Today the Independent ran a story on the recent announcement that the EDL was to back the British Freedom Party. Initially, it ran under the headline of ‘Angry face of far-right protest prepares to storm local elections’, but was later toned down to the rather more sober ‘English Defence League prepares to storm local elections’.
Unsurprisingly, the coverage was not what you would call sympathetic, but at least on this occasion the likes of UAF and Hope Not Hate were not provided a platform from which to spew their language of anti-English hate, employing the mandatory (in their eyes) vitriolic epithets of ‘fascist’, ‘Nazi’ and ‘racist’ with respect to their objects of loathing: the EDL and British Freedom. Instead, the Independent drafted in self-styled ‘expert’ on ‘far-right’ politics, Dr Goodwin from the University of Nottingham, to provide a little context on this development for Independent readers who will not generally be aware of what has occurred in nationalist politics over the past twelve months or so. He foresees that there should be scope for significant growth for British Freedom, as he rightly acknowledges that there exists a mainstream political void in this country when it comes to the question of mass immigration and the desire to tackle it.
Websites inimical to nationalism have not been backward in offering their opinions on the recent tie-up between the EDL and British Freedom, the UAF site claiming that this agreement to co-operate was essentially a classic ‘fascist’ arrangement:
Strangely, they do not seem to apply this warped logic to their own campaigns and organisation, which mobilise considerable numbers of people to take to the streets and violently confront the EDL and members of nationalist parties. UAF is but the street wing of the SWP and the Labour Party, and has been since its inception. It exists to destroy freedom of speech through intimidation and violence, threatening anyone of whatever political persuasion who dares to disagree with their ‘no-platform’ policy. Neither the EDL nor British Freedom believe in the ‘no-platform’ position, and instead support free speech. Which side therefore, would you adjudge to be more ‘fascist’ in its attitude and behaviour? UAF is organised mass thuggery, yet peculiarly the state does not seem to be concerned about its methods and objectives.
More publicity is on the way for British Freedom, as Paul Weston is to be interviewed by the BBC over the coming week. The party has recently been given a boost to both its membership and visibility by its alliance with the EDL; what is required now is to keep the momentum going and to build an effective and disciplined campaigning party machine capable of winning elections. This is perfectly achievable, and if this process is handled correctly and intelligently, electoral success awaits the British Freedom Party, whereas the lies of UAF will be exposed for the hostile fabrications that they are.