Fight Dem Back
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Fight Dem Back, often abbreviated FDB, is an Australian and New Zealand anti-racist group. It concentrates its attention on the Australian & New Zealand white nationalist, fascist and neo-Nazi scenes.
Contents |
[edit] Name
The group is named after a reggae song by Linton Kwesi Johnson [3].
[edit] Politics
The group was founded by a collective of activists from across Australia and New Zealand in late 2004. In Sydney, these people included former advertising copywriter turned law student Mathew Henderson-Hau, generally known as 'Darp', who prior to starting the group was mainly known as a prolific blogger, winning best NSW blog in the 2005 Australian blogging awards. (his now-abandoned blog is still online - [4]]. In Melbourne, the organisation was headed up by Cam Smith, a multimedia producer and radio journalist. In Perth, Donald Oorst, a part-time academic and author helped build the group up. In New Zealand, the public faces of the group were Robert Trigan and well known community activist and anarchist Asher Goldman from Wellington whilst many other individuals toiled away under the guise of their online pseudonymns. Trigan left FDB and New Zealand in July 2005 for New York [5][1][2][3]
In some European countries there has been mutual dislike between more moderate (or 'liberal anti-fascist') groups, for example Searchlight, and more radical (or 'militant anti-fascist') ones, for example Anti-Fascist Action (AFA). The main areas of difference could be summarised as follows:
- willingness to work with the State: groups such as Searchlight will generally, for example, pass on information to and work with the police, groups such as AFA generally will not.
- analysis of fascism as either a form of, or opposed to, capitalism: groups such as AFA generally take the view that the difference between fascist groups and mainstream political parties is one of degree, whereas more moderate groups generally take the view that the difference is a clear difference of kind. Similarly, groups such as AFA as less likely to make a distinction between fascism and extreme conservatism.
- generally speaking, groups such as AFA will use what they call direct action and what their opponents call violence, whereas more moderate groups will use legal means.
By these criteria, Fight dem Back should be compared to the more moderate groups such as Searchlight, as it describes its operations as purely intelligence gathering and dissemination. However the split between moderate and radical anti-fascists does not seem to have happened in relation to the group. For example they interviewed, with implied approval, two former members of the British Anti-Fascist Action [6], and there has been little or no criticism of the group from the left. They also ran an approving article marking the anniversary of the 'Battle of Cable Street' [7]. Fight dem back officially espouse a non-sectarian platform. The group draws its membership from traditional left-leaning cliques but also directly from the various ethnic community groups who are affected by race-hate activism.
[edit] Free Speech
Darp and FDB in general do not take the view that racists have a right to free speech. For example they have generally been supportive of laws prohibiting racist speech, and have been particularly active in having internet companies remove neo-Nazi websites. Their website states that "There are some on the racist-right who contend that Fight dem back! is a campaign against free speech. We fully accept that freedom of speech is a fundamental human right, but one that shouldn't be abused. If you argue that you should be allowed the freedom of speech to promote policies that deny that very same right on the basis of skin colour or nationality, then actually no, we don't believe you have a legitimate complaint when your posters are torn down and your meetings picketed." [8]
The view is by no means unanimous however, as Goldman is staunchly opposed to hate-speech legislation [4].
FDB's position may be contrasted with that of the ACLU for example, who occupy a similar position on the political spectrum but whose activity often involves defending the right of racists to promote their views.
[edit] Membership Policies
Compared to similar groups, FightDemBack seems to give a low priority to recruiting new members, and to 'screen' potential members more rigorously. A 2006 post on their discussion forum authored by 'Darp' [9] was "just a gentle reminder dear readers that being 'IN' FDB comes as a result of the senior and founding members voting you in", and stated that there are only thirteen members in Australia and New Zealand.
[edit] Activities
FDB have conducted a number of disruption campaigns against allegedly racist organisations and their supporters. FDB's campaigns have included attempts to reveal the identity of a person responsible for an anti-immigration campaign in Toowoomba, QLD;[5] campaigning for changes to the parole conditions of neo-Nazi axe murderer Dane Sweetman;[6] and general campaigning against the Australia First Party, the Patriotic Youth League and the New Zealand National Front. These campaigns have resulted in a number of reprisals from radical organisations which have ranged from libel to vandalism and death threats.[7]
[edit] Effect
The effectiveness of FightDemBack's activities is difficult to assess objectively. Naturally, the group claims to have had significant impact on the white supremacist movement, and equally naturally white supremacists downplay their significance.
The group is generally approached for comment by the Australian news media when they run a story relating to the far-right. For example they were approached for comment in relation to Mel Gibson's alleged anti-Semitic remarks during his arrest for drink-driving. [10]
A list of "outstanding results" that FightDemBack claim to have achieved in a year's campaigning may be found here.
The white supremacist scene in Australia and New Zealand seem to regard FightDemBack as the main force opposing them; and indeed they often focus on Darp as an individual. For example the (now-defunct) White Pride Coalition of Australia forum listed 'Darp' as a "Forbidden Topic" [11]. A search of the Stormfront forum on July 31 2006 yielded 240 references to 'Darp' [12]
White supremacists have set up at least two sites which are directly intended to counteract FightDemBack. The 'is it wrong to wish on Darp's bad hair' blog is still online here but has been abandoned. Another site previously existed at www.fightdem.back.org.
[edit] Criticism
As noted above, FDB has been criticised by left-wing or liberal groups far less than similar groups in other countries. There are no known examples of criticism from more radical leftists for their cooperation with government agencies, or from civil libertarians for their support of censorship of racist speech.
The far-right groups who they target have been highly critical. Much of this criticism has focused on Darp as an individual: for example he has been 'accused' of having Jewish ancestry (see for example [13]). A similar common theme of far-right critics of FDB is that Darp is gay, although this may be being used as a general term of abuse as Darp is known to have a girlfriend. (for example "Darp, you are a raving homosexual" - [14]). Flyers and posters have been placed in several neighbourhoods in Wellington accusing Goldman of being a "danger to any community" and stating that "Asher Goldman is a threat to your safety".
A second common theme of criticism is that Fight Dem Back is, or 'must be', funded by or working for or with agencies such as ASIO or Jewish organisations - for example one right-winger rhetorically asked "Darp why don't you just admit that you're only the ANZAC figure head for MOSSAD" [15]. FDB openly say that they will report crimes to relevant authorities, but dispute any hidden connection, including any funding, between them and those authorities.
A third theme is that FightDemBack are hypocritical in that they purport to fight fascism, but use the technique of pressuring authorities to restrict particular forms of political speech. FDB's main response to this argument is that the critics are themselves hypocritical, for example in that they use the rhetoric of free speech while opposing the concept in practice, or that they use patriotic imagery such as that of the ANZACs, while supporting regimes which the ANZACS fought against.
This leads to another main area of argument between FDB and those they target: FDB asserts that the far-right subculture centred around the Stormfront website is entirely fascist in belief, even though elements of it distance themselves from fascist (especially Nazi) imagery. The targets of their criticism assert that their distancing themselves from fascism and Nazism is a genuine ideological difference, not just a strategic choice.
[edit] References
- ^ see Website seeks net loss for Nazis, by Peter Kohn, Australian Jewish News, 17 June 2005
- ^ see Website target of hate emails, by Mike Houlahan, Christchurch Press, 14 June 2005
- ^ see Extremely Vulnerable, by David King and Paige Taylor, The Australian, December 24 2005
- ^ see Hate Speech, Defending Democracy? by Asher Goldman in Lucid Magazine, May 2005
- ^ see Toowoomba Chronicle, Jul 14, 2005, "Net Closes on Racists". [1]
- ^ see Outcry at neo-Nazi's 'soft drink' parole switch, by Greg Roberts, The Australian, 25 January 2006
- ^ see The Age, December 18, 2005, "White Supremacists Hide in Quiet Suburbs.". [2]
[edit] See also
- Anti-Defamation League
- One People's Project
- Southern Poverty Law Center
- Searchlight Magazine
- Anti-Fascist Action
