Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Assault during Leeds anti-deportation demo

In Bloom said:
Meanwhile, in the real world, Redwatch do have those details up and fascists continue to be a bunch of violent, racist, potentially dangerous cunts.
OK, racism is wrong. But just because someone holds fascist views (which can just mean he/she says he supports, or is a member of the BNP), it doesn't mean that he/she is going to attack the next black person that crosses his/her path. I do say that this person is misguided, but it doesn't warrant being hospitalised for what is essentially a thoughtcrime. Also, isn't racially motivated violence against the law, in which case there is a judicary system there that should, in an ideal world, approiately deal with such hoodlums? Oh and yes I know as anarchists you think that the police and government are evil, but that's your opinion.

So really the main issue facing this self-confessed liberal is that I am not keen on vigilantism, it makes me think of angry mobs gathered around the homes of people who have been (often wrongly) accused of being peadophiles during the aftermath of the murder of Sarah Payne. Also if some innocent person was to be subject to a fash-bashing even though he wasn't remotely fascist because of mistaken identity, if would be a very huge own goal for your cause. But unless that actually happens, or if the time comes when the millitant anti-fascist movement mutates into the neo-Stalinist nightmare that I depicted earlier (and hopefully it never will although I have my fears) I am happy to let this matter drop and agree to disagree.
 
Tom A said:
OK, racism is wrong. But just because someone holds fascist views (which can just mean he/she says he supports, or is a member of the BNP), it doesn't mean that he/she is going to attack the next black person that crosses his/her path. I do say that this person is misguided, but it doesn't warrant being hospitalised for what is essentially a thoughtcrime.
For the last time, why do you think he was at the march?

Also, isn't racially motivated violence against the law, in which case there is a judicary system there that should, in an ideal world, approiately deal with such hoodlums?
When we live in an ideal world, let me know.

So really the main issue facing this self-confessed liberal is that I am not keen on vigilantism, it makes me think of angry mobs gathered around the homes of people who have been (often wrongly) accused of being peadophiles during the aftermath of the murder of Sarah Payne.
That was a myth, it never happened.

Also if some innocent person was to be subject to a fash-bashing even though he wasn't remotely fascist because of mistaken identity, if would be a very huge own goal for your cause. But unless that actually happens, or if the time comes when the millitant anti-fascist movement mutates into the neo-Stalinist nightmare that I depicted earlier (and hopefully it never will although I have my fears) I am happy to let this matter drop and agree to disagree.
So what you're saying is that unless antifa do something they have NEVER done before and has NEVER occurred in the entire history of the tradition which they are a part of, you'll drop it? Any particular time frame on this? Or am I supposed to prove that your entirely hypothetical anarchist dystopia will definately absolutely never happen?
 
Tom A said:
The fascists eventually won that one. I don't consider three years of anarchism (all of which at war) a successful revolution.
You're just shifting goal posts now.

Or don't you think that three years of de facto control over large sections of Spain is enough time and space for the massive anarchist, anti-fascist millitias that existed to off a few liberals?
 
i find it very difficult to care. however i do think that the hit and run style has done antifa no good here, because it was clearly uncertain who they were and why they were doing it. they should have at least left a few leaflets explaining that they were slapping a nazi scumbag so that the wanker wasn't helped out by the others.
 
In Bloom said:
For the last time, why do you think he was at the march?
I doubt I will ever know the exact truth of why he was there, as one person I doubt he would have been able to do much harm, one fash versus many non/anti-fash would be a very short battle.


When we live in an ideal world, let me know.
Will do.

That was a myth, it never happened.
Several news reports around the time disagree with you.

So what you're saying is that unless antifa do something they have NEVER done before and has NEVER occurred in the entire history of the tradition which they are a part of, you'll drop it?
Yes.
Any particular time frame on this?
No. It hasn't happened so there isn't any point in continuing this at this time.
Or am I supposed to prove that your entirely hypothetical anarchist dystopia will definately absolutely never happen?
That's for history to decide.

Edit to add: Another reason why I am going to drop it is cause even an argumentitave fuckwit like me realises that life is too short to be always arguing and confronting people. ;)
 
Tom A said:
I doubt I will ever know the exact truth of why he was there, as one person I doubt he would have been able to do much harm, one fash versus many non/anti-fash would be a very short battle.
Make up your mind. Is violent self-defence acceptable, yes or no?

Several news reports around the time disagree with you.
Several news reports which just couldn't quite manage to agree about the details and all later turned out to be a mixture of lies, exagerations and distortions.
 
bluestreak said:
i find it very difficult to care. however i do think that the hit and run style has done antifa no good here, because it was clearly uncertain who they were and why they were doing it. they should have at least left a few leaflets explaining that they were slapping a nazi scumbag so that the wanker wasn't helped out by the others.
This is true, like I say, clearly very badly handled. Though you can't blame some antifa people for getting frustrated with liberal twats like this Tom A cretin, going round comparing them to Stalinist Secret Police for legitimate acts of self defence.
 
It seems likely that Tom A wasn't around in the late 70's when these ingrates were beating people up with impunity. Including the likes of Tom A no doubt, or just anyone who disagreed with their fantasist, hitlerite, hate fuelled claptrap.

Never fucking again. :mad: :mad:
 
In Bloom said:
Make up your mind. Is violent self-defence acceptable, yes or no?
Self-DEFENCE (violent or otherwise) is always acceptable, what else are you going to do, let them walk over and stamp on you? However from my interperation of the OP it seems the "anti-fash" struck first this time.

Several news reports which just couldn't quite manage to agree about the details and all later turned out to be a mixture of lies, exagerations and distortions.
So it's an urban legend that the News Of The World ran a campaign to name and shame peadophiles, which didn't then lead to mass hysteria and several incidents of angry mobs gathering around the houses of supposed peadophiles?

In Bloom said:
This is true, like I say, clearly very badly handled.
Cheers for acknowleging that.
Though you can't blame some antifa people for getting frustrated with liberal twats like this Tom A cretin, going round comparing them to Stalinist Secret Police for legitimate acts of self defence.

Lets look at the original post:

before it started, two guys, at least one in leather jacket and according to vague reports one or both skinheads, approached the square at which we were meeting and attacked a man sitting on his own, leaving him with damaged (not sure if lost) teeth and massive amounts of blood flowing from his nose (he also seemed to be in shock).
Self defence, huh? :rolleyes:

It seems likely that Tom A wasn't around in the late 70's when these ingrates were beating people up with impunity.
Do you have links to prove that fascists were beating people up on any wide scale? Yes, the NF was big in the 1970s (although not as big as the BNP today), but you don't have to be a fascist to participate in racially-motivated violence. Attitudes have changed, racism isn't socially acceptble anymore. The way it's supposed to work is this: you attack someone (racially motivated or otherwise), you get arrested and then prosecuted. Oh and yes I bloody know that it doesn't work like that in practice, thanks to corruption and other issues.

Oh and before you go on about how the anfi-fash smashed them up and chased them off the streets, the real reason for the demise of the NF can all be attributed to a Mrs M. Thatcher appealing to the morons who would have supported the NF. Credit where credit is due, "bash the fash" didn't become "bash the Tories".
 
Tom A said:
Do you have links to prove that fascists were beating people up on any wide scale? Yes, the NF was big in the 1970s (although not as big as the BNP today), but you don't have to be a fascist to participate in racially-motivated violence. Attitudes have changed, racism isn't socially acceptble anymore. The way it's supposed to work is this: you attack someone (racially motivated or otherwise), you get arrested and then prosecuted. Oh and yes I bloody know that it doesn't work like that in practice, thanks to corruption and other issues.

I can't be arsed giving any links. Have a search yourself if you don't believe that fascist violence wasn't part of the NF's strategy at the time. All I'll say on that point is that in the city where I live the violence was so bad that it was featured in a 'World in Action' special. I knew many people who were beaten up (a pregnant woman on one occasion). Windows were smashed, meetings attacked, swastikas daubed etc.

The NF were bigger than the BNP have ever been. At their height they had 17,000 members and had numerous branches throughout the country. They were also able to stand over 300 candidates in a general election. Racism has not gone away despite your naive belief that it has.

Oh and before you go on about how the anfi-fash smashed them up and chased them off the streets, the real reason for the demise of the NF can all be attributed to a Mrs M. Thatcher appealing to the morons who would have supported the NF. Credit where credit is due, "bash the fash" didn't become "bash the Tories".

It was significant events in Lewisham and sustained activity organised by anti-fascists that saw off the NF. Thatcher and her "swamp speech" was political opportunism at it's worst and your talk of "morons" voting NF is typical of those who haven't got a clue what their talking about.
 
You know I've never heard anyone complain in this country that day2day Fascist are ruining there life, Are these brave Fascist hunters around to help the community in ways the community might actually want

Cleaning up estates of general mess and dirty
Bring old people food and helping around the house
Cleaning up estates of drug dealers (hey you might even get to hit people)
Opening Youth clubs,So the far right can't get a grip

Or does the usefulness of the anti-fascist only extend to shouting at brain dead racists and now and again maybe giving one a kicking

So if your community needs another group of people in the area threating violence then the anti-fascist might be what your area needs
 
MC5 said:
I can't be arsed giving any links. Have a search yourself if you don't believe that fascist violence wasn't part of the NF's strategy at the time. All I'll say on that point is that in the city where I live the violence was so bad that it was featured in a 'World in Action' special. I knew many people who were beaten up (a pregnant woman on one occasion). Windows were smashed, meetings attacked, swastikas daubed etc.
I confess I was actually born in 1983 and so cannot have any first-hand info regarding that. So yes, OK, I'll shut up about that one until if/when I can be arsed to read up on fascism in the 70s.

The NF were bigger than the BNP have ever been. At their height they had 17,000 members and had numerous branches throughout the country. They were also able to stand over 300 candidates in a general election. Racism has not gone away despite your naive belief that it has.
The NF one had one councillor elected in a by-election in NI (so says wiki), unlike today's BNP which has a few more. Although according to wiki the BNP only have a meagre 6,502 members (in comparison with the NF of it's height). Also I never said that racism had "gone away", only that you are more likey to have people object to being racist.

It was significant events in Lewisham and sustained activity organised by anti-fascists that saw off the NF. Thatcher and her "swamp speech" was political opportunism at it's worst and your talk of "morons" voting NF is typical of those who haven't got a clue what their talking about.
Maybe not morons (although racism is moronic) but misguided in their support for the fash. However the opportunism of Thacher worked in that it got people who would have voted NF to vote Tory instead.
 
stevepinker said:
You know I've never heard anyone complain in this country that day2day Fascist are ruining there life, Are these brave Fascist hunters around to help the community in ways the community might actually want

Cleaning up estates of general mess and dirty
Bring old people food and helping around the house
Cleaning up estates of drug dealers (hey you might even get to hit people)
Opening Youth clubs,So the far right can't get a grip

Or does the usefulness of the anti-fascist only extend to shouting at brain dead racists and now and again maybe giving one a kicking

So if your community needs another group of people in the area threating violence then the anti-fascist might be what your area needs
Totally agree. It is well documented that many people turn to the far right not because their are intrinsically evil, nasty, racist scumbags, but they are bloody pissed off with their current state of affairs, and the gutter press (particualy the Scum and HateMail) fuel prejudices against vunlerable sections of the society that become the scapegoat for these problems, which leads to people turning to reactionary, far right groups as a result. The way to deal with this is though reason, logic, and education, while taking proactive measures to tacke the problems that fuel the far right. Must be said that beating up someone for being a misguided disgruntled member of the working class is a very un-anarchist thing to do (not that anyone posting here would condone that of course, anarchists or otherwise).

Blame the film American History X. It made me think of fash as human beings, rather than evil monsters. :)
 
Tom A said:
Totally agree. It is well documented that many people turn to the far right not because their are intrinsically evil, nasty, racist scumbags, but they are bloody pissed off with their current state of affairs, and the gutter press (particualy the Scum and HateMail) fuel prejudices against vunlerable sections of the society that become the scapegoat for these problems, which leads to people turning to reactionary, far right groups as a result. The way to deal with this is though reason, logic, and education, while taking proactive measures to tacke the problems that fuel the far right. Must be said that beating up someone for being a misguided disgruntled member of the working class is a very un-anarchist thing to do (not that anyone posting here would condone that of course, anarchists or otherwise).

The guy who got the kicking, Was a moron full stop, Do anti-Fascists alsos give kickings to the extreme Islamic hate groups i've seen in finsbury park
Cause i would still find it out of order for a self chosen group of people to go around beating people up for the views they hold
 
Tom A said:
Totally agree. It is well documented that many people turn to the far right not because their are intrinsically evil, nasty, racist scumbags, but they are bloody pissed off with their current state of affairs
No, really? :eek:

Fucking hell, if you expect this to be a revelation to anybody, you can't be too bright yourself.
 
Tom A said:
Self-DEFENCE (violent or otherwise) is always acceptable, what else are you going to do, let them walk over and stamp on you? However from my interperation of the OP it seems the "anti-fash" struck first this time.
Because clearly the locally known member of a violent fascist organisation was at an anti-deportation demo to hand out sweets.

So it's an urban legend that the News Of The World ran a campaign to name and shame peadophiles, which didn't then lead to mass hysteria and several incidents of angry mobs gathering around the houses of supposed peadophiles?
The "mass hysteria" and "angry mobs" are an urban myth, yes.
 
In Bloom said:
That was a myth, it never happened.
O Rly?

What about this then:

Tabloid sets vigilante terror on innocent man

or this:

Doctor driven out of home by vigilantes

more here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/weekend/story/0,3605,416081,00.html

"...The News of the World's editor, Rebekah Wade, called for "vigilance not vigilantism". The vigilante attacks, of course, began within hours. In Manchester, a 300-strong mob surrounded the home of Ian Armstrong, who was mistaken for a paedophile because he shared a surname with a man named by the News of the World. They backed a six-year-old boy down his garden path and shouted, "Do you want this one?"

Once the misunderstanding had been cleared up, the News of the World scored a bizarre victory by parading Armstrong at a press conference. "I support the News of the World's campaign to name and shame paedophiles," he quivered.

The residents of the Paulsgrove estate in Portsmouth drew up a "mental list" of the 20 most likely paedophiles in their neighbourhood. They set about attacking the homes of those on the list. They admitted to suspecting one man because he lived alone and talked about how much he loved his mother. A 17-year-old boy was included because his girlfriend was 15. The protesters paraded their children for the cameras. A three-year-old held up a sign as if she was supporting her village fete. It read: "Kill Paedophiles!" Five innocent families fled the estate, terrified of their neighbours. The campaign's self-proclaimed leader, Katrina Kessell, declared that if they felt compelled to run away because of guilty thoughts then it was their own fault. It was during one of her many TV interviews that Kessell's three-year-old son was found wandering near a busy road half-a-mile from their home. Social services was alerted..."
 
In Bloom said:
Because clearly the locally known member of a violent fascist organisation was at an anti-deportation demo to hand out sweets.
OK, will take your word for it, if I was there maybe I would be more inclined to agree. Still sickened by the "death to the liberals" brigade on Indymedia who like to visciously attack any criticism of anti-fascist tactics, which makes me think along the lines of this: if the militant anti-fascists cannot take criticsm without resorting to childish keyboard-warrior tactics, it doesn't give their view much crediblity, does it? However I am prepared to accept that the genuine Antifa activists (whoever they may be) are a world away from the Indymedia keyboard warriors.

The "mass hysteria" and "angry mobs" are an urban myth, yes.

From http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/848737.stm

An innocent man who was mistaken for one of the 49 paedophiles named and shamed in a national newspaper has told of his fear following an attack on his home.

Iain Armstrong, 49, from Greater Manchester, was confronted by locals in the street after vigilantes thought he was a child abuser named in The News of the World.
So the BBC have now started publishing urban myths as fact? I actually know of one incident invloving a suspected peadophile on the very estate I used to live in about five years ago, so now I am told that my memory is an urban myth too, then?
 
In Bloom said:
Nobody is going to start crying their heart out over some huge fucking bonehead who showed up looking for trouble at a demo except other fascists.
Some people don't like violence of any sort, even if the people getting beaten shitless hold views they disagree with. I disagree with your views on lots of things but I wouldn't settle that by having you beaten shitless. The "crying your heart out" is simply objecting to pointless, unnecessary and/or excessive/disproportionate violence.
 
Nixon said:
He was there clad in Nazi gear at an anti-deportation demo.It sounds like he was out for trouble.Addmitedly one to however many activists isn't cool,but why turn up wearing that crap,if your not doing it to really rub people up the wrong way.No sympathy here either

Based on this kind of logic, then the police are presumably justified to wade in and discourage (with fists) anyone daring to turn up at Westminster with any form of banners or clothing that might annoy the Government who are gathered there.
 
TeeJay said:
Some people don't like violence of any sort, even if the people getting beaten shitless hold views they disagree with. I disagree with your views on lots of things but I wouldn't settle that by having you beaten shitless. The "crying your heart out" is simply objecting to pointless, unnecessary and/or excessive/disproportionate violence.
As hard as it might be for some people to understand, anti-fascism is categorically not about beating people up for the opinions they hold.

Ideologically committed fascists are dangerous people with a propensity for violence and intimidation.
 
In Bloom said:
Out of curiosity, what do you think this dickhead was doing on an anti-deportation demo?

He was out for trouble and he found it. No sympathy for the cunt from me.

Lovely. So if a Socialist Worker or ANLer is found to be protesting at a Nash gathering, that "cunt" is fair game as well?
 
In Bloom, it sounds like you need some excitement in your life.

Why don't you take your skateboard down the town centre like all your mates do and stop fantasising about being a "hard man".

Either that or join the army.
 
Back
Top Bottom