Why aren’t you banning the far-right agitators?

I wonder if MNHQ ever passes deleted posts and relevant details onto the police. Some are clear attempts to incite racial hatred, so are potentially criminal in nature?

The latter point is one of the genuine conundrums presented by moderation; by deleting posts one effectively hides the worst material which justifies the need for moderation. Sometimes I kind of prefer the old days of Usenet, where pretty much everything stayed in place, and the onus was on forum users to argue against it, as it both presented a transparent view of what was being debated, but also encouraged arguments against offensive material...

(Not practical in the modern world, I know, though I still miss it somewhat.)

I'm waiting to see what the Government do about the people posting inflammatory stuff on Twatter/TikTok/Instagram.

Also amusing myself by spotting the latest "lines" from the agitators. The script is quite apparent.

It really has come to something when we are debating the minutiae of Fascism versus The Far Right / Extremism on a post in site stuff regarding concerns about Far Right* Agitators and that some posters continue to argue that there really isn't a problem.

I think one of the lowest points was when one particular poster claimed that they hadn't seen this, therefore it didn't happen. Despite the fact that it had been pointed out that the worst posts had been deleted, they still demanded evidence.

@CassieMaddox

"That's why you have to read more about fascism."

But if as you suggest the definition of fascism is much more complex than a wiki description and requiring much further research then my question is have all the posters using the word fascism or fascist done such further reading, because so far other than the definition I provided from wiki no one has been able to define what fascism actually is.

So without an agreed definition I return to your earlier comment :

"I'll say it again....not all brexiteers are fascists but all fascists are brexiteers."

And that without a clear definition of fascism this statement is meaningless .

That's why you have to read more about fascism.

Fascism relies on undermining rational thought by discrediting objective sources. And generating an emotional rather than logical response in followers. They do this by discrediting experts and writing them off as an "elite" who don't understand. Fascist leaders position themselves as the only person who understands the "reasonable concerns" and their behaviour increases fear and causes people to see the leader as the solution to "the problem" and only pay attention to what they say.

Once you understand that you start to see the tactics of Farage etc in a very different light.

Anyway it's a derail to the thread. But strongly suggest you look into fascism with an open mind. You might learn something.

@CassieMaddox

That article by Jason Stanley was awful empty drivel - how he managed to get it published is a miracle let alone be a Yale philosopher.

That said at least it is a better attempt at a definition of fascism than anyone with a swastika tattoo.

Let's look at what he said:

"The key thing is that fascist politics is about identifying enemies, appealing to the in-group (usually the majority group), and smashing truth and replacing it with power"

I mean that definition could equally apply to the Socialist Workers Party whose enemies are the wealthy or Just Stop Oil whose enemies are oil companies. Also what the hell does "smashing truth and replacing it with power" even mean? Sure it's got a catchy emotive feel to it but what does it mean? If "smashing truth" means spreading fake news then anyone spreading fake news is a fascist.

"But I really see fascism as a technique to gain power." So on that basis any politician that wasn't entirely truthful in their pre election promises or positions could be described as fascist.

"In the past, fascist politics would focus on the dominant cultural group. The goal is to make them feel like victims, to make them feel like they’ve lost something and that the thing they’ve lost has been taken from them by a specific enemy, usually some minority out-group or some opposing nation."

So that would equally apply to the Labour Party appealing to the majority that they have been screwed over by the Tories or returning to the original point anyone who voted for Brexit is by the above definition a fascist.

The biggest pile of crap stated was:

I" don’t really think of a fascist as someone who holds a set of beliefs. They’re using a certain technique to acquire and retain power."
That makes the power crept of fascism meaningless and subverts it to mean any political figure who is economic with the truth or allow fake news simply to gain power.

I think I will stick to the wiki definition of fascism - it's a lot clearer.

@Uricon2

"Oddly enough, if I see someone with a swastika tattoo rioting in the vicinity of a mosque I don't find it utterly impossible to believe that they might be a fascist. Tell me about all the people you know with swastika tattoos who aren't, I'm listening."

I am trying to establish what the agreed definition of fascism or a fascist is.

Now the person with a swastika tattoo may well also believe in :
Dictatorial rule
Militarism
Forcibly suppressing opposition
Belief in a natural social hierarchy
which can be but is not exclusively based on race
Interests of the state override individual interests
Strong state control of the economy.

Or alternatively they may just be unpleasant dickheads who think they are being controversial.

Equally someone may believe in the above points but not have a swastika tattoo. Mussolini to my knowledge didn't have a swastika tattoo but I think most would agree that he was a fascist.

But having or not having swastika tattoo is not a definition of fascism.

So returning to @CassieMaddox statement:

"I'll say it again....not all brexiteers are fascists but all fascists are brexiteers."

This is a pointless statement unless you can actually define fascists or fascism.

The intro paragraph to a Wikipedia page is not the best source about quite a complex subject. There's lots of better material. I like this interview:

https://www.vox.com/2018/9/19/17847110/how-fascism-works-donald-trump-jason-stanley

The key thing is that fascist politics is about identifying enemies, appealing to the in-group (usually the majority group), and smashing truth and replacing it with power

The online misinformation being spread by Tommy Robinson, Laurence Fox, Nigel Farage et al. is absolutely about "appealing to the ingroup" and "smashing truth and replacing it with power" - it is fascism.

Someone amplifying those messages is either are also fascist or a useful idiot.

"Whereas your entire definition of fascism seems to be based on seeing one person dumb to have a swastika tattoo."

Oddly enough, if I see someone with a swastika tattoo rioting in the vicinity of a mosque I don't find it utterly impossible to believe that they might be a fascist. Tell me about all the people you know with swastika tattoos who aren't, I'm listening.

Bloody decades of experience of these people is a contributing factor also. If every Muslim in this country was spirited elsewhere, they'd go back to officially hating Hindus/Sikhs/black people of Caribbean origin just like they did in the 60s/70s/80s.

ETA, well they still hate them also, just that they find Islamaphobia a richer well to dredge currently.

I feel like I'm banging my head against a brick wall here with the one or two posters who seem intent on gaslighting (yeah, you can use that against me, because you have nothing else in your argument)

I replied to ThisOldThang with what I felt was a considered and balanced reply after he asked me if I thought Brexit, Reform, etc were all were Far Right. He didn't reply. I note that he was also called out while commenting on a recent thread about Single Parents (let's face it, we are talking about Women here, and he really wasn't welcome as a man who is not a single parent)

I also note that he's been very vocal on many threads about benefits in general and constantly uses the phrase 'feckless' when referring to those without savings.

I have no problem calling this out. Advanced Search is there for a reason. I don't agree with his views, and I see a pattern. I feel that he is bordering on the very right wing agitators that we are calling out.

What pisses me off the most, however, is the fact that we (women, mostly) on Mumsnet are getting called out as having Zero Tolerance to Right Wing arguments with absolutely no nuance from him at all. There is an absolute belief that we are all Left Wing, and therefore wrong. He is not listening, or contributing to the discussion in any meaniginful way. He is putting words in our mouths.

He is the one with an Agenda, not us.

I won't be engaging further with him.

@CassieMaddox

"If you just make up definitions then yes of course."

Of course you are absolutely correct on making up definitions.

Except my definition was based on Wikipedia : en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism

Whereas your entire definition of fascism seems to be based on seeing one person dumb to have a swastika tattoo.

I think my definition is more substantive.

If you just make up definitions then yes of course.

Yesterday a far right thug was comfortable enough to attend a protest with his top off to show off his swastika tattoo. I'm not sure how much more fascist you need. But you keep minimising their existence 👍

@CassieMaddox

"I'll say it again....not all brexiteers are fascists but all fascists are brexiteers."

Doesn't that depend though on how you choose to define as a fascist though?

Personally I would define a fascist as:
Belief in dictatorial rule rather than democracy.
Militarism
Opposition is forcibly suppressed (although this equally applies to the far left)
Belief in a natural social hierarchy which can be but is not exclusively based on race (for example the caste system in India would also qualify as would apartheid in South Africa).
Interests of the state override individual interests ( which is equally applicable to the far left and to a degree liberal democracies)
Strong state control of the economy (which is definitely applicable to the far left and also to the moderate left).

On the above definition I can't imagine that there are that many actual fascists in UK society.

It's the level of discourse. Very difficult to communicate with someone who reads my posts and thinks I said everyone who voted brexit is far right.

Anyway, bored now. Glad it seems to be running out of steam now the far right idiots have realised just how much in the minority they are.

You are right, not all fascist will have voted in the referendum

It doesn't really matter, Brexit has been delivered, you got what you voted for.

That's not actually a fact, though, is it?

You keep repeating it, as if it's a fact, but it isn't.

It's just something that you think is clever.

If you can't comprehend basic language there's not much point in us conversing, is there.

I'll say it again....not all brexiteers are fascists but all fascists are brexiteers.

It's not a hard concept.

😂

That would depend upon how you define islamaphobia. No religion is above criticism.

Given your accusations of far right extends to people wanting their democratic will to be implemented (😂) then i doubt you're somebody that I'd listen to on this subject.

Personally, I'd consider Mumsnet correct to act upon incitement to hatred and violence, but not for criticism of the belief system and the problems it causes.

You're still falsely equating a desire to leave a political and economic union with the EU with fascism.

Your ignorance is off the scale.

Nobody at any point said that we should listen to the concerns of the far right. 17,410,742 people voted to leave the EU. The Conservatives then won a landslide victory on the basis of 'getting Brexit done'.

You don't like Brexit. So what? I couldn't give less of a shit about your feelz, because the democratic will of the nation was to leave the EU.

You accusing people of being far right, simply because you can't accept democracy (the fucking irony!), would be funny if it wasn't so insane.

How can it "make it worse" than it is now? Riots, attacks, buildings set alight. Its only luck no-one has been killed.

If the far right want to be listened to they need to learn to talk like adults.

Because telling them that makes fuck all difference, it makes it worse in fact. In any situation like this, the only way forward is to air everything and negotiate. You feel pushed out by immigrants, why? Is there anything that can be done about this without ‘sending them back’ or whatever? How about more investment in deprived areas? Would it help to meet with Islamic religious leaders (as some have offered) and actually speak directly?

These are not happy people. I’m willing to bet most were born into chaos, raised in chaos, and are now raising their children in chaos. They very likely have addiction in their families, were brought up with no money and feel like globalisation and the ‘bourgeois elite’ are determined to ignore them. Many will have been raised without dedicated father figures and see this as the ‘family they never had’. Their personal achievements will be very few and so this makes them feel special and included. They’re being told they’re thick, stupid and ignorant.

Also fascism is the epitome of the far right.

Stop strawmanning me to "prove" that people say "everything I don't like is far right"

Not all brexiteers are far right, but all the far right are brexiteers and "listening to their reasonable concerns" got us into this mess. I'm fed up of being told to pander to the far right. They need to grow up.