WSM remove (more) racist slogans in Cabra

by J.Carax Tue Feb 13, 2007 21:39

More pictures from today.

Swastika Removed

Nazi Scum...

Nazi Scum Out!

Nazis Out!

A.F.A

by J.Carax - WSM Tue Feb 13, 2007 21:41

Two more pictures from todays work.

Before.

After.

by Ci Tue Feb 13, 2007 21:49

The Large "Nazi Scum Out" slogan was painted between two large, badly drawn swastikas, both of which were subsequently crossed out. in hindsight, perhaps "Racist Scum Out" would have done, but sure, it's all very well in hindsight.

by guydebordisdead Tue Feb 13, 2007 22:35

Maybe next time use the word "Racists" instead of "nazis".

by Passerby Tue Feb 13, 2007 23:52

I was cycling through Summerhill over the weekend and while I was stopped at lights a man standing close by hailed a cab which pulled over and stopped. The man looked at the driver who was black and then waved him on. I hoped it wasn't what I thought it was so I pulled in further up the road to see had he changed his mind about getting a taxi or had he in fact refused to get into a taxi because the driver was black. Sure enough within a few seconds he had hailed another taxi. I was shocked and angry. I wondered what was going through the mind of the first taxi driver. Racism is a truly evil phenomenon. Well done lads for the paintwork.

by Coilín Wed Feb 14, 2007 12:15

While I abhor the tendency to xenophobia that occasionally - and I would say rarely enough - manifests itself in anti-Polish graffiti around Dublin, I have profound reservations about painting over other people's graffiti. After all, free speech is a fundamental principle of libertarian political philosophies. You are free to say what you want, and any other human person is free to disagree.

Why not leave the anti-Polish stuff there and write your own comments alongside? For example, "Migrant workers welcome" or simply "Solidarity" in English, Irish and Polish?

Also, I think the swastika should be recognised as an ancient good-luck symbol, a powerful mandala used as a sacred symbol in Buddhism and Hinduism, rather like the St. Brigid's cross, the standard Christian cross or the Jewish Star of David: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swastika . I don't think any of these symbols should be treated with contempt, even though they may have unpleasant and even oppressive connotations for some people or in some circumstances.

(By the way, I think supporters of libertarian political philosophies should denounce and defy any move to criminalise the swastika, just as they should denounce and defy any move to criminalise the star of David, the Christian cross, the Muslim veil, the capitalist neck-tie, the black shamrock or any other religious or political symbol, from the anarchist A to the zapatista Z. I might make an exception for the yellow M, as the bad clown to whom it belongs is a fictional character and so has no rights as a free human person.)

When the swastika appears as graffiti, I think it should be rehabilitated rather than defaced. Associations with Nazism can be countered in a number of ways. For example:
- by painting a dot in each quadrant, so that it resembles a Buddhist or Hindu swastika
- by squaring the sides
- by writing libertarian and/or socialist slogans beside or beneath it.

Beir bua agus beannacht Bhríde,
Coilín.

by painter over Wed Feb 14, 2007 13:06

Graffiti is in itself anti-social. When it is left in place, as the writer notes above, it gives the impression that "nobody cares". It would be better to simply paint over slogans, and return to environment to neutrality, but that might require a bit of grown-up thinking, and not go with the whole "camouflage and cargo pants" persona beloved of groups like the WSM.

The idea that someone has the right to come from outside a neighbourhood and inscribe their views on the walls without consulting the people who live there is juvenile. It makes the graffiti writer, whatever their views, no better than the advertisers who clutter the visual landscape with exhortations to buy Coke or Guinness or whatever they are pushing.

It should be noted Dublin City Council will remove all graffiti from DCC property with priority given to offensive, political or racist graffiti. In Cabra and the North Inner City, the Council has a very good track record in getting rid of graffiti when they are requested, with teams often being sent out on the same day.

Graffiti on private property is the responsibility of the property owner, but DCC will provide graffiti removal materials to organised groups to maintain their area. These groups are mainly resident’s associations and local action groups. Contact the Graffiti Removal Section, Waste management Services, 68-71 Marrowbone Lane, Dublin 8. The reason for the written request is to provide transparency in DCC's spending and provision of goods.

Surely a better tactic in dealing with racist graffiti would be to contact residents' groups, get them to request materials, and offer to help them in removing racist slogans. Or is that not rock-and-roll enough?

by Ci Wed Feb 14, 2007 13:17

The reason the slogans were removed was because of their positioning alongside a busy railline. They were removed before and reappeared days later. I don't dissagree that contacting local residents groups is important, and am also equally aware that the council do provide a grafitti removal service, but as said, this is a recurring phenomenon, and we decided to remove it ourselves. If it appears again, perhaps the local council could be contacted, see if the slogans are removed and then judge what can be done in the future.

by observer Wed Feb 14, 2007 13:25

There are no local residents groups. This monstrosity has been dumped into the middle of a rezoned green belt. Finglas is being turned upside down by this sort of development and the influx of people into an area already under sever pressure in terms of schools, transport and so on. Maybe you would be better off pondering that than some juvenile graffitti.

by Gerry Wed Feb 14, 2007 16:20

When I was last in Limerick a few years back I took an initially pleasant walk from the uni campus along the Shannon into town. As town neared, racist graffiti mushroomed, with swastikas (culchies in the Master Race? That's a laugh!) and "niggers out" all over the place, which put me in a foul mood as you'd expect. The biggest lift I got was in town where some folk had done the same as the WSM lot and sprayed "Nazis out" over the racist shit, so I knew that at least some Limerick folk were anti-racist. This sort of graffiti is nothing to do with "free speech" but is a clear intimidation and a threat to outsiders, the same as "Micks out", which I saw plenty of in England growing up, was. It needs to be fought directly, with direct means, and eradicated as the filth that it is. If you're an outsider, whether a Pole in Ireland today or an Irish person in England yesterday, and you see that sort of shite on the walls everywhere, you feel angry and fearful because you know that the folk who scrawled it are just as willing to attack you in the street.

by Caobhin Wed Feb 14, 2007 16:57

Whenever anyone makes a stand against racists there is usually no shortage of armchair gobshites/fascist trolls bleating about the right to free speech of these scumbags. Fair play and well done to all the people involved.

by Eejitwatch Thu Feb 15, 2007 13:31

Going on about rehabilitating the swastika and allowing bigots to vent their spleen is just insulting to those who have been affected by these hatemongers. It really shows where your priorities lie, Coilin. Why don't you go and join Father Neil Horan and leave hte rest of us alone? Go away and pour your energies into defending bigots. Your pompous, self-regarding meanderings are unimpressive and insulting. You don't stand outside cultural context any more than the rest of us do and you are showing your true colours here. The swastika will never, never, be revived and considered acceptable. You are living in a separate world to the rest of us; one that exists only in your own imagination.

by Tim Thu Feb 15, 2007 15:10

A few years back in Limerick, a bunch of us got together to paint over Nazii graffitti by the canal. What we replaced it with was a mural of the river at Plassey and a 'limerick' about the University building on flood plains upriver from the city. I'm lsure we have a digitial photo of it somewhere. We sourced our own paint and materials.

(by the way, a Swastika can be turned into a window frame or a kite, quite easily, and made to look sunny and happy!)

There's a small group, three to four people giving out more racist stuff in Limerick at the moment. It's all gutless stuff about saving Ireland from multiculturalism. As if multiculturalism is intending to privatise hospitals, schools, destroy national monuments and drag us into an EU super state...

Counter murals are worth doing rather than counter slogans, if you have more time. Ours stayed untouched for quite some time. It was less than 20 ft long, but it was colourful and in a nice location, where the Canal meets the city centre.

Well done the WSM Cabra lads.

by Cabra Community Council Thu Feb 15, 2007 19:10

This article has been brought to our attention by a local resident. The Cabra Community Council condemns the racist slogans and states that the residents of Cabra will not allow mindless morons to sully our communities name.

However, we have looked into the matter and while not trying to be parocial, the actual location of the slogans is in Finglas and the racists appear to be from outside our area. This is in no way an attempt to dampen the vile nature of the matter.

From our enquiries, it would appear that migrant workers from a nearby building site use the canal as an access point and this was an attempt to slander them by known "smelly drinkers" who also use the canal.

Yours

Cabra Community Council

by Coilín Thu Feb 15, 2007 20:05

Eejitwatch wrote: Going on about rehabilitating the swastika and allowing bigots to vent their spleen is just insulting to those who have been affected by these hatemongers.

As a matter of fact, I know plenty about hate-mongers, having been subjected to anti-Catholic and anti-Irish prejudice while living and working in Northern Ireland and England for about five years in the early 1990s.

I detest bigotry, racism, fascism and Nazism, and I think they should be denounced wherever they are expressed. Let me give an example:

Late one Friday night last summer, as I was on my way out of a convenience store on Dame Street, I came across a Pakistani employee of the store, aged in his mid-20s, standing in the doorway. He was engaged in heated argument with a man with an English accent, who had broken a jar on the floow and had been asked to leave. The Pakistani was speaking up for himself fairly well, but sounding a bit rattled - naturally enough.

"Go home!" the Englishman shouted.

"What do you mean?" I asked, putting my arm around the Pakistani's shoulder. "This is my brother."

The Englishman threatened to give the Pakistani a kicking. I stood beside the Pakistani, with my arm still around his shoulder, and told the Englishman that he was the one who should go home.

We kept the man deeply engaged in conversation, still threatening to give the Pakistani a kicking, until the police arrived and laid a heavy hand on his shoulder. I offered to make a statement, but the garda thought the statements of the staff would be sufficient to prosecute.

If the Englishman's only offence had been to express his opinion that the Pakistani should go home, then I think the police should have let us deal with the matter as we did, but because he threatened the Pakistani with violence, he deserved to be punished.

Take care,
Coilín.

by Coilín Thu Feb 15, 2007 20:17

Eejitwatch wrote: You don't stand outside cultural context any more than the rest of us do. The swastika will never, never, be revived and considered acceptable.

As a matter of fact, the swastika is used all over India, and will probably go on being used as a religious symbol for many thousands of years to come. I work with an Indian lady who described for me yesterday how she and her people (Hindus) draw the swastika with turmeric, flowers and rice. In her understanding, the word "swastika" itself has a profound spiritual significance, an expression of devotion to God meaning "I belong to You." I don't share her religious sentiments, but I would defend her right to express them while living in Ireland.

The swastika is also commonly seen in Indonesia, Tibet and many other parts of Asia that Hitler - thankfully - never reached. Please take a look at these pictures of the swastika in its home environment:
http://daveliu.com/images/travel/indonesia/swaztika.jpg
http://www.zeestone.com/antique_detail.php?typeID=2
http://www.hobotraveler.com/141tibetday03_03.shtml

If the swastika is banned in this country, I'll be the first to wear it in protest.

Keep well,
Coilín.

by Coilin Thu Feb 15, 2007 20:44

As I know that the WSM had the privilege of holding their own meeting with Noam Chomsky when he was in Dublin last year, I think it might be illuminating to provide a very brief sample of his thoughts on the matter of free speech as it relates to expressions of Nazi sentiment:

"Some Elementary Comments on The Rights of Freedom of Expression
... I rarely have much good to say about the mainstream intelligentsia in the United States, who generally resemble their counterparts elsewhere. Still, it is very illuminating to compare the reaction to the Faurisson affair in France and to the same phenomenon here. In the United States, Arthur Butz (whom one might regard as the American Faurisson) has not been subjected to the kind of merciless attack levelled against Faurisson. ... When the American Nazi Party calls for a parade in the largely Jewish city of Skokie, Illinois -- obviously, pure provocation -- the American Civil Liberties Union defends their rights (though of course, the American Communist Party is infuriated). As far as I am aware, much the same is true in England or Australia, countries which, like the United States, have a live civil libertarian tradition. Butz and the rest are sharply criticized and condemned, but without any attack on their civil rights, to my knowledge. ... There are, in short, deep-seated totalitarian strains that emerge in various guises, a matter well worth further consideration, I believe.
...
Cambridge, Massachusetts
October 11, 1980"

http://www.zmag.org/chomsky/articles/8010-free-expressi....html

Although Chomsky detests Nazism as much as all of us, - or perhaps because he detests it so much - he holds freedom of speech as a principle that must be defended at all times and in all places, even as it applies to public expressions of Nazi sentiment. Paradox.

Maybe some members of the WSM would like to comment?

Beir bua agus beannacht,
Coilín.

by R. Isible Thu Feb 15, 2007 21:35

When the American Nazi Party calls for a parade in the largely Jewish city of Skokie, Illinois -- obviously, pure provocation -- the American Civil Liberties Union defends their rights (though of course, the American Communist Party is infuriated). As far as I am aware, much the same is true in England or Australia, countries which, like the United States, have a live civil libertarian tradition. Butz and the rest are sharply criticized and condemned, but without any attack on their civil rights, to my knowledge.

I'm not in the WSM, but as far as I'm concerned the question is whether or not you provide the state with an extra means of removing liberties from all of us, or you sort out the fascists for yourself. I'd be totally against laws banning fascists or their parades (because those laws can then be used by the state to control whatever they want -- see e.g. anti-terrorism legislation, ASBOs, customary prevalent surveillance) but totally in favour of the work of AFA or in this case the WSM.

By the same token one has to be careful not to carelessly label others fascist/nazi and only take these last resort actions against those that explicitly declare themselves as standing completely outside of democracy.

Painting out the graffiti was a useful and public spirited move and it's disheartening to see all the toothless gumming of the matter by those with nothing else to do.

I don't know how accurately you're extrapolation of Chomsky's opinions are, but if they are as you represent them, then it's another matter where he's completely off base. I hope that he'd make the distinction between the state and activists taking action though.

by Coilin Fri Feb 16, 2007 13:32

Thanks, R. Isible, for your well-considered comments.

I think Chomsky would agree with you on certain key points, and particularly the point that it would be foolish to give the state further powers, as these are inevitably abused to deprive people - including libertarians, socialists, anti-war activists and marginalised social groups - of their basic freedoms.

For example, I have heard of a recent case where a law criminalising displays of the swastika was used to punish an anti-Nazi activist who displayed a swastika with a diagonal red line through it. This was in Germany in the last six months, as far as I remember.

I don't know what Chomsky would say about graffiti as an expression of free speech. He possibly wouldn't think it mattered much whether the bould WSM activists rehabilitated the swastika or painted over it. Maybe I've been attempting to apply general principles to a case that is in itself too trivial to deserve such heated debate, but I think the general principles themselves, and their applications to much broader developments across Europe, are worthy of all this debate and more.

I am fairly sure that Chomsky would say that it is up to the _community_ to decide how to deal with political graffiti, as he has said similar about the intimately related question of how controversies about routes of demonstrations - e.g. the Love Ulster demo - should be resolved. It then becomes a matter of debate as to how we define and delimit communities and how well Dublin City Council or our comrades in the WSM represent the community in question.

I believe my summary of Chomsky's views to be accurate. The point is that he abhors the tendency to totalitarianism that he sees arising in various guises throughout history, whether this be represented by Irish nationalists who write anti-Polish graffiti or by a city council that has imposed severe restrictions on our constitutional freedom to express our political convictions in our streets and other public spaces.

Of course, you are welcome to write to Chomsky yourself to ask his opinion, if you think that would be a good use of his time. I imagine there are already members of the WSM who are in occasional e-mail contact with him, and they could also discuss with him if they thought it worthwhile.

Take care,
Coilin.

by kk punk - afa Fri Feb 16, 2007 16:28

what it says on the tin.