Last week, neo-Nazi James von Brunn walked into the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, D.C. and opened fire, killing a security guard. In the hours and days that followed, media pundits, government officials, and “experts” of various stripes examined the potential threat from similar racist extremists, a threat many believed could become more prevalent due to anger over America’s first black president and deep-seeded, anti-illegal immigrant sentiment.
Charts and graphs were used to show where “hate groups” existed throughout the country. And many even cited government intelligence to back up their concerns, like a Department of Homeland Security Report released in April, warning of possible attacks by right-wing extremists.
The same week saw significant gains made by the far-right in Europe’s parliamentary elections, most notably the ascension of the British National Party. Notes The Kansas City Star, “the extreme right in Europe is more commonly referred to as the Fascist right, or the neo-Nazi right. Its resurgence is largely attributed to anti-immigration feelings … Mainstream U.S. parties don’t base their campaigns on being anti-Semitic, anti-African, and anti-Gypsy. For Americans, Europe’s recent election is a reminder of the resiliency of our own system, one which honors common ground and avoids the fringes.”
The constant threat posed by radical Muslims has been used to justify the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, as well as a future invasion of Iran. Said President Bush, such nations belong to an “axis of evil” simply for harboring such elements. Like radical Islamists, the number of neo-Nazis in the United States is insignificant compared to their population overseas. But in Europe, fascist political activism has not only long been prevalent, but its recent inroads into the mainstream gives cause for alarm. European neo-Nazi groups have the resources and numbers to train and support terrorists similar to von Brunn, and worse, arm their fascist adherents with a poisonous ideology, intent on terror and impervious to reason.
Just one day after the von Brunn shooting, London’s Daily Mail confirmed this connection with the headline “White supremacist who opened fire at U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum ‘has links to the BNP.'” Reports the Mail: “A white supremacist who killed a security guard after opening fire at Washington’s Holocaust Museum had links to the far-right British National Party … James von Brunn, described as a ‘hard core neo-Nazi’, attended meetings of the American Friends of the British National Party, which raised funds for the white supremacist group.”
With the connections between fascist terrorists in our midst and their support networks in Europe becoming clearer, it’s also clear that America must make a choice. We can fight them over here or we can fight them over there. Iraq was once our ally, but that was long before 9/11. And so it must be now with Great Britain, and any other European nation that harbors America’s neo-Nazi enemies.
Perhaps the greatest danger in rooting out this fascist menace by invading Great Britain is the potential for “blowback,” which might drive formerly moderate or even U.S.-friendly elements of the native population into the ranks of the British National Party and similar groups. That an invasion and occupation of nations where neo-Nazis have influence — including Austria, Hungary, and France — might induce a massive wave of anti-American sentiment across Europe is worth considering.
But so is doing nothing. Neo-Nazi philosophy is anti-freedom, anti-liberty, and anathema to every value we hold dear in this country. There can be no compromise with any enemy intent on destroying us. In the War on Neo-Nazi Terror, foreign nations will find themselves “with us or against us,” and those who choose the latter by harboring our enemies will soon learn of the determination and indomitable spirit of the American people.
Some might ask, “How will invading and occupying a sovereign nation stop an individual or even a collection of individuals from committing terrorist attacks? How would invading Great Britain stop a terrorist like von Brunn?” These are the same unpatriotic pantywaists who wanted to know how invading Iraq might prevent a handful of men with box cutters from hijacking an airplane. And yet for eight years, President George W. Bush kept us safe by preventing such a terrorist attack from happening again. Hopefully President Obama will show the same guts.
In 2002, Bush said, “Some have argued that confronting the threat from Iraq could detract from the war against terror. To the contrary, confronting the threat posed by Iraq is crucial to winning the War on Terror.” The same is now true of Europe. Confronting foreign enemies is crucial to winning the War on neo-Nazi Terror. We must fight them over there so we don’t have to fight them here. Bring’em on.
Catch Southern Avenger commentaries every Tuesday and Friday at 7:50 a.m. on the “Morning Buzz with Richard Todd” on 1250 AM WTMA.
Stay cool. Support City Paper.
City Paper has been bringing the best news, food, arts, music and event coverage to the Holy City since 1997. Support our continued efforts to highlight the best of Charleston with a one-time donation or become a member of the City Paper Club.