On 21 February, Britain First (BF) marched in Manchester to promote ‘remigration’, a term from the fascist ’Homeland Party’ that they are using to attempt to rebrand and legitimise the idea of the ethnic cleansing of non-white minorities through mass deportation.
Anti-fascists in the city responded by mobilising for two separate counter-demos: one organised by Stand Up To Racism (SUTR), and one organised by a collection of local organised left and activist groups under the name of Resist Britain First (RBF).
BF turned out around 250 people at their peak (absolutely nowhere near the ‘tens of thousand’ that they claim in their report of their march), compared to around 400 people at each of the SUTR and RBF counter-demos (about 800 total).
The two counter-demos differed primarily in tactics. SUTR held their rally away from the BF route, first at Piccadilly Gardens, and then at St Peter’s Square, with a series of speakers, while the RBF counter-demo took a more active approach in disrupting BF, blocking the intersection of Portland Street and Princess Street until BF were rerouted, and then moving to intercept BF’s new route on Oxford Road, diverting them again.
The work of anti-fascists had a material impact on the BF rally - by the time they eventually made it to their destination at Castlefield Bowl, half of their numbers had given up and gone home, and the initially sunny day had turned into heavy rain. Even BF’s official report, despite claiming the event as a "massive success", is an entirely depressing account - complaining about being rerouted several times, losing half of their people before the start of the rally, and having to hold their rally in the torrential downpour. Tellingly, Paul Golding (the leader of Britain First) has put out a video of his account of the day, where he doesn't even attempt to claim the march as a success, instead decrying what he's called "extreme police sabotage" for directing BF into "trans communist socialist lunatics".
In that video, Golding calls for BF to attempt a second march through Manchester on 18 April. We should expect that BF will be doing everything they can to mobilise more of their supporters for 18 April, and organise to ensure we are prepared for an escalation from BF.
Police Brutality
The RBF counter-demo faced significant police aggression, particularly whilst holding the intersection. Police surrounded the intersection on all sides, attempted to kettle the demo by suiting up in riot gear and pushing into and beating the crowd, made several violent arrests of peaceful protestors who they were able to grab from the edge of the crowd, and deployed horses and dogs against the counter-demo to intimidate and threaten them - all of this while the counter-demo was far away from the BF march.
This is the consequence of handing the police sweeping powers to crackdown on peaceful protest. Police feel increasingly empowered to use excessive force, and face little (if any) repercussions for brutalising and making spurious arrests against peaceful protestors, or using dogs and horses to intimidate protestors by deliberately putting people in danger.
For as long as anti-protest legislation remains in place, police are allowed to use blatantly dangerous tactics, and there is no accountability for officers who use violence against the public, all of us remain at risk of police brutality. We must be prepared for this whenever we confront the far-right on the streets.
The Need for a United Front
Despite the fact that the anti-fascists outnumbered the far-right, and succeeded in disrupting BF’s rally, the splitting of the anti-fascist demos was a serious problem that must be urgently addressed.
The split allowed the SUTR demo to enjoy relative safety and comfort, at the cost of exposing the RBF demo to increased risk of attacks and arrests. The RBF counter-demo faced an aggressive police response and came into direct contact with the BF march at several points. On this occasion, RBF comfortably outnumbered BF by itself, and was able to defend itself from the police, but on 18 April, it is likely that both BF and the police will be out in greater numbers, and even more aggressive.
There can be value in diversity of anti-fascist tactics, and some anti-fascists, particularly those at greater risk of fascist/police brutality, may not want or feel able to take part in action that directly confronts the far-right - but the SUTR demo did not try to frame itself in those terms, instead diverting resources and people who would've been willing to stand directly against BF away from the RBF demo, which made the RBF demo less effective than it could've been, and higher-risk than it should've been.
The SUTR demo did briefly meet the RBF demo (although separated by a police line attempting to kettle RBF) as they held the intersection against the police, which may have somewhat softened the police response, and a handful of members of the SUTR demo did later join the RBF demo, but this was a coincidental collaboration, rather than an organised attempt at unity.
If SUTR repeats this diversion of resources away from direct anti-fascist mobilisation on the 18th April, it will put people in real danger, and risk allowing BF to outnumber the anti-fascists on the front lines, and embolden the far-right by allowing them a successful march.
Anti-fascists were successful in disrupting Britain First, but we must mobilise even harder against them on 18 April. We must be united in direct confrontation against the far-right, and cannot afford for this mobilisation to be split and left vulnerable by diverting resources to a counter-demo that shies away from direct confrontation.
Comments?We welcome replies, corrections and debate pieces. Contact us