Archive for November, 2008

Mick Hume the Nazi?

November 26, 2008

Don’t prosecute fascist anti-Muslim hatemongers says ‘libertarian Marxist’

“As one who exchanged blows rather than opinions with the National Front in the 1980s, it gives me no pleasure to say this. But we ought to uphold the right of the British National Party to express its views, however vile, after Merseyside Police arrested 13 of its members for distributing leaflets. I’m afraid that free speech means freedom for fools and scumbags, too.

“The BNP pamphlet doled out in Liverpool was called Racism Cuts Both Ways. You can see it on its website. It argues that everybody knows racial hatred is wrong, but that few realise that ‘the vast majority of the real racism that scars Britain involves white victims from the indigenous community’.

“It lays the blame for much of this on ‘relentless’ discrimination against British natives by ‘an institutionally hostile ruling class’ but also claims that ‘our people are the silent victims of an epidemic of racist violence, sexual exploitation and murder’ by Muslims and blacks.

“… racism is not a crime. And while police chiefs may judge ‘racist content’ to be offensive, that does not make it a criminal offence. It should not be the job of the police or the courts to outlaw any ‘ism’, idea or ideology.

“Incitement to racial or religious hatred is a crime, but difficult to prove (the BNP’s leader, Nick Griffin, was found not guilty in 2006). And rightly so. We should draw a clear line between words and violent deeds. The old playground saw about sticks and stones seems a more grown-up guide than current policy. That leaflet is arguably guilty of incitement to elect BNP councillors….

“For this old libertarian Marxist, state action against a political party, however odious, is nothing to cheer.”

Mick Hume in the Times, 25 November 2008

Libertarian Marxist? Give us a break. The political tendency with which Hume is associated, once known as the Revolutionary Communist Party, long ago morphed into a bunch of cheerleaders for right-wing individualism.

Let us remind ourselves what it is in the Racism Cuts Both Ways pamphlet that has resulted in Bruce Kent, for example, demanding that the BNP should be prosecuted. Under the heading “Racist ‘Grooming’ What It Is – and How to Stop It” we find the following:

“All ethnic groups contain paedophiles – sexual perverts who target children, generally by ‘grooming’ them with presents, and then have sex with them. But in most communities these sickos operate alone, ashamed of what they do.

“One community, however, is different. Wherever there are large numbers of young Muslim men, groups of them team up to lure girls – often as young as twelve or thirteen – into a nightmare worid of sexual abuse, rape, heatings, drug addiction and prostitution. Some of these perverts are recently arrived ‘asylum seekers’, others come from settled immigrant communities and were born in Britain.

“But what all the Muslim sex gangs have in common – on top of their religion, with its low status for women – is that they never target girls from their own community. The vast majority of the victims are white, although Sikh, Hindu and West Indian girls are also targeted.

“This deliberate preying on girls from other communities – together with the refusal of Muslim leaders to condemn what is going on – show that these campaigns of sexual abuse are racist. They would never do it to their own girls. The British National Party has been campaigning to expose this scandal of racist paedophilia since worried parents first asked for our help back in 2004.

“Since then we have warned the police about Muslim paedophile gangs operating all over the country. In response to pressure from the BNP and from groups of parents, the authorities have made a few arrests, but all too often the police and the media turn a blind eye to the scandal and the suffering.”

What is this, if not an attempt to incite hatred against Muslims? Does anyone seriously doubt that this sort of vile propaganda doesn’t have actual consequences for the Muslim community in terms of increased hostility, discrimination and even physical violence? Of course, Hume is not a member of this vulnerable community, and therefore not on the receiving end of the BNP’s campaign to whip up hatred against it, so he can easily afford to take a “libertarian” view of the fascists’ right to “free speech”.

It is certainly true, as Hume says, that charges of incitement to racial hatred are difficult to prove and that Nick Griffin was found not guilty of incitement at Leeds Crown Court in 2006. But the main obstacle to a successful prosecution of the BNP is that Muslims (unlike Jews or Sikhs) are not legally defined as a mono-ethnic faith group and the fascists can argue that the promotion of hatred against Islam and its adherents cannot therefore be racist.

The government tried to overcome the problem by means of the Racial and Religious Hatred Act, but this was sabotaged by an amendment requiring that the words or actions complained of should be explicitly “threatening” (which the above passage from the BNP pamphlet is not) and that the prosecution must prove intent (which is in practice almost impossible). Consequently, the law against incitement to religious hated is almost completely useless.

Contrary to Hume’s arguments, the real lesson of the present situation is not that fascists should be free to incite hatred against a minority community without hindrance but that the government needs to revisit the current religious hatred legislation and bring in a law with real teeth which will enable the successful prosecution of anti-Muslim racists like the BNP.


Because Hume doesn’t agree with prosecuting the BNP he can’t be a libertarian Marxist he must be a right-wing Nazi? Ok that makes sense. Doh!

There seems to be a big difference of opinion between those on the hard socialist left and left-wing liberal libertarians on how to deal with the BNP.

Those on the socialist left advocate banning the BNP and locking up their members and not allowing them to say or do anything. Whilst the librels suggest we allow them to speek so their views are out in the open so that we can argue against their views.

It’s quite clear that both sides quite rightly loath and despise the BNP yet can’t agree on the best way to deal with them.

And those on the socialist left take an “agree with us or else” attitude and ridiculously suggests that who disagress with them that the BNP must be prosecuted and banned must be in league with them or hold some sympathy for their vile views.

In this case Mick Hume a man who clearly hates the BNP as much as the Islamophobiawatchers do is more or less being put in the same camp as the BNP because he doesn’t agreee with the Islamophobiawatchers that they should be prosecuted for insighting racial hatred.

Again it’s agree with us or else!

As for the BNP’s pamphlets they should be used as material for joke books because they are so stupid as to be funny.


Panicking about anti-Muslim stories in the Daily Star

November 25, 2008

Media activists slam Daily Star over ‘inflammatory anti-Muslim’ stories

Media campaigners condemned the right-wing trash tabloid Daily Star yesterday for running “highly inflammatory” stories against Britain’s Muslim community.

Over the last month, the paper has run stories with headlines including “BBC puts Muslims above You,” “Killjoys ban white Xmas,” “Poppies banned in terror hot spots,” “Muslim snub to forces’ and “Muslim nutters still preaching hate on our streets.”

In a letter to owner Richard Desmond and editor Dawn Neeson, Media Workers Against the War (MWAW) pointed out: “These headlines and the stories that go with them twist flimsy and misleading ‘evidence’ to pander to ignorance and prejudice against Muslims.”

National Union of Journalists general secretary Jeremy Dear noted that union members at the Daily Star have been at the forefront of campaigns against the use of their papers to publish material which goes against both the letter and spirit of the union’s code of conduct. “Journalists should not be forced to write articles that encourage discrimination and hatred in our society,” he added.

Muslim Association of Britain vice-president Mokhtar Badri regretted that any paper is running stories that don’t reflect the reality. “It is inflammatory to target a section of society in a way that only raises tensions between different sections of that society,” he said.

MWAW has also set up a petition which can be signed at

Morning Star, 25 November 2008

Posted on Tuesday, November 25, 2008 by Registered CommenterMartin Sullivan in , , |

MWAW: open letter to Richard Desmond

Media Workers Against the War (MWAW) have written an open letter to Richard Desmond, proprietor of the Daily Star and the newspaper’s editor, Dawn Neeson, concerning the paper’s coverage of stories on Muslims in the past few weeks.

These stories have all appeared on the ENGAGE website and can be found in the news items and archive folders.

The letter by MWAW can be read here. To add your signature to the letter click here.

ENGAGE, 24 November 2008

Silly stupid stories in a silly stupid tabloid newspaper are blown up into something bigger than they are by Media Workers Against The War.

How many people take what is printed in the Daily Star seriously? More to the point how many people who take anything that is printed in tabloid newspapers seriously? Very few we would guess.

This panic about the Daily Star printing anti Muslim stories reflects a general view amongst the Islamophobiwatchers of the white working class as a gullabble morons who will believe anything they read about ethinic minorities in the papers and will go out and beat up Muslims based on ridiculous stories about Muslims “banning” Christmas.

And this view reflects a fear amongst left-wing socialists of an undercurrent of violent racism brewing amongst white working class people which only takes a few stories in the tabloid press about Muslims banning Xmas to bring it exploding to the surface.