“The workers... battle-cry must be: 'The Permanent Revolution.'” — Marx and Engels, 1850

home | action | about us | sitemap | publications | recent | all | feed

Manchester: EDL fascists on the march

Around a thousand fascist lead nationalists, escorted by mounted police, dog handlers and five deep rows of riot cops, marched through Manchester on Saturday 10th October. They were met with determined resistance by 2000 anti-fascists. But this was no victory for the anti-fa and the Nazis will take much from the day.
 

English Defence League - BNP boot boys on the streets

The English Defence League (EDL) has exploded the myth that fascism has gone respectable. Just two months after the BNP won two MEP seats a ramshackle gang of racists have taken fascism back to the streets. And in so doing have cruelly exposed the failings of not only the official anti-fascism of Hope not Hate and Unite Against Fascism (UAF), but the terrible divisions on the left and hopeless lack of a socialist alternative for alienated working class youth.  

What is the EDL?

 
The EDL are organised by old time Nazis in or around the BNP and NF, on Saturday the back streets of Manchester were full of fascist old timers, safely out of the way, overseeing the direction of the day. But they are fronted by a couple (i.e. literally two or three) mixed race young men who strenuously deny the EDLs links to fascism, Nazism or racism. Instead they say the EDL is only interested in the “Islamic threat” to English society. According to them England, with a population which is approximately 2% Muslim, with a royal family which is constitutionally protestant and a ruling class which is rich, white, racist and Islamophobic, is about to be taken over by Sharia law. Christmas will be abolished they claim. Worse they hate the way that asylum seekers come in the back of lorries from Afghanistan and Iraq and live the good life on benefits of between nothing to a maximum of £5 a day.

But what’s newsworthy about that? Since when has fascism had to make sense? The overwhelmingly male, young, working class support of the EDL are pissed off. Alienated from the political establishment they’re sick of the established parties and have tapped into racism to express their hate of the world and everything in it. Manipulated by Nazi Gaulieters behind the scenes they may be, but the EDL have yet to consolidate into a fascist street squad. We socialists and anti-fascists must fight to stop that happening. Or rue the day. 

UAF - Useless against fascism?

Mike Gilligan the UAF spokesman summed up Saturday like this: “It was a tremendously successful day for the anti-racist movement. The EDL were run out of town, they were not very powerful, they completely failed.” 

OK. 

After the debacle of Birmingham, when Unite Against Fascism (UAF) refused to confront the EDL in order to maintain a hoped for but unrealised cross party non political alliance with the Tories, New Labour and Liberals, “community leaders” and various religious worthies, the UAF in Manchester were under extreme pressure not to repeat that terrible mistake.

So a couple of weeks ago at an organising meeting in Manchester they decided to call for state ban against the fascists, just as they had done in Birmingham, the UAF chair assuring the meeting that “there is no way that the EDL will be allowed to march in Manchester.”

So after the cops had given them permission to march, the UAF tried Plan B, to organise a static protest on the other side of town at Albert Square. Unfortunately, Albert Square was already booked out, so it was time for Plan C but unlike in Birmingham, this time the cops gave them permission to hold a rally. It was to be in Piccadilly Gardens, just opposite the EDLs notional meeting point in the Wetherspoons pub by Queen Victoria’s statue on the Gardens.

The fascists were to be permitted to meet from 10.00 am onwards there. The anti-fascists from 12 noon.

At the UAF meeting prior to the demo it was pointed out that the anti-fascists should stop the EDL from gathering by meeting them at 10.00. The UAF organisers confirmed that they knew the fascists would arrive then, but were nonetheless determined that the demo would form up from 12.00 onwards. No attempt would be made to prevent the fascists forming up, or to clear them away when their numbers were small at the outset. The stewards team selected from trusted UAF hacks. Everything was done from above to ensure UAF controlled the proceedings. The demo was to be quiet and respectable, to provide a respectful platform for such luminaries as the local racist Labour MP, Tony McNulty, recent secretary of state for immigration. They seriously thought he would turn up…

And on arriving at Piccadilly Gardens it was quite clear why the cops had agreed the counter demo there. In Birmingham the lack of an official counter demo the second time, meant that a chaotic but free form opposition to the fascists developed on the streets outside of their control. In Manchester they were not going to repeat that mistake. Over a thousand cops armed with riot gear, dogs and horses would seal down the area to ensure that the fascists could meet peacefully and keep the anti-fascists “safe” sealed behind rows of cops as far away from the Nazis as they could manage. Extensive maintenance works to the tram lines meant that the gardens were enclosed on three sides. The police planned to kettle the protesters inside while the fascists were free to wander the streets outside. 

The fascist mobilisation

So sure enough from 10.00 onwards fascists began to filter down from Piccadilly Station, met by fascist minders, the cops checked them for knives, before they made their way down to the gardens in small groups. But anti-fascists were also starting to form up, ignoring UAFs advice, so that by 11.00 there were already 100s of reds gathered opposite the pub.

The first feeble fascist protest began around 11.30 when a group of no more than 30 racists began to wave the English flag outside the pub. Against the advice of the UAF chief steward, who demanded that protestors leave the matter to the police, the crowd surged out of Piccadilly Gardens towards the Nazis. A determined push, better stewarding and a clear plan could have meant that we broke through the cops line and dispersed the fascists early before they were able to gather their forces through the course of the day.

But without any of that the cops were able to throw up a cordon in front of the racists to enable them to exercise their democratic right to spread race hate and terror. The pattern of the day was set.

The cops escorted the Nazis away from Piccadilly Gardens while trapping the overwhelming bulk of the anti-fascists, now grown to around 2000 strong, inside. As the EDL toured the perimeter the fascist numbers swelled, the streets around the Northern Quarter were crawling with Nazis, so by the time the cops escorted the EDL onto the West side of Piccadilly Gardens their numbers had risen to around 150, blocked from the anti-fascists by rows of riot cops with horses and dogs. 

Cops protect the Nazis

Through the course of the afternoon the cops protected the Nazis inside Piccadilly Gardens enabling EDL supporters to join their racist comrades, while preventing anti-fascists from doing the same thing. Anti-fascists were held inside, while around Piccadilly mobs of Nazis roamed free, met only by those anti-fa who had been able to avoid the kettle and by indignant passers by.

What was missing was the Asian working class community. In the week up to the fascist protest the local Muslim community leaders had been telling their communities to stay away from the town centre, to leave the matter to the police. Disgracefully they were all too successful. As in Birmingham where Respect councillor Salma Yaqoob had lead the opposition to a militant protest, the middle class, bourgeois and clerical leaders of the Asian community were able to keep the overwhelming bulk of outraged Asian people away. It was not until very late in the day around 4pm that any numbers of Asian youth began to arrive in town. They were up for anything but without the numbers and too late to make a decisive difference.

Socialists need to stop treating the Asian community as some undifferentiated religious mass. Religious and respectable rich community leaders will never fight for the interests of the poor and dispossessed. It will not be them to who will be confronted by racist terror on the streets, instead the left need to split the Asian community, like every other community, on class lines. Asian working class youth in particular are key allies in the struggle against the fascists. Apart from a noble few hundred who turned up late in the day, there were never enough numbers present to make the difference on the day.  

Inside the gardens there was no lack of determination or fight either, anti-fascists made repeated attempts to rush the police lines, charging the cops even as the fascist numbers grew through the course of the afternoon. But there could be no break through while the numbers were only 2-1 in our favour.

When the cops decided to escort the fascists out of Piccadilly Gardens there was nothing to stop them. The marched away in a compact mass and hold their rally opposite Urbis. Before leaving on a fleet of buses parked outside Victoria train station at around 5pm, 

So which part of the UAF description of the day was true? The anti-fascist movement managed to rally around 2000 supporters who demonstrated their militancy in spite of UAFs plans for a peaceful and respectful demonstration. But the Nazis were not run out of town. They marched out en bloc escorted by the police. They held their rally unmolested. They felt their strength. They are a powerful and growing force who has trebled their numbers since the Birmingham debacle of a few weeks ago. We underplay their threat at our peril. We have the determination and numbers to crush them. But we will not do so if we kid ourselves that everything is fine and dandy.

Over the next weeks they have visits planned to Swansea and Glasgow before culminating in a show down in Leeds on October 31st. Anti-fascists need to mobilise now, learn the lessons of Birmingham and Manchester and face them down in a really decisive confrontation there.

How to beat the EDL?

Anti-fascists and socialists need a twin track strategy to beat the EDL, first we must organise to confront them now to deny them a platform for their racist ideas, in mass numbers, with tight stewarding that can protect our protests and turn self defence into offence. But we need political answers too.

The overwhelmingly poor white working class EDL supporters can be broken from the racist behind the scenes gangsters to a class alternative, but only if we fight for it harder than the Nazis fight for their hell. Socialists need to provide class answers to the crisis of capitalism and show that the royal family and the English capitalists, who’s praises the Nazis sang so high on Saturday, don’t give a crap about workers whether they be, white, Asian, Muslim, black, mixed race or asylum seeking.

It is not the Muslim young workers who are destroying England it is the rich capitalist scum bags who have looted the state coffers of £60 billion to salvage their banks and now want us, the working class to pay for their theft.

At this moment it suits the Nazi chiefs to allow these entirely expendable mixed race young men to front up the group. But the tension between the official anti-racism and the fascist core is all too obvious, with the chants of “No surrender to the IRA”, baleful choruses of “God Save the Queen” and “Al-Qaeda off our streets”, and mixture of assorted English “seig heils” something of a giveaway. These saps are expendable. Soon they will learn that the hard way.

But for now the strategy of A-B marches, building on the latent racism and justified dissatisfaction of working class youth with the crisis and the capitalists response to it is what the EDL are about. But at a certain point and not too far in the future, they will have to transform this loosely assembled gang of marchers into an action fighting force.

That’s why it is so urgent that the left, anti-capitalists and socialists unite now to oppose the growing fascist mob and present our class response to capitalist crisis.

Everyone out for Leeds on the 31st October. No Pasaran. 

Sun 11, October 2009 @ 22:20

Bookmark with:

What are these?

discussion of this article

brian transport said…

video of the nazis

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAVjwH0KbVo

Sun 11, October 2009 @ 23:37

Robbie said…

You say we need a twin track strategy that the left should unite around. Correct. Why then did the non-UAF organising meeting, called by the 'Manchester Socialist Forum', draw up and distribute leaflets that deliberately didn't put forward the class-based arguments that are needed to attack the fascists base of support and bolster our own?

The debacle in Manchester was down to a split, sectarian left, who refused to put foward the arugments and put into practise the tactics necessary to beat the fascists. Both sets of organising meetings for the counter-demo, UAF and non-UAF, were guilty of that. We need to learn the lessons of Manchester. Fast.

Mon 12, October 2009 @ 02:45

bill j said…

As far as I'm aware the MSF did produce a leaflet with class arguments. In fact as far as I'm aware it was the only group who did so. In fact as far as I'm aware it was the only group who did or organised anything independently of the UAF.

Our small meetings could not have salvaged the situation on their own. But they did provide a good basis for going forward.

Apart from condemning everyone I'm not sure what you're actually proposing. Hopefully its not to join CS who are part of an organisation who opposed the protest and think the fascists should be given a platform. Surely the worst position on the British left? Before you slag everyone else off why not put your own house in order?

Mon 12, October 2009 @ 08:32

Chris said…

So first of all CS is not part of the CPGB, it has it's own structures, politics and the majority of members especially in Manchester are not members of the CPGB, in fact we have a comrade who is a member of the Commune group. Nowhere did CS or the CPGB oppose building a demonstration against the EDL, in fact CS and CPGB members helped build for the demo on Saturday, gave up our room at the union for your organising meeting, publicised the demo in the Weekly Worker and participated in the demonstration. If I remember rightly PR members spent very little time on the streets with leaflets for the anti-EDL demo compared with Manchester CS. Nowhere did we say "let's give the EDL a platform", what the CPGB rightly argues is that we should not be calling on the state to ban these organisations and that the strategy the Left should be pursuing is the building a political alternative.

Secondly, I never saw any leaflets with class politics on, and I helped you out on Wednesday of last week giving out the ones you made. If what comrades from CS and elsewhere have told me is correct, then you took a decision at your organising meeting not to include class politics on the leaflets for fear of alienating the anarchists or whoever. If you did put out leaflets with class politics on, then that is great. It is all very reminiscent of the Euro elections where you just tacked on physical confrontation to the UAF's strategy. Which is no strategy at all.

Finally the debacle of having two organising groups, two times yet one failed strategy is not something that can be blamed on your organising group, the Left when organising these actions need to do so in an open and democratic way. I found it very uncomfortable standing five yards away from comrades in the SWP whilst we gave out leaflets for the same action, with same level of politics but with different times. It did make the Left look like a joke. The UAF were not great during the build up or on the day, seeing Martin Smith march his young comrades at police lines that were three deep just to give them the veneer of radicalism at the cost of injuries and arrests was cynical and stupid.

Beyond these arguments over what the MSF did or did not do we should make sure that those comrades who were arrested or injured get the support they need.

Mon 12, October 2009 @ 11:18

Robbie said…

CS did build the protest actually, and we will be mobilsing for Leeds. There were a couple of posters that me and an anarchist comrade put together and distributed. I saw hide nor hair of a leaflet with class based arguments. If there was one good. I concede the point and I'm glad there was one- it just seemed that at the organising meeting it was a tiny minority that wanted that, and argued for it. Even the other 'left forums' argued against it. That was what I was proposing. An MSF that actually put forward socialist politics as part and parcel of its anti-fascist strategy.

I am perfectly aware of how bad some of the positions on fascism are in CS- mostly the CPGBers- and how my own house needs to be put in order. I am always arguing against them and trying to forward the sort of position outlined in the argument above, believe me.

Mon 12, October 2009 @ 11:26

bill j said…

I really don't care. When you have something positive to contribute then contribute it. If you hate what we do so much then don't do it. Whatever, get a grip.

Mon 12, October 2009 @ 11:38

Chris said…

So you never put leaflets out with class politics on. Robbie was right. Thanks for clearing that up.

Mon 12, October 2009 @ 11:46

Tina said…

Chris

You seem to not recognise that the issue of the time of the demo was political and not technical. The UAF demo was always going to be a rally against the EDL, not a militant demonstration that had the potential to stop them from rallying. If on the day SWP comrades were trying to break the police lines then surely this demonstrates that there is a contradiction at the heart of their intervention in the UAF, with their young members quite rightly wanting to break through and get at the fascists - I wasn't there so I don't know if this was the case, I'm assuming this from what you have written. This is a contradiction that militant anti-fascists can build on.

But yes fighting the fascists on the streets is clearly not enough, we need a long term strategy to show the most oppressed sections of the working class that there is an alternative. A open socialist forum to unite socialists in action, strengthen our class and allow us to debate tactics and strategy in a non-sectarian way is what we need as a starting point to build this alternative and reinforce our class. Unfortunately none of the leaflets that I saw in the run up to the protest on the 10th put forward the need for this.

Mon 12, October 2009 @ 11:52

Tina said…

You may not care about political debate Bill, but other people who visit this site do.

Mon 12, October 2009 @ 11:56

bill j said…

This is getting very petty.

Its really pretty simple in my opinion. We were able at short notice to build a militant anti-fascist bloc on that demo from almost nothing in a couple of weeks. That was very good progress.

Some people aren't happy with that.

No problem, you don't like it, no ones making you do it.

Mon 12, October 2009 @ 12:00

bill j said…

And they're entitled to express their opinion, just as am I.

Mon 12, October 2009 @ 12:01

steve said…

This is a very good account except I am still scratching my head about the claim that the main body of fash was 1,000.

That just is not the experience of my peepers at all.

The lot in the fenced off protest was 200 to 300 joined by another 100.

Floating muppets, maybe a couple of hundred more.

Mid afternoon they were outnumbered 5 or 6 to 1 at least, although that trailed off towards early eve.

Mon 12, October 2009 @ 12:04

Chris said…

Tina, yes it was more than just a technical difference for sure. That is why it is important, even if it is just on campus to start with, that the Left can sit down and discuss openly the planning of other demonstrations that will no doubt come up. The strategy of trying to woo the "legitimate" political establishment against the far right dictates that the UAF has to behave in a way which would not scare the likes of Tony Lloyd off. I agree there is tension in the SWP's own ranks against being passive listeners to Weyman Bennet et al during UAF rallies and that is translated into spurts of militant action from the SWP to give them a cover of radicalism. I watched as Martin Smith rounded up people to march at police lines with no chance of them being broken, it was ridiculous. Just read the morning star's report which I doubt will be much different from the UAF and SWP ones which is calling the day "very succesful". We did achieve some things, and did make a good presence but it was not a great success.

Mon 12, October 2009 @ 12:06

Basti said…

“It is not the Muslim young workers who are destroying England it is the rich capitalist scum bags who have looted the state coffers of £60 billion to salvage their banks and now want us, the working class to pay for their theft.”

 

Statements like that make me throw up. This is a kind of rhetoric that was first used by the fascists and than by the Stalinist. We communists don’t give a (XXX - edited to remove swearing PR Webby) about the capitalists nations. They shall be destroyed all because they are a capitalist construct to divide and to exploit the proletariat. There is no way communists should refer in a positive way to nations, especially not to an imperialist one.

 

I guess the workplaces would be a good place to adress antifascim to whatever kind of workers. Class based demands seem quite useless if they are posed to the bourgeois antifascists around UAF and that kind and not to the proletariat itself.

PR webby reminder - swearing is not allowed on PR web.

 

Mon 12, October 2009 @ 12:26

bill j said…

I saw them march out of the square and reckoned it was around 700. Others thought up to a thousand including the others wandering around. I quite prepared to accept it could be anything from 500 upwards. Difficult to say.

Mon 12, October 2009 @ 12:47

Robbie said…

By the time the second lot of EDL marched into the gardens with the big banners etc, and then when others joined them later there was defintely quite a few hundred of them, plus those scattered around. Bill's estimates are about right. There was no way that we outnumbered them 5 or 6 to 1 at that point, from then on our numbers began to decrease while theirs stayed fairly consistent until they were escorted out of the gardens.

Mon 12, October 2009 @ 13:24

brian transport said…

Photos of the Nazis here

http://www.flickr.com/photos/43470407@N05/sets/72157622568949822/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/43436730@N03/

Mon 12, October 2009 @ 14:51

Ste said…

The first comment says that any debacle was down to a split sectarian left. While it's true that UAF deliberatly had a policy of avoiding direct confrontation with fascists, as far as was visible there was very little disagreement with their strategy.

Some of us tried our best to expose the UAF strategy as stupid and try to mobilise as best we could. This wasn't helped of course by Communist Students/CPGB whatever Chris says to the contreary. Robbie to his credit along with myself did poster runs and leafletting for mobilisation, other CS comrades did nothing, infact when leafletting for the EDL counter-demonstration I believe Chris reminded his comrades that their day school was more important to be buidling for. Pure sectarianism - putting the interests of the sect above that of the class. A talk-shop about how great Communist Students is isn't as important as confronting fascists.

What Robbie says about CS building for the demo is a lie. His own actions were done in spite being a member of CS, not because of it. If he had listened to what he was told by comrades he would of done fuck all, like Chris and other CS'ers. Robbie did a fair bit, that isn't true of hsi orginisation and i daresay they'll do nothing for Leeds too.

Many of the CS attacks are valid. But where were they in the mobilisation, if you didn't like the posters, why didn't you create you own, why didn't you create your own leaflets? I bet you managed to get posters and leaflets done for your little day school.

One CS memebr did a few lecture shout-outs, another leafletted and did poster runs (to his credit), another did one hour of leafletting. CS should be ashamed of themselves for their lack of mobilisation and I think you all have some gall attacking PR. That's not to say that any strategy of attacking fascists on the street but handing our leaflets devoid of politics isn't something worth criticising, but until CS/CPGB actually do something above prioritising their own sect-building events, you should all stay quiet.

Mon 12, October 2009 @ 15:06

bill j said…

I think you're conceding too much to them Ste. Our "strategy", if you want to call it that was to build a direct action mobilisation against the fascists. We started from a very low base, had only a few weeks and under the circumstances made a good start. We shouldn't be listening to anyone who says otherwise.

We also, and we were the only ones to do so, produced a leaflet with the Salford Left Forum explaining why no platform was necessary, which we distributed to the Liverpool TUC demo. I also incorporated what were, in my opinion, some minor changes into the text after it was criticised.

As you know at the first organising meeting we were not able to win producing a more political leaflet. So we're left with a choice. Do we split the meeting, weakening the mobilisation, or insist on producing a leaflet for which there is no agreement? We decided to not split the meeting. I think everyone who has criticised us for not producing a leaflet agreed with that decision at the time. You can't have it both ways.

Leafleting on the day was not the priority, mobilising against the fascists was. That isn't to say we will not propose a more political leaflet again or do it ourselves if we can't win it, but now we have shown how we can work together, then we are better placed to have those political arguments out.

But all this talk about leaflets is basically a diversion. It is an attempt to draw attention from the fact that WW/CS oppose no platform. The reason they were luke warm about the mobilisation is that they are politically opposed to it. They are far to the right of the UAF, lining up with the stay at home community leaders. If we they can't even agree no platform then you can forget a leaflet.

Actions, as ever, speak louder than words.

Mon 12, October 2009 @ 16:26

Robbie said…

Bill, if you disagreed with the decision at the organising meeting, why didn't you distribute a modified version of the leaflet for the Liverpool TUC demo? And Salford Left Forum come to think of it- who made the leaflets for the MSF.

To make things clear. As an organising meeting for the counter demo, the first meeting of MSF was good- the leaflets were bad but we all agreed to do our bit and push up turnout. And you are right Bill that we got quite good numbers for the more militant bloc. What I was saying was that for the first meeting of the MSF it was rather poor, as Tina explains. I stand by my comment about a split sectarian left. The fact that we were all putting around different times was a hinderance (though there wasn't much that our organising meeting could do about that). However, the left was sectarian- it didn't put forward the politics necessary for the day, that goes for UAF AND those who produced the leaflet for the MSF. And yes, my organisation as well. As I said, WE ALL need to learn the lessons of Saturday ready for Leeds and beyond.

As for CS' contribution to building for Saturday. I don't think CS did enough, I agree with Ste. And I have argued this with CS members- there was nothing wrong with promoting our dayschool, but promoting it to the neglect of the counter-demo a week before was wrong, and I will argue that we put in a lot more of our time and resources to build for Leeds. I do think Ste is being a bit overkill though- CS members did do lecture shout outs, did poster runs, did leaflet, and two CS members attended the organising meetings.

As for Bills comments, it is absurd to imply that all of CS oppose no-platform. We don't, even most of the CPGB members are in favour, a minority have an appalling position on it. Most are in favour of militant no platform, including the majority of my branch. But as I have always said, that is a contradiction in my organisation, something I seek to redress.

As for actions speak louder than words, Bill, I have admitted my own and my organisations mistakes you haven't. The strategy you put forward in the report is basically sound. Whatever you did at the Liverpool TUC demo (which sounds good), you didn't put that into practise on the ground in Manchester, or if I recall argue for that in the organising meetings. Your actions speak just as loud as ours Bill, as do your words.

Mon 12, October 2009 @ 17:16

Chris said…

Ste, beyond your puerile and childish attacks on CS I can see four issues here.

First of all you want to make out that CS did nothing to help build for the demonstration. So I will list what we did:

1. Carried anti-EDL leaflets on 10 stalls that we have manned during and since freshers.

2. Built for it through our own and much expanded contacts since freshers through emails and texts.

3. Gave up our branch meeting space for the MSF meeting to organise the demonstration.

4. Took part in leafleting outside the Students Union with PR and Green Left comrades.

5. The Weekly Worker, which was read by nearly 14,000 people last week advertised the demo.

We did our fair share.

Secondly. What is wrong with CS building for a CS event as well as building anti-EDL demonstration on CS stalls? Building a political alternative on campus and across society is more important than just confronting fascists, we need to build a political pole of attraction for those who are thoroughly disenfranchised by society. Our day school is a step in that direction and as far as I understand that is what the MSF was originally about and to that end we supported the MSF, in fact if it wasn‘t for us you wouldn‘t of met in the union or had a stall at freshers, you would have been washed away, but hey us sectarians in CS kicked you out from under gazebo and out of our room didn‘t we? We have been very accommodating to the MSF project and I think it is a shame that a couple of people have undermined what it was supposed to be about.

Thirdly. The Leeds demo will be discussed at our branch tomorrow, I think comrades are set for spending time building that as well as the Stop the War demo in London on the 24 October.

Fourthly. We could of produced our own material that is right. However, it was already a joke that there was two sets of literature from two different organising committees.

So overall we did our fair share, have every right to criticise the lack of politics from PR and it’s anarchist hangers on. If you can’t win working class politics to build an anti fascist demonstration at a “socialist” forum then clearly something is wrong with the approach individuals are taking to build such a forum. Or are they just up for using it as a front to play at being AFA?

Bill, so you do care after all. Maybe you can apologise calling into question the truthfullness of Robbies assertion that you did not build the demonstration on class politics but on the same approach that the UAF use, in fact you really just came across as a more militant version of the UAF.

I am sure that not everyone agreed with you for producing a leaflet that had no politics on it. If what I have heard is correct you simply dropped politics in order to keep on board some anarchists, surely the best way to build a socialist forum!

CS does not oppose no platform, but CS does not follow “Brandlerite distortions” in the fight for democracy and against a fascist threat like you and so many other self proclaimed Trotskyists. It is good to see that you have finally gone back on claiming you built the demo on class politics, why the misleading report of your actions in first place though?

Mon 12, October 2009 @ 17:39

bill j said…

I did distribute it. In fact I spent my money to produce it. Albeit the differences were marginal.

@Chris

People read your paper and they know what it says. Even if you don't. You oppose no platform. That's why all you do is attack it. We were able, in spite of organisations like yours, to make an important step forward in organising the anti-fascist left. That was good. The end.

 

Mon 12, October 2009 @ 18:59

Chris said…

Bill, you wouldn't have had a meeting if it wasn't for CS. You managed to organise next to nothing for freshers, signed nobody up to the society and now want to use what support you did manage to get to use the MSF as a cover for you to play at being AFA. No apology for Robbie still?

People do read our paper quite right, and they all would of read about the demonstration that took place on Saturday. We do not oppose No Platform, we oppose the use of it by sections of the Left including yourself in a way that undermines the fight for democracy and strengthens the bourgeois state. As we have explained to you several times, No Platform is a tactic that our movement can use, it is not a principle. A good read is Trotsky 'On Fascism and Democratic slogans' (1933). The left get the emphasis on what is needed at the moment, it is not groups of middle aged men looking for fights with far right thugs. We need a political alternative, that is why we supported the MSF and that is why we will continue to build a political space where we can organise actions and discussions with other groups on the Left.

Mon 12, October 2009 @ 19:49

JC said…

Chris you are being very disingenuous. I debated one of your members, Mike McNair. And he clearly said that the BNP weren't fascist. So maybe the CPGB don't oppose no platform, but they oppose it when it comes to the BNP because your line is that they aren't fascists.

As PR opposes state bans I'm not sure what your comment is about in terms of strengthening the bourgeois state. I have to say my experience of the CPGB is that you would rather navel gaze than do things. Jack Comrade basically told me a a pub that trade union work is a waste of time. Which probably explains why the CPGB do next to no union work at all. What practical steps are the CPGB taking to build a rank and file in the unions?

Trotsky said one step forward for the working class is worth a thousand programmes and I think the CPGB could listen to that.

What is the CPGB strategy for the future? All I hear is a never ending mantra about marxist re-groupment. Which is even more bizarre given you spend all your time telling everyone what a waste of space the rest of the left is.

Do you really think discussions with the rest of a tiny far left is the way forward?

Mon 12, October 2009 @ 20:33

Chris said…

"one step forward for the working class is worth a thousand programmes" I think you will find that is from Marx not Trotsky during the discussion on the Gotha programme in a letter to Bracke: "Every step of real movement is more important than a dozen programmes".

We do not oppose it when it comes to the BNP, again we argue that it is a tactic not a principle. CPGB members are involved in trade union work in the UCU, PCS and CWU. I think trade union politics is a waste of time, communists fighting in trade union for effective strategies and communist politics is essential.

Mon 12, October 2009 @ 21:55

JC said…

Marx, Trotsky, whatever, the point is still the same.

Why did Mike McNair openly and clearly argue at the PR summer school that the CPGB argue that the BNP is not fascist then? No platform is a strategy specifically designed against fascism, so if the BNP is not fascist why would you no platform it?

You are playing with words about trade unionism. Jack Conrad was saying that doing work within the trade unions is a waste of time, and by that he meant communist work, I assumed you would know that's what I meant as we are both communists. I said "trade union work", not "trade union politics".

The CPGB seems to do extremely little in the trade unions and examples of it are few and far between. Even with a tiny organisation like PR you can find loads of examples of trade union work in our journal and on our website. You struggle to find examples of it on your website on in your paper. I think that says something.

Mon 12, October 2009 @ 22:49

Tina said…

"trade union politics is a waste of time".

Do you really mean that Chris? So unless the collective workplace organisations of the working class adopt a communist programme (whatever you think that means) then everything they do is a waste of time? Tell that to workers who have improved their working conditions, hindered management control, improved pay, got rid of discriminatory practices in the workplace etc., all through carrying out trade union action, yes even routine trade unionism.

If you really think that this is a waste of time, you are going down a ultra-left sectarian road which is doomed to failure in terms of building any of worth within the working class.

Mon 12, October 2009 @ 22:54

Smith said…

I'm just a passer with varying political views, but after reading all of your comments I am satisfied that none of your organisations are worthy of support.

I always had some sympathies with a command style economy, even when my economics education made me think that it could never work in practice. However the real fault with the far-left is displayed right here on this forum....

You have no connection with the working class whatsoever. You have no idea of what they need, how they feel or what their aspirations are.

The EDL are one symptom of the working classes disaffection. Even if you hate that symptom, instead of trying to understand it and take a pragmatic approach, you immediately give it a nasty label and attack it.

I feel sorry for you, because no matter how hard you try you will never win any considerable percentage of the working class over to your ideals. In fact your continued actions will kill any sympathy for your ideals from the working class for a generation.

Mon 12, October 2009 @ 23:08

Kirstie said…

tea and cakes anyone?

Mon 12, October 2009 @ 23:39

Chris said…

Tina, I mean it, but not in the way it came across in my previous post. Trade union work is essential to build a revolutionary movement and party.

So much of the Left has been absorbed into just limiting their actions in the unions to putting forward basic trade union demands and incorporating themselves into the bureaucracy, the Socialist Party is a perfect example of this. What we argue, is that communists must carry out agitational and educational work within the trade unions as well as building socialist caucuses in the medium term. Granted some of this work is done on a small scale in one or two places, Workers’ Fight at Cowley with their factory branch would be an example of what a larger organisation could seek to do on a wider scale. And in a less sectarian and dogmatic way.

If members of a communist organisation was to lead a school occupation or strike then they should put out literature which goes beyond the economist demands of trade unionism and spread the ideas of socialism. A factory bulletin or a bulletin done by socialists involved in an occupation should be explicitly socialist. In the same way we argue for socialist politics in building the anti fascist movement, we should argue for socialist politics in the unions.

JC, No Platform is not just applied to fascists, trade unions, students unions and other organisations use it against homophobes, racists etc. No Platform is just one of the weapons that our movement has to defend itself against reaction.

I wouldn’t want to comment on what Jack said to you in a pub, as I weren’t there. I prefer to stick with what we report and what we do. Look at this weeks paper lead article is on the Postal strikes, and another on what is happening in the PCS. No to be picky, but what has PR got to say about Postal strikes? Clearly we are not going to have the same level of reports that an organisation like the SWP does, we just don’t have the people on the ground to do it. It would be foolish for us to expend our energy chasing reports of this or that struggle every week with the limited resources which would just be a cheap imitation of what you could read in Socialist Worker. Which for its many faults has great coverage of struggles from across the country in the back pages. I am not saying do not report, intervene or attempt to lead these struggles just that we cannot cover all of these struggles.

Back to the anti-EDL demo JC, do you think that we should argue class politics when building demonstrations against the EDL or should we do what Bill and your comrades did in Manchester?

Tue 13, October 2009 @ 10:53

JC said…

But no-one here has said absorb everything to limited trade union demands and you're not debating with the Socialist Party, so it kind of looks like you are setting up a straw man.

The fact remains that if you look at the PR journal and website it is full of stuff about our members activities in the unions and in community campaigns. This cannot be said of the Weekly Worker which is the same size, why is that? In practice you seem to do next to nothing in terms of agitational and educational work within the unions and you don't seem to do anything much to try and build rank and file initiatives. You seem stuck in a bubble world of marxist intellectuals and students.

I have little time for those who are good when quoting texts, writing on the web and putting out slogans but do little or nothing when it comes to actually doing work within workplaces and working class communities.

As for reporting the postal strikes, maybe we should have more on the website, but I'm talking about what you actually do as an organisation in the unions. Your paper is bereft of what your members do in unions, and I suspect that is because they do very little. You seem to spend most of your time attacking the rest of the far left and ironically asking for them all to unite at the same time.

Are you seriously saying we should no platform racists? So why don't you advocate smashing up labour party meetings with new labour MPs? Or Conservative Party meetings? This is just total nonsense I'm afraid. No platform was clearly a tactic that came in the defense of the workers movement against fascism.

But yes I think we should put class politics in leaflets. However I don't know exactly what happened in the meeting and from what Bill is saying it seems your comrades said they would also rather put the leaflet out than split the meeting. I would say though that a socialist forum should have a minimum level of socialist politics that if people don't like they should leave the forum.

Tue 13, October 2009 @ 15:52

bill j said…

Don't listen to this rubbish JC. If he'd bothered to look he would have found that we have already written on the postal strikes here;

http://www.permanentrevolution.net/entry/2798

He doesn't bother to look because its all about pathetic point scoring as a way of diverting attention from the fact that his organisation support the right of Nazis to speak. Read what they say in their recent paper;

"We should not demand the BBC ditch Nick Griffin on October 22 - but that the establishment make room for the Marxist left on its platforms."

So instead of no platform for fascists, the CPGB demand that the BBC put them on Question Time to debate the Nazi leader. Its so laughable its not even funny.

The MSF leaflet did include class politics. Unlike the CPGB it fought for no platform for fascists. In the context of an attempt to deny the fascists a platform that was the class line. Its a shame that this thread has been wasted on this right wing liberal group instead of discussing a real way forward. But that will have to be somewhere else with people who genuinely want to oppose the Nazis.

Tue 13, October 2009 @ 17:53

JC said…

If the leaflet was drawn up at short notice and when there was an urgent need to get people to the demo then I agree that is the urgent priority.

A valid political alternative is needed and a strategy of how to get there but it might be pretty hard to get that in a leaflet drawn up at short notice. At the end of the day class politics are important in all we do, but if we don't actually do anything in terms of action then it's all pointless. The CPGB seem like a left obsessed talking shop to me if their minimal work in the unions is anything to go by (along with Jack Conrads comments), and I agree it's a shame this thread has ended up being derailed.

Tue 13, October 2009 @ 19:45

Chris said…

JC, On No Platform, it is used against racists, holocaust deniers and homophobes etc by the workers movement, students movement and in our communities already. Applying it as a principle against fascists, and apparently fascists only disarms our movement of the other weapons we can use. No Platform cannot beat the BNP, even if you dress it up in militant clothes.We need a political alternative for the working class, without that the BNP will continue to grow as Labour continues to retreat from the working class.

Look through our paper it is has plenty of articles on unions, what is going on in this struggle or that struggle. The Weekly Worker is political agitational paper within the workers movement, that gives space for the Left to clarify its politics and where it is going. “Attacking the rest of the far left” and calling for unity is not ironic. In a workers party the different tendencies and factions would have to be allowed to criticise and fight for their ideas, ensuring the party would be clear on its programme and its way forward. Maybe you should have a look at how Lenin, Trotsky and Marx attacked members of their own organisations. The belief that unity is founded on an uncritical attitude to difference, opportunism and economism has gifted the left a myriad of competing sects and failed “unity” projects. I know you hold disdain against those who study Marxist writers, but maybe a quick look at how the Bolsheviks built their party may help in understanding why we pose unity in such a way?

What is wrong in building in the students movement and attracting clever individuals to our organisation? I think it is strength that acadamics and people like Moshe Machover, Hillel Ticktin, Lars T Lih, Matthew Cobb and Yassamine Mather have written for our paper. It is also a strength that we allow others on the Left to write in, we have had Bill writing in the paper previously. I also think it is a strength that CPGB members are part of a much wider student/youth group in CS and that young CPGB members along with CS comrades have built from almost nothing a national organisation with its own independent political life. We have weaknesses no doubt, and yes it is in union work and other places, but every small left group has similar problems.

Bill, I find it very odd, that you admit there was no class politics after calling Robbie a liar and now claim that there was class politics in the leaflets? Your leaflets were almost identical to the ones the UAF put out. We had some of these leaflets on our stalls and quite clearly they had nothing on socialists attitude towards the EDL. I was not point scoring, that article on the postal strike is a month old. It is funny that you call us liberal considering that you opted out of class politics in building against the EDL demo because of the liberals and anarchists were worried socialist politics would scare people away.

JC, The leaflet was not drawn up a short notice, it was discussed and planned to be devoid of political content at what was supposed to be a socialist forum. This thread has not been derailed, Robbie rightly pointed out that Bill was lying to his own comrades and to the rest of the movement, Bill has tried to cover that up with half baked attacks on the CPGB. Everyone who has been involved in the socialist forum and gave out the leaflets Bill made knows full well that it was devoid of class politics.

Wed 14, October 2009 @ 11:45

Jason said…

Chris you are saying apparently that we don't raise class arguments against fascism. That's certainly news to me having read and even written a fair number of articles both for our organisation when we were Workers Power and Permanent Revolution arguing for the centrality of class politics in opposing fascism.

 

A link if you wish www.permanentrevolution.net/entry/2261  

"only the organised working class through demonstrations, occupations and strikes can force real cahnge that improves all our lives."

 

We argue, I think rightly, that reviving the working class movement, establsihing action on housing, jobs and services is crucial as is building a a socialist movement for revolutionary overthrow of capitalism. That action can and should include organised self-defence against racist attacks.

 

This is not devoid of class politics, nor is the idea that different activists hsould meet together and act together in left and socialist forums. You refer to a leaflet tahat I and proably most readers of this page have not seen- perhaps there were problems with it, perhaps not- why don;t you reproduce it here so we can see?

 

However, more important would be to work together, to link to fight against job cuts and threats to services, to fight racism. For example, the post strike may be a good focus for unity in action.

 

On this we would argue for mass meetings of workers, for rank and file control of the strike, for the whole union movement to give practical solidarity. I'm not saying that there are n't many other political priorities but to dismiss this as a mere trade union activity only useful for building a revolutionary organisation is not, I think, helpful. Perhaps you didn't mean it but that was the impression I got from "trade union politics is a waste of time" which you later clarified by saying "Trade union work is essential to build the revolutionary movement and party."

 

Revolutionary organisation will be built by revolutionaries being the best and most consistent fighters for the class not by seeing the class struggle as merely a recruiting ground. Of course alongside the fight for militant rank and file controlled action we connect this to the fight for a society controlled by the working class- using the strike as a microcosm of why workers need to control things, both in the strike, in the workplace and in society at large. This means building a party but one to fight for workers' interests not seeing trade union work as a way of building ourselves.

Wed 14, October 2009 @ 19:33

Tina said…

Chris,

I think it would be a good idea to put this exchange to bed. For those outside Manchester it doesn't really make much sense. Having said that, I'd like to add a few words. The leaflet distributed was not a leaflet of the Manchester Socialist Forum quite simply because the Manchester socialist forum does not exist. It was an very basic mobilising leaflet to get people on the streets to demonstrate against the EDL. The meeting that agreed to distribute it was clearly not a meeting of a socialist forum, but rather an anti-EDL organising meeting, bringing together socialist, anarchists, and some anti-fascists who claimed to have no interest in politics whatsoever.

There is a space for those kind of leaflets, they do serve a purpose. What was amiss however was that none of the left - including the CPGB - intervened in the run-up to the anti-EDL protest or during it, with a political, class based response to the fight against fascism and how to start building a political alternative now. But don't worry, you and the rest of the left have plenty of opportunities to right this wrong in the months ahead.

Wed 14, October 2009 @ 20:17

Jason said…

Perhaps. Though I think debate can be useful. For example out of this we could not only produce a leaflet - perhaps with different drafts circulated by e-mail for comment and decided in meetings but more importantly also take the arguments into working class estates, campaigns, strikes and actions.

 

Tina, I think the idea of a socialist forum is a very good one. I couldn't make the previous meeting but it is a start of sorts surely and on that basis - of an actual meeting albeit one of different political views it's fine to publish and distribute a leaflet under the name socialist forum.

 Of course simply having a meeting called socialist forum is not enough but we have to start somewhere and having a meeting of activists from different left groups and indeed activists not in left groups is OK I think as a start. 

Wed 14, October 2009 @ 21:14

Jason said…

The EDL is obviously something of a new formation, and that perhaps needs explaining as well.

I did a leaflet on the BNP about 3 years ago with some help from Mark. It obviously massivley needs updating but the text is reproduced below. BOlton Trades Council agreed to distribute it but in the end i think only a couple of hundred were distributed plus it was proably too wordy.

However at least it is a text may be we could improve on and ceetainly update as well as make punchier. May be though it will be denoucned as devoid of class politcs!

"United working class action

can stop the BNP

A warning at the polls

At the local elections last May the British National Party (BNP) won 48 council seats. It gained 32 new councillors. In Barking & Dagenham, on the edge of East London, the BNP won 12 seats, making it the second strongest party in the borough.

In every area where the BNP make gains racist attacks increase. The day the BNP councillors were sworn in in Barking a 30-year-old Asian man was stabbed in a vicious attack. Coincidence? No, the BNP peddle race hate as a doctrine. They may dress it up in fancy leaflets and get their storm troopers to wear smart suits when pushing these lies through people’s letterboxes. But the result is always the same. Black people, Asians, asylum seekers – anyone deemed “racially inferior” – become the targets of a fascist regime of terror.

Anti-Working Class Hate and Despair

Nick Griffin is a Nazi- this is a man who was convicted for denying that Hitler’s slaughter of Jews in the gas chambers – the number one Nazi crime of the last century - ever took place. Hitler, according to Griffin, was a nationalist hero not a mass murderer.

Fascism regards the working class movement as its enemy – demonstrated by the vicious attack, sponsored by a fascist website long linked to the BNP, on the President of the Merseyside Trades Union Council, Alec McFadden.

This is reinforced by the discovery of explosive materials stockplie at the house of ex BNP candidate for Colne, Lancashire Robert Cottage who said he was hoarding them for a civil war- the civil war that fascists want to create against the working class.

The BNP’s election gains were proof that the message of hate can prosper where there is despair. Where there are housing shortages, unemployment, poverty, people can be conned into believing that someone must be to blame – the Black people, Muslims (BNP speak for all Asians) and especially asylum seekers.

This is why we need a workers’ charter for the election

In Barking and Dagenham, where the BNP did so well, is a deprived area that has suffered as a result of sackings and closures at the Ford Motor Company, for example. There are real housing shortages.

The BNP won votes by telling people in the borough that Asylum seekers from Africa were getting all the good council homes. The more they told this big lie, the more people believed them. But in fact, according to the council, of its 20,250 homes asylum seekers or refugees occupy just four.

We need to end council house sell-offs, and a massive public housing programme under workers’ control so both new quality environmentally friendly housing can be built and existing accommodation repaired and brought up to standard.

The BNP pick on a scapegoat that suits their purpose of stirring up race hate and spreading divisions amongst the workers. They divert attention from the fact that all workers and the poor are being hit – whether they are black or white. And the people hitting them are not asylum seekers. It is the employers who closed down Ford Dagenham and countless other factories. It is the government that has cut services, slashed council house provision and proposed cutting hundreds of jobs and losing hundreds of beds in the NHS.

For the organisation of migrant workers by trade unions and the abolition of immigration controls which make some workers illegal.

For the re-nationalisation of privatised industry and repeal of all the anti-trade union laws so workers can organise to defend jobs and services.

Where cuts are proposed – such as in the NHS- we demand a public enquiry under trade union control to inspect the accounts and assess the real needs of communities so we can plan to run services for public good rather than private profit.

We need the troops to be withdrawn from Iraq and Afghanistan now.

How to stop the fascist threat

We believe in pinning the blame for poor housing, unemployment and poverty on the people responsible for these social evils – evils that inevitably lead to crime and anti-social behaviour.

We will campaign for the sort of pro-working class policies outlined above and translate the message into action against the BNP. Wherever they try to stand candidates, wherever they try to publicly spread their poison, wherever they try to organise, we will mobilise everyone we can to stop them. We will deny them any platform whatsoever and scatter this gang of misfits, Hitler worshippers and racist thugs to the wind.

United we can smash the BNP and their message of race hate."

Anyway whilst I'm far from sure we have the luxury of putting this debate to bed- I personally am heading that way for now as I've got to be up at 5.30 in the morning. Ah the joys of life!

Wed 14, October 2009 @ 21:47

bill j said…

@Chris

Don't know what you're on about. But feel free to rant away.

Wed 14, October 2009 @ 23:04

JC said…

Where did I say that we didn’t need a political alternative to the BNP? Another straw man from you? This is blindingly obviously what we need.

So no platform against racists. Are you advocating smashing up Conservative party meetings? Attacking labour party gatherings?

Once again I didn’t ask you for articles on the unions in your paper. I said that you have remarkably few articles about what your members are doing in the unions in practical terms. Next to nothing in fact. Why is this? PR is as small as you yet our members regularly take part in activities in the unions, trying to build up rank and file movements. Why is the CPGB so devoid in these things? Surely an organisation based on working class politics should be active in the working class and in workplaces?

Yes you can attack the rest of the left and ask for unity, but in the way the WW does it is just bizarre. You tell the rest of the left they are largely a waste of space and then ask them all to join a new marxist party. There is a difference between organisations having different tendencies and asking to unite with organisations that you totally denounce.

Thanks for suggesting I have a look at Lenin, Trotsky and Marx. You know what, I have done. Also yet another straw man from you. Where did I say I hold disdain for those who study marxist writers exactly? Care to quote me? I think it’s very important. I said I have disdain for those who sit in ivory towers and patronise others, but do nothing much in a practical sense in the workers movement.

And yet another straw man from you! Where did I say that there was anything wrong in building in the student movements? Nowhere in fact, but heh, just like the WW, don’t let facts get in the way. But it’s interesting that you think the “clever individuals” will come from this movement. Personally I think a fair few students are pompous idiots (but not all of course), but there are far more politically clever people to be found, in general, in work places. But of course it’s easier to operate in the bubble world of a campus.

As for Bill lying to the movement, maybe you could be a little less dramatic? I know student politics is often full of grandstanding, but come on.

Thu 15, October 2009 @ 16:29

Jason said…

May be though I think there may have been a little pettiness from more than one contributor. What is definitely needed is to act together against the fascist threat, build a wider workers movement and a revolutionary current within it.

Thu 15, October 2009 @ 19:29

Kaze no Kae said…

I'd say it *was* a success actually. The objective was never to literally smash heads, the objective was to prevent the fash from having free reign to terrorise bystanders and grow in confidence. By forcing them to hide behind the pigs, we did exactly that, even if it was mostly our comrades rather than the fash or the pigs who paid the price.

Mon 19, October 2009 @ 22:53

Duncan said…

Amazingly, the best antidote to the silliness expressed in the article above (though I do like 'UAF - Useless against fascism') is from the CPGB:

http://cpgb.org.uk/worker/789/asymptom.php

A sensible assessment (with the exception of one glaring error) and good overview about the hysteria provoked by the English Defence League.

Tue 20, October 2009 @ 20:13

Jason said…

Duncan we say that the best and in the long run only way to beat fascism is by building a working class alternative. But when fascists congregate it is appropriate and correct to organise self-defence. Why is that 'silly'?

Tue 20, October 2009 @ 21:23

Duncan said…

Stuff like this is just silly:

"English Defence League - BNP boot boys on the streets"

Tue 20, October 2009 @ 21:48

bill j said…

Silly but true. So not silly. But true.

Wed 21, October 2009 @ 00:05

bill j said…

Actually I think the CPGB has easily the worst position on the UK left on this question. It basically amounts to do nothing, the EDL don't matter, and even if they do, then everything's hopeless as we don't have "Marxist" MPs.

Revealing their useless liberal bleeding hearts.

Wed 21, October 2009 @ 00:32

Jason said…

Are you saying there's no link between the BNP and EDF? No BNP members or supporters on the demo? No support or mobilization for the demo on BNP forums?

That is extremely unlikely.

With both the BNP and EDF the main strategy should be to argue that blaming immigrants, scapegoating Black or Asian workers is completely wrong. The poverty, the crime, the lack of jobs and services in working class communities is down to the fact that we are ruled by a self-serving corrupt elite who put their profits above working class lives, who are happy to see working class people sent to their deaths fighting other working class people, happy to see workers sacked after a life time of service to company, content to make millions out of other peoples' misery.

It is the corrupt elite who are to blame not other workers who happen to have another skin colour or believe in a different religion. The way to fight job cuts, crime, the war and service slashes is to rebuild working class militancy and rebuild the left.

That's the main message against the BNP, against the EDF, against fascism. But where racists congregate ready to attack Asian people or other Black or immigrant workers it is only right that the wider movement also congregate both to show that we are united against racism and willing to offer organized self-defence against racist attacks.

Thu 22, October 2009 @ 04:08

add to the discussion

   

your details (optional)

name
e-mail address
URL

Your e-mail address will not be shared.

your comment

Separate paragraphs with blank lines; HTML markup will be removed; URLs will be converted to links.