The rise of far-right extremism in the United Kingdom during the 1980s and 1990s was alarming. Groups like the National Front (NF) and the British National Party (BNP) were gaining visibility, using hate-fueled rhetoric to appeal to the masses. But while the far-right tried to expand its influence, a new force rose to challenge them head-on. This was Anti-Fascist Action (AFA), a group that wasn’t about standing on the sidelines. They took a hands-on approach, actively confronting the far-right on the streets. Over time, AFA left a lasting impact on the battle against far-right extremism in the UK.
The escalation of far-right radicalism within the United Kingdom
By the late 1970s, the National Front had started losing its political grip, but that didn’t mean the far-right disappeared. Instead, they turned to violence. They targeted ethnic minorities, fueled by race hate and the desperation of losing their foothold.
Race-related attacks increased, and the streets weren’t safe in many cities across the UK. Far-right groups found new avenues of influence, like infiltrating football stadiums and even the music scene. White nationalist bands started popping up, and young, angry men were often drawn to their aggressive, hate-filled messages.
The British National Party (BNP) emerged in 1982, a new face for the far-right. While the BNP tried to hide its fascist undertones behind a veneer of political legitimacy, violence and intimidation were still their main tools. The situation grew so tense that a tipping point seemed inevitable.
That’s where Anti-Fascist Action comes into the picture. These weren’t just protestors waving signs. They were everyday working-class people who were fed up with seeing their communities terrorized. They knew that words alone wouldn’t stop the fascists. So, they decided to fight back—sometimes quite literally.
The establishment of the Anti-Fascist Action (AFA) movement
Anti-Fascist Action (AFA) was officially founded in 1985, born out of frustration with the far-right’s increasing presence. Before AFA, some anti-fascist groups were more defensive, often waiting for far-right groups to make a move before reacting. But AFA had a different approach—they believed in taking the fight to the far-right first. If fascists were planning a rally, AFA would be there to stop it. They were all about direct action and physical confrontation.
What set AFA apart from other anti-fascist groups was its commitment to not just reacting but actively disrupting the far-right. They wanted to make it impossible for the far-right to operate in public. Many of AFA’s members were working-class individuals who felt deeply connected to their communities. They saw the far-right as a direct threat to the people around them, and they weren’t afraid to take to the streets to defend their neighborhoods.
Strategies and methods employed by the Anti-Fascist Action group
AFA didn’t just talk about confronting the far-right—they did it. Their methods were bold and often controversial. Street confrontations were a major tactic. When the far-right held rallies or tried to spread their message in public spaces, AFA would show up in force. They weren’t there just to protest from the sidelines. They aimed to shut down the events altogether. These confrontations could get physical, with AFA using direct action to push back against fascist groups.
AFA also used intelligence-gathering as one of their strategies. They kept a close eye on far-right groups, tracking their movements, meetings, and planned activities. This allowed AFA to organize counter-demonstrations and disrupt the far-right’s plans before they could gain momentum. Their intelligence work wasn’t just about public events. It extended to gathering information on key individuals in far-right organizations, making it difficult for them to operate under the radar.
Another important method was propaganda. AFA understood the importance of public opinion. They made sure that their message reached the wider public, countering far-right narratives with their own leaflets, posters, and even public speeches. AFA worked hard to expose the violent, racist core of far-right groups, showing that these were not just political organizations—they were a threat to the safety and well-being of the community.
Prominent initiatives and achievements of note
Some of AFA’s actions have become legendary. One of the most famous was their involvement in the Battle of Cable Street. In 1986, AFA played a key role in stopping a fascist march that was planned to go through London’s East End, a historically diverse and working-class neighborhood.
Thousands of anti-fascists, including AFA members, gathered to block the march. The confrontation was intense, but in the end, the marchers were forced to turn back. It was a huge victory for AFA and the wider anti-fascist movement.
Another significant achievement was AFA’s ability to disrupt BNP rallies and recruitment efforts. By consistently showing up and outnumbering the far-right groups, AFA made it clear that the streets weren’t going to be safe spaces for fascists. The BNP leader at the time, Nick Griffin, even admitted that AFA’s actions were a major setback for their organization.
The impact on far-right groups
AFA’s relentless pressure on the far-right took a toll. Groups like the BNP and NF began to lose their street-level presence. They couldn’t hold public rallies or recruit openly without facing opposition from AFA. By the late 1990s, the far-right in the UK was shifting away from street activism because it had become too dangerous and too difficult, thanks in large part to AFA’s efforts.
Nick Griffin famously called the situation “a state of war.” AFA’s organized resistance made it nearly impossible for far-right groups to gain traction in public spaces. They were forced to change their tactics, moving their activities into the shadows. Instead of rallies and marches, they focused more on politics and elections, where they hoped they could avoid direct confrontations with groups like AFA.
Challenges and controversies
AFA’s methods weren’t without controversy. Their willingness to engage in physical confrontations led to criticisms from some quarters. Some argued that by resorting to violence, AFA was no better than the fascists they opposed. Others saw their direct action as necessary. The debate over whether violent resistance to fascism is ever justified remains a heated topic.
Legal troubles were also a challenge for AFA. Many of their members faced arrests and prosecutions for their involvement in street fights and other confrontational tactics. This didn’t deter them, though. If anything, it seemed to harden their resolve. They saw themselves as standing on the front lines of a crucial battle, and the risks were worth it.
As the years went on, AFA’s visibility started to decline. By the early 2000s, the group had faded into the background, but its influence on anti-fascist movements in the UK and beyond remained strong. Newer groups like Hope Not Hate and Antifa owe a lot to AFA’s pioneering work in confronting far-right extremism.
Conclusion
Anti-Fascist Action played a crucial role in shaping the fight against far-right extremism in the UK. By taking a direct, often confrontational approach, AFA made it impossible for the far-right to operate in public without facing resistance. Their methods were controversial, but they were also effective. The legacy of AFA continues to influence anti-fascist movements today, proving that the fight against extremism requires more than just words—it takes action.