Tuesday, 14 June 2011

Keeping Things in Perspective: Some Comradely Comments on the Slimelight Campaign

Guest Post by John Eden

[I have made my own statement about the LMHR petition as part of a previous post, and I disagree somewhat with John - my position is that, for all that I might criticise  LMHR's formulations, I think we should not only call for the gig to be cancelled but, specifically, we should be supporting LMHR's demo and campaign, albeit critically, in the hope that they might take on board what we have to say. Still, John's arguments certainly reflect those of many other readers and contributors to this blog - in fact, judging by the comments and private mails I have received, his position probably has more support than mine-AS]

Earlier this year I was having lunch with my family in a cafe in Springfield Park in North London. Some Goths came in, including a woman wearing a Death In June t-shirt with a huge Totenkopf on it. The cafe is near Stamford Hill, which hosts one of the largest Hasidic Jewish communities in the world, and as usual many Jewish families were out in the sunshine enjoying the park.

Even after reading some of the ridiculous comments on this site, I was amazed that someone would be stupid or brazen enough to wander around in broad daylight wearing what most people would recognise as the logo of the SS.

I couldn’t help staring, but decided that making a scene would be counterproductive. It’s possible that my anger was obvious, because she covered up the logo pretty sharpish with her jacket. As usual, my tales of anti-fascism don’t exactly bolster my reputation as a courageous warrior. Staring at a Goth isn’t really on a par with The 43 Group’s work in 1940s Hackney, but I suppose I simply made a judgement at the time about what an effective intervention would be. I know others who would have expressed their displeasure verbally, or even physically. People disagree on tactics. I am conscious that I am at the more “touchy feely” end of the anti-fascist response to Neofolk, probably because, as I explained in a previous article, I used to be a fan myself.

I mention this because I’ve been following the debate about the forthcoming Slimelight gig with some interest. While I am opposed to the bands involved and am quite happy for them to be inconvenienced, I am not entirely convinced that call for the gig to be cancelled is the right tactic. More particularly I feel that the way it has been done is not an effective intervention.

It should be clear to anyone who has read the articles on this website that there are fascist tendencies within Neofolk, but these tendencies generally express themselves obliquely and in the cultural sphere. This needs to be contrasted with the overt Nazism of the skinhead Blood & Honour groups who openly incite racial hatred and have inspired violence towards minorities after their events.

I am not aware of violent incidents taking place after Neofolk concerts, so we can probably assume that there is no direct threat to the communities that host them, apart from the distaste people rightly feel when they see idiots dressed like Nazis prancing down Upper Street.

Indeed I believe that this is the whole point, from a political point of view, of fascist involvement in Neofolk (and let me be clear that I don’t think everyone involved in Neofolk is a fascist or that it is an inherently fascist genre). It is about normalising fascist ideas and aesthetics, not actually establishing fascism in the here and now through violence or electoral politics.

As I said in my previous article on this site “One of the devices used by people who defend neo-Folk is the claim that its critics are outsiders who don’t understand the nuances of the genre.” Fascist currents within Neofolk require an informed anti-fascism, which is sadly lacking from some of the opponents of the Slimelight gig.

I hadn’t intended to voice my reservations publicly until after the date of the gig had passed because I didn’t want to undermine the campaign. Unfortunately I have now been forced to do so because of the petition being circulated by Love Music Hate Racism (LMHR). This petition includes a number of outright errors such as Death In June having “donated to” the National Front and half-truths such as “The Nazi organisation Stormfront is promoting the event and have declared that its supporters will descend on Islington for the night” when it’s more a case of a handful of Nazi keyboard warriors discussing the event on an internet forum. (I have seen no evidence that Stormfront, as an organisation, is promoting the gig – or indeed that Death In June have donated to the National Front. If there is evidence then I will of course retract my comments.)

Neofolk fans and their sympathisers will know that the claims are not true. This undermines anti-fascism in general. We should be exposing the lies of fascists, not creating our own.

LMHR seem more interested in playing to the gallery than effective anti-fascism in this case. I assume they are exaggerating and simplifying their claims to generate support for their campaign. In doing this they alienate the one crucial factor – the non-aligned (or not consciously fascist) Neofolk fans.

A protest outside the event by uninformed LMHR supporters will have the same effect – making the opposition to Neofolk appear ridiculous.

Furthermore I think it's entirely likely that whilst discussing the closure of the gig, someone (be it the Slimelight management, the Police, Islington Council or the media) will discover that the matter is more complicated than it first appears. This makes LMHR look hysterical and not a credible source, which means that the bands and promoters and their weasel-worded excuses may be seen as reasonable and proportionate by those who can actually determine whether or not the event goes ahead.

Ever since reading James Cavanagh’s “Shower of Shit Expected Over Islington” text I’ve thought it unlikely that the concert will actually be cancelled, precisely because of the complexity of the issue.

The key question is: if the gig does go ahead, will fascists operating in Neofolk be stronger or weaker? My feeling is that whilst they may be on the back foot temporarily, they will be in a much stronger position in future. People will be able say “Islington Council and the Police looked into all this and they couldn't find anything wrong". This will then be lapped up by fans and fascist apologists and quoted ad nauseum alongside Tony Wakeford’s content-free statement from 2007.

My position is that the main role we have is still to discuss, expose and theorise about Neofolk - to attack it on the cultural level that it operates. Perhaps that can include intervening at events (and count me in if any glaring at Goths is needed). But let’s get it right – taking shortcuts is completely counterproductive.

108 comments:

  1. This is not a case of trying to "censor" concerts, this is a case of giving venues the information they need to make well-informed decisions about which bands they choose to host, as all venues have a right to accept or reject concert bookings just as much as musicians have a right to free speech (this is no more a case of censorship than any one of us exercising our right to choose who we do or don't admit into our own homes).

    In most cases venues have no idea that, with the likes of Death In June, the band they've been asked to host revels in Nazi imagery, or in the case of Whitehouse and Sutcliffe Jugend, that these bands revel in Nazi imagery and openly promote rape and child-sex abuse. So, in most cases, venues are positively grateful for that information, and are delighted to tell these bands to get lost. Unfortunately things are different with Slimelight manager Mayuan Mak..... perhaps the clue's in the venue's name?!

    As for this blog's take on Love Music Hate Racism, LMHR successfully engage thousands of wonderful people, and overall the work LMHR do is mostly admirable, but from time to time LMHR make mistakes whose stupidity beggars belief and this analysis of LMHR's short-comings is sadly spot-on. Mayuan Mak told the Islington Gazette that the Slime "would not tolerate an event that has a Neo-Nazi focus", and, since he knows perfectly well about the blatant Nazism of Peter Sotos and Sutcliffe Jugend, the dishonesty of his statement speaks for itself - so my belief is that the Slime should reject these bookings, and is that (as a separate issue) the Home Secretary Teresa May should also ban a convicted child-sex offender like Peter Sotos from entering the UK.

    ReplyDelete
  2. For the record, my understanding is that Sotos has a conviction for possessing child pornography, but a charge of abuse or similar was dropped.

    I'm rushing out right now and don't have time to check.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Strelnikov is correct, Peter Sotos regardless of whatever you may think of the man is not "a convicted child-sex offender" and to label him so is slanderous.

    ReplyDelete
  4. "complexity of the issue."?

    "A gig will happen and nobody will actually care about petty internet blog drama" seems about as simple as it gets to me.

    ReplyDelete
  5. "nobody will actually care"

    except, of course, the people threatening legal action, revenge, whining and scared that the spotlight is slowly turning on them and that this could possibly turn out to be a more sustained campaign of opposition, and that it may turn out to be more difficult in future to pose as martyrs to the cause of free expression. Apart from that - yes.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Your only real contribution is to generate more interest in the bands you complain about so please do keep it up Strelnikov. You've turned into their biggest supporter.

    ReplyDelete
  7. In which case I'm sure the relevant parties will be grateful.

    ReplyDelete
  8. In the long run, yes.

    ReplyDelete
  9. To a certain I'm in favor of the goals of this site. I hope you guys manage to ban all these shows at goth clubs, which I feel they shouldn't be at.

    Also I agree that people should held accountable for the consequences of their art. Do you mean it or is some occult fantasy? Reactionary bigotry towards non-whites is not the way to reestablish volk roots in the corpse of western culture, and neither is hiding behind some art fag pretense of ambiguity.

    Direct DIY action and building community on a grass roots level is the way, and that means being honest with yourself and with dealing with others, such as the people who run sites like this.

    White pagan culture has a right to exist but romanticized nazi fetishism and hiding behind ambiguity will not help the matter. If you really care make concrete steps in your day to day and do what you can with what ever means you have at hand.

    -Oneiric Imperium

    ReplyDelete
  10. I am so looking forward to finding out...

    ReplyDelete
  11. "Neofolk fans and their sympathisers will know that the claims are not true. This undermines anti-fascism in general. We should be exposing the lies of fascists, not creating our own." That's very true. Lies might create enough controversy to cancel a gig but they'll never change the fans at the root of the problem.

    I think there's also a perception in the scene that people here are extremely selective about which totalitarian iconography they object to on moral grounds. I'm curious whether you - or other posters here - would have the same reaction to a man I saw recently wearing a t-shirt with a hammer and sickle graphic emblazoned above the legend "CCCP". It looked equally disrespectful to me in light of immigration from Eastern Europe. Would this debate exist if Patrick Legas preferred to dress as commissar?

    ReplyDelete
  12. No, it wouldn't - and that probably explains why none of the people involved actually do that. For all their drivel about how fascism and Stalinism are symmetrical, nevertheless they always prefer fascism - have you ever wondered why that is?

    ReplyDelete
  13. Peter Sotos was convicted for possessing child pornography, therefore he is "a convicted child-sex offender" and to label him as such is therefore not slanderous. He might not be an "abuser", but he is an "offender". Geddit?

    ReplyDelete
  14. Yes, I've wondered about it. And I see a number of reasons for it. But it isn't the bands that LMHR will be handing leaflets to. For your position to be effective amongst people with no clear political belief it has to be more than an emotive reaction to one single set of symbols to which fans are already desensitized or it simply perpetuates the stereotype that you're pushing a subtle agenda of your own in the same way as Southgate might be tacitly promoting Nationalism.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Streil. I suggest you to update references or change pusher. Soviet/anarchist iconography goes quiet strong in Germany, France amd Italian scenes, not to mention several Eastern block countries where, considering the body count resulting from Stalin and friends' actions, still hold an impressive shock value. Seeing a Serb or a Romanian with a Cccp shirt definitely could rise some eyebrow. By the way check the works of ccc cnc ncn, ain soph - who often waved huge hammer and sicles on stage with no one attempting to stop them, stalimgrad, ecc.

    ReplyDelete
  16. http://www.agora8.org/reader/4/highslide/images/large/2LaibachMarx.jpg

    ReplyDelete
  17. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  18. oh cool some copypasta from these anti-fascist blogs, some fascist morons off topic whining about their boring Oi bands getting unfairly branded as 'racist' just because they play some racist songs now and again and are actually racists, and some REAL LIFE NEO NAZIS dismissing all the artists playing at this event as a bunch of jew-loving weirdos with nothing really fascist/white pride about them at all? WOW MORE DAMNING EVIDENCE ABOUT THIS SICK NAZI GIG PROMOTED BY STORMFRONT AND HITLER HIMSELF!!! I'M GOING TO GO BOTHER SOME OVERWORKED BUREAUCRAT IN ISLINGTON COUNCIL ABOUT IT RIGHT NOW, I'M SURE THEY WON'T THINK I'M A TIMEWASTING NUTTER OR ANYTHING!!

    ReplyDelete
  19. @ Magnaramina:

    I think you'll find that Ain Soph, who had direct links to fascist parties (as members) in Italy, were engaged in a Gramscian policy of trying to infiltrate the left when they waved a hammer and sickle flag on stage, just as fascist organisations elsewhere in Italy like Casa Pound were successful in infiltrating local community and squatting scenes through agitating over housing shortages as a way to stir up violence against immigrants. British fascist Troy Southgate, founder of neofolk/martial band H.E.R.R. is always trying to infiltrate his fascist politics (quite explicitly) into some or other revolutionary political organisation. It was the green movement for a while and at present it is the anarchist movement (with his National Anarchist organisation). It's what these people do, and it's why Strelnikov is doing a great job at getting people to look closely at what's going on with this blog.

    ReplyDelete
  20. There is a new thread over on the Stormfont website with several different posters, all discussing a recent Islington Gazette article about the Slimelight gig

    ReplyDelete
  21. @Magnaramina: you are absolutely right. I was thinking about the British scene, where this is much less common. By I stand by the gist of my argument, which isn't that Stalinist imagery isn't used in this scene, but that it is interesting that the people we are talking about here almost invariably love specifically fascist (and usually Nazi) imagery, ideas, references, etc. I think there are a couple of reasons for that, mostly to do with the fact that while Stalin was a counter-revolutionary, much like Hitler, he carried out his crimes (hypocritically, of course) in the name of socialism and freedom, whereas Nazi ideology is much more straightforwardly sadistic, ruthless and homicidal, and their 'aesthetic' reflects this.

    ReplyDelete
  22. The last 6comm cd was full of eastern percussion and dealt mostly, as far as I could understand this very personal work, with experiences mr. Leagas had while travelling in the middle and far east and Gurdjeffian philosophy. Older works dealt with paganism, conflict, etc. I'm actually only coming to see 6 Comm (coming from Belgium) as I have only ever seen the female fronted shamanic techno project Mother Destruction and would like to see and hear the older material performed (out of nostalgia, and because this music still represents an energy I love). I actually hate neo-folk and all the dressing-up, and I find it understandable that there are misunderstandings about that. I sold my DIJ and current 93 stuff years ago to my jewish friend who loves them. It's going to be funny to go to slimelight (where I've never been) and to run the risk of being branded a nazi while I'm the opposite.

    ReplyDelete
  23. @Anonymous: If anyone brands you a 'Nazi' for going to this gig they are an idiot, and an irresponsible idiot too. Slimelight shouldn't be hosting this gig, but I don't think that those who attend it are fascists or fascist sympathisers because of that: a handful may be, but the majority certainly won't.

    I'm sorry if I have to keep repeating this, but some of those who support the groups insist on spreading lies about what this blog stands for.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Understood, but as far as I can see this is not a "fascist" event at all, so I see no reason for people to try and stop it.
    6 Comm play depressing pagan music.
    Freya Aswynn will probably do some rune chants.
    While Angels Watch sound pretty bad, don't know their politics/music/spirituality.
    Sol Invictus play depressing folk music and have made it clear (for me at least) that all the dodgy stuff is in the past.
    Maybe there will be some "fascists" there. Maybe the slimelight won't let me in because I'll be dressed too "casual". That would be hilarious. What I want to say is that in my view the situation is this: there are no nazi bands playing, there will be no nazi songs played, there will not be a nazi audience, so I don't see the problem.
    Maybe I should just stick to only going to New Model Army gigs.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Yep, the typical attire of the real EDL/Stormfront crowd means they are barred from slimelight by dress-code definition unless they come in disguise. :) Haha that would be amazing, nazi Halloween. Maybe I'll cut two holes in a sheet and self-righteously insist I'm a ghost NOT the KKK when sensitive 'anarchists' confront me about it.

    ReplyDelete
  26. I support LMHR on this, but I also think they should correct the errors on their flyer, if only to stop Jon from moaning.
    I certainly wouldn't cross an anti-fasc picket - or pay good money to see that old nonsense at the Slimelight.
    I've been there once, that was enough.

    ReplyDelete
  27. I'm told that LMHR are responding to feedback they've had about the petition. etc., saying they plan to correct errors of fact, and that their aim is to put the argument to locals and the users of Slimelight that the club should cancel the gig - that's all. That's pieced together from what I heard from a couple of people who had spoken to LMHR at some point, so it's possible I got the wrong end of the stick.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Strelnikov, This is going off on a bit of a tangent but I think some of the points raised above about non-fascist totalitarian imagery in industrial, neo-folk etc merit some further discussion. In their early martial-industrial guise (before they became a sort of neo-classical Jedward), In The Nursery played gigs -with Death In June, incidentally - using images of Lenin as a backdrop (http://www.inthenursery.com/reviews/bullfrog_int.html). I loved Test Department back in the day but always felt queasy about their use of Socialist Realist iconography because of the associations with Stalinism - I don't think for one second TD were in the slightest bit Stalinist, but the imagery would probably have been distateful, to say the least, to anyone who had been on the receiving end of Stalinist repression.
    Martin

    ReplyDelete
  29. To answer the person who says "There's also a perception in the scene that people here are extremely selective about which totalitarian iconography they object to on moral grounds. I'm curious whether you - or other posters here - would have the same reaction to a man I saw recently wearing a t-shirt with a hammer and sickle graphic emblazoned above the legend CCCP?"... I've personally asked (in very blunt language) the Communist Party of Great Britain and Revolutionary Communist Group to stop bringing their stupid fucking Hammer & Sickle flags to demos and in fact to not attend these demos at all, and I often post on-line attacking people who support left-wing terrorism. There's also a perception in your scene that it's OK for Sutcliffe Jugend to publish tracks which say society should "Legalise Child Abuse", so I'd take your scene's "perceptions" with a pinch of salt.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Nigel Ayres seems to think that LMHR should correct the LIES on their flyer — but only to stop someone from "moaning". This isn't trivial at all, and rather shows the contempt that the AntiFa types have for facts. With that kind of talk, it seems difficult to believe that this is not all concerned with personal vendettas. There's a reason people on this blog have often alluded to Stewart Home — a man who lives for feuding.
    And as for Wakeford's "hidden Evolian agenda", oh dear! Spare me! His only agenda is to find a way to make a living from selling not-very-interesting records while not succumbing to complications from obesity.
    Sometimes a cigar is only a cigar, and not a sinister Gramscian strategy of infiltration.

    ReplyDelete
  31. @ Strelnikov

    Thanks for making clear your thought. Sorry if I have sounded rude in my past message, and I did not understand you referred to UK only! Anyway I was not referring only to strict Stalinist images. There have been also less “dangerous” images/shirts around. Be the classic overinflated Che Guevara, Lenin, etc.

    @ Tom Skelton:

    >>>>Ain Soph,

    Where did you get this from if I may ask? Ain soph members have no links to parties AT ALL.
    They used sickle and hammers as part of the concept of Oktober and waving them on stage not to gain voters or convince people they were good, but as a further development of their concept regarding ideologies (and their failures), the tensions behind them, people witnessing their utopias falling on their head and so on. If you read the lyrics of their latest records it is evident.
    Many shit has been told about them, but evidently fairy tales are more entertaining than the truth.

    >>>>Casa Pound were successful in infiltrating local community and squatting scenes through agitating over housing shortages as a way to stir up violence against immigrants.

    I thing you have quite a distorted vision of the facts.
    The infiltration idea is pure conspiracy theory since they squatted some places, claiming themselves fascists from day 1. Their approach to squatting is radically different from left-wing one, and there is no connection with alleged violence toward migrants that is another ludicrous allegation considering that they have foreign militants (with foreign I mean “coloured” and oriental) and have been collaborating with Paola Concia, left wing politician, one of the leaders of the LGBT community for a common law project regarding civil unions.
    At the beginning of their militancy they also had a squat with African people, (all documented if you search well).
    This created several problems with die hard Nazis who started calling them “nigger cuddler”, etc. but that is another story.
    If you are antifascist you are not going to like them and it is not my intention to neither defend them nor convince you they are choir boys, or non-violent tree huggers (Cartman style), but you should inform yourself before talking, especially when advocating historical materialism.

    Shalom

    ReplyDelete
  32. I thought this was a bit funny:

    "Regardless of any old NF connections Sol Invictus have absolutely nothing Nationalist in their music that i could find, but do repeatedly go out of their way to attack Christians - which as a Christian myself immediately lost me any respect... for them. Freya Aswynn seems like a complete nut. She believes she is a witch and a psychic, that she is a high priestess, has studied Kabala, and describes one of her best friends and biggest influences as "a well known pagan-friendly Jewish feminist-activist and a supporter of gay and bisexual rights." I really don't see anything WN about this gig at all."
    /Saxon Assassin from Stormfront.

    Good! Hate us, boneheads with way more hair than brains. Perhaps if it wasn't for you, we wouldn't have these confused crypto-antifascists on our heels. Be Gone.

    ReplyDelete
  33. so.....


    ....'Crypto-fascist' as an insult ISN'T something they made up for that episode of Red Dwarf...? :-S

    ReplyDelete
  34. "Stalin was a counter-revolutionary, much like Hitler, he carried out his crimes (hypocritically, of course) in the name of socialism and freedom, whereas Nazi ideology is much more straightforwardly sadistic, ruthless and homicidal, and their 'aesthetic' reflects this."

    I'm sure the victims of Katyn really gave a flying fuck about that.

    ReplyDelete
  35. RE "There's also a perception in your scene that it's OK for Sutcliffe Jugend" etc

    You seem to understand it's necessary to change those perceptions if you're trying to distance yourself from the Communist Party. You certainly seem to want to change some opinions about these bands. You might find it harder to do that effectively while being so dismissive of the people you seek to educate about the real links between fascism and music than you would by, for example, inviting people like "Neofolk Against Racism" (or Karl Blake) to post here. There's a legitimate concern about trading one kind of political infiltration for another and it has nothing to with anybody's feelings about child abuse.

    ReplyDelete
  36. There's a comment elsewhere on this blog that says how some neo-folkies etc abuse existential philosophy with sub-Nietzschean ramblings, and the essence of taking responsibility for your own actions is that you need to find the strength to NOT blame other people for own mistakes and moral shortcomings. So, even if were true that some people who support the campaign against the Slimelight had or have double standards about their attitude to, eg - Stalinism, that still wouldn't make displays of paedophiliac and Nazi imagery right. These jerks are always talking about Strength, Power, Will, Might etc, but there's precious little of these in evidence when it comes to their moral courage.

    To answer the point that some of William Bennett's Nazi blathering goes back 30 years, that might hold more water if Bennett hadn't worked with Fascist music promoter Albin Julius as recently as 2006.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Please do not use ANTIFA as a catch-all term for anti-fascist groups or, in particular, confuse Antifa with LMHR. Unlike LMHR, Antifa are devoted to physically confronting and opposing fascism and have a proven track record for this. I am not aware of London Antifa alligning itself with the campaign to have this concert cancelled though I am sure, should they consider it a genuine manifestation of neo-nazism they will.

    However, as most of the London AFA/Antifa I know have been well aware of the nature of these Slimelight concerts and the composition of the audience they attract for years they would rather devote their energies to the very real prospect of a genuine 'fascist descent' upon London following the EDL's recent announcement to hold a rally in Tower Hamlets at the start of August.

    ReplyDelete
  38. "23" replied to my comment about how "there's also a perception in your scene that it's OK for Sutcliffe Jugend to publish tracks which say society should Legalise Child Abuse", by saying I might find it harder to educate people effectively if I didn't invite people like Karl Blake to post here. I didn't invite Karl Blake to post here. I don't run this blog. I didn't invite anyone. If you'd paid attention you'd know the people who run this blog post using names like Strelnikov, whereas many of the ordinary members of the public post (as I did) as Anonymous.

    There is a legitimate concern about trading one kind of political infiltration for another, and while everyone has their own political views to a greater or lesser extent, what the apologists need to realise is that alot of their critics aren't radical leftists, and that issues around Slimelight performers Peter Sotos and Sutcliffe Jugend promoting child rape are far more important than that issue which seems to concern you most here.

    ReplyDelete
  39. yeah it's really ok tho.

    ReplyDelete
  40. >>I didn't invite Karl Blake to post here. I don't run this blog.

    That doesn't make it less beneficial for the "anti" side of this discussion to be informed by people with direct experience and proper understanding of the genres concerned so that apologists can indeed "realise that a lot of their critics aren't radical leftists".

    As for Sutcliffe Jugend being a more important issue; if you'd paid attention, you'd see the blog post is primarily about the Sixth Comm/Sol Invictus gig. Not bands that have an interest in pedophilia. But if people want to protest - potentially violently - at a gig I'm attending, who is doing that and what their ideological motivations are becomes quite an important issue to me which will affect my real interaction with those people in a way that SJ never will.

    The instant reaction of most people I've discussed the protests with has been along the lines of "fucking communists". They perceive you as the extremists here. My original question was motivated by a genuine curiosity to see how far that's true and I think discussion here is lively enough to deal with more than one topic.

    ReplyDelete
  41. If it helps you, 23, I'm not a fan of Lenin, Stalin or Trotsky myself and I'm not particularly keen on Soviet totalitarian imagery although of course it all depends on context. I've never worn a hammer and sickle or CCCP t-shirt or whatever.

    To give some specific examples:

    I think the imagery used by the Worker-Dandyist International blog is funny and cute.

    I was in Budapest a few weeks back. There's a park slightly outside the town where they've put the few remaining Soviet-era statues as I guess a "those who do not remember the past" type memorial. It's quite eerie and I would recommend people visit if they're in the area and are interested in this stuff.

    Some of the merchandise on sale raised my hackles - especially a t-shirt which seemed to commemorate Soviet military victories with a list of countries and battles on the back with dates - like a band's tour t-shirt. I thought that was out of order and offensive.

    I don't spend much time in left wing bookshops but I was in one a while back which sold busts of Karl Marx. I thought that was ridiculous and kitsch. If someone had one in their house I would take the piss out of them. If they had a bust of Stalin I would assume they were a psycho.

    That probably raises more questions than it answers. I try to use personal anecdotes in my posts here because I think it might humanise the discussion. I'm not sure that's the right thing to do though - it seems a lot of people are much more concerned about who the people are who write things here than what they are saying.

    I notice that one of the critics of my original DIJ piece has attempted to use that personal info to psychoanalyse me, which I find hilarious.

    It's missing the point really - like having a bust of Karl Marx instead of reading his books (not that I've got round to doing that, LOL).

    I don't blame people for wondering about the personalities involved here, or our motivations, but it seems that some are using that as defence mechanism so they don't have to think about what's said.

    ReplyDelete
  42. Just Another Comment16 Jun 2011 12:22:00


    As for Sutcliffe Jugend being a more important issue; if you'd paid attention, you'd see the blog post is primarily about the Sixth Comm/Sol Invictus gig.


    Well, if that is indeed the case, there is certainly an argument to be made in favor of prioritizing the Sol Invictus event over the SJ event.

    If what this blog says is true, SI, 6Comm, etc. are actively working to promote fascist ideas in a way that SJ is not. SJ may indeed be fascists or fascist sympathizers, but they also do not seem to have a clear plan/agenda to promote their beliefs. At least, not on the same level as the neofolk groups playing at the Sol Invictus event do.

    It seems plausible that SJ, and other power electronics groups from the same musical clique really are just posturing and saying naughty words to get a rise. It reminds me of the Simpsons episode where Homer caught a teenage vandal writing 'life sucks' with a can of spray paint on a wall. Homer asked why he was doing it, and the boy said, "It makes me feel like a big man!" I've always thought the actions of SJ, Sotos, etc. were probably more along those lines.

    Neofolk, however, is an altogether different issue, as they really do seem to be following an intentional metapolitical strategy, as outlined by Anton Shekovstov. If this view of neofolk is correct then neofolk should be given priority over the SJ event.

    ReplyDelete
  43. @Just_Another_Comment: The issue of SJ & Sotos was raised not only because they are playing at the same venue, but they are being promoted by the same person (Gaya Donadio) who is organising and promoting the Sol/6 Comm gig. You're right that the issues connected with them are different to those concerning the bands playing next week. But still, it's another of those areas where racism, fascism, extreme misogyny, 'transgressive' culture and a belief in the sanctity and inviolability of of art meet (albeit in a different configuration), and worth discussing here.

    I may try to do a post soon on the subject to continue the discussion, but not for another week or so. If anyone fancies writing a guest post on the subject, you can mail me at the usual address.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Just Another Comment16 Jun 2011 12:58:00

    This is a comment I've been meaning to make, and it is a more general issue as opposed to the topic of any one post.

    People sometimes wonder how DIJ, Rice, etc. 'get away' with using the Totenkopf, Wolfs Angle, various runes, and other 'dodgy' imagery associated with fascism, without ever being called on it.

    Being an American, I can only speak from that perspective. What I'm about to say may not apply to Europe.

    I think one major, incredibly simple, and often overlooked reason that this imagery does not raise eyebrows is that most people see these symbols and don't even know what the hell they are. When I first saw the wolf angle being used by NON ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolfsangel ) I thought nothing of it. Why? Because I had no idea what it was. I just knew that NON was a noise/industrial project, and the name of the project started with N. The symbol looked like a backwards N with a line down the center of it. I assumed it was just something Rice made up. Yeah, this is not exactly a sophisticated view by any means. I eventually began to dig deeper and found out what the symbol was. But initially, it raised no flags.

    The same with the Totenkopf. I thought it was just some goofy looking skull. Skull imagery, after all, is hardly uncommon.

    When the average person, or even average goth/industrial fan thinks of fascist imagery, they probably think of the swastika, and to a lesser extent the iron cross and the SS runes.

    A similar issue comes up with Evola, Devi, Ragnar Redbeard, etc. If DIJ or NON or whatever were constantly referencing Hitler and Mein Kampf, of course this would turn heads. But Evola? Imagine a conversation with someone who is not well versed in these matters.

    Goth: Check out this album by this band!
    Antifascist: You know...these guys might be fascists.
    Goth: What makes you say that?
    Antifascist: Well, look! They have a quote from Julius Evola!
    Goth: Who?

    Sure, antifascists know this stuff. But I think we fall in to the trap of assuming that the general public, even even the more general attendees of gigs like the Slimelight show, know this as well.

    If antifascists distribute flyers and press releases, etc. concerning these vents, it would be useful to include an appendix of sorts that explains the significance of these symbols, writers, phrases, images, etc. In the U.S., it might be useful to reference them to resources like the Southern Poverty Law Center and the Anti Defamation League, who have extensive lists of 'hate symbols'. The symbols used by NON, DIJ, etc. are among these lists.

    http://www.adl.org/hate_symbols/default.asp


    Ignorance of the true nature of these symbols in America is illustrated by the Totenkopf t-shirt controversy in 2007. Wal-Mart began selling a t shirt with the skull symbol printed on it.

    http://consumerist.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-search.cgi?blog_id=1&tag=3rd-ss-division-totenkopf&limit=20

    The above link is a good rundown on the saga. Of course, the shirt never would have made it to the racks at all if the meaning of the symbol was more widely known.


    From reading this blog, and other antifa sources, I get the impression that the meaning of these symbols might be more widely known in Europe. Perhaps someone here can comment on this particular subject?

    So, our arguments might be better received by the public at large if was provide a wealth of information, up front, about these particular symbols. Past associations are all well and good as far as evidence goes, but pointing out that a band has been using nazi imagery for many many years, despite criticism, may actually carry more weight.

    ReplyDelete
  45. Just Another Comment16 Jun 2011 13:07:00

    Stel, oh, I agree. I did not mean to imply it was not worth discussion. I just thought the distinction was worth pointing out, if for no other reason that the variations on the problem mean that somewhat different arguments against the SJ crowd may be needed.

    You are dead on about this problem with "the sanctity and inviolability of art" as it pertains to these issues. That is sort of what I was trying to get at with my previous comments about how thin skinned neofolk fans can be. Even discussing these matters is seen as unacceptable, much less offering criticism of the individuals or the works in question. Taken to its logical conclusion, this position would essentially eliminate art criticism itself as a valid practice on the grounds that anything and artist does is beyond question as long as the purity of the artists intent was not compromised.

    To me, this has always been a problem with extreme libertarianism in general, as well as some currents of thought in extreme anarchism. The intent and freedom of the individual take on such paramount importance that all other concerns are illegitimate, if not outright nonexistent. How something interacts with any larger framework of society or ideas is not a concern if the only issue at stake is preserving some extreme dedication to individual freedom run wild.

    ReplyDelete
  46. Just Another Comment16 Jun 2011 13:22:00

    @ John.

    I don't spend much time in left wing bookshops but I was in one a while back which sold busts of Karl Marx. I thought that was ridiculous and kitsch. If someone had one in their house I would take the piss out of them. If they had a bust of Stalin I would assume they were a psycho.

    As funny as this is, it actually reminds me of something pertinent to this discussion.

    The whole black metal genre is known for having similar issues as neofolk, albeit with some variations. They love 'shocking' fascist imagery and all that due to their love of extreme misanthropy and hatred. Most of the nazi or dodgy black metal acts go the crypto or outright fascist route. But there is one notable exception...

    Apparently Euronymous, the frontman of Norwegian black metal band Mayhem, was a firm admirer of Stalin, Pol Pot, and other Communist dictators and Soviet bloc governments.

    Here are some choice quotes, all from various interviews;

    I’ve been very interested in communism for a while, especially the extreme countries like Albania, Kampuchea, North Korea and so on. I have to say that I have studied so much that I know that real communism would be the best possible system, BUT as I HATE people I don’t want them to have a good time, I’d like to see them rot under communist dictatorship. Ceausescu was great, we need more people like him, Stalin, Pol Pot too. I’ve been to Poland, Hungary and Czechoslovakia in the (good) old days, and was about to go to Albania, although it didn’t turn out. Poland was quite all right, but it could have been even MORE gray and depressing. I like secret police, cold war and worshiping of dictators. I like bugging and spying on people, torture chambers in police stations and that people suddenly “disappear”."

    Another;

    As Mayhem is NOT a political band, I don't really like to mix topics like this into band interviews, but anyway I'm still keeping the faith. I openly admit that I am a Stalinist and I'm very fascinated by extreme countries like Albania and Romania in the good old days. I have thought about quitting from the Communist Party though, but this is just because they are not brutal enough any more. It was much better in the '70s, when they were very Albania-inspired and the leader even visited Cambodia during the Red Khmer period and had dinner with Pol Pot!! Those were the days!

    Another;

    We have studied so much politics/theory/economy (Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin , Mao, Hoxha) that we know that the world will sooner or later become communistic. Its the marketing economy and capitalisms ideas that will be forced forward sooner or later. Maybe in 30 years, maybe in 300 years. The problem is that communism is fucking good for the people, it's total freedom. Thats why we never wish that it happens. The world can go to hell. We want back the old Stalinist dictatorship, there its was gray, misery and evil. THE BERLIN WALL SHALL RISE AGAIN!!

    That last one is particularly insane.

    So, yeah, I don't know if he had a bust of Stalin, but it wouldn't surprise me. Was he a psycho, as you say? Maybe. Or maybe just a con-man. But either way, those remarks are pretty nuts. I think he also once said that he collected various medals, uniforms, and other 'memorabilia' from Communist nations. Of course, this is the same lunatic who actually said the following in an interview;

    I would live in luxury with a harem and watch the children in Africa starve to death on video.

    I would love to see an in depth post on black metal here. Plus, the connection between that genre and Moyinihan deserves some more attention.

    ReplyDelete
  47. I was struck by how many commenters on the Slimelight Facebook discussion implied that the Slimelight clientele were mostly of the left, anarchistic, etc. Now, although I don't doubt that there are leftists, anarchists, etc., among the Slimelight audience, it didn't ring true in general. It confused me for a while, until I realised that what they probably mean is that there's a lot of support for broadly libertarian ideas. But I don't see this as an admirable position. The "inviolability of art" argument often sounds indistinguishable from a right-libertarian / Tea Party defence of the inviolability of free trade: Slimelight management (record labels, promoters, etc.) should be able to do whatever they like without interference from the community or anyone else, whatever the consequences of what they say or do.

    When you put this together with the fanboys' endless whining about 'busybodies', 'political correctness', 'left wing fanatics', 'authoritarian leftists', etc., it might suddenly occur to you how much some of these fans, for all that they think of themselves as socially radical, actually sound like they have been overdosing on Daily Mail editorials - the Daily Mail being a notoriously right-wing tabloid paper here that specialises in scare stories about illegal immigrants, trade unionists and (supposedly) left-wing city councils.

    ReplyDelete
  48. @ Strelnikov: Good point above. What always strikes me about the goth, torture garden type body modification scene & death/black metal audiences is that despite their outre appearance they are probably the most culturally and ideologically conservative music crowds you could ever encounter. their 'subversion' is purely passive. However this is also why I would contend that as fascism is an 'extreme' political position whatever ideologies many of these neo-folk and black metal bands may expound, their 'message' will always fall on largely fallow ground. While it is the possible physical expression of an ideological position being enacted by 'receivers' that is the danger, as far as the goth/transgressive/industrial crowd who attend Gaya's promotions at the Slimelight this is so unlikely as to be an invalid hypothesis. Which is why I feel this campaign to cancel the forthcoming Slimelight events is a self-defeating red herring.

    ReplyDelete
  49. Just Another Comment16 Jun 2011 13:56:00

    @ Strel;
    I was struck by how many commenters on the Slimelight Facebook discussion implied that the Slimelight clientele were mostly of the left, anarchistic, etc. Now, although I don't doubt that there are leftists, anarchists, etc., among the Slimelight audience, it didn't ring true in general. It confused me for a while, until I realised that what they probably mean is that there's a lot of support for broadly libertarian ideas.

    Never having been to Slimelight, I cannot comment. But I can comment on my own experience with more general goth/industrial clubs and similar venues. There is indeed a support for broadly libertarian/libertine ideals. That sentiment is common, and is combined with an overall political apathy, which creates a somewhat naive view as these individuals rarely think of how their views play out in the real world, as you imply.

    Good observation on the similarity to teabaggers and free trade neoliberals and Randian right wingers.

    In fact, a lot of the general sentiments among the right leaning 'libertarian' types who enjoy this music (neofolk, power electronics, etc.) is remarkably similar to the extreme Objectivist ideology of Ayn Rand, depicted in the Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged. Everyone gets to do whatever they want, at least...sort of. There is a clear double standard, as it is usually white male members of the upper classes who get to do whatever they want, and if they end up causing trouble for everyone else...well...too bad.

    What is interesting, especially in light of the supposed 'libertarian' philosophy of SJ, Sotos, etc. is that Rand herself said that the man she most admired was a serial killer who murdered little girls.

    http://www.alternet.org/story/145819/ayn_rand,_hugely_popular_author_and_inspiration_to_right-wing_leaders,_was_a_big_admirer_of_serial_killer?page=entire

    http://www.slate.com/id/2233966


    Here is an actual quote from Rand herself, on why she admired serial killer William Hickman;

    the amazing picture of a man with no regard whatsoever for all that a society holds sacred, and with a consciousness all his own. A man who really stands alone, in action and in soul. … Other people do not exist for him, and he does not see why they should."

    She also said;

    "no regard whatsoever for all that society holds sacred, and with a consciousness all his own. He has the true, innate psychology of a Superman. He can never realize and feel 'other people.'"

    This rhetoric sounds remarkably similar to the sentiments expressed by the likes of Sotos, SJ, and many of 'power electronics' acts obsessed with similar subject matter. It is also somewhat similar to the borderline sociopathic sentiments occasionally expressed by Boyd Rice, as well as the general disdain for "moralism" and society that you get from people like Moynihan and even some neofolk fans in comments here and there.

    ReplyDelete
  50. Just Another Comment16 Jun 2011 14:31:00

    @ Anonymous;

    What always strikes me about the goth, torture garden type body modification scene & death/black metal audiences is that despite their outre appearance they are probably the most culturally and ideologically conservative music crowds you could ever encounter.

    I would like to dispute this just a little bit. I don't think goths should be lumped with with metal fans. Disclaimer, I am speaking of the American scenes, and Europe may be a bit different.

    I've found most goths to be socially liberal in most ways. They tend to be pro gay, pro choice, artsy, vaguely feminist, etc. Most have socially liberal sentiments in a rather generic sense, and are also more or less politically apathetic. I've encountered all sorts of political views in the goth scene, but when the members are political, they tend to be run of the mill Democrats or Republicans. There are sometimes green party types. Far rightists tend to be a bit more uncommon, as do far leftists.

    The metal scene is another issue altogether. I've never felt remotely uncomfortable expressing my non-heterosexuality among goths or typical industrial fans. I would very much NOT feel comfortable, or in some cases even safe, doing so at a death metal or black metal concert. The fans of those genres do indeed lean towards the right, especially if they are fans of metal and nothing but metal.

    I've run in to many racist, homophobic, right wing metal fans. Most of them don't have much of a real political standpoint, they just have right wing reactionary sentiments. I have met many goths and industrial fans who are asian, female, black, transsexual and transgendered, native american, and so forth. I cannot say the same thing about the metal scene. In my own experience, I have never even met a female metalhead, much less a non-white metalhead.

    So, I would concur about metal fans. Not so much about goths.

    As for the body mod crowd, no comment there since I am not familiar enough with that scene to evaluate the political sentiments common to it.

    ReplyDelete
  51. So now the whole goth scene is too "libertarian" and not "anarcho" enough? Aren't all party scenes "libertarian" for the night? You know, dressing up and dancing and doing something different?
    What kind of nightlife (and life in general) do you guys allow?

    ReplyDelete
  52. Just Another Comment16 Jun 2011 15:04:00

    No one said anything of the sort. If you are referring to my post on goths, I was using 'libertarian' in a more generic sense implying a certain degree of social freedom and a live and let live attitude, in contrast to the comment that they held socially conservative politics/views.

    It was certainly not about them being too 'libertarian' and not 'anarcho' enough.

    ReplyDelete
  53. John Eden,
    Thanks for taking the time to respond. People will try to analyse you either way. It's better that it's based on some understanding of where you're coming from than a reflexive assumption about what you might believe. The personal beliefs of posters here don't invalidate their sources but they can affect the way those facts are selected and interpreted - blog posts don't exist in isolation from their authors' lives any more than neofolk lyrics do. Some of the concern about who's be posting probably comes from how it's often an unknown that leaves people free to believe the worst. It helps to put a human face to that.

    I think things like the Stamford Hill division of the gothic SS are useful as a real life example of one of the flaws in the "if you don't like it, don't look at it" argument. It also sounds like your post might be helping to get the inaccuracies in the petition fixed, which can only be a good thing for everybody.

    The Worker-Dandyist blog is great, glad you mentioned that. Maybe the way to redeem those Marx busts is to outfit them with a nice selection of hats.

    ReplyDelete
  54. Sorry sir or lady, I was not referring to your post. I was just noticing that now the focus in the discussion was turning to goths in general and their "live and let live" attitude which apparently is also disliked here. Yes there mostly middlecass not-so subversives. Harmless, not nazi or fascist. So why are they being pulled along into this discussion?

    ReplyDelete
  55. "why are they being pulled along into this discussion?"

    It's a matter of trying to understand the mindset of the Slimelight audience.

    ReplyDelete
  56. The 'mindset' being there really isn't one other than Slimelight being a place they can get dressed up and go to, have a dance and a few drinks where they don't feel they are being or discriminated against. I've been loads of times as I used to live two minutes away on Goswell Road, could get in free as I know a girl who does the door and can drink till 6am. One noticeable thing about the crowd is that while you do get a very small number of folk turning up in uniforms (if military, generally former Czech, from my observation but also a lot of PVC nurses uniforms etc) you also get a lot of , ahem, very 'Rubenesque' ladies, disabled people and certainly a larger racial mix than you will probably find in any other 'alternative music' club in London. As anyone misguided souls turning up to picket the 'fascists descending' on the venue may be a tad surprised to witness.

    Still, they're all fascist apololgists and enablers by default so don't let that get in the way of your argument.

    ReplyDelete
  57. Just Another Comment16 Jun 2011 17:34:00

    The 'mindset' being there really isn't one other than Slimelight being a place they can get dressed up and go to, have a dance and a few drinks where they don't feel they are being or discriminated against.

    This is similar to my own experience with 'the scene' in the U.S. I don't think anyone is going to seriously dispute that the majority of the audience do not have any specific political sentiments, and are probably rather apathetic and not terribly informed about politics in general.

    I would say that many might even make the same objections that this blog is making to the bands in question if they knew all of this information. But none of this is readily apparent, and since the club patrons are probably not that well versed in politics and history then they likely do not recognize the dubious nature of bands in question.

    Even if they attend the show that does not making them 'apologists' or 'enablers', not if they have absolutely no idea what this issue is all about. The fans who do know about these problems are another matter. The same applies to the people organizing the gig who are not politically aligned with the groups in question.

    I don't think anyone here is trying to slander the innocent club goers of Slimelight, and trying to imply otherwise does nothing but confuse matters.

    ReplyDelete
  58. @Anonymous: The argument isn't that they are all apologists for fascism - the argument (about libertarianism, the politics of the audience, etc., taking place - a bit confusingly - both here and in the comments to the previous post) is that many, in the name of 'free speech' believe it would be OK if, for example, a member of a band playing at their favourite club started racially abusing black members of the audience, as Whitehouse were reputed to have done.

    I am not in any way saying that that is on the agenda for the gig next week; I am saying that if it were on the agenda, that would be OK in principle with a lot of the audience, because they believe in 'free speech'.

    (In saying that I am taking into account not only the comment above about 'live and let live' but also a comment a few minutes ago on another post that says "Banning free expression... either by direct action or pressure is a kind of totalitarianism. It gives implicit permission for others to take action to ban YOUR free expression")

    ReplyDelete
  59. "The argument isn't that they are all apologists for fascism - the argument (about libertarianism, the politics of the audience, etc., taking place - a bit confusingly - both here and in the comments to the previous post) is that many, in the name of 'free speech' believe it would be OK if, for example, a member of a band playing at their favourite club started racially abusing black members of the audience, as Whitehouse were reputed to have done."

    That is total and utter bollocks and bullshit on every level and you know it is as well as I do. Your increasing absurdies to justify your utenable position and the Frankenstein's monster you have created with this 'campaign' against the Slimelight is making you look like the 9/11-7/7 tin-foil hatted 'Truther' brigade and their claims of hologrames and black helicopters around the twin towers.

    ReplyDelete
  60. While we're on the subject of contempt for the facts, Zeena, my name is spelled "Ayers" not "Ayres".

    ReplyDelete
  61. I hear whitehouse abuse everyone when they play.

    ReplyDelete
  62. The post-idustrial scene in America is more openly racially oriented and unlike Europe consists more of people from ex-punk and ex-squatter backgrounds rather then ex-goths.

    -Oneiric Imperium

    ReplyDelete
  63. You guys were all calling for ULU student union venue to be closed when SJ played a MUCH higher profile gig with Merzbow there a couple of years back... right?

    ReplyDelete
  64. Bitter left wing bullies.

    ReplyDelete
  65. or, when they played Koko supporting Sonic Youth a couple of years ago? Yea??

    ReplyDelete
  66. @Anon. No one has asked for any venue to be closed, for whatever reason, as far as I can see. And specifically with regard to Sutcliffe Jugend playing at Slimelight, I don't recall anyone recommending any particular course of action. I'm not sure if you are trolling, or if you are implying that people have some special beef against Slimelight in particular (as opposed to, say, ULU), or what. People have simply been discussing the politics of SJ/Whitehouse/Ramleh and their work, and therefore the politics of transgression, aestheticism and related issues. Are you saying that they shouldn't?

    Also it's hard to make sense of your question since it is addressed to 'you guys', as if all of the commenters here had the same opinion. It should be clear enough by now that even the main contributors to the blog don't share the same politics or approach to the issues. Who was your question aimed at?

    The issue of Sotos & SJ was raised simply because their gig is being promoted by the same person who is promoting the Sol/6 Comm event, and when it was raised above it was claimed that such artists also raise questions about what is and isn't acceptable in art and performance - a question which even SJ presumably consider valid, since - as someone points out above - they have implied that the White Power artwork isn't acceptable and that they somehow regret it.

    Now, whatever anyone thinks about their work, at least it is clear from such statements that they think it valid in principle to ask these questions.

    I happen to know that in the past various individuals I've spoken to have petitioned venues and the like when they thought they shouldn't be hosting particular gigs (there was a previous spat when Slimelight hosted Boyd Rice), but that was down to the individuals concerned. I don't know of anyone personally who called for the gigs you mentioned to be stopped for any reason at all.

    ReplyDelete
  67. Now if only the people who are possibly planning action against the Sol/6comm gig would read all these nuances...

    ReplyDelete
  68. The politics of SJ/Whitehouse/Ramleh ? as far as I know there there isn't a lot of public awareness about the politics of these bands. Let's face it, not a lot of people outside of a small obsessive scene in which critical thinking is sorely lacking will have heard of them. And when they've been written up a mainstream mags ie The Wire, their political stance has somehow been avoided - hence little opposition when ULU has promoted them. I'm glad this blog is raising awareness and debate about this elephant in the room.

    ReplyDelete
  69. Strelnikov says "I was struck by how many commenters on the Slimelight Facebook discussion implied that the Slimelight clientele were mostly of the left". Just on the basis of personal experience, we all know they're mostly NOT "of the left", but fact that a person from the Slimelight scene confirms (above) that most Slimelight patrons regard critics of their right-wing gigs as being "fucking communists" proves Slime clientelle's mostly not left-wing.

    So, Slimelight patrons perceive Anti-Fascists as being the "extremists", despite the fact that it was a de-facto leader of their scene, William Bennett, who dedicated his life to EXTREME music and ideas, even using the word "Extreme" in several album titles (y'know, if you want a clue about who's extremist, it's a bit of a giveaway, that word "extreme"). In the minds of these people it's the Anti-Fascists who are more "extreme" than people who talk about "the sublime pleasures of child abuse". What that tells you about is the minds of those people!

    Either way, I'm not a Communist ;)

    ReplyDelete
  70. Just Another Comment17 Jun 2011 19:44:00

    Well, when one actually HEARS SJ, it is VERY easy to dismiss the idea that they can have any impact on anything, because it is apparent that only a tiny number of people will ever even bother with them. Not to say it shouldn't be discussed or anything, but SJ/Ramleh/Sotos/Etc. are even less potentially appealing than neofolk.

    ReplyDelete
  71. that a person from the Slimelight scene confirms (above) that most Slimelight patrons regard critics of their right-wing gigs as being "fucking communists" proves Slime clientelle's mostly not left-wing.

    My personal conversations with a few people - most of whom have never been to Slimelight - shouldn't be taken as representative of the venue's regular patrons, who have a more diverse range of opinions on these matters than you give them credit for.

    I doubt many of the people I talked to would consider William Bennett their "leader" or even somebody they take an interest in, but they usually do see a difference between political activity in the "real world" and the use of extreme imagery in music.

    Nor do I think they see the you as communists per se, but as being involved in a milieu which is often attractive to the radical left in general.

    ReplyDelete
  72. Just Another Comment18 Jun 2011 11:30:00

    To make a comparison...perhaps the use of 'communist' is more a bit of slang, rather than anything indicating political ideology?

    In America, people whine about 'liberals' in cases like this, or 'political correctness'. You hear this bleating even from people who are not right leaning in any meaningful sense. It's just a common phrase that is so well know that people know to use it to refer to matters of this sort.

    So, it may not really indicate and political ideology in many, or even most cases.

    ReplyDelete
  73. AHHHHHHHH!! I gettit now, you've been meaning THIS WIlliam Bennett all along: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Bennett

    Doh!

    ReplyDelete
  74. perhaps the use of 'communist' is more a bit of slang, rather than anything indicating political ideology?

    I think it's a bit of both, analogous to how "fascist" is used here for a lot of people who wouldn't necessarily identify themselves as such but have ideas popularly considered to be close enough.

    ReplyDelete
  75. re: politics of Whitehouse/Ramleh

    Bennett self-defined as broadly left/libertarian on his blog a couple of years ago

    http://williambennett.blogspot.com/2007/04/pc.html

    Gary Mundy of Ramleh talks about their early use of fascist imagery in the first issue of As Loud As Possible magazine, and sounds fairly contrite about the whole thing.

    FWIW - personally I think both groups started off steeped in the language of provocation and grew into something slightly more nuanced and interesting. Not to say there isn't some problematic content in there, but the first post upthread - suggesting Whitehouse "revel in Nazi imagery and openly promote rape and child-sex abuse" - seems to be a rather hysterical, nuance-missing assessment of what they do.

    Mind you, less sure SJ are capable of nuance, given that in interview, at least, they seem to be thick as two short planks.

    Anonymous wrote "So, Slimelight patrons perceive Anti-Fascists as being the "extremists", despite the fact that it was a de-facto leader of their scene, William Bennett, who dedicated his life to EXTREME music and ideas, even using the word "Extreme" in several album titles (y'know, if you want a clue about who's extremist, it's a bit of a giveaway, that word "extreme")..."

    Faultless logic here. By this virtue, we'd probably better watch out for extreme sports fans too. Maybe picket a snowboarding shop?

    ReplyDelete
  76. This isn't about fascism. I just wanted to make the point that Peter Sotos - the person who isn't now playing the Slimelight Gig - seems to think this is 'art'

    Published by Nine-Banded Books in 2010.

    Peter Sotos recounts the abduction and murder of 8-year-old Sarah Payne, a crime that stunned England and spawned an aftermath of reactionary outcry and violent protest. Through news bites and tabloid clippings reassembled in reverse chronology, Sotos examines the media apotheosis of Payne’s parents in the wake of her disappearance, scrutinizes the hidden motives of reporters and citizens driven to hysterical excess by grief, vengeance, and opportunism, and illumines the insatiable lusts that govern the actions of sexual predators. Punctuated by philosophical overtures and self-deprecating quips, Comfort and Critique is a brutal meditation on fantasy and desire set against a backdrop of media banter and illicit back room activity in bars and underground sex clubs. Supplemented by over 100 photos, this volume is possibly Sotos’ most revealing and multi-faceted work to date.
    "Self-deprecating quips"??
    Tell the same jokes to her mother who has had a stroke at the age of 40 - who dreampt when she was on her [possible] death bed that she may see her daughter again...
    So - the person who invited this to come and play is a "nice person". I just don't understand.

    ReplyDelete
  77. Just Another Comment19 Jun 2011 02:11:00

    That his material is in 'bad taste' is so obvious as to be an almost banal observation, but it is one that cannot really be made enough either.

    The fact that his intentions are so unclear makes it even more difficult to get a handle on the issue.

    And even if he is trying to make some legitimate point or is engaged in a bona fide artistic venture, there is also the question as to whether it is any good. As I implied in another thread here, he does not seem to be covering any ground that has not been covered before in a variety of other ways. He just seems to do it with this particularly 'brutal' edge that makes readers wince. But one could certainly make the argument that this is a style vs substance issue, and his 'extreme' approach primarily serves to mask a fundamental lack of content and/or originality.

    The notoriety of his conviction in the 1980's does a lot to blur things even further. Throbbing Gristle can sing about all kinds of things that are ominous, scary, tasteless, etc. but at the end of the day, Gen was a kind of hippie at heart, and even in their blue camo uniforms Cosey and Chris were utterly unmenacing. It isn't too hard to tell that TG was never TRULY endorsing any of the 'evil' subjects they sometimes sang about.

    Sotos, however, he is known for that conviction. That makes it seem more likely to observers that maybe he DOES advocate the things he writes about. Whether this perception is justified or not is another matter. Appearing on a bill with Sutcliffe Jugend, themselves known for similar 'ambiguity', does little to improve his case.

    As a funny aside...I once saw a Sotos book in a Barnes and Noble. Seriously. If I recall, it was in the feminism/womens studies section or something. I don't recall which one it was, however.

    ReplyDelete
  78. jane Canter: There is a great deal of compassion in that book for Michael and Sara Payne, as well as vicious criticism of Rebekah Wade's exploitation of their misery to sell newspapers. It really is remarkable how so few people who comment on Peter Sotos's work have actually read it.

    ReplyDelete
  79. Pretty sure he thinks that's art, not 'art'.

    ReplyDelete
  80. Anonymous -
    - firstly you wrote
    "There is a great deal of compassion in that book for Michael and Sara Payne"
    is this an example of Sotos compassion? the following is a quote from a positive review of the book you correctly assume I haven't read [and on the basis of quotes like this alone I do not intend to]
    'As Sotos writes about Mother Payne, “Mothers like you start sucking cock, in the pejorative sense, soon after you let the press comfort and then define you.”'
    and this
    'Then again: “What do I care about your little fucking murdered child when there are human toilet bowels who say they care just as much as you.”'

    So, anonymous -no doubt you'll want to correct what I presume is a error - bowels should be bowls - but I am only guessing at that as I am a person who hasn't read the book whereas you, the self-assured bibliophile, have [sorry, am I guilty of calling you the wrong type of 'phile'there?].

    One question - where exactly is the compassion in that language? would you like someone to address your own mother if a brother or sister of yours had been so horribly used and murdered as Sarah Payne was? I don't dispute that the press and media handling is salacious - but Sotos only seems at best to be hugely amplifying and displaying the worst aspects of the process.
    Again, from the same review -
    'Sotos tells us again and again that there's no point to any of this. His biggest attachment is to his archives—these collections of articles, photo clippings (a generous portion are included in the back of the book), mediated filth—and his biggest conflict is whether or not to make a magazine as a sort of shrine to this information, to share it with others. His inner landscape is one of depravity and rot laced with the sort of laziness that encapsulates any perversion, and yet with Sotos there's a buried desperation to communicate his obsessions, to scream out at the victims who allow themselves to be raped and deconstructed in the public eye: “Is it possible that the mother of the loudest campaign to rid the world of pedophiles ever has come through these hard slow days without a clue as to just how selfish pedophiles are as a small breed.”'
    Here is the review;
    http://www.nypress.com/article-11832-fucked-in-the-head.html

    The reviewers own line above, repeated;
    "at the victims who allow themselves to be raped and deconstructed in the public eye"

    We are talking in part about a little girl here - so - She let herself be raped?? this beggars belief...

    Whether he [Sotos] thinks its 'art' or art [or 'Art'] for that matter, it isn't.
    What it is is an assault on people who have already suffered more than I presume you can ever know as a result of anothers perversion.

    He - the writer of the review and you, for defending him, should all be thoroughly ashamed of youselves.

    ReplyDelete
  81. @Jane Canter:

    Peter Sotos himself has said he doesn't want anyone to try to defend his work. His books are no longer available via any mainstream outlets due to their deeply offensive nature. There is of course a probability that the endless attacks on someone who is a very obscure literary figure will lead to an image as 'the most dangerous writer alive' and attract thrill-seekers to his books.

    For what it's worth, having read 'Comfort & Critique' myself, I did sense a great deal of compassion for the victims and an overwhelming sadness. He works his way through the media's cruel and salacious stare at the Paynes' msrriage problems following the murder, through the News of the World hysteria and the Paulgrove riots and all the money generated by the murder, all the while mixing in his own thoroughly unpleasant experiences from his real-life sex life as a promiscuous and self-loathing gay man, not skimping on every nasty vile thought which crosses his mind, back to the crime itself and ends by saying (I am paraphrasing as I don't have the book to hand) "Maybe it all wasn't supposed to get this out of control. Maybe someone is waiting for someone to, somehow, make things better". A very sad ending. How can we make it better?

    Maybe it's just my reading of the book which saw it as ultimately an attempt at empathy from a person who lives in a very dark world. Maybe the kindness in his books is just as much of a pose as the sadism. I don't know. His work is indefensible, as he points out.

    ReplyDelete
  82. Just Another Comment19 Jun 2011 18:45:00

    I have to side with Jane here. Sotos himself has implied that there is nothing more to his work that what appears on the surface. I've always thought that attempts to give it more meaning by readers was usually just projection, or misinterpretation.

    It is possible, and I think more justified, to view his work as a kind of grotesque parody of the sensationalism and voyeurism that the media and the public exhibit in regards to this subject matter, but even then there does not seem to be any evidence to support the idea that this is what Sotos intends to do.

    I must say, I am quite enjoying analyzing these issues and the individuals involved! Let us keep this going.

    ReplyDelete
  83. "Sotos himself has implied that there is nothing more to his work that what appears on the surface."

    Itself a position, essentially shared with, if not appropriated from, Francis Bacon.

    One thing I will say about Peter Sotos work is that I think there is no greater writer who validates the Derrida / Lacan hypothesis of the 'receiver' (or reader) of a text making their own 'meaning' of it.

    Possibly why the only author whose work his paralells is was Andrea Dworkin. Whilst many may perceive her writing (and, for the record, I have read all her books and also studied feminist theory at university) as pro-women or sexually liberationist, I would conversely argue that in fact it is quite savagely misogynistic, perpetually casting women as 'victims' and utilising examples of women who have been victimised, abused, raped and murdered to validate this position. A position I think was unequivocally illustrated when a number of rapists on trial charted the Dworkin/MacKinnon ordinance (claiming pornographers should be held legally responsible for incidents of rape) in their defence as an abdication of responsibility for their actions.

    Anyway, i'm not here to 'defend' Sotos. I have just never seen any causality resulting from his work , which surely would be the only reason to call for any artistic media to be censored; the rehabilitation and legitimisation of fascism through the imagery used by certain neo-fok acts evidently being the dialectic of this site.

    ReplyDelete
  84. Just Another Comment20 Jun 2011 12:32:00

    One thing I will say about Peter Sotos work is that I think there is no greater writer who validates the Derrida / Lacan hypothesis of the 'receiver' (or reader) of a text making their own 'meaning' of it.

    Well, I do not deny that is happening. But if that is your position, then in a way it is more or less the same as mine I suppose. My position summed up thusly; Sotos has his own personal reasons for writing what he does. He probably writes it just because he has a simple interest in it, and nothing more. Any further meaning to it is imposed by readers.

    ReplyDelete
  85. Well, it would be fairly strange to have written ten or so books on a subject if you didn't have an 'interest' in it, no? Coupled with the fact that, with a conviction of his nature, I should imagine it's one of the few ways he can make a living. Supply & demand. People (vicariously) like being taken to dark places. It doesn't mean they'd want to live in them.

    ReplyDelete
  86. Just Another Comment20 Jun 2011 14:32:00

    Perhaps a better way to put it...he has a vicarious, perhaps prurient/sexual interest in this matter, and there is no higher motive beyond that. And this is the only reason he writes his books.

    As for making a living, he claims in the interview posted above that he works, presumably in a regular day job.

    ReplyDelete
  87. Mercy said [June 19 - 18.45] "I have just never seen any causality resulting from his work".
    I don't know about 'causality' arising from Sotos work either - but how can you make a statement like that that I feel implies that there hasn't been any causality without stating your boundaries of experience? do you know the family of the deceased - do you know that that they haven't seen or heard of Sotos and what he has done as regards their daughter ?]. I figure I know your response - "no - but do YOU know them either?".
    In fact - I suspect that because the format of the book has altered there HAS been some knowledge of it by the family, or representatives of the family - the cover is changed - and I believe other images within the book too. [Although I must admit -this may be merely the owners of copyrighted material asserting their rights].

    This brings me to empathy - I do percieve an almost total lack of it, or alternately at least a skewing of empathy in many of these remarks - at times to an almost sociopathic degree. To give examples - along the lines of
    "poor Ted Bundy! how sad for him!
    and the same sympathy goes out to Richard Ramirez, Albert Fish, Joseph Kalinger and Jeffrey Dahmer" for example -
    empathy with the person causing the problem along the lines of "Poor Man! he skinned his knuckles whilst sawing that persons head off!"[yes, I know sotos is only a writer and hasn't committed the atrocities of the above list - merely revelled in their exploits - or similar]
    But - where is the empathy for Sarah and her family?
    Can you - or do you think it is 'right and proper'
    to talk so dispassionately - even coldly, about
    such matters? Or is that always going to be the case - intellectual debate doomed to be dispassionate?. Does passion; love or revulsion of any kind always rule out the statements and views of people in the grip of such emotion?. For the record, I obviously don't. [This is a question that looms large over the wider issues of this website - in fact, I could stop myself here and say that I am not surpised to find such a lack of empathy here as this is often endemic in the minds of people who support such creeds as fascism or stalinism - to name but two examples of cold societal theory].
    My main problem by far with what Sotos does is the identification of real people from the present day with real loss and tragedy in their lives - not abstract fictitious constructs who may simply share the same experience.
    I think it is sadly telling that nobody has subsequently
    responded to the question posited by Jane Canter,[June 19, 10.12] above;
    "would you like someone to address your own mother if a brother or sister of yours had been so horribly used and murdered as Sarah Payne was?"
    It is a perfectly reasonable, sensible and oft-asked question in this situation - and one that deserves more than a presumed "no" in response [there goes empathy, again - I suggest the defenders or dispassionate observers of Sotos try it out and apply it where its truly deserved].

    ReplyDelete
  88. If I may take the debate back to fascism now - and just quote from the above article [again, very measured and rational piece, John Eden]

    "The key question is: if the gig does go ahead, will fascists operating in Neofolk be stronger or weaker? My feeling is that whilst they may be on the back foot temporarily, they will be in a much stronger position in future. People will be able say “Islington Council and the Police looked into all this and they couldn't find anything wrong". This will then be lapped up by fans and fascist apologists and quoted ad nauseum alongside Tony Wakeford’s content-free statement from 2007.

    My position is that the main role we have is still to discuss, expose and theorise about Neofolk - to attack it on the cultural level that it operates. Perhaps that can include intervening at events (and count me in if any glaring at Goths is needed). But let’s get it right – taking shortcuts is completely counterproductive."

    ReplyDelete
  89. Just Another Comment22 Jun 2011 16:06:00

    Dan's comments bring to mind a number of attitudes and remarks made in this clique over the years. I want to relate a specific example that is perhaps more sickening and absurd than anything Sotos has done, since it involved direct insults to the parent of a murder victim. Boyd Rice, Moynihan, and James Mason mocked and insulted Doris Tate on a radio show in the early 90's.

    In the infamous Bob Larson interview with Boyd Rice, Michael Moynihan, and James Mason, that trio of shit further shamed themselves with their behavior.

    Sotos limits his actions to writing books and dodging the issues by claiming some kind of...I don't know...distance or whatever. But a much uglier example was on display in the Larson segment.

    To summarize; Boyd Rice, Mikey Moynihan, and nazi James Mason were guests to talk about Charles Manson and how great he was. Also present, via phone, was Doris Tate, Sharon Tate's mother. Rice, Moynihan, and Mason relentlessly mocked her. Mason joked about her work with Parents of Murdered Children of L.A. Rice and Moynihan said that Sharons murder was the best thing that ever happened to Doris Tate since it gave her an 'identity' and allowed her to go on talk shows. The laugh at her, and generally act like complete sociopathic buffoons.

    In the same interview, Moynihan told Larson that he had 'closed his heart to pity'. That, presumably, includes empathy, no?

    Sharon Tate was insulted, her unborn child was called worthless, and Mason even called it 'obnoxious', all while the this trinity of stupidity extolled the virtues and greatness of Charles Manson, saying he was this wonderful philosopher who is misunderstood.

    That whole farce was telling, as it was an example this sort of thing moving beyond mere distanced rhetoric, with two figures of this musical scene actually insulting the parent of a murder victim directly, in real time.

    The entire interview can be heard at Boyd Rice's official website. It is located on the audio files page, and is the fifth Bob Larson interview. It signifies that little Mikey Moynihan is also present in the interview, so you should find it no problem.

    This specific example is a prime example of why Rice and Moynihan in particular are pretty far beyond any kind of redemption at this point. Of course, Rice has always tried to dress this up as some kind of enlightened attitude on the brutal nature of man or something else that a freshman level biology or philosophy course would debunk in a few weeks.

    Rice himself, perhaps more than many others in this musical clique, comes off as a genuine narcissist in many interviews. Maybe he's just putting everyone on, but that seems unlikely. I think phrases like 'narcissist', 'sociopath', etc. are thrown around too loosely these days (much that same way that some people think fascism is an overused term) so I do not use the term lightly when referring to Rice. (With most people in this world, especially the fans, I think there is less pathology and more adolescent 'tough guy' posturing.)

    Of course, this also brings us back to the question of Sotos supposedly having compassion for the victims in his work, as someone claimed above. I still don't see it, at all.

    ReplyDelete
  90. Wakeford's Sol Invictus is a multi-faith and LGBT-friendly outfit singing inoffensive neo-folk. Leagas's 6Comm is basically a 'world music' project that would not be out of place at the old WOMAD festival. The worst threat this Slimelight gig poses is that people might start getting tribal tattoos whilst listening to songs around campfires sung by middle-aged liberals in kaftans. Really.
    Like some other commenters have opined, if you're looking for a cause to fight, look elsewhere, where the action is hot, heavy and real. But this Slimelight neo-folk thing is cold porridge frankly, and all the hot air blown on it so far ain't gonna heat it up.

    ReplyDelete
  91. Christ, Leon, you're a fucking idiot - I'm sorry - i can't even bring myself to adopt reasoned argument with you - I concur that what might be expected on the inside of the gig is a non-event - a polite tea party - with nothing of any import to report ON THE FACE OF IT apart from the carnage raging outside [I put that last bit in for your benefit] "hot heavy and real"? were you playing with yourself when you wrote that? better stick some of your cold porridge down your trousers then, dirty boy..and whilst you are cooling off take time read the relevant blogs on here again [there are many] and see if some of the facts go in stay in and are acted on - unless as I suspect, you are just another stupid troll.

    ReplyDelete
  92. "Hostage LXVI" — stop mewling, pussy-boy. Have you actually HEARD the bands you are flinging shit at, like some chimp in the zoo? Fuck the blogs on here, and the quarter-of-a-century old news and laughable guilt by association. I've SEEN the bands, and I know what they ACTUALLY do. Does knowing what you're talking about seem such a bizarre thing?
    OK — so you have romantic and fatuous notions of being a radical — many sad wimps without girlfriends are the same. Go away and have a good cry and a wank. Roll on Saturday! My girlfriend will kick the shit out of you with pleasure!

    ReplyDelete
  93. Leon - so you've wasted money on this crap? I've heard as much as I want on Myspace of this so-called music - for free - as if they are going to be better at it live - and from the pictures I don't think any of them are capable of holding the attention through charisma alone, unless there just not fotogenic.
    So, you and your girlfriend [the tough one you hide behind] are going, are you? Love it that you're so macho and obviously hard and virile - in fact I can tell that you love yourself SO much that you have to wipe down your mirror every day after your daily good old one-to-one session - thats £32 wasted - who said this crap wasn't a money-spinner? no wonder some of the people playing who probably are not hitler-lovers are so keen to put aside any pride [unless thats 'white pride'] and take up arms alongside their nazi-loving mates - and remember to wear a big badge with your name on it - you can all speak to the antifa, fascists!

    ReplyDelete
  94. Leon said

    "But this Slimelight neo-folk thing is cold porridge frankly, and all the hot air blown on it so far ain't gonna heat it up."
    "Roll on Saturday! My girlfriend will kick the shit out of you with pleasure!"
    Thats nice - It must be his girlfriend who wants to go.
    Hes spending all that money on cold porridge - can he be my boyfriend? maybe hes on the guestlist.
    Nice name - is it really yours? I used to know a Leon.

    ReplyDelete
  95. Yes, I'm spending lots of cash on the 6Comm world music par-tay! I'm serious — that's all it is, no joke! No swastikas, no bullshit, no nazis, No Racist Master Plan. The bloggers here don't know a f'king thing. My girlfriend is a friend of Freya Aswynn — together they could tear any one of the LMHR haters a new arse. They're madwomen, both of them.
    I used to know a Victoria . . . but she was Tiny Rowland's daughter — a Jewish millionairess who let me snort coke from her bosom. That's not you, is it Plum?

    ReplyDelete
  96. @ Leon: "The bloggers here don't know a f'king thing."

    This blogger does. Personal experience. I've already made my contributions about this scene and the players in it. Freya is the exception (I haven't met or seen her) and I'm glad you mention her because it's her comments on race and performance I take issue with. Don't be too much in awe. It makes you look sad. Gosh, you're so chuffed you're getting laid and have bagged yourself a girl you need the world to know. Quite a few men on the scene can't believe it when they pull. They have a hard enough time getting over the fact they're talking to a girl. (if they can find one to talk to.) I'm glad to be out of it.

    ReplyDelete
  97. Leon – although you blew it with the anti-semitic smear in your last sentence, you've done well to bring the fragrant Freya Aswynn back into the discourse.

    This is the same Freya Aswynn who, despite being wedded to Wotan, was co-habiting in Scotland a few years back with Alan Winder? That's Alan Winder, veteran fascist – British Movement activist, BNP organiser for Eastbourne and the man in charge of the Invisible Empire, United Klans of Europe (IEUKE). Winder stated, in a letter to KKK members, that he intended "to make the IEUKE the leading group throughout Europe for the fight for the preservation of our race and community and the exile of the Jewish and mud races".

    Winder's membership of a member of the Inland Revenue Staff Federation ended when he was accused of passing internal documents to Steve Sargent and David Myatt of the National Socialist Movement. Some of this information about trade unionists who he worked with
    appeared on ‘Stormer’ Hit Lists. (For information on David Myatt and the NSM, see "Nazi Nail Bomber").

    Nice people to do business with.

    ReplyDelete
  98. So calling a Jewish millionairess a "Jewish millionairess" is an anti-semitic smear? Dickhead. More proof that the common sense and brain power of many blog commenters is miserably weak.
    Being politically 'committed" is no excuse for being an imbecile. Or maybe all the asshole comments are by the same frustrated person? I think know who you are.

    ReplyDelete
  99. Leon said "So calling a Jewish millionairess a "Jewish millionairess" is an anti-semitic smear?"

    When it comes from your poison pen, then yes. Is the fact that she's a millionairess predicated upon her being Jewish? If not, why mention it? You choose the language you come out with, so at least grow a vertebrae or two and defend it.

    You know fuck all about the 'politics' or the 'commitment' of anyone here, by the way, beyond the fact that they despise fascism (or whatever clever-dick euphemism your heroes in the intellectual vanguard toss around this week).

    ReplyDelete
  100. Attended the gig. Saw exactly two people with identifiable "Nazi imagery" tattoos, and that's it in terms of anyone kind of putting it out there that they're some kind of racist/fascist sympathiser. Another friend who wanted to keep a lookout for any actual said he thought my count was about right--might have been as many as four such individiuals, in a crowd of hundreds. No Nazi or "fascist-style" regalia in sight--unless you count my leather trousers or the de rigeur black clothing seen at any goth or industrial gig. There were no racist or fascist groups holding a meeting or passing out flyers inside, although there were quite a few anti-racist/anti-fascist flyers, stickers and t-shirts on display. The only literature on sale was a left-wing goth magazine. Indeed, I saw organiser Gaya getting her photo taken with a LMHR shirt! There were no racist or fascist statements made from the stage (no surprise, as no racist/fascist bands were playing...)
    What actually happened? Some bands played--and it was actually rather good, a bit more impassioned than a typical neofolk gig. Many people I spoke to noted that like me, while not big fans of most or all of the acts present, they had felt compelled to come along as a statement.
    After the bands played, people danced. In one room some cyber group played (they were pretty wretched) and people dressed oddly danced around with glowsticks. Another DJ came on and we did some more dancing. I stopped in backstage and had a nice piece of cake. I bumped into several Asian and Jewish mates, all having a good time. Saw a few Black folks there as well, on the dancefloor or at the bar, not people I knew so didn't get a chance to chat. The only people I talked to who felt intimidated were those who were shouted at by some numpties with a megaphone on their way in... because it's pretty unpleasant to be called a Nazi, when you're not.
    Just thought you might like to know...

    ReplyDelete
  101. Leon said... "So calling a Jewish millionairess a "Jewish millionairess" is an anti-semitic smear?"

    Is the fact that she's a millionairess predicated upon her being Jewish? If the answer is 'No', then why did it merit a mention?

    You don't "know" who anyone posting here is, because there are a multitude of voices, positions and opinions. The only thing they have in common is a disgust at fascist opportunism, wherever it occurs.

    ReplyDelete
  102. Leon - there was certainly some kind of 'smear' - you said it yourself! coke, was it? you are a sad, inadequate tosser if you come out with that kind of boastful sexist merde - that is all we need to know about you - anything else shrivels to the size of your dick [hereafter presumed miniscule] when predicated on that end statement of yours - your aged, caveman inhumanity negates anything you may say on any subject by exposing the mainspring of inhumanity that bubbles in your wretched head[s] - thus reducing your aerated spume to a speck of acidic irrelevance.

    ReplyDelete
  103. Leon, a huge number of people commenting here come from this 'scene.' The idea that you have some special knowledge of it doesn't jive with that, and it's obvious from your comments you have hardly even bothered to read the site at all.

    The apologists here are amazing, most of you seem to have the reasoning power of fifth graders, and that's being polite.

    No one on here is on a witchunt, in fact the really awesome thing about this site is that unlike many other music-based Antifascist ventures, it actually relies on impeccably researched and presented fact.

    Seriously I can't believe you Totenkopf-drooling drones keep spewing out the same ridiculous, infantile arguments and objections page after page.

    One thing I can say, apparently lack of education and fundamental use of logic isn't just an American problem after all.

    Perhaps all the years of listening to sad old dickheads hock their piles of rancid romantic good have just rotted your brains.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "impeccably researched and presented fact"???

      Look a bit more closely at what you're reading. Just because something is intelligently presented doesn't mean it should be taken as truth.

      Just a very small example. An article previously claimed that the Neofolk CD Looking for Europe had "an Iron Cross on the front".

      First off the symbol on the front isn't an "Iron Cross"!! Just search the CD at the Amazon to see what I mean. Secondly an Iron Cross on its own isn't actually a fascist/nazi device anyway. It was presented as a primarily Prussian award during the mid-1800's around the time of the Austro-Prussian and Franco-Prussian Wars. It was then incorporated as an Imperial German device thereafter. During WW2 Hitler 'Nazified' it by adding the spinning swastika in the center. Thereby combining the symbolism and ideology of National Socialism with the traditions of Prussian Militarism. After the war, German veterans were allowed to replace their Nazi Iron crosses with 'denazified' ones where the swastika had been removed. These were done in agreement with the occupying allied powers.

      So, some friendly advice, if you consider yourself an antifascist (like myself) start reading about your enemy and understand exactly what it is that you're in opposition to. Otherwise you look foolish and only discredit the cause you claim to uphold.

      To be honest I think most people's time would be better spent elsewhere than this blog site...especially if you're making such obvious mistakes and people haven't got the wherewithall to challenge them.

      Delete
  104. Of course people have 'the wherewithal' to correct any errors they find here. You just did, and you will not be the first or last. I don't see your point.

    ReplyDelete
  105. Interesting that our self-stated antifascist - above - quite rightly said what the cross is NOT [yes, one sloppy piece of research - but - you check all things you read anyway, reader, right?] - but NOT what the cross on the front of 'LOOKING FOR EUROPE' is - or whether it too is used both for 'innocent' purposes and non-innocent purposes. It is the "Cross Potent' and it was used, with additions, by nationalists in Puerto Rico very recently - but its historic use - unadorned - by fascists - is thus - from wiki - In 1934 it became the emblem of the Austrofascist Federal State of Austria, adopted from the ruling Fatherland's Front, an authoritarian traditionalist political organisation led by Chancellor Engelbert Dollfuss. And there are probably other uses by both innocent parties and also by fascists. So - yes - sloppy - but are you a REAL antifascist or just an annoying pedant, or both? [but do please try to be accurate, Webmaster and researchers]

    ReplyDelete

Please at least use a pseudonym so it's possible to follow your argument if you make multiple posts