Throughout August and September 2025, anti-immigration protesters gathered outside the Best Western hotel on Wilmslow Road every Sunday, draped in British flags and ready for hours of antagonisation between their group and the equally persistent counter demonstration. These protests form part of a national movement, claiming to “protect our girls”, after Hadush Kebatu, an asylum seeker housed at the Bell Hotel in Epping, was charged with the sexual assault of a 14-year-old in July and has since been convicted and sentenced.
Many asylum protests have been organised online by far-right agitators affiliated with the Homeland party, a splinter group of the neo-Nazi organisation Patriotic Alternative. Helped by the rise of social media movement Operation Raise the Colours, fascist agitators are discreetly acting online to cultivate a new, broader-based following. But does everyone at asylum protests subscribe to their fascist ideologies? And is the anti-immigrant sentiment really as popular as Nigel Farage and Tommy Robinson (Stephen Yaxley-Lennon) would like you to believe?
The Fallowfield protest, attended by The Mancunion, took place five days after Farage’s press conference on August 25, at which he revealed ill-costed plans for mass deportation and pledged to leave the European Convention on Human Rights (EHRC), claiming that “as far as the people of this country are concerned, frankly these measures can’t come soon enough”. Farage describes channel crossings as an “invasion” of the country by “fighting-age men” which could lead to “major civil disorder”. He claims to represent the will of the British people.
However, research suggests this is not the case; advocacy organisation ‘HOPE not hate’ argues that a ‘silent majority’ opposes Farage and his policies, and the media “exaggerates the popularity of extreme and fringe far-right views while simultaneously normalising them”. According to YouGov, it is factually incorrect that a majority of Britons support leaving the EHRC – in fact, only 27% say that Britain should withdraw. In addition, Ipsos revealed that 71% of Brits agree that Britain should take refugees fleeing war and persecution.
But a percentage is wholly inadequate in describing the countless, complex and ever-changing factors representing public opinion. In a modern political landscape shaped by online political actors, divisive lies, and identity politics, what can an asylum protest on Wilmslow Road tell us about how the views of real people are represented?
Outside the Best Western, the anti-immigration protesters were seemingly outnumbered, with counter demonstrators taking to Wilmslow Road in their hundreds. The counter demonstration was advertised online by various grassroots organisations such as Young Struggle, Manchester Feminist Coalition, and South Asian Liberation Movement. A further group, from Stand Up to Racism, arrived at 15:30 to cheers from an already large majority. Their chants of “there are many, many more of us than you” could be heard until the anti-immigration protest dispersed.
The prevailing message from counter demonstrators was clear; chants of “refugees are welcome here” and “fascist scum, off our streets” were the loudest, and the message seemed to get through. Residents of the hotel were seen waving to counter demonstrators on the street from their windows and multiple counter demonstrators reported that an asylum seeker had come outside to thank them.
Despite the counter protest’s success, one organiser for Stand Up to Racism, who attended a protest in Oldham where the counter demonstration had been outnumbered, expressed concerns about the aging demographic of the organisation, and advocated for young people to find efficient ways to take to the streets in greater numbers. This echoes the concerns that there is a ‘silent majority’ of pro-refugee Britons who are not represented, as loud minorities showing up outside hotels are given disproportionate media coverage.
Regardless, the counter demonstration benefitted from large numbers of both local young people and the area’s student demographic. The presence of the latter prompted the anti-migrant protesters to frame their opposition as outsiders, meeting chants of “this is what Manchester looks like” with “you aren’t even from here”. Feelings of identity and belonging have been core to the success of nationalist movements such as Operation Raise the Colours and the asylum protests, which imagine their opposition as a ‘liberal elite’.
However, the anti-immigration group seemed divided itself and at times their messages were contradictory. Protesters, including children who had been brought to the rally and given megaphones, met chants of “refugees are welcome here” with “refugees aren’t welcome here”. Yet, when asked whether the UK should be proud of providing asylum for refugees, one woman agreed that it should, stating that she only dislikes “the illegal ones”.
Another woman, draped in the Union Jack, was interviewed by information group NOVO, who were present at the protest. When challenged on her immigration concerns, she stated that she has “no issue if [refugees] are coming from war torn countries”, or with immigration in general but thought the government was “doing it in the … wrong way”. She also expressed support for safe and legal asylum routes in the interview, which has since been posted to the group’s Instagram account (@novo_org).
NOVO’s presenter told us that he believes the far-right in the UK has entered a “post-organisational” era, where political agitation is done via social media using non-entity movements, such as Operation Raise the Colours, to attract a larger demographic, which includes people who are not necessarily committed to hard-right ideals or affiliated with any particular fascist organisations.
That is not to say that social media does not also attract significant hard-line fascist factions. A protester on Wilmslow Road flew the flag of the ‘Knights Templar’, a Catholic military order from the 12th century, which has been adopted by far-right groups online. Notably, Anders Breivik, neo-Nazi terrorist and mass-murderer responsible for the 2011 Norway attack, claimed membership to the Templar and cited it in his manifesto. Breivik’s online activity is thought to have played a key role in his violent radicalisation.
Some in attendance on Wilmslow Road were reportedly recognised as far-right social media influencers. Many used phones and handheld pocket cameras to film opposing protesters and record taunts, with one man bringing the camera close to pro-refugee protesters and telling supposed viewers to “look at the faces” of what he called “traitors to this country” and “leftist scum”. There are global concerns about the cultivation of particularly violent and aggressive strains of extremism online. In fact, the US congress has recently called on the CEOs of Twitch, Discord, and Reddit to testify on radicalisation.
Domestically, concerns have been raised about the consequences of online misinformation since the emergence of mass social media, with last summer’s Southport stabbing being a notable flashpoint in presenting the dangers of rampant online misinformation. Mobs attacked mosques and asylum centres, after false claims that Axel Rudakubana (the Southport stabber) was a Muslim immigrant gained substantial traction online.
The effects do not seem to have worn off. On Wilmslow Road, a woman wrapped in an England flag brandished a picture of Radukubana, who is British and comes from a Christian family, along with a selection of printed mugshots, exclusively featuring people of colour. Protesters adamantly claimed to not be racist, yet the racialised selection of mugshots was not questioned. And in other instances, British-born, non-white members of the counter protest were incorrectly described as “legal immigrants”.
It was hard to discern a coherent message. There was clear evidence of outright racism and fascism, while some seemed less motivated by hate and more by misguided concerns about immigration and asylum. There were protesters who engaged willingly in conversation, while others resorted to personal insults and angry monologues, with one prominent member repeatedly shouting and signalling at counter demonstrators that they were being mind-controlled by the Covid-19 vaccination. Even within the small group that turned up to protest outside the Best Western, an array of conflicting ideas was on display, with no coherent or unanimous condemnation of asylum.
Neither Farage nor Yaxley-Lennon acknowledge the dissonance amongst their followers. Without their newer and less fascist supporters, they very much remain fringe political figures. They attempt to unify their followers under a racialised view of Britishness, but the illusion that their dogmatic politics represent the British people (or even their own followers) is a reductive one. One which a message of unity could well shatter. In this spirit, counter demonstrators held up signs outside the Best Western bearing words to the effect of “the enemy travels by private yacht, not by dinghy”, a sentiment abandoned by the current leadership of the Labour Party in preference to Trump-like deportation videos. There is a vacuous absence of moral leadership on immigration and the pro-migrant ‘silent majority’ is not represented.
But on Wilmslow Road, the majority was anything but silent. Two messages were loud and clear. To the Farages and Yaxley-Lennons of the world: “there are many, many more of us than you”. And to asylum seekers: unlike fascism, you are welcome in Fallowfield.
