The Nature of the EDL

[Widerstand]

For some time I thought the EDL was an inherently stereotypical far right organisation, with all the xenophobia and homophobia attached to it.

But then my attention got drawn to this:


We are English, we love England, and we are committed to combat racism, fascism, anti-semitism, the biased media, and uninformed politicians.

[...]

Our EDL units have gays, transgender, Black, Sikhs, Hindus, Jews and ex-Muslims (apostates) members. We are professionals of ALL classes!
We are the only organisation in the UK that demonstrates against Muslim violence and discrimination against women, such as forced marriages, underage marriage, female genital mutilation and honour killings. Not one so-called feminist has spoken out against these terrible things, preferring to collude with male Muslims and respect these appalling acts as “culture”!

http://www.englishdefenceleague.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=228:edl-jewish-division-issues-first-press-release&catid=42:feature-stories

Is this just a rhetorical farce, or are they really just an anti-Muslim organisation? Not that this would make them any better, but it would be further evidence to my point that specifically anti-Muslim organisations are on the rise within Europe. If so, can they be compared to Netherland's PVV?

[¿Que?]

It's an interesting attack against cultural relativity, but in a fascist way.

[Steve_j]

Our EDL units have gays,
Who hate muslims

transgender
Who hate muslims

Black
Who hate muslims

Sikhs
Who hate muslims

Hindus
Who hate muslims

Jews
Who hate muslims

and ex-Muslims (apostates)
Well that should read an ex muslim, they only have 1.

They have a few useful idiots, simple as.


We are the only organisation in the UK that demonstrates against Muslim violence and discrimination against women, such as forced marriages, underage marriage, female genital mutilation and honour killings.

Bullshit, utter bullshit. There are progressive muslim organisations (amongst others) who work very hard to deal with these issues in their communities. I fail to see what the EDL are doing about domestic violence, rape and child abuse within their communities. Or how their protests in anyway could help to address these issues. Further more, why are they just protesting it in muslim communities? Is it ok when a when a priest fucks a little kid?


Not one so-called feminist has spoken out against these terrible things, preferring to collude with male Muslims and respect these appalling acts as “culture”! And that little gem, what a load of fucking shit. Im not even going to bother with that one.

Anyway the EDL isnt quite your stereotypical far right group as they are single issue, its support base is generally mixed bag all comming together to share a beer and their hatred of muslims. There does however appear to be alot of former (or current) supporters/members of the BNP in the organisation, and this goes all the way to the top of the leadership.

[#FF0000]

They're bigots. All that needs to be said. Ultra-nationalist bigots who think that "culture" is something that can be attacked and see mosques as a threat.

[Mahatma Gandhi]

The likes of EDL use 'culture' as an excuse to attack anybody who isn't lily white.:rolleyes: Their real intention is to attack people of color ... so if they equate color with culture, it will be easy for them to attack people of color all the while claiming that they're only attacking culture. Pretty clever.

[Sasha]

For some time I thought the EDL was an inherently stereotypical far right organisation, with all the xenophobia and homophobia attached to it. [...]
Is this just a rhetorical farce, or are they really just an anti-Muslim organisation? Not that this would make them any better, but it would be further evidence to my point that specifically anti-Muslim organisations are on the rise within Europe. If so, can they be compared to Netherland's PVV?

well, the PVV is an "inherently stereotypical far right organisation, with all the xenophobia and homophobia attached to it". its just not an stereotypical "classic" borderline neo-nazi far right party but instead an xenophobic populist/corperatist party. like the danish peoples party, the italian lega-nord, the german pro-koln, haiders austrian partys etc etc.

and the fact that they claim to be against "islam" and not muslims, let alone people of colour is just farce.
their politics was best summed up by an famous dutch cartoon in wich the characters are looking very scarred through the curtains outside and are calling the secret service because "muslim fundametalist terrorists are in front or their door, sitting on scooters whistling at girls"

[Che a chara]

They are supremacist scum. Islamaphobia runs rife through the 'organisation', but the truth is more deep rooted. There will continue to be splits in the EDL because of this, as they don't know if they are racists, sectarian, anti-Semite or homophobic yet.

One look at their official forum and the posts made and you can see the white supremacist bullshit coming out. They are also anti-Irish republican and claim to support a British culture (which as far as I know doesn't exist) which they say gives them an identity, but in reality this is an excuse to spew their bile of whoever doesn't conform to the 'mainstream' English values is an enemy. It's hidden, but it's all there.

[alphabetikal]

I found this useful! :)


FRFI 215 June/July 2010

For the past year the English Defence League (EDL) and its local variants, the Scottish and Welsh Defence Leagues, have been staging regular, vocal demonstrations throughout Britain, directed ostensibly against the spread of Islamic fundamentalism. In reality their target appears to be Muslims in general. Although the EDL is clearly nowhere as dangerous as the British state, which has an entire machinery at its disposal with which to attack the Muslim community, its persistent and confrontational street presence means that anti-racists must have an understanding of what it is and be prepared to join mobilisations to physically oppose its racist message.

Some anti-fascist campaigners maintain that the EDL is virtually the same as the British National Party (BNP). Others say the EDL is just a confused bunch of football hooligans. While there is an element of truth in both assertions, neither provides the full picture. Although both the BNP and EDL do appear to reflect the same disaffection among sections of the white working and lower middle classes, who feel abandoned by mainstream political parties, the organisations have substantially different political platforms. As we have detailed in previous articles, the BNP is a ‘little England’ party; it wants immigrants to leave Britain and British troops and British capital to return to the country. It only reluctantly dropped its white only membership policy when confronted with court action and – although the frequent accusation of ‘Nazism’ is not accurate – undoubtedly remains anti-Semitic. The EDL, on the other hand, is far more in step with the mainstream imperialist parties, boasting of its ‘multi-racialism’ and vocally supporting Britain’s wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

It is difficult to make a fully reliable assessment of the class basis of the EDL. An undercover journalist told the Unite Against Fascism (UAF) conference in February that many of the EDL were ‘little businessmen types’, while businessman Alan Lake has publicly supported the EDL and is thought to be a major financial backer. However, a BBC documentary, Young, British and angry, aired on 19 May showed the EDL is also attracting young men angry at unemployment and poverty pay, with no illusions in the political establishment, seeing a way out by ‘making Britain great again’. This mix is consistent with claims that the EDL is reported to have actively recruited via football hooligan ‘firms’.

The EDL was formed after a group of anti-war Muslims protested against British soldiers from the Anglian Regiment, who had just returned from Iraq, parading through Luton city centre in March 2009. The protestors held up placards reading ‘British government – terrorist government’, ‘Illegal war in Iraq’ and ‘Anglian soldiers: butchers of Basra’. They were physically attacked by a group of army supporters.

Since then the EDL has held protests around Britain, initially only drawing a few dozen people, but more recently in Stoke (23 January), Bolton (20 March) and Dudley (3 April) attracting up to 2,000. In Bristol, Manchester and Newcastle it has disrupted left wing meetings organised to oppose its activity.

While there have been arrests of EDL members, the police have increasingly acted with greater ferocity against anti-racist counter-demonstrators. In FRFI 214 we reported on the hardening of police tactics at Bolton, where they viciously attacked the UAF-organised counter-protest, using police dogs and making dozens of arrests.

On 2 May EDL members occupied the roof of a building adjacent to the site of a proposed mosque in Dudley and used a PA system to broadcast anti-Muslim propaganda and fake calls to prayer. When they were confronted by hundreds of anti-racists, the police sealed off the surrounding area, warned that anyone coming into Dudley to cause ‘disorder’ would be ‘dealt with swiftly and robustly’, and allowed the EDL to remain on the roof for nearly three days before arresting them and charging them with burglary and inciting racial hatred.

The EDL’s public show of its few Sikh and black members to ‘prove’ it is not racist and its claims that it opposes only fundamentalism and not Islam as such are belied by its members’ chants, such as: ‘If you build a mosque we’ll burn it down’ and towards counter-protesters: ‘We hate Pakis more than you’. At an EDL protest in London on 5 March, Guramit Singh, a frequent EDL leadership spokesperson, told the crowd ‘God bless the Muslims, they’ll need it for when they’re burning in fucking hell’, and was met with massive cheers and applause. Where the EDL has had the numbers and a lack of effective opposition, mosques and Asian individuals and businesses have been physically attacked.

The SWP and UAF have made a lot of the involvement of former BNP member Chris Renton in the EDL leadership in order to claim that the EDL is a ‘Nazi’ front. It is not surprising that there is a crossover in membership between the EDL and other racist groups, but there seems little evidence that the EDL is a front for the BNP or any other organisation. In September 2009 the BNP made it a disciplinary offence for any member to have anything to do with the EDL, following which Chris Renton resigned from the BNP. Since then Nick Griffin and other members of the BNP leadership have made public accusations that the EDL is a ‘false flag’ operation set up by the British state – hardly something they would say of a BNP front organisation. There have also been several reports of fights between the EDL and Combat 18 and other fascist groups.

But if the EDL are not ‘old style’ fascists, what are they? A very visible aspect of the EDL’s politics is its political affinity with Zionism. Israeli flags have been flown since the early EDL demos, and flew alongside the England flag at the Dudley rooftop occupation. The ‘Links’ section of the EDL website points to a number of Zionist blogs and sites for international news, and in September 2009 the Bristol Evening Post reported that the EDL had approached the Jewish Defence League, a Zionist organisation, seeking an alliance; an offer which was reportedly rebuffed.

Capitalist states have only resorted to supporting fascists when their economic domination has been threatened by powerful revolutionary movements backed by the working class and oppressed. Today no such movement threatens the British state directly. But there are movements which identify with the forces resisting imperialism in Palestine and Afghanistan, which are prepared to act in anti-imperialist solidarity. In the months before the EDL was established thousands had come out on the streets to protest against the Israeli massacre in Gaza.

The EDL is not a ‘Nazi’ organisation; it is a populist domestic reflection of the British state’s imperialist interests in the Middle East and its vicious attacks on Muslim communities in Britain. Having originated in physical opposition to a controversial but entirely lawful and peaceful anti-war protest in Luton, the continued threat of an EDL response provides the state with a convenient excuse to curtail and attack such protests in future.

[Loknar]

It amazes me how you communists are opposed to this behavior when we all know damn well you wouldnt tolerate Islamic treatment of women.

The English have a proud culture and if my country was being overran with extremists (who come from garage dumps, in part because Islam has not advanced since the 1200s) who hated my culture I would oppose them as well.


Oh and since some more extreme Islamic communities (although this is an African practice) practice female circumcision (never in a hospital of course) should we just let it go and say "it's their culture."? of course we know the answer is a resounding NO because like it or not, it is barbaric...

[ChrisK]

It amazes me how you communists are opposed to this behavior when we all know damn well you wouldnt tolerate Islamic treatment of women.

The English have a proud culture and if my country was being overran with extremists (who come from garage dumps, in part because Islam has not advanced since the 1200s) who hated my culture I would oppose them as well.


Oh and since some more extreme Islamic communities (although this is an African practice) practice female circumcision (never in a hospital of course) should we just let it go and say "it's their culture."? of course we know the answer is a resounding NO because like it or not, it is barbaric...

Your not so bright are you? We are opposed to all treatment of that sort; we are not cultural relativists. We are opposed to the poor treatment of women in both Islamic and Christian cultures. We are opposed to the poor treatment of minorities of all varities.

[Loknar]

Your not so bright are you? We are opposed to all treatment of that sort; we are not cultural relativists. We are opposed to the poor treatment of women in both Islamic and Christian cultures. We are opposed to the poor treatment of minorities of all varities.

Well before leveling an accusation regarding my intelligence, maybe you should use the proper contraction....

anyway I am glad to hear that the Communist movement is anti cultural relativist considering it is a very dangerous form of thought. Anyway, in order to be opposed to that barbaric treatment of women you will have to trample over the belief structures of lesser developed cultures.

[ChrisK]

anyway I am glad to hear that the Communist movement is anti cultural relativist considering it is a very dangerous form of thought. Anyway, in order to be opposed to that barbaric treatment of women you will have to trample over the belief structures of lesser developed cultures.

No; I'll have to trample over the belief structures of all countries. Sexism pervades western culture still.

[#FF0000]

It amazes me how you communists are opposed to this behavior when we all know damn well you wouldnt tolerate Islamic treatment of women.

It amazes you that we aren't bigots because some Muslims adhere to sexist beliefs?


Anyway, in order to be opposed to that barbaric treatment of women you will have to trample over the belief structures of lesser developed cultures.

Okay. And all of Western Society too.

[RGacky3]

It amazes me how you communists are opposed to this behavior when we all know damn well you wouldnt tolerate Islamic treatment of women.


A minority of muslims treat women in a dispicable way that should'nt be tolerated, but thats an individuatl criminal matter, if your gonna make it a race or religion issue, then we should pursicute christians for all the stuff crazy christians do. The fact is the right is zenophobic, thats IT, it has nothing to do treatment of women, its bigotry.'


The English have a proud culture and if my country was being overran with extremists (who come from garage dumps, in part because Islam has not advanced since the 1200s) who hated my culture I would oppose them as well.


Who came from garage dumps? Have you been to the middle east you dickwad? You have no idea what your talking about, if it was'nt for the science from Islamic countries and it getting to the west through trade Europe would still be dying from small pox stabbing each other with swords.

Culture is ALWAYS evolving, your idea of molding it or preserving it, is exactly the same as maos idea, culture changes and evolves naturally, thats why its culture.


should we just let it go and say "it's their culture."? of course we know the answer is a resounding NO because like it or not, it is barbaric...

No we should'nt, but what does this have to do with anything? If it happens in the UK it will be treated as a ciminal case is it should be, your the one trying to make it a culture issue.

[Bud Struggle]

Well before leveling an accusation regarding my intelligence, maybe you should use the proper contraction....

anyway I am glad to hear that the Communist movement is anti cultural relativist considering it is a very dangerous form of thought. Anyway, in order to be opposed to that barbaric treatment of women you will have to trample over the belief structures of lesser developed cultures.

Where the hell you come from? Seems you're an old timer. :)

[Loknar]

A minority of muslims treat women in a dispicable way that should'nt be tolerated, but thats an individuatl criminal matter, if your gonna make it a race or religion issue, then we should pursicute christians for all the stuff crazy christians do. The fact is the right is zenophobic, thats IT, it has nothing to do treatment of women, its bigotry.'

From a communists perspective though it should be argued that the majority of Muslim women are discriminated against.

Saudi Arabia does not allow women to drive for example, therefore all women in Saudi Arabia discriminated against.

In Afghanistan, women wear those god awful darth vader helmets, another sign of oppression.

In the end, if you were to compare the opression of women as a percentage, the Islmic world is lightyears ahead of western ideals. How can you refute this?

And I do not care for Christianity. I am a rightist I admit it but I do not care for religion...




Who came from garage dumps? Have you been to the middle east you dickwad? You have no idea what your talking about, if it was'nt for the science from Islamic countries and it getting to the west through trade Europe would still be dying from small pox stabbing each other with swords.


If the middle east and north africa are these bastions of development then why is the flow of immigration to Europe so profound? There is a reason people leave their homelands...

And the middle east is so large it depends on the country...certainly some countries there are very developed compared to others.

And as to the science of Islamic countries...

At one point in Islamic development they began to case aside their religion and favored the GREEK classics (a European thought) and pursued scientific advancement. However, this prevalent myth that Europe was stuck in the dark ages is not true. By the High Middle Ages European nations were rebounding from the long dark age which preceded it.

Howeer what did the Muslims begin? Nothing! They latched upon Persian and Roman/Greek development and thought and continued where their predecessors left off. And in the end what did the Muslim world do with these developments? By the 1500s it was clear that, aside from the Turks, the middle east was not a a significant player on the world stage (except for the pirates from north africa which took millions of Europeans into slavery up until the 1800s).

Finally, if you compare the Crusades, the actual campaign time lasted 14 years. Muslim conquests upon Christian lands continued long before and long after the Crusades and encompassed much more territory.



Culture is ALWAYS evolving, your idea of molding it or preserving it, is exactly the same as maos idea, culture changes and evolves naturally, thats why its culture.

Really? Then how have stone age cultures survived into the modern age? Some cultures do not continue their development and favor stagnation as what happened to the Muslim world. According to Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Americans in the 1800s were useing more sophisticated ovens than Somali's are useing today. This is another example of stagnation.



No we should'nt, but what does this have to do with anything? If it happens in the UK it will be treated as a ciminal case is it should be, your the one trying to make it a culture issue.

And do you think this barbaric practice just ceased once those people immigrated to Europe? In these places, this procedure is never performed in a hospital but in the home (of mud shack in their case). So you really think this does not happen in Europe and America?

[#FF0000]

From a communists perspective though it should be argued that the majority of Muslim women are discriminated against.

Saudi Arabia does not allow women to drive for example, therefore all women in Saudi Arabia discriminated against.

In Afghanistan, women wear those god awful darth vader helmets, another sign of oppression.

In the end, if you were to compare the opression of women as a percentage, the Islmic world is lightyears ahead of western ideals. How can you refute this?

We don't.


If the middle east and north africa are these bastions of development then why is the flow of immigration to Europe so profound? There is a reason people leave their homelands...

Jobs, probably. Europe's probably a lot more stable than many places in the Middle East, as well.


Howeer what did the Muslims begin? Nothing! They latched upon Persian and Roman/Greek development and thought and continued where their predecessors left off. And in the end what did the Muslim world do with these developments? By the 1500s it was clear that, aside from the Turks, the middle east was not a a significant player on the world stage (except for the pirates from north africa which took millions of Europeans into slavery up until the 1800s).

Europe did the exact same thing though. I mean most technologies that Europe used to basically conquer and colonize the world they got from somewhere else. See: Math, Gunpowder, improved smelting and metalworking, a lot of animals, all came from the East or the Middle East and every scientific advance ever is built upon what came before it anyway.

And by the 1500's they weren't a major player on the world stage because they got beaten back into Africa and the Middle East. Before that, Muslims were all up in Spain having their own little Renaissance in pluralist and multicultural societies while Europeans were burning witches and making astronomers apologize for writing down their observations.


Finally, if you compare the Crusades, the actual campaign time lasted 14 years. Muslim conquests upon Christian lands continued long before and long after the Crusades and encompassed much more territory.

Yeah but people were generally allowed to practice whatever religion, with some exceptions (India). Meanwhile Europeans burned heretics all the live long day.


Really? Then how have stone age cultures survived into the modern age? Some cultures do not continue their development and favor stagnation as what happened to the Muslim world. According to Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Americans in the 1800s were useing more sophisticated ovens than Somali's are useing today. This is another example of stagnation.

Somalia's a country torn apart by war and lawlessness. You can't tell me that having warlords roaming the countryside and blowing everything up doesn't have something to do with that?

And further, the "backwardness" people talk about with the Middle East is a rather new development. Up until about 1950, Middle Eastern territories were doing alright with their new independence, and had secular and center-left governments. Then, the UK and the US decided it was a fine idea to overthrow presidents and support tyrants and religious psychotics all over the region.



And do you think this barbaric practice just ceased once those people immigrated to Europe? In these places, this procedure is never performed in a hospital but in the home (of mud shack in their case). So you really think this does not happen in Europe and America?

1) They have masonry and construction in the Middle East, but don't let that keep you from your racist caricatures.
2) No, it doesn't happen nearly as often as you would like to think. Does it happen? I'm sure it does. Is it common? Remotely common? Not by a long shot.

[McCroskey]

The EDL is not a nazi organisation. It´s an ultra-nationalist, not even racist, organisation who wants everyone that comes to the UK to accept British values (what are those, though?) and celebrate the stupid joy of belonging to this country and not to another country. That´s in paper. The reality is, even if we accept, reluctantly, that this was the intention of their founders, they attract the usual fascist scum, and it is a platform from where mainstream racists and fascists can organise. That is why it´s dangerous. They exploit the actions of a bunch of nutters who protest with banners reading "democracy go to hell", "freedom go to hell", "behead those who insult islam", etc etc, and try to show them as a common muslim feature, and (obviously) as being anti-british (they are not particularly anti-british, they are anti-freedom). So, while their literature reads "we are not against muslims, only against extremism", their actions and their demonstrations say "we are against anything that is not good old imperial british supremacy", when it´s not just plain "we are for a few drinks and a few fights, just to get some fun and show how macho we are!"
I happen to know 2 guys in my neighbourhood who supported the EDL and actually went to a demonstration thinking they were going to protest againsts fundamentalists, and they hate them now. If we are to believe them, the EDL that they found there was a bunch of thugs that would beat me up for being a "commie" and non-english european (or for being an english "commie" for that matter). They are basically drunk nationalists who don´t seem to know squat about british history or what it is to be british, and they just think flying the Saint George cross and hating anything different will save them from low wages and boredom.
We can dismiss them as a group of harmless hooligans, or we can believe that the initial intention was actually to democratically protest against sharia law, but we cannot forget that they are a breeding ground for radicalised and organised fascists, and as such, they have to be confronted wherever they go.

[Loknar]

We don't.



Jobs, probably. Europe's probably a lot more stable than many places in the Middle East, as well.

Of course and Europe is a superior place to live.



Europe did the exact same thing though. I mean most technologies that Europe used to basically conquer and colonize the world they got from somewhere else. See: Math, Gunpowder, improved smelting and metalworking, a lot of animals, all came from the East or the Middle East and every scientific advance ever is built upon what came before it anyway.

This is more tricky to tackle down though. In all fairness, Greek civilization had advanced technologies, the Romans had their fair share as well. In fact during Ceasar's day Europe, especially Rome, was actually more advanced than China/ Interestingly enough by the 600s AD China was more advanced (especially when the Tang came to power). This sort of thing flip flops.

Europeans borrowed some but not all things from eastern sourses. In either event, European civilizations sprung up and built cities. The Muslims roared out of the desert and took hold of existing development.



And by the 1500's they weren't a major player on the world stage because they got beaten back into Africa and the Middle East. Before that, Muslims were all up in Spain having their own little Renaissance in pluralist and multicultural societies while Europeans were burning witches and making astronomers apologize for writing down their observations.


I know poeple have this rosy picture of Islamic Spain being this bastion of culture and to be honest it was. However make no mistake Muslims also were intolerant of other religions depending on the individual Muslim King (Islamic Spain was a politically splintered society much like Europe was).




Yeah but people were generally allowed to practice whatever religion, with some exceptions (India). Meanwhile Europeans burned heretics all the live long day.

What you are asserting is, so long as a conqueror allows their conquered subjects to keep their religion and culture then it's ok?

and not every Muslim conquest was bloodless.



Somalia's a country torn apart by war and lawlessness. You can't tell me that having warlords roaming the countryside and blowing everything up doesn't have something to do with that?

Of course it has everything too do with it. Just as we see in Haiti. In fact in Haiti their most stable time was under American occupation, before and after the occupation it has been wracked with civil unrest.

In both cases, what are these nations excuse for not advancing and getting their act togeter. There are plenty of societies more culturally diverse than those 2 smller countries which are advanced...



And further, the "backwardness" people talk about with the Middle East is a rather new development. Up until about 1950, Middle Eastern territories were doing alright with their new independence, and had secular and center-left governments.

Which countries had secular center-left governments?


Then, the UK and the US decided it was a fine idea to overthrow presidents and support tyrants and religious psychotics all over the region.

and if course the Soviets never had their hand in the till right?



1) They have masonry and construction in the Middle East, but don't let that keep you from your racist caricatures.

Oh you mean like in Bam Iran? Remember that earth quake? Yeah their houses were made of mud brick, a 5000 yearold invention...

Ever wonder why quakes in the west are less severe?



2) No, it doesn't happen nearly as often as you would like to think. Does it happen? I'm sure it does. Is it common? Remotely common? Not by a long shot.
You see this is something we cant know now. It does happen, that much I am certain of...how often this happens is hard to say. These communities come to European nations and tend to be closed knit and women dont alwas break free of that oppression.

[#FF0000]

Of course and Europe is a superior place to live.

It stuns me when people come out and say these things that are nothing but pure opinion and are totally subjective and act like it can stand on its own as an objective fact. I had to edit this post half a dozen times just to figure out how to explain to you why this isn't just wrong, but a stupid, an actually stupid thing to say.


This is more tricky to tackle down though. In all fairness, Greek civilization had advanced technologies, the Romans had their fair share as well. In fact during Ceasar's day Europe, especially Rome, was actually more advanced than China/ Interestingly enough by the 600s AD China was more advanced (especially when the Tang came to power). This sort of thing flip flops.

Europeans borrowed some but not all things from eastern sourses. In either event, European civilizations sprung up and built cities. The Muslims roared out of the desert and took hold of existing development.

They didn't borrow everything, but the most important tools for Europe's colonization of the world came from elsewhere (Metal and gunpowder. Living with so many animals nearby also made them mostly immune to diseases that ravaged other societies).

But I have to wonder why this matters? Do the conclusions we draw from comparing medieval Europe to the contemporary Muslim world make the EDL's bigotry and xenophobia towards Muslims any less abhorrent?


I know poeple have this rosy picture of Islamic Spain being this bastion of culture and to be honest it was. However make no mistake Muslims also were intolerant of other religions depending on the individual Muslim King (Islamic Spain was a politically splintered society much like Europe was).

Of course it was. Muslims clashed with Hindus in India all the time, burning religious idols and all that. And then on the other side of the world there was Cordoba. And while Europe was definitely splintered and fractured, the continent had a backbone in the Catholic church, which basically meant if one kingdom was going to be plunged in ignorance and religious nonsense, all of them were.



What you are asserting is, so long as a conqueror allows their conquered subjects to keep their religion and culture then it's ok?

and not every Muslim conquest was bloodless.

No, I'm not saying every Muslim conquest was bloodless or that it was okay. I'm saying it's stupid to say Islam and Muslims were barbaric in the Middle Ages, when it was the goddamn Middle Ages. Sure the Muslim conquests lasted a long, long time, but did they have an Inquisition like the Christians did? Did they exterminate anywhere near as many peoples as Europeans did?

I'm not trying to say the Muslim leaders in the middle ages were kind and gentle people while the Europeans were bloodthirsty savages. I'm just saying that this entire "who was worse" argument is foolish, because you're saying "sure, our atrocity was bad, but those people committed this and that atrocity too". It's a childish argument.


Of course it has everything too do with it. Just as we see in Haiti. In fact in Haiti their most stable time was under American occupation, before and after the occupation it has been wracked with civil unrest.


Haiti. You're talking about that country the CIA installed Papa Doc in? That guy who executed a ton of people on his inauguration night? That country that elected it's first democratically elected president, who was kidnapped with help from the U.S. and France? Is that the Haiti we're talking about? This is plainly one of the most ignorant things I've ever read.


In both cases, what are these nations excuse for not advancing and getting their act togeter. There are plenty of societies more culturally diverse than those 2 smller countries which are advanced...

Colonization and Imperialism, mainly. I mean you're talking about countries that were very far behind the world powers at the start of the Industrial Revolution, and the foreign policy of those world powers didn't help at all.


Which countries had secular center-left governments?


Iran and Afghanistan, to name a couple. Though, to be fair, Afghanistan was run by a communist party (independent from the USSR) until the U.S. poured guns and money onto the Mujahideen and the Soviets invaded.


and if course the Soviets never had their hand in the till right?


Oh I'm sure the USSR was involved in some backdoor dealings, but when you need a coup done right, you go to the United States Intelligence community. They've had a lot of practice with it.


Oh you mean like in Bam Iran? Remember that earth quake? Yeah their houses were made of mud brick, a 5000 yearold invention...

Ever wonder why quakes in the west are less severe?

More money to spend on higher standards of maintenance.

And, uh, yeah there are some really old places where they have buildings made of mud brick, but there are plenty of thriving modern cities in the Middle East. The mud brick and barren desert thing is a dumb stereotype.


You see this is something we cant know now. It does happen, that much I am certain of...how often this happens is hard to say. These communities come to European nations and tend to be closed knit and women dont alwas break free of that oppression.

It's very safe to say that the vast majority of Muslims in Europe do not practice female genital mutilation or adhere to some of the exceptionally sexist traditions that are stereotypical of the Muslim world. Especially considering that many Muslims do not come from cultures where that sort of thing is common. Since, you know, there are 1.6 billion Muslims from all sorts of places with different customs and culture.

Oh and can you explain this?


There are plenty of societies more culturally diverse than those 2 smller countries which are advanced...

Cause it sounds to me that you're suggesting that, perhaps, Haiti and Somalia are "backwards" because they aren't "culturally diverse". Considering the demographics of these countries, it seems to me that you're blaming their level of development on the fact that these countries have a majority black population. I certainly hope I'm not misunderstanding you, and if any other OIers see what I'm seeing here, could you back me up on this so I know it's not just me?

[Loknar]

It stuns me when people come out and say these things that are nothing but pure opinion and are totally subjective and act like it can stand on its own as an objective fact. I had to edit this post half a dozen times just to figure out how to explain to you why this isn't just wrong, but a stupid, an actually stupid thing to say.
Do you know why the Contras had such indigenous support?



They didn't borrow everything, but the most important tools for Europe's colonization of the world came from elsewhere (Metal and gunpowder. Living with so many animals nearby also made them mostly immune to diseases that ravaged other societies).

Europeans developed steel on their own...Gunpowder is an asian invention and this is a beautiful example of a technology developed by Europeans becuse as we have seen they did do something with it!


But I have to wonder why this matters? Do the conclusions we draw from comparing medieval Europe to the contemporary Muslim world make the EDL's bigotry and xenophobia towards Muslims any less abhorrent?

Of course it was. Muslims clashed with Hindus in India all the time, burning religious idols and all that. And then on the other side of the world there was Cordoba. And while Europe was definitely splintered and fractured, the continent had a backbone in the Catholic church, which basically meant if one kingdom was going to be plunged in ignorance and religious nonsense, all of them were.

Of course there was ignorance! hell Marx and Che were ignorant!


No, I'm not saying every Muslim conquest was bloodless or that it was okay. I'm saying it's stupid to say Islam and Muslims were barbaric in the Middle Ages, when it was the goddamn Middle Ages. Sure the Muslim conquests lasted a long, long time, but did they have an Inquisition like the Christians did? Did they exterminate anywhere near as many peoples as Europeans did?

Did they have an inquisition? of course not! did they kill alot of Christians? hell yes they did even more than the crusades!


I'm not trying to say the Muslim leaders in the middle ages were kind and gentle people while the Europeans were bloodthirsty savages. I'm just saying that this entire "who was worse" argument is foolish, because you're saying "sure, our atrocity was bad, but those people committed this and that atrocity too". It's a childish argument.

Haiti. You're talking about that country the CIA installed Papa Doc in? That guy who executed a ton of people on his inauguration night? That country that elected it's first democratically elected president, who was kidnapped with help from the U.S. and France? Is that the Haiti we're talking about? This is plainly one of the most ignorant things I've ever read.

So what did Haiti do from their independence until the occupation under President Wilson? Not a goddamn thing! Hell under the French Haiti was a resource producer! Now its a shit hole! lacks development!

and look at America until then! more cultural diversity and more development! I come from an Irish family I know what my family did to become 'american'!



Colonization and Imperialism, mainly. I mean you're talking about countries that were very far behind the world powers at the start of the Industrial Revolution, and the foreign policy of those world powers didn't help at all.


they wernt powers...and Marx would agree with me...


Iran and Afghanistan, to name a couple. Though, to be fair, Afghanistan was run by a communist party (independent from the USSR) until the U.S. poured guns and money onto the Mujahideen and the Soviets invaded.


and those are 2 examples i always point out to people...on why we should have supported them. I hate that we supported anyone in afghanistan! Iran was a modern nation under the Shah!

Afghanistan was better under the Soviets...I hate that cold war politics was a factor...



Oh I'm sure the USSR was involved in some backdoor dealings, but when you need a coup done right, you go to the United States Intelligence community. They've had a lot of practice with it.

More money to spend on higher standards of maintenance.

And, uh, yeah there are some really old places where they have buildings made of mud brick, but there are plenty of thriving modern cities in the Middle East. The mud brick and barren desert thing is a dumb stereotype.

please point out some development from Musims!

hell do you know why Mesquite indians supported the Americans against the Sandinistas?



It's very safe to say that the vast majority of Muslims in Europe do not practice female genital mutilation or adhere to some of the exceptionally sexist traditions that are stereotypical of the Muslim world. Especially considering that many Muslims do not come from cultures where that sort of thing is common. Since, you know, there are 1.6 billion Muslims from all sorts of places with different customs and culture.

Oh and can you explain this?

I explain it by listening to ex muslim feminsits like Ayan Hirshi Ali and others! the real ones who experienced Islam first hand and she herself said she believes in a hierarchy of cultures!

I used to be an Evangelist! a chiristian nut! and I used to confromt Muslims! in my own city! and when my friend askd them "what happens to the virgins?"

the muslim answered..."they disappear!" lol

Believe me I know religion first hand! I visited a taliban members house! I was a misguided Christian ( I dont lapprove of Christianity now...I see Judaism and islam as an inferior extension)

religion is bullshit! I KNOW!



Cause it sounds to me that you're suggesting that, perhaps, Haiti and Somalia are "backwards" because they aren't "culturally diverse". Considering the demographics of these countries, it seems to me that you're blaming their level of development on the fact that these countries have a majority black population. I certainly hope I'm not misunderstanding you, and if any other OIers see what I'm seeing here, could you back me up on this so I know it's not just me?

No I'm saying that because they ARENT culturaly diverse they are having trouble...
[/QUOTE]

and I said nothing about black people...

[#FF0000]

Europeans developed steel on their ownSort of. They got way better techniques for working with metal from either Asia or the Middle East, I can't remember.


Did they have an inquisition? of course not! did they kill alot of Christians? hell yes they did even more than the crusades!And you've completely missed my point.


So what did Haiti do from their independence until the occupation under President Wilson? Not a goddamn thing! Hell under the French Haiti was a resource producer! Now its a shit hole! lacks development!Haitians were slaves under the French. Then they got their independence. Almost immediately after that Haiti endured a brutal occupation by the U.S. military that killed ~3000 Haitians. Then they left and Trujillo slaughtered tens of thousands of Haitians. Then Papa Doc came around. He had his brutal dictatorship. He was spirited away to the South of France. His son takes over, same thing. Then, Haitians elect a president, and the CIA helps a coup and kidnapping plot against him.

Where exactly is the opportunity for development, here?


and look at America until then! more cultural diversity and more development! I come from an Irish family I know what my family did to become 'american'!America was much older and wasn't under constant occupation for the majority of its history.


and those are 2 examples i always point out to people...on why we should have supported them. I hate that we supported anyone in afghanistan! Iran was a modern nation under the Shah!Iran was a modern nation under President Mossadegh, until the UK and US had him thrown out of power for trying to nationalize Iran's oil fields.



No I'm saying that because they ARENT culturaly diverse they are having trouble...Yeah, I know. You said that because they aren't culturally diverse, they are having trouble, which is total nonsense because East Asia totally demolishes your diversity automatically = prosperity


Ayan Hirshi Ali lol I think I'm done here.

I really hate ad hominem attacks but I have to indulge here, man. You're probably the most ignorant person I've seen in a long time.


No I'm saying that because they ARENT culturaly diverse they are having trouble...Yeah, I know. You said that because they aren't culturally diverse, they are having trouble, which is total nonsense because East Asia totally demolishes your diversity automatically = prosperity theory.

[Loknar]

Sort of. They got way better techniques for working with metal from either Asia or the Middle East, I can't remember.
[QUOTE]
The smelting technology is from Asia I believe but either way Europe produced beautiful art in this time...
[quote]

And you've completely missed my point.

Im sorry I missed it...can you explain?


Haitians were slaves under the French. Then they got their independence. Almost immediately after that Haiti endured a brutal occupation by the U.S. military that killed ~3000 Haitians. Then they left and Trujillo slaughtered tens of thousands of Haitians. Then Papa Doc came around. He had his brutal dictatorship. He was spirited away to the South of France. His son takes over, same thing. Then, Haitians elect a president, and the CIA helps a coup and kidnapping plot against him.

Yes they were slaves and meanwhile produced most of Europes coffee supply on that portion of the island! From Haiti's independence which occurred under President Jefferson until President Wilson, they did NOTHING! I want you to justify their barbaric lazy behavior (yes lazy even L'Ouverture wanted them to stay on the plantation as wage workers)! From then until Wilson they did nothing...explain this!?



Where exactly is the opportunity for development, here?

America was much older and wasn't under constant occupation for the majority of its history.

actually this is not a fair assumption...America was not that much older!

In Haiti by the time of President Jefferson, Haiti majority black!



Iran was a modern nation under President Mossadegh, until the UK and US had him thrown out of power for trying to nationalize Iran's oil fields.

unfortunately zero sum gain was the prevalent thought...


Yeah, I know. You said that because they aren't culturally diverse, they are having trouble, which is total nonsense because East Asia totally demolishes your diversity automatically = prosperity

I dont think diversity equals prosperity...


lol I think I'm done here.

Have you read her books?

Dont you think it's advisable to listen to a woman from this part of the world? Is her experience not valid then?? I guess because she dosnt want to wrap a towel around her head and because she believes in a hierarchy of culture she is a bad person then?


I really hate ad hominem attacks but I have to indulge here, man. You're probably the most ignorant person I've seen in a long time.

please define my ignorance...you accuse me of this therefore please define it!

The funny thing is...you Communists would be worse than I would be if you were to sieze power...

[The Guy]

You can dress a dog up however you like, but it's still a dog; you can dress an EDL member up to appear open to cultures, but it's still an EDL member.

[Sam_b]

I think the 'EDL Supporter Here' thread is a good place to start on the true position of the EDL. One user maing excuses for the numerous events of the organisation before slipping into 'white culture' nonsense and getting banned.

[#FF0000]

Im sorry I missed it...can you explain?

It's silly to argue whether Medieval Europe was better or worse than the contemporary Muslim world is


Yes they were slaves and meanwhile produced most of Europes coffee supply on that portion of the island! From Haiti's independence which occurred under President Jefferson until President Wilson, they did NOTHING! I want you to justify their barbaric lazy behavior (yes lazy even L'Ouverture wanted them to stay on the plantation as wage workers)! From then until Wilson they did nothing...explain this!?

I forgot that big gap of time between Independence and U.S. occupation that was full of the Domincan Republic's military going buckwild on Haiti all the time.

Not to mention Haiti's a tiny half of an island with a handful of options for exports, so it's kind of hard to become a world power as it is, without Haitians being slaughtered by basically everyone else in the world.


unfortunately zero sum gain was the prevalent thought...

I don't know what you're talking about. I'm just saying that Iran had a parliamentary system and a pretty standard democratic procedure, which we got rid of. By the way, our overthrow of Mossadegh is one of catalysts for the birth (or rather, the rise of) "Political Islam". Surprise, the west created their terrorists.


Have you read her books?

Yes.


Dont you think it's advisable to listen to a woman from this part of the world? Is her experience not valid then?? I guess because she dosnt want to wrap a towel around her head and because she believes in a hierarchy of culture she is a bad person then?

Uh, no. I think she's a bigot because she pushes really silly "clash of civilizations" nonsense and acts as if her experiences with Islam holds true for all 1.6 billion Muslims on the planet.

She lumps all muslims into one big group and she's wrong to do that.

I guess she did some activism against female genital mutilation which I think is a good thing but I don't know much about what she did.


please define my ignorance...you accuse me of this therefore please define it!


You seem to have trouble with the concept of opinion vs. fact, you go on about the Muslim world back in the Middle Ages for some strange reason, you seem to believe some ridiculous stereotypes about Muslims...etc.

But above all I've had to correct you on almost everything you said, or bring up facts that you either never considered or ignored.

[Bud Struggle]

what is the situation of the anti fascist movement in u.k.?


The thing that will solve the problem of Fascism in the UK is correct information.

It's the same solution for radical Moslems, radical Christianity, Zionists, Hamas, corporate Capitalism, Stalinism, etc.

Good information properly understood.

[#FF0000]

The thing that will solve the problem of Fascism in the UK is correct information.

It's the same solution for radical Moslems, radical Christianity, Zionists, Hamas, corporate Capitalism, Stalinism, etc.

Good information properly understood.

It's not like fascism needs the full support of the majority to get power.

[Loknar]

It's silly to argue whether Medieval Europe was better or worse than the contemporary Muslim world is



I forgot that big gap of time between Independence and U.S. occupation that was full of the Domincan Republic's military going buckwild on Haiti all the time.

Not to mention Haiti's a tiny half of an island with a handful of options for exports, so it's kind of hard to become a world power as it is, without Haitians being slaughtered by basically everyone else in the world.

Ill include the Dominicans in this equation as well not just the Haitians. That is a small goddamn island, why havent they developed into the modern world. I'll remind you ancient Rome in 1Ad was more developed than Haiti is today.

Actually Haiti was a major exporter under French rule. Coffee was thie main crop and there were some other important crops. They actually have alot of potential...even today.



I don't know what you're talking about. I'm just saying that Iran had a parliamentary system and a pretty standard democratic procedure, which we got rid of. By the way, our overthrow of Mossadegh is one of catalysts for the birth (or rather, the rise of) "Political Islam". Surprise, the west created their terrorists.

Zero Sum gain is a political science term. It basically means if the US loses control over Nicaragua then automatically this outcome is a net gain for the Soviets. It is a crude and overly simplistic way of examining things but it did drive cold war policy.

I've written about the US involvement Iran under Mossadegh. My Marxist professor knew I was pro US but he even agreed with my assertion that the overthrow was a largely British operation. Of course that isnt to deny US involvement I just want people to know the British angle as well.

As to the US creating this Islamic resurgence, I have to disagree. Many countries (Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia to name a few) had a traditional Islamisized population to begin with.

We did nothing to usher this in Saudi Arabia where as we see now the Whabbist sect rules. Iraq has had problems since the British and Turks left and was never entirely stable. The bath party though did stabilize the country but it had to deal on its own with the majority Shia which was a heavily religious portion of the population.

These events leads me to conclude that the people were already strictly religious before the US showed up. When we showed up they just grew even more pissed.

Afghanistan too when the Communists came to power; look at what the Soviet Union had to do to prop up that regime (too bad it didnt last).



Uh, no. I think she's a bigot because she pushes really silly "clash of civilizations" nonsense and acts as if her experiences with Islam holds true for all 1.6 billion Muslims on the planet.

I assume you disagree with Huntingtons clash of civilizations?

I honestly cant ponder what is wrong with that view. Obliviously there is a clash of civilizations. Each culture on this planet is different, some so different to the point of automatic disagreement. Therefore not every culture can coexist with another culture in a political boundary...


She lumps all muslims into one big group and she's wrong to do that.

I guess she did some activism against female genital mutilation which I think is a good thing but I don't know much about what she did.

Yes she's quite heroic. I dont see how I could really bash her considering her position and experience.


You seem to have trouble with the concept of opinion vs. fact, you go on about the Muslim world back in the Middle Ages for some strange reason, you seem to believe some ridiculous stereotypes about Muslims...etc.

But above all I've had to correct you on almost everything you said, or bring up facts that you either never considered or ignored.

Sir, my opinions are based upon sound logic. I merely say things in an uncomfortable way and when I encourage you to address one you simply accuse me of ignorance. ignorance is merely the absence of knowledge. I assure you do not lack in this area. I just have more unorthodox opinions. But my opinions arent bvased on some immature need to make everyone feel good about them selves...

For example, I point out that Muslims migrate to Europe because many of their nations are in the stone age and are not worthy of habitation. Now when I say this you just said I was wrong but failed to provide compelling reasons.

I'm also Irish...there are more Irish people in America than in Ireland. What does this tell us? Ireland is not a good place to live, America is better.

You cant argue with development....

[#FF0000]

Ill include the Dominicans in this equation as well not just the Haitians. That is a small goddamn island, why havent they developed into the modern world. I'll remind you ancient Rome in 1Ad was more developed than Haiti is today.

Ahahahahaha what!?

Actually Haiti was a major exporter under French rule. Coffee was thie main crop and there were some other important crops. They actually have alot of potential...even today.


Haiti was a colony then, and is a subject of Imperialism now.


I've written about the US involvement Iran under Mossadegh. My Marxist professor knew I was pro US but he even agreed with my assertion that the overthrow was a largely British operation. Of course that isnt to deny US involvement I just want people to know the British angle as well.


Oh the British definitely "masterminded" it. They asked the U.S. to do it for them because the UK stood to lose a lot if Iran's oil fields were nationalized.


As to the US creating this Islamic resurgence, I have to disagree. Many countries (Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia to name a few) had a traditional Islamisized population to begin with.


These events leads me to conclude that the people were already strictly religious before the US showed up. When we showed up they just grew even more pissed.

Of course there were a lot of Muslims in the Middle East, but that doesn't mean there was a lot of love for political Islam. Pan-Arabism was the prominent ideology until about the 70's, and I think Cold War politics had a lot to do with that too. Pan-Arabic groups tended to espouse some socialist rhetoric, which of course scared the living hell out of the West which hoped to keep access to the oil (The partitioning of the entire Middle East by the British was based on keeping different groups together and feuding to whip up a good bid of discord and make the oil easier to access via political schmoozing). Besides, friendly, repressive, theocratic tyrants in the Middle East are better for America and Britain than socialists are. At least the Government thought that at the time.

Anyway, as for Saudi Arabia, I'm cloudy on their history but the country's entire oil industry was put together by the United States. Much of this money from the Saudi Oil industry ended up going to pro-Islamist organizations across the Middle East.


I assume you disagree with Huntingtons clash of civilizations?

I honestly cant ponder what is wrong with that view. Obliviously there is a clash of civilizations. Each culture on this planet is different, some so different to the point of automatic disagreement. Therefore not every culture can coexist with another culture in a political boundary...

I'm not saying that culture clashes don't exist. I disagree with Huntington's clash of civilizations because it relies on the tremendous fallacy that the "Muslim world" is a great big homogeneous culture, which is total nonsense.[/quote]


Yes she's quite heroic. I dont see how I could really bash her considering her position and experience.

Because she makes the same stupid mistake Huntington does, and lumps all Muslims together, and makes stupid comments like "Islam is incompatible with liberal democracy", which is nonsense because there have been liberal democracies in the Middle East and in countries where many people were Muslim.


For example, I point out that Muslims migrate to Europe because many of their nations are in the stone age and are not worthy of habitation. Now when I say this you just said I was wrong but failed to provide compelling reasons.

http://seeker401.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/dubai-skyline.jpg

Is this enough? The Middle East isn't one massive desert full of cloth-draped nomads and to say that they are still in the stone age is simply incorrect. It's terribly incorrect. It's completely false.

As for how developed these countries might be, industrially, isn't even always in that nation's control. I can't remember what it's called, but small countries that only really have the means to produce simple things like textiles efficiently, are generally going to mainly produce textiles while countries like the U.S. or China produce computer chips, chemicals, etc. etc. This pretty much means to actually get more complicated industries going is an even tougher uphill battle than it normally would be, and it also means that there are hardly any jobs for skilled laborers as a result.


I'm also Irish...there are more Irish people in America than in Ireland. What does this tell us? Ireland is not a good place to live, America is better.


I like how you talk about your command of logic and then make these huge, stupid leaps like this. There being more Irish people in America than in Ireland (which I don't know about, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt), doesn't mean America is better. It means there are more Irish people in America, and that's it.

[freepalestine]

what is the situation of the anti fascist movement in u.k. ?
in the early 90s, groups such as r.a. and afa had an effect on the nucleus of the bnp and other fascists.
nowadays fascists such as bnp and edl are more blatant.where are the antifascists in confronting bnp/edl?
groups such as anl or uaf seem to have no or minimal effect(surprisingly),where are the likes of afa,or militant antifascists/ antifa.
when they seem to be needed now,more than in the early 90s/late 80s?

[Bud Struggle]

what is the situation of the anti fascist movement in u.k. ?

The thing that will solve the problem of Fascism in the UK is correct information.

It's the same solution for radical Moslems, radical Christianity, Zionists, Hamas, corporate Capitalism, Stalinism, etc.

Good information properly understood.

[#FF0000]

The thing that will solve the problem of Fascism in the UK is correct information.

It's the same solution for radical Moslems, radical Christianity, Zionists, Hamas, corporate Capitalism, Stalinism, etc.

Good information properly understood.

It's not like fascism needs the full support of the majority to get power.

Most people knowing Fascism is bad isn't going to keep fascists out of power.

This feels familiar...


Neither does Communism or even Capitalism. It needs a committed few--and maybe that's the problem with this world.
Wrong about Communism, there.

[Bud Struggle]

It's not like fascism needs the full support of the majority to get power.

Most people knowing Fascism is bad isn't going to keep fascists out of power.

This feels familiar...


Wrong about Communism, there.

I think--'cept for a numnutz few that Fascism is finished. Just like Feudalism is finished as a world philosophy.

I just read a book (Bloodline of the Holy Grail) where the author was making a case for America having a king.

I mean--what are the chances, right? Same goes for Fascism-----now things tainted with Fascism abound. Zionism, Hamas, in that part of the world. Creepy skinhead assholes in Europe, Stormfront nutcases in the US.

But they're crazy people. And we can't base our politics on what zany fanatics do. We have to maintain a certain rational understanding that for the most part people and the leaders that reflect them are in the end--good.

[#FF0000]

I think--'cept for a numnutz few that Fascism is finished. Just like Feudalism is finished as a world philosophy.

I just read a book (Bloodline of the Hold Grail) where the author was making a case for America having a king.

I mean--what are the chances, right? Same goes for Fascism-----now things tainted with Fascism abound. Zionism, Hamas, in that part of the world. Creepy skinhead assholes in Europe, Stormfront nutcases in the US.

But they're crazy people. And we can't base our politics on what zany fanatics do. We have to maintain a certain rational understanding that for the most part people and the leaders that reflect them are in the end--good.

Crazy people have an terrible knack for getting an awful lot of power.

But regardless I know what you're talking about with Fascism, and I sort of agree with you. If we see fascism in the future, it won't look like Mussolini's Italy or Hitler's Germany. Slavoj Zizek had a video on the Guardian's website about this, kind of.

[Che a chara]

Apparently these gentle and peaceful EDL protesters attacked a Hindu temple at the weekend past there with anything they could find and began to run amok, trashing cars, house and shop windows and verbally abused and chased the minority of UAF supporters.

It's quite obvious of their hatred for anything that isn't white or Christian.

[freepalestine]

interesting posts.as for edl being chrischuns-?stil my previous post about antifa scism in u.k -wasnt really answered

[Dr Mindbender]

For some time I thought the EDL was an inherently stereotypical far right organisation, with all the xenophobia and homophobia attached to it.

But then my attention got drawn to this:



Is this just a rhetorical farce, or are they really just an anti-Muslim organisation? Not that this would make them any better, but it would be further evidence to my point that specifically anti-Muslim organisations are on the rise within Europe. If so, can they be compared to Netherland's PVV?



Our EDL units have gays, transgender, Black, Sikhs, Hindus, Jews and ex-Muslims (apostates) members. We are professionals of ALL classes!


None of this proves anything other than to substantiate their fascism. Fascism promotes class unity yet is not inherently racist.

[#FF0000]

Class unity, and they accept nonwhites that they deem "British" enough? Huh, what does this sound like.