A New Europe: Anti-Semitism, Islamophobia, Nation-State

[American Dream]

Surely there is good documentation of parallel antifa movements in Germany, Russia, the U.S., Australia etc.- will have to look around a bit on that...

http://libcom.org/history/articles/afa- ... ist-action

1985-2001: A short history of Anti-Fascist Action (AFA)



A brief history of Anti-Fascist Action (AFA), which fought a secret war against the far right in Britain and drove them off the streets.

AFA was originally set up in 1985 as a broad front anti-fascist organisation. The main fascist organisation at this time, following the demise of the National Front after Thatcher took power in 1979, was the British National Party (BNP), a more extreme split from the NF. Militant physical force anti-fascism has a long tradition in Britain - going back to the 1930's, the 'Battle of Cable Street' and the 43 Group in London's East End, and it was in this tradition that AFA was formed.

The fascists
Wherever fascists were unopposed, they carried out campaigns of violence against ethnic minorities and working class organisations. Taking Liverpool as an example, the few attempts by the BNP or NF to hold public marches or meetings in the city centre during the 1980's had been smashed into the ground by a large turn out from locals - notably from the Liverpool black community [1]. This failure of big events, however, didn't stop the BNP selling papers openly in the town centre on a regular basis, unopposed. This also didn't stop them starting a campaign of violence against left wing targets - in particular against the bookshop 'News From Nowhere', run by a feminist collective. After a few almost-successful attempts to burn the bookshop down, the windows being smashed in on Saturday daytime attacks - probably after a paper sale - and fascists generally strutting into the bookshop to intimidate staff and customers as and when they pleased, it was obvious something had to be done. Other fascist attacks at the time included smashing the windows of the Wirral Trades Council (over the water from Liverpool). BNP local activity like this, coupled with racist and homophobic attacks, was typical in any area in Britain where they were left unchallenged.

AFA
AFA was launched in Liverpool in 1986. At that time, Militant (now the Socialist Party) was still the strongest working class group on the left. Neither they nor the Socialist Workers Party (SWP) were interested in being organisationally part of AFA, though both turned out in the event of fascist marches. From an early stage the main organisers of Liverpool AFA were associated with the local anarchist scene.

Liverpool AFA was mostly anarchist - but it was never an anarchist front or a recruiting tool, except by way of natural influence. Anyone who agreed with the 'physical and ideological opposition to fascism' could be involved, and many did. Links were made with trade unions, Jewish and other anti-racist groups, and meetings were held to attract wider participation. Anti-fascists at the two universities also set up AFA groups at this time - a process repeated several times as students came and went.

Within a year or so, the Liverpool BNP went from boasting about how the 'reds' were always beaten in Liverpool when they tried to force the BNP off the streets (according to confiscated copies of the 'British Nationalist'), to the effective collapse of the group. Years later, the BNP admitted in the Liverpool Echo that "they were driven underground by left wing extremists in the mid-80s" [Oct 1993]. This kind of effective shut-down of BNP groups - by any means necessary - was also typical of AFA in this period.

Re-organisation
Nationally, meanwhile, the original AFA had collapsed due to incompatible political differences. Local and Regional groups (like the Northern Network) however continued, and national call-outs still occurred using existing contacts. AFA was re- launched in London in 1989, and in 1992 a national meeting was held in London to sort out a new national structure. The re-launch of AFA was as a militant 'united front' - an alliance of different political tendencies - orientated towards the working class, to reclaim working class areas then claimed by fascists as their own. The class perspective was agreed because, first, fascists don't just play the race card - they address genuine fears of the white working class (unemployment, bad housing etc.) and their success was often based on disillusionment with so-called 'socialist' councils. This propaganda needed a class-based answer. Second, it wasn't enough to 'defend democracy' - if AFA didn't say the system needed to be smashed, that would leave fascism as the 'radical' alternative. Third, the aim of fascism is the utter destruction of working class power, and so only the working class have a stake in opposing it. AFA, it was agreed, wasn't interested in 'allies' that were part of the problem such as corrupt councillors. Links, it was agreed, would continue to be made with black and asian communities under attack, but AFA propaganda should be mainly aimed at the communities where fascists themselves aimed to recruit [2].

Organisationally, it was agreed that AFA would be a decentralised federation based on a regional structure - building from the existing regions of London AFA and the Northern Network. The only national structure was to be a national coordinating committee of two delegates per region, to meet as and when needed, with no powers to make policy (or certainly to impose policy - some minor national decisions did have to be made over these years, but these were non-controversial).

London AFA at that time was mostly run by the Marxist Red Action - in alliance with elements of the anarcho-syndicalist Direct Action Movement (DAM)[3], and the Trotskyist Workers Power. There were also non-aligned independents - anarchists and other socialists - involved.

The Northern Network (originally the Northern Anti-Fascist Network) was a looser federation of Northern AFA groups - Bolton, Liverpool, Manchester , Leeds, South Yorks, Tyne and Wear, Preston , and others. Tyne and Wear were actually a Council-funded body set up before AFA. Of the rest, Manchester were run mainly by Red Action (probably the strongest Red Action branch outside of London); a few groups - like York - would probably be best described as "non-aligned" independents. The rest were mainly organised by anarchists - sometimes in the DAM, sometimes not. The DAM didn't officially prioritise anti-fascism - many or most of the DAM were trade union activists or shop stewards - though some anarchist groups definitely prioritised the anti-fascist fight more than others.

Zenith
AFA at its height consisted of far more than its activist core, and far more than just its street fighters. AFA activism involved public speaking, magazine and pamphlet production, organising fund-raisers (gigs, carnivals), etc. A lot of people put time and effort into AFA-related activities who agreed with the aims, but weren't particularly involved organisationally or in going to meetings. At this time there was a working - and productive - relationship between the anti-fascist magazine 'Searchlight' and AFA, partly because AFA was the only game in town.

At a regional and national level, AFA actions were mainly based around countering known - or intelligence-indicated - fascist mobilisations. Remembrance Sunday in London was the first national focus point in 1986 - the National Front having made a point of marching to the Cenotaph on the day, then attacking left wing targets - notably the anti-Apartheid picket outside the South African Embassy. These militant AFA mobilisations had the desired effect - the fascists were stopped. In the North, meanwhile, the Northern Network mobilised against the BNP's Remembrance Sunday meetings at Clifford's Tower, York. The BNP chose Clifford's Tower as it was the site where many of York's Jewish community were burned to death in the middle ages. Some of these early AFA mobilisations to York were relatively open, and quite large. In 1988, for instance, Liverpool AFA took a full coach and minibus - over 80 people - to the event, though on that occasion they were stopped on the outskirts of York and escorted all the way back to Liverpool by the police (the same happened to a coach from Newcastle). Echoes of police tactics in the Miner's Strike of 1984-85… Later mobilisations tended to use just mini-buses. Again, after a few years, AFA tactics were successful.

Remembrance Sunday was only one day - many other AFA mobilisations occurred, in many parts of the country, over these years. This was especially so as new AFA groups were formed and new AFA Regions were organised[4]. Tactics evolved and were constantly under review. A typical 'event' in the North would involve a call-out after intelligence indicated fascist activity – e.g. a BNP election leafleting would be taking place (mobilisations weren't just about marches). AFA would meet, send out scouts, and act according to intelligence gathered on the day. Sometimes AFA leafleting of estates was not just to counter fascist propaganda, but also to provide a legal excuse for being there. As time went on, in the Northern Network (London AFA operated very differently), each local group elected a delegate during mobilisations. Delegates from each group got together on the day and coordinated events. Usually, but not always, the unofficial 'chief steward' was the one in whose backyard the nazi mobilisation had occurred. Coordination was more based on informal working relationships and trust rather than any official positions, and once the fascists were located, what happened next had more to do with personal initiative and 'bottle' than a 'commander'.


AFA take on Blood and Honour in Hyde Park, 1989

The main national public AFA events over these years are worth outlining:

In London, Blood and Honour - the nazi record label and music front - was beaten off the streets in 1989 when they tried to organise publicly. In 1991 an AFA Unity Carnival in London - attended by 10,000 in September - was followed on Remembrance Sunday by a 4,000 strong confrontational 'National Demonstration Against Racist Attacks' through the East End. From reacting to the fascists, AFA was seizing the initiative. This was the biggest anti-fascist demo in years - AFA seemed on the verge of some kind of breakthrough.

Instead, seeing the way the wind was blowing, within months the SWP had re-launched the Anti-Nazi League (a very different animal to the original militant ANL of the 1970's [5]), Militant launched Youth Against Racism in Europe, and Black Nationalists in the Labour Party launched the Anti-Racist Alliance 6]. The end result of this was that, while these new organisations brought in new faces, anti-fascist unity had suddenly become a competitive market place, with organisations which were better funded, and better-connected in terms of media publicity than AFA. AFA did continue to help organise and provide stewards for specific broader anti-racist marches - such as the 1992 'National Demonstration Against Racist Murders' [7] - but there were no more AFA marches. By 1993, in big national anti-fascist marches, like the marches to the BNP headquarters in Welling, organised by all the 'big names' - the biggest being of 40,000 in September 1993 - AFA activists either organised separately to track down any BNP groups ( e.g. London) or joined the march (e.g. Liverpool). AFA carnivals did still continue. A rained-on Unity Carnival in London in September 1992 provided a useful recruiting ground for the 'Battle of Waterloo' a week later - when Blood and Honour were smashed off the streets again, by over 1,000 anti-fascists organised around AFA. The last big AFA carnival was in Newcastle in June 1993, with 10,000 taking part. In London, in January 1994, an AFA national mobilisation humiliated another attempt by neo-nazis to go public - this time by paramilitary group Combat 18[8].

Other areas AFA was involved in included Cable Street Beat - inspired by the Rock Against Racism of the original (1970's) ANL, to promote anti-fascism through music. Freedom of Movement was set up later - based in Manchester - to further this idea in the clubbing scene. Other AFA campaigns were launched to promote anti-fascism at football grounds - starting with Leeds, and later Newcastle, Manchester, Glasgow , etc. A national AFA magazine - 'Fighting Talk' - was produced, and the AFA profile was also raised by a BBC 'Open Space' programme about the group.

Breakdown of the united front
The 'united front' where activists worked together started to break down as the 1990s progressed.

The relationship with Searchlight started to turn sour. Anarchists had not trusted Searchlight since at least the early 1980's - when articles in anarchist papers examined Searchlight's then editor Gerry Gable's links with Special Branch (alleging a 'something for something' relationship – i.e. Searchlight would give details to the State, and not just about fascists)[9]. In 1993 Searchlight ran a smear campaign against anarchists - in particular against specific DAM and Class War members - alleging they were really fascists. This probably wasn't a coincidence now there were alternatives to AFA to back. From the mid-1990's Red Action - who had previously had a very close relationship with Searchlight - began more and more to take the line that association with Searchlight was becoming a liability - with Searchlight increasingly providing misinformation and trying to manipulate AFA for its own agenda [10].

Relationships between Red Action and anarchists also began to break down. In London , state interest in Red Action at this time seemed more than just paranoia, and anarchists were obviously being kept out of the loop. Workers Power left for the ANL, many independents left, and, increasingly, London AFA was moving from an alliance run mainly by Red Action, to one consisting more or less exclusively of Red Action.

In Glasgow - around late 1992 - relationships between anarchists and Glasgow Red Action deteriorated to the extent that anarchists felt compelled to organise a separate meeting. At least two anarchists leaving the meeting were physically attacked by Red Action members. One of the organisers of the meeting - a committed anti-fascist of long standing - was later falsely smeared as a police grass in Red Action's paper 'Red Action' [11].

The main contribution to the united front breaking down, however, became the pushing of a new Red Action strategy: creating a new political party - the Independent Working Class Association (IWCA) - around 1995. The IWCA didn't come from nowhere. A turning point, as far as London Red Action goes, was the election of a BNP councillor - Derek Beacon - in the Isle of Dogs, London, in 1993. As was said at the time, London AFA felt they had nothing to offer people apart form 'don't vote BNP', which in the circumstances, Red Action felt, could only have meant vote Labour or Liberal Democrat - the very people who'd helped create the housing problems in the Isle of Dogs in the first place. Red Action had always been a strong supporter of the Irish Republican movement - and the move of Republicans from the armed struggle towards community organising, and the electoral success of Sinn Fein, may well have also played a role in the re-thinking of Red Action's strategy.

When Red Action started pushing forward the idea of the IWCA, articles were written, circulars sent out, and a meeting held in the North in late 1995 where London Red Action put forward their case. The argument was basically 'if not us, who?' was to fill the political vacuum created on the left by Labour abandoning the working class on the one hand, and AFA's success in beating the fascists on the right. The BNP were moving from the 'battle of the streets' (which they'd lost) to a EuroNationalist/community activist [12] strategy. AFA, it was stated, would have to adapt. This wasn't billed as a decision-making meeting. No vote was taken, but from then on Red Action argued that there was a 'mandate' - that there was a 'consensus' in AFA to officially back the IWCA - despite the Northern Network voting against official backing[13]. This position was backed by London's control of 'Fighting Talk' [14].


AFA graphic of the celtic cross - logo of Blood & Honour, being smashed

As was said at the time, many AFA activists already had wider political commitments and they argued that why should a united front organisation like AFA prioritise any particular working class party in an election? After all, AFA was open for SLP and other party supporters to join - and many AFA activists were against electoralism as a strategy anyway. The IWCA down-playing of the workplace as an area of struggle also came at the time when 500 Liverpool Dockers had been locked out and solidarity actions were occurring all over the world (most notably among USA longshoremen and in Australia) during a struggle lasting over 2 years.

The IWCA was being pushed as a way to stop AFA stagnating as the BNP abandoned the battle for the streets. In reality, the struggle for the party political line alienated much of the AFA core and periphery - in undermining the united front it became a factor in the decline it was stated to prevent.

Decline
After 1995, some anti-fascist mobilisations did still occur i e.g. against the NF in Dover in 1997 and 1998. Internally, a new AFA National Coordinating Committee was set up in 1997. From the way this was used it is clear that this Committee actually had powers - a far cry from the old national committee – an indication of how few anarchists were still involved organisationally, and how far the Northern Network had declined. In 1997 an AFA statement officially banned members from associating with Searchlight - and, in 1998, Leeds and Huddersfield AFA were expelled by the new Committee, officially for ignoring this policy. Expulsions didn't stop the decline. There were some local re-launches – e.g. Liverpool in 2000. But by 2001 - though probably a long time before - AFA as a national organisation hardly existed.

Some argued that unless AFA adapted to the new BNP strategy, AFA would 'atrophy' and wither. AFA was geared for confrontation. Without confrontation AFA - as it then was - would have no reason to exist. Some believe its demise was hastened by the creation of the IWCA which diverted some AFA time and resources. But there were definitely other factors. Key ones included:

- the police cottoning on to AFA tactics
- 'competition' from more high-profile anti-fascist groups
- the lack of intelligence following the break with Searchlight
- street fight, arrests and injuries from the war of attrition and a ageing activists with increasing family commitments taking their toll as the income of new members slowed.

Offshoots
Some former elements from AFA regrouped to form militant anti-fascist group No Platform in 2002 and others later in Antifa in 2004. Antifa, largely dominated by anarchists, has imitated AFA's stance of physical and ideological confrontation with fascists and has a policy of non-co-operation with Searchlight or any other state-linked agencies. The IWCA continues to run for election in certain areas and has a small number of councillors.


The bulk of this text was from an article, Anti-Fascist Action - an Anarchist perspective, by an ex-Liverpool and Northern Network AFA member written in February 2005 for Black Flag magazine. It mostly took a Northern angle and was run past other ex-AFA members - from Liverpool and elsewhere - to cross-check the facts and provide feedback. The text was heavily edited by libcom.org in 2006 to shorten it, remove the first-person writing style, remove some analysis and opinion and remove some footnotes. The Offshoots section was also added. The original article will soon be available in the libcom.org library.

Footnotes
1. Eg attempted fascist meetings in the Adelphi Hotel and St. George's Hotel.
2. Information taken from the Liverpool AFA minutes of the national meeting - these were a lot more detailed than the official minutes.
3. DAM abolished itself and launched the Solidarity Federation in 1994 - the aim being to build a class organisation based on anarcho-syndicalist principles - based on industrial and community networks - rather than being just a political grouping of anarcho-syndicalists (see http://www.direct-action.org.uk/ ). Not all DAM members - including some of the most active anti- fascists - joined the new organisation.

For a brief overview of some of the events in London AFA during these years, from a DAM member's perspective, see the pamphlet "Bash the Fash - Anti-Fascist Recollections 1984-93", K.Bullstreet. Published by Kate Sharpley Library, BM Hurricane London, WC1N 3XX.
4. Scotland existed as a Region probably since 1993. In 1994 the Midlands Region was launched and moves were begun to launch a Southern Region. The AFA public contact list in 1996 (as shown in Fighting Talk) had 12 groups listed in the North, 12 in the South (including London), 4 in the Midlands, 3 in Scotland, and 1 in Wales. There were quite a number of groups not in the list – e.g. Doncaster, Chesterfield, and Mansfield. Groups also varied in terms of numbers and resources, and were often contacts for a much wider area (i.e. you really need to know the background) but this still gives a rough idea about where AFA's strength lay at this time.
5. For a comparison of the old and new ANL, see "The Anti-Nazi League A Critical Examination 1977-81/2 and 1992-95". Originally published by the Colin Roach Centre in 1996, it can be read at http://www.red-star-research.org.uk/rpm/anl.html .
6. 'Black Nationalist' meaning that, according to ARA, racism could only be fought under Black leadership. Where this left Asian or Chinese members for example wasn't mentioned…
7. November 1992, Eltham, London. The march was held under the banner of the 'Rohit Duggal Family Campaign'. 16 year old Rohit Duggal was murdered in July 1992 in a racist attack.
8. Some people called this 'Waterloo 2' - though it wasn't anywhere near as public. Combat 18 (18 standing for AH i as in Adolf Hitler) was the short-lived organisation of nazi 'hard men' and would-be terrorists designed to take on AFA and others, and used to provide security for the BNP. C18 eventually disintegrated. The history of C18 is quite convoluted and bizarre, so will not be explained in detail here.
9. Various articles in anarchist papers and magazines. Also New Statesman, 15.02.1980.
10. See various articles on the Red Action web site http://www.redaction.org. Also various 'Fighting Talk's. Whatever the reasons, it's clear there was a breakdown in the Searchlight-Red Action relationship.
11. Information re-confirmed recently [2004] by a then member of Glasgow DAM, and by a contact in Liverpool. Looking back, the Glasgow Red Action attack on anarchists wasn't really dealt with properly - either within AFA or the wider anarchist movement. As it was, the incident caused a lot of bad blood nationally, but AFA held together.
12. "EuroNationalist" meaning a strategy similar to Le Pen's National Front in France - rather than a 'march and grow' storm trooper traditional nazi approach. 'March and grow' in Britain had by now become a lot closer to 'march and die'.
13. Liverpool AFA sent out a statement nationally - soon after London Red Action's meeting, arguing against AFA becoming the physical wing or part of any political party or organisation. This statement was provisionally adopted at the next Northern Network meeting, pending further debate.
14. Fighting Talk (Nov 1995) stated that the Northern Network supported the IWCA, and printed an IWCA recruitment article. This was never updated. AFA groups were sent IWCA leaflets with 'AFA' on as sponsors. To keep things brief - the way things happened could, perhaps, have been due to a genuine misunderstanding of how the Northern Network operated. It came across as railroading - to put it mildly. It could certainly have been handled better.
15. There's some background information on this in "The Labour Party, Marxism and Liverpool": http://prome.snu.ac.kr/~skkim/data/arti ... rpool.html

More information
No Retreat: The secret war between Britain's Anti-Fascists and the Far Right. Dave Hann and Steve Tilzey.Milo Books.

[Zombie Glenn Beck]

You didnt answer me AD. How big is your no communication list?

[American Dream]

Beware of "spiritual" fascists:


http://www.whomakesthenazis.com/2011/12 ... beast.html

Julius Evola: A Dangerous Beast

Alfio Bernabei reviews Social and Political Thought of Julius Evola
by Paul Furlong (Routledge, 2011). Published in Searchlight magazine, Nov 2011.

As discussed in previous posts, Evola is a pin-up boy for legions of neo-folk, martial-industrial, etc., bands. I'd go so far as to say that mention of his name is used as a dog-whistle call between groups to indicate their interest in fascist ideas. This is transparent to those who know something about Evola, but may fool those who have been led to believe that he was a 'spiritual', 'mystical' writer, or a 'philosopher' - AS


A NAZI-FASCIST RACIST propagandist who after the fall of Mussolini and Hitler wondered whether sufficient men of sufficient quality still remained "on their feet" to carry out his grand design of more refined and successful dictatorships is not an easy subject to tackle, especially when the man in question, Julius Evola, sought to minimise the genocide almost to the point of negation and failed to acknowledge the responsibilities of both regimes. No wonder if he has been described by one of his critics as "so unclean a racist that it is repugnant to touch him with the fingers", and no surprise if his"Nazi delirium" is said to have inspired extreme right-wing militants and terrorists who in the late 1960s, 1970s and 1980s planted bombs in banks, trains and stations, killing and maiming dozens of people in the so called Italian "years of lead".

Paul Furlong recognises all this. He knows he is dealing with a dangerous beast. Wearing thick gloves he insists, however, that Evola needs to be studied because "the position of the anti­ modern intellectual may not appear comfortable, but the species exists and has its own survival mechanism". Some of the language may appear at times far too kind to his subject, but however wrapped in complex metaphysics this is ultimately the dissection of a mind capable of inspiring murderous acts in the tradition of those behind the Holy Inquisition, 9/11 or Utoja island.

Fantasy and falsification are embedded even in Evola's name. Beware of vainglorious Italians who think of themselves as descendants of the Roman Empire and feel the need to Latinise their identity to evoke Emperors' crowns and laurels. Already pompously called Giulio Cesare - Julius Caesar- when he was born in 1898 in Rome into a family of minor Sicilian aristocracy, he was to change the too plebeian "G" into "J", a letter foreign to the Italian alphabet, to mime himself into some tradition of the Imperium Romanum.

As a young man he was too distracted by the Dadaist movement, experimentation with drugs, magic practices and the esoteric in general, to take any notice of Mussolini's terrorist gangs rampaging up and down the country killing hundreds of people prior to the 1922 March on Rome. But as soon as the dictator ditched democracy, abolished parties, trade unions and a free press, and began to incarcerate and murder dissidents, Evola was quick to support the authoritarian experiment and eager to provide his intellectual contributions. He developed a lifelong interest in tyranny and how to perfect it through a minestrone of ideas that included alchemy, superstition, the occult, initiatory rituals, the sacred as inherited from mythologies, combining tradition with nationalism in search of the "absolute", by which he meant the primordial force that renews itself through the heroic deeds of men belonging to an elite, members of a superior race in a superior order, a hierarchy of the spirit.

Between 1927 and 1929 he sought to imbue Mussolini with a sense of the sacred through magic techniques. He engaged devotees to generate a spiritual force to put the uncouth dictator with peasant blood onto a transcendental level. How Mussolini reacted to such attempts to spiritualise fascism is not known. He was probably more interested in preparing the path to attain his imperial ambitions, hence the conquest of Abyssinia and Ethiopia presented as a kind of duty by a superior race descended from the Romans to rule over inferior people for their own good. Racist justification was needed and Evola obliged enthusiastically. Racism became his speciality. There was race of the body, race of the soul and race of the spirit. Needless to say, he was anti-semitic and anti­ black, as well as a misogynist who relegated women to the role of procreating machines.

After the Second World War he was charged alongside others engaged in terrorist activities with the crime of promoting the revival of the Fascist Party in breach of the new Italian Constitution. He may have perfected this idea after meeting Corneliu Codreanu in 1936, the Romanian founder of the Legions of the Archangel Michael whose Iron Guards carried out assassinations of politicians thought to be corrupt Developed further, as Furlong explains, this concept implies that "the spiritual value of an act is determined by the interior disposition of the actor and the integrity of his commitment to the perfection of the act itself". This is precisely the argument that one finds throughout history, all the way to the Twin Towers and Utoja Island.

That Evola was sometimes critical of fascism made him more valuable to the regime than other contemporaries, such as the philosopher Giovanni Gentile, Mussolini's Minister for Education. When intellectuals enslave themselves completely within the dominant culture they simply turn into part of the mechanism for the reinforcement of established values and fail to provide the permissible dissenting voice, the oxygen that is vital in the process of the maintenance of power. The fact that Evola was not content enough with fascism or Nazism and believed that such regimes were only the first rough step on the ladder to some elevated, more spiritual form of governance, was perfectly acceptable, in fact, functional. He wasn't saying stop, this is enough. He was saying the opposite: continue to push ahead and refine your means because there is an optimum level to be found, a level of absolute tyranny reaching all the way to some spiritual dimension that humans have no right to challenge.

As an enemy of democracy and a believer in the cast system, he was so steeped in legends inspired by the rigid order of spiritual paganism as to believe in history as a cycle likely to resurrect in some form Hesiod's Golden Age and a return to the Age of the demigods (Achilles and suchlike). He so fancied himself as an inspirational figure that he choreographed his own death in that fashion. He is said to have asked his friends to lift him out of bed so that he could die "on his feet", like a mythic warrior, looking through his window over the Gianicolo district of Rome at the place where the Temple of Janus once stood -Janus being the two-faced God of time looking simultaneously at the past and at the future. As well as implying that unrepentant nazi-fascists can "ride the tiger" through time (an expression he was fond of) he was seeking to evoke the fascination for "the quest", the magic pointer (he had once written about the Holy Grail), while reconfirming his support for the right-wing terrorists who were at the time seeking to destabilise the country. Evola is now gaining followers in the United States, Britain, and especially in Russia where some right-wingers with political influence dream of a coming Russian Imperium, with Moscow romantically associated with the notion of a "Third Rome". His ashes, construed as a beacon, were scattered on top of Monte Rosa, Italy's magic peak said to emit a pink glow.

Furlong states unequivocally that "Evola's failure to speak clearly on the Holocaust; still less to acknowledge the responsibilities of regimes with which he was associated is a fatal lapse, enough to destroy his authority"and equally recognises that "the deliberate refusal to condemn those who use one's work to promote violence is not significantly different from condoning violence". This association could have been made clearer by placing Evola's thought development more closely in touch with the historical context of the events he must have witnessed and condoned. We find no mention of the repression that followed the dictatorship after 1926, no word of the Abyssinian war that butchered hundreds of thousands of people and was one of the preludes to the Second World War and there is silence on the Spanish Civil War in which the Italian fascists took part with the Nazis, all episodes that would have provided plenty of evidence to Evola of the bloodshed meted out by both regimes in their thirst for power. And if after the Second World War the "strategy of tension" involved some of Evola's disciples, could it be that in spite of his anti-Americanism he was the maitre a penser of the gladiators in the Stay Behind secret network set up to strike a deadly blow at democracy? [emphasis added- A.D.]

The danger now is that Evola's ideas, still evidently capable of influencing Nazi­ fascists longing for absolutist solutions, may filter more widely into the current wave of historical revisionism, turning him into an acceptable figure in the Italian intellectual landscape of generations to come. It is shocking, to give but one example, to find one of the most popular contemporary writers, Roberto Saviano, author of Gomorrah, publicly listing Evola among his favourite intellectuals. "As a writer", he stated "I formed myself on well known authors in the traditional and conservative culture, Ernst Junger, Ezra Pound, Louis-Ferdinand Gline, Carl Schmitt. I don't even dream of denying it. I must add that I often read even Julius Evola ..."

One hopes that Furlong's important study will soon be translated into Italian so that more people can be better informed on what Evola stood for. Some adjustments are needed. Mussolini set up the Social Republic with Nazi support from September 1943, not 1944. And I can't help thinking that in citing the terrorist massacres perpetrated by some of Evola's admirers, the number of victims should be mentioned: 17 people died and 88 were wounded, for instance, in the Piazza Fontana bombing in Milan in 1969. Real blood helps to put things into perspective.

Alfio Bernabei

[jakell]

AD seems to have been wounded by the opening up process and seems on a quest to warn others of danger. Laudable, I suppose.

You've said this before, and it seems to indicate that AD has undergone some sort of transformation. This is something I haven't witnessed and can only comment on what I see at present.

If he is hampered in some way (which seems to be the case), then this does not stop him taking certain steps to preserve this fragile condition. Suddenly switching to non-engagement is an insightful way of doing this, the insight being that if he engages me (and others) he will be exposed, and will have to climb down.
This 'insight' shows that he has the potential to take positive steps too, in other words, under all that, there is the potential for empathy (that is actual empathy, not just used for particular ends).

As to him wanting to warn others of danger, I am hoping that this 'insight' also extends to an eventual realisation that his actions don't serve to warn anyone, but to possibly obscure these things instead.

[jakell]

You didnt answer me AD. How big is your no communication list?

Maybe you're on his 'no communication' list. We'll have to ask him about that.

Oh wait....

[seemslikeadream]

look for them in the zone

[Zombie Glenn Beck]

Did AD just suggest without any evidence at all that Julius Evola was a part of GLADIO?

[Project Willow]

Okay, enough is enough already.

Jakell, I get that your initial interactions with AD were not very pleasant, and I'd understand if you were still angry, but now you're just trolling the hell out of this thread.

Find something constructive to contribute, another topic to focus on, or take a time out.

Everybody, this is not a forum for badgering, dogging, and psychoanalyzing each other through the virtual ether. Please keep posts centered on the topic and not on other posters' perceived foibles, inadequacies, quirks, or general assholery. Do pm a mod in the case of flagrant assholery.

Thank you.

[jakell]

look for them in the zone.

I get the impression that this is why AD doesn't say much, because when he does he makes dumb comments like the 'grey zone' one.

Don't despair AD, I think you're just out of practice, and probably spend too much time hunting around for massive texts that hardly anyone can find time to read (never mind digest). If you just chill and engage normally, you will do ok.

[American Dream]

Back to topic:

http://www.solfed.org.uk/no-platform-for-fascism

No Platform for Fascism

BNP fascism
The British National Party is a fascist party and must be treated as such. Don’t be fooled by their growing electoral success. Don’t think that because “ordinary” people, and even non-racists, are voting for them and joining them that the party has somehow changed. Elected positions and an influx of “moderate” members will not transform the party.

In the BNP, power and policy flow from the top down and the party is run by veteran fascists who won’t deviate from their long held agenda. Whatever they say in public, these people are committed to creating an authoritarian regime, to severe limits on individual and collective freedom in every sphere of life, to racial segregation and eventual removal of non-white people. On top of this, the BNP has a stated commitment to maintaining capitalism and free enterprise, contradicting its claims to be an “alternative”, radical or even revolutionary party.

electoral politics
Yet the BNP will push its electoral strategy to the limit, seeking to capitalise on any and every source of voters’ fear and discontent. These range from local community concerns to disgust over MPs’ expenses, from fears about the economic crisis to concerns over immigration, radical Islam and terrorism. The BNP don’t care what the issue is, or whether people’s fears are justified; they just tailor the message in an attempt to win people over. This is what fascists have always done. They will use the electoral system, democratic “freedoms” and the notion of freedom of speech to put across their poisonous message, For as long as they can, they’ll portraying themselves as a democratic party, acting within the law and seeking to gain power by legal means. Ultimately, their aim is to silence all opposition.

strategy of tension
Yet BNP leaders know that there are limits to their electoral support, even in cases like the recent Euro poll, where the voting system, low turnout, economic uncertainty and popular anger at the “political class” all played into their hands. They know that there will always be a majority opposing them.

How then, can they get around this? In the past, fascists have played the parliamentary game while also exacerbating tensions in society which they hoped would drive people into their camp. In Italy, in the 1920s and as recently as the 1980s, fascists sought to use class conflict, the strength of the left and the perceived threat of revolution to persuade powerful sectors of society, inside and outside of government and industry, to opt for an authoritarian “solution”. In the ’20s this “strategy of tension” worked, with Mussolini’s minority fascist party attacking the left and being hoisted to power by its influential conservative friends. In the ’80s it failed, but only at the cost of many lives, as fascist gangs and their allies in the state structure engaged in armed actions and bombings.

In Britain today, the organised working class has taken a battering and, despite some encouraging signs lately, cannot be painted as being about to seize control. How-ever, this won’t stop the BNP denouncing opposition to it as “red mobs” in an attempt to whip up fears of political violence on the streets. Two days after his election, BNP leader, Nick Griffin, was calling on police to “get a grip” on anti-fascist protestors – the first step in the authoritarian solution he advocates for all Britain’s ills. But the BNP’s main arena will be race and immigration. It will be here that they try to whip up fears of impending social conflict, of the destruction of “traditional” British values and institutions and of the “indigenous” population becoming a persecuted minority in its own country. Here, the BNP will be helped not just by the undercurrent of racism still present in British society, but by those sections of the media and the political elite which feed it on a daily basis with scare stories about everything from asylum seekers, immigrants and Islamists to the EU. Though these media outlets do not support the BNP, their expressions of nationalism and xenophobia inevitably play into the party’s hands.

But for fascists, even this fetid mix of fear and paranoia is not enough. They are already seeking to spice it up with racial violence on a frightening scale. The BNP argument will be helped enormously if they can point to actual conflict between ethnic groups, and moves are already afoot to provoke this. While the BNP itself will seek to retain its democratic and legalistic image, other far right groups, some linked to the party, some not, are already taking to the streets trying to ignite violence. The BNP will deny any ties with them, but will seize upon any resulting clashes to argue that multiculturalism doesn’t work, that black and Asian youth are attacking whites, and that the “indigenous” population can no longer tolerate this state of affairs.

On May 24th, groups calling themselves “March for England” and “United People of Luton” supported a protest in the Bedfordshire town over an earlier Muslim demo against troops returning from Afghanistan. Though some of the organisers denied this was a racist march, around 400 people, some masked, and including known fascists, assembled and roamed the streets waving British and English flags. Asian-owned shops and cars were attacked and police intevened to prevent the mob descending on the Bury Park area, a centre of the town’s Asian community. “March for England” have said they are planning future events.

new phase of conflict
This was barely reported by a mainstream media still playing down the BNP’s potential at the Euro elections, but it is a portent of what is to come and a clarion call to anti-fascists. We are entering a new phase of conflict with the far right and we must be absolutely clear about what we are doing and why. Fascism is about far more than racism, and a reinvigorated far right will not just focus on its perceived racial enemies. Its activists are already targeting radical bookshops, social centres and those on the left. Should the economic crisis deepen, especially in conjunction with the collapse of parliamentary “legitimacy” in the eyes of many and increased racial tension, elements of the state, business and conservatism will begin to contemplate supporting the BNP. By any assessment, this scenario is still far down the road, and circumstances may never bring it into being. But we can ensure that this cannot happen by attacking the BNP and its ilk now, by preventing them from organising and developing their strength, and thereby eliminating them as a potential or actual ally of other anti-working-class forces in society.

Defeating fascism is an integral part of building a revolutionary movement. It increases our combativeness, forces us to communicate our ideas to ever wider circles of potential sympathisers and exposes as false the liberal arguments that fascists have a right to “free speech”, that parliamentary democracy is a defence against the far right, and that relying on the forces of the state is the best way to protect working people from oppression and violence. We must close down fascism as a first step to ridding our class of all of the parasites currently exploiting us and living off our backs.

what is to be done?
Build SF – we have a great tradition of anti-fascism and must recruit on the basis of that and of our work today. We are the revolutionary alternative.

Support wider militant anti-fascist campaigns – that means Antifa (http://www.antifa.org.uk/) which already has many anarchist adherents. It’s the only national anti-fascist organisation with a policy of “no platform” for fascism, of not allowing the BNP to organise, speak or campaign without physical opposition. If there are like minded people in your area, form an anti-fascist group and get affiliated to Antifa.

New links with those threatened by fascism – the BNP seeks to “divide and rule”, preferring to defeat us piecemeal than to take on a united, militant anti-fascist movement. Anyone who agrees with “no platform”, whether part of organised anti-fascism before or not, now needs to organise around it. A primary responsibility for anti-fascists is to make direct links with communities which fascists will target. This does not mean going to “community leaders” (unless they genuinely back a no platform approach), but making efforts to draw in disaffected and angry members of those communities which militant anti-fascism has often previously struggled to connect with. We can much more quickly raise the numbers we need to swamp fascism by dramatically and imaginatively broadening our networks of supporters. New times call for new tactics and we must look outwards and break down barriers between people willing to confront the BNP.

No platform for fascists – don’t be conned by liberal notions of free speech or of appearing “anti-democratic” by preventing the BNP from organising or speaking. No measure of electoral success can be allowed to legitimise fascism. Organise direct action against all fascist manifestations – stalls, leafleting, meetings, venues, marches. We have made a good start with this. Griffin and Andrew Brons were forced from public view outside Westminster the day after the election. In Manchester the next day, they were boxed into a run down pub owned by a BNP supporter, only fending off protestors with the aid of the police. These protests were organised mainly by Unite Against Fascism, linked to the SWP and reformist trade unions. It has in the past sought to prevent direct action so it remains to be seen whether the BNP’s electoral success will prompt it to take “no platform” more literally.

Keep up the pressure – Griffin says of anti-fascists that “in the end they will get bored”. He clearly intends to put across the party’s message in Britain, rather than jet off to Brussels and fiddle expenses. This will be a crucial contest of will with a BNP desperately trying to be an accepted and permanent feature of the political landscape, to “normalise” and “decontaminate” itself in order to rise up the greasy political pole. Anti-fascists must wreck this strategy at all costs.

[jakell]

Okay, enough is enough already.

Jakell, I get that your initial interactions with AD were not very pleasant, and I'd understand if you were still angry, but now you're just trolling the hell out of this thread.

Find something constructive to contribute, another topic to focus on, or take a time out.

Everybody, this is not a forum for badgering, dogging, and psychoanalyzing each other through the virtual ether. Please keep posts centered on the topic and not on other posters' perceived foibles, inadequacies, quirks, or general assholery. Do pm a mod in the case of flagrant assholery.

Thank you.

Really? ok then, but I thought I was being fairly urbane. Have you read my earlier comments in between the tomes. They were attempts at being positive

I'm not angry, and wasn't initially either. The projected perception of this has been a bit of (apparently successful)theatre.

[jakell]

Back to topic:

http://www.solfed.org.uk/no-platform-for-fascism

This is another inaccurate and out of date article. The BNP are in no way achieving electoral success and haven't for ages. If you want to know the real deal, ask me, I can provide you with relevent and up to date info.

In my opinion, you are spamming any old thing that you can find, and considering the gravity of the subject matter, this is a fairly grievous thing.


ETA: just looked and it is from 2009, which isn't exactly ancient, but this was their last gasp of any success with both Griffin and Brons achieving EU positions. This was the utter Zenith of their achievements, and their plummet after that has been spectacular.
Run this stuff by me first, or find someone else in the know.

[Zombie Glenn Beck]

Okay, enough is enough already.

Jakell, I get that your initial interactions with AD were not very pleasant, and I'd understand if you were still angry, but now you're just trolling the hell out of this thread.

Find something constructive to contribute, another topic to focus on, or take a time out.

Everybody, this is not a forum for badgering, dogging, and psychoanalyzing each other through the virtual ether. Please keep posts centered on the topic and not on other posters' perceived foibles, inadequacies, quirks, or general assholery. Do pm a mod in the case of flagrant assholery.

Thank you.

Thats not very fair. AD can accuse Jakell of being a Nazi but Jakell cant get a few passive aggressive pot shots in return? As the defenders of this link spam thread have stated in the past, you are free to ignore anything you dont like. You are are free to ignore us poking the resident paranoid with a stick, and Jakell, Seemslikeadream, me and anyone else who AD has explicitly and implicitly stated are Fascists are free to ignore AD. But personally, I dont like being accused of being a Nazi so Im just going to keep on poking.

[American Dream]

I dont like being accused of being a Nazi so Im just going to keep on poking.

I'm not going to distract from this thread for further discussion like this- would be willing to say some things in a thread specifically about board dynamics- but this is crap...

[Zombie Glenn Beck]

Im also surprised that more people arent offended by the line of thought where this entire board is full of mush brained children who need ADs careful protection lest evil reactionary thoughts be implanted in their heads. Or the even more offensive interpretation where this board is a "grey zone" full of people who are already down the road to full on 14/88 Sieg Hiel Fascism and just need a little push to make the transformation complete.