The Pope in Spain: spreading poison

Few heads of State have ever managed to visit a country and slag off their hosts at the same time. Ratzinger just did it.

What is it with this Pope? Bad manners? A twisted propensity for poisoned confrontation? A rabid desire to interfere in a sovereign state's internal affairs even when it's against the most basic diplomatic protocol? Or is his a simple case of sheer ignorance?

How else can anyone begin to comprehend the poisonous comments as those spurted out by Pope Benedict XVI on his current official visit to Spain?

As he consacrated Barcelona's Sagrada Familia and paid tribute to the shrine of Santiago de Compostela, Pope Benedict lashed out at Spanish society and its Socialist-led Government, slamming the country's "strong and aggressive secularism" and its "form of anti-clericalism akin to that last seen in the 1930s". The latter was a clear nod to the Civil War and the days when Republican troops killed thousands of priests and pillaged churches in rage at the clergy's backing of Franco's military coup d'etat.

An interesting way, that was, to show gratitude to a country which just forked out €13,333 per minute (each minute!) - in the middle of its biggest economic crisis in decades - so that his trip could take place without a glitch.

And yet, whoever briefed Ratzinger forgot that few countries are as generous as Spain when it comes down to the Church's privileges.

Since Franco's death took away that appalling brand of national catholicism so dear to the Vatican's hierarchy, 21-st century Spain has not amended a single one of the Church's prerogatives. Amongst them, huge fiscal incentives and direct state-funding of the Catholic church. So much for Ratzinger's talk of aggressive secularism and parallels with the Civil War, each year the Spanish State subsidises Catholic activities to the tune of 6 million Euros.

But Benedict XVI went further. The former Hitler Youth member charged against Spain's recent easing of restrictions on abortion (note that legislation in Spain is still way more restrictive then anywhere in northern Europe) and took a swipe at the country's liberal policy on same-sex marriage, legalised by the Socialist Party (PSOE) soon after they office in 2004.

"Spain needs to be re-evangelised", were Joseph Ratzinger's exact words.

"The Church supports natural order when it comes to the family as an institution", the Pope added in Barcelona, calling for governments to introduce "economic measures" to incentivise what he dubbed "the natural family", so that "the woman can find her complete fulfilment at home (does he mean in the kitchen?) as well as at work". Incidentally, in the midst of his verbal diarrohea, the 84-year-old white-clad bloke did not say a single word about the enormous paedo scandal that has been marring the Catholic Church the world over.

Pope Ratzinger can blame modern times as much as he wants. If Spain's rapid de-christianisation is bugging him so much, he should lay the blame on the Vatican's incapacity to grasp humanity and do soul searching rather than spreading poison and prejudice.

Official: BNP launch their own dailies

It's a point we've remarked on time and again. A token negative adjective or two won't hide the fact that some British tabloids are doing some sound propaganda work on behalf of the BNP.

There is nothing new in newspapers or tabloids displaying political affiliation. The Mirror does it for Labour and the Telegraph has long-been known for its clear Tory sympathies.

Never, however, has the consonance between a party's narrative and the newspapers been so worringly clear.

In the run-up to the election, both the Express and the Daily Mail have increased their rate of bombastic anti-immigration stories. They're churning them out and recycling them one after the other, several each day, fitting exactly within the BNP's own narrative, nevermind the token smallprint that the BNP are "vile".

Today must be one of the most blatantly obvious examples.

While containing at least four negative stories (most of them grossly inaccurate) about foreigners, the EU, Muslims and "the immigrants", today's Mail is running an editorial titled Playing into the hands of the BNP. Sure enough, they call the far-right party "vile" and add that "[A]mong them are bigots with criminal records for inciting racial hatred and carrying offensive weapons".

But then, discussing the BNP's rising profile, the Mail remarks that:

"Of course, the explanations are not hard to find. In part, the BNP's success reflects public disgust over the Commons expenses scandal, which tainted every established party. But isn't it also a deeply worrying sign of voters' despair over finding a voice in the political mainstream for their legitimate concerns over mass, unrestricted immigration? Indeed, by seeking to close down debate on this highly sensitive issue, hasn't the political establishment played into the BNP's hands?"

The irony is unbelievable. The consonance between the far-right's party and the Daily Mail couldn't be any more obvious. Basically, they're ugly, but they've got it spot-on on immigration (as well as more) and they're the only party who are talking about it. Just like we do.

For three days now, the Mail's website has sported a story about the NHS, Muslim nurses and crucifixes. The BNP's own website gave it exactly the same angle.

More, this morning's main story for the BNP is the words used by the Daily Mail's own Melanie Phillips in an article published for an Australian newspaper.

Taking shots at the Tories, Phillips -as quoted by the BNP- writes that "millions of conservative voters have been brutally abandoned" and that "[T]his great swathe of Middle Britain wants a halt to immigration, the restoration of the powers of self-government ceded to the EU [...] and an end to the onslaught on British national identity and morality through politically correct reverse discrimination against majority values".

You bet that, to a BNP reader, that will sound familiar. It could be one of their own leaflets. Which is why the article was promptly picked up by the BNP's website.

The Express are no better. Their massive front page headline says STRANGERS IN OUR OWN COUNTRY. As usual, it's based on a blatantly distorted reading of statistics. Even though the rate of foreign pupils in English schools ranges from between one in seven to one in ten, both the Express and the Mail choose to spin it as "English-speaking pupils now a minority", as they selectively refer to 1,500 schools only.

It's like having the headline ASTON VILLA FANS LARGEST GROUP IN BRITAIN NOW only for the article to then reveal that figures are based on football fans in the West Midlands.

For all the trite protestations that it's a "taboo subject" and that the debate is "closed down", distorted immigration scare stories are now a daily feature of Britain's biggest tabloids - presented with relentless regularity to a minimum of 3 million readers everyday.

In the meantime, the BNP can only be extremely grateful.

2010 Election special: the BNP*

Part 4 of our Pre-election guide. Today, Daniel Hoffmann-Gill attempts to get into the mind of a BNP voter.

*Author's disclaimer: I despise the BNP and everything they stand for. I've spent a fair few years working both online and in the real world to disrupt and challenge their racist, myopic and unworkable ideas. Hence, I feel that I know their nonsense talking points inside out and, from a position of utter disbelief that their pseudo-policies engage reasonable minds, wanted to try and write and perhaps, start to grasp, the BNP voter perspective.

I urge you to vote for the BNP at the forthcoming elections because we are the only honest party, the only truthful party, that is willing and able to stand up and say the things too many are afraid to say. We will say them because our country needs saving from the horrors that have been inflicted on it by decades of inept and useless governance. We are the party to save Great Britain.

You will not hear "I'm not a racist but..." coming from me. I am a racist. We all are. Even you reading this, right now. It might not be obvious but we all have our deep-set personal prejudices towards different ethnicities based on our very real life experiences. These are natural and right; a defense mechanism against external threats that threaten our way of life here in the UK. And I can assure you, it is under threat.

Is it racist to point out just how much violent crime is committed by non-whites? Or that foreign imports destroy our indigenous industries, leaving us weak? Or that immigrants undermine our indigenous workforce and lower standards? Or that the Islamification of the UK brings with it severe repercussions for our human rights and our personal safety, under the deadly siege of terrorism? Is it racist to point out that the abuses of our democratic systems by these foreigners makes their very end all the more likely? At what cost? What are we getting from this one-way deal? Let us not forget our brave servicemen and women, who are spilling their precious blood in foreign land and for what end? At what cost? For far too long, Britain has been abused, exploited and taken for granted by those coming to our shores and at what cost? But no longer, if you vote BNP.

And many people already have done and yes, you may be comfortable dismissing some 1 million people who voted BNP in the European Parliamentary elections as idiots, but ask yourself this: what gives you the right? Who made you judge and jury? The BNP speaks to and for this ever growing silent majority. Is Political Correctness and fear limiting the scope and range of your ideas? Must not this fake idol but sacrificed at the altar of truth and you turn to us?

So dismiss us. Give us 'No Platform'. Attack the personalities of our parties with vile accusations but oddly never our raft of excellent policy. Drag up ancient dictums of our party to browbeat us with, even though we no longer believe in them. Do all of these things and know that it will only make us stronger, because men and women all over the UK believe in us to be their lone voice, speaking truth to power, in their moment of need as their country slips through their very fingers. Join us, your country needs you.

Daniel Hoffmann-Gill is an actor and writer. He blogs at Blurred Clarity.

[Tomorrow: Labour Left, by HarpyMarx]

May God Help You

A very small selection of grassroots Christian initiatives, inspired by this Killing Joke sleeve.

Archbishop Pio Laghi with Argentinian dictator Jorge Rafael Videla in the 1970s.

Pope John Paul II with Gen. Augusto Pinochet, 1987.

Luteran Bishop Ludwig Müller at the National Synod in Wittenburg, 1933.

Spanish dictator Gen.Francisco Franco with Cardinal Tedeschini in 1952.

Benito Mussolini with the Vatican's top hierarchy signing the Lateran Treaty, 1929.

Archbishop Cesare Orsenigo celebrates Adolf Hitler's birthday, 1939.

Why banning Islam4UK is a very good thing

Democracy does not mean that you can call for the stoning of all homosexuals or the massacre of those who insult Islam.

Isn't it touching to see the chiefs of Islam4UK , the same people who once famously held placards that read "FREEDOM GO TO HELL", whingeing and moaning that "freedom is turning into a dictatorship" on the day the government finally decided to ban them?

Isn't it stunning to savour the contradictions of a man, Anjem Choudary, who calls for a fundamentalist Muslim regime in Britain where every single citizen should convert to his particular brand of Islam, while at the same time crying for his "freedom of expression"?

Isn't it pathetic to read that "Muslims merely stand up and say that we are being oppressed, that our brothers and sisters are being murdered", while not a word is ever said about the thousands of Muslim brothers and sisters who are butchered every month in the name of Islam in Pakistan, Afghanistan and other countries (see this)?

True, in theory the ban on Islam4UK and its sister organisations al-Muhajiroun and al-Ghurabaa may be a bad day for freedom of speech.

But their track record is just intolerable. Democracy does not mean that you can demonstrate in central London waving banners such as "Massacre those who insult Islam", "Be prepared for the real holocaust" and "the Fantastic 4 are on their way". You can't call a press conference and call for the "stoning of all homosexuals" without facing the consequences.

Anjem Choudary, current leader of Islam4UK, is the same man who went on BBC Hardtalk (and shame on those who invited him) and said that the victims of the 7/7 atrocity were fair game because "only the Muslims are innocent" and if you don't accept Islam "that is a crime against God". He refused to condemn the London bombings, called the 9/11 attack "magnificent", publicly remarked that "Islam is not a religion of peace" and said that "the Pope should face capital punishment".

A year ago, his mentor Omar Bakri, now in Lebanon, said at a public meeting "Do not obey the British law" and "we must fight and die for Islam".

If all of the above (and that's just a brief summary) isn't incitement to hatred, violence and terrorism, than what is? How can normally commendable bloggers such as A Very Public Sociologist write that "[Islam4UK] do not intimidate their opponents" and that the ban is "indefensible"?

Even the idea that the ban may "force some people underground" is ill-informed. To start with, you have to balance it out with the effect that Islam4UK's ultra-inflammatory activities can have on community cohesion and the stirring up of tension and violence.

Second, one assumes that security forces would be keeping an eye on those groups anyway, the only notable change being that their odious public glorification of terrorism and abuse against sexual minorities and other religions (which is illegal) will have to stop.

The fact that Islam4UK isn't a "white" or "christian" brand of nazism does not make it any less dangerous. To quote journalist Johann Hari, "the real racism would be to hold non-white people to lower standards, as if their bigotries were less real or less deadly".

Fear of change

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Spot the difference

Preposterous, left-wing, trashy, crass, circus, partial, multi-cultural. The Daily Mail lashes out at Question Time.

The Daily Mail's support of BNP policies is descending into parody. Sod subtle machinations, spotting their strategy is as easy as piss.

Step 1. Littlejohn, Glover, Philips or Platell write entire tirades about the immigrants swamping the country, "ZaNu Labour" inflicting social engineering upon Britain, the nasty Muslims, the welfare state and all the rest.

Step 2. As suspicions of inflammatory content begin to surface, any of the above mentioned opinionators writes a token word or two against "the racist BNP"- better if garnished with adjectives such as vile, ogre and odious. Because: how can you say that the Daily Mail is racist when they've just badmouthed the BNP?

Step 3. See Step 1, only more virulent, with three quarters of the paper's content resembling Nick Griffin's shopping list.

Look no further than today's paper for evidence. While the entire country saluted the way Question Time exposed the fascists' appalling ideas, Nick Griffin complained that:

• the BBC is "hard left";
• Question Time was "a lynch mob";
• The programme should have been filmed elsewhere as London is "not my country anymore" and [the audience was] "dominated by ethnic minorities".

Now look at how the Daily Mail are reviewing the subject today (presenting it to a readership of 3.1 million people). The similarities with Griffin's language are simply striking.

• the BBC "is utterly in thrall to the left-wing agenda of the majority of its staff";
• "Question Time became a public lynching"
• the "multicultural" audience "bore little resemblance to the [...]average community";
  

Not only that. The DAILY MAIL COMMENT accuses Dimbleby of turning the programme into "a trashy Jeremy Kyle-type show", insisting that "the subject that WASN'T discussed was the official forecast that Britain's population will be more than 70million within 20 years".

And, icing on the cake, the same paper sports a story by DAILY MAIL REPORTER about "Labour engineering multicultural UK", which is exactly the language of...make a wild guess.

The BNP has the tabloids to thank

No other political party can say they enjoy the privilege of having at least three dailies echoing their policies.

As the most talked about Question Time ever is about to be broadcast, articles and blogs discussing the BNP are reaching fever pitch.

If Nick Griffin is currently walking around with a grin, he's got a long list of benefactors to thank. New Labour, for instance, for their systematic sticking two fingers up at the lower classes, successfully completing the race to the bottom in employment relations that was started by their predecessors.

Which leads us to the Tories, lest we forget, with an inglorious history lined with characters like Enoch Powell or Maggie Thatcher. In case you didn't know she publicly came up with words like "swamped by an alien culture" and was a staunch supporter of racist South Africa.

But for this blog, like we've repeated ad nauseam, it is no coincidence that the BNP's success is peaking at the time of the most intense tabloid bombardment on immigration.

Like, AngryMob writes here, "support for the BNP is the inevitable result of concerted tabloid lies about Muslims and immigrants in general".

For the past ten years, not a single day has gone by without the Daily Mail, the Express, the Daily Star, the Sun or all of them, pummelling in half-baked myths or outright lies about ethnic minorities.

Their "stories" have escalated exponentially in both frequency and virulence -and it doesn't matter that their top columnists occasionally drop a token remark or two about how "nasty" the BNP may be. Two paragraphs down the line they'll be reading straight from Nick Griffin's hymn sheet (literally, in some cases).

Remember that the above mentioned tabloids total a circulation of up to 6 million copies. Think of millions of Britons flicking through massive headlines carrying paranoid/horror stories about the immigrants- mostly without verifying the content.

No other political party, not even the Tories with the Telegraph or Labour with the Mirror, can say they enjoy the privilege of having at least three dailies reverberating their policies so blatantly. So sod your victim-posturing, Nick Griffin, you're talking shite again.

Also: "10 things you should know about the BNP when you watch Question Time tonight".

Porno-fascism

Have 'Express Newspapers' decided to be the official mouthpiece for the far-right?

First on Wednesday the Daily Express reproduced a tried and tested BNP slogan as a massive front page headline (see Tabloid Watch for details).

Now its sister paper the Daily Star (aka 'the Tits Gazette') is engaging in PR work for the English Defence League.

One thing is to interview EDL members to find out more about their motives and perhaps challenge their views. In the past two weeks both the BBC and the Guardian did something similar.

Yesterday, however, a whole article in the Daily Star was offered as a platform for the EDL to parade its press statements to the wider public.

The piece, signed by Ross Kaniuk, opens like this: "The English Defence League last night claimed it had been swamped with messages of support from all races" and is a textbook collection of pro-EDL PR soundbites without a single statement, question, or remark, to challenge their inflammatory views or balaclava-laced photo ops. Nothing, for instance, like a simple question about this EDL demonstrator (see photo below) as spotted on their Birmingham rally three weeks ago .

Even the rickety UAF statement they pasted at the bottom is worded so that it turns out to be yet another positive: "The EDL is looking for an excuse, which they say is silencing extremists and stopping terrorists".

As if that wasn't enough, on their home page, the EDL are now parading this: "the Daily Star had a poll asking readers if the EDL had got it right. The results? 99% YES, 1% NO!" without, of course, the slightest hint of irony in quoting a porn rag -whose polls normally consist of "Are curvy babes sexier than skinny beauties?"- as their showpiece advocates.

What is clear, however, is that pornographer, multi-millionaire and king-of-lost-libel-cases Richard Desmond is playing with fire. Some suspect that, with over £1,570,000 (a national record) paid in damages in 2008 alone, Dirty Des (as he's known by Private Eye) is thinking that satiating the masturbating contingent may not be enough and that becoming the country's far-right mouthpiece is the way to boost core readership.

In which case, expect journalistic gems like BB Noirin Kelly topless or Amanda Whipping Her Kit Off to frequently sit next to BNP or EDL-borrowed headlines. Porno-fascism has gone mainstream.

Choudary: the best gift to the fascists

Both fascists and Islamofascists share the same goal, that is racial tension and social instability. By Stan.

The activities of the English Defence League have cause a bit of a stir as of late. Some commentators noted how the mess that kicked off in Harrow in response last weekend is going to "do no one any good".

It's quite obvious that the current climate is an extremist's wet dream. On one side, it's increasingly clear that the EDL are not the innocent lillies they'd like to come across as. Unless you're hearing-impaired, you may have heard "we hate the Muslims" and other assorted inflammatory insults at their demos. Their repeated pleas that they're "neither racist nor far-right" are as convincing as Michael Jackson's statement that he most definitely only had plastic surgery twice.

However, here's the big however. Some on the left are also getting carried away. Whether denial, delusion, or both, they insist on envisaging a kind of "tremendously militant" grand anti-fascist alliance with Muslim groups that doesn't exist.

The simple truth is that the type of violence and anger that erupted at Harrow is only going to play into the hands of the right-wing tabloids and right-wing groups that have made a political mission out of victimhood and paranoia.

If that wasn't enough, three days ago, Islamofascist and terrorist-supporter Anjem Choudary issued a video. Defined as "a special address to members of the English Defence League", it reiterated his firm aim to impose shari'ah law all over Britain and to have the Islamic flag fly over Downing Street (watch the disgraceful video peppered with usual talks of 'infidels' here).

More, Choudary lashed out at "socialists" and leftists stating, amongst other things, that they're only sticking up for the British Muslims out of political capital and that they should basically piss off.

The left and the vast majority of anti-fascists can't go on ignoring this.

Sure, Choudary represents a tiny little fraction of the Muslim population of Britain, but in the same way, the EDL and/or the BNP are not representative of the country's public opinion. However, the tireless way both fascists and Islamofascists are working towards the same goal, that is racial tension and social instability, is quite shocking.

Each time Choudary and pals open their gob that's extra votes for the BNP. Similarly, each time the skinhead oiks are heard singing anti-Muslim slogans dressed up as pissed-up football chants that's more Muslim people closing ranks, playing the game of the "us and them" peddlers.

Someone needs to take a step back, have a cup of tea and focus on real problems.

Also read: "Hooligans, racists, bigots: we don't want your help".

Birmingham: more ugly scenes to come?

West Midlands Police announced they're not going to ban tomorrow's EDL march.

Last month, the shaven headed football geezers of the English Defence League were given permission to protest "against Islamism" in Birmingham city centre. That was met, as announced, by a counter-gathering sponsored by UAF (United Against Fascism) which took place outside the Bullring. As widely predicted, within an hour, mayhem ensued.

I was in the city centre when I saw the ugliest scenes since the October 2005 riots.

Innocent people (regardless of their ethnic origin) randomly having the shit kicked out of them by gangs on the rampage, hundreds of riot police effectively closing down the perimeter between New Street, High Street, Bull Street and Corporation Street, helicopters roaring in the air, tons of tension that lasted until the following day and violent scenes that were shown by the media worldwide.

None of the groups involved (and I underline, none of them, and this comes from an anti-fascist), emerged with much dignity. The police carried out over 30 arrests, and Birmingham went through an ordeal that was totally uncalled for.

So it is with utter disbelief that we learnt West Midlands Police refused widespread calls for a ban and are to allow the same demonstrations again tomorrow. In a statement, the police say: "At this stage we believe two groups intend to protest peacefully", adding that "the ability to protest is a fundamental democratic right", which sounds eerily similar to the optimistic statements in the run up to the August 8 riots.

While the appeal to democratic rights is an admirable one and the police are confident they can contain it, more consideration should be given to the overwhelming majority that does not want to run the risk of repeating August 8.

The simple truth is that Birmingham already witnessed how this has nothing to do with "the ability to protest". And, anyway, when the experiment was tried last month, it turned into complete chaos, with hundreds of Saturday passers-by seeking refuge in shops as violence erupted. So who exactly would benefit from a repeat of that?

Add to the equation that tomorrow England are playing Slovenia around the time of the planned demonstrations and the police panglossian approach appears even more puzzling.

(h/t Liberal Ladywood)

Rampant homophobia in Berlusconi's Italy

From beatings, stabbings and arson attacks to bombs going off in Rome's "gay village". Life for sexual minorities in Italy is not looking safe.

More news about Italy's rapid journey to a 21st century version of European fascism. In the past we've already documented the alarming rise in anti-immigrant attacks, the legalisation of vigilante groups (including the adoption of dubious symbolism) and the implementation at local and national level of punitive measures against ethnic minorities (i.e. the so-called 'kebab ban').

Italy's rampant homophobia is another reason for concern. Since some seriously ugly rhetoric was the soundtrack to the right's electoral triumph in 2008, anti-LGB attacks have been piling up. August 2009 was the worst month on record across the whole country, with a worrying daily escalation of street aggressions (including stabbings and attempted murder). Last week, a popular gay nightclub in Rome was the target of an arson attack, while last night two bombs were thrown in the midst of what is known as the capital's 'Gay Village'.

As passers-by chased after the culprits, they soon had to relent as one of the bombers produced a gun and managed to run off. Opposition MP Pier Luigi Bersani spoke of a "civil emergency" and called for the government to pass urgent measures to tackle homophobic crime.

****

On to more developments, in the past few days billionaire Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi announced that he's sueing a number of newspapers, Italian and foreign for writing about his sexual scandals and asking questions he slammed as libellous. As he's seeking damages of up to €1m, to many this looks like an attempt to gag the press.

Two days ago, a newspaper editor mildly critical of the PM's recent sexual scandals was publicly smeared with a front-page story (later exposed as unfounded) in one of Berlusconi's own national dailies as a closeted homosexual and convicted stalker. Some observers called it a latter day (and more effective) version of force-feeding castor oil to political opponents - a strategy the old brown shirts were notoriously very fond of.

Italian government to legalise vigilantes...

...And guess who's already volunteering?

With the controversy surrounding Italian Prime Minister Berlusconi's love for young female company and his ill-conceived invitation of new best pal Libyan dictator Colonel Gaddafi, the international press have plenty to talk about.

However, perhaps due to all of the above, something more sinister is taking place away from the limelight. The Italian government has just issued a White paper on law and order that gives the go-ahead to private vigilante groups. While the paper states that such groups will have to sign up to a licensing scheme, it's interesting to take a peek at those who are enthusiastically jumping at the opportunity.

Enter the Guardia Nazionale Italiana, whose website is currently recruiting "true Italian Nationalists and Patriots, people who are able to wear their uniform with pride and dignity, and for everything that it represents, are able to serve our land and the Italian people".

You may be excused if it rings familiar: black trousers with yellow band, black hat donning the Imperial Eagle of the Holy Roman Empire, khaki shirt carrying both Italian flag and a certain symbol (a black sun that is popular amongst German neo-nazis), black armband, black tie and black boots.

Yet any allegation that it may echo a certain period in history are dismissed as 'nonsense'."It's a legitimate way of combating crime", says Home Secretary Roberto Maroni. So why the garish outfits?

The answer comes the moment you take a peek at the people behind the vigilantes. Amidst retired carabinieri and assorted military, there he is, the founding member of the far-right Social Movement (MSI-DN, the group that rose from the ashes of the Fascist Party following Mussolini's death in 1945) and leader of the Italian Nationalist Party, both groups possibly to the right of the BNP.

So next time you hop to Venice, Florence or Milan for your long weekend break, don't be surprised if you spot vigilante squadrons marching along la piazza. You may have to get used to it. And quick.

Click here to find out more about why Italy is currently the most right-wing country in Europe.

Watch it, Italy

A strange mix of racism and authoritarianism is surfacing in Berlusconi's Italy

As parallels are constantly drawn between the current economic climate and the 1929 crash, we can at least hold on to the certainty that Europe is now a profoundly democratic place.

Italy, however, is a peculiar case. Since Silvio Berlusconi's landslide victory last April, it's as if the country started to passively give the nod to a disturbing series of populistic and semi-authoritarian measures. Whether it's style, rhetoric or actions, whatever the government is doing is increasingly greeted by a collective shrug. The result is that Italy's standards of democracy are lowering fast.

Berlusconi's victory wiped out of Parliament the radical and green left and dropped the decimated centre-left into a morass of petty infighting. That allowed the Government to hit the ground running. Propped up by the type of anti-immigration rhetoric that Britain would only tolerate if the BNP were in power, the new Italian executive agreed to some seriously draconian legislation. Immigrants are now officially b-citizens. One measure, for instance, requires their expulsion the moment they get a criminal record - and the grounds for appeal are strictly limited. In the meantime, reports of immigrant-bashing and racist incidents, in some cases involving the police, are just piling up.

In September, Giancarlo Gentilini, a pro-Berlusconi mayor (famous for his calls for "the right to carry out ethnic cleansing against the faggots") said: "I wanted our streets cleansed of all the ethnics groups that are destroying our country". He taunted the immigrants that "piss in our streets". "Let them go and piss in their own mosques", he barked, adding "I don't want to see any blacks, browns or greys teaching our children"… Only two months ago, members of the ruling Northern League, including MPs, took part in the pan-European far-right gathering in Cologne, the type of event you'd want to pop to if you fancied a picnic with the NF or Combat 18.

Next, the Government proceeded to set up 'special' classes for children of non-Italians at school. And while Berlusconi grabbed the headlines for calling newly elected Obama "suntanned", only muted grumbles met his new ad-hoc law that will grant the Italian Prime Minister (himself, that is) immunity from all criminal courts. What followed was the scandal at the Parliamentary Committee overseeing the state television network RAI. Even though the committee is traditionally chaired by an opposition MP elected on a bipartisan vote, the government rejected the centre-left's official candidate. Instead, they handpicked their own. This too was shunned by the general public as petty political squabbling.

And then came the student strikes. Unhappy with budget cuts proposals as detailed in the White Paper on higher education, undergraduates and college students alike took to the streets in numbers. And this is where it turns sour. After scuffles erupted in Rome when a mob of organised skinheads attacked unarmed teenagers (see pictures here), the hawkish former Home Secretary (and later President) Francesco Cossiga went on record saying that the best way to deal with such protests is to infiltrate them with agent provocateurs and shoot (or beat) at random.

"This is how I dealt with them when I was at the Home Office", he revealed in an interview. Cossiga was speaking of Italy's so-called 'years of lead' in the late 70s, at the height of the country's own terrorist crisis. Between 1977 and 1979, a period of high civil unrest, several demonstrators died in dubious circumstances. Some were shot by random fire during protest rallies. Although the courts were never able to convict anyone in particular, we now officially know that the government was directly behind it. In the words of Cossiga:

"The security forces should massacre the demonstrators without pity, and send them all to hospital. They shouldn't arrest them, because the magistrates would release them immediately, but they should beat them up. And they should also beat up those teachers who stir them up. Especially the teachers. Not the elderly lecturers, of course, but the young women teachers."

No doubt Cossiga is pleased that only in 2001, during Berlusconi's last stint in power, the Italian police pulled off that magnificent mix of Pinochet-style torture, mass-beating and planted evidence that stoked up the infamous riots at the G8 in Genoa. And they really did pull it off because no police officer will ever spend a minute in jail for that.

Yet, what's most disturbing is the Italian's sense of resignation, as well as Berlusconi's enduring popularity in the polls. The temptation is to say that, after all, Italy is the place where fascism was invented. But it wouldn't be fair on all the Italian trade unionists, socialists and liberals who lost their lives fighting for their freedom.

Stop talking about the BNP!

With the leaking of the party's membership list, the press has taken the bait like a fish would a juicy grasshopper

If it's true that a disgruntled former BNP member is behind the online publication of the party membership list, you've got to question the motives. Were the leaked details a traitor's attempt to embarrass the leadership? Were they, really? Because as far as betrayals go, this is no Julius Caesar material. The BNP spokesperson said that "someone out of malevolence or treachery has published it", but the press has taken the bait like a fish would a juicy grasshopper. The BNP, in fact, is receiving press coverage like never, literally NEVER, before.

Worringly, the amount of interviews their leaders are being given is now reaching the Cheryl Cole threshold. And the BNP are doing what they do best, posing in their usual concoction of victimhood and self-satisfaction. On the surface, they're moaning about privacy issues, human rights, threats and abusive phone calls. But they are pleased to announce that "the range of ages and occupations of [its] members disproved the caricature that the typical member was a 'skinhead oik'".

Paradoxically, the two papers that are covering the story like there was no tomorrow are the Daily Mail and the Guardian. While the former are repeating that the BNP are vile and all the rest, they're also echoing the opinion that "[a]lmost every shade of opinion, every walk of life, is said to be represented among the party's 12,000 members". As if the presence of one university lecturer, a vicar and a few former soldiers were shocking material. Two royal servants at Buckingham Palace? What were you expecting, Socialist Workers' material?

In the Guardian, you get Lola Adesioye writing this: "While I find BNP ideology abhorrent, the publishing of this list has brought home the fact that the people who belong to the party are ordinary British citizens [...] more understanding of the party and those who belong to it is, therefore, vital. This could be an opportunity for some open engagement and dialogue".

Really, Lola? You may start by watching this then. It's a BBC documentary called BNP exposed. As far as I'm concerned, the only type of coverage the BNP deserves.

"Jobs to whites"? Pack it in NOW before it's too late

Today's cliché that we've got to speak the same language as the BNP if we want to defeat them is, frankly, absolutely pathetic.

If you thought "don't we all just adore Girls Aloud" was today's most popular cliché in Britain, then you obviously haven't paid much attention. Try and find, in fact, a single day without an article or opinion column pontificating that "the only way to stop the BNP from recruiting new followers", as the formula goes, "is for the government to stop discriminating against white people". Everyday Labour, Tory or LibDem MPs, pay lip service to the fact that "it's true we just went too far" in trying to accomodate ethnic minorities. "All those jobs handed out to the them", "positive discrimination" and "council homes quaffed by non-whites" - "no wonder the BNP is rising". And if we don't start understanding their language, well then...there's going to be trouble.

Even MPs like John Cruddas, well-meaning and all, universally acclaimed as saviour of the Labour left, are repeating that "The Labour Party too often fails to articulate the concerns of large swathes of its traditional working class supporters" - those allegedly in awe of the BNP. Except that Cruddas hasn't explained what he means. No details, no recipe regarding how to best articulate those "concerns".

So what exactly is this language that would magically win people back from the BNP? Do they mean we have to go down the Daily Star route with its GIVE THE JOBS TO WHITES headline? Do those politicians and columnists really think that if they all decided to write elegies to Enoch Powell, the BNP-voting oik would suddenly go: "hang on, fuck this, I'm Labour through and through"? Does it mean that if all local Councils were persuaded to start advertising for "WHITES ONLY" jobs, the BNP would die a natural death? Or would "No Somali for council homes, we've had it up to here" do the trick? I mean, really?

As if at the height of the tax-dodging non-dom controversy you got politician after politician going: "Let's stop alienating our working class voters. Let's stop licking the arses of Abramovich & co, otherwise we're gonna hand all our voters to the Communist Party of Great Britain at the next council elections". Do you hear Tory and Labour MPs alike wailing that if we don't double cycle lanes pronto the Green Party will clear the tab at the next elections? Or, does anyone ever say, "we'd better not bail those banks out otherwise we're gonna get our own British version of the Red Brigades"? No, something tells me you don't. And that's because for decades now the left and centre-left, both in Britain and in continental Europe, have instinctively felt they had to fight a rearguard battle against the (far) right and its ugly rhetoric.

Today's new obsession that we've got to speak the same language as the BNP if we want to defeat them is, frankly, pathetic. If there ever was one way of vindicating the BNP and its ignorant, racist, nazi, hate-soaked policies, it'd be exactly it: appealing to race resentment -as if your job, your house, your life, were really all about your skin tone, no less, like in apartheid South Africa. A Britain like that would be truly, very, little.

The BNP on trial. Or is it freedom of speech?

The BNP and its leader Nick Griffin are on trial at Leeds Crown Court on charges of incitement to racial hatred.

The subject is a very delicate one and I can't help but wonder whether a ban on the BNP or the 'judicial route' are the correct way of dealing with the issue.

Sure enough, the BNP is a vile, old-fashioned, homophobic (or more generally, phobic), far-right organisation. But, like it or not, it expresses views that are not that uncommon across sections of society; views that are not helped by a permanent ban on the media, on the grounds that they are 'racist' or 'unpleasant'.

Honesty would suggest that - at this point in history- if damage on minorities and the Muslim community is being done, part of the blame is also to be shouldered by fundamentalist Islam or the preachings of Imams such as Abu Hamza or Sheikh Mohammed Bakri of Al-Mujaharoun. Meetings legally take place in this country -remember the Al Mujaharoun rally at the Birmingham NIA, just down the road- where appalling things are said about women's liberties, the 'infidels', or wiping the Jews off the map. Victimising the BNP won't solve a single thing.