Results 1 to 20 of 34
It seems that once again anti-fascist activists have successfully disrupted a meeting at the Oxford Union debating society where Nick Griffin and David Irving were suppose to be talking.
The demo is still going on but there are now protesters inside the chamber and the meeting has had to be moved somewhere else and split up.
Good job all round!
BBC
NO PLATFORM!
Good to see working people out in force. Also good to see the mainstream anti-fascist movement has a spine once again!
Shame I couldn't be there but I had to see a doctors about a terrible chest infection! Seems I wasn't needed anyway!
"How you cling to your purity, young man! How afraid you are to soil your hands! All right, stay pure! What good will it do? Why did you join us? Purity is an idea for a yogi or a monk. You intellectuals and Bourgeois anarchists use it as a pretext for doing nothing. To do nothing, to remain motionless, arms at your sides, wearing kids gloves. Well, I have dirty hands. Right up to the elbows. I've plunged them in the filth and blood. But what do you hope? Do you think you'll govern innocently?"-Jean-Paul Sartre
Yeah this is good news.
I was going to post this story but you beat me to it TAT! :angry:
I will give a link to the Guardian's story on it:
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/farright/st...2217431,00.html
"No references to the need to fight terror can be an argument for restricting human rights." Vladimir Putin
"The strengthening of our statehood is, at times, deliberately interpreted as authoritarianism." Vladimir Putin
"We shall fight against them, throw them in prisons and destroy them." Vladimir Putin
In reality, the 'mainstream anti-fascist movement' (i.e. London Mayor Ken Livingstone's Unite Against Fascism) once again showed that it is absolutely spineless in confronting the ideas of the far-right - by choosing to appeal to bourgeois institutions to censor speech.
Say NO to 'No Platform'. Say NO to censorship.
One of my friends at Oxford was at this- i actually just look at his blog where he mentioned it.
The interesting thing is this friend of mine is a debator himself. I'm glad he doesn't go for that "balanced argument" bullshit put forward by the organisers.
Good to see that the event was completely disrupted, and that the media covered it.
Hear the words I sing,
War's a horrid thing,
So I sing, sing, sing,
Ding-a-ling-a-ling.
--Baldrick, Blackadder Goes Forth
Barricade Books
The last time I was sentenced to death, I ordered four hyper-vodkas for my breakfast. All a bit of a blur after that... I woke up in bed with both of my executioners. Lovely couple, they stayed in touch! Can't say that about most executioners. - Captain Jack Harkness
I think you are right in the respect that we should not call on bourgeois institutions to censor free speech, but that does not justify a no no-platform position.
It should be up to grass-roots activists to prevents fascists from having a platform and that is what was attempted in Oxford.
I think it's more worrying that they gave Irving a platform.
Irving has time and again been shown to be a charlatain, giving intellectual credibility to the far right. He has no academic credentials, has been proven in several times to be a holocaust denier in court, was thrown out of Russia for allegedly attempting to steal documents from the Kremlin archieve [not because of any zionist conspiracy as he claims]. Letting this twat speak at Oxford one of the most respected Universities just makes him look like he has some respectability.
Unite Against Fascism is calling on bourgeois institutions (like universities) to restrict the free speech rights of the BNP. Grassroots or not, that is the demand. The point is that this is an utterly reactionary demand, which is totally alien to any progressive tradition.
For those interested, you can watch Luke Tryl, president of the Oxford Union, discuss why we should uphold free speech, along with Peter Tatchell and spiked's Brendan O'Neill - here on 18 Doughty Street.
I'm confused. Do you or do you not support a No-platform approach to fascism?
I don't support it.
So you do not support grass-roots activists refusing to allow fascists a platform?
Do i support 'grass-roots activists' like UAF asking a university to ban Griffin and Irving from speaking? I certainly don't.
Actually, this will most likely reinforce the view, held by a growing number of people, that the BNP is a victim of illiberal censorship. It makes the BNP look like they are fighting for freedom, and that the left is fighting to supress freedom. The general picture is that Griffin and Irving have something so important, true and valid to say, that some people don't want their views to be heard.Originally posted by Northern Front@November 27, 2007 05:02 pm
Seems NG is quite mixed up. Lately he has been stating that the BNP and not anti-Zionist, he then bans Lady Re Nouf from ever speaking at a BNP event (due to her attended a Anti- Zionist Conference in Iran) now he appearing along side Irving?
Why would this man do such a PR blunder so close to election? Irving's name is smeared at every chance, and the BNP's new found additions seems to be coming from the Tory side.
Simply, Nick has lost the plot.
In all truth, Griffin and Irving are a couple of nutjobs and their views don't stand up to a gram of rational reasoning. So why are we so scared to confront their views?
More importantly, do we hold the general public to such low regard that we believe they will easily be misled by such views upon hearing them?
He means do you support the position antifa has. That is to oppose all state censorship, and all forms of working with the state to combat fascism. But making sure that the organised working class (in this instance antifa) prevents the fascist from speaking?
So rather than asking the UNI to cancel him speaking, blokading the place on the night..
"How you cling to your purity, young man! How afraid you are to soil your hands! All right, stay pure! What good will it do? Why did you join us? Purity is an idea for a yogi or a monk. You intellectuals and Bourgeois anarchists use it as a pretext for doing nothing. To do nothing, to remain motionless, arms at your sides, wearing kids gloves. Well, I have dirty hands. Right up to the elbows. I've plunged them in the filth and blood. But what do you hope? Do you think you'll govern innocently?"-Jean-Paul Sartre
That might be the position of antifa, but it's not the position of the 'mainstream anti-fascist movement', who you praised in your previous post. The 'mainstream anti-fascist movement' is calling on bourgeois institutions to censor.
Why? What exactly is your justification for this?
What are you on about? Erm, they're fascists.
Yes, but is trying to close down debate an effective way to defeat them? Or does it in fact do quite the opposite?
Yes of course it is! Fascists aren't interested in debating with you, they would sooner smash our faces in that engage in debate. Community based work is important in countering fascist propaganda but that must be coupled with physical confrontation against actual ideological fascists.
What are you trying to ague?
If Griffin and Irving want a public debate, i'm afraid that we do not have the luxury of backing out. We have a duty to confront their ideas, which shouldn't be hard.
One of the interesting things about groups like Unite Against Fascism is that they rarely actually put forward a case against the views of the BNP. For example, one of the main reasons that the BNP gains support is the irrational fears of immigration which exist in mainstream society. And, yet, there's no real debate about immigration. Even those on the left aren't prepared to put up a consistent positive case for mass immigration. Instead, all we have are so-called radicals shouting 'Smash the BNP', asking the state to ban far-right groups. This doesn't work - because the reasons for BNP's support aren't being addressed. All that happens is that the BNP looks like a victim of censorship, with increases public sympathy for it.
They are and were confronted.
Antifa groups around the country do community work to counter the ideas that the BNP proposition, but when fascists like Irving and Griffin attempt to legitimise their politics by holding public meetings then we need to demonstrate that this is simply not acceptable. After all, their politics is not legitimate.
For clarification, I am not support UAF attempts to have bourgeois institutions intervene on our behalf. I'm talking about grass-roots and working class direct action.
