Letter: Advocacy of force and free speech
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Sir: Andrew Marr's article 'A duty to hear muttonheads' attacks the views expressed in the letter which I, Paul Foot and others wrote to the Independent (8 April) and in Paul Foot's subsequent Guardian column. Most of those who signed the letter are not members of the Socialist Workers Party. But those of us who, like Paul and I, are SWP members are used to hearing the old chestnut that we, too, advocate violence and are therefore 'red fascists', as the press in the Seventies described us.
Mr Marr, like his precursors, argues that if we were consistent in our argument, we would end up the victims of the very policy of no platform that we urge in the case of Nazi organisations.
But would Mr Marr have argued that the French Resistance was wrong to fight the Nazis? Were London's East Enders wrong to block the path of Mosley's blackshirts at Cable Street in 1936? Or does he believe that fascism must grow to epidemic proportions before we can ask that its proponents be denied free access to the media?
The point at issue here is not 'the use of force in general'. The real question is: 'Who is using the force and for what ends?' When Nelson Mandela or Gerry Adams advocate the use of force, they do so as part of a wider struggle for greater freedom and democracy. When the Nazis use force, it is part of a wider attempt to deny elementary rights to trade unionists, socialists, black people and many other sections of the population.
I urge Mr Marr, other journalists and Independent readers to take heed of Hitler's own admission:
Only one thing could have stopped our movement - if our adversaries had understood its principle and, from the first day, had smashed with the utmost brutality the nucleus of our new movement.
Yours,
JOHN REES
Socialist Workers Party
London, E3
14 April
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments