Further to my previous posts here and here regarding the controversial decision to invite the BNP to speak at a debate on the European Elections of June 4th 2009, this is my account of what occured at the meeting.
Arriving at about 1830 (I had aimed to get there at 1800, but the bus hit a very expensive looking-car half way down Bathwick Hill, so we decided to walk), there were dozens of protesters from various different groups, including the Bath Activist Network, Unite, Bath Labour Students, Bath LGBT group, the various political parties, a group whom I suppose were “Anarchists” and some people who probably didn’t know what was going on.
For about 30 minutes everything remained reasonably calm as cars passed by and occaisionally beeped their horns, greeted by a return cheer from protesters. Doors opened a little after 1900 and by 1913 things started to kick off.
As punters arrived and attempted to enter the public meeting, a few of the Anarchists (with the black hoodies and scarves over their faces) sat at the top of the stairs to block people in. An elederly gentleman tried reasoned argument about democracy and freedom of speech and so on, but it fell on tin, hoodied ears. He tried to step over the teenagers but was tripped up. Eventually he managed to get in.
At this point, a few punters were able to hop over the line as they followed a policemen in. This could not have been more than ten or so, before more protesters began to copy the television and linked arms, blocking the steps as seen here:
By 1923, the entrance was totally blocked with only of handful of police around. Soon after, a group of BNP members arrived, most of whom conformed to the stereotype of big, shaven-headed types. Albeit in ugly suits. It was sad to see a few young teenagers who probably weren’t into being shouted at, but I didn’t really stop to chat.
At 1945, traffic was stopped completely and a second wave of police arrvied, numbering about ten. There was a lull while people waited for something to happen. The police put on their helmets. The speaker from one of the fringe parties (I understand the member ship was 2) made an empassioned speech that bemused the crowd.
A large police van pulled up at 2004 and a “senior police officer” proceeded to read a statement to the blockade claiming that the meeting was cancelled. (Image below).
The police, numbering about 25, formed a circular barrier around the entrance to clear a space. One by one, the protesters were peeled off from the blockade at 2023. (Image below) Most of them came quietly, and were ‘released into the wild’ with everbody else. A few of them decided to put up a bit of a struggle, but the police carried them out.
Though there were cries of “pigs” and “fascists” and other insults (like what they saw covered by the G20 protests) directed towards the police, I think it’s worth pointing out that the Bath Police did a really good job at what was clearly a very difficult situation. They weren’t equipped for dealing with crwods and it seemed like nobody was sure what to do, but in my opinion it was handled very well.
As the BNP group was admitted, at 2031, it became apparant that the meeting was not really going to happen. Ricky Knight from the Green Party took the stage by shouting face-to-face at the BNP candidate, there was chanting of “Shame on you” (presumably they were unaware of Al Murray’s comedy catchphrase) seen in this video:
By 2040, Liberal Democrat Graham Watson MEP was fed up and went home. Inside the building, the speaker sfrom the BNP and the English Democrats were ready to speak. A vote was taken and it was decided that they would be permitted to give their speech.
Back outside, somebody had got hold of a megaphone and was passing it around as every randomer suddenly had something to say”Um, er, you know. Fascism is bad.” Next. I was waited patiently for my turn. It didn’t come. Glyn Ford got to the mic to explain his position. Here he is talking about Jean-Marie Le Pen:
At 2048, the few people inside, now including Libertas, began to speak, though the crowd was mostly BNP. There were no questions. The protesters didn’t know this (I had a friend on the inside) and left as it got dark , probably time for dinner anyway.
Some police dispersed and traffice was reopened at 2051. Only a few people stayed behind and a group of policemen stayed around the door.
So, by way of a conclusion: Sadly, democracy was obstructed. Glyn Ford specfically said that although he was taking a ‘No Platform’ stance, he was no there to prevent the meeting from taking place, but the various other groups didn’t take this line. I don’t know what the teenagers thought they were doing, but it didn’t work anyway.
The BNP spoke, which some of the protesters tried to stop (and failed) and it was another own-goal for them because now there was nobody inside to listen and challenge them.
In my opinion, though I think it’s good there were so many demonstraters around from very diverse organisations, it was wrong to stop the meeting. I can totally understand why people operate a “No Platform Policy” but I, like many others, prefer to challenge and question. Chances are they’re damned out of their own mouth anyway.
All very messy.
I just stopped by your blog and thought I would say hello. I like your site design. Looking forward to reading more down the road.
The car on Bathwick hill may have looked very expensive, but it's not: a new mark 3 Mazda MX-5 (the car in question) is about £20k, see http://www.mazda.co.uk/showroom/mx-5/mx-5-standar… for more.
I was on a bus going up the hill and had to walk the rest. I couldn't see what all the fuss was about, there was hardly a scratch on it.
The BNP should be allowed to voice their opinions, as long as they don't commit crimes by inciting violence yadayadayada.
A "no platform" policy for (say) the Lib Dems should be: the BNP are not allowed to speak at Lib Dem meetings, the lib Dems will not provide a platform for the BNP.
What they did here was a "no _shared_ platform" policy because it was meant to be a cross-party debate in the first place! Frankly childish behaviour.
Libertas are a bit of a joke, their French candidate is none other than De Villiers, who was the Presidential candidate of the "Mouvement Pour La France". No prizes for guessing who they're like.
I have a feeling that this will lack coherence.
From what I can gather here, BNP is a far-right (aka Facist) political party/group? That's certainly a completely different political landscape than across the pond, where our Canadian Conservatives are more left than the US Democrats…
I don't know what their platform is, but facism is a legitimate politcal and economical standpoint; the Nazis were facists, but not all fascists are Nazis. At least in theory. It's a little amusing to see the opposite kind of fearmongering – in the US, there's the socialism/communism fear (they are surrounded by us pinkos,) but for once it's the fear – or perhaps complete disdain – for fascism that's being pushed.
I think quite frankly that the idea of an anti-fascist protest to stop fascists from talking is oxymoronic.
It also gets to me how supposed "Anarchists" could do it. Isn't their whole idealogy about no boundaries, no conformity, no compulsory government. In this case they compromised all these ideas.
Mr Bevan is quite right here. "Anarchists" are as bad as the BNP! They both don't like the idea of rule of law.
[...] But if you want to read about the evening outside and inside the building I recommend you to go to Hadleigh’s blog for eye witness accounts. Posted in Politics | No Comments » Leave a [...]
Well the BNP are not often considered a "normal" party. There is a anooty argument that they are actually a far left Party, because they are pro-protectionism and working-man etc. etc.
The main problem people have, and rightly so, is that they are almost openly racist. Their big deal is "chuck out the non-whites" but as the story goes, "First they came for the… then the…" so it would only be a short matter of time before Homosexuals and other groups would be persecuted. Not to mention, as you say, "socialists" like me!
They don't play by our rules, i.e. the main political parties. Politics is a dirty game, but they use other techniques (tattoos, shaven heads, BIG BIG guys, turning up all at once in a group, intimidation techniques, swamping the audience…) A lot of the "high ups" have criminal records for racist and violent crimes, as well as a general holocaust denying position.
What I hate though, is that people don't really know how to handle the BNP, and we get the same unsustainable arguments over and over again. "They're Nazis and we should ignore them" versus "I don't like them, but that's democracy." It's the protesters who blocked democratic debate (not the ones who just wanted to make their point) that do themselves discredit. The BNP are not symbols of free speech and you raise their standing every time they are heralded as "martyrs of liberty". Furthermore, in this case at least, they were more sensible than half of the protesters.
The organisers were asking for trouble by inviting the BNP. Yes, they paid they're deposit and that's democracy. It's just that this is the one aspect of democracy people (outside kindly-old-men and junkies like myself) care about.
That said, just looking at the BNP people sent a shiver down my spine.