Is the use of violence necessary in the fight against fascism?

[MilitantAnarchist]

This may seem a stupid question to some... but is it?
I've had thoughts, and convosations with people that could prove violence against fascists could be counter revolutionary....
It came about when one of the local BNP members (i do no know him or anything about what happened, honestly...) has been getting death threats, and told to seal his letter box up at night ext... but alot of people have seen the threats to be worse then being a member of the BNP....

If everyday people dont understand fascist parties true motives, how can they understand our violence towards them? Especially when the media will make us look like loony lefty terrorists???

What are your thoughts?

[DreamWeaver]

They love to play the victim and the position of underdog suits them best. This will make them larger for they will be the party that voters will turn to when they are agry with the way things are going in the UK. If people want things to change, they will turn to radical parties, left and right. I don't see an alternative on the left in the UK that can stand up to the BNP. Therefore it is more productive to create or support a party on the left that disillusioned voters can turn to, instead of using violence to cause minor blows to the BNP but grant it a lot of votes.

The only time violence is allowed is when a political advisary does not have any power (and therefore media-attention) yet. When they are just a small group of radical people without power they cannot abuse the underdog posititon in the media. If this is the case, kill 'm all ;)

[Holden Caulfield]

Kicking the shit out of everybody who votes BNP will be counter productive, firstly because alot are working class folk who have been fucked over by Labour and see no other alternative at the ballot box. The BNP set themselves up as a party of the working class, and this, sadly, is how they are often seen. Secondly it will make us seem like mindless hooligans, will give them a siege mentality and countless propaganda pieces to use against 'the left'.

We should work on their base of support, we should actively organise for a left alternative in communities, host anti-racist gigs, be present in support of striking workers, and show the working classes we are them, and that we are on their side. We should counter BNP propaganda with facts and figures on the effects of immigration, multi-culturalism, and their record as a party, as individuals, and as elected officials.

We need to point out certain aspects of the BNP, and I dont just mean screaming 'Nazi' in a middle class voice like UAF suggest, i mean pointing out that it is strange that the leader of this party for the working class is part of the landed gentry, pointing out the local activist who calls immigrants 'parasites' is on benafits but has a jaguar with private plates (because he was a coke dealer).

What we should do is focus on their ability to organise, put pressure on local venues that host or support the BNP, attack the intests of key figures in your locality, and if you can hit their paper sales/stalls. Certain members of the BNP deserve a kicking, but you should do your research: I would not support violence against the disillusioned and mislead worker, however the local BNP activist who's photos (that he had taken) just happened to turn up on redwatch would appear to be a legitimate target. Mark out the activists in their communities, spraypaint and flypost counter BNP propaganda, and gather intelligence on people in your local party (you never know when their local activists will be seen in town with a guy in a '14 words, White Power' jumper).

Be creative, Hereford antifascists got an BNP blog closed down by getting all their contacts to go on and vote in the polls with the opposite of what the obvious answer was, and by setting up a duplicate blog.

But always remember that we are the good guys, and that getting your arse kicked or arrested for a good cause doesn't make you brave, it makes you stupid, and stops your ability to organise.

Use violence when necessary, non-violence is the negative basis of slavery, but do not solely rely on it.

and visit www.antifa.org.uk (http://www.antifa.org.uk)

[redSHARP]

violent and non-violent actions all have their place in anti fascism. you will know when it is appropriate when it is not.

[Melbourne Lefty]

Use violence when necessary,


Yup.

Personally I wouldnt even suggest attacking paper sales, merely showing up with over ten people who then peacefully hand out anti-BNP flyers whilst blocking the BNP people and DARING them to start something would probably be a better bet.

Too many people, many of them young males seem to think that stopping the BNP is simply a matter of kicking the daylights out of people or scratching up someones car at 3am.

HC is right again [stop it] in saying that what is needed is real community organising, and when I say that I dont mean that the local UAF went to the MPs office who called up the local mosque, temple and church to get a few people around for a photo shoot "against racism".

What I mean is people working in their local communities to make them better places to live. Sometimes [heavent forbid] you do this by getting on the local parish council. The BNP have been putting their people on these bodies for years now and use them to make themselves really felt in the communities where they live. A sort of "Joe bloggs? yeah everyone knows Joe, great bloke" thing which makes it very hard for anti-racist groups to budge local people come election time [he has been here twenty years, where were you last week?].

Now how many left wing groups do you know who are doing community politics like that? I think the IWCA did some really good work in that area, but no-one rushed to help them.

People brush it off as NIMBYism, but they forget NIMBYism is how you build grass roots, explaining to people why the issues they are worried about would be better off if your vision became reality.

How many left wing groups are out in the suburbs getting on parish councils like the BNP? And how many are setting up yet another stall to grab yet another load of middle class uni students who will get bored after two weeks and pack it in?

Think about it. Please.

[Pia Fidelis]

I am pretty sure this conversation has been had one thousand times over. Use the search function.

[Holden Caulfield]

I am pretty sure this conversation has been had one thousand times over. Use the search function.

I dont mind answering new users questions, if its pointless keep your inane one liners to your self.

[Pia Fidelis]

I dont mind answering new users questions, if its pointless keep your inane one liners to your self.

How is it pointless? Maybe the new poster was not familiar with the search function? I see your e-crush on me is still alive and well.

[Rosa Provokateur]

No, the use of the ballot is. Fascism is nothing if it cant win office; no matter how many street-fights they win, if un-able to gain strength on the ballot they've got nothing

[mykittyhasaboner]

No, the use of the ballot is. Fascism is nothing if it cant win office; no matter how many street-fights they win, if un-able to gain strength on the ballot they've got nothing

Except they can win positions through the ballot box. Remember that guy Hitler?

Also, what makes you think a bunch of fascist gangs cant seize political power? Or perhaps launch a coup? It happened in Italy and Portugal.

[Holden Caulfield]

No, the use of the ballot is. Fascism is nothing if it cant win office; no matter how many street-fights they win, if un-able to gain strength on the ballot they've got nothing

wrong again mon amis, it divides the working class along racial lines, it doesn't necessarily need to get into office to smash the class struggle, or to help divide us so we will be good worker drones for our 'own' bourgeois.

[Pogue]

This may seem a stupid question to some... but is it?
I've had thoughts, and convosations with people that could prove violence against fascists could be counter revolutionary....
It came about when one of the local BNP members (i do no know him or anything about what happened, honestly...) has been getting death threats, and told to seal his letter box up at night ext... but alot of people have seen the threats to be worse then being a member of the BNP....

If everyday people dont understand fascist parties true motives, how can they understand our violence towards them? Especially when the media will make us look like loony lefty terrorists???

What are your thoughts?


Violence is by no means the only tactic or enough on its own. But of course its neccesary. And unavoidable.

Fascism is a violent ideology. By its nature it is. The means by which it seizes power are often violent. What it does when its in power is violent. The BNP want to get elected and they want to proceed to segregate white and black people. How would it be possible to do this without violence?

And look at Spain in 1936. The fascists used their base in the ruling class and military to launch an assault on the people of Spain. Clearly, at this stage, a violent response was needed on behalf of the workers, and this is what they gave. When the fascists are marching through the streets with guns shooting and raping, obviously you have to fight back.

This is the nature of fascism, because it is fundamentally violent, expansionist, segregationist, etc.

With regards with modern fascism, the BNP etc. The BNP are basically the re-modelling of the more thuggish BNP of earlier years, and are direct descedants of the National Front and British Union of Fascists. All of these groups have histories of violence. We know of the BNP nail bomber David Copeland and other assorted thugs linked to the party.

In the 70s and 80s anti-fascist protestors and ANL members would go on the usual march/rally protest against the NF which would usually have confrontration. Naturally in these cases violence happens. The fascists have always had a physical agenda and have alot of violent people in their ranks. Violence was simply unavoidable, and it still is.

I think the main issue is in what way violence is used. I think if you use violence it is defensive in thecase of anti-fascism. Fascists represent a threat to the class, our groups and ourselves and individuals and we have to defend against this. So theres cases of us needing self-defense organisations for our movement, militant armed groups ready to defend ourselves. We've needed this throughout hsitory. Look at the history of the Irish Citizen Army as an example of this, as one example. And obviously theres individual defense, because if your a well known anti-fascist you're going to be targetted. Violence shouldn't become a sport in and of itself, as a source of a rush or something. It should be calculated and applied when neccesary. For example, on a mass mobilisation against fascism you should be ready for violence and be prepared to defend against it with violence, but going out with the sole intention of getting in a scrap is when it becomes a problem because then you're going to get in trouble and lead to further problems. It needs ot be defensive, but I don't mean in the sense that we should only hit back after we've been hit, but I mean our violence should be directed towards protecting against the violence we'll encounter as we try to go about building mass movements, say if we're leafletting or something.

So yes, violence is neccesary. It happens and you have to be ready for it, too respond to it, to defend against it. You shouldn't fetishise it, or go seeking it recklessly, but it will come your way as class struggle and the anti-fascist struggle erupts and we must not hesitate to respond to it.

[Comrade Anarchist]

Everyone must try to stop fascism in any way they can. We may be portrayed as loony by the mass media but the mass media calls every communist a loony because they are owned by some of the richest men and corporations.

[Melbourne Lefty]

Violence was simply unavoidable, and it still is.

While I am bang alongside the idea of using violence when it can help [blocking meetings, intimidating venue owners, etc] I dont think it can be said to be "unavoidable".

The BNP as of 2009 is not the NF of 1978, they are for all intents and purposes completely different groups with completely different strategies.

The BNP has re-organised in such a way that it is no longer an organisation that uses violence to achieve its ends, it seems to have found that it can do a lot more damage if it DOESNT use violence [aside from the vioence of the state if it ever got any power].

The NF had violence as one of its main platforms, it was probably more important to them that ballots, the NF COULD NOT be stopped without violence [or at least physical opposition].

The BNP is different, and the more they get beat up the better it makes them look, the media hates them but they dont really like us that much either, if we keep being seen as the only aggressors and the BNP remain suit and tie material.... who knows?

If a BNP activist accidentally got killed next month during an anti-fash activity in the run up to the elections whose side would the press take?

I dont know, and that scares me.

[Rosa Provokateur]

Except they can win positions through the ballot box. Remember that guy Hitler?

Also, what makes you think a bunch of fascist gangs cant seize political power? Or perhaps launch a coup? It happened in Italy and Portugal.

They only win on the ballot if you dont provide opposition.

Coups are fascist in and of themselves. Doesnt matter who does it.

[Rosa Provokateur]

Everyone must try to stop fascism in any way they can. We may be portrayed as loony by the mass media but the mass media calls every communist a loony because they are owned by some of the richest men and corporations.

Well we dont have many well-spoken people on our side. They put Sammy Webb on the news and he did terrible. Get better speakers, ya?

[Holden Caulfield]

Well we dont have many well-spoken people on our side. They put Sammy Webb on the news and he did terrible. Get better speakers, ya?

We have brilliant minds on our side thank you very much

[Pogue]

The BNP as of 2009 is not the NF of 1978, they are for all intents and purposes completely different groups with completely different strategies.

Not true. The NF went for electoralism too and the BNP are an extension of this. The only reason they are not as open on the streets as the NF is because they know we'd stop them.

[mykittyhasaboner]

They only win on the ballot if you dont provide opposition.
Ok and? There was opposition to the Nazi party, but they got elected.


Coups are fascist in and of themselves. Doesnt matter who does it.I'm not surprised that you have no clue to what the term fascist means. Coup's aren't "fascist in itself", although fascist parties have came to power through a coup. Many others have as well, that did not put any fascist party in power.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coup


Well we dont have many well-spoken people on our side. They put Sammy Webb on the news and he did terrible. Get better speakers, ya?
http://www.pslweb.org/site/PageServer

(videos of interviews are in the bottom of the page)

[Holden Caulfield]

Ok and? There was opposition to the Nazi party, but they got elected.


Hitler and Mussolini were both appointed actually, proving that the Ancien Régime support fascism.

But they did have electoral support that got them into that place.

[communard resolution]

In response to the original question: it depends on the levels of fascist violence and what threat they pose in the street. In present-day Russia, for instance, I see absolutely no other way than using physical force to clear the streets of neo-nazis.

But I won't go and beat up people because they voted BNP.

[Holden Caulfield]

But I won't go and beat up people because they voted BNP.
Did you read my post? Read it then respond to the thread then.

[communard resolution]

Did you read my post? Read it then respond to the thread then.

No I didn't, and furthermore I don't have the time now. As stated, it's my response to the original poster's question.

[Holden Caulfield]

No I didn't, and furthermore I don't have the time now. As stated, it's my response to the original poster's question.

I wasnt trying to be arsey (sorry if it did) i just adressed the issue you raised in the first line.

[communard resolution]

I wasnt trying to be arsey (sorry if it did) i just adressed the issue you raised in the first line.

Hey, no problem. I just thought I'd quickly put my 10 cents in, but I will read the whole thread next time.

[Melbourne Lefty]

In present-day Russia, for instance, I see absolutely no other way than using physical force to clear the streets of neo-nazis.



The differences between russia the UK is striking.

In Russia the fascists are trying to take over the streets through force. In the UK they are attempting to influence popular opinion through non-violent means.

It should be clear that these two tactics require two different strategies to deal with them.

[communard resolution]

Did you read my post? Read it then respond to the thread then.

Read it now and agreed. Use of violence depends on the situation - fight fire with fire.

BNP --> counter their propaganda if it need be, then again there's bigger fish to fry: the Labour Party for instance. Maybe it's best to ridicule and embarrass the BNP as much as possible - that's something they will not attempt to claim martyrdom for.

Russia, etc: I honestly cannot think of anything other than violence given the current situation. Push them in front of trains so there's less of them - or something.

[MilitantAnarchist]

I think what we need is (sorry for management talk) but a two pronged approach (as someone as said), but BNP leafletted my town recently, so why cant we leaflet? we can get money through benefit gigs and leaflet, then use violence against all active fascists that are in the street. I get the idea from most of the fuckers that they'll fold as soon as they get real opposition. We'll never change peoples oppinion we just ignore the fuckers. If all the leaders disband, the lemmings will follow...
NO PASARAN!

[reddevil]

violence against fascists is acceptable provided we distinguish between truly violent and dangerous people and armchair generals

[Sasha]

euh no, armchair generals (or Schreibtischtäter) are excelent legitemat targets as well. the only fascists who are not are the stupid & misled hangarounds, the kids, the voters.

[MilitantAnarchist]

Make an example of one armchair general and the rest will fall out... most fascists (without sounding eliteus) especially racists, lack intelligence, there is no real foundation to it, so show them threat and i beleive theyll abandon there bullshit beliefs.

[Pogue]

I'd honestly like to see some of the liberal anti-fascists who shy away from physical combat last a minute in Moscow, or even London in the 70s, 80s and early 90s.

[Melbourne Lefty]

Make an example of one armchair general and the rest will fall out... most fascists (without sounding eliteus) especially racists, lack intelligence, there is no real foundation to it, so show them threat and i beleive theyll abandon there bullshit beliefs.

Wrong. From their point of view where the tribal collective identity is more important than the class collective identity their point of view is entirely valid.

They are not stupid, its simply that their logic flows from an incorrect original assumption.

Yes there are not-so-bright BNP voters out there, but thats mainly because their voting targets are working class, who on the whole dont get the best of education under the capitalist system.

Acussing the BNP of being stupid is stupidity, they are just as dedicated to their cause as we are to ours, and from their perspective the logical response to attacks on soft targets is to respond in kind.

I dont think the BNP has the capability to respond in kind anymore, but if they put their minds to it i am sure they can restructure again and bring the war to us.

The Best way to beat the BNP is to strangle them, take away their voters, make venues afraid to host them and get them fired from their jobs.

How you do that is up to you.

[Comrade Kaile]

say a country managed to become a communist state, wouldnt removing neo-nazis and fascists be somewhat of anti liberal stance? isnt it the persons choice?

[Pogue]

say a country managed to become a communist state, wouldnt removing neo-nazis and fascists be somewhat of anti liberal stance? isnt it the persons choice?

Communist state is an oxymoron mate.

Neo-nazis and fascists are the enemy of revolution and the working class and destroying them would become neccesary. We're not liberals, so we wouldn't be bothered about the liberal choice, but if you mean freedoms, then they are a threat to everyones freedom, the freedom of black, asian, etc (everyone nazis hate) people. They would attack the revolution and we'd have to fight back. Its their choice but they have to accept the consequences of it, and the consequences are we fight them.

[Comrade Kaile]

Communist state is an oxymoron mate.

Neo-nazis and fascists are the enemy of revolution and the working class and destroying them would become neccesary. We're not liberals, so we wouldn't be bothered about the liberal choice, but if you mean freedoms, then they are a threat to everyones freedom, the freedom of black, asian, etc (everyone nazis hate) people. They would attack the revolution and we'd have to fight back. Its their choice but they have to accept the consequences of it, and the consequences are we fight them.

communist state as in a personal state of, not a government state.
so basically if a fascist gets in my way i roll a barrel of napalm into his face? seems easy enough, thanks for fixing me up.

EDIT: scratch that, i meant socialist state, i.e. the ussr

[Pogue]

communist state as in a personal state of, not a government state.
so basically if a fascist gets in my way i roll a barrel of napalm into his face? seems easy enough, thanks for fixing me up.

If you were out organising and a fascist was threatening you, disrupting you or attacking you, you are entitled and obliged to defend yourself and others. In a revolution, fascists/neo-nazis will be firmly on the counter-revolutionary side so will attack us and our movement and we'd have to defend against them.

[YoungScouseRed]

Time and a place for violence....
x

[Kikkis]

They didn't need it in Portugal:)

[Rosa Provokateur]

Ok and? There was opposition to the Nazi party, but they got elected.

I'm not surprised that you have no clue to what the term fascist means. Coup's aren't "fascist in itself", although fascist parties have came to power through a coup. Many others have as well, that did not put any fascist party in power.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coup


http://www.pslweb.org/site/PageServer

(videos of interviews are in the bottom of the page)

Because they had a workable plan, a terrible plan but workable none-the-less. People dont consider communism or anarchy because they dont think its workable; show that it is and you win.

In my eyes, fascist is anything that uses coercion to attain power. Coups have no popular support, no democratic basis, thus they are fascist.

[mykittyhasaboner]

Because they had a workable plan, a terrible plan but workable none-the-less. People dont consider communism or anarchy because they dont think its workable; show that it is and you win.
Oh yeah, its just that simple. Lets show them it works, then they'll definitely jump on the bandwagon!

Seriously, do you live in a bubble? Its not as easy as you make it seem.


In my eyes, fascist is anything that uses coercion to attain power. Coups have no popular support, no democratic basis, thus they are fascist.

What your definition of fascism is, frankly doesn't matter at all because its incorrect. Fascism is a political tendency, not the means by which a political movement seizes power.

[Rosa Provokateur]

True but because most fascist movements use that tactic, its safe to say that the coup is fascist in essence; it mudt be on-order to be so favored by that movement

[anarchomaniac]

Hell yeah, *****es!

[Omi]

True but because most fascist movements use that tactic, its safe to say that the coup is fascist in essence; it mudt be on-order to be so favored by that movement


Most fascists drink milk, so it's safe to assume milk is fascist!
We must never drink milk, otherwise people will think we are the fascists!
But, if we go and smash all the milk cartons in the shop, the fascists will only take the stance of underdogs, therefore gaining them popular support. We must give the workable alternative, like applejuice. If we get people to like applejuice, the fascists will be alienated and that will prevent them from getting power!

Get a grip at reality mate, this is not how politics work.:rolleyes:

[Melbourne Lefty]

Most fascists drink milk, so it's safe to assume milk is fascist!


:laugh:
I knew it!

[RedArmyUK]

Stalin had the right idea, Kill them or work the fuckers to death :D

[Omi]

Stalin had the right idea, Kill them or work the fuckers to death :D


And you'r going to do that on your own now are you?:rolleyes:

I hate it that discussions about if the use of violence against fascists is a legitimate tactic always turn into a lot of people spamming this kind of junk, and people stating that ''OmG y0u us3 vialance you are faScItst YouzelVes~!1!'' and stuff like that. That way a proper discussion about tactics is never going to get off the ground. Maybe we should make a moderated group only for militant anti-fascists, for people who are tired of this sh*t and want to have a proper discussion about the use of certain tactics.

[RedArmyUK]

And you'r going to do that on your own now are you?:rolleyes:

I hate it that discussions about if the use of violence against fascists is a legitimate tactic always turn into a lot of people spamming this kind of junk, and people stating that ''OmG y0u us3 vialance you are faScItst YouzelVes~!1!'' and stuff like that. That way a proper discussion about tactics is never going to get off the ground. Maybe we should make a moderated group only for militant anti-fascists, for people who are tired of this sh*t and want to have a proper discussion about the use of certain tactics.

I,ve gone toe 2 toe many a time in Warsaw with skinheads,, I have not always won, but I stand my ground.

I take it you would run off?

[DreamWeaver]

I,ve gone toe 2 toe many a time in Warsaw with skinheads,, I have not always won, but I stand my ground.

I take it you would run off?

I have stood shoulder to shoulder with Omi in many cities across Europe and he is the type that runs toward the front.

I think that you misunderstood him, he was trying to say that people should stop repeating themselves when it comes to criticizing militant antifascism. There are people out there who call us fascists for using violence. This is a non-argument, fascism might be about the mythefication of violence but not everyone who uses violence is a fascist. Omi tried to make this clear with the milk-analogy.

[Omi]

Yeah, that, and making a point that comments like ''Stalin had the right idea, Kill them or work the fuckers to death'' are equally stupid. These are not serious anti-fascist arguements nor does it provide us with valuable information about how we should deal with fascists tactically.

[RedArmyUK]

Yeah, that, and making a point that comments like ''Stalin had the right idea, Kill them or work the fuckers to death'' are equally stupid. These are not serious anti-fascist arguements nor does it provide us with valuable information about how we should deal with fascists tactically.

No,, maybe not but MY OWN view is to kill all fascists, Nazi,s and so on.......

How would you deal with them?

[Holden Caulfield]

No,, maybe not but MY OWN view is to kill all fascists, Nazi,s and so on.......

How would you deal with them?

Thats dumb. Seriously fascists don't just pop up out of the ground or exist as evil 'baddies' seperate from the real world. Fascism grows by manipulating the working class, some fash need countered with physical force, but the vast majority of 'fascists' need a left wing alternative and things like this, not a kicking.

You shouldn't fall back on 'My own views' as an argument either, its the same thing Christians do to justify things which cannot be justified

[Vasilis-M]

I think that the antifascist movement should use violence when that is necessary.
For example,if we want to deal with the nazis of Russia (they kill,they hurt immigrants and anarchists) i vote for violence against them.

But if the nazi movement is not so "popular" i think that we should not use violence against them,cause we will end using fascist methods.

We are against nazis and fascism but hate and violence should not rule us..we must not end up like them.

consciousness,rage and reaction is the solution.

(excuse me for my english)

[communard resolution]

No,, maybe not but MY OWN view is to kill all fascists, Nazi,s and so on.......


You're probably some sort of fascist yourself for putting that antisemitic bastard Jaruzelski in your avatar - so go kill yourself.

[RedArmyUK]

Thats dumb. Seriously fascists don't just pop up out of the ground or exist as evil 'baddies' seperate from the real world. Fascism grows by manipulating the working class, some fash need countered with physical force, but the vast majority of 'fascists' need a left wing alternative and things like this, not a kicking.

You shouldn't fall back on 'My own views' as an argument either, its the same thing Christians do to justify things which cannot be justified

Oi,, read this

http://www.revleft.com/vb/neo-nazis-get-t107431/index.html

Seems i,m not the only one who likes the idea of Killing all Nazis

[RedArmyUK]

You're probably some sort of fascist yourself for putting that antisemitic bastard Jaruzelski in your avatar - so go kill yourself.

I can always put Stalin if thats more your taste?

[communard resolution]

I can always put Stalin if thats more your taste?

It's not necessarily more to my taste, but it would prevent me from getting emotional every time I see your posts and insulting you until I get banned.

I hate you for mindlessly glamorising Jaruzelski.

PS - aren't you the guy who claimed that 99% of Poles are racist?

[RedArmyUK]

It's not necessarily more to my taste, but it would prevent me from getting emotional every time I see your posts and insulting you until I get banned.

I hate you for mindlessly glamorising Jaruzelski.


And your hate for Jaruzelski comes from.......................????

[RedArmyUK]

It's not necessarily more to my taste, but it would prevent me from getting emotional every time I see your posts and insulting you until I get banned.

I hate you for mindlessly glamorising Jaruzelski.

PS - aren't you the guy who claimed that 99% of Poles are racist?

Yer,, and I would admit I was a little over the top with 99%,, although It does feel that way I lot of the time.

[Holden Caulfield]

Oi,, read this

http://www.revleft.com/vb/neo-nazis-get-t107431/index.html

Seems i,m not the only one who likes the idea of Killing all Nazis

You need to learn to draw the line in where violence is a necessary and justified tactic.
In that case it was entirely justified for obvious reasons,

In other cases killing is not the goal, the use of physical force is to set an example, to show there is working class resistence, to hamper the efforts of the far right organisational ability etc. In these situations killing is not the goal, no antifascist wants to go down for murder, murdering one person will not change anything (this has been proved in Russia, and else where, with historical assasinations, such as the Tsar), and advocating murder disregards the material base of fascism.

People are not evil, and people can change. Fascism growns when capitalism fails as people are disperate and mislead, not because they are evil. Education, propaganda and a valid left wing alternative are what is needed most to combat fascism, not death squads sent out after the manipulated members of the working class.

Also who is a fascist? A BNP voter? A BNP member? A supporter of the NF? Where do you draw the line, and what would give you the authority to make such a call.

If you want a police state created after the revolution where past political dissenters are tried and hung, give Stalinism a whirl, if not, think before you speak.

[communard resolution]

And your hate for Jaruzelski comes from.......................????

One of the main responsible men for the massacres of (predominately leftist) striking workers in Gdynia, Gdanks, Szczecin and other Polish cities in 1970, where police and military were ordered to open fire at unarmed protesters. And of course, First Secretary of a parasitary gang known as the PZPR from 1981 onwards.

The reasons why I'm getting aggravated every time I see one like you defend Jaruzelski's regime of scoundrels and butchers on revleft are largely personal and have to with things that happened to my family (and to a much lesser extent to myself). Since they're anecdotatal and I cannot 'prove' them, there is probably no place for them on a political discussion forum - nor am I too keen to cheapen my familiy's experience by offering sob stories to strangers.

I can, however, ask you back: where does your admiration for Jaruzelski stem from? Is it because he was a 'great Polish patriot' who declared Martial Law in '81 to prevent the Red Army from popping over and shutting up the working class for good?

Or is it because, as it turned out later, he was such a good lapdog he actually did ask the USSR for assistance to shut up the working class for good (only the USSR wasn't interested so he had to do it all himself)?

I'm aware that the PRL was no fascist state in the historic Mussolini/Hitler sense. On the other hand, it was pretty mych the kind of state that Strasser and Rohm would have loved to see (had their Fuhrer not fucked them over).

I'd like to end this on a light note - here's a music recommendation for you and fellow Jaruzelski lovers:

LINK (http://www.soviet-empire.com/ussr/viewtopic.php?f=108&t=45206)

[communard resolution]

Yer,, and I would admit I was a little over the top with 99%,, although It does feel that way I lot of the time.

If you find that disturbing, maybe a politician who sent out police to spray paint "Solidarnosc = Jews" on the walls of Warsaw playing at popular antisemitic prejudice is not the right man to idolise.

[RedArmyUK]

One of the main responsible men for the massacres of (predominately leftist) striking workers in Gdynia, Gdanks, Szczecin and other Polish cities in 1970, where police and military were ordered to open fire at unarmed protesters. And of course, First Secretary of a parasitary gang known as the PZPR from 1981 onwards.

The reasons why I'm getting aggravated every time I see one like you defend Jaruzelski's of scoundrels and butchers on revleft are largely personal and have to with things that happened to my family (and to a much lesser extent to myself). Since they're anecdotatal and I cannot 'prove' them, there is probably no place for them on a political discussion forum - nor am I too keen to cheapen my familiy's experience by offering sob stories to strangers.

I can, however, ask you back: where does your admiration for Jaruzelski stem from? Is it because he was a 'great Polish patriot' who declared Martial Law in '81 to prevent the Red Army from popping over and shutting up the working class for good?

Or is it because, as it turned out later, he was such a good lapdog he actually did ask the USSR for assistance to shut up the working class for good (only the USSR wasn't interested so he had to do it all himself)?

I'm aware that the PRL was no fascist state in the historic Mussolini/Hitler sense. On the other hand, it was pretty mych the kind of state that Strasser and Rohm would have loved to see (had their Fuhrer not fucked them over).

I'd like to end this on a light note - here's a music recommendation for you and fellow Jaruzelski lovers:

LINK (http://www.soviet-empire.com/ussr/viewtopic.php?f=108&t=45206)

Thank you for explaining your reason for your hate Jaruzelski's regime, I fully understand now.

My admiration for Jaruzelski stems from the fact my woman,s dad has strong links to the past, i.e being a high rank MP.

Due to my respect of your past I will change my photo.

[communard resolution]

Due to my respect of your past I will change my photo.

Why, thank you. At the same time I apologize for overreacting. Of course I don't think you're a fascist - like most revlefters, you probably mean well.

I checked the forum before going to work and saw Jaruzelski's mug glaring at me first thing in the morning - so I snapped. :)


My admiration for Jaruzelski stems from the fact my woman,s dad has strong links to the past, i.e being a high rank MP.I hope you understand that most Poles did not belong to the privileged caste and had quite a different experience with that regime than your girlfriend, who I assume was sheltered from all the things most people had to put up with.

I don't blame her, though. It's not her fault what information she was given by her dad, although you would have to live in an extremely sterile social environment not to have any contact with 'common' Poles and be unaware what the PRL was like for them.

Come to think of it, it would probably be an interesting situation for me to speak to your girlfriend. We're children of people who were each other's deadly enemies: the party and the people.

[RedArmyUK]

Why, thank you. At the same time I apologize for overreacting. Of course I don't think you're a fascist - like most revlefters, you probably mean well.

I checked the forum before going to work and saw Jaruzelski's mug glaring at me first thing in the morning - so I snapped. :)

I hope you understand that most Poles did not belong to the privileged caste and had quite a different experience with that regime than your girlfriend, who I assume was sheltered from all the things most people had to put up with.

I don't blame her, though. It's not her fault what information she was given by her dad, although you would have to live in an extremely sterile social environment not to have any contact with 'common' Poles and be unaware what the PRL was like for them.

Come to think of it, it would probably be an interesting situation for me to speak to your girlfriend. We're children of people who were each other's deadly enemies: the party and the people.

Sent a PM, as nothing to do with Fascism

:)

[Holden Caulfield]

I'm getting happy vibes off this thread winding up how it did.
Happy vibes....

[Radical]

I adovcate violence against people who spread fascist/racist/nationalist views to a point where it could create a risk.

Where its NEEDED or not. I believe its RIGHT.

[Il Medico]

Non-violence is best. However, if I had to shoot someone I would want it to be a fascist. In their case you sometimes just have to kick ass.

[Holden Caulfield]

Non-violence is best. However, if I had to shoot someone I would want it to be a fascist. In their case you sometimes just have to kick ass.

Non violence is best for everybody involved - that is a very intelligent thing to say, alot of people dont think like that - but the use of violence is a necessary evil.

To renounce violence all together is to comit yourself to failure and reaction.

[MilitantAnarchist]

I sort of agree with you... non-violence would be the best option, but you do need it.
I have a feeling later on today BNP will be in my town... its market day, and i heard they were in the city center yesterday... And i will go and see if they are there... i wont be violent to them, for the main reason at the minute i cant get a criminal record because i start college n uni soon, plus family obligations... but i will take a nice bottle of chocolate milk to pour over their leaflet table... and if they react violently, i will react violently.... because that will be necessary.
My boots shall be laced, and my mind will be prepared, but in 99% of cases, violence is an 'evil' but if it is against fascists and state, i think it is more a case of 'beauty' then 'evil'.

[communard resolution]

I have a feeling later on today BNP will be in my town... its market day, and i heard they were in the city center yesterday... And i will go and see if they are there... i wont be violent to them, for the main reason at the minute i cant get a criminal record because i start college n uni soon, plus family obligations... but i will take a nice bottle of chocolate milk to pour over their leaflet table... and if they react violently, i will react violently.... because that will be necessary.

Fake BNP leaflets would come in handy here, like the BPP ones that Holden posted the other day. Should be easy to liberally spread them around their info stand, or ideally - if there's a way - mix them with their propaganda leaflets.

With every free BNP paper - a free 'We support gay marriage between Aryans' flyer. That would be a laugh.

[Holden Caulfield]

Fake BNP leaflets would come in handy here, like the BPP ones that Holden posted the other day. Should be easy to liberally spread them around their info stand, or ideally - if there's a way - mix them with their propaganda leaflets.

With every free BNP paper - a free 'We support gay marriage between Aryans' flyer. That would be a laugh.

Hereford Antifascists got a BNP blog to shut down by creating a carbon copy of it with a slight twist, and by getting all their contacts to vote on the polls they keep putting up on these things (voting for the 'wrong' answer obviously).

Its worth a giggle and if it hinders their efforts, even in the slightest, you can justify this type of pissing around. :)

[Jester]

Violence is not always needed. But occasionaly it has to happen.

[Melbourne Lefty]

I like the idea of fake leaflets. The ones put out saying that the BNP was against the Ghurkas which got picked up by the Sun was the best example.

[Skin_HeadBanger]

violent and non-violent actions all have their place in anti fascism. you will know when it is appropriate when it is not.

Precisely. But you also need to remember, sometimes the best way to get something through someones head is with a hammer. Some people don't understand anything but violence.

[brigadista]

TACTICALLY it might be worth pointing out to people that when BNP councillors have been voted on to local councils they have done precisely NOTHING -in fact i think they hardly any turn up for meetings..

[Il Medico]

Non violence is best for everybody involved - that is a very intelligent thing to say, alot of people dont think like that - but the use of violence is a necessary evil.

To renounce violence all together is to comit yourself to failure and reaction.
That is why I don't. I believe that it is something that should only be used as a last resort, when all other possibilities are exhausted.

[hippiedude94]

No, violence is not needed. Anything can be fought with words.

[nuisance]

No, violence is not needed. Anything can be fought with words.
Got us quite far ain't it? Fuck off you mug.

[Pogue]

No, violence is not needed. Anything can be fought with words.

Yeh man, you should have told that to the Jewish resistance in the Warsaw ghettos, or maybe any number of the hundreds of people killed by far right gangs throughout history.

Last time I took a punch when dealing with some racists, I surely blew them back with my words, worked a treat.

[Holden Caulfield]

Got us quite far ain't it? Fuck off you mug.

be nice.
(damn feisty anarchists)

[Pogue]

be nice.
(damn feisty anarchists)

fuck off, when your lot get angry they go kill some sailors

we just munch our vegan squat food slightly harder

[RedMonty]

HC's first post here hit the nail right on the head.

[Spud]

Kicking the shit out of everybody who votes BNP will be counter productive, firstly because alot are working class folk who have been fucked over by Labour and see no other alternative at the ballot box. The BNP set themselves up as a party of the working class, and this, sadly, is how they are often seen. Secondly it will make us seem like mindless hooligans, will give them a siege mentality and countless propaganda pieces to use against 'the left'.

We should work on their base of support, we should actively organise for a left alternative in communities, host anti-racist gigs, be present in support of striking workers, and show the working classes we are them, and that we are on their side. We should counter BNP propaganda with facts and figures on the effects of immigration, multi-culturalism, and their record as a party, as individuals, and as elected officials.

We need to point out certain aspects of the BNP, and I dont just mean screaming 'Nazi' in a middle class voice like UAF suggest, i mean pointing out that it is strange that the leader of this party for the working class is part of the landed gentry, pointing out the local activist who calls immigrants 'parasites' is on benafits but has a jaguar with private plates (because he was a coke dealer).

What we should do is focus on their ability to organise, put pressure on local venues that host or support the BNP, attack the intests of key figures in your locality, and if you can hit their paper sales/stalls. Certain members of the BNP deserve a kicking, but you should do your research: I would not support violence against the disillusioned and mislead worker, however the local BNP activist who's photos (that he had taken) just happened to turn up on redwatch would appear to be a legitimate target. Mark out the activists in their communities, spraypaint and flypost counter BNP propaganda, and gather intelligence on people in your local party (you never know when their local activists will be seen in town with a guy in a '14 words, White Power' jumper).

Be creative, Hereford antifascists got an BNP blog closed down by getting all their contacts to go on and vote in the polls with the opposite of what the obvious answer was, and by setting up a duplicate blog.

But always remember that we are the good guys, and that getting your arse kicked or arrested for a good cause doesn't make you brave, it makes you stupid, and stops your ability to organise.

Use violence when necessary, non-violence is the negative basis of slavery, but do not solely rely on it.



Holden as a new member here I would like to thank you for this post. This is really great.