th people who did this should have been photographed and made public.

so what were the uaf supposed to do? we organised this demo and your "supporter" was pissing people off.
so educate us - what would you have done in our position?

Perhaps you didn't want us to see people like this.

Personally I don't believe the statement goes far enough however.

The UAF and the SWP are as much the enemy as the Police, the BNP, organised religion etc etc and should be treated as such.

Authoritarian, dangerous...and holding us back.

I completely support this article - its another example that the UAF are not only an ineffective organisation for challenging fascism but actively try and prevent such a challenge. It stresses the desperate need for alternative modes of organising ourselves, in order to mount a serious, unambiguous challenge to fascism. This is something both the Trots AND anti-fa are seriously failing at at the minute

Left a group of antifascists who did march kettled in by police with edl.There was also a guy pottering around while they were giving shit speechs to the converted and i saw him lat year.white flatcap england badge on it and a tattoo on his neck that i could see a b on. Similar pictures that he took at the bpps anti hip hop demo apeared on redwatch.
Uaf were fucking useless more keen to get their faces on tv and in the papers

I am neither an anarchist nor a socialist nor an active anti-fascist (although I am anti-fascist like any decent person is) and have never really liked the bickering between the anarchists and socialists in the anti-fascist movement. I feel there is space for A to B marches and electoralism as well as direct and autonomous actions. I have been on a couple of UAF demos in the past because I wanted to protest the BNP and they were the ones organizing the demos.

But I totally agree with the Anarchist Federation on this one, if what they say is accurate, as there is no excuse for grassing on comrades. Providing the activist wasn't punching UAF supporters or something equally stupid, it is none of the UAFs business how another activist chooses to conduct themselves. The streets don't belong to the UAF doesn't matter what agreement they may have set up with the cops.

Fascism is a complete abdication of personal responsibility. You are surrendering all responsibility for your own actions to the state in the belief that in unity there is strength, which was the definition of fascism represented by the original Roman symbol of the bundle of bound twigs. yes, it is a very persuasive argument: “In unity there is strength.” But inevitably people tend to come to the conclusion that the bundle of twigs will be much stronger if all the twigs are of a uniform size and shape[.] So it goes from “in unity there is strength” to “in uniformity there is strength”, and from there it proceeds to the excess of fascism as we’ve seen them excercise throughout the twentieth century and into the twenty-first.

Now anarchy, on the other hand, is almost starting from the principle that “in diversity there is strength”, which makes more sense from the point of view of looking at the natural world. [sic] The whole program of evolution seems to be to diversify, because in diversity there is strength.

And if you apply that on a social level, you get something like anarchy. Everybody is recognised as having their own abilities, their own particular agendas, and everybody has their own need to work cooperatively with other people.

Alan Moore Magpie’s book…

More in depth reply  http://projectsheffield.wordpress.com/2009/11/14/the-anarchist-federation-are-scum/

Everyone already knew that UAF are basically middle class New Labour voters. What's new?

UAF are the sorts of 'leftist' people that would have sold anarchists over to General Franco given half the chance. Cooperation with state oppression is state endorsed facism.

to see how the 'anti-racists' left the confrontation of the EDL/SDL to listen to speeches,

 http://www.indymediascotland.org/node/17396

same article may be published on uk Indymedia soon.

&heanor& some others UAF though have organised alot of antifascist demo's within state parameters. UAF leaders like Bennet etc say their necks are on the line if demo goes astray. If they threw a AF member to cops that sucks, I guess this member has not been arrested is ok?, either way I will bring this up my first UAF meet& tell them this isnt acceptable.
Its hard though when UAF nationally are organising most of the demo's, whilst this happening though, if we want to stop EDL lets take& hold the pubs.

EDL use footy hooligan strategy, if we educate people more to their nazi links& keep their poison out of most of pubs in areas they protest they will get less cheer & or we will get help throwing them out if they start.
Most people hate nazis or hooligan gangs& in my experience when I have stood up to gangs like this complete strangers intervene in numbers, usually only after they start attacking, but they help intervene against agressors if necessary, sometimes against antifash if it appears we are the aggressors, it really is human nature.

Most nazi idiots want to attack us, so when they do it,lets throw them down the stairs & if they get detained as well fine, they should be.Nazis should be inside& or getting professional help, otherwise they often just go back underground, beating them up or having repeated wars isnt a solution.This might not be what the state wants, but majority of people want physco nazis or Al queada types locked up & around the world most people want Bush &Blair,maybe even Obama with them. Most Fascists hate democracy& we dont even live in a proper democracy yet, but a direct democracy locally,nationally & internationally is acheivable.
UAF have to accept that dictatorship by a vangaurd is unacceptable,fascism is unacceptable & rule by groups of corporate oligarchs is unacceptable.

"so what were the uaf supposed to do? we organised this demo and your "supporter" was pissing people off. so educate us - what would you have done in our position?"

Wherever the edl come there is going to be an antifascist opposition. The UAF contacting the police to tell them they are holding a counter-protest does not give them the right to dictate the parameters of the protest for every single person who turns out to oppose fascism. UAF do not own the streets any more than the police think they own the streets.

Also, I don't remember "pissing people off" being an arrestable offence the last time I checked the statute books.

For next time, the UAF should take an attitude that they are one of many groups protesting, and they do not have any special legal rights or responsibility for other people's behaviour.

First thing to say is to congratulate all the folks who protested against the EDL in Glasgow - 1,500 Anti-Fascists against 90 EDL tops is an overwhelming humiliation for Fascism. People who have photos and video please post on You Tube and Wikipedia ASAP

It sounds like UAF fucked-up big time on several counts in Glasgow, and while I'm no fan of the SWP, Antifa are guilty of an equal degree of ideological opportunism, and I'm caught between genuine admiration for everyone who's got the courage to physically oppose Fascists, and the painful realisation that both the SWP and Antifa go out their way to alienate people from getting involved in Anti-Fascism

However you have to remember that most of the anti-EDL mobilisations would never have happened were it not for the UAF and while I personally admire authoritarian leftism as much as I'd appreciate a jab in the eye with a red hot poker, I concede UAF some respect for at least bothering to organise the protests that Antifa then enjoy the luxury of moaning about

next time we have a case of uaf stewards grassing people up and helping pigs to arrest people, they should be sorted out. Work with the enemy and yo uwill be treated like an enemy.

In the park I voiced opposition to Labour's attacks on migrants. One steward told me "If you don't stop I'll call the police and ask them to remove you."

After a cop accused me of pushing him, someone told me "We're not here to fight the police."
"Two myths have grown up around the event (the battle of Cable Street), which of course was a milestone in the long history of working class struggle. One is that the opposition to the Mosley fascists was almost entirely Jewish. The other is that the “battle” was between the protesters and the Blackshirts. It was not – it was a battle with the police."
Reg Weston

when a member of the AF can publicly wish for another anarchist to have a full mental breakdown, do we really think the uaf did such a bad fucking thing?

AF member: "I can't wait for [anarchist comrade's] complete mental breakdown online, it's going to be absolutely epic... My money is on either a full-time, David Icke style focus on imperialist aliens, or taking more management strategy lessons from the Wehrmacht. Preferably on the L&S blog."


Django (AF manchester) - looking out for you sunshine

This member of the AF wasn't "pissing everyone off". The UAF stewards can't even speak for everyone. Seemingly he was pissing them off. When the AF member was taken away by the police and his comrades asked the stewards why they'd done this, the only answer they got was "Because I don't like anarchists."

The fact that they think this makes it ok to hand him over to the cops is absolutely dispicable. In answer to the question of what I or anyone else who condemns this behaviour would suggest as an alternative: pretty much anything but that. In my opinion, handing anyone over to the cops for anything makes you a class traitor, but whatever your view on the law, if they weren't even committing a crime, then thats disgusting.

In answer to "Is the af really the anarchist group we want them to be?": What are you on? Are you actually saying that because apparently another member of the AF in a different city, on a different, entirely unrelated occaison said something that you consider to be pretty dickish, that this means that on this occaison it was ok to hand a member of the same organisation over to the cops for something completely different?

billy the Squid seems to have gotten confused with there mirror

but still the UAF are made of epic fail and will never become epic lulz.

the UAF even existing and running around like there going to lead us to the promised land is all are faults failures to build a real anti-fascist resistance on this island.

all collaborates are class traitors,though i dont really know if you can betray the middle class!?

uaf is a single issue popular peaceful campaigning organisation. Many of the people who attend their events have never been on a demo before. They need to be protected and nurtured. People who cant meet our standards of behaviour will be asked to leave, and if they choose not to the police will become involved. The alternative is that we dispense our own "Justice". That would make us as bad as our opponents.

The comments between this post and my last do not offer any practical solution to a situation that is lightly to reoccur so you now have a choice. You can put up or you can organise your own demo. What you cannot do is impose your style of demo on others.

To those that understand this message, see you on the streets.

TBH, I'm not sure what you really expect the AF as an organisation to do, we're not exactly about to go around policing the comments of every single member online all the time. Some might even see that as a tad authoritarian.

you stupid cock, you usually hijack demos anyway, not "organise" them. If you want to have a safe space "to have your say" and wave placards as opposed to actually confronting fascists or providing friendly crown for those that do confront them, then do it, but don't ever pretend on your websites that you actually have anything to do with stopping fascists from doing anything. I am sorry son, fighting fascism is not a game, yo ueither do it or you pretend that you do it. Next time fascist gather somewhere fuck off somewhere far away, then a.) your sorry ass will not be in any danger b.) that will leave space for those that actually want to confront fascists to do something about it and use methods they want to use, without you wankers imposing your code of safe behaviour.
As for dispensing your own justice- be careful you piece of shit that your wish doesnt become true, because next time your stewards will grass people up and help police dealing with the crow, the justice will be dispensed to you like to fucking traitors that yo uare.

Just because I arrange to meet friends in the town centre doesn't mean I can tell them how to act even if I was the one who set up the meeting. Just because you may have promoted an event does not mean you have a right to control it. The streets are not yours, they are ours. I've never had a real problem with the UAF but if this is true, you've crossed the line big time.

There is no place for grassing on other activists.

Although I wouldn't have put it quite like that I agree with what you are saying for the most part. I disagree that having 'lawful/official' type demo are useless I think such things can be good for people with kids, etc. to show support and so on. but as you say they should be held a long way from any action. They should not hold back people who can do something directly.

I also agree that we must build a consensus that stewards do not have a right to prevent activists from doing anything that is not harming other activists, animals or unrelated members of the public. If a steward chooses to obstruct anything else they are choosing to act as state enforcement and reasonable force may be used to remove the obstruction to the activist in the course of their duty!

uaf is a single issue unpopular pacifist SWP front organisation. Many of the people who attend their events have never been on a demo before, and after seeing our demo never will again. They need to be protected and nurtured, like the children they are. People who dont do (or believe, or look like) what we want them to do will be grassed up to our friends, the police. The alternative is that we dispense our own "Justice" against anti-fascists. That would make us as bad as our "opponents".

The comments between this post and my last do not offer any practical solution to a situation that is lightly [sic] to reoccur so you now have a choice. You can put up with us handing you over to the police or you can organise your own demo that we will try to undermine, co-opt or render useless. What you cannot do is impose your style of demo on others, because thats our job and we will set the police on you if you disagree.

To those that understand this message, see you on the streets miles away from any fascists or anything to do with what we pretend to be demonstrating against. Copy of the Socialist Worker?

For how long will those of us on the left that are not S.W.P members put up with their nonsense. This political cult has not only been a shambles with regards to challenging the state (they believe STW played a part in Blairs resignation!Ever so slightly deluded there!), with regards to Ending the war, well its still raging in the middle east and all over the world and no one much talks about it now it seems.

My point is this - when an issue that requires action arrives, so do the SWPs and they inevitably dilute the whole movement down, more specifically so it can seem like they are in control and they represent the voices of dissent. They do not listen to outsiders, even within their own party, cliquey i believe would be the term, common sense overturned by party/clique/lines. Even when they attempt to work with other left groups they cannot resist the urge to start recruiting for their bloody party, see the parents strikes over the school closure for just one of many many examples of this.

The SWPs hijacked the antiwar movement into this nice little wave banners, march , speeches and talks group I don't know if others agree with me here but I believe they blunted what could have been something very special as a movement. I believe they are doing the same with the anti-fash movement now as well. If I was a conspiracy theorist I would think they were a tool of state power to neuter the left, I am not of this opinion though.

I would like for all the groups marginalised and sidelined by the SWPs on the left , in Glasgow and around the UK, to seriously consider a coalition. The reason being there is no counter balance to the SWPs at the moment, and we need one if they are to be held accountable for things like turning over one of our own to the police just because they don't like anarchists, or for the clusterf**k that was the Nov 14th anti-EDL day in Glasgow. I personally have had enough of this party hijacking and blunting every movement they are in then claiming victories that never even took place or were not exclusively theirs in the first place.

"I expect nothing but hope for something"

It appears that we can agree on something. Anyone who can't, or won't, march with UAF is free to organise their opposition to the fash and set their own demo/protest agenda. We welcome this. We won't disrupt your demos. Hopefully you won't disrupt ours.

Some of the previous comments are so absurd that i question the motives of the posters. Who wins from spreading dissent?

you simply don't get it, do you? Its obviously too late for you to open your eyes, too deep in this shit already...
It's not just a case of us not coming to your demos and yo unot coming to ours- yo ualways try to hijack every protest that is happening and force your fucking agenda (which is fuck knows what exactly, because definitely its not fighting fascism in UK). I would LOVE to go to one anti-fascist protest in this country without seeing your fucking lollipop brigade and listen to same slogans for years and years and where crowd is confrontational and UAF stewards and leadership don't collaborate with cops and try to steer ppl away from actually doing something about fascism (and uaf supporters following like the sheep they are). So all in all excellent idea in theory, only if you woulnd't try to stick your fucking fingers in every protest that is happening. Oh yes and believe me- there is a LOT of talking about justice being dispensed to fucking collaborating scum that call themselves uaf stewards- you simply crossed the line on recent protests.

Think about what you're saying there. Seriously, just for one second, actually think about it.

I was there when it happened, and the reason he was handed over is because of blind prejudice towards anarchists. We were accused of starting, what turned out to be a good kicking for some fascist prick who'd managed to get inside the UAF demo. Incidentally, that was started by two SWP members (both of whom I know personally) and had fuck all to do with any anarchists, especially the guy that was handed over to the police (not that we wouldn't have given him a kickin' had we been stood next to him). Some dickhead steward saw a fight and then immediately assumed it was some anarchists, which apparently gives automatic legitimacy to police collaboration.

But in any case, since when has "pissing people off" ever been a reason to literally hand over militant anti-fascists to the police. What kind of nonsensical excuse is that? For god sake, you're an adult, get a fucking grip.

"Antifa are guilty of an equal degree of ideological opportunism, and I'm caught between genuine admiration for everyone who's got the courage to physically oppose Fascists, and the painful realisation that both the SWP and Antifa go out their way to alienate people from getting involved in Anti-Fascism "

How on earth do you come up with this statement regarding Antifa? In what way have Antifa been 'opportunist', and how have we gone out of our way to alinate people?

Here's a recent Antifa national statement:

"28/10: Fighting Fascism Is A Task For Us All (Antifa Statement)

In the past in Britain (and still today in most other European countries) opposing fascism was considered a duty by almost all anarchists and socialists. Today, many (particularly within the British anarchist movement) have abdicated responsibility for taking on the fascists, and either ignore the issue completely, or at best seed responsibility to specialist antifascist groups such as Antifa. Opposing fascism is something ALL of us have to play a part in, particularly with the growing influence of fascist groups like the British National Party (BNP.)

Organizations like ‘Unite Against Fascism’ (UAF) and ‘Hope Not Hate’ would probably agree with the above premise. However, while many of their rank and file supporters may be genuine in their intent, the organizations themselves have no real interest in defeating organized fascism. The UAF is a front-group dominated and controlled by the Trotskyite ‘Socialist Workers Party’ (SWP) who are far more interested in selling papers and recruiting members than in effectively confronting the BNP. ‘Hope Not Hate’ were set up by the State-affiliated entity ‘Searchlight’, who tell us we can stop the BNP by voting Labour and helping to strengthen the tools of the State itself (i.e. new laws.) Both groups merely seek to manipulate and exploit antifascists, and arguably their stupid politics must take some of the share of responsibility for the rise of the BNP in the first place. At best they are a waste of time.

Antifa is a network of ordinary men and women opposed to the rise of the Far-Right. We work autonomously, but are united by a shared set of principles enshrined in our Founding Statement. If you support our position, you can get involved with one of our groups, or you could even set up your own. Ultimately however, we are not asking for people to join us; we are not asking for your contact details or for your money; we are simply asking for you to ACT.

While their true aims have not changed in the slightest, the BNP are trying to make the move from the shadows of neo-Nazism to mainstream politics. They are hiding their old swastika armbands under suit jackets and going out leafleting instead of petrol-bombing the homes of Asian families (leaving that kind of terror to their fascist allies and their ‘off-duty’ members.) They stand candidates in elections and regularly hold stalls in town centres around the country. Going public in this way however, makes them vulnerable.

Besides the BNP, there are other fascist groups who must also be opposed when they come out onto the streets. They are in many ways even easier to combat. In fighting organized fascism the only limits are our imagination and courage, even small numbers of people can make a difference.

Antifa however, also believe in organizing within our own communities against the spread of racism stirred up by everyone from the mainstream media to New Labour, and against the fascism of the BNP. Only by organizing in our own communities and workplaces can we hope to defeat fascism once and for all. In the white working-class areas where the BNP have already gained a toe-hold (primarily former Labour strongholds where people rightly feel betrayed by the mainstream parties and have been conned into seeing the BNP as some form of ‘radical’ alternative), as well as confronting the BNP physically, we should aim to challenge the BNP’s fascist politics and replace them with our own anti-racist, anti-state, and pro working-class politics.

These are desperate times for antifascists and all of us must play our part in taking on organized fascism. Antifa believe we have already shown on numerous occasions that a relatively small number of dedicated antifascists can score decisive victories. Most of our actions and activities go unreported, but the fascists know and fear us. Imagine what a difference it would make if there were thousands of us.

Antifa England


It is the UAF/SWP and the rest of the Trotskyite left that are being opportunistic in terms of their supposed opposition to organised fascism. This is something that Antifa have been saying consistently for several years, and for clued-up antifascists the recent behaviour of UAF/SWP stewards in both Leeds and Manchester should come as no surprise. Nonetheless, they have certainly crossed a line, and should be treated accordingly.

“These are desperate times for antifascists and all of us must play our part in taking on organized fascism. Antifa believe we have already shown on numerous occasions that a relatively small number of dedicated antifascists can score decisive victories. Most of our actions and activities go unreported, but the fascists know and fear us. Imagine what a difference it would make if there were thousands of us.”

I entirely agree with the above statement. It is the solution that I dispute. Due to changes in the law, benefits, ‘war on terror’ etc. our numbers have dwindled. The fact is that the right-wing has changed its game. They are building their numbers in these troubled times by lying to people who want a solution to perceived problems. The parallels to the rise of Natzism in the 1930s scare me to death. If the BNP were ever to gain power we know, if we watched Mr Griffin on Question Time, that the rules would suddenly change. Then we would be in real trouble. The key to our success is how we increase our numbers. So, yes, I get very protective when it comes to first time protesters.

On the demo in question a lot of people turned out who might normally not associate themselves. Labour supporters marching next to Tories next to Muslims next to SWP next to etc etc. This issue is too important to be derailed by ideological differences of opinion in other areas. The fact is that the first reaction of the majority of the 60+ million people we share this country with to this kind of incident is to call a policeman. The dispensing of street justice would put a lot of people off. In this case it would have been a PR disaster as the person in question appears to have done nothing wrong. Getting the police involved, in this case, appears to have been the right answer. Asking Stewards to use violence is a total non starter. It is they who would end up in jail in the event of a mistake. That’s not fair on them.

UAF appear to have created a focus point for all concerned parties to direct their energy. Over time as the group expands it is inevitable that control of the group will shift. There will be mistakes. And I’m sure we will learn from them. We can’t afford not to. All I can suggest is dialogue and engagement amongst ourselves. If this cause becomes mainstream with tens of thousands turning out then the BNP and its fellow travellers are finished. To get there we have to compromise, even if that means using the police. We simply have no other choice.

I have no love for the authoritarian left like the SWP but it's interesting they are accused of being opportunists who are jumping on the anti-fascist bandwagon.

Often people here are criticized for being too single issue and not seeing the bigger picture.

Surely all the SWP are doing is seeing anti-fascism as part of a bigger struggle? That must be a good thing, even though we don't agree with their politics for the bigger struggle. They are at least opposed to fascism.

Is Antifa too single issue?

Surely anarchists SHOULD be jumping on the anti-fascist bandwagon and using the opportunity for promoting general anarchist values and ideas? Anti-fascism is important but it isn't the be all and end all of our existence.

Ultimately, there is *no chance whatsoever* that the BNP are going to gain anything resembling real political power. The idea that they will is little more than a scare tactic used by the big three parties to moblise potential voters who've lost interest.

The problem with the BNP is that they seek to portray the problems suffered by the working class as being caused by immigration and ethnic minorities, they organise on this basis and this is where we need to fight them. If you really want to hurt the BNP, organise in your own community, spread the message that the BNP offer us nothing and are, ultimately, no different to Labour and the Tories, just another bunch of politicians trying to parasite off the working class.

When it comes down to it, the current Labour government (and previous Tory governments) have instituted policies that the BNP could only dream of. It's Labour who seek to fragment working class communities by offerings services on the basis of ethnicity, it's Labour who are currently in charge of a government that has thugs in uniform kicking down the doors of "illegal" immigrants, fuck, it was a Labour Prime Minister who put forward the slogan "British Jobs for British Workers". They are just as much our enemy as the BNP, perhaps more so, since they actually have sufficient power to do these things.

Of course, when fascists march through the streets, we should oppose them, just as we should when any group of racists try to intimidate and threaten ethnic "minorities". But this should be done on the basis of class solidarity and working class independence, not on the basis of uniting with the very people who opress and exploit us in the here and now.

I thought the Scotland United event was organised by UAF and that the demo starting at St Eunoch Metro, referred to here, was organised by AntiFA. I could be wrong. UAF did bring their placards and banners but the only organising I saw them doing was telling people to "hold up" so the police could slow down the march. As we set off, 2 police stopped a march of about 200 (it grew through the town), which was possible because UAF had got their banner across the front.

The police force official protests to have stewards, who are expected to police the protest. Where the police or stewards attack the protest, it is necessary for the protest to defend itself. This is normal behaviour (except maybe for posher folk) and does not require any experience of protesting.

The following post should not have been hidden since it contains important information and debate on the history of this significant days action:

An open letter to UAF/Scotland United.

frosty | 14.11.2009 18:55 | Anti-racism
You are a disgrace, disgusting, and a liability.

I was in Glasgow today, and your actions put all of us in danger, and alienated the general public.

Scotland United - why, why oh why did you march from the green to George square? chanting all the way. Who where the chants aimed at the fash? where were they? miles away so they could not hear you. does your march achieve anything? what difference did it make to the thugs in the pub? they are not an organistion that can be stop or changed in that way?"?!? So all you done was long like a rabble to the mass public who looked confused.

UAF - (Disgrace) who the fuk do you think you are! when we got to the pub where the fash where, which was confirmed, you lot went the other way. Off to the green and speeches! what was the fukin point in that. The fash are there you run away shouting bash the fash. Leaving antifa, green brigade etc to sort it out. There was no need for you confront them, engage or get violent. But a presence was needed, without doubt.

To both of you - you disgust me, you marched around today chanting "antifa hooligans" and "no parasan" when none of you are antifa, and will not engage in anyway! And how dare you, how FUKING DARE YOU, say those words - no parasan. People have died over this, over the years, those words mean something. Not marching through the streets with weekend warriors, and celeb politicians.

One more thing, sort it, this has happened too many times, someone is going to get hurt, through your actions.

Antifa hooligan.

see you on the streets.

frosty
Comments

Hide the following 11 comments
sorry bout spelling

14.11.2009 19:09
I am tired after running about all day chasing the fash.

frosty
Keep Yer

14.11.2009 19:45
Myself and my partner attended this march today. Not as members of ANY of the above mentioned groups but as concerned human beings, both of us with families who would easily fall into the fascists *hated groups*.

When we arrived outside the pub where the fash were, the police (we were told) were keeping the fash in the pub. The fash were not on the street (in any greater number than 3 or 4) and as you say only came out to scuttle off to their buses surrounding by uniformed protection. Job was done mate...the general public were, I found, supportive.

We followed the main group to Glasgow Green as we were not sure what was to happen there. When we discovered that the "great and good" were to give speeches, we turned and walked back to Central Station and departed.

Our only complaint would be that ONE of the slogans chanted from Enoch Sq area onwards sounded unclear if it was for the fash or against fash...namely "Whose streets? Our streets!"

We'll be there again if need be.

Hair On
Know when you've won

14.11.2009 20:21
I was on the march from Enoch square today. I'm not a member of any political group. This was my first march for 20 years, after a period of major anti-rascist activity in my 20's. I have continually argued and fought against fascist views (hence my presence today). My grandfathers fought at Sydney Street. I know the history of the fight, and I'm proud of my small role and that of my predecessors.

We won today! Why can't some people realise that! The SDL weren't able to march. They were kept in small groups or penned up in pubs. We marched through Glasgow, publicised the issue, won public support.

Theres a time for a physical confrontation - today wasn't it. If anti-fascist hooligans start a kicking needlessly the only things that result are BNP gaining the moral highground and a loss of public support. Guys - learn strategy. Make sure its the fascists who are identified as thugs. Not us.

Today we won. A small victory perhaps. But the public relation victory could be lost so easily if all you want is a punch-up. Choose the time to fight with care.

Barearse
Minor correction...

14.11.2009 20:37
Tired tonight. Ofcourse meant Cable Street not Sydney Street!

Barearse
Great letter.

14.11.2009 21:08
Let me guess, you were to tired from chasing fash aswell? Bullshit.
Great letter mate, you have made some great points that's been pissing me off aswell.

Antifascist
Run them out of Town

14.11.2009 22:21
Let me get this straight a group of protesters, lets not give them a name for the moment, actually marched away from where the SDL were congregating/meeting. Whoever led them away needs to get a grip on life. Either they have an ulterior motive in such actions or are just plain stupid. I remember being involved with the predecesors of UAF and we often confronted the Nazis with ultimate success, then a strange rule was passed down to no confrontations but standing waving a placard, it seems they have moved on from placard waving to marching away from where the opposition are congregating. It does not seem the right way forward to me. But then again I am a wizzard.

Merlin
mail e-mail:  meldearlove@btinternet.com
home Homepage: http:// meldearlove@btinternet.com
please avoid attacking other protesters

15.11.2009 09:03
Frosty, I find your article very offensive and intolerant and in breach of editorial guidelines. First of all, you seem not to have any sympathy for people who are not in the same situation as you - people with families, people who are not that empowered as you are or that are not as politically aware as you. Maybe also migrants or asylum seekers or people with disabilites or similar who might not be able or willing to confront the fash physically.
For them, going to the big march was then the only alternative to doing nothing and staying at home. Imho it would be better if you would attack the organisers of the big march for the route and the way the protest was conducted than the participants.
Secondly your anger seems to be directed against the people who went to the other march in the hope that if they would have come to the pub location than that it would have made your protest more successfull. This is a misconception as you don't know if it would have made a difference. There might have been more police and different means of policing deployed; furthermore, many of the people from the other march might not want to use militant tactics or even be sympathetic to it. You would have had a whole lot of different problems and a totally different situation which could have not been foreseen. Also let me make the point here that often militant antifascism can also often be perceived as quite elitist/cliquey and scary to other leftists, too.
Thirdly, swearing at people does not make them more likely to want to join you and/or your protests in future or in present. it will make them feel unwanted whereever they are - they are more likely to drop out of politics altogether than move further to the left. Many of the marchers will have hopefully come to the conclusion themselves that their march did not achieve that much practically.

ooops
Rewriting history as we go

15.11.2009 10:42
"Secondly your anger seems to be directed against the people who went to the other march in the hope that if they would have come to the pub location than that it would have made your protest more successfull"

It's more of an issue that UAF / Scotland Utd. changed their message late on in the week, from "there is a protest here and a protest here" to "the protest at St Enoch Sq is a feeder march to the rally". Their organisers than acted to take half of a demonstration away.

It is dishonest to present it as a straight choice of tactics rather than a manipulative sabotage that could have got people hurt.

Ethel Macdonald
Consensus

15.11.2009 12:04
There is also quite a good fly on the wall report here  http://www.workersliberty.org/story/2009/11/14/glasgow-14-november-scottish-defence-league-setback-counter-mobilsation-disorganise one

The consensus of the various eyewitness and news reports - both on Indymedia and elsewhere - on the Cambridge Street incident seems to clearly indicate the following.

The UAF/SWP/Scotland United contingent left St Enoch Square to follow the SSP/Anarchist/GAFA contingent up to Cambridge Street. They then tried to lead it/commandeer it on the trek up to Cambridge Street. Having got there the UAF/SWP/Scotland United didn't hang about for long, and then led a lot of people away again down to Glasgow Green, taking a lot of unaligned people (and perhaps some confused SSP/Anarchists) with them in the melee.

This seems to have then left the SSP/Anarchist/GAFA contingent with less people at Cambridge Street than they arrived with. In short, it would have been better had they told the UAF/SWP/Scotland United contingent when they tried to follow them, thanks but no thanks. Or if you wanted to be less police "f*** off".

It seems clear the UAF/SWP/Scotland United set out up to Cambridge Street not with the sincere intent of joining in, but to blindly obey party (and police orders) to stay well away from the Scottish Defence League protest, and encourage and lead others away from doing so. That seems to be the whole point of why they were there instead of gathering at Glasgow Green - to sabotage the SSP/Anarchist/GAFA march and protest. That would explain why they didn't integrate, but instead gathered separately in a huddle in St Enoch Square away from the SSP/Anarchist/GAFA contingent.

The UAF/SWP took clear advantage of the lack of leadership in the SSP/Anarchist/GAFA, and the pre-programmed inclination of the UAF/SWP/Scotland United contingent to do what there told, or follow/copy what the majority seemed to be doing.

The SSP/Anarchist/GAFA could learn a lesson there that is essential to have some semblence of leadership, otherwise you leave yourself wide open to have some Pied Piper of the SWP, like Weyman Bennett, spiriting people away.

There are some that might suggest calling for the resignation of Weyman Bennett. Personally, I think that might be going to far, but at the very least you should call for some sort of investigation and disciplining by his party/campaign group.

His actions in leading people away left supposedly fellow protestors and comrades exposed and in danger. That can not, should not and will not be tolerated within the movement.

Andrew Hardie
Where now

15.11.2009 17:05

If I may add my thoughts...

The challenge of the EDL/SDL is different from what we have been faced with in recent times with city-centre provocative actions. I think that at this stage we can count it is a victory when we do stop them from marching, which didnt happen in Manchester or Leeds (despite UAF saying that it was a victory) but seems to have happened in Glasgow.

On the UAF; as an antifascist, the first organisation I came across was UAF and naturally I have been on demonstrations with UAF but the more I have experienced and the more I have read and tried to educate myself about antifacism, the more I have become completely dissillusioned with UAF.

I appreciate their wish to want to try and draw a lot of people, families etc into a mass organisation- one which is inclusive and accessible- I think its important to try and include a wide base of people in the antifascist movement BUT there is a limit to the compromises you can make. STANDING IN A POLICE PEN WITH A PLACARD CHANTING WHILE FASCISTS ARE MARCHING THROUGH THE CITY DOES NOTHING! And its a disgrace to count that as a victory. (I'm referring to Leeds, where a break away of EDL supporters marched- and spat in the face of a woman who opposed them- While UAF claim a victory for getting the prime spot outside the Art Gallery!)

For me on a personal level, I'm not keen on marching with UAF in future, I think that a lot of their members are well meaning and would be up for much more militant action but that the leaders are bending over backwards to please the police and are compromising too much. But where does someone like me and plenty of others who feel similar fit? On militant anti-fascism I am ready to support physical confrontations with fascists and I dont want to just stand around with UAF placards but for example I can understand why some people would regard Antifa as a bit elitist and not exactly easy to get involved with...

DJB
How it happened

15.11.2009 18:49
I was present when the decision to lead the march away from the fascists and to the park was made. This decision was not taken by Bennet but by consensus of Glasgow SWP's most active members. I realised that a decision was being taken about how to deal with a potential kettle on Cambridge street and so sought out these UAF decision makers.

UAF: To the park?
ME: You'r collaborating.
UAF: Don't call people collaborators when you don't know. We don't know where the fash are.
ME: They're not in the park.
UAF: We're just a small element of the Anti-fascist movement. We need to join up with the rest of the movement and bring them on to the streets.

"The rest of the movement" were the the Labour Party, the SNP, the Conservative Party, the Liberal Democrats, the TUC and the Church of Scotland.

Me

The following is copied from the above link to the Workers Liberty report. It clarifies that the march mentioned here was not organised by UAF but by a coalition initiated by Socialist Appeal.

One comment reads: "Some things surely are more important than building the party and selling the paper" but the party that concentrates on building itself will tend to gain power; competition between parties tends not towards cooperation but the type of appalling behaviour exhibited by UAF. Bolsheviks have always acted like twats; if you think grassing someone up to the police is bad, look at what they did at Kronstadt.

Glasgow 14 November: Scottish Defence League setback, but counter-mobilisation disorganised
By Dale Street

The Scottish Defence League (SDL) had planned to stage a city-centre rally in Glasgow today (14th November). In the event, they spent most of their time sitting in a pub, reliant on the protection of several hundred police officers.

As more reports are written and published over the next few days, a clearer picture will emerge of what actually happened today. Right now, however, the day’s events and their – chronological and political – background can be summarised as follows.

In late September articles appeared in the Scottish media about a protest which the Scottish Defence League (SDL) planned to hold in Glasgow, following similar events staged in English cities by the English Defence League (EDL).

The SDL claimed that it was not against ordinary Muslims – just those who wanted to see sharia law implemented in Britain, and those who supported Islamist terrorism. The SDL also claimed that it was non-racist, nothing to do with the BNP, and a non-sectarian organisation.

It is true that the Scottish BNP website has carried articles condemning the SDL, just as the website used by the EDL and the SDL has carried articles criticising the BNP and its Combat 18 thugs.

But the SDL’s professed non-racism and aversion to the BNP stand in stark contrast to the reality of racist chants on EDL protests, the presence of known BNPers on those protests, and the involvement of individual BNPers in organising such protests.

Similarly, the SDL has had no success in its claimed ambition of ‘rising above’ the West of Scotland sectarian divide. And this was certainly confirmed by today’s events.

In response to the news breaking of the SDL’s planned protest, “Scotland United” (SU) was launched at a press conference on 19th October. Although it is not clear who the political forces were behind this initiative, it soon took on a familiar political physiognomy.

Following a well-established tradition – dating back to the years when the Communist Party exercised a substantial, albeit entirely pernicious, influence on the Scottish trade union movement – SU was set up as a ‘broad’ non-party-political initiative devoid of any specific labour-movement orientation or politics.

Thus, the initial list of SU signatories included the Scottish TUC, individual unions, the usual religious organisations, MPs and MSPs from different political parties (soon to include the Tories), voluntary sector organisations, and various individuals anxious to bathe in the reflected glory of such an august body of sponsors.

United Against Fascism (UAF; read: Socialist Workers Party (SWP)) signed up to it from the outset, and so too did the Stop the War Coalition (read: SWP) and individual members of the SWP.

While some Scottish Socialist Party (SSP) members denounced SU as an exercise in ‘popular frontism’, the SSP as an organisation signed up to it, along with a number of individual SSP members. Tommy Sheridan likewise put his name to SU, along with the rump Scottish Solidarity Movement which split from the SSP in 2006.

The SU founding statement called on Glasgow City Council and the police to ban any SDL activity on November 14th (which eventually emerged as the date chosen by the SDL for a stationary rally, after it had failed to be given permission for a march).

Initially, the sole activity which SU intended organising on 14th November was its own stationary rally on Glasgow Green, at the (assumed) same time as the rally being held by the SDL. By early November, however, SU had decided that its Glasgow Green rally would be followed by a demonstration through the city centre.

Politically, the SU dissolved a specific labour movement response to the threat posed by the SDL into a nebulous multi-culturalism and celebration of religious pluralism. Organisationally, as a necessary consequence of those politics, it staged a rally and demonstration as an alternative to mobilising to confront the SDL.

A statement on the website of the Scottish-Islamic Foundation (one of the SU’s initiators) explained: “The move (to launch SU) comes after the stated intention of the far-right SDL to protest outside Glasgow Central Mosque on 14 November. SU have said that they will be organising a rally elsewhere in the city at the same time.”

An SU representative put it even more bluntly at a meeting held on 13th November: "We have a clear policy of avoiding direct confrontation with the SDL. Police are in agreement with this and the SDL will not be allowed to protest or congregate anywhere near where Scotland United will be."

While SU prepared for its rally and demonstration “elsewhere in the city at the same time” as the SDL’s protest, a series of meetings were held to mobilise to confront the SDL.

The meetings were initiated by “Socialist Appeal”, the SSP, and non-aligned socialists. Eventually, the name “Glasgow Anti-Fascist Alliance” (GAFA) was adopted as a flag of convenience.

The GAFA meetings were not about having a confrontation with the SDL for the sake of it. There was no rhetoric at GAFA meetings glorifying physical confrontation as an end in itself. The need to confront the SDL was posed in political terms.

The political issue recognised by GAFA, but not by SU, was that any SDL activity carried with it the threat of physical attack – or, at the very least, intimidation and threats – directed at members of ethnic minorities. Not confronting the SDL would only embolden them and give them the confidence to stage further protests, which, again, could easily flow over into racist attacks.

The emergence of GAFA confronted the SWP/UAF with a problem. Unable to ignore it, they had to decide whether to support it or oppose it as a diversion. (SWP/UAF are referred to here as a single entity because that is what they were, in the sense that the UAF was no more than a transmission belt for SWP decisions.)

You would think that it would be axiomatic that anti-fascists and revolutionaries would support the GAFA initiative. But supporting GAFA would sour SWP/UAF relations with SU, while not supporting it would undermine their posturing as the militant anti-fascists. An additional problem for the SWP/UAF was that they did not control GAFA.

At the early GAFA meetings the SWP/UAF maintained a low profile and generally limited themselves to stressing the importance of building for the SU event. But at the GAFA meeting of 10th November, the SWP/UAF finally came out with a fully developed position.

The GAFA decision to meet in the city centre at 10.00am on Saturday, instead of at Glasgow Green at midday, explained an SWP member, was “voluntarism”. (He probably meant “adventurism”, but that would have been no less inaccurate.)

Assembling in the city centre at 10.00, he eruditely continued, would mean isolating the most militant elements from the masses (i.e. supporters of the SU event at Glasgow Green). This would be a gross mistake.

The UAF approach had been proved correct in the past, he claimed. The UAF had stopped the BNP’s “Red, White and Blue” festival from going ahead (not true), the UAF’s tactics had been successful when Nick Griffin had appeared on “Question Time” (how?), and the UAF had stopped the SDL in Leeds (not true).

In response to criticism of the SU rally being addressed by Tory MSP Annabel Goldie, the SWP member argued that while some speakers at the SU rally were “not as good as you might want”, they would attract people who would otherwise not turn up.

(The idea that anybody would turn up to Glasgow Green at midday on a Saturday to hear Annabel Goldie speak was surely the most preposterous of all the claims made by the SWPer.)

With a concluding flourish, the SWPer declared that we needed to get away from a situation where it was just the left against the fascists – what was needed was “society against the fascists”.

Like Baldrick of “Blackadder”, the SWP/UAF had a cunning plan: You turn up to the SU rally, and then, when the details of the time and venue of the SDL event are discovered, you split off from the SU demonstration and take the militant elements with you in order to march on the SDL.

But subsequent events were to show that, like Baldrick himself, the plan stank.

The day after the GAFA meeting of 10th November, the SWP/UAF’s cunning plan was already in tatters. It became known that the SDL had instructed its supporters to turn up in Glasgow city centre at 10.00am on Saturday.

Staging a rally in Glasgow Green which would not begin until half twelve and a demonstration which would not begin until half one, would all be too late. The SDL would have been and gone well before the SU rally had had the delight of being addressed by a Tory MSP.

The SWP/UAF then supposedly changed line – the operative word is “supposedly” – and claimed that it would be supporting the GAFA mobilisation for 10.00.

But even after the supposed change-in-line the UAF website carried no information about the 10.00 mobilisation. It publicised only the SU rally and demonstration. And while the odd individual member of the SWP or UAF may have helped distribute publicity material for the GAFA mobilisation, neither the SWP nor UAF as organisations made an effort to publicise the 10.00 mobilisation.

Around 300 people had turned up at the GAFA assembly point by about half ten this morning. An SWP/UAF contingent was present, but not in any great numbers. And, symbolically, it assembled on the opposite side of the road from the GAFA assembly point.

By eleven o’clock spotters had reported back that the SDL were gathering in a pub in Cambridge Street, on the opposite side of the city centre.

The GAFA contingent headed off towards Cambridge Street, with the publicity-conscious SWP/UAF contingent putting itself at the head of the contingent – despite their earlier opposition to the initiative – and SWP/UAF full-timer Weyman Bennett suddenly emerging as some kind of self-appointed steward-in-chief.

(And Cambridge Street could have been reached a lot quicker without the stops for photo-opportunities.)

The police were out in force at Cambridge Street. After a few minutes of facing up to the police lines the GAFA contingent did an about-turn and marched back through the city centre to join up with the SU event which was gathering in Glasgow Green.

This was a mistake (but is easy to be wise after the event). With the benefit of hindsight, the GAFA contingent should have stayed put.

True, there was a risk of the GAFA contingent getting ‘kettled’. On the other hand, there was also a possibility that more anti-SDLers might have turned up to swell the ranks of those already gathered at precisely the place where the SDL were meeting up.

And if the GAFA contingent had stayed put, then there was much less chance that the SDL would have been able to stage the ‘stationary rally’ which they subsequently held, even if only briefly.

But such considerations do not seemed to have counted for anything with the organisers of the SWP/UAF. They were visibly keen to lead people away from Cambridge Street and to the SU rally on Glasgow Green.

Around half twelve the SDL emerged from the pub. There were less than a hundred of them, and a number of them looked the worst for wear after two hours in a pub. Despite the SDL’s claims that it stood above football rivalries, their turnout looked like a day out for a handful of Rangers fans.

The SDLers marched about fifty yards, sang “Rule Britannia” and “God Save the Queen”, and shouted a few slogans against sharia law. A couple of them gave Nazi salutes.

Then they turned around and marched back to the pub, where they were put on buses by the police and driven away. Two double-deckers buses were more than sufficient for the numbers who had turned up.

The “two minutes silence for all British soldiers who have lost their lives so far this year” which the SDL had promised never materialised. Perhaps hanging around on a street corner after two hours in a pub was not the most appropriate occasion for it.

While the SDL was having its mini-march GAFA spotters phoned back to Glasgow Green to let people down there know what was going on and to urge them to return to Cambridge Street.

GAFA supporters who were at Glasgow Green at this time are categorical in saying that SWP/UAF organisers told people to stay put in Glasgow Green and not to head off to Cambridge Street.

And it is certainly a fact that the bloc which left Glasgow Green at this point – although it was too late to get back to Cambridge Street, which underlines the mistake of going to Glasgow Green in the first place – was devoid of the SWP/UAF.

The SWP/UAF’s cunning plan of breaking away from the ‘official’ protest in order to confront the SDL had turned out to be just so much hot air – a pseudo-militant posture designed to cover up their accommodation to SU.

In the meantime, the SU demonstration had set off from Glasgow Green in the direction of George Square in the city centre. There were about 2,000 on the demonstration, with the SWP/UAF firmly ensconced in its ranks. But by this time the SDLers were already on their way home.

According to a report currently on the BBC website, “There were clashes outside Central Station and at several points around the city centre. Police said they had made five arrests.” These appear to have been small-scale incidents with isolated groups of SDLers.

The SDL might try to present today’s events as another successful protest, given that they were able to march – even if only for a hundred yards or so.

In reality, they suffered a real setback. Only around a hundred of them turned up, there was nothing non-sectarian about their turnout, they spent most of their time sitting in a pub, they had to rely on police protection, and they had to be bussed out of town (or to other pubs) as soon as their non-event was over.

As one dejected SDLer has commented on the SDL Facebook page: “What demo in Glasgow? People were too scared to leave the pub. What a fucking shambles wae people laughing at us. I’m embarrassed. People were literally laughing at us like we were clowns.”

What lessons can be learnt from today for future anti-SDL and anti-fascist mobilisations?

One lesson, even if not necessarily the most important one, is that the SWP/UAF are not to be trusted, neither in terms of their political judgements nor even in terms of basic honesty. They were politically wrong to support the SU event, and they were politically dishonest when they claimed that they intended to confront the SDL.

More importantly, unfortunately, today’s events emphasised the gap – in fact, abyss – between those intent on confronting the SDL and the ‘official’ labour movement. There was not even a single trade union banner nor any kind of organised turnout from the unions on the GAFA mobilisation.

The third lesson, which follows on from the above, is the need to mount a campaign in the unions – not to just to mobilise against the SDL and the BNP, but also to provide a political alternative which can attract those who might otherwise be taken in by fascist demagogy and racist scapegoating.

sdl march
Submitted by scott_sdl on 15 November, 2009 - 19:03.

you state The “two minutes silence for all British soldiers who have lost their lives so far this year” which the SDL had promised never materialised. Perhaps hanging around on a street corner after two hours in a pub was not the most appropriate occasion for it.
i was there and i can assure you it did it took place at the end of cambridge street where the police u said were protecting us(another lie they were there to stop us and break us up)stopped us from marching any further.i thought this site looked respectable but you could do with getting the facts right before you post blatant lies we had the silence and the sdl members respected it impeccably so please dont disrespect the facts and spout lies!!!!i know u probably wont post this as it tells the truth and makes you out to be what you are full of lies

Facts?
Submitted by TomU on 15 November, 2009 - 19:51.

Scott,

Surely this is too small a point to quibble over? I'd rather you weren't attempting to parade through Glasgow at all - or anywhere else, for that matter. Whether or not you stood quietly for two minutes is of little importance.

You ask for facts. Perhaps you can give us some? Why did you turn up for the SDL demo on Saturday? Why did the SDL want to march on a mosque? If the EDL/SDL isn't connected to the BNP and other fascist groups, why are leading EDLers members of the BNP? Why have EDL supporters been photographed giving Hitler-style straight-armed salutes? Why did EDL supporters physically attack Muslims and people who appeared to be Muslim during your riot in Luton?

I'm perfectly willing to believe that you yourself are not a racist or a fascist. So why associate yourself with racists and fascists? Why join a movement organised by racists and fascists?

TomU

Non-sectarian? Non-racist?
Submitted by dale street on 16 November, 2009 - 00:15.

The article says at the outset: "As more reports are written and published over the next few days, a clearer picture will emerge of what actually happened today."

So, Scott, thanks a lot for the clarification about the fact that the SDL had its two minutes silence.

And there might be another factual inaccuracy in the article - it was probably over-estimating your numbers when it said that there were about a hundred of you.

You're right to say, I think, that that police weren't very helpful to you.

But that's the point - like the rest of the population, not even the police wanted you lot strutting around Glasgow. You might have got that message when people shouted "scum" at you when you had your jaunt down to Sauchiehall Street.

The SDL says it is not a sectarian organisation. So why allow people to post on your Facebook page using the name "FthePope"?

The SDL says it is not racist. So why do SDL supporters post comments such as "I want a white country 4 white people" on its Facebook page?

Glasgow demos
Submitted by toddleon on 16 November, 2009 - 19:09.

OK, I'll try again........

Good report and analysis of the Glasgow demos from Dale Street....cheers for that.

It must be the old hack in me but I can't help but make two observations:

- The old CP/STUC tactic of 'broad fronts' used to result in organisations so broad that even those they were opposed to could join. Good to see a motley crew of New Labour, old churches and....Tories, carring on the grand tradition.

- SWP comrades may, like policemen, appear to get ever younger but the old habits remain entrenched. Every 'united front' (I would call them popular fronts) organisation the SWP sets up is treated with disrespect ( no democratic decisions or accountability). They are treated thus until they are cast aside once the old build the party/sell the paper routine has run its course.

Come on SWP comrades....you know perfectly well that the only way to cut fascists down before they become big enough to cause damage is to....well, cut them down. Some things surely are more important than building the party and selling the paper