Banning a Fascist party

[Comrade #138672]

A few days ago a MP of the Labour Party in the Netherlands suggested that certain parties should not be allowed. At least, not in their present form. Of course he was referring to the PVV ("Freedom" Party), which I consider to be at least semi-Fascist, although some Dutch comrades here may not agree).

What do you think? Is this good or bad? I'm not sure. If Fascist parties are banned, then Communist parties will probably be banned aswell.

[campesino]

being a member of an underground party is way cooler than being a member of a regular party. banning fascist parties will eliminate fascist from influencing legislatures. but banning commie parties, will not end class struggle.

[Questionable]

We should not seek solidarity with fascists. They have literally nothing in common with us. If socialist parties are banned along with fascist parties, then socialist ones should fight their own battle against the bourgeois parliaments without any concern for fascists. We shouldn't give into the liberal illusion of all-or-nothing free speech.

[Jimmie Higgins]

A few days ago a MP of the Labour Party in the Netherlands suggested that certain parties should not be allowed. At least, not in their present form. Of course he was referring to the PVV ("Freedom" Party), which I consider to be at least semi-Fascist, although some Dutch comrades here may not agree).

What do you think? Is this good or bad? I'm not sure. If Fascist parties are banned, then Communist parties will probably be banned aswell.

Have there also been calls for banning communist or left-wing oppositional parties or is this just speculation that if some parties are banned, then others can be as well?

Generally the only time anti-fascism is used against communists from what I've observed comes in cries against "exteeemism on both sides". But usually this is only directed at the left in practice and lumping the far right with the far left is only to provide cover and make it seem like the mainstream polticians aren't going after representatives of a more popular left-wing opposition.

[The Jay]

banning fascist parties will eliminate fascist from influencing legislatures.

How do you know this?

[helot]

I don't think banning fascist parties would have positive effects. It'll just bolster their rhetoric claiming the government is under Marxist/Islamic/whatever influence. Far better for them to be under constant attack by the working class than the state.

[Jimmie Higgins]

I don't think banning fascist parties would have positive effects. It'll just bolster their rhetoric claiming the government is under Marxist/Islamic/whatever influence. Far better for them to be under constant attack by the working class than the state.


Well I totally agree that the only reliable defense against fascism is one that involves workers being able to mobilize a defense, as long as this is a specificly aimed restriction and not some more general repression of "extreemism on all sides" then I think that barring a fascist party from ataining legitimacy, participating in public political debates and so on is preferable - especially in the current time when fascism is gaining legitimacy in many parts of Europe.

It will not "solve" the problem for workers, but I think it is not a move workers should oppose on some "free speech grounds" or whatnot.

[Tim Cornelis]

Banning fascist parties will not change the opinion of fascists. They will continue to operate either underground (which makes them more dangerous) or regroup into another legal political party (as we've seen in Germany and Belgium). Repression usually leads to a growth of a political movement, not its decline.


Have there also been calls for banning communist or left-wing oppositional parties or is this just speculation that if some parties are banned, then others can be as well?

The Labour PM in question argued any party that does not accept the "democratic rechtsstaat (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rechtsstaat)" should be banned. He was referring to far-right parties but evidently far-left parties would fall under this category as well.

[Jimmie Higgins]

Banning fascist parties will not change the opinion of fascists. They will continue to operate either underground (which makes them more dangerous) or regroup into another legal political party (as we've seen in Germany and Belgium). Repression usually leads to a growth of a political movement, not its decline.I don't know about this. First of all a party can't really be fascist if it is only a legal party without street-forces backing it - that would be more like a proto-fascist party or just a far-right party. So I don't see how a fascist group with vigilante street-forces is more dangerous when they don't also have a legal arm oriented towards electoral politics.

I think a more likely issue is just that banning openly fascist parties just means the fascist groups will look to other far-right parties or fronts for engaging in the mainsteam politics or electoral sphere. But unpoularity and marginalization (as in the US) does this as well - fascists looking for mainsteam audiences will likely join a more moderate but still far-right anti-immigrant party like the US reform party or will participate in Tea-Party organizations.

And repression does not automatically do anything predictable as far as I can tell. For the left: the US CP or IWW didn't grow after red-scares in the US, but at other times repression against radicals has opened up mass solidarity for leftist groups. For the right, in US history, actually state repression against the KKK and 1990s Militias and other organizations did effectivly disorganize them into irrelevance. But in most of these cases, the US state only repressed these groups when they no longer needed them or when they were already in decline. The US government was meeting with and some polticians were praising the new KKK of the 1920s and then 10 years later they were using anti-raketeering laws against them to dismantle the organization.

So IMO it can potentially be effective for the state to repress fascists, but the problem for workers is that the state's anti-fascism is in no way the same as anti-fascism for working class reasons. This is why these laws or restrictions might work in a way but are not relyable IMO. Sometimes the state will promote fascist groups when regualr repression isn't enough to keep the population "in their place" - but other times the state will be anti-fascist in order to maintain ruling class hegemony and stability.


The Labour PM in question argued any party that does not accept the "democratic rechtsstaat (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rechtsstaat)" should be banned. He was referring to far-right parties but evidently far-left parties would fall under this category as well.Thanks for the clarification - yeah that does sound like a different matter than just repressing a specific fascist group.

[thälmann]

there are some fascist organisations illegal in germany, as well as the KPD. but the biggest fascist party. the NPD, is still legal. they could not banne them because it was full of intelligence agents and its not clear who is doing what in it.

[Sasha]

It's really bizarre to see sometimes leftist Germans in one sentence plead for a NPD ban and say "wir sind alle 129a" (the german anti-terror law that is frequently used to lock up up autonomous activists).
The fash need to be defeated by the people, we don't have to come to their defence if the state decides to make their life more difficult for a while (and we with AFA are admitedly not above to give the parlemantairy left some tactical ammunition for it) but it shouldn't be something we should rejoice in let alone plead for. The state is illegitimate, their repression is illegimate and most of all (as proven countless times and now again in Germany and Greece) they cant be trusted to suppress the fash as they will need and will use them in times of crises.

[Comrade #138672]

Have there also been calls for banning communist or left-wing oppositional parties or is this just speculation that if some parties are banned, then others can be as well?It's speculation.

[The Douche]

I can't believe I'm saying this, but I agree with ARA in this situation:


We don't rely on the cops or courts to do our work for us. This doesn't mean we never go to court, but the cops uphold white supremacy and the status quo. They attack us and everyone who resists oppression. We must rely on ourselves to protect ourselves and stop the fascists.

Emphasis in the original.

[Mather]

Fascism and the state both serve the same interests, those of the bourgeoisie. As we can now see in Greece and as we once saw in Germany, fascism is capitalism in decay. Expecting the state to counter the threat of fascism is both absurd and delusional. In Greece for example, the state and fascists work together in dealing with the dissent that the bourgeoisie really fears, that of the working class. The cooperation between the Golden Dawn and the Greek police is evidence of this. To fight fascism, the working class must organise on their own as a class. The overthrow of capitalism is the only permanent guarantee against fascism.

All calls to empower the state with a 'right' to ban political parties and organisations are inherently reactionary and totally counter-productive. The working class does not need the 'justice' of the bourgeoisie nor their oppresive legal system.

[Rottenfruit]

A few days ago a MP of the Labour Party in the Netherlands suggested that certain parties should not be allowed. At least, not in their present form. Of course he was referring to the PVV ("Freedom" Party), which I consider to be at least semi-Fascist, although some Dutch comrades here may not agree).

What do you think? Is this good or bad? I'm not sure. If Fascist parties are banned, then Communist parties will probably be banned aswell.
Hypocritical, what is the netherlands not a DEMOCRACY? Time to get the Usa to invade the netherlands and bring some freedom and democracy

Bad joke but in seriousiness, you cant say that a nation is democratic and yet the same nation bans cerent political partys for views not liked by the goverment. I find this to be a very serious irony when people who are all for open democracy but when theres a group or a party they thing is extreme they want to ban it , so much for open democracy :blink:

[#FF0000]

How do you know this?

Yeah I want to echo this sentiment. Fascists can find a home in most right-wing party, to be totally honest, because in spite of the details, every right-winger is out there fighting for the same thing: Privilege and power for one group of people over another.

It's why you see Libertarians in America working with the Republicans and Fascists supporting Ron Paul.

But yeah, I'm against the state banning parties and sicking their dogs on anyone. In America, the same group that stomps out those state militia losers are the same ones that have crushed us for decades.

[Sankara1983]

I'd vote for banning them. Doesn't Germany currently have something like this?
Italy's Constitution states, "It shall be forbidden to reorganize, under any form whatsoever, the dissolved Fascist party."

[PC LOAD LETTER]

I could have sworn the historical fascist parties stepped up with approval of the establishment regardless of their (relative lack of) popular support re- parliamentarism

I know the nazis had a good bit of support for a minute but it was short lived

[newdayrising]

banning fascist parties will eliminate fascist from influencing legislatures. but banning commie parties, will not end class struggle.
Whenever "fascist" policies are convenient, they will be carried in by whatever party is in charge of a bourgeois state. It's not Like they need actual fascists to implement these things. Even so called leftist governments will promote chauvinistic, xenophobic and violent anti working class measure whenever it's the most efficient way to keep the status quo going.

[Agathor]

We should not seek solidarity with fascists.

So brave.

[Lev Bronsteinovich]

I am really puzzled by many of the comrades comments on this topic. I always thought that it is a basic communist principle that we do not want the bourgeois state to say who can and cannot form a party. Any legislation used against fascists is likely to be used against the left. Let me also be clear that I am not in favor of "free speech for fascists." Firstly, speech is not their preferred mode of political engagement. It is up to the labor movement and the left to clear these vermin off the streets.

In the US, the laws that put members of the then Trotskyist SWP, and later the CP in prison were originally put on the books to "prosecute fascists." I don't think an fascists went to prison because of the "Smith Act." It is a good case in point.

[blake 3:17]

I'm opposed to banning parties of the far Right or censoring their speech. This gives way too much power to the state and is more likely to be used against us than the Right.

If people are spreading worthless hateful ideas then expose them as such, and argue for better ideas. My first experience in politics was in anti-fascist work and part of what the Neo-Nazis were able to build on and find some support among marginalized youth was they were seen as outsider rebels.

I have no problem with popular mobilization against the Right, but be careful not to embrace direct or indirect state sanctions against them. By direct, I mean banning of parties or organizations. By indirect I mean relying on or pushing for things like banning fascists from campus or appearing in the media.

Garbage ideas can be exposed as garbage. They are actually very easy to argue against.

If fascists groups are involved in criminal activities (eg. physically attacking immigrants, vandalizing synagogues or mosques or abortion clinics), they should be treated as criminals.