Lancaster’s fascist would-be student society, whose behaviour at a public talk on the politics of fear (subtext 173) and rejection by LUSU as an official society (subtext 176) is well documented, are at it again. This time, they’ve publicly promoted an event, ‘What is the Value of Capitalism?’ It might sound like your bog standard management school student style debate, but any debate seeking to discuss whether capitalism leads to the ‘destruction of natural hierarchies and identities’ is bound to raise eyebrows.
Local activists didn’t disappoint. subtext understands that the group in question (who we continue to refuse to name) attempted to book a table for ten at a Lancaster venue on Tuesday 5th June. Upon being made aware of the sort of company they were about to keep, the venue in question immediately cancelled the event. The advice from the local police to venues who might unwittingly be hosting far-right functions is to cancel any such event, the worry being that the opposition from decent people would lead to a public order offence. Failure to comply could lead to the revocation of licenses. Thankfully for the far-right student group, they had booked multiple venues, and had publicly urged supporters to meet a delegate at Common Garden Street in order to be directed to the correct location.
According to numerous eyewitness accounts, one member of the group in question, who is known to have joined Generation Identity protests, was present on Common Garden Street to welcome attendees. No attendees showed up, but the member in question was flanked by three individuals, who were acting as his ‘private security.’ He was also joined and, indeed, outnumbered by, a number of individuals from various local anti-fascist groups. A vociferous conversation ensued, in which our fascist declared that the ‘SS instilled a sense of national pride’, adding that he didn’t believe in ‘pride’ as a concept. He claimed that he didn’t personally know other members of the group who had behaved in the ways described in subtext’s reports (even though he has publicly shared photographs of himself with them). Indeed, he even suggested that a splinter-group might be in the works, due to differences in ideology. After affirming that he was ‘scared for [his] white skin’, he complained that he had once been assaulted for being white, failing to add ‘supremacist’ and ‘by antifa’ to various junctures in his sentence.
The behaviour of our fascist’s security detail is also worthy of note. One of the trio was unhappy with the idea of being filmed or photographed in any way, and the anti-fascist protesters duly obliged and put away their phones. She then proceeded to unsheathe her own phone and record the vast majority of the altercation. Another ‘guard’, who was variously described as ‘a whirling dervish’, ‘tired and emotional’, and ‘clearly on something’, made many memorable interjections – including to declare himself a national socialist. In general, it was felt that he frequently invaded the personal space of those in attendance, at one point nearly elbowing a pensioner in the face. He was difficult to pin down verbally – in some instances he was admitting to his ‘boss’ that the protesters ‘had a point’, in others, he openly mocked a protestor’s Polish accent. All throughout, he was reportedly laughing like a hyena. Our fascist’s entourage are said to have distanced themselves from his views, insisting that they were simply his mates with his personal safety at heart. Stockholm syndrome?
Our fascist has announced that a ‘report’ and ‘video footage’ are forthcoming. It’ll take an awful lot of editing to present him in a positive light, but we await it with bated breath all the same.