|
Despite
the defeat of Jean-Marie Le Pen in the French Presidential
elections the issue of Fascism is still very much
on the agenda. In countries like France and Austria
the extreme right has entered the mainstream political
arena, whilst in Britain the BNP is beginning to make
an electoral impact. Certainly the recent local election
results in Burnley and elsewhere have provided a degree
of impetus for the BNP, and this has precipitated
renewed concern about the (re)emergence of the Fascist
right. Indeed, according to Dr. David Baker (University
of Warwick), the election results constituted a “credibility
breakthrough” for the British National Party.
The
fact is that, far from being consigned to a particular
historical epoch, Fascism has never actually gone
away. The Fascist creed, which embodies among other
facets, a toxic combination of xenophobic nationalism,
racial supremacism and a commitment to an authoritarian
state, has been sustained during difficult periods
by a small coterie of fanatics. The difference now
is that the political and social context has altered
significantly, and the Fascists themselves have modified
their strategy and re-articulated their message.
In
Britain we now have a “New” Labour Party
unambiguously committed to Thatcherite assumptions
about the importance of private enterprise and the
need for a severely circumscribed role for the state.
Those marginalised working class communities most
in need of resources have been disappointed by a government
pre-occupied by the pursuit of power for its own sake.
No amount of political doubletalk or spin-doctoring
can disguise “New” Labour’s supine
submission to capital. The smoke and mirrors will
not work anymore. Those with any pretensions toward
left-wing radicalism have long since abandoned ship,
whilst activism amongst a declining membership at
constituency level is sparse, and even the unions
are now re-considering their relationship with what
is essentially Tony Blair’s fan club.
This
situation has created a political void in Labour’s
core constituency, which the BNP is hoping to fill
by claiming to be the “radical” alternative.
At the same time, the BNP has attempted to re-invent
itself in Euro-Nationalist mode by eschewing street
confrontations and the bully-boy skinhead image. As
BNP leader Nick Griffin put it, “we have de-commissioned
the boot”. This may be overstated, but the emphasis
has undoubtedly changed. The BNP is attempting to
work within communities on the so-called “sink”
estates that have been effectively abandoned by “New”
Labour. Moreover, as George Monbiot has rightly pointed
out, Fascists now are expressing their message in
a variety of different ways, for example Fascist activists
have infiltrated the Countryside Alliance, trade union
organisations and even the anti-Globalisation protests!
Prominent BNP strategists are determined to break
out of the political ghetto, where once they squabbled
over the fickle loyalties of political psychopaths
and football hooligans, and enter the electoral mainstream.
All
of this makes constructing a viable anti-Fascist strategy
exceedingly problematic. Of course the notion, expressed
recently by New Labour “guru” Anthony Giddens,
that the so-called “Third Way” can somehow
eradicate the right wing threat, displays an alarming
lack of political perspicacity. In fact, by continuing
to undermine organised labour - a movement which might
be expected to be at the very forefront of resistance
to Fascism - Blair’s government is making it
far easier for Fascists to operate. In short, more
of the same pallid pragmatism will not work.
Unfortunately,
for other organisations on “the left” the
struggle against Fascism has often meant purveying
the same old puerile sectarianism. For the Anti-Nazi
League, to take the most prominent example, the fight
against the extreme right has always represented an
opportunity to inculcate new members with their Trotskyist
credo. Although Alex Callinicos has referred to the
“enormous success” of the ANL since 1977,
the paradox is that whilst they were the most vocal
and vociferous in their opposition to the Nazis, the
ANL were often the least able to deliver, despite
their revolutionary rhetoric.
Yet
Fascism does need to be confronted, both physically
and ideologically. In effect this means denying them
political space and adopting a “no-platform”
position. However, it is here that those adopting
a pro-active anti-Fascist stance encounter powerful
arguments prioritising civil liberty and freedom of
speech. Certain elements on the left, and in the liberal
intelligentsia, argue that Fascism can be dealt with
most effectively by exposing it to the light of democratic
debate. Rational people will, it is argued, see through
the lies and half-truths of Fascist discourse and
be convinced by the intellectual rigour of those advocating
freedom and democracy.
Such
arguments will undoubtedly resonate with certain elements
in the broader Irish Republican Movement (especially
those intimidated by the Provisional leadership),
who seek an open and genuine debate about political
strategy and the “peace process”. However,
we need to be absolutely clear here, because to conflate
the two issues, and prioritise liberal freedoms over
and above political necessity, would be a fundamental
error.
The
argument for greater democratic control and debate
within Republicanism is entirely sustainable and reflects
a legitimate aspiration in the context of a potentially
progressive political movement seeking positive social
change. To extrapolate from this and justify the right
to air and disseminate any political aspiration would
be to undermine effective anti-Fascism in deference
to an, albeit valuable, libertarian instinct. The
fact is that Fascists utilise freedom of speech in
order to destroy it. In this sense Fascism is the
political equivalent of plutonium, and there is no
genuinely safe means of engaging with it at any level.
In any event, we all accept legitimate constraints
upon our freedom of expression, and it cannot be construed
as an absolute right in all circumstances. Freedom
of speech is a contingent liberty, which depends very
much upon political circumstances and social consequences.
Fascism
needs to be destroyed, with force if necessary. Those
of us who aspire to becoming part of a “relevant
left” must not be squeamish about confronting
this issue. The failure to do so effectively may consign
us all to irrelevance.
Index: Current Articles + Latest News and Views + Book Reviews +
Letters + Archives
|
