Latest news with #Undercover:ExposingtheFarRight
New Statesman
5 days ago
- Politics
- New Statesman
Neo-Nazi safari
Photo by Hollie Adams/Reuters In the 1980s, Bill Buford began work on Among the Thugs, an immersive account of the thrill of football hooliganism – or, as Buford more prosaically put it, an investigation into 'why young males in England were rioting every Saturday'. It has since been hailed as a classic study of violence and sport, of the paramilitary grandstand, but also for its insights into radicalisation and pack mentality. When he first went undercover in the British far right in 2023, in the project that has become Year of the Rat, Harry Shukman didn't know what kind of violent potential he might find. But, as he writes in the book's introduction, his investigation has been lent a sharper salience by the events of last summer: not the weekly, rhythmic violence of the football terraces, but one fell spate. Why in August of 2024 did young males in England embark on their greatest exhibition of far-right rioting since the Second World War? Shukman's investigation took place over the calendar year of 2023. Working with the anti-fascist campaign group Hope not Hate, he became 'Chris', an apparent sympathiser who allows himself to be led down the spiral of the far-right network, down into its rancid depths. Parts of his findings were broadcast as the Channel 4 documentary Undercover: Exposing the Far Right in October 2024. But this courageous and diligent book is the full account of Shukman's subterranean year. He is interested in what would bring otherwise everyday people to commit themselves to such doomed political ostracism, and on the more powerful interests urging extreme ideas about race, IQ and human reproduction into the mainstream. The result is a close and gripping inspection of the character of the far right and threat it poses. Though each of Shukman's chapters cover a specific far-right group or sub-group, his book divides broadly into two halves, covering two roughly defined realms of far-right politics. The first is what we might call its proletarian, or at least quotidian aspect, hidden within British civic society. Shukman is interested in the extremists scattered among the eccentrics of everyday life, not so much reds under the bed, but the fascists among the fruitcakes. This leads him first to a group called the 'Basketweavers'. Advertising itself as a free discussion forum, and organised on secretive online forums like Discord, 'Chris' must answer an allusive political questionnaire to gain entry (asked his political views he replies that he is a 'a nationalist and a traditionalist' hoping to meet similar, innuendo enough to pass muster). This gives him access to the weavers' meet-ups in pubs, where participants are free to trade in conspiracy theories, anti-Semitism and racism. Via the network he meets at the 'Basketweavers', Shukman's persona is able to gain invitation to further gatherings and groupings: a conference in Estonia, bringing together race scientists and manosphere influencers; an English activist group called Identity England; Britain First, a political party led by Paul Golding. Each faction has its own aesthetics – conferences like the one in Estonia attempt to appear as suave and academic as they can manage, while Britain First is ultimately heir to the kind of alleyway racism we've known from the National Front to the BNP, complete with coke-sniffing heavies and hooligan-firm veterans straight out of Buford. But several common themes do emerge across these geographies and generations. The first is that very masculine combination of a self-pity and aggression – and it is striking how few female characters crop up in this portion of the book. Whether at the piss-up or the political demo, each of these groups is marshalled through a form of petty hierarchy more familiar to the sixth-form common room than the Sturmabteilung. At Basketweaver events, participants are egged on to cross taboo thresholds ('Say it! Say n*****! N*****!'), while the awkward and sexually inexperienced, particularly virgins, are viciously mocked. First encountering him in Estonia, Shukman introduces us to the fascinating figure of Ryan, who projects a sub-Andrew Tate lifestyle of fast cars and fast (but strictly Caucasian) women, and who touts pick-up tips to desperate young men, bringing them under his thrall. Nights out after far-right conferences often conclude with a visit to the massage parlour or the strip club. And even active members of the far right remain stranded in the swamp of adolescent sexual milestones: Shukman quotes from the autobiography of one Holocaust denier, who blames 'the late loss of [his] virginity' for placing him at odds with society from early on. But a further common theme, not disconnected from these whimpers of neglect, was how little threat I felt from the networks and characters Shukman describes – certainly not as much as him, who exposed himself to great physical threat to report on them. Throughout the book he emphasises the intellectual networks fomenting these sites of activity, connected by phoney academics like Neema Parvini who circulate the Great Replacement theories these men then regurgitate. But whenever he gets down to head count, Shukman couldn't truly scare me. Discussing the Basketweavers, Shukman writes of an 'enormous' organisation of 'more than 2,000 members worldwide, with hundreds of them in the UK'. But he then tries to present this as an increase on Patriotic Alternative, at one time 'perhaps Britain's biggest far-right group, [with] a membership of a few hundred', which sounds quite similar to 'hundreds' to me. 'The membership of Identity England is moribund,' he concedes more straightforwardly, 'with approximately a dozen activists.' Britain First 'has represented one of the biggest far-right electoral threats', he writes elsewhere, before adding that, despite Golding's ludicrous claim of '20,000 members', there 'are around forty inner-circle activists'. Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe The events of last summer show how small groups can still rally mobs to their side. And Shukman's unsparing scrutiny is clearly necessary – he writes at one point of a previous Hope not Hate investigation which revealed two members of the Royal Navy to be far-right activists, including one serving on a nuclear submarine. But though at times escalating to the scale of a far-right pogrom, the distinctive thing about the August riots was their organic, localised nature, involving individuals with little or no history of far-right involvement. And to pep up the threat from the groups he has investigated, Shukman unwisely extends his definition of far right to take in Nigel Farage ('Far-right activity in the UK takes a number of forms… These range from large parties, like Reform UK…'). While we should never shy away from what is paranoid and extreme about Farageism, there are clear differences between it and a group like Identity England. The latter is more of a sociological than a political phenomenon, involving not the clash of coherent ideological forces but the mutation of more elusive and self-selecting human neuroses. The second half of Shukman's investigation is more threatening, interesting itself in hyper-elite incarnations of far-right ideology. This is a world of dark money and dark ideas: the IQ-derived race science promoted by quack research institutions like 'Aporia', which, posing as another potential financier, Shukman reveals has received funding from the Silicon Valley powerbroker Andrew Conru. Then there is the super-wealthy couple and parents of four, Simone and Malcolm Collins, purported pro-natalists who, Shukman reveals by again feigning personal interest in their projects, are also very interested in IQ, and make use of experimental screening technology to test their embryos for intelligence. Their goal is to sustain global humanity's cognition through the preservation of a boffin caste who can settle in exclusive, hyper-intelligent communities. (They claim to have had talks with the government of the Isle of Man to discuss establishing one such community on its territory.) In common with the foot soldiers of the British far right, the Collinses are self-deluding and bizarre (at one very funny point in what is a surprisingly witty book, Malcolm claims that for over a decade he drank 45 beers a day, every day, which Shukman calculates as 'a beer every twenty minutes… a preposterous amount of cans'). But even if these are hobby horses, luxury bigotries, the difference is their connection to the powerful which, in the ideologically accelerationist space of Silicon Valley, is tremendous. And not just in America: through the character of Andrew Sabisky, one of Dominic Cummings' original squad of 'weirdos and misfits', Shukman shows the spread of similar ideas into the British elite. Sabisky was introduced to Boris Johnson's No 10 before being rapidly ejected when his history of publishing on evolutionary racism was unveiled. But Shukman perhaps leans slightly too much on Sabisky's braggadocio when the latter claims he's still in contact with Conservative Party intellectuals and even Westminster itself (a Conservative source told Shukman that this wasn't true). Shukman's reporting is bold and assiduous, and provides rare documentary insight. His reasons for going undercover – that it is the only way to capture these people with true candour – is justified by his results. His writing is precise and direct, brightened by an off-key, deadpan humour (after describing a character called Sam, whose girlfriend dumped him after he embraced racial genetics, and who now refuses to date Asian or Jewish women, Shukman simply adds, 'Sam is still looking for a partner'). And his approach is elevated by an interest in the psychological state of his subjects, not their political instincts, but their pre-political conditioning. 'I was struck by their loneliness,' he writes. 'Many of them are indeed lonely, and share their disappointment that the friendships and relationships they expected from life have yet to materialise.' He quotes one Basketweaver: 'I spent most of my formative years being rejected by people.' But ultimately Shukman's distance from the men he writes about is too great to overcome. In Among the Thugs, Bill Buford sought to understand football violence by doing it, releasing himself to the crushing mass. While Shukman released himself to the spiral of the far-right network, he couldn't abandon his consciousness to the spiral of their thinking, to the kind of impotence that longs desperately for prepotence. Understanding that sublimation has engaged and dismayed some of our very greatest minds. It is not to Shukman's discredit that he has not cracked it. Even if these politics remain opaque, we understand their shape and patterns better than we did before. Year of the Rat: Undercover in the British Far Right Harry Shukman Chatto & Windus, 320pp, £20 Purchasing a book may earn the NS a commission from who support independent bookshops [See also: Southport and the rage of England] Related
Yahoo
25-03-2025
- Entertainment
- Yahoo
Sex-Selective Abortions in Armenia, Moldova's Healthcare System, Infertility in Georgia, and More Explored at CPH:DOX
Eight high impact film projects from Eastern Europe took center stage at CPH:Forum, the industry platform of Copenhagen's CPH:DOX international documentary film festival, this week. Emerging filmmakers from Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine pitched their films to industry representatives, including Arte, IDFA and the Whickers Fund. More from Variety 'Parade: Queer Acts of Love & Resistance' to Lead Hot Docs Lineup, Featuring 35 World Premieres 'Undercover: Exposing the Far Right' Director on the Future of Political Doc Programming: 'Selection of Films at Some Festivals Is Becoming Weaker' Janus Metz on 'Rescue' and Saving Migrants in the Mediterranean With Co-Director Sine Plambech and Doctors Without Borders (EXCLUSIVE) It marked the culmination of a six-month training program under Change, founded by IMS (International Media Support) in partnership with CPH:DOX, EAVE (the European Audiovisual Entrepreneurs), and the Danish Film School, to support underrepresented filmmakers from the region in accessing the global market. This year's selection explores themes of war, national identity, patriarchy and activism, with budgets ranging from €92,000 ($99,000) to €329,000 ($356,000). The pitches are followed by one-to-one meetings with industry decision-makers over the next couple of days. Variety spoke to the teams in Copenhagen – some projects are not highlighted here due their sensitive nature. 'Leave Easy Come Back Safe' (Belarus) by Sasha Kulak and Masha Maroz examines Belarusian identity through two young artists – one in exile, the other still in the country – while documenting the cultural heritage of the remote Polesia region. The film follows three characters – a traditional beekeeper, a healer and a priest attempting to save a dilapidated church – and features archival material dating back to the 1930s. 'Through our film, we aim not only to document and preserve the unique traditions and culture of the region but also to reflect on our own cultural and national identity. We want to showcase this unknown cultural archipelago to the world and to people within our own country,' producer Julia Shaginurova told Variety. 'My Name Is Enough' (Armenia) by Ani Grigoryan and Marina Arzumanova explores sex-selective abortions in a remote Armenian village. Ashkhen, the protagonist, awaits the results of an ultrasound that will determine the fate of her unborn child while neighbors and relatives turn to ancient folk traditions to predict the baby's sex. 'Hearing how many girls never had the chance to live, and how women were forced to undergo illegal and unsafe abortions – makes us ask: 'What if that were me?'' said producer Ani Ordyan. The documentary interweaves the stories of other women across different generations, shedding light on the societal pressures that force illegal abortions. 'Missing in Action' (Ukraine) by Marharyta Melnychuk and Kateryna Holovko follows Natalia, a former border guard searching for her missing brother, a combat medic who disappeared in Donetsk in 2023. Supporting her brother's daughters and her elderly mother, Natalia takes a job far from home that provides financial stability. Determined to find purpose, she pursues a master's degree in psychology, and uses her experience to help others searching for missing loved ones. 'More than 60,000 people, both civilians and soldiers, are missing in Ukraine. This is the population of a town. Natalia's story is just one of thousands,' producer Aliona Kachkan said. 'Import/Export MD' (Moldova) by Max T. Ciorbă and produced by Sergiu Scobioala of Realitatea Film exposes Moldova's struggling healthcare system, where doctors faced with low wages are forced to seek opportunities abroad. Featuring intertwining narratives of doctors and patients, the film also includes a group of doctors-turned-comedians who use humor to highlight the absurdities of the system. 'We want to make a film that lets doctors tell their story, and sheds light on the challenges both doctors and patients face in our country,' said Ciorbă. 'Whispers of Womanhood' (Georgia) by Rati Tsiteladze and produced by Olga Slusareva follows Tsiteladze's sister Dea, who has spent more than a decade navigating infertility in Georgia, a society where motherhood defines a woman's worth. The film captures her personal and poetic journey through medical interventions, ancient rituals, and the loss of her newborn child due to medical negligence. When Dea considers adoption, her husband's traditional beliefs create a rift, and she seeks solace with other women facing similar struggles. As she secretly explores IVF despite the Church's opposition, her journey shifts from the pursuit of motherhood to a search for self-discovery. 'Through Dea's raw honesty, we aim to break this silence and offer a voice to countless women who suffer quietly,' producer Olga Slusareva said. 'This film is not just about infertility, it's an exploration of human nature, identity, grief and societal roles.' Tsiteladze and Slusareva's previous documentary, 'A Song Without Home,' about a transgender woman seeking a new life in Austria after being locked away by her parents for years in Georgia, was presented at CPH:Forum in 2023 and is set for release later this year. 'Entr'actes' (Ukraine/Belgium) by Yuriy Shylov follows charismatic 73-year-old Olena, who leads an amateur theater troupe for the elderly amid war. Despite air raids and her declining health, she writes a play based on her experiences and her son's frontline service. Guided by young director Serhii, the troupe prepares for an amateur theater festival, which could be their final performance. 'This is a film that carries a sense of irony,' Shylov said. 'For these characters, humor is a way to endure and resist violence.' Attending the Change pitches for the first time, Alice Burgin, who took on the role of head of industry at leading Swiss doc festival Visions du Réel last year, was impressed: 'This program brings home the urgency that so many filmmakers are facing – working to tell powerful and important stories in environments that are not always conducive to hearing their truths,' she said. 'Perhaps this pitch can offer these projects another pathway to financing that resonates with European values while reminding us of the importance of ensuring local stories continue to be heard.' CPH:Forum runs in Copenhagen until March 27. Best of Variety The Best Celebrity Memoirs to Read This Year: From Chelsea Handler to Anthony Hopkins New Movies Out Now in Theaters: What to See This Week Oscars 2026: First Blind Predictions Including Timothée Chalamet, Emma Stone, 'Wicked: For Good' and More
Yahoo
25-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
‘Undercover: Exposing the Far Right' Director on the Future of Political Doc Programming: ‘Selection of Films at Some Festivals Is Becoming Weaker'
In Havana Marking's documentary 'Undercover: Exposing the Far Right,' investigators from the organization Hope Not Hate use hidden cameras and fieldwork to track down and expose members of violent far-right extremist groups in the U.K. and the U.S. One of those members is American Holocaust denier Mark Weber who is secretly recorded in the film telling a crowd of white men that, 'The question every American should ask himself is can whites and Blacks live in America in the same society on the basis of equality and mutual respect? Liberals would say, 'Well, of course, or we should.' Conservatives say, 'Well, it's a good idea, but it's going to take time until we reach that.' The answer is no. It's not going to happen. Thomas Jefferson and Abraham Lincoln both grappled with this question, and each of them concluded that it's not going to happen and the only answer is to remove Blacks from North America.' More from Variety Janus Metz on 'Rescue' and Saving Migrants in the Mediterranean With Partner Sine Plambech and Doctors Without Borders (EXCLUSIVE) Chicago's Doc10 Lineup Includes Sundance Hits 'The Perfect Neighbor' and 'Predators' (EXCLUSIVE) Sundance Documentary 'Predators,' an Exposé of 'To Catch a Predator,' Sells to MTV Documentary Films The film centers on Patrik Hermansson, a senior researcher who infiltrated the 2017 Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, and journalist Harry Shukman, who infiltrated far-right movements beginning in 2023 under Hermansson's guidance. Marking was given access to all of the footage Hermansson and Shukman collected over the course of two years. Marking is the first filmmaker in Hope Not Hate's 20-year history that was granted behind-the-scenes access to the org. 'It took a long time to gain the wider team's confidence,' Marking told Variety. 'I had to prove myself ultimately, and that took many months. The key thing was that they trusted me not to compromise their safety and the success of the mission. I took security seriously and understood the dangers involved.' Last October, the BFI London Film Festival pulled the film from its lineup at the last minute over safety concerns. 'I think the film is exceptional and easily one of the best documentaries I have seen this year,' festival director Kristy Matheson told the Observer newspaper. 'However, festival workers have the right to feel safe and that their mental health and well being is respected in their workplace.' The doc went on to premiere on the U.K. network Channel 4 and Danish television station DR. The film also screened at IDFA in November 2024 and is currently screening at Copenhagen's CPH:DOX in the Education section – UNG:DOX. While Marking doesn't think that anyone who is committed to the far right would watch her film, she believes that 'there are swathes of people in the middle who are being manipulated by this stuff, especially online, who could watch this documentary and realize how easy it is to be misled.' Variety spoke to Marking in Copenhagen about the three years she spent making 'Undercover: Exposing the Far Right' and U.S. distributors' interest in the film. Hope Not Hate gave you unprecedented access to their dangerous, undercover operations. How did that happen? Marking: Originally, I was talking to HNH about a historical story, a straightforward past tense interview film. But every time I talked to (HNH founder and CEO) Nick Lowles, something extraordinary had just happened. He was being followed. His family was being harassed. The office was being hounded with hoax calls. It was a frightening time, and it suddenly seemed mad to be talking about something that took place 20 years ago: we agreed we had to start filming now. It was only six months later that Nick let me know they were also conducting an undercover investigation. Did you ever feel in danger while making the film? We knew right from the start this was a dangerous film to make. We follow three different storylines and there were differing levels of risk for each aspect. There were moments that we knew were risky in and of themselves: filming at extreme far-right rallies with no police presence, for example. Then, highlighting the illegal and obnoxious work of (far-right British agitator) Tommy Robinson has its own risks: he has form for harassing journalists he doesn't agree with and setting his legions of online fans against them. And then there were the legal dangers: one of our stories traces a million-dollar funding network back to Silicon Valley. Above all, though, the danger was that we might blow the cover of the HNH journalists or locations of their offices, etc. We had a huge number of protocols in place to ensure secrecy, using encryption, code words, and prioritizing meeting in person over using messaging apps. I also changed my appearance: not to be in disguise, just to blend in and 'disappear' on shoots. The far-right in Europe and the U.S. don't try to hide their racism/intolerance/antisemitism – i.e., Britain's anti-immigrant rioters, Charlottesville's Unite the Right, Jan. 6 U.S. Capitol attackers. Why did you think it was necessary to make a film about how the far right operates behind closed doors? Well, some of the far right are open about what they believe, but many aren't, and almost no one wants to admit how they are funded, or how they manipulate the narrative. We have layers here about what is said openly. Some might say they are anti-asylum-seekers in public, but refuse to admit they are racist, or they might say they hate Islam, but would never admit to anti-semitism, for example. When you go undercover, you see the true extent of the extremism, and importantly, the associations. Funding will often come from 'respectable' sources who would not openly want to be connected to those more vocal. How did you feel about the London Film Festival's decision to pull your film? We were shocked, confused, and devastated! It was beyond cowardly and has set a dangerous precedent. It was sad that they couldn't see why it was so politically important not to pull the film: for us, yes, but also for political films in general. We asked repeatedly for alternative ways to screen the film in the festival setting: different locations or different platforms, but they wouldn't entertain it. They selected the film in early June, so they had over four months to put a safety protocol in place before the festival in October. Do you think that by pulling the film, the festival gave even more power to the far right? Fear is its own form of censorship, and literally the only people to benefit from that decision were the far right. Anyone familiar with the work of American historian Timothy Snyder will recognize the concept of 'obeying in advance.' This was a perfect example. Recently, Miami Beach Mayor Steven Meiner attempted to shut down the city's nonprofit art house cinema O Cinema following screenings of the Oscar-winning documentary 'No Other Land' because he thought it was anti-semitic. Meiner didn't get his way, but do you feel like we are heading in a direction where politicians and film festivals will censor political films? Yes, for sure. It's already happened to us, and we can see that the selection of films at some festivals is becoming weaker. There are different reasons, and there may be some genuine fears, but there should always be ways to create safe spaces – even if it's virtual – to show political films. We believe in the right to watch films without the fear of intimidation and hope to ensure the resilience of the cinema industry for the long run. What territories are you trying to sell to, and is there any hope that an American distributor will touch the film? The film is selling very well to broadcasters in Europe and having a fantastic festival run. So far, we have had no bite whatsoever from the U.S. We can't believe the change in government hasn't had an effect on that. 'Undercover: Exposing the Far Right' is a Marking Films Inc/Tigerlily production, directed and produced by Havana Marking and Natasha Dack. Best of Variety The Best Celebrity Memoirs to Read This Year: From Chelsea Handler to Anthony Hopkins New Movies Out Now in Theaters: What to See This Week Oscars 2026: First Blind Predictions Including Timothée Chalamet, Emma Stone, 'Wicked: For Good' and More
