The current crisis is a gift for the far right

These groups feed off a growing discontent and mistrust towards immigrant populations. How can they

Extreme right-wing ideology across both sides of the Atlantic has traditionally been rooted by notions of singular identity bounded in place and space. But it today's post-9/11 era and its ensuing war on terror, a clash of civilization-style narrative has fuelled the emergence of a common enemy uniting the various disjointed identities. Commonality in hatred, fear and othering has become a transnational phenomenon in today's information age.

While Europe and the US have dealt with the problem of organised far-right groups for decades, the evolving nature of the elevated identity requires an evolution in approach to overcome what represents a major internal security challenge for Nato nations.

Firstly, the infiltration of Islamophobic narratives in mainstream discourses needs to be noted. It appears to be the strategy of far-right pundits in the US and activists in the UK to highlight, increasingly, the 'failure' of Muslim communities to integrate into mainstream life. They accuse immigrants of being responsible for the creation of ghettos; profiteering from social security systems and taking away jobs that 'belong' to 'indigenous' communities. The proliferation of this perspective, along with increasingly aggressive tactics, particularly in the UK and Holland (such as far-right demonstrations in areas with a high Muslim population) inflames community tension, costs millions of dollars to police and appears designed to provoke a violent response from the Muslim community.

Exacerbated by the current global financial crisis, these groups feed off a growing discontent/mistrust that some American/European whites have towards immigrant populations and government in general. These groups can be exploited by hostile external actors and thus provide platforms for hostile interventions.

The electoral success of the far right in Europe has increasingly legitimised their exclusionist narratives in media circles and, perhaps more dangerously, has led to the open adoption of many of their views by more 'mainstream' right wing thinkers/appeasers. There has also been a recent increase in attacks by such groups, from the notorious massacre by Anders Breivik in Norway to an increase in vandalism towards mosques and harassment of Muslims on streets.

In the US, anti-Muslim rhetoric has been openly used by politicians including some former US presidential candidates. All this activity is correlated with a dramatic increase in the numbers of supporters, funding and visibility for far-right causes, and is linked to greater cross-Atlantic co-operation between far-right groups. This cooperation takes the shape of intellectual exchange, direct financial support and joint misinformation projects.

We must not underestimate the capacity of these groups to exploit the multitude of overlapping crises facing Western societies by funneling populist frustration through this vehicle. In the age of globalisation, the West faces not only a panoply of interconnected global crises - financial instability; environmental degradation; food inflation; energy insecurity; state-failure; international terrorism - there is also an increased propensity for shocks and grievances in one sector to be swiftly transmitted to other sectors due to the power of global communications. Far-right extremists exploit these interconnections by providing simplistic explanations based on identity politics, scapegoating particular communities while obfuscating the real causes of social problems - and, more dangerously, offering a course of action that can potentially lead to mass violence

Our leaders should respond to this threat by actively building cross-Atlantic networks to facilitate co-operation among anti-extremist activist groups, media portals and policy makers. Europe can learn from the success of the US multicultural model, while the US can learn from the challenges Europe faces in integrating diaspora communities, with the ultimate aim of developing a new inclusive vision for a multi-ethnic Western polity.

The next 5-10 years are likely to see a disturbing consolidation of these groups into a political force with the potential to significantly influence and transform the political landscape. It is therefore critical that leaders amongst the transatlantic community begin taking this challenge more seriously. Politicians should seek to address the root causes driving disenfranchisement, while taking active efforts to purge extremist views from their discourse.

Equally, politicians should seek ways of criminalising some of the actions of these groups. More light needs to be shed on the financing of these networks and efforts need to be made to names and shame the individuals that finance their campaigns and actions. Finally, increased financial support is necessary for organisations combating such prejudices, while mainstream right wing parties must concertedly disavow extremist rhetoric and intensify outreach to minority communities.

Muddassar Ahmed is founder and the Chief Executive of Unitas Communications Ltd, a London based international communications agency. Cenk Sidar is the managing director of Sidar Global Advisors, a Washington-DC based strategic advisory and research firm. Sidar and Ahmed are both members of Young Atlanticist NATO Working Group.

Getty
Show Hide image

Copeland must be Labour's final warning

Unison's general secretary says Jeremy Corbyn is a friend - but must also take responsibility for turning the party's prospects around. 

No one objective could argue that last night’s by-election results were good for Labour.

Whilst it was undoubtedly pleasing to see serial fibber Paul Nuttall and his Trumpian politics put in their place in Stoke, this was never a seat where the result should have been in doubt. 

But to lose Copeland – held by Labour for 83 years – to a party that has inflicted seven years of painful spending cuts on our country, and is damaging the NHS, is disastrous.

Last autumn, I said that Labour had never been farther from government in my lifetime. Five months on the party hasn’t moved an inch closer to Downing Street.

These results do not imply a party headed for victory. Copeland is indicative of a party sliding towards irrelevance. Worse still, Labour faces an irrelevance felt most keenly by those it was founded to represent.

There will be those who seek to place sole blame for this calamity at the door of Jeremy Corbyn. They would be wrong to do so. 

The problems that Labour has in working-class communities across the country did not start with Corbyn’s leadership. They have existed for decades, with successive governments failing to support them or even hear their calls for change. Now these communities are increasingly finding outlets for their understandable discontent.

During the 2015 election, I knocked on doors on a large council estate in Edmonton – similar to the one I grew up on. Most people were surprised to see us. The last time they’d seen Labour canvassers was back in 1997. Perhaps less surprisingly, the most common response was why would any of them bother voting Labour.

As a party we have forgotten our roots, and have arrogantly assumed that our core support would stay loyal because it has nowhere else to go. The party is now paying the price for that complacency. It can no longer ignore what it’s being told on the doorstep, in workplaces, at ballot boxes and in opinion polls.

Unison backed Corbyn in two successive leadership elections because our members believed – and I believe – he can offer a meaningful and positive change in our politics, challenging the austerity that has ravaged our public services. He is a friend of mine, and a friend of our union. He has our support, because his agenda is our agenda.

Yet friendship and support should never stand in the way of candour. True friends don’t let friends lose lifelong Labour seats and pretend everything is OK. Corbyn is the leader of the Labour party, so while he should not be held solely responsible for Labour’s downturn, he must now take responsibility for turning things around.

That means working with the best talents from across the party to rebuild Labour in our communities and in Parliament. That means striving for real unity – not just the absence of open dissent. That means less debate about rule changes and more action on real changes in our economy and our society.

Our public servants and public services need an end to spending cuts, a change that can only be delivered by a Labour government. 

For too many in the Labour party the aim is to win the debate and seize the perceived moral high ground – none of which appears to be winning the party public support. 

But elections aren’t won by telling people they’re ignorant, muddle-headed or naive. Those at the sharp end – in particular the millions of public service employees losing their jobs or facing repeated real-terms pay cuts – cannot afford for the party to be so aloof.

Because if you’re a homecare worker earning less than the minimum wage with no respite in sight, you need an end to austerity and a Labour government.

If you’re a nurse working in a hospital that’s constantly trying to do more with less, you need an end to austerity and a Labour government.

And if you’re a teaching assistant, social worker or local government administrator you desperately need an end to austerity, and an end to this divisive government.

That can only happen through a Labour party that’s winning elections. That has always been the position of the union movement, and the Labour party as its parliamentary wing. 

While there are many ways in which we can change society and our communities for the better, the only way to make lasting change is to win elections, and seize power for working people.

That is, and must always be, the Labour party’s cause. Let Copeland be our final warning, not the latest signpost on the road to decline.

Dave Prentis is Unison's general secretary.