Enemies of Reason Poundshop potshots at the media moral maze.

So what do we call these scum?

The English Defence League, I mean. I think it would be nice to think of a description that was suitably fair to them, and represented what their world-view accurately.

Some like John Denham call them 'right-wing', which is reasonable and not entirely inaccurate, but gets people upset. Generally those people on the right who aren't as right-wing as the English Defence League, but who nonetheless do go about spouting a load of cock that they might say. You know the kind of person I mean, who would say something like there are 'no border controls' in Britain but then criticise the BNP for its anti-immigration stances, but then also go on to call the BNP left-wing because of some of their economic policies. Because the reason anyone votes for the BNP is their economic policies, isn't it?

No, that won't do. I don't think we can settle with calling the English Defence League far-right or right-wing, because that simply annoys those people who are also on the right. And this isn't about lumping the likes of the idiotic Dale in with the unpleasant EDL because we don't happen to be on that side of the political fence; there's a big difference between Dale and the EDL. The EDL are cold, calculating, nasty and disgusting, whereas Dale is a twit who doesn't understand things properly. It's wrong to try and link together a dunce like him with the far more intelligent and dangerous types of the EDL, or their friends the BNP.

So what's going on with the EDL and who are they? This article over at the BBC is a good guide. And look what it says about the motivation for the intimidation and violence:

They found common cause with other "soccer casuals" and "firms" associated with major clubs. The chatter concluded that this was a national problem and they had to put aside club rivalries.
Things really took off after the same Islamist group "converted" an 11-year-old boy in Birmingham city centre in June. That incident caused a minor tabloid furore - but a greater reaction on the net, particularly on websites and forums associated with football violence and far-right activity.

Ah, a tabloid furore. When and if the tabloids (and other newspapers) ever do defend themselves against accusations that their articles have any impact on events like violence, they'll always develop Teflon shoulders and claim that they're not doing anything wrong; they're just reporting the stories their readers want and it's not their fault. But what if it were? What if violence started happening against foreigners for no reason other than they're foreigners? And what if that happened at the same time as newspapers tried to imply that a small rise in foreign-born mothers was a 'boom' or that 1% of all children being called Mohammed was being deliberately concealed by the authorities? What if those same newspapers misrepresented a peaceful protest by Muslims and claimed they were hurling abuse at British soldiers? Wouldn't that be fuel for the racist fire? The newspapers just walk away whistling a merry tune. No, not us, they claim.

Is it simple enough to call the EDL racists, then? Well, they are as slippery and weasel-like as the BNP when it comes to definitions. It's similar, but I imagine that both the BNP and the EDL would be appalled to be linked to each other. I am guessing that all links between the organisations will be denied utterly and completely, and that any connections between the two will be swept under the carpet. That's what I'm guessing, given that Nick Griffin is aiming for the respectable chair at Question Time and has attempted in the past to tell his BNP legions not to look like skinheads. He doesn't want the rowdy, threatening elements of the EDL to be associated with him and his cosy job at Brussels. I wonder, though, how different they are?

Anyway, racist doesn't do it justice either. The EDL will no doubt claim they aren't racist. Some of their best friends are black, or something like that, except there won't be any black people involved in the EDL, naturally enough. They'll claim they're simply revolting against extremist Islamism in England, and just happen to be composed of white men up for a barney on a Saturday afternoon. They'll organise a protest outside a mosque - not an extremist mosque, just an ordinary mosque - on the 9-11 anniversary not as an inflammatory gesture but because they genuinely care about the future of England and want to take it away from Islamification. That sort of thing. Is calling them 'racist' or 'fascist' going to help them do anything other than be able to play the victim status on this?

I'd go for something like ultra-nationalist or extremist nationalist, if I had to choose a term for a fair description. And if I had less time, I'd simply call them scum, since that's what they are. I liked this quote from the BBC story:

"I've got a mate who's just come back from Afghanistan - he's in the Army - he's an Asian man," continues the bystander. "You're giving me a bad name as a white person."

Perhaps a better name might be 'English Disgrace League'. Because they are a disgrace, to Englishness, to being white, to everything they claim to love. They're the exact opposite of all the things to be proud of in this country. One day they might be going on Question Time with weasel words to try and justify their position. I'm not a no-platformer but I just ask it to be borne in mind just where these people come from and what they want - and how the newspapers are responsible, in part, for any violence that gets committed.