In the article he supports Tommy Robinson[0], who I think most people in the UK would consider a fascist. He started the EDL (english defense league) which was a more violent extreme version of the BNP (british national party), which the ADL article I just linked describes as "fascist".
I only found out about his views the other day too, so can't say I've noticed any articles that are explicitly fascist, but given what I've read and his support for fascist figures I wouldn't necessarily be surprised at the moment to be honest.
I am from the UK and know about Tommy Robinson in passing. I read the ADL article and am struggling to see how he is a fascist, he is anti-islam and anti-immigrant but how does that translate to wanting a dictatorial leader, autocracy, forcible suppression etc like Russia?
The EDL is basically a union of street thugs, fascist politicians who split off from the BNP, and political opportunists like "Tommy Robinson".
Fascist is an accurate enough term for their politics, the stated political positions may not align 100% to historical fascism, but given all the fascist associations most objective observers would say that's likely to be a product of political positioning rather than any genuine ideological differences.
you don't think of Tommy Robinson as fascist? that's surprising to me. Ok, so I've grabbed a random definition of fascism[0] (first thing that came up googling).
> a populist political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual, that is associated with a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, and that is characterized by severe economic and social regimentation and by forcible suppression of opposition
now, let's think about tommy robinson and the EDL.
* exalts nation and often race above the individual - check.
* wants a centralised autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader - check.
* by forcible suppression of opposition - I mean... it's the EDL, big check.
I am not sure how I was being a bad actor, I asked the same question three times and was not getting an answer.
> how does that translate to wanting a dictatorial leader, autocracy, forcible suppression etc like Russia?
> > * wants a centralised autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader - check.
> Where did this come from? I don't think that article said anything about this.
You responded to this with a wikipedia article, which said he denounced fascism/neo-nazis & banned people from events.
> So has he ever expressed anti-democratic ideas? Such as wanting a dictatorial leader, autocracy etc that kind of is a key component of fascism.
I don't see how my follow up question was unreasonable given the wikipedia or ADL article you linked never said he expressed anti-democratic ideas.
However, projectazorian has convinced me that while they may not have expressed fascist views directly, with their deep connections to neo-nazis/fascists they could be hiding it to be electable.
Alright, I wasn't planning on posting any more, but let me editorialize, and simplify:
How is DHH fascist?
- here he is espousing ethno-nationalist viewpoints (one key fascist ideology).
How is that fascist?
- ok, here he is supporting a fascist. See this article specifying that he was a member of a fascist organisation for 5 years, and then started a more extreme offshoot of it.
How is tommy robinson fascist?
- Here are some reasons.
How is the EDL fascist?
- here is an article discussing fascism and the EDL
Maybe not Aussie bartender but even a lot of typically 'white' Europeans have very different cultures than English and Australian. For example when it comes when it comes to punctuality or queuing. Even stuff like how contracts are treated can be very different depending on the culture. DHH is Dutch and maybe closer to English culture than Italian/Spanish/French.
"Do you really think he's complaining about the white Aussie bartender who comes over here?"
-> Theres little complaint about the "white" Ausie bartender, BECAUSE he probably speaks great English, came there legally, isn't consuming wellfare resources, isn't advocating for Sharia law, and might even end up going back to Ausie land.
It's not about *skin color*, it is about culture/crime/wellfare resources and legal double standards.
If an Ausie entered the UK illegally, he would be deported. If an Ausie committed a crime, he goes to jail and/or deported. With these other people, they enter illegally but then get placed in tax payer funded hotels and politicians conspire with police to cover up their crimes (see the rape gang scandals) and they literaly arrested the victims.
At one point there were plenty of complaints when *too many Polish white dudes* rocked up in the UK and competed for jobs and didn't always speak good English.
Not about race - it is about Language, culture, job competition, crime rates, wellfare resources, values (sharia-law / treatment of women), social integration vs enclaves.
And only when it involves so many millions of people comming in that it rapidly alters the local culture. (or shifts votes! or whatever other thing people care about - overwhelming of infrastructure / housing availability)
Why is DHH a racist for sympathising with some Britts whom are unhappy with the 60% cultural transformation that is occuring in London?
You are reading between the lines to hastily conclude that DHH is a racist. You need more than just "he wasn't complaining about white Ausie bartenders".
Quote me an actual paragraph or sentence where DHH says he dislikes anyone because of their race ? Or stop calling people racists without hard proof. The tone of that DDH London article seems quite radical. But tone is not enough to indict.
Calling people racist is cheap.
I literally just explained how people can have legitimate concerns about illegal migrants entering in large numbers, concerns which are COMPLETELY UNRELATED to skin color, and all you do is call these things racist talking points.
He says "non-native brits" and says there are "about a third" and links to a page showing 36% "White British"[0] (note: explicitly excluding non-white british)
he excels in this kind of dog whistling. it confuses people who were born yesterday, but it is loud and clear to people who agree with him or are the intended victims.
Agreed, but being a conservative or right wing person does not equal being a fascist. We should be reserving those words to the people that really deserve them, otherwise the word loses the meaning.
We as a society keep coming up with more and more esoteric definition of "fascist" just to avoid having one that fits modern day political actors. I feel like the word has far more meaning here, where it's used to describe a set of policy prescriptions than it is as only referring to a list of groups with all criteria for entry erased.
Personally it seems the other way round, more and more esoteric definition of X so you can label your opponent it and discount everything about them without having to debate. Hence why I had to ask if he actually is one.
Let's start with the simplest definition I could find, just to walk you through it.
> "(n) an authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization."
Is this what DHH is advocating for? Absolutely. I'll skip past right wing because that part is obvious. Nationalistic in terms of "non-Londoners" being used interchangeably with immigrants, a person from Birmingham meets his "Native London" criteria, and using that criteria for social organization.
Pretty cut and dry for anyone using just the basic dictionary definition. Obviously, there's a version with more stipulations and exceptions you'd rather use but those can be safely filled under "overly esoteric".
And this is why these very serious words have lost their power. Racist, Sexist, Fascist.... When half the country is deemed to support "literal" Himler, or when Elon Musk, or Jews with family impacted by the Holocaust, are called Nahtzees, then these words have been diluted to mean nothing.
I hope people who so overused&misused these words are happy with what they achieved.
Congratulations you made these words lose all power. I would have preferred a world where these words still had serious meaning attached to them.
Interesting it says knife crime for 23/24 was up 16% for London. I wonder if they only record convictions so the 19% decrease will change as people are convicted.
Also West Midlands is that not Biringham etc? Is that not one of the other mostly non-white places in the UK? You could have pointed to number 3 on the list Cleveland being mostly white(95%+ I think) and not being much lower than London.
It's almost like crime isn't that strongly correlated with the ethnic mix of a place! I'm sorry reality doesn't support your racism.
Of course, if you don't believe the police data, that page suggests you look at hospital admissions.
Again, as I said, London is lovely. You said there was a problem with knife crime. I pointed out that London is lower than a comparable major US city. It's also lower than several areas in the UK.
Come and visit - don't believe the lies being spread.
> It's almost like crime isn't that strongly correlated with the ethnic mix of a place! I'm sorry reality doesn't support your racism.
How is what I said racist? I was agreeing with you but saying London being #2 and pointing to #1 is not really proving your point. You should point to #3 to make your point.
> I pointed out that London is lower than a comparable major US city.
Again, you can not compare across countries you don't know the difference in how the data is recorded. For example is a murder not recorded in the USA for every suspious death where as the UK it is for every murder conviction?
> It's also lower than several areas in the UK.
It is #2 on that 23/24 list.
> Come and visit - don't believe the lies being spread.
I lived on London's outskirts for multiple years and have to visit multiple times a year. I wouldn't describe it as great, I dread going everytime.
