Results 1 to 20 of 33
Statement fron Antifa UK
During this time of economic downturn - the credit crunch - it is important that we don't let fascist ideas take hold amongst our class. It is precisely in times like these, times of mass unemployment and hardship, that fascist organisations can spread their hatred and lies amongst the working class. In Germany in the 1930s Hitler used the recession to divide society. Today Nick Griffin and the BNP are trying to do the same.
The BNP will use any tricks they can to blame 'foreigners' and 'immigrants' for Britain's problems, whether they are drugs, crime or unemployment. The real blame for the economic and social problems we are facing lies squarely at the door of the bankers and bosses. Take the example of 'Sir' Fred Goodwin’s massive £700,000 a YEAR pension paid for out of taxpayers' money for FUCKING UP as the head of RBS (Royal Bank of Scotland) and compare that to the 1000s of workers who have been thrown on the dole and told they are lucky to get £60 a week in benefits.
How can you blame 'foreigners' and 'immigrants' for injustice like that?
The bosses are sticking the boot into workers regardless of what colour or nationality they are... Just look at the recent discovery of the bosses' 'blacklists' of union activists in the construction industry. They didn't mention where the workers happened to be born did they? Just whether they would stand up for decent pay and conditions. The rich must be thanking the BNP for trying to divide us, and laughing all the way to the bank when we fight among ourselves.
It's time to stand together and fight back.
FUCK THE BNP! FUCK THE RICH!
CLASS WAR NOT RACE WAR. ANTIFA.
www.antifa.org.uk
------------------------------------------------------
on a personal note: its good to be back, i missed you all.
Ivan "Bonebreaker" Khutorskoy16.11.2009"We won't forget, we won't forgive"
It was for making statements like these that people were giving me a load of shite before i was elected local mod.
just sayin'.
because you were wrong, you clearly stated "the third reich started with one man" this is a poorly worded over simplified point, but the intended meaning can be easily taken from the fact it says "Today Nick Griffin and the BNP are trying to do the same" in the next sentence.
not that i need to defend it, as anarchos are hardly arch-materialists like myself.
if you want this debate we can have it, but i really, really don't think you do want to start it.
Too simplistic.
Check the BNPs propaganda, they are smarter than they used to be.
They dont go around blaming immigrants for the problems, they blame the "polititians who got us into this mess" and piously tell people not to attack ethnic minorities as they are just "innocent pawns" [a more condecending view would be hard to find].
They also attack the bankers about the "GFC" far more than they attack immigration, they know people expect them to attack immigrants so they dont even bother. They know that people who are against immigration will already vote BNP, so concentrating on attacking the bankers reaches more people and makes them look like more than a single issue party.
The nazis and fascists in Italy attacked capitalism in their propaganda far more than anything else [aside from communism of course], they knew that such a message sold, and the nazis knew that anti-semites would vote for them anyway so they were free to expand their image to the greater public.
The BNP are pulling the same trick today.
I'm pretty sure Germany had been in a period of economic boom prior to the NSDP gaining power. Well it was on the up after the period of hyper-inflation following WWII.
Lumpen As You Like!
Sounds like AFA in the UK has a decent amount of socialist influences. A good statement.
I think, thus I disagree. | Chairperson of a Socialist Party branchMarxist Internet Archive | Communistisch Platform
Working class independence - Internationalism - Democracy
Educate - Agitate - Organise
You almost make it sound like this could not have been written by an anarchist...
Every great advance in natural knowledge has involved the absolute rejection of authority.
-Thomas H. Huxley
Excellent point!
The left must counteract! How? Attract those reluctant of immigration? How? Link the anticapitalist leftwing rethoric with immigration issues. Why does mass immigration even exist?
1. Capitalism needs cheap labor
2. Third world from which the cheap labor comes from is ruined by colonialism and post-colonial capitalism
Ergo socialism would nullify the need for our countries to get immigrants, and the need for people from the third world to even emigrate.
This point should be made more often in leftwing rethorics.
And therefore speaking to the hearts of racist xenophobes? Become socialist, then you will never have got that paki bastard in your neighbourhood anyway!
...
Every great advance in natural knowledge has involved the absolute rejection of authority.
-Thomas H. Huxley
No it shouldn't, what the hell.
We are one oppressed working class, no matter what nationality we have or where we live. Our movement against capitalism needs to reflect this. Your kind of rethoric only divides the working class by telling people that some fellow workers shouldn't really be here. Saying that, for whatever reason you might have is just plain wrong. Would you deny them the right to stay in or move into a socialist or communist society after the revolution? I sure hope you don't cause if you do you have no business being here.
A large part of the working class is immigrant, or descendant of an immigrant. Of all the working class they're usually the most exploited. They too should be part of a revolutionary workers movement. Yet you seem to rather want to win over xenophobic people, even appeal to their xenophobicness to do so. You think that's going to create an united movement?
Well antifa in the UK was set up by class war and afed.
Not wanting to brag or anything ...................
PETER
Human beings weren't meant to sit in little cubicles, starring at computer screens all day, filling out useless forms and listening to eight different bosses drone on about mission statements.
MICHAEL
I told those fudge-packers that I like Michael Bolton's music. God.
Yeh they're basically anarchist.
Ivan "Bonebreaker" Khutorskoy16.11.2009"We won't forget, we won't forgive"
This is in no way xenophobic. The issue of immigration,and an issue DOES exist, is here because of capitalist globalisation. i would not deny anyone the right to move across the planet not now not ever. but there is a sociological reason why mass movement does happen. It happens because of exploatation,and if we go away with exploatation the percentage of migrants will decrease in great numbers because several causes will be eliminated.
And why should people be forced to go from their country just to survive?
Not all anti-immigration supporters are essentially xenophobe. Xenophobia is a "good" and easy justification and a oversimplified explination of the economic problems that uncontroled and mass immigration causes.
And in the long run. Would you rather use unconventional rethorics and take away voters from the far right , or would you rather play hollier than thou socialist and watch while the far right growns exponentially - if they ever gain power you'll be seeing 0% of free border movement.
We keep saying that the left doesnt know how to counteract to the rise of far right. Well here's a way, destroy their biggest asset - immigration policy.
Sure, it doesn't sound all that politically correct, but it essentially it is the truth. Immigration is an issue,and the left shouldnt ignore it. The cause is economical and we have to make it known.
I see no reason why being anti-immigration restrictions is either holier than thou socialist nor something that would lead to people not listening to you. Are you suggesting we water down our principles to make them more appealing? If a leftist speaks of immigration they should do it in the logical, rational and correct style, i.e. that issues of immigration are manipulated by racists and capitalists to divide the working class, and any concepts of 'over-population' or any of the other bollocks xenophobes use is always the result of capitalism. If we didn't have such an appalling economic system, we could comfortably house millions more people in this nation, and give everyone a brilliant standard of living. Just look at the amount of wasted land and moeny spent in the wrong places. Immigrants are not the problem, capitalism is, and I for one prefer to cut to the root cause of problems rather than take the moronic approach of going 'Z0mg but we can't cope'. If there was no more immigration, if it stopped completely today, even if you were barbaric enough as the BNP want to be and deported some people, you'd still have unemployment and crowding because capitalism is shit at looking after people. Immigrants are not the problem, capitalism is. Capitalism always is. In a socialist society, these supposed 'problems' would not exist, because we could give everyone a good life, so they could go anywhere they wanted.
Ivan "Bonebreaker" Khutorskoy16.11.2009"We won't forget, we won't forgive"
"basically"?
Obviously there are reasons, but this does not justify in any way the denial of freedom of movement. The problem is the immigrants forced biopolitical 'flight from power', not immigration itself.
Actually, being anti-immigration is intrinsically xenophobic since it denies a given individual or group of individuals the right to free movement and mutually consensual association based on a non-negative characteristic such as nationality (for example). Hence, the claiming and 'bordering' of a geographical area and restricting it's usage based upon the supposed homogenity of the dominant group, will intrinsically result in exclusion.
Bordered areas based on the principle of homogenity and exclusion are by definition xenophobic and anathema to any progressive movement.
Obviously the forced 'flight from power' that forces immigrants from their 'homelands' is just as much exclusion as the denial of access to the west is, but that is not the point. The point is that they should be free to associate themselves with any collective/administrative area as they please. Denying this right either by virtually forced migration or the denial of access to a country is the denial of freedom of movement and association.
And here we have the first sign of surrender. By adopting anti-immigration rethoric one implicitly condemns immigration and implicitly places the blame (partially) on the shoulders of the immigrant, hence shifting your stance to the fascist point of view. By adopting rethoric simply because it appeals to fascist sentiments in fear of 'losing voters' one shifts towards the position of the fascists and in the long run will adopt and internalize their point of view. Syntax is in some cases nearly as important as semantics.
Besides, voters are unimportant as is the entire parliamentary system.
It can help, but in the end the de facto power does not rest with the parliament, but with the powers controlling the economic reality which produces the cultural hegemony and hence the voters. These powers are not bound by parliament, the parliament is bound by them. Simply 'taking over government' (if you even succeed despite the overwelming cultural hegemony, the control of media, police and intelligence agencies and the slander) will only result in the de facto power, transnational capital, considering the country as an internal problem to it's mechanics and proceed to isolate you from the outside world.
The key to fighting both capitalism and fascism lies in taking control of the productive reality itself, disregarding nations, borders and parliament.
Immigration being 'an issue' doesn't say shit. In the '50s communism was 'an issue' in the '80s anarchism was 'an issue' does that mean we have to adopt that point of view? No, obviously not. Class solidarity is not to be divided. By 'taking out there asset' one simply takes over their point of view and rethoric eventually simply becoming the fascist thread ,or a weaker version of it, itself.
"Of Man's first disobedience, and the fruit
Of that forbidden tree..."
- John Milton -
"The place of the worst barbarism is that modern forest that makes use of us, this forest of chimneys and bayonets, machines and weapons, of strange inanimate beasts that feed on human flesh"
- Amadeo Bordiga
1. Im not pro immigrant restrictions im pro connecting the issue of immigration with the issue of capitalist economics. how is that anti-immigration? isn't it in fact true that immigration would decrease if we had socialism instead of capitalism?
2.i am well aware all workers are equal. i am well aware capitalism breeds inequality and xenophobia, i'm just suggesting a way to bring potential right wing voters to the left wing. i would rather use unconventional rethorics and keep the fascist at bay than be ultra politicaly correct and see the fascists gain power
This rethorics would not include denial of freedom of movement, it would still be pro-freedom of movement, it would just point out the causes of overtweaked immigration.
Where in my proposition of new rethorics did you see denial of any rights?
How is convincing jobless working class kids there would be more jobs for them if they voted socialist because:
a) foreigners would not have the need to move at the first place and take low paid jobs
b) socialism would eventually lead to a society of abundance
in any way denying the immigrants to move as they wish in the meanwhile.
You have to see the difference between eliminating immigration (surpressing the symptoms) and eliminating the cause of immigration (curing the disease, by disease i mean capitalism just so you wouldnt call me anti-immigrant)
.im not talking just about voters, im talkin about public opinion. im talking about getting more people to consider themselves leftwing and radical.
bad analogy, you are comparing an ideology with a socio-economic group of people. the fact is that demonized communism in the west did not cause shifts in class/ethnic structure. immigration does. And altought we as leftist all belive that ethnicity does not essentialy matter,meanwhile the most of the society thinks otherwise and thus makes their assumption a sad reality. so it is important that the lower class is made up of more and more immigrants whilst europeans are becoming jobless since they are not used to a less than minimum wage. these jobless folks will be right when they say that "they took their jobs". it is our job to convince them that "they" are not immigrants but capitalists who "provide" jobs. but you can't go quoting Marx to him. You have to speaking the tounge of the working class, and that tounge right now is far from being marxist.
Because the capitalists want cheap labour.
While obviously this is not an issue we really want to campaign on, denying reality is not going to get anyone anywhere.
The capitalist state currently funds and encourages numerous "Anti-racism" campaigns in order to make mass immigration more palatable to the general public who have had their pay packets cut.
So the far right argument against capitalism would seem logical from their point of view, yet they still support capitalism, which makes a giant joke of the whole affair.
So what should the left do? Well not lie to people, mass immigration has many good sides, but it has its bad sides as well [overcrowding, infrastructure woes, cultural conflict, strain on state resources for the poor], and the capitalists did not allow these workers to immigrate because they had a sudden hankering for a curry, it was so they could make more money.
Dont let us tell fibs or deny whats in front of our faces if people ask us, but theres no reason to use it as an argument in favour of socialism, let the far right steal our ground rather than the other way around.
