Dave Renton, Fascism, Anti-Fascism and Britain in the 1940s

The 1930s were the devil's decade, as unemployment rose, and communism and fascist fought each other on the streets. But the struggles did not end in 1939. Even in the years of the reforming 1939-1945 Labour government, there was a revival of fascism. By autumn 1947 a confident fascist movement had been established, with a strong network of local organisers and public speakers. Yet within a year the fascist had collapsed and were no more than a succession of sects. This book explains how it was fascism could grow so fast - and then go into decline.

This book was published by Macmillan Press, 2000. ISBN 0333760859. £47.50.

Review: Philip M. Coupland, 'Fascism, Anti-Fascism, and Britain in the 1940s', Canadian Journal of History, August 2002, Vol. 37 Issue 2, p391, 2p

Whilst its topic has been covered before, this is the first detailed, book-length study of the attempts of fascism in general, and Sir Oswald Mosley's Union Movement in particular, to relaunch themselves in Britain after 1945.

Based on its author's doctoral thesis, Fascism, Anti-Fascism, and Britain in the 1940s is in four sections, the first of which promises to tell "what actually happened" in the history of British fascism, 1918-1951 - presumably as a corrective to earlier efforts. Indeed Renton sharply censures those writers whose work has been "distorted" by their contact with surviving blackshirts (p. 9) and, instead of drawing critically on all sources, he only interviews antifascists. Regarding this critique of other historians, it must be hoped that readers will seek out the works in question and make up their own minds. Those readers would also do well to consult earlier histories of British fascism rather than rely exclusively on the account here: at points it is too compressed to provide a sufficiently detailed narrative and too single-minded to critically examine its own interpretations.

The next chapter turns to post-war fascism, stressing the principle that fascism should be understood in terms of its "practice" rather than its "theory." Thus, unlike some histories which may have overemphasized the ideas of the fascist leadership, Renton pays greater attention to the actions of the rank-and-file. Fascism emerges as a force for violence, driven by elitism, racism, antisemitism, and hatred of socialism and the working class. However, whilst these are central parts of the story, do they reflect the full, more ambiguous reality of fascist ideas, motivations, and practice?

Reflecting Marxist assumptions about fascism, Renton also analyzes the class origin of 1940s fascism. Unfortunately, the evidence linking the "capitalist class" to post-war fascism is so scanty as to be unworthy of the space devoted to it. Moving on to argue that post-war fascism was predominantly "middle class," he has to turn to studies of the pre-war British Union of Fascists (BUF) for anything approaching a substantive survey, but fails to discuss Thomas Linehan's East London for Mosley ( 1996), which does not support this thesis. However, given that 1940s fascism was, as Renton writes, "[e]ven where it was strongest…pitifully weak" (p. 70), one wonders whether the participation of an estimated six to seven thousand persons in an extreme and eccentric politics might be better understood in terms other than class?

This admission of the weakness of fascism is also at odds with the argument elsewhere in the book that it was "large…and popular" and "very powerful, confident, and threatening" (pp. vii, 36). This apparent contradiction is of more than pedantic concern in as much that interpretation of the relative threat offered by fascism is crucial to any assessment of the responses of anti-fascists and the state to it.

It is with these subjects that the two final chapters deal, the first devoted to antifascists in the labour movement and Jewish defence organizations. Approval here goes to those who were prepared to use all means against fascism, including offensive force - to, as one antifascist is quoted as saying, "out-violence the fascists" (p. 94). Whilst a liberal democratic state cannot legitimately step outside of the rule of law in this way, in the final chapter the efforts of the police to preserve order at fascist meetings becomes intervention "on the side of the fascists" (p. 104). Whereas a careful consideration of the influence of, for instance, anti-semitism on law enforcement might have been made here, possible police bias is traced ultimately to the willingness of the state under a Labour government to "work with or tolerate fascism" (p. 128). The positive evidence for this is meagre, but much more important is a failure to consider the other anti-fascist tradition: the long-established practice of gathering intelligence, and seeking legal action and legislation where essential, whilst denying fascism the publicity created by violent incidents and high-profile prosecutions. Given that this approach had successfully "smothered" the BUF in the 1930s, Renton offers no convincing reason why the even more feeble fascism of the 1940s demanded more attention from the overstretched Attlee government.

As the conclusion admits, fascism may have been "destined" (p. 144) to fail in any case. In times of relative stability, the public was offered a politics which, notorious in the 1930s, was now associated with a hated enemy and appalling atrocities. The emergency in Palestine made fascist antisemitism attractive for a few but then British withdrawal denied even that appeal. Renton's argument that the antifascists ensured that fascism was "smashed" (p. 144) is not without validity -they ensured that it remained associated with disorder. However, whether to step outside of the law and match violence with violence was necessary or desirable is more questionable. Furthermore, although not mentioned here, Union Movement was not destroyed but remained on the political fringe through the 1950s and 60s.

Whilst Fascism, Anti-Fascism, and Britain in the 1940s demonstrates extensive research, it may leave readers pondering the differing approaches to argumentation and evidence of polemic and history, and where the boundary between those two modes of discourse lies.

Review: 'Underestimating the British?', Richard Thurlow in Patterns of Prejudice 36:2 (2002), pp. 63-4.

Dave Renton, Fascism, Anti-Fascism and Britain in the 1940s. Basingstoke: Macmillan 2000. ix+203 pp. Notes. Bibl. Ind. £47.50.

As one might expect from the insertion of an erratum slip correcting the misinformation that the author was a 'former' member of the Socialist Workers Party (SWP) rather than the committed activist he is, this is, basically, an impassioned anti-fascist tract that possesses the strengths and weaknesses of the genre. Many radicals and socialists will welcome this contribution to their historical analysis of British fascism, and Renton's version of the often neglected attempt to resurrect British fascism after the Second World War. His key point is his interpretation of this period as crucial in the emergence of British anti-fascism, as a hinge connecting the opposition to Mosley in the 1930s, mainly led by Jewish Communists, and the alliance of radical and socialist groups in the Anti-Nazi league of the 1970s and 1990s (which was created, influenced led, organized, manipulated or controlled by the SWP, depending on your viewpoint). After reading this volume the reader can understand why working-class radicals and Jewish ex-servicemen felt so enraged as to oppose by militant means the re-emergence of fascism and the fanning of the flames of anti-semitism, which the war had supposedly been fought to eradicate, both internationally and in Britain. This is certainly the major contribution of this well-written and cogent book. Good use has been made of the oral contributions of militant activists in the 1940s in building an interesting argument, buttressed by the selective use of contemporary documentation. In particular Renton has gone beyond the perspective of the 43 Group, and the fascinating reminiscences of Morris Beckman, to present a broader picture of the radical alliance militantly opposed to the re-emergence of British fascism. Yet, while a significant contribution to the literature, the book has several difficulties.

For this reviewer, the problems start with the definition of fascism and anti-fascism, and the discussion of the historical context of the 1940s. Although fascism is a controversial subject and there is no agreed definition, Renton's hatred of the phenomenon is such that he sees the historians' duty not to understand fascism, but to provide the ammunition with which it can be destroyed. He is also keen not to differentiate between fascists and Nazis, as well as to associate fascism with state oppression. He therefore has a broad definition that incorporates racial populists, the radical right, fascists and Nazis, not forgetting all the 'capitalists' or agents of the state who had any connection with Mosley, or who attended, for whatever reason, any meeting or function at which fascists were also present, or who hindered direct action or legal moves to force Mosley off the streets. Similarly, whilst recognising that Mosley had a very limited political constituency in 1945, only those who wished to ban fascism or to oppose fascism on the streets could be defined as 'anti-fascist'. For Renton, the majority of the population who failed to oppose the officially sanctioned policy of ignoring Mosley could be described as 'non-fascist'. Given the fact that in 1945 Mosley was probably the most unpopular British politician ever and that, as a result of the war, anti-fascism had become an ingrained part of national culture, 'non-fascism' is an odd concept. Much better us the approach taken by Nigel Copsey in his recent Anti-Fascism in Britain (Macmillan 2000), in which two types of anti-fascism are distinguished, the militant anti-fascism that Renton describes so forcefully, and the publicity boycott, educational work and strengthening of general legislation and the Common Law to enable the authorities to control potential political violence with a minimum infringement of civil liberties, even if it means that militants are discriminated against as much as fascists.

Although, as the discussion of the general factors that prevented Mosley's attempted political resurrection in the conclusion shows, the author is well aware that in 1945 British fascism was a political dodo, and Mosley was a dead duck from the outset. Nevertheless there is a tension between the implications of this and the attempt to show that militant anti-fascism was the main reason why a significant revival of fascism was defeated in the 1940s. Whilst, as Tony Kushner has shown, the survival of anti-semitism was a nasty political undercurrent in the 1940s, and that violence and terrorism surrounding the background to the formation of the state of Israel did fan the flames - leading to riots in Liverpool and an attempted revival of a scarcely veiled Mosleyite 'European Socialism' - there is no evidence that it had any significance or that anybody revealed it as more than a political nuisance. In essence the Mosleyite battleground was in a small corner of East and North-eat London, with no sign that it had any reverbations elsewhere. Militant anti-fascism was important not for stopping the non-starter of a significant Mosleyite movement, but for illustrating that the war against fascism and Nazism had taught many radicals and Jews that 'passive' forms of ignoring provocation were no longer enough. In that sense Renton's implication that new strategies of counter-violence were developed to oppose fascist violence against Jews is probably putting the cart before the horse. Whilst there is plenty of evidence to show the growth of significant confrontation, violence and counter-violence in the 1940s, at least in Mosley's 1930s stomping ground of the East End, the implication is that militant anti-fascists got their retribution in first. The war against Nazism had convinced many Jewish ex-servicemen that if anti-semites began to provoke Jews, then the origins of the irritation should be unceremoniously cut off at source. This undoubtedly is what happened, but to confuse this with the argument that it prevented a significant revival of British fascism is misleading.

There are also problems with the chapter on the state management of fascism and anti-fascism in the 1940s. Whilst keen to emphasize the 'institutional racism' of the police, particularly against provoked Jewish militants, Renton understates the balancing act between civil liberties, political violence, and public order that the authorities performed. He also fails to discuss the impact of the Second World War on the police, who had valiantly coped with many extra duties as a result of the Blitz: destruction caused not by the Jews but by the Nazi Luftwaffe. If the police supposedly disliked Jews, they also had no cause to love fascists. Indeed the Home Office files released into the Public Record Office show quite clearly that both Lord Trenchard and Sir Philip Game, the Metropolitan Police Commissioners, were for banning the British Union of Fascists in the 1930s, and were only dissuaded from pressing their case by Home Office mandarins who pointed out the implications for civil liberties.

In conclusion it may be said that Renton over-exaggerates the threat of a fascist revival in Britain in the 1940s and, although providing a graphic portrait of anti-fascist militancy in the aftermath of war, he understates the underlying anti-fascist cultural consensus in British society.

Review: Andrew Moore in Labour History Review (Australia), November 2001.

Viewed from the distant shores of Australia, it is difficult to remain unimpressed by the vigorous state of scholarship in Britain about British fascism and its inter-war manifestations in particular. In Australia the most recent works about antipodean fascist groups of the 1930s were published in the late 1980s and can be numbered on the fingers of one hand. Dave Renton's Fascism, Anti-Fascism and Britain in the 1940s deals with the rebirth of Sir Oswald Mosley's political career after World War Two, to which it makes a major contribution, but it builds on a substantial literature about Mosley in the 1930s. In a field nurtured by the scholarship of Richard Thurlow of Sheffield University (Renton's book is also a Thurlow-supervised Ph.D.) there are about 100 books, review and journal articles, as well as numerous postgraduate theses. Many of these studies (including Mike Cronin's important edited collection, The Failure of British Fascism, Macmillan, 1996) have been completed within the last ten years. The literature on 1970s British fascism is also extensive. The reasons for this rich load of scholarly enquiry are logical enough. As fellow readers of the British anti-fascist journal, Searchlight, would be aware, fascism and the threat from the Right are pressing concerns in Britain.

Holding significant rallies in 1947 and 1948, by any account it was remarkable that Mosley was able to revive fascism in Britain so soon after World War Two. As one anti-fascist activist cited by Renton recalls: 'We'd had the news of the Holocaust. It was not all revealed but what we had heard was bad enough, and then these bastards came along with their arms up, giving the fascist salute. Our minds boggled'. (p.36)

Fortunately British fascism's post-war revival proved short-lived. By April 1949 Renton reports that Mosley and his Union Movement were routed. Faced with the prospect of a short and somewhat anti-climactic book, Dr Renton turns to the anti-fascists. In this respect it is possible that he allows sympathy for their cause to exaggerate his account of their effectiveness. Mosley's inability to relive his 1930s glory days was attributable to many factors. Dr Renton lists many of these- including the increasingly social democratic temper of post-war Britain- but he stresses that it was the physical opposition provided by the anti-fascists that proved crucial. In this respect there remains some doubt in my mind as to whether Renton takes too much of the old comrades' subsequent reflections, flexing their once youthful muscles and recalling the glorious thrashings they inflicted upon the Mosleyites, as gospel, without sufficiently interrogating their reliability as sources. In Australia old communists often reported that their physical intimidation through the Workers' Defence Corps stopped the New Guard in its tracks, but I found little evidence to support this contention.

A similar quandary surfaces in relation to Renton's indictment of British police as being unequivocally on the side of the fascists. This is certainly the way the anti-fascists felt at the time and have remembered the events of the 1940s- as well as those of the 1930s. While I have not consulted the relevant primary sources upon which Renton bases this claim, Home Office Records in the PRO pertaining to the 1930s show that the police forces' position was complex and ambiguous, and certainly more so than the anti-fascists of the period would have it. For instance, Sir Philip Game, the London Metropolitan police commissioner and former assassin of the Lang government in New South Wales, deserves credit for taking a strong anti-fascist line and standing up to Mosley, on one occasion quite literally, prior to the legendary 1936 'Battle of Cable Street'.

Written crisply and accessibly, Fascism, Anti-Fascism and Britain in the 1940s is, nonetheless, a commendable case of the anti-fascist activist wielding his pen as historian. Recent issues of Searchlight feature important articles by Dr Renton. His book's flyleaf reports that he has both published in such left-wing journals as Lobster, International Socialism and Race and Class and 'is a former member of the Socialist Workers Party'. (An erratum slip corrects this cruel canard, announcing that Renton remains a member of the SWP and that the publisher regrets this unfortunate mistake!). A pleasing aspect of his politically committed scholarship is the author's determined rescue of the need to comprehend fascism in class terms, rather than the currently voguish position to see it primarily as a set of ideas.

Review: Sarah Glynn in the Newsletter of the London Socialist Historians' Group, Lent 2001.

This book chronicles the brief renaissance of British fascism immediately after it was supposed to have been exterminated and buried by the great anti-fascist war, and while people were still struggling to come to terms with the enormity of the Holocaust: a revival made possible by the climate of cold-war anti-communism and by a revived anti-Semitism fed on the experiences of the British army in Mandate Palestine.

Dave Renton acknowledges that, under the shadow of Hitler and the Holocaust, the odds were heavily stacked against the fascists achieving even their pre-war success, and that their chances were even further limited by a situation of almost full employment, by the revival, after 1947, of the Tory Party (the traditional home of the right), and by the end of the British Mandate in Palestine in 1948. However, he argues that 'at a time when the fascists were already experiencing major difficulties, the intervention of anti-fascists proved decisive, their hostility effectively reduced Mosley's potential support, reinforced the political isolation of the Union Movement as a whole, and exposed the weakness of the fascists to their audiences and to themselves.' And in significant corroboration of this argument he quotes the ex-Mosleyite anti-fascist Michael Maclean: 'I believe a united and bitter opposition amongst the audience is effective... provided such opposition is sustained.'

By anti-fascism Renton means both sustained campaigning in the form of leafleting, meetings and demonstrations, and also more militant action to disrupt and close down fascist meetings. Although he stresses the routine nature of much of the work involved, more emphasis could perhaps have been given to the type of grass roots work carried out by the Stepney Communist Party from the late 30s in addressing local issues. It was this work which enabled the party to build a strong community base, politicising and organising the victims of fascism and undermining potential and actual fascist support.

Crucially, Renton demonstrates the futility of waiting for the authorities to take action, and it is here that his careful chronicling of individual incidents, comes powerfully into its own. He shows the cosy relationship between some key fascists and state agencies such as MI5, and the extraordinary lengths to which the police would go to keep open fascist meetings in the name of free speech, whilst routinely closing anti-fascist ones.

The book's strength is in its detailed use of archival sources, but written records are less useful when trying to understand the fascist movement itself. Renton outlines the different theories and tactics of the leaders, extracts the class make-up of the movement (which was disproportionately middle-class though with a stronger working class element in the East End), and details the kind of actions they promoted, but he can only speculate on what attracted some thousands of men and women to fascism and how they saw their roles.

While not questioning Renton's decision to avoid fascist apologists, I wonder if he could have interviewed some of the many grass roots ex-fascists who must remember those days. What makes this omission especially significant is his convincing argument against regarding fascism simply as ideology: 'The important point is that the ideas of fascism are not in themselves distinctive. What makes fascism is not its language but its method of political mobilisation.'

Renton presents us with a strong case for anti-fascist action as the only successful way of fighting fascism, but, in comparing the situation in the 1940s with more recent battles, it is important not to overlook some significant differences. Among those who fought against British fascism in the 30s and 4Os, the main victims of its dominating racism - then the Jews - played a leading part, not only on the streets but in the main anti-fascist organisations orchestrating the campaign, such as the Communist Party. In the 70s, 80s and 90s the Black and Asian victims of the National Front and BNP fought the fascists in their turn, but although they welcomed the organisational skills of the various left wing groups who helped co-ordinate that fight most were with but not of these organisations, remaining suspicious of their wider motives, and preferring to group together along ethnic . lines. This may not have hampered the immediate fight but it did little to help in the wider battle to alter the economic and social conditions which allow fascism to grow. How to get beyond this situation is a question for us all.

Review: Nigel Copsey, Oral History (2001) 28/2.

This book springs from the author's recent PhD and is a detailed study of the recent revival of British fascism after 1945. Although British fascism has received much scholarly attention and arguably more so than its historical significance deserves, the fact remains that the immediate post-war period has been neglected. But besides filling this obvious gap, what distinguishes Renton's portrayal? Unquestionably, the originality of his book is his attempt to provide a 'total' history of the conflict between fascists and anti-fascists in the 1945-5 period. His conclusion is that anti-fascism worked and was both an appropriate and successful response to the revival of Mosleyite fascism.

One of the key features of the book is its versatile methodology and certainly Renton deserves praise for accommodating oral testimony. As part of his research, some eighteen anti-fascists were interviewed. However, since no surviving fascists were approached, Renton does leave himself open to charges of partiality. A group of ageing fascists, known as the Friends of Oswald Mosley, have previously supplied material to researchers but the suspicion that they only do so in a deliberate attempt to present Mosley and his followers in more favourable light. According to Renton, some historians (he singles out Cullen for special criticism) have been 'taken in' by these surviving Mosleyites and have been corrupted by the 'fascist' understanding of events. For this reason, and since Renton's own self-declared political leanings are to the far Left, he stays well clear and decides against interviewing any surviving fascists.

Although there were several anti-fascist groups active in the immediate post-war period, what comes across strongly through the oral testimony is the sense in which all anti-fascists shared a collective anger and fear at the post-war revival of fascism. Many anti-fascists had fought in the Second World War against the evils of European fascism only to return home to find fascist activity resurrected in their doorsteps. Naturally, for Jewish anti-fascists in particular, the revelations of the Holocaust concentrated their hostility: 'Our fuel was anger … the Holocaust injected us with anger' (p131). As Renton shows, such emotions often gave rise to violent responses, especially from Jewish radicals in street-activist organisations such as the 43 Group: 'We were tough. We were prepared to beat up anyone who was anti-Semitic' (p99).

Renton's book shows how a rising tide of popular anti-Semitism - a reaction to events in Palestine in 1947 - enabled British fascism to reassert itself under the guise of such groups as the British League of Ex-Servicemen, led by Mosley's disciple, Jeffrey Hamm. Although Renton maintains that a confident fascist movement was re-establishing itself, it is clear that this 'resurgent' fascism had little national significance. Renton's claim that fascism enjoyed an 'extraordinary bubble of success' perhaps overstates reality. In fact, the focus of fascist activity was localised, mainly restricted to London, for the most part Dalston, where throughout the autumn of 1947 there were regular clashes between fascists and anti-fascists. Mosley did attempt a come-back in 1948 and formed the Union Movement but even at its peak, it never had more than 7,000 followers. With such a small base of support, it was the active intervention of anti-fascists which ensured that the Union Movement was finally smashed. Whilst Renton does identify other factors that inhibited fascism's growth: the revival of the Conservative Party after 1947; improving economic conditions; Mosley's poor leadership; it is anti-fascism which holds special significance because such was the defeat inflicted on fascism that 'it was 20 years before another sizeable fascist party could be formed' (p144). But even if it was 1966-7 before the National Front was established, this conclusion fails to explain why further ant-fascist campaigns against Mosley were deemed necessary in the early 1960s.

One controversial aspect to the book is the claim that the state worked with and tolerated fascism. This accusation is supported by a variety of evidence including oral testimony: 'The police were totally hostile to us and totally supporting the fascists' (p104). Here Renton recalls similar claims made by anti-fascists in the 1930s that the forces of law and order regularly favoured Mosley's fascists. But this apparent 'prejudice' is unsurprising not least because the police were instructed to keep fascist meetings open and that the tactics of anti-fascists were often violent and deliberately confrontational. However, Renton lays aside any suggestion that the state was 'unbiased'. His verdict is that with the onset of the Cold War, the state (even under a Labour administration) was prepared to tolerate fascism and 'perhaps even encourage it' as a counterweight to communism. As for the police, they merely fulfilled their historic role as defenders of private property and were accordingly hostile to the Left. For Renton, there was marked 'anti-anti-fascist' continuity of state policy between the 1930s and 1940s. Undoubtedly, this section of the book raises some important questions but research on fascism and the state in the 1930s by Thurlow suggests that the state's role was more 'neutral'. Arguably, the state's role has been to 'manage' political extremism on both sides, careful to maintain public order alongside freedom of speech.

More generally, I must take issue with Renton's definition of anti-fascism which he restricts to activists in organisations. The problem with this definition is that it is too narrow and fails to acknowledge 'passive' forms of anti-fascism. By stressing the importance of activism and organisation, Renton fails to appreciate that anti-fascism is an attitude that may or may not be acted upon. Anti-fascism can also take many forms and can range from an anti-fascist editorial in a newspaper to the proscribing of a fascist organisation by the state. But definitions aside, Renton's treatment remains authoritative. His research is rich and informed, his command of the subject impressive. The book is lively and accessible and despite the fact that newcomers to the field will have to negotiate a text often 'overburdened' by references to lesser-known individuals, this book is not just for devotees. It deserves a wide readership and as a work of serious historical analysis, Renton's book has much to recommend it.

Review: Sean Kelly, Labour History Review 66/1 (2001), pp. 112-3.  

In this work, Dave Renton has provided a much needed addition to the study of British fascism, which covers the immediate postwar revival and subsequent failure of he British far-right. Renton begins with a criticism of the generic fascism school of thought, arguing that fascism in its British variety should be regarded as a movement of action rather than just as an ideological movement. Elsewhere he has already outlined his thoughts on the theory of fascism, and in this book he concentrates on the three themes of the title. His first chapter provides a brief history of British fascism,from its roots after the First World War until 1951. The second offers a history of the revival of fascism after 1945 and its subsequent failure as both an ideology and movement. The third chapter is devoted to a study of the role organised anti-fascists played in the fight against fascism. The fourth examines the actions of the state concentrating on the role of the police, who, Renton argues, did not play the neutral role ascribed to them by other historians of the far-right. Renton concludes that it was surprising that British fascism made a political comeback in the postwar period, certainly after Britain had fought a war that many people believed was a direct fight between liberty and fascism. As to the subsequent failure of fascism, Renton concludes that the resurgence of the Conservative Party provided a base for those of the right; the British withdrawal from Palestine removed one of the main planks of the fascists' antisemitic diatribes; memories of the war and the Holocaust were fresh in many peoples' minds, combined with the action of organised anti-fascists helped to ensure that fascism in Britain was unable to achieve the same level' of prominance it had in the 1930s and would later again achieve in the 1970s. This book is both well-researched and well-argued and it does advance a forceful argument. The main criticism is its brevity. The work sometimes seems to move ahead at too rapid a pace. However, Renton has certainly shown the continuation of both fascism and anti-fascism from the 1930s until after the war. His arguments will not be supported by all, but this work should certainly inspire historians to move their concentration away from British fascism in the interwar period towards an examination of the revival and failure of right-wing extremism in postwar British society.

Review: John R Howe, The Lecturer, February 2001.

This volume has the obvious merit of exactly fulfilling its title's promise. Based on its author's doctoral thesis, it has a clear focus, a number of interesting hypotheses and an impressive volume of evidence. But as Renton concedes, quoting Stanley Payne, 'the volume of literature on the British Union of Fascists is inversely proportionate to its significance.' Do we need yet another study?

Dr Renton illuminates a little-studied period of fascist history, arguing that a planned revival of activity in the late 1940s was thwarted by organised and often violent anti-fascist groups. He represents the passion and drama involved in political violence, particularly in his use of oral evidence from participants, though it is odd, and perhaps a reflection of his own political stance, that his oral evidence comes from one side only. Renton attempts a definition of fascism and surveys the history of the groups which fit his definition from the 1930s, noting what he sees as the lenient treatment of fascists during the war (in comparison with that of many anti-fascist refugees) and their early release from detention.

His discussion of fascism after 1945 is in the context of a view of British society and social class which this reviewer finds entirely unconvincing; more importantly Renton concedes that fascism was clearly identified with the national enemy (perhaps particularly the Italian enemy) and that evidence for the holocaust was impossible to ignore; hence the idea that fascism could have succeeded in 1947 seems highly implausible. Dr Renton argues, however, that a nucleus of supporters might have been created which would have provided a basis for later expansion; the organised anti-fascists successfully prevented this and their success provides an important lesson for later generations.

Dr Renton discusses the role of the state, regarding both the police and the Home Office with distaste. Careful reading of Special Branch and Home Office papers, local press reports and other contemporary accounts gives clear evidence of considerable police bias in favour of fascism. But the anti-fascists were aiming to breakup meetings which were formally legal; the extent to which the state or individuals should intervene to prevent the expression of views of which it or they disapprove is not as easily decided as Dr Renton appears to think.

This is an interesting study, very well-supported by extensive evidence, but written from an overtly committed standpoint which the reader must allow for in judging Dr Renton's conclusions.

Reply: Dermot Smyth, The Lecturer, May 2001.

I found John Howe's review of Dave Renton's book Fascism, Anti-fascism and Britain in the 1940s (February's ) deeply depressing.  John Howe thinks that Renton should have included evidence from the fascist side. He doubts that British fascists received lenient treatment during the war.  He also thinks that 'legal' fascist meetings should be allowed to go ahead. Has he learned nothing from history?  His position is precisely that which allowed German Nazis to achieve state power - when time and time again they could have been stopped.  Social freedoms should not be extended to those who would smash those very freedoms by the calculated use of violence. When the BUF regrouped in Britain after the war, no one could have predicted the 30-year absence of the poverty and despair that is needed for fascism to flourish.  What's more, sections of the British establishment had long been perfectly at ease with European fascism and only went to war for fear of losing their empire. Only in hindsight can a resurgence of British fascism be declared 'implausible'. I'm sorry, but I really can't see that allowing fascists a platform is any different to allowing one to rapists and paedophiles.

Review: Sheila Lahr, Revolutionary History (2001) 8/1, pp. 288-90

The difference between the printed page and the events portrayed (unless the writer is a talented novelist) is that the excitement, danger, commitment and camaraderie come over flatly, or not at all. I was there at Ridley Road, together with other comrades of the Revolutionary Communist Party, on a Saturday evening in the late 1940s, to take and defend the pitch and so prevent the fascists from getting a platform. Some of the comrades were actually sleeping rough overnight. The era for me is represented by milling crowds, the antagonism of the police, fear of arrest, the Cossacks (mounted police) riding in, and our determination.

Renton, under the heading of 'Method' (p. 7), says that the main purpose of the work is to portray the attempted revival of British fascism in the late 1940s; 'not any one dominant argument or thesis, but a series of secondary claims. At every stage, these arguments are linked together.' These secondary points include:

1. That fascism did revive after 1945.

2. That fascism is better understood as a movement than as an ideology.

3. That anti-fascism was an appropriate response to British fascism.

4. That the state failed to take an active role in combating fascism.

5. That fascism failed.

I agree that the fascist organisations revived in the late 1940s. As Renton points out, fascist organisations were spurred on by the Cold War, in which both the government and the labour movement played its part. Renton records that 134 civil servants identified as 'Communists' were removed or sacked by the Labour government as 'extremists'. One fascist was also sacked. It has to be remembered that at this time the trade unions also barred 'Communists' from holding office, and removed them from their posts.

As Renton points out, the fascists at this time took advantage of the results of British policy in Palestine, under which Ernest Bevin refused the Jews fleeing from Europe permission to settle in Palestine. This brought retribution from militant Zionists in the murder of British soldiers. In the UK, this encouraged anti-Semitism, racism and fascism.

I must admit that I don't understand what Renton means when he says that fascism is better understood as a movement than as an ideology. I think the main problem is that Renton confuses fascism and racism, as if they were one and the same, and, of course, this is not so. Anti-Semitism was endemic in the UK, and the Immigration Bill passed in 1906 was aimed against further Jewish immigration from Russia and Poland. Immediately before the Second World War, the number of Jewish refugees accepted from Nazi Germany was low indeed, and, as Renton points out, most of them were interned during the war on the Isle of Man, or shipped out to Canada or Australia. (Several hundreds on the Arandon Star drowned when a U-boat torpedoed the ship.) This type of racism, together with the refusal of golf clubs to admit Jews (p61) is not necessarily fascism, and many of the organisations Renton cites were High Tory rather than fascist. Fascism demands an economic, social and political programme, populist in that it appeals to the mass, although funded by big business. Of this programme, racism is only part.

I fully agree with Renton's statement that anti-fascism was an appropriate response to British fascism, and that 'anti-fascism provides the most immediate obstacle to the growth of fascist parties'.

The state certainly failed to take an active role in combating fascism; but does Renton really expect the state to have done so? For he himself points out that during the interwar years, MIS, taking the view that the British state was 'under assault from minorities, extremists and Communists' (p. l26), employed a number of fascists (apparently fascists were not included in 'minorities'!), some of them continuing to be active in MIS during 194S-5I. In fact. Maxwell Knight, a long-standing member of a fascist organisation, became head of Section F4, the wing of MIS with responsibility for placing agents within the Communist Party.

This is not to say that pressure should not have been put upon Chuter Ede, the Labour Home Secretary, by Labour Party members and the trade unions, against the antagonism of the police and the arrest of anti-fascists. With regard to banning fascist meetings, as Renton himself points out, bans for the most part work against the left, and not the right.

Did fascism fail? Renton points out in his preface that the fascist organisations in the UK, re-established at the end of the Second World War, 'collapsed within the year'. He remarks that 'the ascent and decline of immediate postwar fascism seemed sudden and inexplicable to contemporaries and needs to be explained'. While not underplaying the necessity for anti-fascist activity wherever and whenever fascism raises its ugly head, it has to be remembered that in the late 1940s the country was in a process of change.

The East End of London, as well as other cities, had been badly bombed during the war, and families had moved out, never to return. Following the war, successive governments were engaged in building new towns out in the sticks, to which the working-class population was being decanted. This was taking place throughout the UK. Therefore, in the East End, the old Jewish communities on which the fascists based their racism were disappearing. Added to that, in a period of full employment and the inauguration of a welfare state, unlike Mosley in the 1930s at a time of economic crisis, the postwar fascists were deprived of a social (or anti-social) programme which would appeal to the mass of the people. It was not for some years until immigrants from Bangladesh settled in the East End that the race card was played again, and this time by a Tower Hamlets Liberal Democrat Council!

I smiled to read Renton's remark that the fascists in the 1940s propagated the theory that economic slump was just around the corner, for this was the line of Gerry Healy, later to become leader of the Workers Revolutionary Party, but in his case it was used to forecast the Socialist revolution! As the poet William Empson wrote in his smack at Auden 'waiting for the end boys, waiting for the end'.

I was surprised to find that Renton attributes' much of the anti-fascist demonstrations and activity taking place at Ridley Road to Common Wealth, an ethical Socialist party formed by Sir Richard Acland to break the electoral truce during the war. To my knowledge, following the landslide Labour victory in the 1945 general election. Common Wealth MPs joined the Labour Party, as did many lay members. Therefore, finance dried up, the offices at 4 Gower Street were closed, the staff were sacked, and all that remained was one small office across the road, manned by two ex-servicemen and a secretary. Later publications were issued from Bloornsbury Street. Apart from the fact that Common Wealth was a middle-class movement, not given to scuffling with fascists or police, I doubt whether manpower would have been available in great enough numbers actively to oppose the fascists, although I am not arguing that members, or former members, of Common Wealth were not present at anti-fascist demonstrations.

In the 1930s, thousands of Mosley supporters, packed in the back of lorries, were conveyed to large fascist rallies. The fascist newspaper was sold outside Jewish shops throughout London and the suburbs; local fascist groups advertised on notice-boards - these were supported largely by small shopkeepers and businessmen. In the 1940s, as today, fascist demonstrations are infinitesimal compared with this, but I agree with Renton that it is always necessary to oppose actively the attempted re-emergence of fascist organisations.

Review (with N. Copsey, Anti-Fascism in Britain): Mike Cronin, American Historical Review (2001) 106/4, pp. 1459-1460.

As both authors make clear in their retrospective introductions, the literature on the history of fascism is extensive. The size of the literature, especially in relation to the British Union of Fascists (BUF), during the 1930s and the National Front in the 1970s, is probably far greater than would be merited by the political importance of either movements. The work of both Nigel Copsey and Dave Renton is an attempt to redress the balance and to fill a serious lacuna in the historiography of extremist politics in Britain. Throughout the twentieth century, the number of people involved in anti-fascist activity has always outstripped the totals of those enrolled in or supportive of the fascist ranks. Despite this, and the key role that anti-fascists have played in undermining the chances of British fascism from gaining a political foothold, there have been few previous works that have attempted to understand what motivates antifascism, how successful antifascist campaigns have been or the political backgrounds of those individuals and groups that have fought against fascism in Britain. What work that does exist detailing the history of antifascism has usually been the product of those involved in the struggle can therefore be understood as a personal memoir rather than considered historical analysis. Copsey and Renton have identified this gap in the history of an important part of British political history, and both offer high quality and original research in a highly readable form. Copsey's work covers the history of antifascism in Britain across the whole of the twentieth century, whereas Renton concentrates specifically on the experiences of the 1940s. Renton explores the activities of fascism during the postwar period, when the horrors of the concentration camps and the efforts of fighting Nazism were fresh in the mind. This, one would expect, was a period when fascism would have no chance of political success. However, as Renton explains, British fascism, by mobilizing around specific issues such as British involvement, did make some significant headway. As a result, anti-fascists gathered to oppose any fascist resurgence. In effect, Renton's work can be read as a fascinating period case study and test case of many of the general arguments put forward by Copsey. Copsey's book takes a chronological approach to the twentieth century. His work is based on a wide range of primary and secondary sources and concentrates, where possible, on the material published and produced by antifascists themselves. Copsey's strength is that he seeks to move the debate surrounding the history of fascism and antifascism in Britain beyond a concentration on the BUF and the activities of Oswald Mosley. While stressing the importance of the period in generating the specter of a potentially powerful fascism in Britain, and the legends that surrounded the anti-fascist response, especially at Olympia and Cable Street, Copsey sees the period within its own context. He is at pains to demonstrate that the domestic fascist threat did not disappear with the onset of World War Two. Copsey's central thesis is that antifascism, whether during the 1930s, before or since, has been a reactive force. He argues throughout the book, and illustrates his point convincingly, that the vibrancy of antifascism bears a distinct correlation to the potency of any given fascist or far right movement. While this may appear at the surface a straightforward argument, it is one that has not previously been tested in a century-wide study. In addition to demonstrating the oppositional nature of antifascism, Copsey is at his best in examining the nature of the different responses to fascism and the perceived nature of the threat that the far right posed. He shows that those who were involved in opposing fascism were not a uniform group and that their agendas were quite different. During the 1920s and 1930s, they key opponents of fascism were those drawn from the ranks of the left. Fascism did not however, produce an official response from the Labour Party at the central level: opposition to fascism was conducted on a localised and often issue-specific basis. The response was, until the 1960s and 1970s, ad hoc and far from universally organised. The 1930s did, however, bring about two key themes within the battle against British fascism: the involvement of Jewish organisations and the legislative attempts of the state to control political extremism in the shape of the Public Order Act. Copsey sees the re-emergence of a British fascist movement especially the one that was headed by Mosley in the post-World War Two years, as untenable given the political legacy of the Holocaust and British involvement in the fight against Nazism. In this, he argues that the main bodies involved in the struggle against any renewed fascist activity were drawn from the ranks of British Judaism. Copsey is at his best when covering the rise of the National Front in the 1970s and the British National Party in the 1990s and the antifascist response that these movements, especially their limited political success, produced. The Anti-Nazi League was central in the late twentieth-century struggle against fascism. Copsey shows how powerful a largely united antifascist umbrella movement, which joined together the radical and moderate left along with the representatives from the Jewish and new Commonwealth immigrant populations, could be. Despite the success of the Anti-Nazi League in combating the National Front and the British National Party and creating a general public awareness of their activities, the history of the League also demonstrates Copsey's central thesis: without the active threat of a potential political breakthrough by fascist groups, antifascist groups do not maintain steady high levels of high popular support. It is clear that anti-fascists have been a constant feature of the British political landscape in the twentieth century, but their numbers and power are totally reliant on some semblance of far right threat. Renton's book, which is based on a thoroughly impressive trawling of available primary sources, looks at a period which emerges from Copsey's work as one of the least important in the century. In covering the 1940s, Renton has carried out important work. True, the level of fascist activity in the 1940s was, by comparison with the 1930s or 1970s, low. The political threat, the levels of street violence, and even the scope of antifascist action seem insignificant when compared to other high water marks of the twentieth century. In offering coverage of this period, Renton skilfully explores the political culture, especially at the margins, of British society at a time when it had emerged victorious from a war fought on moral grounds, and was engaged in a major experiment in welfarism. Renton demonstrates that while fascists were relatively low in numbers during the 1940s, their ideological message was as virulent as ever, and their inability to find political space for themselves around the Palestine issue was illustrative of the potential power of fascism. The antifascist of the 1940s were comprised mainly of those from the 43 Group, the Communist Party, and the Board of Deputies. Renton illustrates how these groups were often divided on points of details surrounding levels of activism and ideology, yet combined around the central issue of vigilance with respect to any renewed fascist threat. Renton is someone who is clearly attached to the antifascist cause at a personal level. This could be problematic if it were not for his thorough use of available historical material: instead it actually adds to the book. Renton's style demands attention, as it is that of someone who sees in the antifascists of the 1940s the roots of the postwar political activism that would so empower the antifascist of the 1970s. He is more cautious than Copsey in seeing the antifascists solely as a product of fascism, and he uses police records in the Public Records Office to argue that the state is as hard , maybe even harder, on antifascists, as it was on the fascist themselves. In this, the antifascist emerge with a dual purpose that Copsey does not ascribe to them. First, their job is to defeat fascism, second it is to fight against the laissez-faire attitude of the state towards fascism and to defend civil liberties more generally. The history of antifascism is one that has previously received little attention. These two books offer a fresh dimension to the historiography of British extremism and should be read with enthusiasm by anyone interested in the topic.

Review (with N. Copsey, Anti-Fascism in Britain): Julie Gottlieb, Twentieth Century British History, 12/2 (2001), pp. 262-3

As Richard Thurlow has suggested in regard to the ever-growing field of British fascist studies, 'rarely can such an apparently insignificant topic have been responsible for such an outpouring of ink'. The field has been consistently buoyant for the past two decades, drawing together a range of scholars interested in the larger themes of political history and political ideologies, race, ethnicity, and immigration, centre-regional relations and the demographic patterns of political allegiances, the Secret State and methods of social control, political violence and the boundaries of civil society, and the patterns of membership and the psychological profile of joiners and political activists, thus suggesting that the topic is not quite insignificant. The University of Sheffield formed the first base for historians of the politics of marginality - as British fascist studies may be subtitled - and now houses an excellent archive on the British Union of Fascists and related movements, which together with the periodic release of Public Records Office files in recent years, has provided source fodder for this expanding canon. Dave Renton's Fascism, Anti-Fascism and Britain in the 1940s and Nigel Copsey's Anti-Fascism in Britain pour some fresh ink on the subject of British fascism. Unlike earlier studies, they each shift the chronological focus by examining 'failed' British fascism at moments when the extreme right's failure appeared to be absolute and its chances for resurgence unthinkable. Indeed, Renton starts from the premise that British fascism was not moribund, but in fact revived after 1945, only to be defeated again by the force of organised anti-fascists. Copsey does not deal with the postwar period exclusively, but the emphasis of his study is also on the postwar period, with more than half of the book devoted to the years 1946 to 1990s. Both Renton and Copsey also change the direction of historical enquiry by juxtaposing fascism and anti-fascism in Britain, and suggesting the co-dependence of the political extremes. Renton claims that 'as yet, there is no historical literature of anti-fascism for any period; the studies we have are only partial, often limited to particular campaigns or a set area' (4), and this claim can be seen to serve as the mission statement for both his and Copsey's studies. The organisation of British fascism and anti-fascism were both spurred on by the need to mobilize in opposition to either the 'Red' or the 'Black' threat; their respective ideologies, tactics, and the levels of enthusiasm for particular campaigns were conditioned by perceptions of the advances made by their opposites; and both movements were together engaged in debates on political militancy, race, ethnicity, the limits of free speech, and the strictures of democracy. Perhaps Copsey makes this point more forcefully by regarding anti-fascism as 'a reactive phenomenon', whose 'scale of response has been defined by the nature of its stimulus' (189). While fascism and anti-fascism were doomed to occupy the margins together, Copsey is careful not to define the organisational complexion of anti-fascism, placing emphasis on the fact that no one group, party or movement represented British anti-fascism. Rather it was 'a mosaic, a variegated phenomenon which, when pieced together, provides a rich picture of a neglected yet important part of British political history' (4). While both books cover new ground and contest the periodisation of the history of British fascism, neither breaks new ground methodologically. Both are empirical studies, tightly focussed on popular politics, referring to relations between police and politicised public, punctuated by moments of political violence, concerned in equal measure with the victims as well as the purveyors of social control, and reliant for their source bases on public records, police files, and newspaper coverage. Due to the historical proximity of the events under scrutiny, Renton also draws on oral history sources. However, he uses these selectively - he has interviewed eighteen anti-fascists - and he expresses disdain for the testimonies of former fascists themselves, and similar contempt for the historians who have tapped these sources and made contact with an organization known as the Friends of Oswald Mosley. Renton considers these fascist sources 'insidious', implying that any histories that have been informed by fascist sources, in whole or in part, are somehow tainted and an unwitting platform for the fascist old boys' network. His own selection of interview sources, however, certainly carries with it its own imbalance and signals the author's uncompromising anti-fascist but also anti-Labour perspective. Renton's partisanship is evident at every turn of the argument, notably in his overarching contention that 'the reforming Labour government of 1945-1951 [was] unwilling to do anything to act against the rise of fascism' (7). Renton argues that the postwar Labour government's relative failure to curb resurgent fascism by law - thus leaving the task of crushing fascism to grass-roots and community-based anti-fascist groups - is evidence for the larger claim that 'the Labour government did not live up to the radical hopes of its supporters' after 1945, and he remarks upon an 'anti-anti-fascist continuity between the policies of the Conservative-dominated National governments of the 1930s, and the actions of the new Labour government led by Clement Attlee' (144). Yet the book as a whole does not engage with these larger issues but offers instead a very thorough catalogue of political movements on the peripheries from 1945 to 1951. Fascism, Anti-Fascism and Britain begins with an overview chapter of British fascist and anti-fascist activity from 1918 to 1951, provocatively titled 'What Actually Happened', which outlines the history of the British Fascisti, the British Union of Fascists, various other extreme-right splinter groups, and the Union Movement, juxtaposed with anti-fascist responses. It then examines in closer focus the fascist groups that emerged from 1945 to 1951, contrasting those groups that followed on from a prewar fascist tradition with those that took their marching orders direct from the Nazi example. One of the most interesting points of divergence between prewar and postwar British fascism seems to be its class appeal the degree of its marginality. Renton asserts that if British fascism made a certain appeal to elements of the Conservative Establishment during the 1930s, this was no longer the case during the 1940s when British fascism was clearly a déclassé movement, relegated to pariah status. However, 'the fascists won more members when they attempted to link up with members of the middle class' (61). Renton provides a vivid picture of the class composition of active fascists, and the membership crossover between various far-right organizations, and is convincing when he notes that 'the fascists had far less success when they attempted to relate to members of the working class' (66). Moving on to anti-fascism in the same period, Renton asserts that 'anti-fascists by definition were activists, people who objected to the rise of fascism, who hated the doctrines of fascism and did something to stop their growth' (71). By this definition, the leading anti-fascists of the immediate postwar period were members of the Communist Party, the Young Communist League, the National Council for Civil Liberties, and Jewish anti-fascist formations, most prominently among these the Association of Jewish Ex-Servicemen and the 43 Group. Meanwhile, Renton characterises the Labour Party an d the Labour Government in particular as pathetic and complacent in the face of resurgent fascism. While he goes some way to pay each anti-fascist group its due, he emphasises the similarities rather than the differences between them, stating that 'although the several anti-fascist groups had different strategies, they also had a great deal in common' (97). Renton then considers the relationship between fascist and anti-fascist activities and the state, referring specifically to relations with police, and patterns of political surveillance, and puts forward the argument that 'the state as a whole was prepared to work with or tolerate fascism' (128), which appears to provide a point of continuity with interwar practices when anti-fascists observed that the police were biased in favour of Mosley's blackshirts. The emphasis is on the political perspective of community relations, the relationship between police and public order, and the distance between the state and the extremist peripheries, all themes very much in keeping with the questions raised in the historiography as a whole. Fascism, Anti-Fascism and Britain in the 1940s fills a gap in the literature - a chronological gap. But wider questions - who were the fascists? What motivated them? After the obvious bankruptcy of the fascist idea in Europe, what were their visions for a Greater Britain? Why are their memories so unreliable? - go unasked and unanswered. In Anti-Fascism in Britain, Copsey too focuses on events and the dynamics of organization , particularly the internal politics of a loose anti-fascist coalition, though again this approach tends to exclude personalities, underrate the colourfulness of biography, and sideline the scrutiny of the psychology of the political activist. This absence of a personal dimension, however, is compensated for by evocative turns of phrase, tonal liveliness, and clarity of style. Anti-Fascism in Britain is concerned with the story of British opposition to British fascism, rather than with British forms of opposition to Continental fascism (not an unrelated theme that still merits exploration). Copsey begins by tracing the roots of British anti-fascism from 1923 to 1935, and sets out the model of anti-fascism as a reactive rather than a self-propelling movement. Copsey provides the background to Renton's indictment of the Labour Party for its record on anti-fascist mobilization, also observing that during the 1930s 'the Labour Party leadership remained steadfastly opposed to direct action against fascism in Britain'. (23) This emphasis on forms and patterns of development of political organizations also supersedes an interest in intellectual content, and while Copsey provides time lines for the formation of anti-fascist groups (such as the Communist Party of Great Britain, the Grey Shirts, the New World Fellowship, the Co-ordinating Committee for Anti-Fascist Activities, etc.) and traces the emergence of anti-fascist opinion in various publications (the Daily Worker, the Daily Express, etc.) he makes scant reference to the actual content of to the intellectual context of an ideology of anti-fascism. Copsey next addresses the period 1936-45, which, due to 'the forcible injection of militant anti-Semitism in the BUF's campaign' at the end of 1935, 'marked a turning point in the fortunes of British fascism and correspondingly heralded a second wave of anti-fascist activity' (42). Again, he provides a narrative of anti-fascist mobilization: meetings, marches, confrontations with the police, and internal cleavages within the anti-fascist camp. However, this opportunity to revise the reigning narrative of the BUF's decline, and convincingly argues that historians have misdiagnosed the waning of anti-fascist militancy following the BUF's Bermondsey march of January 1938. The records indicate that both British fascists, and as an equal but opposite reaction, British anti-fascists sustained their militancy into the war years. Copsey's third chapter covers the same period as Renton's book, dealing with anti-fascist activity from 1946 to 1966. Here he contests Renton's evidence concerning police bias against anti-fascists, highlighting the facts that 'the tactics of anti-fascists were aggressive and intentionally put fascists on the defensive' and that 'under the terms of the Public Order Act the police had sole responsibility for stewarding outdoor meetings (fascists were no longer responsible for their self-defence)' (90). Indeed, the general tone and approach to sources in Anti-Fascism in Britain - a readiness to problematize anti-fascist sources, and to pay regard to other sources that may destabilize a predetermined thesis - makes for a convincing thesis which does not digress from the evidence at hand. Suggesting the wider significance of anti-fascist politics, Copsey outlines a process whereby, 'the incorporation of anti-fascism into British national identity proved the most decisive factor in fascism's continued marginalization' (192) The variety and plurality of anti-fascists expressions tends to underline, rather than undermine, this claim that anti-fascism, loosely defined, emerged as an integral feature of British national identity by the postwar period. If Renton's study provides an epilogue to histories of interwar British fascism, and to tales of wartime internment, Copsey's draws a picture of the obverse side of previous studies of British anti-fascism through his 'attempt to write a broad history of British anti-fascism as a continuous phenomenon from the 1920s' (1). These monographs have more in common than their length, the fact that they both developed from Ph.D. dissertations, and that they have been published in the same series by Macmillan. They are both products of the 'Sheffield School', and Renton himself was based at the University of Sheffield. However, while their subject areas converge, they use similar sources, and they both deal with as yet largely neglected phases of extremist politics, their approaches differ. Renton's emphasis is on forms of participation and organization. He declines to engage with the intellectual and ideological material that emerged from the resurgent fascist movement after 1945 - and once again considers it outside the scope of his study to take on board a valuable source base. No doubt the exclusion of this kind of subject matter gives apparent credibility to his claim that 'the important point is that the ideas of fascism are not in themselves distinctive. What makes fascism it not its language but its method of political mobilization.' (8) But he thereby also dismisses out of hand a whole body of secondary literature on generic fascism and refuses to join current debates on the constituent elements of fascist ideology. Copsey claims that his argument 'departs from Renton' (4) by broadening the scope of anti-fascism. Whereas Renton defines fascism and anti-fascism in terms of activism, and thus conceptualizes the movements in terms of organization, Copsey instead regards anti-fascism as 'an attitude or feeling of hostility towards fascist ideology and its propagators which may or may not be acted upon' (4). None the less, while the clarification of their polemic is helpful, neither approach radically transforms or challenges prevailing narratives of British political extremism. While both books pour some fresh ink on their subject, it is a shame that neither Renton nor Copsey consider using new colours of ink, or contesting the categories, the methodologies, and the approaches to the history of British fascism. As a consequence, while both books are informed and informative, and both consciously diverge from the fixation on the interwar period, neither study is likely to change the ways in which historians look at British fascism or read political extremism. Renton suggests that fascism revived after 1945, and now perhaps is the time for historians of British fascism to revive and refresh the historiography by shifting the methodological goal posts, by considering the wider cultural implications of British politics on the peripheries, and by taking an active speaking part in the current dialogue on the culture of political failure, and the politics of cultural marginality.

Review: Mike Herbert, North West Labour History 26 (2001), p. 53.

For a movement which, even at its height in the mid-1930s, had no more than 40,000 members and never succeeded in electing an MP nor even any significant number of local councillors, British fascism continues to attract a puzzling amount of academic' attention compared with the dearth of studies on far more significant political movements. Surely by now there must be almost as many books as there were active members. Can there be anything new left to say about what has often been argued was nothing more than a grotesque strutting political puppet-show, a brief eruption of irrationality, anti-semitism and violence into the otherwise calm and decent world of mainstream British political life? Fortunately Dave Renton, by dint of focusing on a barely-remembered episode - Mosley's attempt to rebuild his organisation in the post-war years - and through some exhaustive research, succeeds in extending our knowledge and understanding of British fascism in this well-written and straightforward presentation of the main events and issues. There can have been no time less suited to the re-emergence of British fascism than the immediate post-war years. Tens of million had perished in a global war to crush Germany and Japan, many European cities lay in ruins while the newsreels took the horrors of the Holocaust into cinemas on every high street. Yet first cautiously and then more boldly Mosley, who had been released from internment in 1943 despite massive protest from trade unions, the Communist Party and many Labour Party branches, moved back into the political limelight, finally setting up the Union Movement in November 1947. He claimed to have made a break with the past and to look to Europe as the future but few believed that the leopard had changed his spots. Anti-fascist groups clashed with dozens of Union Movement outdoor speakers across London, particularly in Ridley Road in Dalston, with thousands getting active to stop Mosley in his tracks. The Labour Home Secretary, Chuter Ede, was urged to make support for fascism a criminal offence but he took no action except to ban marches in East London when Mosley planned to march from Dalston to the East End in May 1948. The march took place on a different route and there were frequent clashes along the way. There were further clashes outside Kensington Town hall in January 1949 in Tottenham in March. The following month Mosley himself was prevented from speaking in Ridley Road by anti-fascists. Union Movement meetings, as Dave Renton illustrates with many citations from the press and court cases, were left alone by the police, despite the routine anti-semitism of their speakers. Instead the police chose to concentrate on protecting the meetings and stopping anti-fascists from breaking up the meetings. This, the author argues, was because the police saw the anti-fascists as being connected to the political left and therefore a greater threat while the fascists who stressed law, order and discipline were perceived as being on their side. The conflict in Palestine between British forces and Zionist guerrillas' potentially gave the Union Movement its biggest popular cause, most notably when two British sergeants were kidnapped and murdered by the lrgun which lead to a brief outbreak of anti-Jewish rioting in Liverpool, Manchester and other towns in August 1947. Numbers at Union Movement outdoor meetings notably increased. Yet in the end this was an isolated episode, quickly forgotten, and in any case British troops left Palestine the following year. By 1948 the Tory party was getting back its confidence after the disaster at the polls in 1945 whilst the Labour government had run out of steam and was even using troops to break strikes. The political space the Union Movement hoped to capitalise on had evaporated. Labour scraped back in the 1950 general election and lost to the Tories in 1951. Mosley acknowledged his defeat by leaving for Ireland, only returning at the end of the decade to try and make political capital from the Netting Hill riots.

John Newsinger, 'Blackshirts, Blueshirts and the Spanish Civil War', Historical Journal 44/3 (2001), pp. 825-44, 834

David Renton's monograph focuses on the attempted resurrection of British fascism by Mosley and his followers in the imediate post-war years. While only briefly commenting on the BUF in the 1930s, it is in many ways an exemplary study that highlights the need for a similar volume on the earlier period that examines fascism and anti-fascism in tandem.