http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/regions/westcountry/2004/06/292726.html
With regard to tactics of our refusing to debate with the BNP, I think we have to look at each situation. At the moment the BNP have only just got a little toe hold in the media, and the effect of official bodies like trade unions and elected MPs, etc refusing to appear with them can make the BBC etc. change their minds. So that is what we should be doing at the moment.
The “no platform” argument is to continually remind everyone that the BNP are not part of the legitimate democratic debate, because they want to destroy democracy themselves. However things change, and maybe we will have to adjust our tactics in the future.
In the 1970s “no platform” worked out in the end, with the NF eventually being squeezed off the air, and I remember even the BBC once describing them as the “neo-Nazi National Front” (showing my age). But that was then and this is now.
The NF were much bigger than the BNP, but the BNP have been more succesful in elections – that means that it is easier for the BBC to fall into the trap of treating the BNP as an ordinary political party. If we end up in the situation like in Italy where the fascists do regularly get on the telly, then maybe we will have to debate with them, but let’s cross that bridge when we come to it.
But for now – I think no-platform still works, and this small victory shows that the main stream media can be made to withdraw invites to the fascists.
FYI The following press release was therefore issued to the local Swindon and Wiltshire newspapers:
Notes for editors:
I am issueing this hoping to get a story that will show cross party condemnation for the BNP, and some exposure of that party's extremism in advance of thursday's elections. You may of course feel obliged to ask the BNP to comment for balance, but please leave in as much negative stuff as possible about the BNP - we are not trying to get publicity for ourselves so we would much rather it didn't run at all rather than run in a form that might help the BNP.
All the negative facts about the BNP can be verified: http://www.stopthebnp.com/
Wiltshire BBC in BNP interview storm.
Wiltshire BBC have backed down over plans to give a radio interview to the extremist BNP on D-Day, 6th June after scores of local people telephoned and e-mailed the BBC to complain, including James Gray MP and Julia Drown MP.
Swindon campaigners from Unite Against Fascism leafleted Calne on 6th June against the BNP, who are standing in the Euro elections. The BBC offered to interview Andy Prendergast of Unite Against fascism on Matthew Smith's Sunday Morning programme about why he considers the BNP a fascist party. However, the BBC then said that the BNP’s Press Officer would also be on the programme.
Mr Prendergast, who is an official of the GMB union in Swindon, then withdrew from the programme rather than give the BNP free publicity. The BBC then said they intended to proceed anyway with the BNP interview.
Andy Newman, spokesperson for Unite Against Fascism explained: “The BNP pose as respectable politicians but many of their leading members have convictions for violence, and race hatred. 355000 British and Commonwealth Servicemen died fighting Hitler’s Nazis so it is quite wrong to give a platform to the BNP on the 60th anniversary of D-Day. The BNP pose as patriotic but the BNP don’t even support the England football team, because some players are black or Jewish! So when I learned that BBC were planning to give them air-time I immediately contacted as many people as I could and asked them to complain. I am glad the BBC changed their mind - this is an example of peoples’ power!”
James Gray, conservative MP for North Wilts wrote to the BBC: “The BNP are not a legitimate political party, and their extremist racist views are not welcome over Wiltshire's airwaves.”
Julia Drown, Labour MP for Swindon South rang the BBC to complain, and said she was very pleased that the BBC had changed their decision.
Mark Weaver, also wrote to the BBC: “I am a Liberal Democrat candidate in Swindon. I am planning to take time out from our campaign to come to Calne to support Unite Against Fascism on Sunday. I understand that you have used the event to give an interview to the BNP. The point of the action is that the BNP are beyond the pale of normal political discourse and I wish to complain about the organization being given airtime.”
The BNP gained coverage in the Swindon Evening Advertiser, and its sister paper the Wiltshire Gazette and Herald earlier this year by wrongly claiming they would be standing candidates in Swindon and Malmesbury for the local elections. However, they were unable to find candidates in either town because the BNP has very little support in Wiltshire.
Kirsty Ward, BBC News Editor stated that the item had been withdrawn because it was not news.
Comments
Hide the following 25 comments
oh yeah I forget
05.06.2004 23:44
andy again
silly ridiculous pointless
06.06.2004 14:55
All this demonising of the BNP ... actually led by New Labour in fact (all NL MP's are saying this) ducks the issue that Blairite Labour people are waging a holy war against koran reading foreigners
Who are the real racists here?
BTW I don't deny that elements in the BNP leadership are racist - but Immigration creates a serious legitimate housing problem for traditional UK working class communities
Stop demonising stop censoring and start debating - then we can force the BNP to get rid of the neo-fascists within.
Scots and Welsh have perfectly good 'nationalist' parties - but not the English - we should ask why that might be and challenge the BNP publicly on their neo-fascist links.
anon journalist
its right to deniy the BNP a voice
06.06.2004 16:08
as andy has pointed out, the BNP if in power would attempt to suppress all political expression ,we would not be able to vote them out of power and therefore pose a real threat to democracy.
other people have argued that we should share a platform and argue with the BNP and show up their ideas and inturn people would be unatracted to the vote BNP>
The point is that the BNP are not going to go on TV and advocate their nazi's idealogoly (which the majority of people would reject). they are slightly more sophisated than that. they would attempt to appeal to the soft racist and blame asylum seekers for all the social problems inturn striking a cord with alot of people, they would say they are a democractic party and tolerate free speech.
what is distressing is that people with racist ideas but are totally against nazism are supporting the BNP and in some cases standing as candidates.for e.g a women who used to be in the green party ,(her mum and dad were green councillors!!!!) is standing as a BNP candidate in north england , she works for a charity for disabled children. what this candidate refuses to see is that if the BNP did get into power those disabled children she cares for would be seen as useless/burden and not part of the "master Race" and likely to be exterminated as they were in nazi germany.
the BNP will use all tactics at their disposal to get into power, they are not the old nazis like the 70's NF, they dont march down the streets sieg heiling or brandish swazstickers. they wear suits and despretaly seeking to be respectable. they look to le pen NF for ideas. one of the main reason that Le Pen NF has done so well is that the frence left refused to call them nazi and allowed them to have a platform , the NF in france is huge and the left need to be exposed them as nazis and not respectable politions.
therefore the same principles apply as in the 70's NF- no platform to nazis.
red letter
Excellent news
06.06.2004 16:09
They are heard. They have a web site of their own, they are free to hold speeches and debates, now they even have Party Political Broadcasts funded by the license fee, for fucks sake. Do the taxpayers really need to give them even more space to spew out their lies?
"[either youre in favour of free speech or youre not] there is not one inch of middle ground"
People who have vocally denounced freedom of speech in the past, and make no secret of their plans to clamp down on freedom of all kinds, have no right to demand a publicly-funded platform on the grounds of "free speech". And your categorical assertion that there is no middle ground is simply wrong. Life is complex. Middle ground exists everywhere, and in abundance.
"All this demonising of the BNP ... actually led by New Labour in fact "
Pardon? New Labour are issuing orders to the Conservative and Lib Dem parties now? I think you overestimate them.
"...ducks the issue that Blairite Labour people are waging a holy war against koran reading foreigners"
That's a separate issue. Nothing to do with whether the BNP deserve more time on the BBC.
"Who are the real racists here?"
Hm. I suspect you are, for one, Mr. BNP astroturf-man.
"BTW I don't deny that elements in the BNP leadership are racist - but Immigration creates a serious legitimate housing problem for traditional UK working class communities "
Yes, you are from the BNP, aren't you. Elements? They're racist from top to bottom, and most of them have criminal convictions for it.
"Stop demonising stop censoring and start debating - then we can force the BNP to get rid of the neo-fascists within."
When you get rid of the fascists within, what will be left? Won't you at least need someone to answer the phone? :)
Ian
Are Brett Lock and the BNP opposite sides of the same coin ?
06.06.2004 17:14
David
WTF?
06.06.2004 18:35
What is going on with all these random personal attacks on this random guy?
What on earth did he do to get up your nose so much?
mystified
but the BNP are *inherently* fascist!!
06.06.2004 18:44
Unlike the Scots and Welsh, English is a dominant culture and so any English nationalism would inevitably be linked to fascism. For example, English is spoken all over the world, whereas Welsh was forcibly supressed within living memory.
Why do you feel you need an English nationalism? What would its purpose be if it wasn't fascist/racist?
mystified
No they are not!
06.06.2004 19:32
As for the original posting: Fantastic! This just demonstrates how clever tactics can be applied with minimum effort to stop these scum!! I think the "no platform" position has been covered above and I fully agree with this. As to the point of weather we will have to debate with them on tv "if it gets like it is in Italy": Please don't let it get this far!! I live in Italy and I know what this is like!! The point is though, it is exactly tactics like this that stop the Fascists from "making their breakthrough" -to quote Griffin. It really is great to see people getting together in the UK and stopping these scum!!
Keep up the good work!!
Oh, the "anon journalist" is a BNP troll so don't feed him!!
Andy
Andy asked...
07.06.2004 00:48
"How can people/groups who openly campaign against the BNP be opposite sides of the same coin???"
Never heard of a paradox ?
Andy then wrote "Brett Lock...could not be considered a BNP supporter"
Who claimed he was a BNP supporter....? (Nice bit of subversion there mate !)
'opposite sides of the same coin' does not equate to 'a BNP supporter' ..although it could mean they both have fascist ideologies. Before dismising the idea out off hand, read the argument and judge for yourself:
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2004/06/292615.html
BTW, I take it you will have noticed that Bush and Kerry will be opposing each other in the forth comming elections...would you consider them to be opposite sides of the same coin ?
David
As for the BNP
07.06.2004 01:53
Why hasn't this already happend ?
Because it serves TPTB to keep things as they are - divided, in perpetual chaos !
In a fair and honest world the BNP should of course be allowed to have their say - but we don't live in that nice fluffy world. Until such TV programs are made I would go with the 'No Platform!' strategy. If people had been truly aware of Hitlers' real intentions, I'm sure they would not have ever given him a platform - and a great many inocent lives would have been saved.
Also, perhaps we should be aware to the fact that campiagning for free speach is surely a double-edge-sword....i.e. when our government use D-notices, and when networking with media whores to controll their agenda is seen as acceptable PR.
David
Here we go again!
07.06.2004 06:05
Overall, I am glad that the BBC have declined the BNP airtime, particularly so close to the elections. However, I suspect that the far right may attempt to portray themselves as victims of the (in their paranoid fantasies) 'liberal media' too.
Keep fighting the reactionaries.
Thank you
Caz
Independent Left
Yup, more trolling
07.06.2004 08:12
His latest hobbyhorse is trying to show that Outrage are Nazis, so we can expect him to disrupt every discussion on how to fight the BNP with his nonsense.
Louis Aragon
Opposite sides of the political spectrum!!
07.06.2004 13:32
"David" however is clearly a homophobe, but I am prepared to accept he is genuine in wanting to fight the BNP -am I right?? Ok, we can discuss homophobia elsewhere (come on Brett, get some Outrage stuff on here, I'm itching to get stuck into this!). The point here again is tactical: If we are gonna defeat the BNP we want as many people as possible involved in an anti-Fascist campaign (I happen to beleive UAF have got this exactly right, but others may dissagree?). Now, given that Gays in general represent about 10% of the population -probably THE largest "minority group" there is, we want them on our side to defeat Fascism. (I mean man, have you seen the size of those "Gay Pride" marches -these guys represent an army!!). Not to mention the fact that gays will be executed by Fascists if we let them in!! Now do you see where we are at?? If we wanna defeat Fascism then WE HAVE TO WORK TOGETHER!! Jesus! if we are ok about getting a Tory MP to phone the beeb to stop the BNP getting on telly then surely we can work with gay rights groups on this (weather you like gays or not!!)?? Besides, gays can put up a good fight when they want to as well (did no-one ever tell you about Stonewall?? -these guys make Black Block look like a bishop's tea party!!) Let me paraphrase a famous ant-Fascist poem to help demonstrate this:
First they came for the Muslims
but I didn't stand up because I am not a Muslim
(this applies to YOU Brett Lock)
Then they came for the homosexuals
but I didn't stand up because I am not a homosexual
(this applies to YOU "David"!!)
Then they came for the Communist
and I didn't stand up because I am not a Communist
Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not stand up because I am not a trade unionist
Then they came for me (the troll??)
but then it was too late because there was no-one left to stand up for me!
(Primo Levi I think??)
David: Don't wait for it to get "too late"!!
If you really do wanna stop the BNP then get out and help UAF leaflet against them in your area. Go on man! The poet has spoken!!
Andy (not Newman)
Point of Informaton
07.06.2004 15:28
While I was arrested by the security police on a few occasions I was released without charge. Documents where confiscated and stern lectures given about "the Red peril" etc, but I was never imprisoned. Along with thousands of others who disobeyed militart call-ups, I was sought by the military police for a few years but - although there were a few close calls - I successfully evaded them. If caught, the sentence was 6 years. I was lucky, others weren't.
There is a very interesting story in the current edition of Gay Times about a South African who did get caught and went to jail. And of course there were people - real heroes - like Ivan Toms who volunteered to go to jail to draw attention to the conscientious objector issue.
Brett Lock
Bogus Islamophobia
07.06.2004 16:02
but I didn't stand up because I am not a Muslim
(this applies to YOU Brett Lock)"
I appreciate what you're saying, but this is a little unfair. Neither I nor OutRage! oppose full human rights for Muslims or people of any other religion. We have nothing against any individual Muslim person and deplore any attacks on any person because of their religious background. We are categorically opposed to Islamophobia. However, it is not Islamophobic to criticise specific Islamic groups - like The Muslim Council of Britain - who have serious antigay policies and actively campaign to deny lesbian and gay people their civil and human rights. I have already posted links to their website where they support antigay legislation like Section 28 as well as oppose an equal age of consent, legal recognition of same-sex couples, gay parents and generally infer that homosexuality is an immoral perversion - in case there was any doubt.
How can it be Islamophobic to criticise an organisation (like MCB) that actively campaigns against your human rights, or to point out that it is exclusively Islamic countries that still have the death penalty for homosexuality. In spite of this, most of our criticisms of - and confrontations with - homophobic religious groups has been with the Church of England. So any suggestion that we pick on Islam more than on any other religion is simply not true. But you surely can't expect us to remain silent when the Respect-endorsed PJP try to score points in their constituency by claiming other parties are pro-gay!
Brett Lock
Andy
07.06.2004 16:18
I mean no malice to anyone, (not even those two snipers above) although this type of topic will envariably raise tempratures. Having said that I hope we are above that stage in the discussion by now.
Cheers, man ! ;)
David
Likewise, Bogus Homophobia
07.06.2004 18:03
The quote: "Then they came for the homosexuals but I didn't stand up because I am not a homosexual (this applies to YOU "David"!!)" is erroneous as I am attemting to prevent what I see as an inevitable backlash for gays.
As a straight person who does not have a problem tolerating and showing some respect for gays, providing they also tolerate and show a little respect for those around them, perhaps I can offer this clarification:
Surely what is most obvious from reading this, and the thread in question, is the sheer intolerance displayed by those whose opinions I oppose - and when we get down to it, just how extreme is my opinion really ? Not really that extreme at all, especially when you consider that it is supported by gays themselves, it's just not 100% behind OutRages' ideologies.
So, maybe it would be worth considering that when all those shout "Homophobe" at anyone who dare disagree with them, they perhaps inadvertantly subverted and devalued the very term 'Homophobia' by using it to define just about anything that is seen as not being 100% behind your own ideologies. A bit like how the accusation of Anti-Semite loses it's true meaning when misused by those who see any criticism of Ariel Sharons policies as Anti-Semitic. In that sense I am about as much homophobic as the readers of Indymedia are Anti-Semitic. Flagrent misuse of either term will surely undermine it's very purpose of defining the particular form of bigotry it serves to oppose.
Just a thought !
Peace.
David
Why we want gays on our side!!
07.06.2004 20:05
Andy
.... and most folks are on the gays side anyway.
07.06.2004 22:42
I'm not with Respect, but I showed a couple of old SWP bods that are local organisers the heated debate that Brett and David had over last weekend. Brett - they said that Respect is committed to gay people's and womens human rights, although they admit there is much debate on how to deal with the separate issue of abortion. They feel that working alongside Muslims can weaken the hold of reactionary ideas. David - they said they'd rather you didn't pit Respect against Outrage in future debates as a) they disagree with you about the aetiology of homosexuality and b) it's a diversion from much needed anti-fascist unity.
Thank you
Caz
Independent Left
David = Copeland?
08.06.2004 05:58
great Queeruption gig in holland fighting the fash. sure beats the waffle on here anyway!
Anarcho-Radio
Queer AntiFascism
08.06.2004 11:05
Adric
Dont confuse principles with tactics!
08.06.2004 11:14
I think "Caz" demonstrated a very constructive example here for all you people who have a problem with Respect: If you've got issues with them, speak to THEM about it!! I'm not a member of Respect, but I would describe myself as being "with" them in the sense that I support anyone having a go at the system. The point about working alongside Muslims is a very important one I think. In fact, I would go further to say that this is THE MOST IMPORTANT ISSUE FACING THE MOVEMENT THROUGHOUT EUROPE AT THE MOMENT, which is why I am quite prepared to throw my lot in with these Respect guys!! They are getting a lot of flak at the moment (did you notice the Observer have joined in th tyrade??) for forging aliances with "reactionary Islamic groups". The point these guys make about "working alongside Muslims can weaken the hold of reactionary ideas", is exactly what I'm on about here. In fact, I would go further to say that UNLESS we are prepared to work alongside Muslims we cannot even begin to talk to them about reactionary Islamic ideas. They simple won't listen to us! Given the level of Islamophobia sweeping europe at the moment, the last thing we wanna be doing is lecturing them about how they are "against womens rights" or "against gay rights" or "pro-abortion". To them, this will just make us sound like intellectual equivalents of Kilroy-Silk (which is EXACTLY what Nick Cohen's article in the observer sounds like to me: http://observer.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,6903,1232361,00.html but hey, maybe I'm just biased??)!!
I am not saying that we duck the issues with these Muslim groups, just not to get confused about principles and tactics. The movement in France made this mistake and look where it got them: evreybody, from Le Pen to the far left groups supported the government's ban on the Muslim headscalf an the grounds that it was "progressive" and would somehow "help liberate Muslim women from oppression". This was a disaster for the movement in France I think and will have the sole effect of pushing Muslims away from collective action with non-Muslims (something we have seen a lot of lately), and into the hands of the Clerics -more worryingly, into the hands of the Al-queda elemnts!!
I am not saying Respect have got it exactly right, what I admire about Respect is at least they are getting their hands dirty and having a go. To me this is a much better strategy than just standing on the sidelines and moralising. If you think they aint going about this right then should you not be showing us how this should be done the right way instead (I think most of the criticism of Respect are more about point-scoring rather than constructive. Some people have a vendetta against the SWP which they are seeking with avengeance. Beware though!! You may end up being quoted by pro-war Balire apologists in the Observer!! I think Respect represents much more than just the SWP too so you ain't doing yourselves any favours ranting about this)?? What the movement needs right now is careful tactics!! Whoever comes out with the best tactics gets my support! Right now it seems like only Respect are prepared to attempt to organise the Muslims. It is much better to form an aliance with muslims and make a few mistakes, than to go down the road of France!!
Andy S
Building Bridges
08.06.2004 12:21
Maybe i'm being over optimistic, coz there are plenty of bigots out there, but there are loads of ordinary people too who are human and friendly.
Regards to all anti-fascists.
Gay lad
Over optimistic??
08.06.2004 13:32
I don't think you are being over optimistic at all!! It is examples like this that we should be building on. The problem at the moment is to avaoid being OVER-PESSIMISTIC!! We have an enormous opportunity in the European movement to branch out and "build bridges" in exactly the way spelled out above. Beleive me, I have been around long enough to realise that we don't get many opportunities like this. They are precious!! We need to stop looking inward and start opening up to other ideas/strategies/initatives, you know, in that post-Seatle sense!! The French experience points to a mistake we should avoid!! Respect are trying a different route, mistakes are being made but if we learn from them we can really take the movement forward I think. If we sit here and do nothing apart from criticising people who some of us clearly don't like, but are at least having a go, then we are definately gonna miss the boat!!
Oh, and thank you for bringing some "optimism" to this thread!!
Andy S
grassroots engagement
10.06.2004 19:18
> hold of reactionary ideas", is exactly what I'm on about here. In fact, I
> would go further to say that UNLESS we are prepared to work alongside
> Muslims we cannot even begin to talk to them about reactionary Islamic ideas.
Yes, but there's a huge difference between engaging with Muslims on a grassroots level and engaging with big national right-wing Muslim organisations and/or Muslim 'leaders'. We have to bypass all that and engage with people on a human level.
Unfortunately RESPECT bods (especially Galloway et al) tend to have the traditional top-down party mentality so this really isn't their style! No surprise then, that they work in the ways we've seen.
www.dontjustvote.com
-because our dreams will never fit in their ballot boxes-
.