Racism and Resistance in Europe
The face of Western Europe has been fundamentally changed by labor migration in the last few decades. But the racist far right apparently dreams of turning back the clock by whatever means necessary. Ron Blom evaluates the strength of the far right in various European countries, as well as the organisations that exist to fight racists and fascists AS SOON AS INDUSTRIALIZATION BEGAN IN Western Europe about the turn of the eighteenth century, people were pulled from Western Europe's periphery toward its industrial centers. Just before the First World War labor migration gradually began from Europe's colonies-now called the Third World-particularly from the Maghreb (Algeria, Tunisia and Morocco). By the end of the 1960s this immigration was at its peak. Estimates of the number of migrants who traveled from Turkey, North Africa and other Third World countries to Western Europe range from 20 to 25 million. At the same time migration continued inside Europe. Many Greek, Spanish and Italian "guest workers" tried their luck in Northern and Western Europe. The poor South supplied much of the labor force for Northern European factories. Often "migration chains" were at work: for example Anatolian agricultural workers went first to Istanbul and then as industrial workers to Germany.
With the "new international division of labor" and the beginning of the crisis in 197374, the labor influx came to a halt. It was replaced by farming out of parts of the production process to peripheral regions. European capital no longer drains the Third World's surplus population off to Europe, but instead uses its own countries unemployed, unskilled and flexible workers. Cutting off labor migration was a protective measure in
SMir TOC OIS order to maintain domestic jobs, wage levels and social services: in any event, this is how union leaderships argued for it. One result of union bureaucrats' defensive attitude was that it took them a long time to realize that "guest workers" were here to stay, and that the labor movement had to develop some kind of approach to them.
The decades after 1973 were a time of "family reunification", which has in turn been sharply restricted in the 1990s. Many of the immigrants had put down roots here and had few prospects in their homelands. Now a third phase has begun: social "integration" of minorities. Meanwhile illegal immigrants and refugees continue to arrive. Political refugees arrived regularly though in relatively small numbers in Western Europe after the Second World War, for example from Eastern Europe (just after the war and from Hungary in '56 and Czechoslovakia in *68) but also from other countries (Chile after Pinochet's coup,
Europe * RACISTE Iran, Vietnam, in much greater numbers from ex-Yugoslavia, etc.). Today many "illegals" are refugees whose asylum applications have not been granted.
Immigrants are often unemployed (unemployment is 7% in the Netherlands on average, but 27% for Turks and 44% for Moroccans). If they do have jobs the jobs are usually unskilled, in processing plants, construction and the service sector. Nonetheless, since the early 1980s they have been targeted by an ideological offensive that blames them for the crisis. Fortress Europe
The development of the European Union, a free-trade zone based on more or less open borders, means at the same time that there is more and more discussion about how to shut illegal immigrants out of Europe and its work force. On March 26, 1995 the Schengen accords took effect, and with them a sharply restricted immigration and refugee policy. Capital and goods can circulate freely on the European continent, but not labor. Here the emphasis is on controlling immigrants and refugees along with "terrorists" and "extremists." For years before 1995 police and "anti-terrorism experts" cooperated secretly (without any control by national parliaments or the toothless European parliament) in the "Schengen Committee" and (since 1975) the TREVI group (Terrorism, Radicalism,
July 1996 #279 9
* Europe Extremism, Violence International). Aliens"" papers are being checked more and more often. This has already led in France to an increase in racist identity checks, a number of deaths among young immigrants, and punishment of whole communities by means of large-scale police sweeps (for example, comprehensive identity checks of North Africans after bombings in Paris, based simply on "face value," i.e. skin color).
The definition of "illegal" has also been expanded to cover new groups. All over Europe, rights to social services are increasingly dependent on having the "right" papers. Employers are being made criminally liable for hiring illegals (though one may ask how rigorously this will be enforced). Each of the "Schengen" countries must compile a database with all "aliens" present on its territory, indicating each "alien""'s status. All "illegals" are supposed to be detained whenever they are found so that they can be deported as soon as their identities are established. Those without papers disappear immediately behind bars. All of this is accomplished with the Schengen Information System (SIS), an immense computerized surveillance system including files on more than five million mostly "undesirable aliens."
The Dutch and other European governments have devoted considerable thought to devising means of frightening off as many refugees as possible. Their efforts have been a big success. The total number of applications for refugee status in Western Europe fell from 700,000 in 1992 to 300,000 in 1994, in spite of the Yugoslav crisis. Total applications in the Netherlands fell from 52,500 in 1994 to 28,000 in 1995. Meanwhile more people than ever are being deported. The right of refugees to appeal a negative decision is being fiercely contested.
Fortunately, "Schengen" is not yet working at top efficiency. Countries are not yet able to identify refugees whose applications other countries have rejected, because they cannot agree with each other about how to install the Eurodac computer system, which can compare fingerprints. Also, refugees who arrive in the Netherlands by way of France or Italy are not always automatically sent back (as the law requires): the immigration judge sometimes blocks deportation because it is not clear that the refugees' appeals for asylum will even be considered in France or Italy. 10 International Viewpoint
Rise of the far right
The most important assumption behind all this legislation is clear: Western Europe is supposedly threatened by an "invasion" of immigrant and refugee hordes from the rest of the world, particularly North and Sub-saharan Africa, Asia and Eastern Europe. Therefore the West has to protect itself by all available means from those who are trying to escape from hunger, repression and war. On the one hand illegals and immigrants in general form an underpaid, vulnerable part of the working class; on the other hand they can be blamed for social problems that arise as the welfare state is chipped away. French, Danish and British conservatives have not hesitated to use racist prejudices in order to increase their popularity. But in the words of Jean-Marie Le Pen, leader of the French National Front, people would rather have the original than a copy. The far right has thus been able to break through in one country
On the local level in France, the National Front is clearly no longer a marginal phenomenon. Only the unusual French electoral system ensures that it is at the moment no longer represented in the national parliament. In Antwerp, the largest city in Flanders (Dutch-speaking Belgium), the far right Flemish Bloc won a third of the vote in the last municipal elections. In Italy, Fini's neofascists were briefly represented in the cabinet last year. And in Austria Jörg Haider's far-right Freedom Party was able to win 22% of the vote in the last parliamentary elections.
One notable development is that these parties are winning working-class votes. They thus have a broader constituency than their "natural" electorate (farmers, the middle class, civil servants, etc.). In Austria 43% of industrial workers voted for the social democrats and 41% for the Freedom Party. During the first round of the French presidential elections in the spring of 1995, LePen did best among blue-collar workers (27% percent of them voted for LePen, 20% for the SP and 17% for the CP).2 Another striking detail is that Haider's Freedom Party belonged until recently to the "Liberal International." Various "liberal" parties ("liberal" in the sense of "pro-free-market") are evolving to the right. The popular Dutch "liberal" Frits Bolkestein has been openly appealing to antiimmigrant sentiment. In Germany too, Free Democratic Party leaders like Von Stahl are trying to win back the party's dwindling popularity by setting a nationalist, conservative course.
Luckily, despite many attempts by "revisionist" historians like Professor Ernst Nolte and British amateur historian David Irving to deny the Holocaust, the Nazi past is still generally taboo. The various far-right parties try as much as possible to avoid references to fascism in public (although many old collaborators with German and Italian fascism have found a home in their ranks). But thanks to the intolerance not only of the right but also scandalously enough of social democracy, hatred of immigrants continues to increase. Social democracy, at its wits' end in trying to reform the crisis-ridden economy, has buckled under and joined in spreading xenophobia. No wonder that firebombings take place, not only in Solingen in Germany but also in other countries. Antiracism
Among those trying to resist the rise of racism in Europe, three currents can be broadly distinguished. The first can be found in many European countries under the name "Anti-Fascist Action." It consists largely of young people who look to anarchist or "autonomist" traditions. What is valuable in their approach is that they favor "direct action" and do not avoid confrontation with the far right. Often, however, this takes the form of "Nazi-hunting" by small groups of dedicated activists. In part because of their ideological leanings they have no organized European network, but nevertheless they work in a more or less "pan-European" way. The two other currents require description at greater length. One current, consisting of the most mainstream organizations, includes the Anti-Racist Network for Equality in Europe (ARNEE); the other consists of initiatives linked to particular Marxist groups.
ARNEE was founded in 1992 as a direct response to persistent far-right violence around Europe and the formation of a far-right parliamentary group in the European parliament (the so-called "techincal fraction," which has since fallen apart). The network consists of 15 or so of the major national antiracist organizations of various kinds from ten different Western European countries. Several of them were formed on the model of the French SOS Racism, which came into existence in reaction to a wave of racist murders of young Arabs: it became known in the early
1980s above all through its symbol, a yellow hand with the words "Hands Off My Buddy."
The network adopted a manifesto at a 1994 conference in London calling for joint work against racism on a European scale. "We call on all victims of racism - Blacks, migrants, refugees, Jews, Moslems, Romanies-to link up across Europe," the manifesto says. It takes a stand against all restrictions of the right to asylum. *Everybody living legally in Europe must have the right to vote and be elected, whatever his or her nationality," it says. "Anyone born in a European country, as well as those with five years residence, must have the right to citizenship of that country and of dual citizenship." It also calls for an end to militarization of the North-South conflict and to exploitation of the South, for negotiations over cancellation of the Third World debt, for development cooperation on a basis of equality, and for solidarity. Black leadership
There has been a major discussion in ARNEE on the issue of black leadership. The British member organizations in particular emphasize the importance of having blacks and immigrants in the leadership of all antiracist movements, including in ARNEE's own leadership. The argument is that since blacks and immigrants are the main victims of racism, they should have a veto on all decisions that the network makes. It is of course a practical as well as major political problem that many of ARNEE's member organizations are largely white. In addition many Moroccans and Turks do not consider themselves black, understandably given that they often look more or less like Greeks or Spaniards.
"United for Intercultural Action: Network against Racism, Fascism and Xenophobia and in Support of Migrants and Refugees"UNITED for short-is a looser network that was founded in June 1993 in Cologne, Germany. Its newsletter reaches over 1200 Western and Eastern European groups that resist racism in one way or another. UNITED serves mainly as a means of exchanging information and coordinating activities that ARNEE's member groups and other antiracist organizations carry out in different countries. For example, most European antiracist organizations take part in events around March 21 (International Antiracism Day, when hundreds of thousands demonstrate each year in many European countries) and November 9 (the commemoration of Kristallnacht, the night in 1938 when the Nazis wrecked many synagogues and Jewish shops, killed hundreds of Jews and caused thousands to flee the country. Front groups
The third broad antiracist current is made up of left front groups that have made a name for themselves or play a more or less significant role at a European level. The grandfather of these front groups is the Anti-Nazi League, which dates back to August 1977, when the National Front tried to hold a big march in Lewisham, England. The British Socialist Workers Party responded by organizing a militant counterdemonstration. 5,000 antifascists answered its call. In the action's aftermath the SWP brought together left-wing Labour Party supporters, revolutionary socialists and others to found the Anti-Nazi League. The ANL held many counterdemonstrations when the National Front or other fascists tried to march. It also supported big antiracist rock concerts (Rock against Racism). Tens of thousands took part in ANL actions, a striking success.
Fascists and antifascists attracted somewhat less attention in the early 1980s under Thatcher, when the Tories along with their anti-labor austerity policies pushed through severe restrictions on immigration. But that did not prevent the British National Party (BNP), doubtless encouraged by the success of racists like Le Pen in other countries, from beginning to grow in the early 1990s. The
Europe * Anti-Nazi League also got a second wind and its actions grew once more. In 1993 60,000 antifascists demonstrated in Welling to demand that the BNP office there be closed: the number of racist attacks had risen since the BNP office was opened. Few were surprised when the police attacked the antifascists. The ANL neglected to provide enough marshals, leaving many demonstrators helpless in face of police attacks: this led to a conflict between the SWP-led ANL and the Militant Labour-led Youth against Racism in Europe (YRE).
Youth against Racism in Europe is known above all for the 40,000-strong demonstration it organized in October 1992 in Brussels, with contingents from Germany, Ireland, Britain, Belgium, Czechoslovkia, Poland, Norway, Austria, the Netherlands and France. The YRE leadership in each of those countries is in the hands of British Trotskyist Militant Labour and its sister organizations. Severa years ago Militant Labour also set up a black organization and newspaper named Panther UK. After a few years the organization collapsed, however, at least in part because of divisions between its black leaders and Militant Labour.
In principle it should be possible to work with these front groups in the context of a united antiracist movement. In practice though this can be extraordinary difficult. What perspective?
One of the big problems in antifascist work is that there are many anti-fascist structures (at local, regional, national and as we have seen even European levels), but no real antifascist movement. That has to do with the spontaneous character of much antifascist activity on the one hand and with political and organizational weaknesses on the other. Protests keep on happening, particularly against fascist gatherings. In February 1995 the Swedish trade unions organized a strike against racism. Hundreds of thousands demonstrate around March 21, etc. But it often turns out that the same politicians who are responsible for racist policies, even conservative prime ministers, speak from the stage at these big demonstrations. In between these big, unfocussed demonstrations, mainstream antiracist groups largely limit themselves to spreading information. On the other hand, the anarchistic Nazi-hunters and Trotskyist front groups can sometimes carry off dramatic actions or bring out big crowds, but their devotion to their own groups and tactics can get in the way of broader antiracist movement-building and unity.
How can this situation be turned around? After all, the basis for a broad antifascist
July 1996 #279 11
* Europe movement does exist. Millions of people feel threatened by the rise of the far right. Tens of thousands are prepared to do more than attend a not very effective demonstration once every few months. But this does not automatically lead to building a movement or working out a strategy. The social basis for an antifascist completely driven out of existence, that would not stop millions of people from having racist prejudices. As long as the economic sources exist that make this
MARXISTES! FU movement can only be found among those
SIONISTES!
who are fascism's targets: mainly immigrants, but also gays and lesbians, people with
HORSDES FRES disabilities and others. This has to mean more ideology proliferate it will continually take new organizational forms, either via existing bourthan raising abstract demands and inviting token representatives to Paris: "Marxists, Zionists off campus!" joint discussions. The key requirements are selforganization and mobilization. This brings us back to the whole discussion of "black leadership." As Malcolm X said in 1965: "If we are going to work together, the blacks must take the lead in their own fight. In phase one, the whites led. We're going into phase two now. This phase will be full of rebellion and hostility. Blacks will fight whites for the right to make decisions that affect the struggle in order to arrive at their manhood and sefrespect. The hostility is good. It's been bottled up too long."4 The labor movement
The second strategic issue concerns the unions, particularly organized leftists and rank-and-file oppositionists in their ranks, as well as left intellectuals and feminists. Some of these people see the threat posed by the far right, but the threat is not adequately understood as a central problem that has to be tackled consciously. The changing multi-ethnic and cultural makeup of the West European working class has far increased the importance of fighting against racist prejudices.S The question is how.
Sometimes among antiracist activists one gets a feeling of confusion and disorientation. Racist terror (such as setting immigrants or refugees' houses on fire) is often unpredictable and unfathomable. Only rarely can the victims be directly protected. The enemy is often shadowy, since it rarely appears openly in public on the streets. Fascists reach their intended audiences with magazines, the Internet and other media; during election campaigns with fliers, TV ads and posters hung out of reach. In general they restrict their worst provocations to the media. When antifascists focus only on preventing Nazis from gathering in public and on the explicitly Nazi groups, they hardly make a dent in the far right's real political effectiveness. After all, even if all extreme-right organizations were 12 International Viewpoint geois parties or independently. Therefore, in addition to fundamental social change, fundamental changes in consciousness are needed. Nor are programs in the schools enough. People have to learn to reject racism on the basis of their own experience. Self-organization and solidarity
When people are afraid and feel powerless, when they cannot change anything and have no influence, then they are in danger of being attracted and enlisted by demagogues. But when by contrast they organize themselves to defend their own interests, they change their own consciousness in the process. They shape and change their own environment-mostly in the face of resistance. This is a simple lesson of experience. People who have taken part in initiatives from below are less easily won to authoritarian formulas. This has to be linked to concrete interests: preserving jobs and working conditions, affordable housing, opportunities for women and youth. It has to involve a real social movement.
For this reason the French strikes of November-December 1995 were a hopeful sign. Unlike before, immigrants hitchhiking to work were often given lifts. The experience of taking to the streets together for common interests blew away the racist atmosphere among much of the French population. Marseilles, France's second-largest city and a National Front bulwark, was the site of the most powerful strike movement. There was a real cultural shift. This is what we need to defeat the international of hate and build an international of hope. *
(1) The National Front won 30-40% in major French cities such as Nice and Toulon and elected many mayors, e.g. (2) See A. Casterlleras, "The far right advances," International Viewpoint no. 267(June 1995) and B. Schmid. "Gespaltene Anhuengerschaft: Frankreichs Rechtsextremisten vor strategischen Problemen," Sozialistische Zeitung no. 7 (Mar. 1996) about the National Front's establishment of unions under its control particularly in (3) The French CP has adopted some of this racist language: its leader Robert Hue advocates "equitable division of the burden of immigrants" among different French towns. (4) Malcolm X Speaks (New York, Pathfinder, 1965), pp. 207-08. (5) Trotsky argued that black workers can be realistically expected to develop class consciousness "only when the white worker is educated" in antiracism as well as class struggle. Nevertheless, he predicted that blacks could react against oppression by playing a disproportionate role in the revolutionary movement-provided that the revolutionary party "carries on an uncompromising, merciless struggle not against the supposed national prepossessions of the Negroes but against the colossal prejudices of the white workers and makes no concession to them whatever." Leon Trotsky on Black Nationalism and Self-determination (New York, Pathfinder, 1978), pp. 29-30. (6) B. Schmid, op.cit. The National Front had been advocating "ethnic and cultural separation" in society. Its newspaper National Hebdo (14 Dec. 1995) complained, "The political debate is being displaced from the national terrain, where the National Front is invincible, to the so-called "social' terrain. The aim is to strengthen the left." LePen not only called for banning public sector strikes but called strikes in general an "archaic and ruinous means of settling social conflicts" and demanded jail sentences for strike leaders.
----- pull-quotes on this page -----
GUD