the openly fascist 'Above the Ruins' recordings long after that. He says that he has had no connection with the ideas of the National Front - but, then, he wouldn't, since he adopted the position of the ITP / political soldier faction before leaving the NF - and their ideas were completely at odds with the NF drive to make themselves respectable and electable, much as the BNP has tried to do more recently. The political soldier faction - led by people such as Nick Griffin, current leader of the BNP - believed that the NF was merely a radical version of the Tory Party, and argued for a revolutionary fascist strategy that embraced violence and illegality. This faction was very much influenced by a group of Italian fascists, led by Roberto Fiore, who had fled to Britain to escape the Italian police. According to Wikipedia: "In England Fiore became a close friend of Nick Griffin and following Griffin's departure from the National Front he helped to organise the International Third Position, becoming a founding member. Fiore had connections with the traditionalist philosopher and has written about topics such as traditionalism and the third position.Julius Evola"

I do not have the time to go into the details of this argument now, but this review of an academic treatment of neo-folk takes up the argument as to why Wakeford's claims are dubious, and tries to show how ideas drawn from revolutionary traditionalism (an offshoot of fascism that, via the work of Evola, for example, was influential on the fascist milieu Wakeford was a part of) continue to influence the lyrics and themes he and some of his friends deal with. Incidentally, his group, 'Above the Ruins', was named as a tribute to Evola's work 'Men Among the Ruins'.

Comments on the LMHR Petition and Campaign

LMHR have issued a petition as follows, asking people to sign and support it:

No to Slimelight’s Nazi-fest in Islington
 
Love Music Hate Racism has discovered that the Slimelight club in Islington has booked bands with deep links to fascist and neo-Nazi groups. They will play on Saturday 25 June. All of the acts on the night use racist lyrics and decorate their set with swastika symbols and Nazi images. The Nazi organisation Stormfront is promoting the event and have declared that its supporters will descend on Islington for the night. The event is organised by Tony Wakeford, who is founding member of Nazi band 'Sol Invictus' and an ex-member of the Nazi National Front (NF). He continues to move in fascist circles. Wakeford is the founding member of known fascist bands such as 'Death in June' and 'Above the Ruins' both of which have donated to the NF and are promoted in fascist magazines. We believe that these Nazi bands represent a threat to community cohesion in Islington are an insult to those that have suffered at the hands of fascists. We call on the organisers cancel this Nazi-fest. It is in all our interests to keep Islington free from racism, violence and fear.

Several people have contacted me to say that, while they support the campaign for the gig to be cancelled, they cannot sign the petition because it contains a number of errors. For instance, Tony Wakeford is not the organiser of the gig (that's Gaya Donadio, aka Hagshadow) and neither is it true that  "All of the acts on the night use racist lyrics and decorate their set with swastika symbols and Nazi images". The fear is that such errors exaggerate the charges against the performers in a way that will make it harder to win the support of some of the fans because they will see that some of these charges can't be sustained.

Now, I think that the reason they have taken this approach is because, with groups such as the NF, BNP and EDL it has been important to establish that, despite their denials, they are essentially fascist organisations (and 'Nazi' is here used as a synonym of 'fascist'). I think they were right about that. However, in this situation the problem is that many of the fans of these bands (and most of the fans of Slimelight) are neither racist nor fascist, but they believe that people should be allowed to say and do whatever they like without being opposed, even if what they are saying promotes racism and fascism.

Therefore this blog has always argued that the key to the situation is to win the argument with the fans that clubs, etc., should not be providing a platform for artists who promote racist and fascist ideas. The problem is that the really dubious performers already understand perfectly well that most fans will not accept racism and fascism, and so they deny that they are either fascist or racist. In that situation the job is to 'patiently explain' to the fans what the issues are. If they are approached with the claim that they are willingly attending a 'Nazi-fest', as if it were the BNP summer camp, they won't find it credible and will therefore be more inclined to support the gig.

Despite all this I would encourage people to support the call to stop the gig, not because I agree with the text of the petition but - given that Islington ALARM have decided against any sort of mass action (see above) - it is now the only game in town in terms of an active campaign. People should either compose their own statement as to why the gig should not go ahead and send that to LMHR (which you can do here), or, if you don't want to go through LMHR, make a comment below or contact me directly with a statement and I'll collect them and send them to  the press, the venue, etc. But if you don't want to do either of those things I hope you sign the LMHR petition itself despite its exaggeration.

The danger is that people take a purist, abstract position on all this. We have to realise that it is a step forward for activist campaigners such as LMHR to take the issue seriously. At the same time, they are new to this territory and are bound to get the details and emphasis wrong to start with, and it seems to me abstentionist to refuse to support their effort until they get it right. Hic Rhodes! Hic Salta!

The job of the LMHR picket/demo is to argue with the punters about why Slimelight should not provide a platform for such gigs, hoping that enough pressure can be put on the venue management to make them back down. This simply isn't going to work if they assume that the people attending the gig (and, even more so, those attending the venue generally) are willingly participating in a 'Nazi-fest' - the vast majority of the attendees are not the enemy, but are potential friends and allies, and if the campaign isn't aimed at convincing these people then it will be counter-productive.

A Question for Slimelight Supporters

I may add to this post later, as more thoughts occur to me concerning the campaign against the Slimelight gig, and in response to later developments. In the meantime I would like to ask supporters of the Slimelight management: if you really want to have nothing to do with racism and fascism, and if the artists playing on the 25th have nothing to do with racism and fascism, can you explain why Gaya Donadio (in her guise as 'Hagshadow') - who is, I believe Patrick Leagas's partner, and who is promoting the Sol Invictus / 6 Comm gig - has managed to book a gig at Slimelight for later this year featuring Sutcliffe Jugend and Peter Sotos?

To give an idea of the lyrical and literary themes dealt with by Peter Sotos, I will merely quote some extracts from a review by Trevor Blake of Sotos's fanzine 'Pure';

"Kiddie Torture" speaks of "the sublime pleasure" of child abuse and the "added pleasure" in witnessing the pain of the parents whose children are murdered. It focuses specifically on Ian Brady, whose domination of Myra Hindley is glorified as is their murder of Lesley Downey (age 10) and Marie Payne (age 4).

The twelve pages headed "Nazi Triumphs" are mostly photographs of emaciated dead people and victims of medical experiments, with one page of commentary by the editor and scattered quotes from concentration camp commandants and Hitler. 

Sotos describes women as dogs, garbage, dirt, shit... yet must somehow delight in Myra Hindley's role in the Moors murders. He accomplishes this by ignoring the fact that she is a woman. Women to Sotos are victims or they do not exist. 

The arguments around Sotos are different to those about Sol Invictus - while the content of his work is much more extreme, the political context is more complex. I mention him not because I think it is problematic in the same way, but because it too raises complex issues about what is and isn't acceptable. My point is that I find it completely irresponsible to take the position that any and all art should be welcomed just because it's called 'art'.

On a similar note I should  mention that the headliners, Sutcliffe Jugend, contributed a track to this release, 'White Power', from 1983. Perhaps they have repudiated this, but if so I haven't heard about it. But in any case, even if the group are not fascists (I don't see any reason to think they are, as it happens), don't you think this might possibly count as promoting, encouraging or affirming fascist ideas?

What Ends When the Symbols Shatter? My Time as a Death In June Fan

Guest Post by John Eden

One of the devices used by people who defend neo-Folk is the claim that its critics are outsiders who don’t understand the nuances of the genre. I’ve written this piece for a number of reasons, but mainly to show my perspective as someone who was there as a fan at the outset. Another argument is that none of the rhetoric and imagery matters, that it’s all a bit of a laugh which doesn’t make any difference in the real world. I would counter this by saying that it certainly made a difference to the beliefs of some of the people I knew.

What's Behind the Mask?

In 1987, at the ripe old age of 17, I asked the bloke behind the counter of Our Price if I could hear The Brown Book, an LP by a band called Death In June. I knew nothing about the group except that people from slightly less obscure bands in the industrial music scene made guest appearances. The sleeve gave very little away – a skull and the title of the album, embossed in gold leaf. The inserts were seriously weird – leaflets about occult supplies and some very sinister T-shirts. It sounded fantastic – nice and loud over the shop’s great system and headphones: dark ballads, weird imagery and simple folky songs.

The final track on side one was a dreamlike spoken word piece over a haunting soundscape. When it finished I handed over my cash. Death In June were one of the ultimate bands for fans who liked a bit of a treasure hunt. Very few clues were ever given away. Before Google or Discogs had even been thought of, this was quite exciting.

Putting the pieces of the jigsaw together became my new obsession, but when I saw the finished picture I was older and wiser and didn’t like what I saw. The skull on the cover was a Totenkopf and one of the songs on the album was an acapella version of 'Horst Wessel'. These were the first steps in the “are they dodgy or aren’t they?” game that Death In June plays with their fans. The consensus seems to be that those in the know can get off on this elitist / faux-Nazi imagery without actually being a Fascist.

And of course, I wasn’t a Fascist. I’d spent a typical British seventies childhood playing with model soldiers, Action Men and Airfix models. I read 'Commando Comics' which were available in all the local newsagents. Me and my mates played 'war' and we knew that the Nazis were the bad guys. Not least because my grandfather had died fighting them in World War 2. I’d had my first encounter with actual Fascists at the tender age of 11. I was in the school canteen for lunch and the only available seat was next to three older boys who I didn’t know. When I sat down one of them asked me, with a disgusted sneer on his face, if I liked “little black boys?”. To my eternal shame I replied that I didn’t. I guess it was partly his tone of voice and the fact that they were bigger than me. I certainly had no problem with the black kids in my class. My reply animated my fellow diners. They told me it was cool to sit with them and asked if I interested in joining the Young National Front. One of them started listing, from memory, the NF’s manifesto. I realised this was pretty fucked up and started making my excuses. They didn’t seem to mind that much.

Lots of the desks at school had 'NF' written on them and you’d see their stickers on bus stops, as graffiti etc. It was part of the landscape, along with anarchy or CND symbols and the iconography of various bands. As I got older and bolder I used tear down racist stickers and cover up the graffiti.

I Ain't Nuthin' But A Gorehound

I had an enquiring mind. Actually that’s a rationalisation. I had (and still have) a tendency to be slightly obsessive. This is a trait I have in common with a lot of people who collect records or are involved with other subcultures. I used to devour the music press, trying to find out everything I could about music I liked the sound of. If it was attached to an extreme ideology then all the better, more stuff to delve into.There were swathes of other music I liked – synthpop, punk, postpunk, hip hop, goth, indie, reggae, whatever. But industrial music was unique in giving me access to an entire subterranean world of strangeness – art, magick, revolution, sexual deviance. There was a lot to get your teeth into.
I felt that Throbbing Gristle’s concept of an Information War was useful – that some things were kept hidden because they were so powerful. This was a good rationale, before the internet, for checking out all manner of extreme phenomena.

I liked the starkness of Death In June’s imagery, words and music – probably in that order. I guess there might have been something in there which reminded me of those childhood war games. Something heroic and male – romantic and bleak. I bought their records and defended them in discussions with friends. I rationalised, with lines fed from interviews in fanzines, that they were simply exploring the darker side of human nature – they didn't believe any of this stuff themselves. And anyway, Douglas P was gay, so there was no way he or anyone he worked with could be a Nazi, right?

When I moved to London in the late eighties I regularly visited the Vinyl Experience record store in Hanway Street. The shop was a focal point for the emerging 'apocalyptic folk' genre (it later evolved into World Serpent Distribution). I picked up a bunch of records and ended up going to what I guess are now legendary gigs like Current 93 and Sol Invictus at Chislehurst caves. I was also involved with the fringes of anti-Fascist campaigning at that time. The Nazi skinhead group Blood & Honour had opened a shop near my college and its bonehead customers were causing some grief in the area. I remember getting some funny looks off people I was protesting with when they saw my Death In June totenkopf badge. I removed it, telling myself that they wouldn’t understand the ambiguity of it all.

I suppose it’s fair to say that I had a fascination with the aesthetics of Fascism but was, like most people, repelled by the ideas and practise. Unfortunately it soon emerged that not everyone was quite so discerning.

Don’t Eat That Stuff Off The Sidewalk

In the early nineties some cassettes of US Christian radio talkshows circulated around the underground scene I had immersed myself in. Evangelical preacher and self-publicist Bob Larson had taken it upon himself to interview Nikolas Schreck (of the group Radio Werewolf) and industrial noise stalwart Boyd Rice   (who had launched a 'think tank' called the Abraxas Foundation). Both were involved with the Church of Satan, which I knew little of. The cassettes were very entertaining, with Nikolas and Boyd being relentless in their criticism of Christianity and a whole heap more.

So far so good, but Schreck and Rice also expressed social Darwinist ideas and a 'might is right' philosophy. Boyd described himself as 'an occult Fascist' but went on to say that he didn’t mean that in a political way. These concepts also formed the basis of his album Music, Martinis and Misanthropy. At the time they seemed quite exciting: daring, but also troubling. I don’t remember fully embracing it all, but it certainly piqued my obsessive curiosity.

I inevitably stocked up on Church of Satan reading material to have a look. Other books like Apocalypse Culture and Schreck’s Manson File added a new slant to what I’d previously seen as being an anarchist or left wing perspective. Slowly, friends who were more into this scene than me started spouting a load of old bollocks:

“All this stuff about how ‘the weak should be crushed by the strong’ – you’d understand that if you sat on the top deck of bus with me in South London.” 

“I truly believe in having society run by a nobility – especially when I see all the human waste queuing up to buy their lottery tickets on a Saturday afternoon.”

“Why should I have to come in at night and turn on the TV to see a bunch of stuff about bhangra – this is London!”

People who might previously have talked about anarchism, or William Burroughs, or Situationist theory were now coming out with the sort of right wing shit you’d read in the Daily Express. This led to a number of heated debates in pubs and at parties, with predictably mixed results. (Each of those quotes is real, I remember them clearly because they wound me up so much. But I'm not going to name and shame people – at least two of them have since expressed regret about talking such rubbish.)

How Far Can Too Far Go?

In the mid-nineties there was a gradual intensification of what was being said in fanzine interviews. I’m still not clear if the artists were trying to outdo each other, or if there was a testing of boundaries involved – seeing how much of an already existing agenda could be revealed without any comeback.
The arrival of Michael Moynihan’s Blood Axis project in 1995 marked a significant gear change. I picked up the notorious issue of No Longer, a FANzine from Tower Records in Piccadilly, and read Moynihan’s comments about wanting to reopen the gas chambers, but how he’d be a lot more lenient in terms of the admission criteria. The 'zine also had an interview with James Mason, an actual Nazi who clearly wasn’t exploring any ambiguities. Blood Axis’ first album got rave reviews in all the right places, but was laughably awful.

Around this time I also found out about Tony Wakeford having been a member of the National Front. He brushed this aside in interviews saying that he hadn’t really been a member – he’d just been knocking about with some people who were into historical re-enactments, some of whom knew some people who were a bit dodgy. Which more recently has been revealed as being an outright lie. The fanzines I was reading also started to pick up on Black Metal. I sent away for some  Burzum 'zines and was revolted by Varg Vikernes’ blatant anti-Semitism.

Zombie Dance

Gradually all this stuff started to become de rigueur, like a new fashion. It was actually comical how rapidly the subculture became an identikit set of ideas and themes. I satirised this with a pretend fanzine called Blood & Fire  (named after the reggae tune by Niney The Observer, but also very similar to the title of an early NON album). It seemed to amuse the right people, but there wasn’t nearly enough criticism going on.

A lot of the howls of protest were from the mainstream anti-Fascist sources who'd also had problems with Joy Division, New Order, Throbbing Gristle, and even Front 242 in the past. People who were actually fans of the music displayed a staggering lack of political nous. Despite priding themselves on being independently minded (not being part of the 'herd mentality' was the new thing, right?) they swallowed any old bollocks which was on offer as long as it was wrapped up in a limited edition embossed runic cover.

The final straw for me came with the arrival of issue 6 of Esoterra magazine. This had started out as a really good occulture fanzine that had amazing graphics and in depth features and interviews with all sorts of interesting people. I’d been distributing a few copies in the UK (alongside a bunch of other stuff) and had baulked a little at the obligatory Blood Axis feature in issue 5. Issue 6 of Esoterra included a full page advert for Canadian Nazi skinhead band Rahowa. Their name was an acronym for RAcial HOly WAr. Here was a group with blatant connections to political Fascism (in the form of the wacko World Church of the Creator). Rahowa’s singer, George Burdi, founded Resistance Records, the biggest neo-Nazi skinhead label and distributor outside of Europe. He was imprisoned for violently assaulting a female anti-Fascist protestor.

It was clear to me that the more articulate parts of the Nazi music scene were trying converge with the more retarded parts of the industrial/occulture scene. These were people I didn’t want anything to do with. The same shitheads I’d shared a school canteen table with, the same knuckle dragging boneheads who had assaulted Asian students near my college. All of them worshipping the regime that killed my grandfather. I ended up having an argument with the editor of Esoterra and not distributing that issue. He informed me that the group had offered him money for a whole lot more advertising if he published an interview with them, but he had declined.

The next issue featured my interview with Amodali of Mother Destruction – a brilliant group who managed to avoid all the stiff-right-arm posturing which seemed to be becoming the norm. In retrospect this was probably my last ditch attempt to draw a line in the sand and show that it was possible to be concerned with dark, occult material, but not be a Fascist. I was particularly encouraged that the group included Patrick Leagas, formerly of Death In June, who also expressed his frustration to me with the nudge nudge, wink wink nature of what was unfolding. But we were both pushing against the tide. I climbed the cliffs to dry land whilst Patrick seems to have re-immersed himself in the icy waters of neovolkisch runic twiddling.

It gradually dawned on me that the music was becoming less and less interesting. It was pointless hanging about and watching an entire scene go down the toilet musically and ideologically at such an exciting time for dance music. My philosophical needs continued to be satisfied by the whole 'post-situ' scene, including the refreshingly un-sinister Association of Autonomous Astronauts, London Psychogeographical Association and many others.

Tear It Up

I never formally 'left' the industrial / neofolk scene, I just found more interesting things to do. Things which involved people who were less grim and music that was much better. Towards the end of the nineties I’d have a pop at things which came my way, but I no longer went looking for trouble. A good example would be my (quite ranty, in retrospect) review of the third issue of the UK fanzine Compulsion:

"The subtitle is 'Surveying the Heretical', which I think highlights my problems with this (and the 'scene' as a whole). Doing a survey suggests that it's just a report of what's going on – someone else has to analyse it all. But obviously this isn't the whole story. Anyone who puts out a 'zine goes through a process of selection, deciding what goes in and what stays out. It isn't like someone went through the racks at Tower Records and pulled out every 10th CD or something, is it? So the editor must either like the material, or at the very least find it intriguing. But, oh no, there's a 'Views and beliefs expressed' statement on page 2, so we have to guess, eh?

This wouldn't be a problem were it not for the fact that Compulsion contains some pretty dubious people, some of whom have worldviews that I consider thoroughly objectionable. For example there's a puff piece on ex-American Nazi Party organiser James Mason and his Manson-inspired Universal Order. I'm sure James is fantastically exciting, but it fucks me off that he can blandly suggest that the Tate killings were great because they were all "drug users, drug dealers, Jews, anti-racists and homosexuals" without even the teeniest bit of editorial comment.

Mason's publisher is also interviewed. Unsurprisingly he's also happy to be called a Fascist and we even get to read his (ooh how heretical!) views, though thankfully we're spared his usual spiel about re-opening the concentration camps this time. Admittedly Compulsion isn't all blokes with an unhealthy fixation with uniforms and the music of Wagner. The Boredoms, Foetus, Jim Rose and the excellent Somewhere in Europe are also covered. It's just that anyone who expresses an ideology in any depth is completely reactionary. That is clearly one of the editor's major interests, but any conclusions he's made or insights he's gained are missing completely.

It's not even as if the editor is a Fascist, it's just the usual laziness that seems to permeate industrial culture these days. Nobody is ever challenged about their views, not because people agree with them, but because people just aren't bothered. The 'scene' seems to have ditched Throbbing Gristle's ideas of actively researching extremes and is now just a darker version of MTV, spoon-feeding extremity for the sake of it. The excuse is always that people can make up their own minds, which no doubt is true – there just doesn't seem to be any evidence of it happening.

Most of the people I've discussed this with have a pretty unsophisticated analysis of it all, despite all the elitist "oh we are so much more intelligent than the masses" bollocks that goes with the territory. The fans either just get off on the 'mystery' of whether such and such a group is 'dodgy', nudge nudge, wink wink, or try to get themselves off the hook by arguing that so and so can't be a Fascist because he isn't racist (as if the two were the same thing). There are too many people who still think that Nazis are all evil, stupid and ugly. That sort of liberalism just leaves them ill-equipped to critically examine anything resembling a considered argument for (for example) racial segregation, or stopping all welfare and letting people starve to death. I'm not suggesting that every paragraph should come with a dogmatic PC analysis, or that such views shouldn't be allowed to appear in print. That isn't a situation I will ever be able to (or want to) enforce.

However, I am not happy to just uncritically consume people's ideas. It is not in my interest to give Fascists or their fans an easy ride. Perhaps that makes me the biggest heretic of all."

Sometime shortly afterwards, the editor of Compulsion started distributing a US industrial fanzine called Ohm Clock which featured Rahowa on the front cover, and had an extensive interview with them inside. Oh, and quite a lot of adverts for them.

In the summer of 1998 someone else who I had considered a good friend called me up to discuss some industrial CDs he was releasing to see if I would be interested in reviewing them. I wasn't. He went on to have a rant about the power of the media and how 'they' never told the whole truth. Sentiments I wholly agreed with, until he started referring to the brutal racist murder of James Byrd Jnr. My friend was outraged that none of the media reports had mentioned that Byrd had been in prison previously with his murderers. I felt that the salient point was that three white men (two of whom were known white supremacists) had chained a black man to the back of their truck and dragged him two miles along a road, killing him. We were clearly getting our analysis and worldview from completely different sources.

Kizmiaz

Since then neofolk seems to have continued in this vein with people getting less and less shy about describing themselves as Fascists, working with former members of the National Front, namedropping Evola, bandying about terms like eurocentrism (aka “white pride”) and dressing up in uniforms like an amateur tribute to “’Allo ‘Allo”. I sold my Death in June / Current 93, etc., collection on Ebay (or tried to; “The Brown Book” is banned for being “hateful or discriminatory”). I did this partly to finance new projects and partly just to get rid of it all. Quite a few of the people who emailed me to discuss my auctions reminded me of my younger enthusiastic self. I wasn’t about to give them a lecture or stop them having fun. If someone had done that to me 25 years ago it would just have confirmed how 'out there' and dangerous I was. Let’s be clear – enjoying Death In June records as a teenager didn’t make me a Fascist. What I hope this piece has shown is that there is a bigger picture, a wider context than that. There is merit in extreme music and culture, but there are also pitfalls.

A lot of people in 'alternative' scenes like to pretend that politics don’t matter to them. To me that means that they just haven’t thought through their politics. It is precisely this kind of ignorance that can provide a cover for people who are explicitly political to operate and influence the cultural landscape.
History shows us that people are attracted to far right politics for all sorts of reasons, some of them ideological, some of them social. Any mass movement will happily incorporate “apolitical” people who like the violence, or the uniforms, or the music, or the kudos of being weird, the feeling of belonging to an exclusive club.

I think the critique being developed on this blog and elsewhere is long overdue. I’ve thoroughly enjoyed reading the contributions here and the discussions they have provoked. Ultimately it's up to people to decide for themselves where they draw the line, which artists they support and what they believe in. I don't really regret my dalliance with neofolk (bar having given my money to some people I now despise) because I think ultimately I made the right decisions.

From Anarcho-Punk to Fascism

aka. NAZI PUNKS FUCK OFF!

Gary Smith / Decadent Few

I've spoken in a previous post of Gary Smith's involvement in Above the Ruins and Sol Invictus (Tony Wakeford's bands after leaving Death in June). Smith was simultaneously a Combat 18 and BNP supporter as well as a member of hardcore Nazi skinhead group No Remorse.

One aspect of the situation that deserves having more light thrown on it is the extent of overlap or continuity between the anarcho-punk and Fascist milieus in the early 80s. On the left is a picture of Gary Smith around the time that he was a member of his first band The Decadent Few. According to their mySpace pages; "Formed in East London,1984 by Kaya, Mike, Bernie and Mark of YOUTH IN ASIA, plus Steph of HAGAR THE WOMB briefly, Decadent Few’s first gig was at Studio One in Slough, June 1984. Mark and Steph had stepped out by this point and a friend, Gary, was taught Bass by Mike in vintage Paul Simenon-style, i.e. coloured stickers on the frets to denote where to play which note which song. Luckily, Gary learnt fast and this line up played regularly across London with bands like FLOWERS IN THE DUSTBIN, TOM’S MIDNIGHT GARDEN, STIGMA, ANDY LOVEBUG & THE TENDERHEARTS and the WET PAINT THEATRE, a Punk Theatre Company".

The t-shirt he's wearing here is a bit of a giveaway, of course, since it features the Celtic Cross symbol beloved by Nazi skinheads and others. While anarcho-punks could be extremely militant against, and were often in the forefront of, physical opposition to, racism, Fascism, etc., at the same time there was an ambivalence in their ideas that could also make (some of) them in some circumstances susceptible to accepting Fascists in their midst. In his autobiography Crass founder Penny Rimbaud talks about how the group initially had a sizeable contingent of NF / British Movement (BM) supporters among their fans, and first adopted the anarchist symbol merely as a way of keeping both the NF and SWP at bay by taking up a position that was neither Fascist nor Socialist but independent of both (the SWP and RCP apparently had the cheek to ask Crass to play anti-Nazi gigs). This, of course, is to duck the issues rather than taking a clear anti-fascist stance. There are even rumors that Steve Ignorant (Crass vocalist) may have played on some Above the Ruins recordings alongside active Fascists such as Ian Read and Smith.

One of the interesting things about the list of bands The Decadent Few played with is the way that it overlaps with groups associated with pro-Fascist fan Dev, of While Angels Watch. According to Dev; "During the early 1980's I also played in: PERSONS UNKNOWN (Guitar and Vocals), YOUTH IN ASIA (Drums), FLOWERS IN THE DUSTBIN (first Drums then Guitar), TOMS MIDNIGHT GARDEN (Vocals and Guitar), HYPERACTIVE (Guitar and Vocas) and SIXTH COMM (Guitar)." This raises the idea that some parts of the anarcho-squat-punk scene overlapped and co-mingled with various Fascist and pro-Nazi ideologues. The mySpace pages for Tom's Midnight Garden explicitly mention Smith and Patrick Leagas (of Death in June) as members, and of course Sixth Comm was Leagas's band after leaving Death in June. All of which is further evidence of the many threads that tie Death in June to Fascism and Fascist musicians. But it also raises the question of to what extent Fascists were able to operate on the fringes of the anarcho milieu. No doubt we'll talk more of Dev in future, but for now I just want to register this issue and say that if you have more information about this murky territory I'd be happy to hear about it.

Peter Webb Investigates

In an earlier post I said of sociologist and Goldsmiths lecturer Peter Webb that "he is either unwilling or unable to do the work required to comprehend his chosen field". I think I owe it to Webb to bear that opinion out by looking more closely at his work. In a section of the book that concerns us, Networked Worlds of Popular Music: Milieu Cultures, he discusses the 'apocalyptic folk, postindustrial, folk-noir, neo-folk' scene through the work of the three core members of the group Death in June - Tony Wakeford, Doug Pearce and Patrick Leagas - who, he tells us, have been "central to the developing British underground and postindustrial/post-Punk milieu"¹. Webb is well aware of the controversy surrounding these musicians due to their use of fascist imagery and symbols², and their promotion of arguments associated with various strands of contemporary esoteric fascist and 'conservative revolutionary' thought derived from Ernst Jünger, Julius Evola, Savitri Devi, Otto and Gregor Strasser and others. He knows that Wakeford was a member of the fascist National Front, and he certainly should know of the fascist connections of some of the group's collaborators, such as Boyd Rice, Albin Julius and Michael Moynihan, since they have been widely publicised. Given this, what is staggering is the extent to which he accepts their excuses and evasions at face value and refuses in any way to critically examine the ideas they promote, or place them in a context that would make sense of them. Instead of challenging any of this he chooses to descend into the gutter with his heroes to join them in condemning the 'fascistic censoriousness' and 'McCarthyism' of the left³. The result is a complete whitewashing of the people concerned, and the corresponding destruction of any credibility Webb might have had as a researcher or commentator.

In his chapter on method ('The Theoretical Development of the Milieu'⁴) Webb says that his concept of 'the milieu' addresses "the networks of interaction, production and influence that music makers and actors in the particular music 'scenes' (are) involved in [and] articulates a set of overlapping levels of meaning, relevance, disposition and understanding"⁵. He argues that "there are three main levels of theoretical abstraction" that must be addressed in order to understand a milieu⁶, encompassing three sets of relations; those internal to the milieu itself, those between different milieus and different orders of milieu (specifically in this case, between the musical milieu and the record industry), and a third level of interaction between the milieu and the surrounding "culture, economy and politics"⁷. Anyone reading the latter might imagine that Webb would therefore want to examine - to pick some minor examples at random - what Patrick Leagas means when he says he has a "sense of being English" despite the fact that "I do not recognise this as England"⁸, or perhaps Doug Pearce's claim to have been part of a "reawakening of... Eurocentrism" in the milieu⁹, or any of the many similar statements that litter the interviews here.

Webb repeatedly mentions the group's interest in 'traditionalism'¹⁰ without bothering to find out if this might refer not to a vague hankering after Morris Dancers and cricket on the village lawn but rather the traditionalism of René Guénon and the 'super-fascist' Julius Evola¹¹ - who's work, after all, has been edited and published by a key collaborator of the group, Michael Moynihan (of Blood Axis), who is mentioned repeatedly in the book¹² and whose connection to Evola is even noted¹³. Similarly you'd expect that he might be interested to know whether the group's interest in "occult influences in the social and cultural order"¹⁴ might possibly be connected with Evola's idea that an occult war is being waged for control of society, in which Jews and Masons work for the "forces of subversion" seeking to overthrow the "forces of order"¹⁵. According to Evola this plan was revealed in The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion, the infamous anti-Semitic tract for which he wrote an introduction when it was published in Italian in 1937, and the veracity of which he continued to defend long after it had been exposed as a forgery¹⁶ cooked up by the Czarist secret police. Since Evola's arguments on the matter are taken from a book edited and published by Moynihan there is every chance that this is precisely what was intended, but Webb is in no hurry to find out. Indeed, Webb seems not even to be curious about the politics involved: his bibliography lists none of the relevant texts by or about the fascist ideologues who have inspired so many members of this 'scene'.

Despite the constant use by the group of dog-whistle references to ideas from the radical right¹⁷, Webb consistently steers clear of any attempt to find out what the members of Death in June and their friends actually think. In fact, if we are to believe Webb his subjects have few real opinions¹⁸. Instead they seem to suffer from an incurable case of chronic ideological indeterminacy which prevents them from concluding anything at all; they are forever 'exploring' and 'investigating', apparently without arriving at any definite convictions. So, his musicians have "a thirst for esoteric knowledge, and an art of self-questioning and soul searching"¹⁹; they 'deal with' "the traditions of Europe"²⁰ and 'allude to' "paganism, heathenism, Europe, the West"²¹; they have "explored and looked at a variety of philosophies and pagan knowledges"²² and "sought out ideas and ways of understanding"²³; they are "searching for something else"²⁴; they 'take inspiration' "from a wide variety of sources and (show) "their thirst for knowledge and new ways of interpreting things"²⁵; and the neo-folk milieu as a whole has created a space in which "a variety of ideas can be explored and developed"²⁶. But it is impossible to imagine how any idea could be 'developed' if everyone involved in its development refused to say what they thought of it, how they interpreted it, or whether they believed it to be true. But, again, Webb puts his blind eye up to the glass and refuses to see.

To some small extent this dereliction of duty simply reflects Webb's declared methodology. In an early chapter ('A Journey Through Theories of the Intersection of Music and Culture'²⁷) he offers a potted overview of the history of popular culture studies in which, broadly, the (pseudo-) Marxism of Dick Hebdige and the Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies (CCCS) is given a rap on the knuckles for placing undue emphasis on structure above agency, and a string of post-modernists are wheeled out to make a case for privileging instead "the subjective meanings of subculturalists rather than deriving these from a pre-given totalising theory"²⁸. While I have no interest in the minutia of such debates within the sociology department, it's clear from Webb's arguments that he simply wants to justify his preferred approach, in which he can tell his story from an insider's point of view, as a fan of the genre, its cod philosophy, kitsch aesthetics and atavistic politics. To some extent, then, the problem is that Webb, in his enthusiasm to paint himself as the hippest and most edgy sociologist in town²⁹, has simply 'gone native'. His 'phenomenological' approach is solipsistic, allowing him to seal off his favourite musicians from even the possibility of criticism. This is hinted at in the tendentious example he provides of a 'momentary milieu', in which someone from "a Socialist background", on meeting a Nationalist, may "respond with disdain and contempt", in which case their "momentary exposure to this other political milieu is... fenced off by the rigidity of his or her particular political vision"³⁰.

This relativism is mirrored by a corresponding blurring of moral lines. At one point he considers the lyrics to the Death in June track 'C'est un Reve' (It's a Dream):

Ou est Klaus Barbie?
Il est dans le coeur
Il est dans le coeur noir

Liberté
c'est un reve

Webb concludes that Barbie (an SS captain in occupied France known as 'The Butcher of Lyon', who personally tortured his victims and had as many as 4,000 murdered) is to be found "in the heart" of everyone³¹; a repulsive argument which attempts to capsize the moral distinction to be made between Barbie and his victims³². Webb offers this as an example of "the direction of Death in June's art" which works to "enliven, question, re-examine and provoke a response"³³. Certainly  arguments like this are going to 'provoke a response', if only because they are so repellant, but that hardly justifies the art. If it did then we would have to be similarly grateful to Barbie himself for also 'making us think'.

Another gear in Webb's machinery of obfuscation is his idealist concept of art. For Webb the aesthetic is a privileged domain in which no one needs to say what they think or be held responsible for the results. He claims that the racists and fascists who attend neo-folk concerts have "taken the symbols and references... directly and uncomplicatedly", not understanding that the bands are using them "for artistic purposes"³⁴, as if the re-presentation of an idea in the context of a song somehow means we can ignore its meaning or the intentions of the singer. Of course a song can express opinions on behalf of a character other than the singer, but in the case of Death in June the two may often coincide. If we were to rely on Webb we would never know: he might have tried to find out one way or the other, but instead he uses the idea of 'artistic ambiguity' to avoid the question. Similar feelings about the sublimity of art are common among those postindustrial fans who claim they are interested in 'the aesthetics of fascism' but not the politics, ignoring the fact that, as the anti-fascist critic Walter Benjamin argued, fascism crucially involves precisely the admixing of aesthetics and politics, such that the two cannot be so neatly separated³⁵.

Webb relies extensively on his half-baked notion of 'ambiguity' to provide cover for his pop idols. Of course such ambiguity can be central to the artwork, but it can also provide the perfect cover for supporters of the radical right pursuing a strategy of 'right-wing Gramscianism'. This strategy has been developed by Alain de Benoist and other supporters of the Nouvelle Droite / European New Right (ENR), whose ideas chime neatly not only with the 'third way' faction of the NF that Wakeford mixed with but also with the positions defended by him to this day. As Anton Shekhovtsov has explained, the aim of the strategy is;

"to modify the dominant culture and make it more susceptible to a non-democratic mode of politics... the adherents of the ENR believe that one day the allegedly decadent era of egalitarianism and cosmopolitanism will give way to ‘an entirely new culture based on organic, hierarchical, supra-individual, heroic values’. It is important to emphasize, however, that ‘metapolitical fascism’ focuses... on the battle for hearts and minds rather than for immediate political power. Following Evola’s precepts, the ENR tries to distance itself from both historical and contemporary fascist parties and regimes."³⁶

Webb notes that Death in June "deliberately were ambiguous about any political meaning that they might be conveying"³⁷, but fails to register that if someone dresses up on stage as a fascist and sings songs promoting fascist ideas while waving a fascist flag around, but then denies being a fascist, what they are engaged in is not ambiguity but subterfuge. He notes that "this milieu acts as a source of pathways into a set of... ideas"³⁸ but refuses to consider what those ideas might actually be behind the blabber and smoke.

If that were all there were to it this book would be just another example of the vacuity of academic sociology, the impotence of postmodernism and the dangers of letting a fanboy loose in the academy. But Webb's self-imposed myopia becomes a shade more sinister when you consider the gaping aporias he leaves scattered around his text so that his boys can emerge from it unsullied. For instance, in telling the story of the group's origins he omits to mention that their name commemorates the 'Night of the Long Knives', in June 1934, when the Nazi regime executed the leadership of the Sturmabteilung (SA - The Stormtroopers, or Brownshirts), including Gregor Strasser, a major influence on sections of the National Front with which Tony Wakeford has been associated. This event, in which the Nazi leadership dispatched the left-facing wing of their movement, was also known as Operation Hummingbird, which also happens to be the title of an album the group recorded with Albin Julius, whose band, Der Blutharsch have been banned from playing in Israel and elsewhere because of their stance. Such coincidences are certainly going make the audience think; unless, of course, they are sociologists or phenomenologists from Goldsmiths University.

Webb discusses Crisis at some length, since they were the band Wakeford and Pearce belonged to back in the days when they were, respectively, members of the Socialist Wokers Party (SWP) and International Marxist Group (IMG). Strangely, though, he has nothing to say about the group Wakeford formed on leaving Death in June - Above the Ruins - whose members reputedly (Wakeford will neither confirm nor deny) included Gary Smith, previously of the openly Nazi band No Remorse (who were part of Ian Stuart's Blood and Honor organisation and also, co-incidentally, recorded an album that referred to the Brownshirts; The New Stormtroopers) and Nazi activist Ian Read. The band contributed a track to an a album, No Surrender, which was produced as a fundraiser for the British National Front, and which included a track by Skrewdriver, the first and most notorious White Power band, and their name is presumably derived from the title of Evola's book, 'Men Among the Ruins'. None of this gets a mention from Webb. Perhaps Wakeford himself never mentioned the band or its members to him. This is possible, since Wakeford has admitted lying to and misleading interviewers in the past (on preparing for a particular interview he says "I better dig out my bumper book of fibs"³⁹), but then such evasions could be got around by a little independent research. But it seems that Webb has no interest in doing such research, preferring to base his work entirely on the say-so of his subjects - in the name of 'phenomenology'.

Similarly, when Webb discusses Wakeford's involvement in the online fanzine Flux Europa he tells us that the magazine "discussed postmodernism, art, literature, philosophy, film and music", reassuring us that "the content was diverse". He proves this by mentioning the articles it contained "on Camille Paglia, Jack London and Ezra Pound"⁴⁰. What Webb conspicuously fails to mention is that, as reported by Stewart Home, Flux Europa was an extension of the cultural activities of Transeuropa, which itself emerged from the wreckage of National Front cultural-intellectual group IONA (Islands of the North Atlantic) - both organisations that Wakeford has had some involvement with. And - a tiny detail but one that is highly revealing - while Webb mentions Camille Paglia, Ezra Pound and Jack London as artists about whom Flux Eropa had published articles, what he omits to mention is that they are among a small group of people who are included under the site's 'Personae' section, which is presumably how Webb came to choose them in the first place, and at the time Webb was doing his research that section contained biographies of just two other people; the Vorticist and fascist supporter Wyndham Lewis, and Ernst Jünger, the German Nationalist fanatic who celebrated war, death and pain, and whose Stirnerian concept of the sovereign individual as 'Anarch' has inspired subsequent generations of radical rightists and neo-fascists - including Troy Southgate of the neo-folk band H.E.R.R. In an act of blatant self-censorship, Webb chooses not to mention these names. Of course, if he wanted to exclude all of the fascist supporters on the list then he'd have omitted to mention Ezra Pound too - but that wouldn't have left him with much of a list.

Another curious omission concerns Death in June's album Rose Clouds of Holocaust, which was banned from sale in Germany by the Bundesprüfstelle für jugendgefährdende Medien (Federal Department for Media Harmful to Young People), who found that the title song cast doubt on the occurrence of the Holocaust on account of lyrics that run "Rose clouds of Holocaust/ Rose clouds of lies/ Rose clouds of bitter/ Bitter, bitter lies"⁴¹. As we have now come to expect, none of this is mentioned by Webb.

Boyd Rice

Webb applies his now familiar uncritical and tendentious attitude to Wakeford's supposed renunciation of his fascist past, hastily posted to the Sol Invictus website when the heat was beginning to be turned up on him, and which is worded so ambiguously as to convince me that he still holds to at least some of the core ideas he learned as a member of the National Front (NF). He says; "I have no connection with, or sympathy for, or interest in [the ideas of the NF], nor have I had for around 20 years"⁴², but then that would be true of other ex-members who also moved on to more diverse forms of radical rightist politics since that party's collapse. When Wakeford adds that "none of the artists I work with hold such views either" you know that he is throwing sand in your face given that he has worked with the likes of Boyd Rice, who is quite happy to promote the white power skinhead party, the American Front, appearing in full Nazi uniform alongside its leader, Bob Heick. Webb, on the other hand, accepts the statement as definitive proof that Wakeford has nothing to answer for. Stranger still, he continues to believe Wakeford's reassurances despite having been shown to have been misled by him. As Stewart Home has argued, Wakeford's attempt at rehabilitating himself falls a long way short of what you would expect from someone who had truly broken with their fascist past.

Apart from covering up for this gaggle of neo-fascists Webb has little or nothing of interest to say about the milieu or its art. His analysis of the music on offer would make even the the most lazy and inept music hack blush. Generally all he can muster is the observation that the music is 'melancholic': so Nico made "intense melancholic music"⁴³; Scott Walker's work combines "simple melody... with the melancholy of the words"⁴⁴; Death in June are attracted to "melancholic poetry"⁴⁵ and their work is pervaded by "a type of melancholia"; neo-folk has added "melancholia" to industrial music⁴⁶, and so on. It never occurs to him to ask what the artists are melancholic about. He doesn't bother to speculate about why folk music, which idealises the pre-capitalist past, should be so appealing to his subjects. His attempts at analysing the use of collage in art are laughable: he  manages to compare Death in June's deliberately evasive and dishonest jumble of fascist iconography with John Heartfield's superbly pointed and polemical anti-Nazi collages⁴⁷, and he thinks that what Death in June do "is like a more structured version of William Burroughs and Brian (sic) Gysin's cut up method" adding "(reference needed here)"⁴⁸. Indeed, a reference is the very least that would be required to make this argument get off the mortuary table - it's like saying that a car maintenance manual 'is like a more structured version' of an exploding library.

Peter Webb has written a book which deals with a milieu that is riddled with neo-fascists and supporters of the radical right. He claims that he wants to explain the milieu by considering the relationship between it and the wider 'culture, economy and politics', and admits that "there are many questions [concerning] the political and cultural implications of a scene such as this", but he finally concludes that "These questions are outside of the remit of this book"⁴⁹. To the rest of us this looks like exactly what it is; an attempt to justify an utterly craven and dishonest book that fails to meet even the most minimal academic or intellectual standards.


NB. Peter Webb subsequently replied to these criticisms in a statement that we have also published - Strelnikov, 11/10/10

---

Evola, Julius. 1953. Men Among the Ruins: Post-War Reflections of a Radical Traditionalist, (2002: tr. Guido Stucco, ed. Michael Moynihan, Inner Traditions, Rochester NY)
Shekhovtsov, Anton. 2009, Apoliteic Music: Neo-Folk, Martial Industrial and “Metapolitical Fascism"’, in Patterns of Prejudice, Volume 43, Issue 5 (December 2009), pp. 431-457. This excellent essay is also available online.
Sykes, Alan. 2005. The Radical Right in Britain, Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke.
Webb, Peter. 2007. Exploring the Networked Worlds of Popular Music: Milieu Cultures, Routledge, Abbingdon.


1. Webb, 2007, p65
2. ibid, pp93f
3. ibid, pp94f. In an extraordinary page-long digression from his thesis, he also claims that these 'fascistic tendencies' are also behind the hounding of former members of the Revolutionary Communist Party (RCP), who we must assume are his former comrades since I see no other justification for his dragging in them into the argument at this point.
4. ibid, pp29-38
5. ibid, p30
6. ibid, p37
7. ibid, p38
8. ibid, p96
9. ibid, p97
10. ibid, pp 98, 99, 105
11. Evola, Julius. 'Things Put in Their Proper Place and Some Plain Words', in La Torre, issue #5, April 1930, quoted in H.T.Hansen, 'Introduction', Evola, 2002, p42. Here Evola explains that he is an 'anti-fascist', critical of Mussolini and Hitler, only to the extent that he is a 'super-fascist' and wants to go much further.
12. Webb, 2007, pp 66, 67
13. ibid, p92
14. ibid, p97
15. Evola, 2002, p236
16. ibid, p239f
17. My use of the terms 'fascist', 'revolutionary conservative' and 'the radical right' is sometimes fairly loose since with many of the people concerned it is hard to say exactly where they stand in the spectrum of ultra-right thought. But I follow Alan Sykes in seeing the 'radical right' as a term that encompasses fascism. I also include within this the 'traditionalism' of Evola and others, as well as movements that could be described as 'reactionary modernist', 'radical imperialist' or similar. Sykes, 2005, p2.
18. Although in the case of Patrick Leagas this may well be true, since he admits that "coming to a conclusion about anything at all is beyond me!". Webb, 2007, p81
19. Webb, 2007, p66
20. ibid, p68
21. ibid, p68
22. ibid, p81
23. ibid, p85
24. ibid, p85
25. ibid, p89
26. ibid, p105
27. ibid, pp11-28
28. ibid, p21
29. "This book has been inspired by a love of popular music for over three decades", ibid, p7
30. ibid, p30-31 
31. ibid, p79
32. In April 1944 Barbie ordered the deportation to Auschwitz of a group of 44 Jewish children from an orphanage at Izieu. He was also responsible for a massacre in Rehaupal in September 1944. See Wikipedia.
33. Webb, 2007, p79
34. ibid, p92
35. Walter Benjamin, 'Epilogue', 'The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction'
36. Shekhovtsov, 2009. Apoliteic Music
37. Webb, 2007, p76
38. ibid, p105
39. Wakeford, Sol Invictus profile, Facebook, 26 July 2008
40. Webb, 2007, p89
41. Shekhovtsov, 2009. Apoliteic Music, note #6.
42. Wakeford, 'A Message From Tony', tursa.com 14 Feb 2007
43. Webb, 2007, p61
44. ibid, p62
45. ibid, p98
46. ibid, p105
47. ibid, p93
48. ibid, p78
49. ibid, p105