DESCRIPTIONS of mindless violence and criminal thuggery give the impression that the riots have come out of nowhere or are the sole outcome of fascist agitation.

There can be no doubt that a loose set of neofascist actors either by physical organisation on the ground or via online encouragement through popular apps like Telegram have played a significant role.

The attempt to set fire to a hotel housing asylum-seekers in Rotherham which was still occupied at the time of the attack could be viewed as arson with intent to endanger life.

This rightly carries a sentence of life imprisonment for all those involved.

Further evidence has now been presented by ITV and others that convicted fascist terrorists associated with proscribed groups are at the heart of some of the violence.

These fascist elements must be opposed by the working-class movement and solidarity rendered to all those who have been targeted, whether that be worshippers at mosques, those who have been attacked in racially aggravated assaults or had their houses or cars smashed because they were not white.

People who have committed violent crimes must be punished accordingly and it is important that victims see justice done.

However, dealing with the long-term problems that the riots have revealed will take more than simply punishing those who have taken part, particularly those who committed non-violent offences such as looting.

When the riots happened in 2011, there was rightly an attempt by those on the left to understand the social conditions that led to the violence.

At the time, the effects of austerity were one of the driving forces behind why so many took part.

The riots did see attacks on police and journalists and the burning down of businesses.

But those individuals who were not involved in serious disorder, and instead stole a pair of trainers from sports stores while they were ransacked, were still given custodial sentences.

Following the hard-line rhetoric from Prime Minister Keir Starmer, who made little to no distinction between those organising and committing the most violent acts compared with someone taking sausage rolls from Greggs, it is likely we will see similar “swift justice” in the coming days and months.

Punishment needs to fit the crime and due to the scale of the riots it is clear a wholly legalistic or moralistic approach will be inadequate.

We have had 14 years of Tory austerity, Covid and an explosion in wealth inequality with more billionaires than ever.

In the meantime, getting a decent contract of work, with an affordable living arrangement and reliable public services, is out of reach for millions in Britain.

It is no surprise that within this social decline, the seeds of fascism and racism begin to find fertile ground.

Issues like immigration are part of the conversation that multi-ethnic working-class communities are having whether people like it or not.

A traditional left position has always been to support a humane immigration policy, but to oppose globalisation or open borders and against brain drain from the developing world.

Immigration has always been a facet of Britain over the centuries, and people are now coming to our shores taking highly perilous journeys fleeing imperialist wars and neoliberal economic policies that have devastated their countries.

Due to a dire economic climate and shortages in housing and local services, it is inevitable people on the receiving end will seek to find people to blame, aided and abetted by a right-wing media looking to blame migrants for all our ills.

The answer to these problems is not to dismiss the immigration concerns of working-class communities out of hand, but to engage in the debate.

It is not only correct to do so, but it is something the political right of varying shades is having every day with their target audiences.

To foster a tolerant environment, you have to make the economic circumstances favourable — secure permanent jobs that are well paid with decent conditions, build modern council housing and have good local public services.

Cross-community cohesion is something that requires work too. There needs to be respect for difference but also to have some shared public facilities and spaces that everybody feels they have a stake in.

Ordinary people, many of them part of an underclass in Sunderland, Rotherham and Middlesbrough, have very little to look forward to.

The devastating effects of deindustrialisation from the Thatcher period are still keenly felt.

And when hundreds of thousands of people in these deprived communities have no real stake in society, some of them will allow their frustrations to boil over into destructive disorder.

The working-class movement must draw a distinction between those who have committed serious violent crimes and engaged in fascist agitation to those who loot a corporate store for sausage rolls or makeup.

We cannot afford to simply mirror the line of the government and call for further draconian measures to be introduced which will no doubt be used against us when we want to take direct action or engage in civil disobedience.

The battle for hearts and minds is at a critical juncture and our approach should be one that has some basis in historically successful anti-fascist work.

The battle of Cable Street in 1936 is often cited as a moment when militant anti-fascist forces physically defeated Oswald Mosley and his British Union of Fascists (BUF).

But what is not talked about as much is the intensity of the community organising that went on in the lead-up.

Phil Piratin — then a notable member of the Stepney Tenants Defence League — spoke about their approach during a 1986 interview.

He detailed how two families were going to be evicted from their homes by their respective landlords.

The two men in the households were Oswald Mosley supporters. But by helping them with their rent arrears, Piratin points out that they were able to canvass the locals telling them the BUF had done nothing.

This helped to drive a wedge between the BUF and the local community.

Piratin, who would go on to become a Communist councillor, said: “There were those among the fascists or their sympathisers who were ordinary decent folk that could be won over.

“Therefore there had to be a very important effort to discriminate between the hard-line thugs of the fascists and the ordinary people who were attracted to their propaganda.”