We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.

Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]

BLM UK has a uniformed paramilitary militia

Yesterday in Fulham, I observed a group of ten or so men and woman striding purposefully down North End Road. They were dressed in black uniforms, with ‘tactical’ vests displaying FF Force on one side and ‘Forever Family’ on the other… and they are a Marxist militia adjunct of BLM UK. This is entirely illegal.

Upon encountering a long line of schoolchildren lined up outside a MacDonald’s, they started doing down the line chatting with the more ethnically diverse children (which was more than half of them given the area). Interestingly, the 100% English barrow boys (and girls) ignored them (they were all busy selling things at the street market) but I observed several middle eastern passers-by glaring at the militia as they interacted with the children.

2020 is starting to have a rather 1930s feel about it. The pressure cooker is starting to shake.

24 comments to BLM UK has a uniformed paramilitary militia

  • The Sage

    You just know that if it had been a nationalist group with a St George’s flag logo, Plod would have been down on them like a ton of bricks.

  • Robert

    Why do you describe them as “paramilitary”? Do you have any evidence that they had any weapons or violent intent? All you have described is a bunch of similarly dressed people walking down the street talking to some other people. The picture you post doesn’t even show that – it shows some people on the street talking, one of whom appears to have a vest over their jacket with the words “Forever Family” on the it.

    On the evidence presented, I think you might be over interpreting what you saw.

  • Why do you describe them as “paramilitary”? Do you have any evidence that they had any weapons or violent intent?

    They were uniformed, all exactly the same, and this group are on record openly calling for “Marxist revolution”. Perhaps you think that would not involve violence? Moreover, their uniforms in combination with the fact they are a political group is in direct contravention of the Public Order Act 1936. This is not the Salvation Army.

    Wake up.

  • Mr Ed

    Surely they should be operating under their true name, ‘Democrats Abroad’?

  • Paul Marks

    The Marxist world view of Black Lives Matter is broadly supported by British institutions – indeed their, Frankfurt School, doctrines are taught to the police and armed forces. The Corporations also massively SUPPORT this.

    Anyone who speaks against these Frankfurt School Marxist doctrines is persecuted by the British establishment (education system, bureaucracy and Corporations) – which teaches the lies of Marxism as truth.

    Most schools and all the universities (with the exception of the University of Buckingham) also teach these false doctrines as truth.

    “Ah but Paul – the establishment elite do not REALLY support Marxism, they support a Saint-Simon style Corporate Collectivism, with Credit Bubble bankers at the very top, and all in the name of “Science”, SCIENCE, SCIENCE, SCIENCE…..”

    Not exactly comforting. Whether the slogan of the totalitarian regime is “All Power To The Soviets!” or “Sustainable Development!” it is still a totalitarian regime. The choices under Agenda 2030 (endorsed by most Western governments and by most big CORPORATIONS) are slavery or death – they offer no other choices.

    And it will hit the United States as well – President Trump’s Executive Orders against Marxist brainwashing of the bureaucracy (in “Critical Race Theory” and so on) will go after January 20th 2021 (in time of for Klaus Schwab to celebrate the 50th anniversary of his campaign for tyranny – under the name of “Stakeholder Capitalism”, the modern name for FASCISM – the coming together of Big Government and Big Business coming together to utterly exterminate the freedom of ordinary people, this is the true aim of “Davos” and all the rest of it).

    Why cares about a few BLM activists when tyranny will be enforced by such bodies as the FBI?

    Some American conservatives are still calling upon the FBI to investigate this and that – they STILL do not understand that this is as absurd as Jews calling on the Gestapo to investigate attacks upon them in the 1930s and early 1940s.

    “But Paul the FBI are good!” – so a million films and television shows have taught you, but they are NOT good.

    As for the “Republicans” – the Corporations bought them long ago. In Georgia the “Republicans” refuse to allow signature checks on mail-in ballots. Thus HELPING the Democrat Election Fraud.

    And in Michigan – “Republican” State Legislatures say they know of no evidence of election fraud. In short they are going around with their eyes shut and their hands over their ears – as the evidence of election fraud in Michigan is obvious and massive.

    In the face of all this, in most Western countries, ten thugs outside “McDonalds” (which gives money to BLM – as do most of accursed Corporations) is a minor matter.

    After all (as I have pointed out) the British police and armed forces are being taught the same false doctrines anyway. What are you going to do when the police come for you? What can anyone do?

    I will end on a hopeful note.

    If (a very big IF) the Hungarian and Polish government stick to their position of rejecting the European Union budget – Hungary and Poland may be spared the agenda of the Frankfurt School of Marxism (“Diversity and Inclusion”) uniformed BLM thugs and all.

    But that is a very big “IF” – saying NO to all that money, that will take great courage.

    I doubt that Hungary and Poland will stick to NO – but we have to hope so.

  • AndyM

    “They were dressed in black uniforms….”.

    Surely they were dressed in uniforms of colour…?

  • Paul Marks

    Britain in the 1930s was actually fairly stable and strong society – both my parents were about in the 1930s, and my father lived in the East End of London (the most violent place in the United Kingdom) and he confirmed that, in spite of the “Battle of Cable Street”, the society was basically stable and strong.

    Most families were unbroken (most children lived with married parents) and there was a lot of manufacturing industry – even in London.

    To say that modern Britain is like 1930s Britain is sadly wrong.

    The situation now is vastly worse than it was in the 1930s.

    Our “economy” is a vast Credit Bubble (where are the factories of London now?) – and our society is utterly broken, it has been undermined since at least the 1960s.

    “But Paul – UNEMPLOYMENT is much less than it was in the 1930s”.

    Unemployment – wait and see for 2021.

    Stanley Baldwin and Neville Chamberlain were big “Social Reform” types – not my cup of tea at all.

    But they had some regard for domestic manufacturing and small family owned business enterprises in all fields (including shops and so on).

    The modern rulers of the West could not give a damn about such things.

    The are totally committed to “Sustainable Development” – Agenda 21, Agenda 2030. The modern rulers are “educated” in these things – they do not see the World Economic Forum and the United Nations (and on and on) as enemies, for they are not the enemies of the establishment elite (they are only the enemies of ordinary people).

    The future is going to be terrible – although we must cling to hope.

    Perhaps a few countries will REJECT it all.

    How to tell a ruler or businessman who is NOT committed to all this evil.

    They are NOT welcome at “Davos” or any other international conference.

    Such a ruler of businessman may be bad in other ways – but they are not ally of all this.

  • Paul Marks

    As for these ten young people – under the edict of the Mayor of Greater London, they may be part of the 40% of new policemen.

    I am sure putting them in blue uniforms rather than black uniforms will make everything so much better.

  • Natalie Solent (Essex)

    I’m not in a position to link to it right now, but I made a post about this group on August 10th called, “There should be no law to forbid people parading in paramilitary uniforms”. In it I defended the right of Fascists of then and now “not to riot, not to beat people up, but to swank around in pretendy uniforms and look like the silly asses they are”, to adapt Bertie Wooster’s remark to Sir Roderick Spode.

  • John B

    @Robert

    ‘Why do you describe them as “paramilitary”? Do you have any evidence that they had any weapons or violent intent?’

    If they did, they would be called military. Paramedics are not doctors; paralegals are not lawyers

  • bobby b

    Good. Easier targets.

  • TMLutas

    Robert – I would guess the formation marching and the stab vests seem to be leading some people to the conclusion that they are paramilitary. What signs would you take as informative whether a group was paramilitary or not?

    Natalie Solent (Essex) – I would support their right to march in the US. The US has a legal code that should be able to handle it. The UK has walked a different path which means that I would support them marching only if their opponents were not constrained by the law from mirroring their actions. To maintain a double standard turns FF Force effectively into an arm of the government.

    The NFAC marched and so did the 3 Percent in Louisville. It was a fairly scary situation. There were casualties but it was a negligent discharge by an NFAC marcher who hit other NFAC people. People seem to have woken up and the two groups do not seem to have clashed since then.

  • I would support their right to march in the US. … The UK has walked a different path which means that I would support them marching only if their opponents were not constrained by the law from mirroring their actions. (TMLutas, November 21, 2020 at 5:17 pm)

    That is indeed the point. We support fewer restrictions rather than more in general, but as restrictions on free speech go, being equally deprived of the right to march in uniform – everyone who would march having equally to do so only in civilian-style garb – is far down my list of concerns. Unequal law enforcement by contrast – looking the other way for the vicious BLM but not for less evil groups – is high up my list.

  • Flubber

    The reasons the elites support “Communism” is an age old one, power.

    Its a vehicle for unlimited authoritarianism, the ability to execute your opponents, suppress all freedoms.

    You laugh, but these bastards are utterly ruthless and utterly serious.

    They might dress it up in frippery, but you dismiss this at your kids peril.

  • Nicholas (Unlicensed Joker) Gray

    Aha, Flubber, the old argument, ‘Do it for the kids!’ Won’t someone do it for the children? Please?
    What do you propose as a counter-action? Different squads prepared to beat up the fascists? Instead of fighting fire with fire, can’t we fight fire with water? Can’t we issue leaflets extolling liberty and freedom, and the right of all to express opinions?

  • Spot on! More and more people are starting to notice that policing in this country is not a level playing field any more.

  • Tim

    The reasons the elites support “Communism” is an age old one, power.

    Its a vehicle for unlimited authoritarianism, the ability to execute your opponents, suppress all freedoms.

    You laugh, but these bastards are utterly ruthless and utterly serious.

    They might dress it up in frippery, but you dismiss this at your kids peril.

    What exactly then is the appeal of communism? I mean yes there is lots of power for the elites at the top but how do you motivate the many rank-and-file to say nothing of the people at large? What do they get out of it? What sane person given a choice (other than the bosses) would desire that?

  • bobby b

    “What exactly then is the appeal of communism?”

    See all those people over there who live like kings with the McMansions and BMWs and new Harleys and big boats and gold watches and 401k’s and beautiful vacations and perfect teeth and $400,000 college degrees and . . . and . . . and . . . ?

    – There’s lots of them.
    – Mostly they were just born lucky.
    – If they had to share, we could all live like princes!

    Vote for me and I’ll make them share!

    (I don’t think it’s any more complicated than that.)

  • Flubber

    Vote for me and I’ll make them share!

    (I don’t think it’s any more complicated than that.)

    Envy wrapped up in the facsimile of fairness seems to be history’s most potent lie/rationalisation.

  • GregWA

    bobby b at 11:04am

    “I don’t think it’s any more complicated than that”

    I agree–mostly. First you have to destroy the education system, make sure the average person has no real knowledge of history or civics. For proof this has been achieved, look no further than the public reaction to BLM in spite of their openly Marxist aims. Or people willing to vote for AOC and her “squad”.

    That’s also our ONLY way back: re-take education, Kindergarten to Bachelors, from PhD Ed Admin types.

  • Robert

    John B said: “If they did, they would be called military. Paramedics are not doctors; paralegals are not lawyers”

    TMLutas said: “I would guess the formation marching and the stab vests seem to be leading some people to the conclusion that they are paramilitary. What signs would you take as informative whether a group was paramilitary or not?”

    I guess something is “para-X” if it is not a “real” X, but is sufficiently similar in some important respect to X. The question then is in which ways and to what extent does something have to be similar to X to be a “para-X”?

    However for the word “paramilitary” this is a fairly easy question to answer, in a British context at least. The word “paramilitary” is strongly associated with the various Irish terrorist groups that fought a war from the late 1960s to the late 1990s. Perry surely knows this, and I’m fairly confident that he used the word so as it associate BLM with the IRA in his readers’ minds.

    It’s a perfectly fair rhetorical move, but it’s equally fair to ask if it’s anything other than rhetorical. Is there any evidence that these people are in any way remotely similar in intent or capability to the IRA of the late 1960s to late 1990s?

    Possibly they are, but Perry doesn’t provide any evidence of that claim. There isn’t even any evidence that they have any weapons at all.

    Perry said: “…this group are on record openly calling for “Marxist revolution”. Perhaps you think that would not involve violence?”

    Indeed, but people ‘calling for “Marxist revolution”‘ are two-a-penny, and for most of them it’s about striking a pose rather than a serious ambition. You’re going to have to provide some pretty convincing evidence to overcome my Bayesian priors and convince me that the people you saw the other day seriously intend violent revolution.

    And since you can buy stab-vests on amazon, I don’t think wearing one is evidence of anything other than an inflated sense of self-importance.

    Perry also said: “Moreover, their uniforms in combination with the fact they are a political group is in direct contravention of the Public Order Act 1936.”

    I don’t know anything about the Public Order Act of 1936, but I agree with Natalie that BLM (or any other group) should have the right “not to riot, not to beat people up, but to swank around in pretendy uniforms and look like the silly asses they are”.

  • bobby b

    “I don’t know anything about the Public Order Act of 1936, but I agree with Natalie that BLM (or any other group) should have the right “not to riot, not to beat people up, but to swank around in pretendy uniforms and look like the silly asses they are”.”

    But the issue is, could the Proud Boys (or some other right wing militant organization) be just as free to swank around in pretendy uniforms? Recent history suggests that they could not.

    So, our preference lies with no restrictions on rights, but the minimum we’ll accept is not playing favorites when imposing restrictions. If you don’t restrict yourself, don’t try to restrict me.

    (But you can wear pink vagina suits if you want. I won’t complain. A paramilitary uniform is one that makes it harder to find you in a scope. Anything else is a costume.)

  • However for the word “paramilitary” this is a fairly easy question to answer, in a British context at least. The word “paramilitary” is strongly associated with the various Irish terrorist groups that fought a war from the late 1960s to the late 1990s. Perry surely knows this, and I’m fairly confident that he used the word so as it associate BLM with the IRA in his readers’ minds.

    Nope. The dead giveaway is when I wrote: “2020 is starting to have a rather 1930s feel about it.”

    I am comparing them to the Italian Fascist (and indeed the closer to home BUF) Blackshirts of the 1930s, uniformed political militias).

    Possibly they are, but Perry doesn’t provide any evidence of that claim. There isn’t even any evidence that they have any weapons at all.

    So what? How is that relevant? Political militias of the 1930s in UK were all about parading down the streets & intimidation.

    I don’t know anything about the Public Order Act of 1936

    I linked to the Act in the article! This legislation was targeted at the BUF but is still on the books. The fact it is not being enforced now is… interesting.

  • Further to Perry above (Perry de Havilland (London), November 23, 2020 at 8:14 am) about the 1936 Public Order act:

    – Between the end of WWI and the mid-1930s, communist, fascist and national socialist militias on the continent acquired a well-grounded reputation for marching and intimidation in Spain, Italy, Germany, France and elsewhere, leading to further consequences in all but France.

    – I have several times noted how Weimar Germany’s attempt to handle the problem by hate speech laws did not work out well.

    – In the UK, by contrast, the 1936 act left political speech far free-er than on the continent while instead providing legal means to ban para-military marches.

    If one starts from the point that the state, seeing a problem, will react by banning something, then I prefer the UK’s choice to that of the Europeans.

    Although the UK in the 1930s was far less gun-hostile than today, the question of being armed was not an issue in this. UK marchers were typically not armed, any intimidatory effect was not from the belief they were all carrying revolvers under their uniforms, and a sufficient force of UK police, when obliged, could expect to confront them using the standard bobby’s truncheon.

Leave a Reply

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>