How Tommy Robinson's 150,000-Strong March Exposed the SWP's Strategic Dead End

Creeping Fascism in a Digital Age

Sep 19, 2025

The twenty-to-one numerical defeat at Tommy Robinson's march reveals a crisis that goes beyond numbers: the British left's fundamental inability to build the united front necessary for effective anti-fascist struggle. The "Unite the Kingdom" march on 13 September 2025, organised by far-right activist Tommy Robinson, mobilised an unprecedented 110,000 to 150,000 people, while the anti-fascist counter-protest by Stand Up to Racism drew only around 5,000 participants. This significant imbalance represents a monumental strategic defeat for the anti-fascist movement and serves as a damning indictment of its current organisational effectiveness and strategic paralysis.

This failure was not accidental, but a direct consequence of deep-seated organisational crises, ideological confusion, and a fragmented programme. Factions from the Labour leadership to revolutionary groups offered competing and often contradictory analyses, preventing the formation of a unified and effective response. The core lesson is that the anti-fascist struggle cannot be separated from a militant, class-based programme that directly addresses the material grievances of the working class. A purely moralistic or liberal anti-racist stance proved strategically insufficient against a movement that has skilfully weaponised the anxieties of neoliberal decline.

1. The New Model of Far-Right Mobilisation: Creeping Fascism in a Digital Age

The mobilisation of 150,000 marchers for Tommy Robinson was not a simple replication of 1930s tactics against Oswald Mosley's British Union of Fascists or 1970s confrontations with the National Front; it represents a "new model of fascist advance" driven by fundamental changes in capitalism and technology. The question is not whether this movement is technically classical fascism (a debate often deemed futile) but rather recognising that it is part of a "fluid political process" known as "fascisation" or "creeping fascism".

This process is characterised by:

Proto-Fascist Development toward Authoritarian Democracy: Modern far-right movements do not typically organise paramilitary forces to overthrow the state by revolution, as in the interwar period. Instead, the "direction of travel of the Right as a whole" is towards an "Authoritarian Right". This aims for "authoritarian democracy" (or a managed democracy), where political life is suffocated, and democratic rights are systematically restricted, rather than eliminated outright. The essence remains counter-revolutionary: to defend the capitalist system against the threat of radical change from the working class and the oppressed.
The Digital Bypass of Traditional Organising: The march's scale was achieved by leveraging a "new, technologically enabled, and globally networked ecosystem" that "bypasses traditional organising methods". Modern fascism relies less on mass parties and Nuremberg rallies and more on a "shifting kaleidoscope of online hate channels". This online infrastructure amplifies the far-right's toxic cocktail of nationalism, racism, and misogyny, driving xenophobic narratives and inciting direct action.

The event received crucial support from international figures, notably Elon Musk, who addressed the crowd via video link with incendiary comments such as "violence is coming to you, you either fight back or you die" and a call for a "dissolution of parliament". This underscores how global capital supports this new brand of right-wing populism. The presence of foreign far-right politicians, like French politician Éric Zemmour, who spoke of a "great replacement of our European people" by migrants, further cemented the international character of the movement.

Strategic Imperative: The response cannot be based on fighting "the last war". While the primary agent of fascist repression remains the existing bourgeois state, the far right provides the ideology and the "auxiliaries". Revolutionary Marxists must fight the real tendency of the bourgeoisie towards the "strong state" through persistent daily battles, while opposing the potentially catastrophic danger of open fascism.

2. Organisational Mapping: The Crisis of the United Front

The left's "monumental strategic defeat" was fundamentally a "consequence of a profound inability to build a united front capable of mass mobilisation". The fragmentation of the response, particularly concerning SUTR's strategy, demands a sharp organisational critique based on Leninist united front logic.

The SUTR Failure: From Genuine Front to Party Front

The model employed by SUTR/SWP suffered from three key strategic weaknesses:

Lack of Democratic and Class-Based Culture: While SUTR/SWP was the central actor in the counter-protest, the mobilisation was undermined by a lack of clear political direction and a refusal to adopt a clear, "working-class, anti-austerity programme". The anti-fascist struggle "cannot be separated from a militant, class-based programme". True unity of action against fascism requires exposing the failures of the far-right by addressing the material grievances exploited by nationalist demagogy, such as the "real insecurities of working-class communities around shortages of housing, jobs, and services".
Sectarian Isolation vs. Coalition: The united front principle demands "March separately, but strike together!" The revolutionary party must maintain "complete freedom of criticism of temporary allies" while seeking "agreements for mass action". The failure of SUTR to function as a genuine united front, incorporating other forces effectively, contrasts starkly with historical successes:
1. Cable Street Model: The 1936 victory was achieved by a genuine united front, including local activists, trade unionists, and community groups. Critically, while the Communist Party claimed credit in semi-official histories, it was actually the ILP and sections of the Labour Party who were the backbone of the mobilisation, focusing on working-class unity rather than the CPGB's "Popular Front" with bourgeois interests. The strength of the mobilisation was in spite of CPGB politics rather than because of it.
The Critique of "Smashism" (Elitist Tactics): The defeat highlights the necessity of avoiding small-group confrontations in favour of mass action. "Smashism" has been associated with elitist tactics, such as Red Action-dominated AFA branches, which operate as an "elitist hit squad" seeking to "trash the fash". This approach must be rejected in favour of strategies traditional to the workers' movement—namely, mass pickets and mass action designed to overwhelm and disperse the opponent, as used at Cable Street.

The Need for Geographic Differentiation

The strategic response must be flexible, recognising that "one size doesn't fit all" for anti-fascist organising, as the struggle must be based on a "precise appraisal of the specific historical situation and, primarily, of economic conditions".

The Scottish Dynamic: The existence of a strong "left-liberal bourgeois force" like the Scottish National Party creates a different political context for far-right advance compared to England. While the SNP remains a bourgeois nationalist force, it may temporarily alter the dynamics of the struggle by providing an alternative to traditional British ruling class parties. Furthermore, Reform UK's approach in Scotland notably drops their central focus on independence to concentrate explicitly on austerity and anti-migrant themes, requiring revolutionaries to adapt tactics accordingly.

3. Synthesis of Action: Balancing Mass Mobilisation with Community Organising

The strategic defeat on September 13th was rooted in the failure to leverage the full, organised power of the working class. To overcome this, the anti-fascist struggle must adopt a "combination and synthesis" of mass mobilisation tactics and bottom-up community organising.

Mass Action as the Essential Aim

While grassroots work is indispensable, mass mobilisation remains the "essential aim" of anti-fascist organising, primarily by blocking the far right's major propaganda functions—their marches, meetings, and demonstrations. The objective in imperialist countries is the "unification of the proletarian forces" on an anti-capitalist basis.

The Grassroots Foundation and Self-Defence

Mass mobilisation cannot succeed without strong forms of "self-organisation" built from the bottom up. The working class needs organised self-activity. This strategy must emphasise the creation of community-based self-defence networks to protect vulnerable communities. These measures are part of preparing the movement for inevitable confrontation while maintaining the focus on mass political work and mass intimidation, not "Smashism" or elitist tactics.

The trade union movement, with its 6.5 million members, failed to mobilise its full strength, a tactical failure that played a significant role in the defeat. The trade union movement must be a central pillar of any future anti-fascist organising, providing not only banners but also the resources, organising capacity, and authority needed for a successful mass campaign.

4. Strengthening the Starmer Government Analysis: Bourgeois Enablement

The response of the Labour leadership—what can be categorised as the "Conservative Left" approach—must be framed as a specific strategic failure that objectively functions as bourgeois enablement of the far right.

Labour's Strategic Failure and Normalisation

The "Conservative Left" strategy views the far right primarily as a threat to liberal institutions, emphasising legal and political containment. This approach fails strategically because it refuses ideological confrontation.

Normalisation: Labour leaders normalise the far right's mobilisation by framing it within the bounds of liberal tolerance. The Business Secretary's defence of the large turnout as proof that "free speech, free association, is alive and well" exemplifies how the political establishment seeks to neutralise the threat by treating it as a legitimate democratic expression, rather than an accelerating proto-fascist development.
Failure to Address Material Grievances: The Labour leadership avoids a militant, class-based programme. The failure to address the underlying "social and economic misery of neoliberal austerity" and the "real insecurities of working-class communities" means the political ground exploited by the far right remains unchallenged and fertile.

Social Democracy as an Objective Obstacle

This strategic failure conforms to a historical pattern where the moderate wing of the workers' movement acts as an "objective obstacle" to anti-fascist victory. When faced with crisis, the bankruptcy of moderate politics "drives the despairing petty bourgeois into the arms of the fascists". The Labour Party's strategic impotence and illusions in parliamentary democracy ensures that the capitalist ruling class, which regards the fascist gangs as useful "auxiliaries", can maintain its power.

5. Contemporary Digital Strategy: Countering Post-Truth Disinfotainment

The modern far-right threat is intrinsically linked to its technological model, requiring a comprehensive "sophisticated digital strategy" as a central pillar of the Revolutionary Democracy response.

The Networked Threat and Weaponised Disinformation

The march's success was enabled by a "new, technologically enabled, and globally networked ecosystem". This operates as a "shifting kaleidoscope of online hate channels" that accelerate radicalisation through "disaster disinfotainment"—manufactured narratives exploiting global crises to activate "vengeful passions against well-selected enemies".

The "Post-Truth" Dynamic: This disinformation thrives on a lack of trust in traditional authority. In an environment where neoliberalism fosters competition and distrust, people turn toward "DIY investigation" because they cannot trust established sources. There's a critical point where people stop caring whether what they think is true or not—this erosion of rational judgment is exactly what revolutionaries must address.

The Revolutionary Counter-Strategy

The left cannot simply dismiss the "culture war" and focus only on economics; this would risk siding with forces attacking the oppressed. The digital strategy must target the "capacities of rational judgement of interests, of ends and means" to counter the far-right's reliance on irrationalism. This must be paired with mass campaigning that exposes the links between the far right, global capital, and the political establishment while offering a clear vision for an alternative, socialist future.

6. Immediate Strategic Lessons for Today's Organisers

The Centrality of Class Struggle: The far-right's advance is fuelled by the social and economic misery of neoliberal austerity, skilfully channelling legitimate anger into xenophobic demagogy. The left must stop viewing immigration as a "legitimate concern" to be managed and instead fight for a clear, anti-austerity, class-based programme. A moralistic opposition to racism must be combined with firm economic demands for jobs, homes, services, and protection of living standards to cut the ground from beneath the far-right's narrative of national decline.

The Imperative of a United Front: The most critical lesson is the imperative to overcome the left's deep-seated sectarian fragmentation. This requires "practical cooperation in a non-sectarian way" with other left parties and movements while maintaining "complete freedom of criticism of temporary allies". The aim is to unite various forces in action, not to merge programmes or banners.
A Forward-Looking Strategy: The new, transnational, and digitally-enabled nature of the far right demands a similarly sophisticated response. This includes building community-based self-defence networks, launching mass campaigns that expose far-right links to global capital, and developing comprehensive digital counter-strategies.

The meaning of September 13 is not that the fascists have won, but that the left has been given a wake-up call to reorganise and fight back on new terms. By embracing a strategy rooted in a militant, class-based programme and a unified front, the left can transform this strategic defeat into a catalyst for a new, more effective revolutionary movement. The response cannot be based on fighting the last war—it must address the contemporary reality of creeping fascism in the digital age while drawing on the proven principles of working-class solidarity and mass action.

Discussion about this post

Ready for more?