Ah, racism. How Stoke has missed thee. Nine years ago the British National Party were banished from the council chamber when, prior to the 2010 general election, Nick Griffin had proclaimed Stoke the jewel in the BNP crown. Well, sucks to be them. But the stench has never fully gone away. Every so often there's an unwelcome waft of the recent past when some councillor or another says or does something. For instance, the City Independents - when it was (ostensibly) the senior partner in the coalition running Stoke - put forward one Melanie Baddeley for the office of Deputy Mayor back in 2015. The problem was she sat for the BNP during their height and, at that point, had never accounted for racist past deeds. A one off then? Perhaps. If you was feeling charitable, you could put this down to political naivete. There was never anything much holding the City Independents together, apart from the desire to be the Big I Am and antipathy toward the local Labour Party. Not long after Baddeley's appointment was derailed her co-councillor in the Abbey Hulton ward, one Richard Broughan of the United Kingdom Independence Party, made his presence felt after tweeting a "joke" about the deaths of 71 refugees in Germany. Can you guess what happened next? UKIP decided he was too much of a racist liability for them, and out the door he was pushed. Only to wind up sitting for the City Independents. He lasted until finding further controversy as a sex pest and a drunkard. He ended his political career as the sole elected official for Anne Marie Waters's For Britain. Thankfully Labour's Jo Woolner had the satisfaction of taking his seat last May. Lightning sometimes strikes twice, okay? But how about three times? Cllr Jackie Barnes entered the chamber at a by-election in 2012 after issuing the most ridiculous manifesto I've ever seen. It fulminated against cervical smears, plagiarised crap Facebook memes, and had nudge nudge, wink wink innuendoes about "proper Stokies" littered throughout. Still, it got them the seat and I suppose it was logical it would serve as their programme for the 2015 local elections. Success breeds success, right? Five years on we're still awaiting the promised tea set and package tour. But hey, madcap peccadilloes and weirdo policies are no barriers to getting elected in Stoke-on-Trent. Anyway, to pull things back from this necessary tangent Cllr Barnes, who is presently the Lord Mayor of our fine city has added herself to the City Independents' ignoble record on matters racism. Our so-called first citizen has excelled herself reposting fake news, sharing the "White Lives Matter" statue bullshit of the self-proclaimed 'Proud to be British' Facebook group, and the meme that did the rounds exploiting the memory of Lee Rigby - one that has been publicly attacked by Lyn Rigby, his mum. The Mayor's feed is peppered with this sort of nonsense, the usual "immigrants should be grateful" and whites under siege idiotics. Again, if one was charitable you could put this down to stupid boomer edgelording flipping the bird to the "you can't say that!" liberal in their heads, but then we have stuff about the golliwogs. When you consider all this together, the manifesto she stood on, and the dubious record of the City Independents on racism, the conclusion is obvious: she is racist. The question is what the ruling coalition are going to do about it. This is not the first time racist posts and endorsements on Jackie Barnes's Facebook feed have been flagged up, but the City Indies don't care and neither do their Tory coalition partners. There is no electoral price to be exacted one year on from a famous victory, and so the eyes stay shut and the pall of silence seals independent and Tory lips. Pathetic. Damning. And for both parties, most revealing. Image Credit
I thought the morning had a darker aspect about it than usual, and lo it turned out Theresa May was in town. No walkabout down Stoke's pearly avenues, it was Wades Ceramics that was the entirety of her itinerary. And her purpose was to push her Brexit deal in what has variously been dubbed the capital of Brexit, and she laboured her point. Either her vote passes tomorrow evening, or we face a no deal Brexit or no Brexit at all. Well, if the UK's membership of the European Union was a technical matter I'd be a-okay with that. But it isn't. Brexit cannot be wished away, and the clock cannot be dialled back to 23rd June, 2016. Still, the idea that Brexit might not happen or, to be more precise, the consequences of it not happening is interesting, because it has the potential of becoming a very serious political crisis. It suits Theresa May and her lackeys, like the doomed incompetent Chris Grayling, to talk up no Brexit in blood curdling terms because, well, scaremongering is the Tory thing to do. And they don't have any politics left beyond trite soundbites to defend their position anyway. Still, one shouldn't too readily dismiss some of the concerns they raise simply because they raised them. To be sure, casting aside a democratic decision is a serious, if not foolhardy business, even if the argument for doing so is couched in the sophism of more democracy, in the form of another referendum. Let's set Grayling's observation that thwarting Brexit could prove a spur for the far right in more credible terms. The foundation of our febrile politics is a malaise, and this used to get the establishment hand wringing a decade ago. Long-time readers will remember the moral panic every time the BNP got themselves a councillor, and the applause a succession of New Labour politicians would bask in from sundry editorials as they stated "unthinkable" thoughts about refugees, and talked up the tough treatment of immigrants. Yet no matter how far right leading politicians were prepared to go, they only sanctified and legitimated the BNP's xenophobic bile. A bit of liberal do-gooding here and there about how nasty the BNP were was more than drowned out by the racist sentiments articulated by the press and mainstream Labour. What we now call and is openly described as a 'hostile environment' was the fertile soil that nourished the BNP and, to a similar extent, UKIP, and this culminated in the BNP returning two Members of the European Parliament in 2009. Success ultimately did for the BNP, they couldn't keep it together. And political fortunes turned against them shortly after Nick Griffin's infamous Question Time appearance. The Tories were looking dead certs to win the 2010 general election, and as Labour collapsed into Brownite decline and recrimination the populist sheen rubbed off the BNP. In Stoke, once described as the jewel in the BNP's crown by Griffin, at the 2010 local elections half of their councillors were lost and come 2011 they were wiped from the council chamber completely. Entirely welcome, but the same deep alienation from official politics didn't go anywhere. With the BNP a busted flush across the country, the anti-politics slack was picked up by UKIP, especially after 2013. Nigel Farage himself spoke about how the party was doing politics a favour by picking up former BNP voters and effectively domesticating them. Yes, but it was enough to put the frighteners on the Tories. In 2014 UKIP won the largest plurality of votes in the European elections and sent to Brussels the largest contingent of MEPs, and in 2015 they polled well over four million votes. At every step of the way, like his predecessors in government, Dave did not take on the xenophobic right: he cleaved to them. And we all live with the consequences of this now. The problem is there is a mass base for reactionary politics as cultivated by previous generations of politicians and nurtured by a press at the peak of its influence. Cowards and liars have rode it to prominence, and others have tried compromising with it - seldom has it been challenged. The question then for anyone interested in progressive politics is to directly confront and win over its more amenable fringes, while demobilising and politically dispersing the rest. Well over a decade of appeasement has caused the present damage, given us Brexit, caused a surge in hate crime, and seen regular but smallmobilisations of the far right. By accepting Brexit but marrying it to a popular programme of the new class politics, Labour was largely able to see off the reactionary bloc in its heartland seats in 2017 while a lot of that vote transferred to the Tories as custodians of Brexit. If then the Tories are seen to be responsible for thwarting it, that poses a big problem for their voter coalition - and an opportunity for the far right. Unfortunately, many of the people who poured scorn on Grayling's warning at the weekend are the sorts who've spent the last two-and-a-half years telling everyone who'll listen that Leave voters were thick and racist, that the referendum should be rerun/pulled because it was "advisory", and they were manipulated by Russians. In other words, exactly the sorts of people least capable of understanding how reactionary politics can have mass appeal, and therefore the most clueless when it comes to taking it on. It might only be social media knockabout, but remainy/centrist rhetoric aligns with everything the far right have previously said about the liberal establishment, and could prove a boon to mobilising reactionary support in the context of a second referendum or Brexit's cancellation. There are a couple of other things worth thinking about. Building reactionary support might not trouble the electoral calculus of the main parties. It's hard to see how even UKIP can make a comeback without its best known figures attached to the project. But the price would be paid in even more hate crime, more far right mobilisations, more Tommy Robinson, and other awful political pathologies. Other forms of political violence can't be ruled out either. We saw how Brexit's toxic rhetoric culminated in a fascist murdering Jo Cox, and it could quite easily happen again. Now, none of this is about giving an imaginary far right a veto on how we go about politics now, as some of the self-same clueless centrists put it over the weekend, but it is about recognising that political actions have political consequences. If you are seen to trample on a democratic decision you don't like, don't act all surprised if you end up stirring anti-democratic political forces. If you strike an elitist pose, don't be shocked if right-wing populism finds itself a big audience again. Because in Stoke-on-Trent and many other places like it, the BNP and UKIP may have been and gone but the slab of reaction is there, latent, abiding, and ready to mobilise if it is antagonised and enabled.
A scene replaying itself night after night in drinking establishments across the land. A man, in late middle age, sat alone nursing a pint. He wears a creased suit and a defeated expression, and staring into the drink his mind races with what might have been. This was the London Road Ale House on Friday evening, and the gentleman concerned was Mick Harold, the chair of the local UKIP branch. When Tristram Hunt announced his resignation, Harold must surely have thought he was in with a shout of taking the seat. His party, he came second in 2015 after years of hard work and financial sacrifice. With a low turn out, with Jeremy Corbyn in the leader's office, with a government paralysed by indecision and dithering, and the media hype machine bigging up UKIP, there, right there, was his chance to hit the big time. And it was taken from him without so much as a thank you. Pausing only to disentangle himself from a parachute, the moment UKIP leader Paul Nuttall appeared at the North Staffs Hotel for Friday night's selection meeting, it was all over for anyone else's ambitions. And to make sure, the NEC were in the back pocket to overrule the branch's decision had it not gone the right way. After all, they couldn't well pulp all the 'Paul Nuttall for Stoke-on-Trent Central' leaflets his goons brought with them ready for Saturday morning leafleting. Contrary to my useless prediction and warnings about the localist flavour of this by-election, they decided to go for the big name. In as much Nuttall can be regarded as an A-lister. That said, and to be fair to the purples their leader was in a sticky wicket. He won the party leadership on the promise of targeting Labour seats though, historically, like all right-populist and fascist outfits they do best among small business and middle class voters. Their mistake. Nuttall therefore would have looked pathetic and frit to not follow through the logic of his position, despite having no prior association with Stoke. However, the UKIP leader has mined his past for appropriate biographical links. Sandwiched betwixt playing professionally for Tranmere Rovers and being there at Hillsborough lies the claim, revealed on the West Midlands segment of The Sunday Politics, that he lived in Shelton a short time as a student. Yeah, in much the same way I "lived in Liverpool" during Labour Party conference. Nuttall's first leaflet goes on about what a great MP he would be. Stoke-on-Trent Central can look forward to "representation it has never had in Parliament before". Whatever you might think of Barnet Stross, Robert Cant, Mark Fisher, and Tristram Hunt they did turn up to the Commons and represent the constituency. Nuttall came 736th out of 756 in terms of attendance at the European Parliament in the 2009-14 session. As the best predictor of future behaviour is past behaviour, I agree with Nuttall that our constituency can look forward to something novel. Still, doing the business on the green benches is only half of what goes on. Every MP is more than one woman or man, they are a small team of researchers and caseworkers. Here, Nuttall's record promises something exceptional too. Tristram, just like his Labour colleagues Ruth Smeeth in Stoke North and Rob Flello in Stoke South have offices in the constituency that deal with the problems their constituents bring them, and produce the work that makes for strong challenges to government policy. Nuttall's office operation is currently getting looked into by the European Parliament. Despite claiming office expenses and three staff to support his sporadic work in Brussels, no trace of his operation can be found beyond a PO Box. Can Stokies therefore look forward to their correspondence getting filed in the waste paper basket a la the luckless folks of the North West? His leaflet goes on. He promises to prioritise housing for local people (nudge, nudge, wink, wink), understands the pressure of uncontrolled immigration (so out of control that only 96.3% of Stokies were born in the UK) and calls for the abolition of the bedroom tax. Sounds identical to the platform the BNP took to the electorate during the 2011 council elections. It didn't work then, and Labour is going to make sure this opportunist pitch doesn't work now. If UKIP are so keen to imitate the BNP, I would ask the local branch to cast their minds back to the 2010 general election. They might recall Alby Walker, then leader of the group in the City Council chamber. He and his not-so-merry band of misfits worked hard and expected to snatch the seat from Labour off the back of Gordon Brown's popularity and media hype. Then Simon Darby, the BNP's deputy leader overruled local aspirations and imposed himself as the party's candidate. Walker resigned, coincidentally discovering that his party was racist along the way. He announced his own independent candidacy and came nowhere. Darby fell short by a country mile too, but still. Walker could look at himself in the mirror. He got steamrollered, but dusted himself down and fought back. Despite dwelling in the fascist gutter for the sake of a modest councillor's allowance, he salvaged some self-respect from the whole affair. I therefore urge that lonely man in the Ale House to think seriously. His dreams are shattered. He'll only ever visit Westminster on a Parliamentary tour. But he doesn't have to be one of the little people, he doesn't have to take a shafting from an uncaring career politician. He can win back his sense of agency with a display of the bulldog spirit. How about it then, Mick? You can't win, but the next pint doesn't have to taste so bitter.
Meet Melanie Baddeley. She is one of two councillors elected from Stoke-on-Trent's Abbey Hulton ward. She, along with a representative from UKIP, was returned by the local elections that took place three weeks ago. Melanie has been a councillor before, representing Abbey Green (as was) between 2008 and 2011. And today she was due to be made the deputy Lord Mayor. All in all, quite unremarkable really. And so would be the person of Cllr Baddeley if it wasn't for one blemish on her character. For nine years, Stoke-on-Trent's politics were disfigured by the presence of the BNP. Their brief stay in the council chamber between 2002 and 2011 earned the city a reputation for racism and intolerance. According to the council's own internal figures, funding bids lost and investment that never materialised thanks to the bigoted image they promoted amounted to hundreds of millions. At one point, a senior figure at Staffordshire University told me they had seriously considered pulling out and concentrating their campus in Stafford. The council lost staff, local public sector bodies and companies had difficulty recruiting from outside the area, in all it was appalling. All because a small fascist party fed off local disaffection by whipping up racism and scapegoating powerless ethnic and religious minorities for the city's problems. And who was one of the BNP's leading members at that time? None other than Melanie Baddeley. Since noting that Baddeley's nomination for deputy mayor might not be a good idea, events have moved on. For the Labour Group, Ruth Rosenau argued that it was not appropriate for someone who once stood on the politics of division to represent a diverse city. The local anti-fascist group, NorSCARF said "history as a BNP councillor made it very difficult for her to represent all the people of Stoke-on-Trent". Stoke North MP, Ruth Smeeth also said "appointing a "former" right-wing extremist to the mayoralty will divide our communities and repel business investment in our city." And so this afternoon when the assembled councillors filed in to propose their choices for lord and deputy lo and behold, Baddeley's name had been withdrawn. Amazing what a bit of pressure and the promise of a ceaseless headache can do. Imagine every function scheduled for her: allowances would have to also be made for her constant shadowing by anti-fascist protesters. Not a good look for a city desperately courting inward investors. Of course, Baddeley thinks this is much ado about nothing. She originally set her nose against the protests by claiming "I left the BNP following the 2011 elections and in the four years since I have continued to work hard in my community. I no longer support the BNP or any of its policies and beliefs." Council Leader Dave Conway also defended the initial decision: "I interviewed every prospective council candidate for the City Independent Group ... She no longer agrees with any BNP policy and has turned her back completely on far right politics." That's alright then. Except it's not alright. Actions have consequences, and some take a long time to be forgotten - Baddeley and Dave might want to ask Jean Bower's proposer about that. Of course, people change their minds and move on. But we're not talking about some naif who rolled up to the BNP and fell into representing them for four years. To earn that dubious distinction, you had to be deemed ideologically sound. You would have to have sat through the tedious "educationals" and Mike Coleman's rants about Muslims. You would have braved numerous anti-fascist protests, perhaps have had friends and family members who cut you dead and, of course, agreed to have had your name put on racist leaflets. And clearly the party must have been impressed by you to have fielded you as a parliamentary candidate in Stoke North in 2010 when, they thought, they were riding high on a national turn to the BNP. Sitting down with a gentleman in possession of a questionable taste in coats and saying "yes Mr Conway sir, no Mr Conway sir, three bags full Mr Conway sir" is hardly a repudiation of past associations and commitment to the very basics of normal politics. Nevertheless, seeing off Baddeley's nomination is an early victory for the opposition before the new council had even officially sat. It also raises questions about the new council leader's judgement. As we've seen, the City Independents' manifesto makes a virtue out of not having a whip. i.e. Party discipline. Yet when you're sat in a coalition with the Tories and UKIP, and you're going to have some unpalatable choices to make, how can you guarantee your group will vote your way? You can't, unless you get as many of them on the gravy train as possible. As a nice allowance and status is attached to the pompous, forelock tugging nonsense of the mayoralty, by proposing Baddeley he attempted to purchase her loyalty for two years - until those pesky troublemakers (*innocent face*) disrupted the transaction. Yet Dave might not emerge from this a tarnished figure. As he scrabbles around for an excuse, he could point out that he had "listened to concerns" and "changed his mind", and contrast that to the perceived image of his predecessor. Though if he does now, we will know where he turns to for advice on spin. The Melanie Baddeley affair, however, was completely unnecessary and calls this coalition's fitness to govern into question from the off. You're forced to ask yourself what the dear leader has next in his sights. As toddlers can't vote, are Children's Centres - which the City Indies once made a big song and dance about - going to be for the chop? In the name of cost-cutting, is Dave going to let his little Tory helpers hand more city functions to the increasingly imperious Matthew Ellis, Staffordshire's Police and Crime Commissioner? Is he going to row back on deleting the chief executive post and scrubbing out most of the press department, after hasty manifesto promises could land the council with huge constructive dismissal costs? And will his "immediate reality check" mean the City Independents won't go into the next set of local elections with a manifesto written in crayon? I suppose that one is too much to hope for.
Three local comrades sat in a McDonald's. In come a group of similarly-dressed men who, before occupying their seats directly behind them, each buy a Happy Meal. Who were these oddballs? They were the eight remaining members of Stoke-on-Trent's British National Party. Yes, remember them? It was only a few short years ago that the party - along with Stoke City FC and Robbie Williams - were counted among the city's three biggest claims to fame. Over the last decade, it had picked up nine councillors. The party came within a whisker of taking the elected mayoralty. They were barely off the front page of the local rag, and Nazi Nick himself dubbed Stoke "the jewel in the BNP's crown". And now it is reduced to eating brightly packaged food for the under-10s. How did this happen? When Brons and Griffin were packed off to Brussels in 2009, I'm sure they weren't the only ones who'd thought the BNP had hit the big time. A discredited Labour government was stumbling toward a heavy election defeat, and the Tories were in the full flush of hug-a-huskyism. Then, as now, the press and broadcast media was rammed with anti-immigrant scaremongering. Yet the fascists' hopes for 2010 were thwarted. Their parliamentary candidacies went nowhere and they suffered severe reverses in the local authority contests held on the same day. They were checked because, on the whole, the general election is the one that "matters". People file to the polling booths to cast a ballot for the government of their choice, not to protest. So yes, everywhere the BNP stood their candidates recorded modest increases but on the whole, their support stuck to the parties they knew. Unfortunately for the BNP, their toe-tip advance was prelude to a total rout. UKIP disproportionately benefit from Tory disenchantment. The BNP drink the anti-politics run off from Labour. But here there is a significant difference. UKIP is drawing on dozens of small scale splits from the Conservative Party proper - a councillor here, an association chair there. UKIP's story is part of the historic decomposition of Conservatism. The BNP on the other hand did not thrive the same way. In the main, they spoke to and temporarily won over the most backward sections of working class people. The lumpen and semi-lumpenised, those anxious about Asians Muslims, those who feared being out-competed for jobs and social housing. And, not to be underestimated, a layer of normal Labour voters for whom the BNP were the protest equivalent of the nuclear option. For their part the BNP blunted their racist edge and donned cheap suits. UKIP is sustained by an organic crisis of Toryism. The BNP a certain dropping off of the Labour vote. This left the BNP particularly vulnerable to the political winds. With the Tories in and Labour out of power, what's the point in protesting against the opposition?* The rug was torn from under the BNP, politics had undergone its periodic polar reversal. Hence in the by-elections following May 2010, and at the 2011 local elections the BNP's (anti-Tory) vote returned back to Labour. Political tectonics precipitated the BNP's fall. More often than not, when other (second order) elections are held on the same day as a general, candidates standing for the main parties do better than in "off" years. General elections push turnouts up, and those accustomed to only voting every four or five years tend to vote for their preferred party of government in secondary contests. This can sink smaller parties, and the BNP proved no different. Bloodied and smarting from hitting an electoral brick wall the BNP's rotten internals spilled out in messy leadership challenges, expulsions, splits, and scandals. The discipline of success caved like a soggy souffle as factional battles had free rein. Many fash simply gave up and the softer, gullible layer quietly "forgot" to renew their subs. Of course, being an open member of the BNP has its personal costs too. Is that a price worth paying when your party's going nowhere, when it hasn't won a single council seat or chalked up any success at all since its 2009 high point? The majority of the BNP's membership thought "no". The BNP in Stoke built up its position by faithfully applying the "suits, not boots" strategy. It put out rasping, ranting racist fare but also posed as community champions, as the authentic voice of white working class Stokies "let down" by Labour councillors who couldn't be bothered to knock on doors even at election time. If there was a gap in council services, the BNP's activism would plug the gap. Hence former leading figure Steve "Bin Bag" Batkin regularly knocked around his ward litter picking, helping with small household repairs and offering ornithology tips. Alby and Ellie Walker, the former fascist "power couple" kept a handle on their Abbey Hulton fiefdom by substituting themselves for the City Council's meals on wheels. Them leaflets through the door might have the BNP down as goose-stepping holocaust-denying morons, but they were handy with the flatpack furniture. Stoke BNP began careening in early 2009, before the European elections. A small scale split involved the party's branch secretary, Craig Pond and his henchman Terry Cope. Pond (who by coincidence, features in this week's Weekly Worker) fell out with the local BNP because both were, how shall we say, a bit "unreconstructed". That and, bizarrely, as a fascist interested in nuts and bolts policies Pond was frustrated that the party was only interested in general propaganda. His politics were best characterised by racism and library opening times. It was a crack, but as the BNP were still on the up it didn't appear to matter. The election came and went and in preparation for 2010, the local party picked Alby Walker - its council group leader - to contest the Stoke Central seat, where six of the BNP's nine councillors had their wards. However, as Griffin and his lieutenants believed this was the BNP's best bet of getting into Parliament, he unilaterally imposed himself on Barking, which was hitherto Richard Barnbrook's (remember him?) fiefdom. Griffin's lackey in the West Midlands, Simon Darby did the same in Stoke and Alby was turfed out. And so, hours after Griffin launched the BNP's 2010 campaign in Stoke Alby announced his resignation and decision to contest Stoke Central too. While that was the real reason, Walker's "good reason" was his discovery that the BNP were a bit racist. Yes, he really did say that. The election challenges came to nought, and the BNP lost four seats in the simultaneous council elections. It wasn't long before Ellie Walker also packed it in and made the leap from the fascist far right to the leftish (short-lived) Community Voice party. And come 2011 the national swing to Labour put paid to the remainder. Michael Coleman, Stoke BNP's "brains" since got a little bit of notoriety for saying racist things on the internet, but as an organisation they're broken. Coleman's "normal bloke" image hasn't been enough to prevent the jewel in the crown from disintegrating like a sherbet lemon. Even dear old Bin Bag has reportedly given up fascist politics and is now, apparently, a reformed character. In the two Stoke by-elections since 2011 the BNP have come nowhere, the mantle of anti-politics having passed firmly not to UKIP (as elsewhere) but the ragtag-and-bobtail City Independent group. So, while there are local dynamics pushing the BNP down these have not been decisive factors in their decline. National politics have done for them. Could the BNP ever come back though? You should never say never in politics. If the Tories get back in in 2015 it's unlikely. Their fortunes are better served by having Labour in power. Yet the dynamics on the ground are likely to be much different. UKIP are trying to corner the anti-politics vote, and might do well under Labour too. But they cannot feed off Labour in the same way they do the Tories. It will be a bottom feeding operation, picking up disenchanted and alienated votes as the BNP did last decade. With broadly similar messages to UKIP, a now-fragmented far right, and possible electoral competition from the far left in the shape of TUSC and Left Unity with any luck they'll remain a political relic - and a warning to Labour to never neglect its core areas again. * An understanding lost on TUSC, but not the working class voters they claim to be the vanguard of.
It will no doubt be a cack-handed operation, but that is - apparently - what the BNP are planning to do. This from Nick Griffin's "analysis" of Thursday's election results on the BNP's website.
Join us – or do this! If, for whatever reason, anyone who thinks of themselves as a nationalist isn’t prepared to join us and lend a shoulder to our wheel, then there is one other useful thing they can do: That is to join UKIP or to put in effort in the social networks to find and `influence those who have. Over the next few months, UKIP will sign up thousands of new, mainly newly politicised, members. Most of them are not merely patriotic, they are also instinctively, though at present totally incoherently, nationalist and racially aware. They don’t really belong with Farage and his internationalist big business set at all. It will not take many people within UKIP to set about the quiet, careful promotion of genuine nationalism in order to create an underground ideological tendency. Done systematically, this can bear big, juicy fruit for real nationalism in the future. UKIP is growing too fast to be stable and it contains too many fundamental contradictions to avoid explosive divisions in the future. Those nationalists who are not willing to be with us in the BNP should take note of this massive medium-term opportunity and get to work to seize it. We’ll be doing our bit too, but the more who move in and spread nationalist groundbait in the expanding UKIP pond the better.
One of the first things imbibed at far left school is that the state is essentially and irreducibly racist at an institutional level. But is that really the case? Well, officially, yes, it was. According to the 1999 Macpherson Report into the police handling of the Stephen Lawrence case, whose appalling murder took place 20 years ago today, institutional racism was “the collective failure of an organisation to provide an appropriate and professional service to people because of their colour, culture, or ethnic origin”. I am sure large numbers of socialists would accept the Macpherson definition, but sharpen it up by replacing 'collective failure' with 'active discrimination'. That said, at the time and not long afterwards on the then-notorious UK Left Network discussion list, debates around institutional racism, anti-fascism and 'bourgeois' vs 'proletarian' anti-racism were among topics visited and gone over time and again. Looking back at those arguments, which were pioneered by the cpgb/Weekly Worker on the far left, I thought there was some merit to their view that the ideology of the British state was officially anti-racist as part of an establishment-friendly embrace of multi-culturalism. And 20 years after Stephen, and one year after the bravura London Olympics opening ceremony, I still think that now. Some thoughts. 1. Capitalism and the capitalist state emerged soaked in the sweat and blood of peoples colonised, exploited, and enslaved by the early bourgeoisie. This was still the case until capitalism's recent history, where overt forms of colonialism have largely given away to the "hidden" economic exploitation by the west of the east and the south, and the subsequent rebalancing of the world economy away from the west and toward the east. In the former colonises, 'freedom' often led to weak state structures that tended to found themselves on a particular (local) ethnicity to give new governments a base of support. More often than not, the link between ethnicity and governance stretched back to the control of the colonial powers. Obviously the legacy of this has left deep, racist imprints on the ideologies of coloniser and colonised countries, be they labourist/social democratic, liberal, or conservative. 2. Capitalist societies are in constant ferment. As the dynamic nature of capitalist production ascends peaks and tumbles down troughs, state hegemonies, power balances, the relations of classes within and across borders are forever shifting. Befitting this state of affairs a constant churn of ideas rise and fall with the ebb and flow of conflict and economics. The state, as the first and last institutional guarantor of the prevailing system of things reflects change as much as it effects change. Its limits are the material wealth of the economy it rests on and the character of the class relations that structure it. Within a certain range states can possess large differences while retaining their identity as thoroughly capitalist entities. 3. The operation of markets spontaneously generate an indefinite number of appearances (ideologies), some of which will be racist. The state, which can embody, co-opt, and be changed by political and cultural struggles "from below" is also a political instrument with the weight of a diffuse commonality of powerful economic interests behind it. But unlike the day-to-day operation of the market, state power can be consciously utilised for policy implementation. For example, a diffuse official ideology can be promoted via the state's ability to legislate education, and therefore determine the content of what can be taught in schools, colleges, universities, etc. (The power to do so is not limitless, it is always conditioned by the struggles between classes and fractions of classes). Racism and sexism will always find an echo in the capitalist state apparatus, but because it is flexible it can institute policies that seek to tackle the attitudinal and material effects of prejudices, for example. However, total eradication is impossible because ultimately they are perpetually generated by the unconscious operation of capitalist relations. 4. The 'choice' of the British state to promote an officially anti-racist ideology is not really a choice at all. It is a culmination of a long process rooted in post-war immigration; of the identification by far sighted members of the establishment of the need to integrate racialised minorities (e.g. The Scarman Report); the slow but steady embourgeoisement and mainstream integration of *layers* of these communities; the struggles of these minorities and their allies against racial discrimination; the decline of organised labour and the inability of the labour movement to code race as a 'class' issue; the colonisation of mainstream politics and the state's administrative apparatus by, in the main, liberally educated people; and the decline of overt racism in popular culture. 5. Official anti-racism and multiculturalism were a specific political/cultural orientation pushed by Blair and New Labour to modernise the British state. As Thatcher had accomplished a new economic settlement but had put the legitimacy of the British state into question through her overt pursuit of class struggle policies, so Blair sought a new constitutional settlement. This meant devolved administration for Scotland, Wales, and London; peace and self-governance in Northern Ireland; city mayors and regional assemblies across England, a more modern-looking monarchy, and the promotion of a new British nationalism. Where it was once unashamedly white, protestant, imperialist, and xenophobic, the "new" nationalism presents itself as multi-cultural and multi-racial. In this view colour and religion doesn't matter anymore: liberal tolerance and self-identification does. 6. Since 1997 and after, as far as the state was concerned institutional anti-racism was the game. This was institutional in the sense it was consciously and actively promoted by policy and guaranteed by statute (and, in some cases, came attached with criminal penalties). This was not a mere matter of appearance behind which the taint of the racist state remained hidden. Rather the practices traditionally described in leftwing analysis as racist underwent a significant revision of content and were re-branded in accordance to the logic of "inclusive" Britishness. But like all nationalisms, there are always some outsiders. The new nationalism defines itself culturally against foreigners in general, but also groups portrayed as antithetical to western civilisation per se (radical islamists) or an economic threat to Britain in particular (asylum seekers, East Europeans). When government attacks these groups it doesn't do so out of malicious racial hatred in a manner akin to the BNP but to separate them from those minorities the state wishes to officially co-opt. i.e. "Law abiding" muslims, "genuine" asylum seekers, "hard working" Poles. 7. Some "native" Britons lie outside the new, anti-racist nationalism. The BNP and the far right are beyond the pale of mainstream politics because they do not accept the logic of official anti-racism. They argue minorities can never be a fully integrated part of British culture because of blood/culture/religion/whatever, and should therefore be removed. They are a crude throwback to the kind of ideologies the state used to promote when it presided over a colonial empire, and is therefore completely at odds with the new national project. To demonstrate how powerful this line of demarcation has become, public displays of overt racism by Tory and UKIP activists tend to be met with a swift boot. 8. While the state promotes official anti-racism, racists continue to occupy posts in the state apparatus. The police are still more likely to target asian and black people. Immigrants from non-white backgrounds have a harder time securing UK citizenship. Racialised glass ceilings still persist. This itself is not a solely a product of individuals with power and influence holding racist views, but reflects the racist ideologies spontaneously generated by capitalism as a system. In other words, the state as an entity that is part of and presides over capitalism finds itself officially combating racism and embodying it at the same time. The state therefore is not unproblematically anti-racist, and neither is it straight forwardly racist. It's a contradictory unity of both.
While I accept the basic points advanced, by way of a (sort of) reply to Rob Ford's piece in this month's issue of Progress magazine, here are a few thoughts on the far right. In my opinion there are a number of things working against a revival of the BNP (or a successor organisation) in the short-term. That, of course, comes with the caveat that this is no counsel for complacency. 1. The far right are certainly in decline as all their results from 2010 suggest. Internal ructions, the EDL, fallings out, splits have all played a part. But also the personal costs of far right activism are quite high. The racism of the BNP and EDL are out of step with an increasingly tolerant and accepting culture. Racism is not the done thing, and open BNP membership will likely cost you friends and good relations with some family members. 2. Sticking with the costs theme, anti-fascist activism has continued to make the far right an unpalatable choice for a political career. Putting aside debates on the strategic efficacy of certain approaches, and whether Unite Against Fascism or Hope Not Hate have more of a handle on tackling fascist organisations; getting leaflets shoved through your estate's doors decrying you as a racist, being confronted by anti-fascist demonstrations, sometimes ending up on the wrong-end of local or national media interest, or running the gauntlet of braying anti-fascists outside a count does take its toll. When the far right's fortunes are on the rise, the hassle can be dampened by internal camaraderie and a feeling the political winds have caught in your sails. When they're not and the whole ship is sinking, why bother putting up with it? 3. Labour has finally got its campaigning act together. As this piece by Jane Heggie and Mark Davis notes, it is vitally important Labour parties campaign all year round. The BNP were able to get toeholds in traditional Labour areas partly because, for whatever reason, the regular contacts of leaflet drops, canvassing sessions, party-organised community events did not happen. Campaigning is now taken extremely seriously by the party leadership, and constituency organisations in 'safe' areas who do little between elections are thankfully much rarer these days. 4. The axis of politics has changed. For former Labour supporters, voting Conservative as a protest against the Blair/Brown governments was unthinkable. But that nice be-suited BNP man who talked about Labour betraying white working class people, he seemed worthy of the occasional punt. It certainly forced the Labour establishment to wake up to the needs and aspirations of a taken-for-granted core support. Now, with a right-wing government in power supported by the LibDems, Labour is the main beneficiary of ballot box discontent. 5. The rapid collapse of the National Front after 1979 was helped along partly because the Tories adopted some elements of their programme. Winding the film of history forward to 2012, not only are the Tories of today determined to be seen to be tough on immigration, those lovely people in UKIP are gobbling up the political space for anti-establishment right-wing populism. Unlike the BNP, the whiff of racism about UKIP is much fainter, they have a chunk of the media cheering them on and, crucially, in a certain light Nigel Farage can appear charismatic. UKIP itself presents mainstream politics and the Labour Party its own challenges, but while its star burns brightly in the protest party firmament it is highly doubtful the BNP or any other fascist vehicle can regain the momentum they once possessed.
BBC Four's The Year the Town Hall Shrank is hard-hitting, powerful stuff. As a profile of Stoke-on-Trent, it is unflinching and uncomfortable. The fate befalling those on the end of austerity is deeply upsetting. As a critique of the ideologically-motivated cuts imposed on councils by central government, it's damning. Yet for all that, there is something unsettling about The Year beyond the tough subject matter. And last Thursday night's episode, which prominently featured the BNP, exemplifies it. "We have proven people will vote BNP in large numbers when the conditions are right" Michael Coleman, the "brains" behind Stoke BNP intones as we catch up with them in the lead up to last year's local elections. And, for once, Coleman was right. A few snatched words shared by Dave, a refuse collector, sums up the attitudes of that pissed off section of Stoke's working class who, at one point, had returned nine fascists to the Council chamber. He and his family were traditionally Labour voters and always supported the party at general election time. But he had started voting BNP locally because they considered themselves patriotic (but not racist), didn't like the idea of immigrants getting housing when his son couldn't get onto the Council's waiting list, and were frustrated with the local authority. Stoke BNP's 'Activist of the Year 2010' Mickey White hailed from a similar constituency. As Coleman observed of him, Mickey was "typical of new BNP members - disaffected, betrayed, can't get work, struggling to get anywhere with his family, sees no future for mainstream politics, and is looking for something new". While Mickey certainly has "issues", he talked about the appeal of the BNP and how they made sense of his everyday lived experience. At home, surrounded by his family, he observed how at his dad's workplace it was "the foreigners" who were getting all the overtime as the expense of "British blokes". I imagine spending 18 months on the dole has reinforced his perception that local working people were losing out. Mickey then holds up a couple of anti-immigrant tirades from The Sun and The Mail that "prove" what's going on (so much for their disavowal of the political consequences of their poisonous "journalism"). And at the same time, Micky looks up to Coleman, an admiration that borders on hero worship: "I respect everything he says and does. He speaks the truth". The Year tries to get at Coleman's motivations too. Parked near a Mosque as worshippers file in for prayers, he is asked "what do you see?" His answer is revealing: "I see the future of our country. I see a group of people who are well-organised, have money, and the support of the regime under which we live ... this was an English working class community. I don't like it. I fear it." Coleman voices similar sentiments about the new Mosque planned for Normacot, a sign, he says, of "an occupation by a body of foreign people". Unlike Mickey's path to nationalism, or the soft support evidenced by Dave, Coleman's commitment to the BNP is inseparable from a paranoid, racist loathing of anyone who does not pass his white British litmus test. As we have seen of late, his bigoted commentary on the summer 2011 riots got him in hot water with the law. Unsurprising considering that, by his own admission, the BNP want to "stir up and agitate". Unfortunately for the BNP, for all their campaigning (do they always go out leafleting dressed in trousers and matching blue shirts?), for all their grand standing and claiming to be Stoke-on-Trent's authentic voice, the people of Stoke spoke and returned Labour with a decisive majority. Not one BNP councillor retained their seat. And for Mickey, who appeared to believe he was going to get a seat in the multi-member Baddeley, Milton and Norton ward, he limped home with a feeble 3.4%. While I am a firm believer in giving fascists enough rope to hang themselves, there is much to criticise in their portrayal. Unlike The Year's treatment of Council Leader Mohammed Pervez (pictured), who is often depicted as bewildered and on the receiving end of Blast Film's sharp questions, neither Coleman nor Mickey were challenged on their beliefs. They were offered the opportunity to explain where they're coming from without criticism or contradiction, whereas Pervez was not afforded the same privilege. As we Big Brother fans used to say back in the day, the BNP got a 'good edit' while the producers had it in for the Council Leader. The biggest problem is the perspective adopted by the documentary itself, which reminded me of the Allegra Stratton affair. Stoke is treated as 'the other' to the burgeoning dynamism of the South East. There is constant talk of derelict factories, joblessness, public sector-dependency, immigration, and economic uncertainty. You are left with the impression the city is one giant council estate full of dilapidated buildings and benefit claimants. There is nothing about new schools, the new hospital, new housing, and the stream of ongoing regeneration projects. It is a place of irrepressible misery and irreversible decline. But in contrast to the South East, at the same time Stoke is an earthy place full of honest folk. Via the focus on the BNP (who, at the time of filming, only held five out of 60 seats), the film panders to the fascination sections of the metropolitan elite have with our homegrown fascists. They are to be poked at, laughed at, be appalled at. Yet, the BNP here serve as a marker of working class authenticity. They are a sign working class people are thick and mired in bigotry. By confirming themselves as the liberal intelligentsia's exotic opposite, their privileged position as opinion formers and decision makers is assured to their satisfaction - they know best. As American activists are fond of saying, Blast Films really should have checked their privilege. Nevertheless, this is compulsive viewing for all and not just the handful of Stokies who follow local politics in The Potteries. But just remember whose eyes you are seeing this through.
On a day that demonstrates the thugs of Golden Dawn in Greece aren't necessarily having it all their way; on a damp, cold island off the coast of North West Europe, a beleaguered co-thinker attempts to stir up some controversy:
It's likely the small band of A Very Public Sociologist readers who've returned to the fold post-reboot have a passing familiarity with the case mentioned by Nazi Nick. There is more than a hint of desperation to Griffin's tweet. It's hard to believe it's been three years since the BNP was something of a power in the land. In the grand scheme of things its two MEPs, London Assembly member, and 50-plus councillors (including threatening concentrations in Barking and Dagenham, and our very own Stoke-on-Trent) didn't really amount to much, politically speaking, but they attracted coverage way beyond those numbers. The BNP fed off anti-immigrant feeling whipped up by mainstream parties and the press, and sparked off panic right through the political spectrum when it appeared they were making inroads into what some now euphemistically term 'marginalised majority communities'. They congealed the logical end point of widespread immigrant-bashing and Islamophobia, legitimated it to a degree, and then pushed the political spectrum even further to the right on these issues. Looking back now, it's a wonder the BNP didn't do even better. What a difference a few years can make. When the shine had come off the BNP's polished turd, the party found itself losing its membership databasetwice, wracked by ruinous localsplits, subject to persistent allegations of of fraud, on the receiving end of an expensive and protracted court case, two leadershipchallenges, and, of course, disastrous election results that saw the BNP's council representation down from 50 to just three councillors. Then there is the small matter of recent events. You may not have heard about it, but the BNP are undergoing what is probably its most damaging and, possibly terminal split. Fascist "elder statesman" and BNP MEP for Yorkshire and Humber Andrew Brons announced his resignation from the BNP just yesterday. I expect the standing he has among the party's dwindling ranks will encourage a number of core cadre to follow him out the exit. Saddled with an imploding party and haunted by the spectre of continuing electoral irrelevance, Nick Griffin's tweet is an attempt to jumpstart the BNP's fortunes and, perhaps, distract his remaining loyalists from the crisis engulfing his organisation. As the one party that frequently and ostentatiously styles itself as the champion of Christian Britain (though, arguably, the BNP is the party least in tune with Christian values), and with the Islamophobia market currently cornered by the EDL, Griffin's publication of Michael Black and John Morgan's address and subsequent threat will probably see him arrested. The subsequent outrage and comment, of which this post is part, and the prospect of a court appearance might be enough to scoop up a few hundred gullible recruits and several thousand quid in 'defence fund' donations. But it could also help boost his position as the far right's most prominent personality and, in the event of a conviction, might prevent him from running again in 2014 - giving him the stuff from which to fashion a claim to political martyrdom. With the run of absurd convictions around offensive and tasteless Facebook posts and tweets, it's hard to see how der Fuehrer won't get his wish. Whatever happens, it will be a while before we truly see the back of Nick Griffin.
Stoke BNP councillor Steve Batkin (appropriately, on the far right of the picture) is known for being a spanner short of a tool box, but you would at least think he'd have learned something about handling the media in his 20 years of BNP membership. Alas, to assume such a thing would be to overestimate the man. Our Steve got himself pictured with these boneheads from Blood and Honour at the war memorial in Stone during his re-election campaign a couple of years ago. This photo was apparently in the possession of Alby Walker, until recently the darling of Stoke BNP, who passed it on to Nothing British. In an attempt at damage limitation Batkin was interviewed by Stoke-centric blog Pits 'n' Pots. Unfortunately for him and the BNP, Batkin is yet to learn that you're supposed to dampen down controversy; not fan the flames. In the third part of the audio interview, Batkin says:
I've always believed about 300,000 people died in the Jewish holocaust, not six million ... there's no way there was that many Jews in Europe at that time who could have sustained that amount of deaths.
Next time Cllr Batkin finds himself in a hole, will the local fash remember to confiscate his spade?
It's not everyday Nick Griffin writes to me begging for cash, but that's exactly what he's done. This morning thousands of BNP leaflets polluted Stokie letter boxes with their usual mix of lies and hate.
As most readers will be aware, the posties' union, the CWU has agreed a conscience clause with Royal Mail management that allows postal workers the right to refuse delivery of offensive material. As a racist, fascist organisation that would like nothing better than to see "Marxist" trade unions ground beneath the jack boot, the BNP have always fallen foul of the conscience clause. To get round this, the BNP have bundled their pathetic pleas for cash in an unbranded envelope featuring a glum, elderly couple and the legend "Ay up duck, thar's sum rate gud stuff fer Stokies in 'ere" (pictured). Don't be surprised if they use a repurposed envelope elsewhere.
There's no need to dwell on the begging letter itself, except to say Nazi Nick must think Stokies are as thick as his minions if he wants us to swallow the whopper that "tens of thousands of pensioners freeze to death in winter, even here in Stoke" (underlining theirs).
NB: The BNP have provided a free post envelope with their material. I'm only sayin'.
There's been a storm brewing in leftyblogland this week, a storm the comrades at Though Cowards Flinch are responsible for seeding. In a seriesofposts Dave and Paul take Iain Dale to task over his intention to run an interview with BNP fuhrer Nick Griffin in Total Politics magazine. They argue this will contribute toward "mainstreaming" and normalising the BNP as part of Britain's political life, and announce that if the interview appears TCF will boycott this year's Top 100 political blogs contest. They have been soliciting report from other bloggers, and HarpyMarx, Bad Conscience, Stephen Newton and The Provisional BBC have pledged to back the boycott. I imagine quite a few others will be signing up too.
However, I won't be one of them.
The only context I support a blanket no platform is inside the labour movement. Trade unions and student organisations are absolutely right to deny fascists openings for their politics within their structures, up to and including the outright expulsion of far right activists. The BNP is the modern day antithesis to everything our movement values and, in the unlikely event of a fascist government here in Britain, it will be us who gets carted off to the camps first.
But outside of the labour movement, no platform is a tactical question. The need to oppose and confront the BNP must be weighed against giving them the oxygen of publicity, while avoiding the twin pitfalls of portraying the left as running scared of the BNP's arguments and making the fascists look like free speech martyrs.
Unfortunately the BNP do have a platform afforded them by voters in 56 local council elections, the London Assembly elections and last year's European elections. Anti-fascism needs to be informed by containing this level of representation and throwing it into reverse, and that requires we tackle the BNP at the level of ideas, exposing the crap they spout and holding up to the cold light of day their less than stellar records as elected representatives.
Returning to Total Politics, I doubt Iain Dale will put Griffin through the wringer - but who knows? I imagine he won't want to be seen giving fat Hitler an easy ride either. Whatever the case, I don't see an interview in the seldom-read TP adding much to the BNP's mainstream profile - constant appearances on BBC and C4 News have done little to make the BNP any more acceptable as far as the overwhelming majority of people are concerned.
One more minor point about the boycott. By advocating action against TP, the TCF comrades have ensured Iain's interview will receive wider circulation than would otherwise be the case. Inadvertently, calling for no platform in this case means Griffin gets a broader platform.
NB On a slightly related note, Hanley YMCA organised a 200-strong youth hustings in Stoke Central on Thursday night. The panel included all three mainstream parties (MP for Stoke South Rob Flello stood in for Mark Fisher), Matt Wright of TUSC and Stoke SP, and Staffs Uni politics prof Mick Temple. Simon Darby of the BNP was also invited and had apparently confirmed but never turned up! Turning his nose up at a platform like this is far more damaging to the standing of the BNP in Stoke than being prevented from taking the stage. They had a chance to debate their opponents and they bottled it. Interested folk will find a report here.
At a secret location in Essex yesterday, the BNP's boneheads voted to amend their constitution to allow non-white members take out membership for the first time.
Of course, this was foisted on the BNP by the Equality and Human Rights Commission on pain of facing further action in the courts and I'm sure some of the hardcore Nazis in the BNP's ranks will not be best pleased. I'm inclined to agree with former Stoke group leader and ex-BNP councillor Alby Walker who said "I think some hard-line members will see this as a sell-out by Nick Griffin and leave the party." With any luck this might include a few in The Potteries who then go on to stand against the BNP in the imminent local elections. If any of them are reading this I say go on, you know you want to ...
Ultimately this won't make a blind bit of difference. You can't really disagree with Weyman Bennett, chair of Unite Against Fascism, who notes "I think that regardless of the vote, the changes are cosmetic and have only happened because the courts forced them to stop racist practices." Even in the unlikely event of an influx of deluded idiots from BME backgrounds, nothing will stop the BNP facilitating and sustaining the racist networks that in turn animate the organisation. The window dressing of a few non-white faces will not prevent it from being a danger to the labour movement and any kind of democratic politics.
Fortunately, so far the BNP have proven completely inept. After a decade of near perfect conditions for the far right - a decay of the Labour vote, the ebbing away of 'class politics', media obsessions with radical Islamism, alienation and atomisation, the largest wave of immigration Britain has ever seen *and* an economic crisis - their support remains around the two per cent mark, they have around 50 local authority councillors (and, apparently, another 50 parish councillors), one member of the London Assembly and two MEPs. Only a political leadership devoid of all talent could equal the BNP's dismal show of support.
But one must not be complacent. I pretty much agree with this piece from Mark Seddon. The EHRC ruling will make it easier for the BNP to market itself as a non-racist populist hard right alternative to mainstream politics. Because the BNP's leadership are too stupid I don't think they will pull it off (plus there is too much ugly political baggage attached to the name). But that isn't to stop something even more frightening in the future from emerging. An immeasurably greater threat to politics as is would be a neo-fascist organisation at peace with the presence of most minorities and wraps its message up with a strong dose of liberal tolerance. It happened in The Netherlands once.
In the mean time, immediately after declaring the BNP "had changed" they proved their democratic credentials by assaulting an invited journalist and publishing an endorsement by a fictitious black guy. So the new 'non-racist' BNP marks a significant milestone in its history with violence and lies. Oh well, start as you mean to go on.
Last week was pretty poor for the BNP. Nazi Nick's attempt to do a Pat Robertson and attract publicity by making outrageous remarks about the tragedy in Haiti was barely noticed by the mainstream media. Then there was the embarrassing news that Terrance Gavan, one of their members was jailed for 11 years for stockpiling a cache of weapons in his bedroom (has anyone else noticed a correlation between would-be BNP terrorists, middle age, and a tendency to still live with their parents?)
But the most damaging revelation came on Friday. Hours before Nick Griffin and his odious sidekick, Simon Darby came to Stoke to launch the BNP's general election campaign, Alby Walker, former leader of the BNP group on the council, announced that he too would be contesting Stoke Central - the same constituency Darby has been parachuted into! When fascists fall out they really fall out!
Actually, it's not too surprising Walker has behaved this way. Since supplanting the utterly tool-like Steve Batkin as BNP group leader, along with his wife and fellow councillor, Ellie, the Walkers have proven less gaffe prone than the hapless Batkin and have worked to portray the BNP as community activists (needless to say their "community work" is problematic). Nonetheless appearances count and they've served the BNP's profile in the Potteries well.
So Alby was most displeased when he got wind that the BNP's number two (in both senses of the term) had decided to contest Stoke Central. Given the record of electoral support for the BNP (six of the council group represent wards in the constituency) they can be forgiven for fancying their chances. But this support only exists because of the consistent work that's been put in - especially by the Walkers. By parachuting Darby into Stoke Nazi Nick is basically saying "thanks for all the work - now fuck off". Of course the fuhrer has form on this - remember how he elbowed Barnbrook aside in Barking? And as if to add fuel to the fire, there's a rumour doing the rounds that the English Defence League plan on contesting the seat too. Brilliant!
There is a bit more to this than sour grapes. According to Walker's statement supporting his Stoke Central candidacy, he's come to the conclusion that the political infighting - between and within Stoke's parties - is placing the regeneration and the welfare of The Potteries in jeopardy. The present stance of the BNP couldn't have helped either - they're very good at criticising but never offer much in the way of alternative policy (a stance at the root of a small scale split early last year).
Apart from Walker's drift into a more generalised anti-politics (it'll be interesting to see if he dumps the BNP ideological baggage), what the BNP does conflicts with his own practice as a "community councillor". As Edmund Standing points out, the BNP's political practice is about keeping the quasi-religious cult of the non-personality around Griffin on the road. Populist lies about immigrants getting a better deal than old folks are just that. They're designed to get the votes in and accumulate monies and prestige (if it can be called that) for the national leadership. BNP activists aren't actually expected to give a shit about the people they represent (the party's accounts certainly demonstrate the leaders couldn't give a hoot about the led). But it seems in Walker's case that he actually, genuinely does. In the end he had to make a choice - carry on being Stoke's public face for a bunch of chancers and criminals or carry on in his community activist mould. And within the terms of his own politics he did the decent thing. Were he not a fascist I would applaud him.
In fact, today Walker made the breach with the BNP official. He informed the City Council that he's stepped down from the BNP council group and resigned his party membership. There is also a strong rumour Ellie Walker will be resigning too with the possibility of a third. None of this negates a need for a strong anti-fascist campaign in Stoke during the general election, but these splits will severely blunt the BNP's chances.
In just over a week's time my magnum opus, 'A Reflexive and Value-Added Analysis of the Life History of Trotskyist Activists' will be handed in. I won't say it's been an easy beast to write - but by far the hardest part has been overcoming a sense of directionless and keeping motivated. Occasional bouts of writer's block didn't help any either.
But all that's in the past. At this very moment I am half way through the final draft. Approximately 45,000 words lie behind me. A similar amount are still waiting revision. In addition I have to re-do the introduction and conclusion, put together my appendices, join it altogether in one giant document and then print the jocker. The final act is more traumatic than it sounds. The powers that be want THREE copies.
As there's still a bit of a distance to go, I imagine blogging's going to be very light this week. Which is a shame as there's plenty I want to talk about. I quite fancied saying a few things about Stoke BNP quaking in their boots because Assed Baig, the president of Staffs Uni Student's Union, in a little-read article linked to a site listing addresses of local fash. According to local gauleiter, Michael Coleman, the home addresses of political opponents should be sacrosanct. Perhaps he should try telling that to BNP'ers all too happy to supply Redwatch with addresses and phone numbers of socialists and trade unionists.
There's also been a very interesting debate on a couple of blogs about the relationship of socialism to feminism. Harpy and Dave have got the goods. I would have weighed in with some reflections on this debate in the classic Beyond the Fragments. I still might when all is done and dusted.
Well, I leave you with a slice of music from 1999. IMHO this is probably the best dance track ever. If you have an aversion to trance, turn away now.
