21.07.2004

Racist to the core and packed full of criminal thugs

But should we call for state bans of the British National Party and the introduction of religious hate laws? Eddie Ford does not think so

The secret agent showed once again that the BNP is a cesspit of racism, anti-semitism and “criminal levels” of violence. “On a barrister’s advice”, a constant mantra of the programme, the vile comments we heard uttered by various BNP members were deemed “threatening, abusive and insulting” - in the legal sense.

BBC lawyers must have sat up pretty smartish when they watched the demented John Tyndall - BNP founder and would-be fuhrer - constantly taunt Michael Howard by calling him “Michael Hecht” - a reference to the Tory leader’s Jewish-Romanian original family name. Tyndall continued his Hitlerian attack on “Hecht”, fulminating: “This interloper, this immigrant or son of immigrants, who has no roots at all in Britain, has the effrontery to talk to us about what is alien. It is not the BNP that is alien.” In a grandstanding finale, Tyndall ‘did a Kilroy-Silk’ and affirmed that Africans have only produced “black magic, witchcraft, voodoo, cannibalism and Aids”.

Of course, the section of the programme which has attracted the most attention is where Nick Griffin, the BNP’s Cambridge graduate leader, tells cheering supporters that islam is “a wicked, vicious faith” and ventures into theological exegesis - claiming that the Koran tells muslims to rape white women and children, to “take any non-muslim woman you want”.

It is no accident that Griffin made this speech in Keighley, West Yorkshire - where it has been widely alleged that Asian men are ‘grooming’ under-16-year-old white girls for sex. This allegation became the basis for a Channel Four documentary, which was withdrawn at the last minute at the request of the police, thus inevitably fuelling paranoia amongst those who want to believe that there has been a cover-up by the ‘pro-Paki’ media and police.

Gwynne actually referred to the withdrawn documentary in The secret agent, saying that white men were involved in the ‘grooming’ racket as well, but apparently this was not the thrust of the girls’ testimonies. Naturally, this is all food and drink for the BNP, which found a real live-wire issue to exploit, hence Griffin’s demagogic appeal at the Keighley meeting: “You’ve got to stand up and do something for the BNP because otherwise they [the muslims - EF] will do for someone in your family.”

Significantly, during his outburst on islam and the Koran, Nick Griffin went on to say that if he expressed such viewpoints in public he would face a seven-year jail sentence and even went on to dare David Blunkett to prosecute him: “If Blunkett wants to put me on trial about whether we’re entitled to warn about the dangers of islam, I will be absolutely delighted.”

Griffin’s goad is well timed, if nothing else. In the past few weeks there has been renewed talk of ‘updating’ the Public Order Act and, more pertinently, the Race Relations Act, so that incitement to “religious hatred” will be on an equal legal par with incitement to racial hatred - ie, a criminal offence. The current ‘race hate’ laws incorporate religious groups only if they can be classified as a distinct ethnic minority community - such as Jews or Sikhs.

In a July 7 speech delivered to what is normally described as the ‘left-leaning’ Public Policy Research, Blunkett outlined his desire to correct this ‘anomaly’, saying he wanted measures put in place as soon as possible to combat “extremists” who use religion to whip up conflict: “We tried unsuccessfully to introduce an offence of incitement to religious hatred in the aftermath of the September 11 attacks, but I hope we will now have the parliamentary backing to put this in law.” Blunkett said the new law, which will probably take more than a year to introduce, even if it does not run into parliamentary opposition, would apply equally to islamic extremists who urge their followers to violence as to those who targeted muslims: “to far-right evangelical christians and to extremists in the islamic faith”.

Just so as there can be no doubt on our views, let us make them absolutely clear. The BNP are a gang of vicious, reactionary thugs who hate not only foreigners, blacks and muslims, but class fighters and communists too. However, we will not join in the chorus calling for them to be banned or even silenced under existing or proposed legislation.

Communists resolutely oppose the introduction of ‘anti-religious hatred’ laws. Not that we are in favour of whipping up bigotry and hatred against religious groups or communities, or that we think discrimination directed against muslims or Sikhs is okay - quite the opposite. We unequivocally defend the democratic right of individuals to embrace any religion (or reject a religion) as they see fit. But communists oppose all measures which give the authorities the right to decide what can and cannot be said, or to adjudicate as to what is ‘correct’ or not.

This is precisely why we want to ditch the utterly barmy blasphemy law, which accords the christian cult a privileged status - theoretically banning anything which might give all or any offence to believers in christ, the man-god. In this same backward spirit, Monty Python’s The life of Brian was banned by some local government authorities such as Torbay, meaning that the film could not be shown in any public authority-owned venue.

Quite frankly the last thing we need now is a situation in which such an approach is extended to include just about every religious faith or belief-system you can think of (moonies, scientologists, pagans, UFOologists, jedis, etc). This would lead to a draconian nightmare which would turn the democratic right to freely think and criticise into nothing but an empty husk.

The establishment’s reaction to the BBC programme has of course been predictable - something must be done. The Guardian, The Mirror and even The Sun joined together in an unlikely united front. A spokeswoman from West Yorkshire police - which not so long ago was deemed ‘institutionally racist’ - duly issued a statement saying that “we always prosecute where we find evidence of anyone being involved in racially motivated crime”. Barclays Bank has already closed down five accounts linked to the BNP, not all of which are registered in the party’s name.

Then there are those on the sharp end of the BNP’s filthy propaganda and often the boots and fists of its membership too. Iqbal Sacranie, the secretary general of the Muslim Council of Britain, argued that the BNP has been exploiting a “loophole” in legislation which outlaws incitement to racial hatred, but does not forbid “incitement to religious hatred”. Bary Malik, a local magistrate and president of Bradford’s Ahmadiyya Muslim Association, demanded that David Blunkett take action: “The home secretary should see there’s no room for a party like this.”

We would not dream of raising a finger to save BNP members from being prosecuted for assault, arson, threatening behaviour, etc. Indeed we communists, along with many trade unionists and other leftwing militants, consider it an obligation to physically stand alongside any community being targeted by the BNP or any such outfit. However, that does not mean calling for some sort of state ban or prohibition. While communists loathe the BNP just as much as both Sacranie and Malik, we do not trust the existing state - whether it is headed by Tony Blair or Michael Howard makes no difference.

In point of fact, communists fearlessly say that it is the British state, not the BNP, which is the main enemy. Britain forcibly colonised, savagely oppressed and ruthlessly plundered Ireland, India and half of Africa in order to further enrich the already fabulously rich. It was a past master of divide and rule. Religion was pitted against religion, tribe against tribe and people against people. 

Nor has the beast changed it nature. Today the British state demonises migrants and poor foreigners. It stands before the world as the most loyal ally of US superimperialism, a thug nation-state, ever ready to use nuclear, chemical or other such WMDs. Hypocritically and criminally it helped the US starve, bomb and then invade Iraq. And it is the state which ultimately stands guard over the whole rotten system of inequality and exploitation which breeds alienation, poverty and the social sickness which is the BNP. In extremis the very same state, and, of course, the class that stands behind it, would energetically promote and if need be unleash the BNP - just as the Italian capitalists did with the blackshirts and the German capitalists did with the Nazis.

Moreover, as history repeatedly shows, in all likelihood, if not certainly, anti-racist, anti-fascist laws would be turned against progressive and working class organisations and individuals. That is what happened in the 1930s.

Reactionary and backward ideas can only be genuinely eradicated by overturning existing social conditions. Meanwhile they are in general best fought in the open, where they have no room to hide and fester. Jason Gwynne’s film was an excellent example of this approach in practice.

Unfortunately, some sections of the left have a poor record when it comes to defending freedom of speech - indeed, at times they are the most vocal in agitating for state prohibitions on ‘extremist’ political organisations. Individuals like not-so-red Ken Livingstone and Diane Abbott advocate state ban on the BNP - their model being the German state which outlaws Nazi groups (also till recently the Communist Party of Germany and communists teaching in schools). The same goes for Searchlight, which talks approvingly of plans to ban online “hate speech”.

What is particularly sad though is when an avowedly Marxist organisation like the SWP chooses to go along with the liberal, pro-banning stream. While Socialist Worker will repeat the appeals of the Muslim Council, the Anti-Nazi League and Unite Against Fascism the SWP itself maintains a formally correct position. However this takes the form of silence - the SWP does not initiate, or take a lead, in demanding that the capitalist state to extend its powers and ban far-right/fascist groups. But on the other hand nor does it not voice any objections.

The is a word for this spineless opportunism - tailism.