Leslie Seavor has emailed me saying:
How dare you insult the EDL on Twitter! You know nothing about it or its members.
I’m a member. I’m not far right… Just keep your moronic prejudice to yourself.
Well yes, I dare.
There is ample evidence that the English Defence League (EDL) is a far-Right racist organisation. Even if some of its members are not (and if not what are they doing there?), that doesn’t change the politics and ethos of the EDL. It’s like telling me you’e a pro-woman Islamist. Well, good for you, but that doesn’t change the realities of the Islamic movement and it does raise the question of why you remain in and defend a misogynist movement. Clearly you must agree.
In fact, I know the EDL better than most. I’ve and met with ex-EDL members and co-authored a report for One Law for All called Enemies not Allies: The Far Right which gives evidence on why we make this claim.
In the report, we write:
While the English Defence League purports to be a pluralist movement, its actions and the opinions of its leadership betray an unwillingness to distinguish between Muslims and Islamists and reveal a desire to target Muslims en masse. Its rallies often descend into violence and arrests. While the EDL officially opposes ‘Nazi infiltration’ of its activities, their events are frequently attended by members of Blood & Honour, Combat 18 and the BNP. Neo-Nazis have also been recognised as organisers and ‘official stewards’ of their events.
The EDL has made use of ‘non-white’ persons sympathetic to its cause to insulate it from accusations of racism. However, its British Sikh spokesperson Guramit Singh has made racist and anti-Muslim comments online, as well as at EDL rallies. He has also stated that he believes most Muslims support ‘extremism’. Its leader Tommy Robinson has spoken of England’s ‘Apartheid’ system and its ‘oppression’ of English people, making threats and abusive remarks which differ in tone from his televised statements.
Any impartial observer who genuinely wants to know more about the EDL should read our report and why the European or American far-Right is similar to Islamism – they are two sides of the same coin.
The far-Right and Islamists have similar ideologies, characteristics, and aims. Both rely on religion. Both use a language of hate and are extremely xenophobic, misogynist, homophobic, and anti-Semitic. Both rely on indiscriminate violence and terrorism to intimidate the population at large. They are dogmatic and punish free thinkers and dissenters. They use threats and scaremongering to push forward their agenda. Both are vehemently anti-working class and the Left. They believe in the superiority of their views and culture and deal harshly with anyone who transgresses… The world they have in mind is equally bleak, segregated, hateful and inhuman.
And whilst there are obvious differences within far-Right and Islamist groups as there are in any phenomenon, the differences are not fundamental. The ‘hate cleric’ Anjem Choudhary supports stoning to death as do more ‘liberal’ Islamists like Tariq Ramadan. The ‘liberals’ have merely adapted their language to better dupe public opinion. The same is true with the European far-Right. There is fundamentally little difference between Anders Behring Breivik’s Knights Templar and the EDL or Stop Islamisation of Europe (SIOE). What they want is the same; the language they use is different. The EDL and SIOE are merely better at duping the public.
You can read more about their similarities here.
As is clear from Lesley’s email, there is yet another similarity. Both deem any criticism an “insult” and a form of “prejudice”… But prejudice is against people and not beliefs and political movements and ideologies.
In the real world, criticism is called free expression and this is politics after all. If you can’t stand the heat, get out. Otherwise why not defend your organisation’s racism? It would be more honest.
Finally, if you honestly aren’t a racist and are surprised to hear what we have reported on the EDL, well I’d suggest you leave immediately and join campaigns like One Law for All.
Others have done so, including ex-EDL members who are now anti-racist activists whilst also being anti-Sharia and Islamism and ex-BNP-ers. In fact one of One Law for All’s very good activists is a former high-up member of the BNP, Alistair Barbour now blogs about the far-Right including on the One Law for All site. You can see his excellent posts here.
By the way, CEMB member and founder of the Northern Ex-Muslim Meetup Group, Sandbad, recently posted a guest post on Alistair’s blog entitled “Righteousness in Islam and BNP“.
You chose to blog an answer to this chap instead of replying to him directly. That was a dirty trick, pretty cowardly, really. I see what he means about prejudice. You’ve made up your minds about a mass of people you don’t know. I can’t support an organisation like yours.
Hm, She doesn’t know anything about EDL? page 21 – 35 in
http://www.onelawforall.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/Enemies-not-Allies-web-version1.pdf
Even for those who know nothing about Maryam, CEMB or One law for all, most people would after reading those pages, Well, I’m pretty sure of the reason for that document was needed, wasn’t EDL or Tommy , but the reason was veryy much (“connected” him and EDL.
I cant believe I’m reading such rubbish. Feminism in itself is a fascist movement, even more so than the edl and even islamist groups some might argue.
Search up about the misandric laws the feminists have and are trying to push on society.
Asking for equality of genders isn’t fascism. Feminists haven’t asked for anything else, they’ve never asked for a reduction of male salary or the prohibition of men walking around barechested. Neither the movement principles nor the movement’s actions have put men in disadvantage, and the whole idea of misandric laws is quite ridiculous, since I never felt any hate towards my or any other’s male nature. Are you sure you aren’t misogynistic yourself, maybe?
I’m not saying this about you Saman so don’t take it personally, but my experience tells me that most men who rant about organized misandrism and male disadvantages are actually trying to cover up a great deal of emotional and sexual frustration with the opposite sex.
1. Women are treated better in all aspects of the legal system. For instance, women receive lighter sentences and a higher chance of acquittal, simply for being women.
2. Men are significantly more likely to be the victims of violent crime (of which rape is included) than women.
3. Despite domestic violence being equally committed by women, for the most part only male perpetrators are arrested:
4. The feminist definition of domestic violence has skewed arrest and prosecution philosophies, resulting in having mostly male batterers criminally pursued, and female batterers left alone.
5. It is legal to circumcise male babies against their will. In some places, laws have been passed which forbid any attempts to make male circumcision illegal. Meanwhile, female circumcision is completely illegal, even though some types of female circumcision are equivalent in harm to male circumcision, and other types (a symbolic prick to draw blood) are non-harmful.
6. Men comprise 95% of workplace deaths.
7. Men commit suicide at over triple the rate that women do.
8. The vast majority of prisoners are men.
9. Men are doing worse in all aspects of the educational system, from kindergarten to university. Despite all these statistics, government funds women aid 100x more than male aid.
10. Men who are falsely accused of rape can have their names published and their lives ruined even if they are not convicted or charged – their accuser is protected and is likely to face no punishment, or a light one.
11. Reproductive rights. Men have none.
12. Parental rights. Men have virtually none. See below.
A woman can name any man she likes as the father, he gets a letter in the mail, if he does not prove he isn’t the father within 30 days—(suppose the letter gets lost by the USPS?)—he is now the father and must pay. He cannot contest it.
A boy who is the victim of statutory rape must pay child support to his rapist.
A man who is raped while unconscious must likewise pay child support.
A man who fathers a child and wishes to take custody may have his child adopted out against his will and essentially kidnapped
13. The majority of homeless are men.
14. Despite men’s need being arguably greater than women, government spending to help women is 10 to 100 times greater than that to help men. That figure is unrelated to medical spending.
15. In 2009/2010 it was $1,516,460 toward men and $57,562,373 toward women. In 2010/2011 it was $3,740,800 toward men and $48,331,443 toward women. In 2008/2009 the province dedicated $561,360 toward men’s resources and $98,983,236 toward women’s resources. (figures are for British Columbia, Canada, but representative of Western society).
16. Female-owned businesses get free government money for literally no reason other than being a woman (i.e. all other factors are equal, same size of business, same income, etc. etc. but the owner’s gender is different = money or no money.
17. On some airlines, men were banned from sitting next to kids on airplanes, simply because they were men. Why? Because men are pedophiles, obviously. This ban remains on some airlines, such as Air New Zealand.
18. Under a recent federal directive, men are convicted of rape in university campuses if the investigating board finds that the chances they committed the rape are at 50.00001% or greater.
19. The DOE policy in practice: Caleb Warner was accused of rape and expelled from the University of North Dakota, then his accuser was charged with filing a false report. He remains expelled as of June 2011.
20. Selective service.
So ask yourself, judging by the things that feminists want to install on society and have, does this movement sound like it’s trying to achieve equality or does it sound like fascism?
REFERENCES:
http://www.terry.uga.edu/~mustard/sentencing.pdf
http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/gla…les/vsxtab.cfm
http://www.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm
http://www.law.fsu.edu/journals/lawr…/304/kelly.pdf
http://www.boysproject.net/statistics.html
The EDL is not supposed to be a racist orginisation. It says in their mission statement: “The EDL is therefore keen to draw its support from people of all races, all faiths, all political persuasions, and all lifestyle choices. Under its umbrella, all people in England, whatever their background, or origin, can stand united in a desire to stop the imposition of the rules of Islam on non-believers.”
There are racist members on the EDL but if they say racist things, according to the orginisation’s own policy, they’re supposed to be kicked out.
A fascist organisation or a racist one can have members of all races. There are Iranian fascists, Sikh fascists and so on – are you saying that if there are ‘minorities’ in a movement or group, that it cannot be racist or fascist? Of course it can. the EDL is just more subtle in hiding its racism by using words that try to dupe the public. Islamists will also say there is no compulsion in religion but will be the first to chop your head off if you are an apostate. One must judge political movements not only by what they say and what impression they hope to give but by their practice, the realities of their movement as well as their effect on society and humanity.
The fact that Nazis are able to “infiltrate” the EDL at all says everything about the EDL. Nazis wouldn’t be able to infiltrate an anti-racist organisation, for example, or a feminist organisation, or a gay rights organisation, or an ecological pressure group, or a rambling club, or a thespian society, or a flower-arranging club. Nazis only ever “infiltrate” groups of football hooligans and organisations like the EDL. What could be the reason for this?
I dare too ..That makes at least two of us
Hear, hear! Very well said.