Mediaboss Marketing

Election 2020

Analysis: They're beginning to register in the polls, but under criticism for policies seen as far-right and with only a week to go, do the New Conservatives really have a shot at making it to Parliament? Marc Daalder reports

The New Conservatives sure aren't Colin Craig's party anymore.

That's one of the first things the party's leader and Waimakariri candidate, Leighton Baker, wants to get across. While the old Conservative Party was a one-man band, this newer body is a grassroots political movement for democracy and family values, he says.

"The party is different because it's based on a team approach. There's no one person who's controlling the whole thing."

This is Baker's fourth election with the party and his second as party leader - he took up the reins in January 2017, a year and a half after Craig resigned in disgrace over sexual harassment allegations.

Despite his long history with the party, Baker has struggled to get the New Conservatives to register above 2percent in the polls, although he insists that internal polling has the party on 4.5 percent. His campaign has also been marred by repeated vandalism of party hoardings, allegations that a candidate lied about being a Cancer Society ambassador and policies that critics say are alt-right.

Getting over Craig

Under Craig, the Conservative Party was focused on social and family issues, with opposition to the anti-smacking bill kickstarting the party's support ahead of the 2011 election. It fared well in its first two polls, reaching 2.85 percent in 2011 and 3.9 percent in 2014, but everything fell apart when the news broke of Craig'salleged sexual harassment offormer press secretary Rachel MacGregor.

Craig resigned and Baker, who had himself resigned as a board member just three months earlier, ended up as board chair. The leadership position remained empty while the party struggled to reconsolidate its base. Baker himself raised the possibility that the party might not contest the 2017 election or would have to change its name first.

In the end, he led the party - name unchanged - into electoral oblivion in September 2017. The Conservatives garnered just 6,253 votes - 15 times fewer than atthe previous election and just 0.24 percent of the party vote. Two months later, the party changed its name to the New Conservatives.

That rebranding has come with a slight ideological shift as well, with the party focused more on culture wars issues - free speech, abortion, gun laws - that sound like they've comestraight from the American right. But Joshua Tait, a historian and expert on conservatism, told Newsroom the New Conservatives' politics arerooted in a sense of vulnerability about Western civilisation.

"The difference between the New Conservatives and most of our centre-right or right-wing spectrum is that totalising - although not necessarily coherent - world view that sees themselves pitched in an ideological battle against something that has all sorts of names,and I think none of them are particularly useful,but leftism, or progressivism, or marxism or cultural marxism," he said.

"Now ACT has an ideological vision as well, but it's a much more modern one - it's a neoliberal outlook that's quite distinct from the New Conservatives' vision, which is predicated on an existential conflict between a religious Western civilisation and the threat of secular leftism. In the New Zealand context, it does seem quite out of the bounds of what we normally expect our conservative parties to look like."

Culture wars

What does that look like in practice?

In part, it's a rejection of what Tait says the New Conservatives might see as secular moral degeneracy. For the party faithful, that means one issue: abortion.

"The recent abortion law reform has shifted a lot of the socially conservative voters who were upset that National didn't hold the line stronger against it, that New Zealand First went for it and ACT went for it and so on. So I think they're looking for a more socially conservative option," he said.

At the same time, however, he sees the party as less religiously-oriented than that of Colin Craig. It is instead much more focused on its own secular perception of Western civilisation - hence the references on the website not to Christianity but to Judeo-Christian heritage.

Paul Spoonley,a distinguished professor at Massey University and an expert on New Zealand's extreme right, made a similar observation.

"There's certainly a lot less of the evangelical and Christian elements, although they're still present. There's much more on rights and, in particular the idea that somehow rights to speech are being impinged and there are organisations which are restricting the rights of New Zealanders," he said.

Indeed, theparty has a number of policies addressing culture wars issues that few other parties seem to think are worth any focus.

In their Heritage Policy, the New Conservatives say, "Public statues and memorials to historic events and figures are an important part of our heritage and must be protected.New Conservative is the only party prepared to state a policy on this."

That's a response to discussions earlier this year in New Zealand (and perennially in the United States) about removing statues of colonisers, slave-owners and other historical figures who engaged in unsavoury acts. The party has also waded into debates about transgender rights and transphobia, insisting in its Gender Identity Policythat "there are two biological genders" and demanding the removal of "gender ideology" from educational resources like Mates & Dates.

Sharia Law and migrant pacts

At times, these policies veer into languagereminiscent of far-right extremism. Parroting American Islamophobia, the party promises to "ensure there is no conflicting jurisdictional authority in New Zealand, such as aspects of Sharia Law".

Baker told Newsroom he had seen no indication that anyone wanted to implement Sharia Law as an alternativeto the secular justice system inNew Zealand, but cited discredited reports of "no-go zones" where Europeanlaw enforcement are purportedly unable to investigate crimes as a disturbing precedent.

"It's preemptive. We've seen internationally where parts of Sharia Law were implemented," he said. "All we've said is put a stake in the ground and said this is New Zealand. We'd love people to join New Zealand. People from all over the world come here, of all different belief systems, whether they're Muslim or Hindu.We're saying come in and join New Zealand, the culture we have in New Zealand, but don't try and change us to what you have left behind. Just enjoy the different flavour we have here."

The New Conservatives also want New Zealand to withdraw from the non-binding United Nations Global Compact for Migration.

Signatories to the agreement pledge to do more for migrant welfare but are not required to make any legislative or policy changes. Nonetheless, the innocuous document has become a target of far-right fever dreams about a wave of migration from developing countries. The March 15 terrorist opposed the agreement and referenced it in writing on one of his assault rifles, prompting the National Party to remove a petition against the pact form its website on the day the terror attack took place.

That left the New Conservatives as the only party still promising to pull New Zealand out of the agreement.

"This is something that our Government signed us up for without discussing that they were going to sign up for it," Baker said. He claimed the Government only revealed it would sign the compact two weeks before doing so in late 2018, but New Zealand publicly signed up to a UN declaration in September 2016 committing it to work on the global agreement.

Spoonley said the New Conservatives are concerned about perceived threats to New Zealand's sovereignty - yet another potential vector for the attack on the West, in Tait's framing.

"There's a deep suspicion of anything that is international and the UN epitomises that. And there's often an explicit argument that those international organisations are working against New Zealand's interests," Spoonley said.

Can they make it?

But the party's leaders aren't the only issue for Spoonley.

"It's not always the leadership of the New Conservatives that voices them, but as soon as you get anywhere near some of the meetings or the online comments, then you begin to see this QAnon and conspiracy material starting to appear. I'm really talking about the concern with free speech, vaccines, 5G, the UN. There's quite a clear populist nationalist message which has conspiracies feeding it in various ways. I think they've found a constituency here which appears sympathetic to some of the fringe and sometimes the far-right views that have been circulating internationally."

Baker dismisses all of this, calling it laughable.

"I laugh at it, actually. I think it's bizarre. The reality is what we've stood up for is that families are really important, we believe in hard work, people being rewarded for effort, we believe in free choice, we believe in justice and democracy. I can't see anywhere where that could be considered far-right," he said.

For him, the party's central policies are the ones that touch on family values and proposals to reform the way New Zealand operates so that it has fewer MPs and more decisions are made through referendums, including binding, citizen-initiated ones.

Whether they'll have a chance to implement those policies is another question entirely. The party's best showing since last election was in the latest Newshub/Reid Research poll, which had it on 2.1 percent. That's still less than half of the votes the New Conservatives need if they want to be sending members to Wellington.

Baker insists the party still has a chance, saying the polls don't reflect the enthusiasm he's seen on the ground.

"I've been involved for about 10 years. I've never seen the amount of action that we're seeing at the moment, right across New Zealand."

He also pointed to the fact that the New Conservatives are one of just two parties (the other is Labour) to be running candidates in every electorate, including the Mori electorates. That's despite the party wanting to abolish Mori electorates.

'Historical hurdles'

Other political experts aren't so bullish about the party's electoral chances.

"There's always been maybe a 2 to 3percent constituency for this sort of conservative Christian party," Tait said.

"I think you've always had that type of voter group, probably primary evangelical or conservative Catholic, looking for a political party putting more emphasis on Christianity. And I know the New Conservatives tend to put it in a secularised Western civilisation language, but many of the voters are looking for a party that has explicit religious values in a way that National and certainly ACT or New Zealand First don't."

Jennifer Curtin isa professor of politics andDirector of the Public Policy Institute at the University of Auckland, as well as an expert on minor party politics. She told Newsroom that New Zealand's MMP system can only support a handful of political parties - tacking on a conservative minor party when the libertarian ACT is doing so well could be too much to sustain.

"How many parties can MMP in New Zealand sustain? The argument is that we can only have two parties on different spectrums. Around the centre, around the different ways of seeing a mixed economy versus a market economy, we know that for the most part Labour and National capture that. Then a party system like ours could theoretically sustain parties that voters identify with their postmaterialist issues. This might be where the Greens come in and potentially a party that's based on ethnicity," she said of research commissioned around the time the country moved to MMP.

"The argument is there's only really room for one more party, just by nature of the votes, the number of votes, the number of electorates and the number of seats - and the way in which voters identify, I suppose."

The New Conservatives also face a historical obstacle in that no party has ever entered Parliament without being led by an existing MP and having split from an existing party.

"No party ever has. There's some historical hurdles we've got to overcome," Baker acknowledges.

"There is definitely a cohort of Christian conservative votes out there in New Zealand and the first Conservative Party demonstrated that, by getting 3.9 percent," Curtin said.

"That seems to have dissipated - where those votes have gone, I wouldn't like to speculate. But the argument would be that, theoretically at least, our party system would only be able to sustain one of those parties, ACT, New Zealand Firstor the New Conservatives."

More here:
Will the New Conservatives defy the polls? - Newsroom

By Blyth Crawford, for The Conversation

Just as the global death toll from COVID-19 reached 250,000 at the start of May this year, a short film emerged that hassince been calledthe first true hit conspiracy video of the COVID-19 era. Titled Plandemic, it featured a lengthy interview with thediscredited scientist Judy Mikovits, who falsely argued that the COVID death tolls were being exaggerated to pave the way for a large-scale vaccination programme.

Allegedly orchestrated by big pharma companies in conjunction with Bill Gates, this scheme would supposedly kill millions in the name of generating profit. The video was removed from Facebook and YouTube where it had been shared, but not before it was watched an estimated8 million times.

The perceived danger of an eventual vaccination programme has been one of the most concerning and far-reaching of coronavirus conspiracy narratives. But it has also been linked to attempts by the far right to exploit the pandemic to promote its extreme ideology.

Similar conspiracies are prevalent within far-right social media circles, but many of them degenerate intoovert antisemitism, with claims the virus is a hoax engineered by Jewish elites intent on implementing a vaccine either for profit or to eradicate the white race. Onejournalist warnedthat the Plandemic video may be the first step in introducing new audiences into the depths of the far-right abyss.

By playing on peoples health fears in such ways, the far right is hoping tonormalise its viewsand make those of the political mainstream seem inadequate when it comes to explaining or resolving the crisis. And its possible that the pandemic may be increasing public awareness of and even participation in extremist discourse.

Arecent reportfrom the United Nations Security Council warns that extreme right-wing groups and individuals in the US have sought to exploit the pandemic to radicalize, recruit, and inspire plots and attacks. This sentiment is echoed in anote from the Council of the European Union, which warns that it is highly likely right-wing extremists are now capitalising on the corona crisis more than on any other issue. It adds that this focus may have led to an expansion in target selection, with sites like hospitals being viewed as legitimate targets for large-scale attacks.

The far rights focus on coronavirus has been reflected across social media. Onerecent reportshowed that between January and April 2020, hundreds of thousands of far-right posts about coronavirus were made to public Facebook groups. Meanwhile, conspiratorial narratives relating to elites a staple of far-right discourse steadily increased from mid-March.

Similarly, far-right groups on the encrypted messaging app Telegram have set up a range of channels dedicated specifically to the discussion of coronavirus, often amplifying disinformation. In March, Telegram channels associated with white supremacy and racismattracted an influx of over 6,000 users, with one channel, dedicated to the discussion of coronavirus, growing its user base by 800%.

One of the key ways the far right is doing this is by taking advantage of the staggering extent of misinformation and conspiracy theories surrounding the virus. The plandemic narrative is one example, but there has also been asignificant risein social media activity relating to the QAnon conspiracy movement, which has alsoamplified misinformation about the pandemic.

A number of these conspiracies have also been influential within theReopen movement, which advocates for the lifting of lockdown restrictions. This momentum has been harnessed by some far-right actors, particularly the Proud Boys, an alt-right, pro-west fraternal organisation.

This group has historically attempted to market itself towards the Republican mainstream on platforms such as Facebook bydeliberately avoiding the use of overtly racist symbols. Now a number of Proud Boys have been spotted taking part in anti-lockdown protests, with the groups president, Enrique Tarrio, framing the Florida protests as the point where the battle for the 2020 election starts. This suggests he is using the protests as apropaganda opportunityfor his movement.

Indeed, the spirit of the protests accords closely with narratives being propagated by some more overtly extreme facets of the right, suggesting the Reopen movement has presented an opportunity to popularise extreme anti-state messaging. For example, one alt-right figure used his Telegram channel to paint the lockdown measures as a power grab by the state, and an orchestrated attempt to ensure citizens particularly men remain slaves to society and the government.

Perhaps one of the most concerning groups that appears to have been buoyed by similar narratives is theboogaloo movement, a loose online network of radical firearms activists that has been linked to several violent incidents across the US. It unites a widevariety of people, some of whom have attempted to associate with Black Lives Matter, and others with neo-Nazism, with a commitment to preserving their right to bear arms and a shared desire to incite a civil war in order to overthrow the government.

In place of a rigid political philosophy, the movements disparate followers are instead bound byin-jokes and memes. But some supporters have also demonstrated a propensity for violence, with several incidents this yearleading to arrests, and three alleged followers now facingterrorism charges.

This activity has been matched bynumerous online postsreferring to insurrectional violence relating to the coronavirus. And unrest related to pandemic restrictions appears to have significantly boosted the profile of the movement.

Researchhas shownthat the conspiracy theory that the US government is using the pandemic to restrict American citizens freedoms has been central in influencing calls for a civil war. Some Boogaloo supporters also believe that the pandemic and subsequent lockdown have helped raise awareness of their civil war narrative amongst wider populations.

The pandemic has certainly been fertile ground for far-right messaging, helping give new platforms to activists and movements. While it is impossible to predict the long-term effects of these events, the potential for the crisis to spread some elements of far-right ideology to more mainstream audiences cannot be ignored. Shifting those people away from these ideas may be as difficult as tackling the virus itself.

By Blyth Crawford, for The Conversation

Blyth Crawford PhD Candidate, Department of War Studies, Kings College London. Blyth Crawford is a Research Fellow at the International Centre for the Study of Radicalisation (ICSR) based in the Department of War Studies at Kings College London.

More here:
Coronavirus And Conspiracies: How The Far Right Is Exploiting The Pandemic - StopFake.org

Note: This article discusses violence and violent rhetoric. Reader discretion, etc.

It was only last Tuesday, which in the 2020 U.S. news world is about a millennia ago. On that day, President Donald Trump, during his debate with former Vice President Joe Biden, told a group called the Proud Boys to stand back and stand by.

The actual group, the Proud Boys, swiftly changed their logo to include Trumps quote, celebrating the moment on their online forums. [News organizations widely criticized the statement as a refusal to condemn white supremacy and violent militias from a President who has, intentionally or not, courted such groups in the past.]

Probably intentionally.

Even Merriam-Webster (yes, the dictionary) weighed in:

Because somebodys got to stand up for the truth.

The above clip from September 29ths chaotic debate has sparked outrage from op-ed columnists and celebration from the Proud Boys themselves.

The next day, Donald Trump claimed not to know who the Proud Boys are, but told them to stand down and let law enforcement do their work.

However, Trump has a previous connection to the proud boys: Roger Stone. Trump commuted Stones sentence for lying to Congress (see video below) on July 10th. Stone himself is an associate of the Proud Boys, particularly of Enrique Tarro, the groups current leader.

Tarrio also heads Floridas Latinos for Trump.

While Trump himself doesnt have a direct connection, there is a chain of connections. If he didnt know who the Proud Boys were before claiming so, well, that was impressively ignorant of him.

If you havent encountered or heard of the group in real life, and you arent the right (wrong?) kind of Extremely Online, you might have had no idea who the Proud Boys were before Tuesday. In the wake of Trumps comments, however, the group gained a lot of public attention.

So, who are the Proud Boys? According to the International Centre for Counter-Terrorism, theyre a radicalization vector. That is, members of the group are likely to get involved with more extremist groups. Therefore, the group can maintain a sort of plausible deniability. In fact, the Proud Boys sued the Southern Poverty Law Center for labeling them as a hate group.

The group was founded in 2016 by Gavin McInnes, who (according to the International Centre) acknowledges himself as a xenophobe. He envisioned the group as a pro-western fraternity dedicated to celebrating western culture. Effectively just a drinking club.

However, they have established themselves as more of a fight club, showing up at political rallies and participating in fights (often escalating force) such as confrontations at the protests in Portland. In fact, one prominent member was arrested in Portland on September 30th.

In Summer 2017, amid controversy over the removal of Charlottesville, Virginias Confederate monuments, numerous far-right political groups organized a Unite the Right rally (heres a YouTube video reviewing the event).

That is: neo-Nazis, neo-Confederates, the Ku Klux Klan, et cetera. These protestors marched through the streets of Charlottesville with tiki torches. They shouted slogans such as blood and soil, white lives matter, Jews will not replace us, and you will not replace us. This rally turned violent (predictably) and one woman, Heather Heyer, was killed on August 12th.

McInnes and the Proud Boys were invited to the rally, but declined because, if we do go, it will look like were fighting for Nazis we dont like. This is consistent with the Proud Boys MO: they seek to distance themselves from more overt alt-right groups while maintaining indirect associations with them.

While McInnes and the mainstream Proud Boys group didnt appear at the rally in Charlottesville, their more violent offshoot (the Fraternal Order of Alt-Knights) was present.

So although the Proud Boys maintain some plausible deniability by disavowing and distancing themselves from devoted white-nationalist, anti-semitic, and neo-fascist views, the fact is that theyre closely associated with other groups that proudly hold these more overtly violent views. This has led to the Proud Boys being labeled as part of the alt-lite by hate-watch groups.

Since 2016 the alt-right movement has gained increased public attention as an influential movement in the U.S. The term was coined in 2008 by Richard Spencer, and is effectively a repackaging of white supremacist and ultra-nationalist ideologies.

The movement is a loose association of groups, not an organized whole, and is therefore difficult to reliably define. What unites them is their racist, nationalist ideology and their online activity, including memes.

The alt-lite is, just like the Centre for Counter-Terrorisms article described, more of a vector for radicalization into the alt-right. Alt lite groups, such as the Proud Boys, share a disdain for feminists and immigrants but shy away from more overt expressions of white supremacist ideas.

Alt-lite groups often keep their focus on civic nationalism rather than racial nationalism. The Proud Boys put their own focus on western values, avoiding any direct tie to the racial nationalism of, say, the KKK and neo-Nazis.

While individuals such as Jason Kessler, the Unite the Right rallys organizer, have a past association with the Proud Boys, the group tries to keep its public image free of that association. Kessler was apparently kicked out of the Proud Boys when he became too extreme for them.

However, this doesnt change the fact theyre more than happy to show up and exacerbate violent situations.

Summer 2020s series of protests in American cities, originally sparked by the extrajudicial police killing of George Floyd in May, has resulted in clashes between Proud Boys and right-wing groups in their orbit, and left-wing groups loosely called antifa (anti-fascist). This moniker has come to include the Black Lives Matter movement.

Although politicians have condemned violence on both sides of this conflict, its very important to note that police have been far more permissive with groups such as the Proud Boys than with antifa and protestors against police brutality. Consider the use of federal troops in American cities earlier this year. Consider Trumps insistence that U.S. political violence is primarily left-wing. (This is statistically untrue in recent history).

Consider the false equivalencies made by commentators, seeking to be evenhanded, between protests against police brutality (responded to with more police brutality, even in the absence of destructive tactics), and counter-protests (often protected by police groups).

See the article here:
Who are the 'Proud Boys'? The neo-fascist group backed by Trump - Kulture Hub

Mere hours after the President of the United States turned an opportunity to denounce the rise of white supremacist thinking in America into a chance to tell a hate group to stand back and standby, a new look at an upcoming documentary aims to shed some light on the very people most thrilled by the possibility of a white supremacist government: the alt-right. In White Noise, directed and shot by Daniel Lombroso in his directorial debut, viewers will go inside a spreading movement, bolstered by social medias reach and a cadre of outspoken leaders who think nothing of spewing hate to anyone who will listen.

The film is also The Atlantics first feature documentary and is billed as the definitive inside story of the movement that has come to be known as the alt-right. Lombrosos film follows three of the movements biggest stars, including Mike Cernovich, a conspiracy theorist and sex blogger turned media entrepreneur; Lauren Southern, an anti-feminist, anti-immigration YouTube star; and Richard Spencer, a white-power ideologue.

Per the films official synopsis: This film takes the viewer into the terrifying heart of the movement explosive protests, riotous parties, and the rooms where populist and racist ideologies are refined, weaponized, and injected into the mainstream. Just as the alt-right comes to prominence, infighting tears the movement apart. Spencer and Cernovich clash over the role of white nationalism in conservative politics. Southern struggles to reconcile her leadership role with the sexism and misogyny of her peers. Lawsuits mount and internecine fights erupt, but even as the alt-right fractures, its once-marginalized ideas gain a foothold in mainstream discourse; in Republican politics; in the establishment right-wing press, especially Fox News and on the worlds biggest social-media platforms.

In anticipation of the films premiere at AFI Docs this summer, IndieWires Eric Kohn billed the film a troubling and timely look at a trio of far-right nationalists behind its harrowing resurgence around the country. Through online conspiracy theories, fake news, and hate-spewing YouTube followings, these loathsome provocateurs are responsible from some of the most profound issues facing American discourse today as well as its impact on who makes it into public office.

White Noise will be available on demand on Wednesday, October 21. Watch the films first trailer, exclusively on IndieWire, below.

Sign Up: Stay on top of the latest breaking film and TV news! Sign up for our Email Newsletters here.

Read more:
White Noise Trailer: Urgent Doc Tracks the Rise of Americas White Supremacist Alt-Right - IndieWire

The anti-immigrant, all-male organisation was referenced in the presidential debate, with Donald Trump telling them to stand back and stand by

Yesterday (September 29), in a presidential debate described by BBC News as the political equivalent of a food fight, Donald Trump proved, yet again, that not only is he unfit to run a country, hes also a total piece of shit.

Widely perceived as a hot mess and the worst presidential debate in living memory by both the public and global news corporations, the night was overrun with interruptions, false claims, rants, and personal insults largely from Trump. Joe Biden, his Democrat opponent, kept his cool, occasionally interrupting, and frequently laughing at the presidents incoherent heckling.

In one particularly frenzied moment, Biden was being interrupted so much by Trump, he had to urge, Will you shut up, man? Later referencing the presidents inability to STFU, he told moderator Chris Wallace who frequently lost control of the debate that its hard to get any word in with this clown.

The pair did find some time to address actual issues, including the coronavirus pandemic and institutional racism. However, when Trump was given the chance to renounce right-wing violence, he instead told one far-right group, called the Proud Boys, to stand back and stand by. He then pivoted to attack left-wing and anti-facist activists.

Here, following their direct address by the president of the United States, Dazed outlines who the Proud Boys are, what they stand against, and how theyve reacted to their reference on prime time TV. For a more detailed overview of what happened during last nights presidential debate, head to The Guardian or BBC News.

The all-male Proud Boys group has been described as an alt-right, fascist organisation, which was founded ahead of the US election in 2016 by VICE co-founder Gavin McInnes. It was reportedly started as a joke in the far-right Takis Magazine, with its name stemming from the song Proud of Your Boy from the Aladdin musical. McInnes who was pushed out of VICE in 2008 began distancing himself from the group in 2017, saying hes not a part of the alt-right because his focus isnt race, but Western values. OK.

As reported by news podcast The Takeaway in 2018, the groups recruitment process focuses on white men aged between 15 and 30. The Proud Boys say they have an initiation process which, obviously, includes hazing a process where those wanting to join are degraded and humiliated in order to prove their commitment to the group. According to The Daily Beast, one of the hazing rituals includes calling out the names of cereal brands while getting punched in the face.

Equality, basically. The group believes that white men and Western culture are under siege, and therefore engages in misogyny, homophobia, racism, and violence in order to protect the values held dear by the most marginalised people in history: them. The Proud Boys have described themselves as a Western chauvinist group, with McInnes once asserting that women and other marginalised groups have incentive to be a victim. The group is opposed to feminism McInnes has reportedly called it a cancer and is overtly racist, Islamophobic, anti-Semitic, homophobic, and transphobic.

Though the group reportedly rejects white supremacy (it permits non-white male members) it has regularly participated in racist events, and the FBI has labelled it an extremist group with ties to white nationalism (although the agency later backtracked). The Southern Poverty Law Centre lists the Proud Boys as a hate group.

The group glorifies political violence against the left-wing, with McInnes once declaring: I want violence, I want punching in the face. Im disappointed in Trump supporters for not punching enough. In 2018, when the Proud Boys Twitter account was shut down McInnes was also removed the groups profile photo depicted a member punching a counter-protester.

The Proud Boys have an extensive history of street violence against left-wing activists and protesters. In recent months, the group has repeatedly turned up to oppose Black Lives Matter or Antifa demonstrations, with their presence often resulting in violence. Since 2017, the group has engaged in political fights in a number of states across the US, as well as in Canada. One notorious 2018 incident in Manhattan in which anti-fascist activists protesting a talk by McInnes were attacked by the Proud Boys resulted in the arrest of ten men, two of whom were sentenced to four years in prison.

Much to the dismay of Fred Perry, the Proud Boys have adopted the British labels black and yellow polo shirt as its uniform, even going as far as appropriating the brands signature wreath emblem to advertise a recent rally. Fred Perrys signature polos are associated with the skinhead movement, which originally stood against fascism, but became linked to the far-right politics of the British National Front in the 1970s. The brand has since been adopted by various right-wing movements around the world, many of which are dismally still going strong.

On Sunday (September 27), Fred Perry announced that it will stop importing the shirt to North America and Canada, due to the styles associations with the Proud Boys. Fred Perry does not support and is in no way affiliated with the Proud Boys, the label said in a statement, adding that the groups subversion of its clothing and logo is incredibly frustrating. The brand confirmed that its working with lawyers to pursue any unlawful use of our brand.

Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, and YouTube have all banned the Proud Boys from their platform, but as BBC News reports, the groups chairman, Enrique Tarrio, responded to Trumps shout out on discussion network Parler, writing: Standing by sir I will stand down sir!!! The group also added the phrase Stand Back, Stand By to their logo. Sigh.

Visit link:
A brief history of the violent, alt-right group, the Proud Boys - Dazed