English Defence League

DSN wrote:Am I reading this wrongly or are they actually declaring a distaste for multiculturalism? I always expect the average leftist website to be ridiculously anti-everything, dismissing everything as racist and having a strange fetish for multiculturalism.

Well who ever wrote it is on the right track as far as I'm concerned,if people of specific cultures or races want to band together and live in one area and they and the indigenous population can come to some sort of understanding I think it could work.

TheocWulf wrote:It's a shame that all people on the left can offer is the same multicultural jargon,people are generally speaking ethnocentric.

The vast majority of the left refuse to realize that mass immigration and multiculturalism that has gone with it has been a very effective tool of the capitalist elite. I also think that the UAF is a cynical tool of Trots to recruit people and/or make their members feel important- they know well that the EDL is not fascist.

People are in general as you say ethnocentric- but ethnicity transcends mere biology, though obviously biology is usually a factor in it. A serious question is whether the immigrant communities can become properly English, properly intergrated into English society.

Paradosis wrote:People are in general as you say ethnocentric- but ethnicity transcends mere biology, though obviously biology is usually a factor in it. A serious question is whether the immigrant communities can become properly English, properly intergrated into English society.

With certain cultures it can simply be a matter of time. Race/culture mixing within families is often an important catalyst for integration. My dad is a Greek Cypriot whose parents were both born and raised in Cyprus, but having been born and raised in England he would appear to be your average English bloke if you met him (despite his ethnicity/colour, obviously). However, being raised by a family that wasn't English and wasn't really accepted by the English, my dad would never call himself British or English. My dad actually enjoys complaining about the English as though he doesn't even live here by the English ways of life. He strongly identifies as Greek and seems to think that I do as well, when I actually prefer to see myself as English. My mum was also born into a mixed family – an English father and an Irish immigrant mother.

However, if you look at a lot of people in England born into Asian families, they will often still identify as Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi etc. a few generations on from arriving in the country, as they tend to stick to their own kind in areas where they can retain their cultures and identity. I grew up in and still currently live in an area full of Asians, so I know firsthand.

Even people such as Nick Griffin can accept the integration of non-British peoples. In an interview he cited Sir Trevor McDonald as an example of an ethnically non-British person who has successfully integrated into the British system.

The question is really how far you want to take integration. I don't think we will see the complete assimilation of Asians in the UK (or at least in areas like London) until immigration is put to an end, or at least drastically restrained.

TheocWulf wrote:It's a shame that all people on the left can offer is the same multicultural jargon,people are generally speaking ethnocentric.

The problem is that the "Left" seems automatically to side with "ethnics" and comes across as hostile to the white working class- at least the blue collar white working class. They wont touch the issue of discrimination against whites when it comes to housing for instance. Their whole reaction to the EDL is massively counter-productive to put it very mildly.

Paradosis wrote:The problem is that the "Left" seems automatically to side with "ethnics" and comes across as hostile to the white working class- at least the blue collar white working class. They wont touch the issue of discrimination against whites when it comes to housing for instance. Their whole reaction to the EDL is massively counter-productive to put it very mildly.

It has been largely counterproductive but their reaction was not completely wrong either. Many of the views held by the core of the EDL are reactionary and must be fought. The differences come when you ask how to fight them. Should you present solutions that would solve both the root causes of the very problems that they see as well as some of the actual problems or shout names at them until they grow dejected and disgusted to the point that they are no longer willing to listen to the opposition even more than they are at the moment?

I agree that the whole ethics thing is becoming ridiculous within the left, as it seems to have developed into some kind of comforting playground of love and candy rainbows. It's turning into a social hippie scene now for a lot of people, although there is some serious genuine leftist activity coming from a lot of it so it's not all bad.

Anyway, what do you mean by "hostile to the white working class"?

Red Aegis wrote:It has been largely counterproductive but their reaction was not completely wrong either. Many of the views held by the core of the EDL are reactionary and must be fought. The differences come when you ask how to fight them. Should you present solutions that would solve both the root causes of the very problems that they see as well as some of the actual problems or shout names at them until they grow dejected and disgusted to the point that they are no longer willing to listen to the opposition even more than they are at the moment?

Growing up in the Unionist community in Northern Ireland I was surrounded by their type of "British Nationalism" that focuses whether they admit it or not around the Army and the Monarchy- its something that I have grown to completely hate. I despise the EDL and everything they stand for. They are also clueless about Islam, the Muslim world and geopolitics. But they are not fascists and they have been successful in creating a mass movement.

Paradosis wrote:Growing up in the Unionist community in Northern Ireland I was surrounded by their type of "British Nationalism" that focuses whether they admit it or not around the Army and the Monarchy- its something that I have grown to completely hate. I despise the EDL and everything they stand for. They are also clueless about Islam, the Muslim world and geopolitics. But they are not fascists and they have been successful in creating a mass movement.

Ill be honest the people from the province I know and I have met leave me with the impression that without Britishness they would have no identity.When The union no longer exists what identity will people move to?.I can't see them taking on an Irish identity perhaps a new Anglo-Scottish identity in a Northern Irish state.

TheocWulf wrote:Ill be honest the people from the province I know and I have met leave me with the impression that without Britishness they would have no identity.When The union no longer exists what identity will people move to?.I can't see them taking on an Irish identity perhaps a new Anglo-Scottish identity in a Northern Irish state.

A lot of Unionism comes down in reality the belief that the British State will protect their tribe against the other tribe (which is false- once Roman Catholics become a majority which they will soon the British state will side with them because they want to keep Northern Ireland for strategic reasons). A lot of peoples first loyalty is Ulster and their own community. Ulster has her own rich but complicated history. You are right though- my community has been putting a knife to its own throat.

TheocWulf wrote:Why should the working class rally to our cause when most of the left would still allow the "others" to take up living space and jobs ect and demand they integrate themselves into a multicultural society in their own land?

The only 'others' I see are the ruling classes who through exploitation cause mass migration. The ruling class in this country encourage immigration as a tool to keep wages down. This is why we need international revolution to end exploitation globally.

As far as taking up land, I believe in sustainable socio-economic policies and a sustainable society. This means a balance between land for food, recreation and housing. This balance cannot be tipped one way or another. I think you should also read some of the documents produced by parties such as the CPB which question mass immigration.

Modgardener wrote:The only 'others' I see are the ruling classes who through exploitation cause mass migration. The ruling class in this country encourage immigration as a tool to keep wages down. This is why we need international revolution to end exploitation globally.

I'm down with that in my mind third world migration to our country has been happening for three reasons.One to keep wages down,two to keep the indigenous working class divided and three the modern globalist bourgeois needs a world where everybody is a consumer of products and not a member of a tribe.

As far as taking up land, I believe in sustainable socio-economic policies and a sustainable society. This means a balance between land for food, recreation and housing. This balance cannot be tipped one way or another. I think you should also read some of the documents produced by parties such as the CPB which question mass immigration.

Yea I'm on side with Green stuff mate we defiantly need a sustainable nation.Ive read what CPB have to say and I concur on some of it,however post revolution what are we going to do about the non indigenous population?.You can read some of my older post and my thoughts on Autonomy for the non indigenous population.

With respect to the issue of immigration, following the ascent of socialism, I am of the position that all policies related to the issue be democratically determined by each nation. I also believe that the rights of immigrant populations within current bourgeois states must be protected, which is why I think the only reasonable solution to the national question resides in establishing a framework for such things as the free political secession of nations, national personal autonomy, federation, etc. This would mean that the current constitution of bourgeois states would be maintained for those content to perpetuate that status quo. However, various national groups, within that context, would be afforded the freedom of self-determination via the aforementioned policies. This would, of course, lead to the development of many new nations, each based on its own unique sociocultural factors.

Racists and chauvinists are unlikely to embrace the true self-determination of nations for a number of reasons; not the least of which is the fact that the sorts of inequities that serve to perpetuate racism in capitalist societies will cease to exist. Therefore the notion that a nation, based upon the requisite socialist framework, would pursue policies opposed to some level of immigration and assimilation by individuals of differing ethnic backgrounds is either too optimistic or too pessimistic — depending on one's disposition.

With respect to the EDL, they appear to be little more than a ragtag bunch of British football hooligans imbued with false consciousness.

The EDLs core activists are indeed casuals and football hooligans however in their early days when they went to a town or city they could rely on there numbers being boosted by large numbers of indigenous working class people turning out and marching with them.This doesn't seem to happening anymore and probably has more to do with the EDLs leadership falling out with each other than it has with the media and Governemnts message.

I'm sure I've elaborated on this before in another thread but we could learn a thing or two from the EDLs early days where thousands of working class people marched through the streets of England.

Admin wrote:With respect to the EDL, they appear to be little more than a ragtag bunch of British football hooligans imbued with false consciousness.

Red Action, the only left wing group in recent times to attempt seriously to understand how British society and its State works rather than cling to Trotsky or whoever, came out mostly from foot hooligans and the skinhead movement. Its not that their casuals which a problem in my opinion, its that they are idiotic ones imbued as you say with false consciousness.

Paradosis wrote:Red Action, the only left wing group in recent times to attempt seriously to understand how British society and its State works rather than cling to Trotsky or whoever, came out mostly from foot hooligans and the skinhead movement. Its not that their casuals which a problem in my opinion, its that they are idiotic ones imbued as you say with false consciousness.

A good example I don't know much about red action however they appear to be the lefts version to combat 18.The thing about both these groups is they are both of working class origin and its ranks were working class and both got expelled from the SWP or BNP for being violent revolutionaries and both seem to have a dislike of the middle class intellectuals who dominate the leadership of the left and right. Apparently at one stage the individuals involved on both sides got to know each other well and the violence became almost as organised as rival football firms with pre arraigned fights and tit for tat pub attacks.It must have been Interesting watching two groups of working class people dressed the same as each other battering one another over politics.

Red action, C18 in there day and nowadays the EDL show us that the working class are the only people capable of change because we actually have something to fight for,The middle class who run the left and right parties have as much to lose as the upper class who run the "respectable" parties.

TheocWulf wrote:The middle class who run the left and right parties have as much to lose as the upper class who run the "respectable" parties.

That isn't true and just what is your conception of class?

Red Aegis wrote:That isn't true and just what is your conception of class?

The people who run the left and right parties in the UK generally are from middle class families and university educated and have never worked a normal job the party is their employment and/or lifestyle,Post revolution 99% of us would have no need for this political intelligentsia they can move into work or traditional inteligensia roles.Once the folk have archived social justice and national freedom and are aware of their rights,responsibilities and duties the people will be such a massive part of the system that this intellectual political elite will vanish.

TheocWulf wrote:The people who run the left and right parties in the UK generally are from middle class families and university educated and have never worked a normal job the party is their employment and/or lifestyle,Post revolution 99% of us would have no need for this political intelligentsia they can move into work or traditional inteligensia roles.Once the folk have archived social justice and national freedom and are aware of their rights,responsibilities and duties the people will be such a massive part of the system that this intellectual political elite will vanish.

You define the middle class as political intelligentsia of the left and right?

DSN wrote:You define the middle class as political intelligentsia of the left and right?

Not in their entirety no just the people who fill the leadership positions of said organisations in the UK.

TheocWulf wrote:The EDLs core activists are indeed casuals and football hooligans however in their early days when they went to a town or city they could rely on there numbers being boosted by large numbers of indigenous working class people turning out and marching with them.This doesn't seem to happening anymore and probably has more to do with the EDLs leadership falling out with each other than it has with the media and Governemnts message.

I'm sure I've elaborated on this before in another thread but we could learn a thing or two from the EDLs early days where thousands of working class people marched through the streets of England.

Tens of thousands of working class people also march through the streets opposing racism.

Modgardener wrote:Tens of thousands of working class people also march through the streets opposing racism.

I don't doubt they that but the organisations that some of those people are part of are as detrimental to social nationalism as the EDL are.

Paradosis wrote:Red Action, the only left wing group in recent times to attempt seriously to understand how British society and its State works rather than cling to Trotsky or whoever, came out mostly from foot hooligans and the skinhead movement. Its not that their casuals which a problem in my opinion, its that they are idiotic ones imbued as you say with false consciousness.

As an American, who lacks any real attachment to contemporary British culture, I am not in a position to judge how relevant football hooliganism is to the working class of that part of the world. (My criticism of the EDL has far more to do with the aforementioned false consciousness they happen to suffer from.) However, I cannot imagine that the skinhead subculture resonates with a meaningful number of British workers. Indeed, given the many stereotypes associated with that subculture, I suspect that its affiliation with radical social movements serves to alienate more workers than it attracts.

Feel free to correct me if I am being too presumptuous.

Google Tommy Robinson (EDL) vs Abdullah al Andalusi TV debate - Does Islam equal terrorism? Youtube.

The Muslims and the BNP spokesman come across as reasonable and urbane. Tommy Robinson comes across as an utter moron and the shorts on TV are embaressing.

Admin wrote:As an American, who lacks any real attachment to contemporary British culture, I am not in a position to judge how relevant football hooliganism is to the working class of that part of the world. (My criticism of the EDL has far more to do with the aforementioned false consciousness they happen to suffer from.) However, I cannot imagine that the skinhead subculture resonates with a meaningful number of British workers. Indeed, given the many stereotypes associated with that subculture, I suspect that its affiliation with radical social movements serves to alienate more workers than it attracts.

Feel free to correct me if I am being too presumptuous.

The skinhead and punk subcultures have passed their hey day for sure, but during the 1970s and 80s they were mass movements.

Football is an incredibly important part of British working class culture. The tag football hooligan is bit middle class snobbery of young male working class football supporters.

At the end of the day any revolutionary movement needs young working males who are "Hard".

If it is just a bit of snobbery then is there not any truth to stories of them getting as drunk as possible and causing massive brawls over who won a sports game?