I don't like Madrid. someway it happened that all time I was there, it was authoritative – as a correspondent – and always erstwhile there were demonstrations of the far right in the city. For example, in November a year and a half ago, erstwhile the streets of the Spanish capital were filled with representatives of virtually all possible right-wing variety.
There were centrists, Christian Democrats – elegantly dressed and calm, though firm, who shouted (but not besides loud) the slogans of the type: "go with the Prime Minister". There were besides present prayer groups – older women refusing the rosary, both those connected with conventional spiritual communities and more extremist ones, close to the crusaders' movements. Then – young men chanting sometimes without a trace of embarrassment: “Heil Hitler”.
Next to them – flags Frankist Falanga, as well as another banners, with a immense red cross on a white background – symbols of erstwhile Spanish imperial ambitions, identified for a 100 years with dwarfs. Karlists, although they were opposition to General Franco's regime, did so from an even more right-wing position, due to the fact that ultra-Catholic and monarchist at once. "We have our regional varieties of the far right here," my friend, an activist of the Catalan left-wing CUP party, joked.
About this circumstantial Spanish paradox – a country profoundly divided, where both the utmost right and the left have a strong historical root – political criticism has besides frequently written. Shafran Cuba described for example, how the political divisions in Spain proceed to follow the lines set inactive during the 1936–1939 civilian war.
Because Spain, with all its story of the Dąbrowszczaks and revolutionary reasoning of a more or little progressive state, is inactive an crucial mention point for the planet left. besides Polish – go to any left-wing manifestation in the larger city, and you will hear from young cashewers, as inspired by the brave anti-fascists of 1937. Ask the expert, and for a fewer minutes he will talk about the politics of Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez or his predecessor, besides representing the left, José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero.
It is worth recalling that Zapatero not only importantly developed the Spanish welfare state (in a sense it could be compared to Mark Belka), but besides carried out extended social reforms – he introduced partnerships and guaranteed many rights to LGBT+ people.
Maybe it's a good time to look at the Spaniards again and follow their example.
Thursday 26 June Spanish legislature of Deputies Final approved improvement of the law governing the right to association. Amendment proposed by the Spanish governing Socialist Workers' organization (PSOE) is intended to enable the dissolution of those organizations that praise Francoism and "bring down the dignity of the victims of General Franco's dictatorship".
Attempts to weaken the provisions of the Act by the opposition People's organization (PP), which has a majority in the Spanish Senate, were rejected by the voices of socialists and their coalition and parliamentary allies. These amendments only supported the parties of the far right, openly referring to the Frankist heritage: Vox and UPN (i.e. the plankton organization of the right from the Navarra region, in the north of the country).
The fresh law is in accordance with the provisions of the alleged Democratic Memory Act (Spanish. Ley de Memoria Democratica), adopted in October 2022, which provided for the request to adapt the existing regulations of association to fresh standards for the protection of historical memory.
In line with the current reform, it is pointed out as the basis for the resolution of the organisation that, among another things, "public proclamation of the praise of Frankism, the praise of a coup, dictatorship or its leaders – as long as these actions combine with demeaning the dignity of the victims of the government or calling for hatred or force against them."
This does not mean that the problem will disappear. Law is not only a collection of regulations on paper – it is besides a clash with profoundly rooted capital structures. And not only economical capital, but besides symbolic and cultural.
Spain will always have a policy of the far right, present most frequently of the Vox party, which shouts, "but for Franco it worked!" And then it doesn't substance that it "worked" thanks to a strategy of slave labour of political prisoners or an extended apparatus of repression.
The fresh law gives you a tool for real combating right-wing brutality, which is already visible and increasing. And no substance what definition we adopt (for those interested: it is worth to scope for a fewer late released in Political Critics Books on Modern Forms of FascismOne thing is certain: Fascism in the 21st century is not a informing but a fact. An example? For example, the presence of fascist flags and chanting "Heil Hitler" during November protests in Madrid. And if anyone wants more, just open Twitter.
And in Poland?
The Constitution clearly states: Article 13 prohibits the existence of political parties and another organizations which in their programs mention to totalitarian methods and practices of acting Nazism, Fascism or Communism. So much for theory. And in practice?
Let's start with the law. In the realities of individual affairs, fewer people trust on the Constitution – Article 256 of the Criminal Code is much more frequently used, which prohibits the public promotion of fascist or another totalitarian state system, as well as calls for hatred. However, since this is simply a provision of criminal law, the presumption of innocence applies. And that means that before the court finds anyone guilty, you gotta prove it. But how in practice do you prove that individual is simply a fascist?
A good example can be a case dealt with late by the ultimate Administrative Court in Warsaw (signature II GSK 2046/23). It active a individual accused of spreading Russian misinformation about the war in Ukraine. Did the court consider that fascism? Not necessarily, the explanatory memorandum points out that ‘the absence of any evidence in the case file in this respect makes it impossible to measure whether specified propaganda actually happened’.
In accordance with the applicable Convention Law, the municipal body – i.e. most frequently the city president, mayor or mayor – has the right to prohibit the assembly if its intent violates the law, including the aforementioned Article 256 of the Criminal Code. In specified a case, the decision to prohibit shall be issued at the latest 96 hours before the planned date of the event and shall contain detailed reasons. The decision can be appealed to the court in an accelerated manner – that is, as shortly as possible in the judicial procedure. And even if this way fails, there is simply a anticipation of police intervention in the assembly itself.
However, it is not essential to read judgments to note that something in this strategy is not working properly.
In May he passed completely legally through Warsaw streets Anti-immigrant and xenophobic March Against Immigration, organized by the Border Defence Movement – initiative of Robert Bąkiewicz. No 1 banned Mr Bąkiewicz from organising this event, for why? Finally, we have freedom of speech in Poland.
Such marches arrive: on June 15 a akin 1 took place in Toruń. The pretext was a brutal night attack on a 24-year-old female – most likely with the intention of killing her. The victim was Polka and the alleged perpetrator was a Venezuelan citizen. In consequence to this incident, a march was organized, with about 200 people raised the passwords calling for the expulsion of migrants from Poland.
However, the Spanish offer us a concrete solution: the introduction of precise regulations. Under the fresh Spanish law, a individual who publically calls for the expulsion of any of the people of the country or the establishment of a fascist dictatorship is at least liable to a fine. This may seem harsh, but in the present situation it is simply necessary.
In the Polish legal system, specified cases are dealt with under the Criminal Code, which, as I mentioned, means a large difficulty in proving guilt and puts freedom of assembly first. As a result, not only does the problem not disappear, but it is underestimated. In the meantime, it seems that we should partially limit this freedom of assembly erstwhile there is open propaganda of hatred.
Let us remember that a crucial part of the current anti-immigrant or neo-fascist moods may be the consequence of Russia's hybrid war. This subject disappeared from the first plan during the last presidential campaign, erstwhile Rafał Trzaskowski imagined that he would gain designation of a part of the right-wing electorate by the deficiency of axenophobes and by letting his eye go. The consequence is that present it is Donald Tusk's government – the same 1 that went to elections under democratic and pro-European slogans – emits anti-migration spots, fueling social fears and stereotypes. If you don't believe, let's watch the last place of the abroad Office.
Meanwhile, the subject of the state's relation to the increasingly popular successive varieties of Fascism only grows. Let's just look at France – there, in the first half of June, 2 anti-fascist organizations were banned for it. It is La Jeune Garde and Lyon Populaire – organizations accused of utilizing violence.
On the another hand, Spain is not the only 1 seeking peculiar regulations. In Romania, where conservative liberals led by Nicușor Dan won as a consequence of a alternatively large coincidence – they effort to ban appeals to the fascist past of the country at all costs. And already the government prosecutors are utilizing these regulations to further plunge Dan's future counter-candidate— far right, pro-Russian Călin Georgescu.
So it is easy to fall into a trap – simply forbidding will not do anything. If Fascism is inactive an attractive option, due to the fact that offering the next social groups a false promise of emancipation – the specified ban will only bring martyrs. But progressive forces would gotta have any affirmative proposition. no so far.
The introduction of separate rules on the activities of organisations referring to the ideology of hatred could actually strengthen the protection of democracy and civilian liberties. At least give us a small time while there is inactive any government in power that at least declares liberal-democratic values.
