UK Disability – the New Holocaust 2014

aDisability-Love-01

The current national government of the UK – the aptly named ‘ConDem Nation’ – has been ideologically committed since coming to power, to the systematic attack of the British working class in general, and its most vulnerable members inparticular. This policy of appeasement to the far-right has specifically targeted British citizens with psychological and physical disabilities and has been carried-out with a clinical precision reminiscent of the Hitlerite Nazi regime it so obviously is emulating. This policy is designed to disempower a minority of citizens who already represent a peripheral and marginalised sub-group within British society, and constitutes a new ‘holocaust’ against those human beings who possess disabilities. The point of this policy is to cut all state support for the disabled, whilst simultaneously pursuing a vicious media campaign premised upon Judeo-Christian ignorance and prejudice, that present disabled individuals and groups as personifying evil incarnate, and representing a punishment from god – through their various issues and needs. This literal and figurative ‘demonisation’ of a group of people with varying abilities, medical issues, and psychological needs, is a manifestation of medieval feudalism, that is conditioned to attack anything that is perceived to be an affront to god.

The British political right – like the church that it supports – although living in modern times, has not evolved beyond this primitive state, and is always seeking new ways to resurrect old policies in new garb. That which is punished by god – so the ignorant think – must not only be attacked, but removed from public sight altogether. This used to mean being brutally tortured and burnt to death on the village green, but today the same effect is achieved in a less dramatic fashion by withdrawing state benefits, housing, medical care, and general support for the disabled, whilst ensuring there is no society-wide sympathy for those with disabilities, manifested by those without. The disabled must be portrayed through the media, (such as the BBC, Channel 4, and Channel 5), as dysfunctional scroungers whose presence in society is the reason the economy does not work. Although some people have non-visible disabilities, and others do not suffer cognitive issues, the fact remains that the most at risk in this vulnerable group are those who possess psychological and cognitive disabilities, and who are not able to comprehend reality to any great extent, or understand the hatred that is being aimed at them by a group of privileged middle class politicians who do not suffer from any disabilities whatsoever.

The phases of exclusion from society are premised upon a mixture of rhetorical terrorism, and frightening practical action. Hitler carried-out his destructive intentions when he came to power without hesitation. He did exactly what he said he would do. The current ConDem government is behaving in exactly the same manner, and distinct phases of their attack on the disabled can be clearly discerned:

1) Rhetorical terrorism – continuously state exactly what is going to happen, and when, across the media of the UK. This creates fear in the minds of those being attacked, and is designed to diminish resistance to the changes.

2) Shut self-help, and charitable groups that offer free help and advice to the disabled by withdrawing state funding. This means that those on the lowest incomes can not afford to access legal advice that was previously given to them without charge. This prevents any legal or procedural resistance to the changes from the intended victims.

3) Under the guise of cutting or reducing all state benefits, specifically target state benefits designed to alleviate the inequality suffered by people with disabilities.

4) Whilst scrapping these benefits – such as Incapacity Benefit – make it a legal requirement that all disabled people must re-apply for a new benefit – such as Employment & Support Alliance.

5) Ensure that the new benefit can only be accessed if the applicant is ‘available for work’. As many people are excluded from the workplace because of their disability, they are left with no state benefit at all.

6) Disregard all medical evidence of disability.

7) Introduce a new measure for deciding if a disabled person is fit for work. This includes the severely mentally disabled (who perhaps have to wear adult nappies, and can not talk), facing an aggressive DWP officer with no medical training, who arbitrarily decides a) is the person really disabled? b) can the person work? Many people with disabilities have been declared ‘fit for work’, despite the fact that no one will employ them, this has included those who are paralysed and can not move, the blind, the terminally ill, the deaf and blind, and those with limbs missing, amongst many other examples.

8) The psychological cruelty associated with this treatment, coupled with a withdrawal of material support, has led to disabled people dying from a mixture of stress and neglect.

9) The demonising of people with disabilities so that there is a frightful increase in the UK of attacks against the disabled by those who view themselves as ‘able-bodied’.

10) Encourage the ghettoisation of people with disabilities, so that their visibility within mainstream society is discouraged and minimised.

The current UK government has put all this in place with a rapidity that suggests many years of planning whilst in political opposition. Once it attained power through a statistical quirk, it instigated this policy – which might be better described as a ‘hate-crime’ – with breathtaking efficiency and disturbing irrationality. This policy attacks without discernment. Those with disabilities can be categorised into three broad groups:

a) Those born with disabilities.

b) Those who develop disabilities through accident or illness.

c) Those who suffer injury through military service.

In 1945 the Labour Party came to power on a Socialist ticket. The instigation of disability related benefits, the blind tax allowance, and employment schemes such as the now defunct Remploy, were all designed to cater for the tens of thousands of ex-servicemen who had suffered disfigurement, loss of limb, loss of eyesight, and a plethora of other debilitating injuries. In the process of these revolutionary changes, those born with disabilities also benefitted from these improvements provided through the Welfare State and the National Health Service. However, much prejudice remained within UK society that prevented disabled people from being integrated into the mainstream. By and large, people with disabilities remained side-lined and reliant upon state benefit. The current ConDem government has ripped away the safety net of the Welfare State and whilst privatising the NHS, does nothing about the prejudice and discrimination disabled people face everyday of their lives. Indeed, the reason the government does not tackle this problem is because it forms many foundational rightwing viewpoints that dictate government policy. People with disabilities are the victims of discrimination and hatred; the attitude of the current government is that the disabled victims of this rightwing ignorance are to blame for the oppression they suffer. In other words, it is the notion of ‘disability’ that is believed to cause the offense – and not the hatred that responds to it. This attitude was displayed by the Sunday Times recently which featured a London academic talking about mental disability as if he were a UKIP or Britain First member having a drink with fellow supporters at the local pub! This kind of inverted mindset has led to a disabled BBC presenter of children’s programmes – Cerrie Burnall – receiving hate-mail from viewers claiming that the fact she has one arm upsets their children, and that the BBC should not have people with disabilities on open display! Why the BBC would release this disturbing information into the public domain is another demonstration of its lurch to the right. A lurch that can only be indicative of the hate-filled climate of prejudice and xenophobia cultivated by the Conservative and Liberal Democratic Parties, as they machete their way through the progressive cultural norms that was once Britain.

Taijiquan as Advanced Rationality

DSC_0350

Taijiquan, regardless of its philosophical underpinnings, or its historicity, is the product not of a mind ensnared in a world of vague mystery and rampant imaginations, but is rather a product of the objective observation of the human body whilst experiencing the duress of combat. Taijiquan is the advanced and progressive consequence of a human rational mind, which has transcended the limitations usually associated with the brutality of human conflict. Of course, Taijiquan is not a physical art imposed upon the body by a mind that is out of control, or operating through the premise of ordinary awareness. On the contrary, minds that created the physical framework of the Taijiquan form were themselves ‘mature’ and ‘cognitively developed’ – this is how the principle of Taijiquan emerged through environmental (and psychological) conditioning. Those who practiced regular military arts, and who experienced and survived engagements in battles that remained primarily ‘hand-to-hand’ – despite the presence of fired projectiles on the ancient and modern Chinese battlefield – were able, through the agency of experience, to eventually ‘see through’ the psychological and physical confusion, hesitation, and fear, and were consequently able to develop and modify the existing military martial arts into a physical expression of an advanced state of understanding, which operated through physical movement. These circumstances created the material reality of the Taijiquan technique – a clearly recognisable set of movements that share a common philosophical basis.

Ordinary logic – which satisfies itself primarily with instinctive responses to perceived and real external threats – was transcended by those individuals who experienced combat on a regular basis throughout their lives and lived to benefit from the experience. This progression of human understanding is thoroughly inaccordance with the premise of human psychological and physical evolution, and as a principle, has been evident within Chinese science for millennia. The military martial arts, far from being inferior in structure or theory, have performed a very important function throughout Chinese history and culture, and have been the preferred vehicle for conveying discipline, moral fortitude, virtue, honour, and the notion of ‘selflessness’ to the younger generations, as they have been prepared for service in the military as a soldier, or as a scholar-official within the government. The military martial arts are the historical foundation of Chinese martial culture. These martial arts developed out of primitive combat and hunting skills, and were transformed into effective self-defence techniques practiced and used by vast and disciplined military formations that numbered tens of thousands, or more.

The ability of the mind to direct the body in combat led to the extensive diversification of armed and unnamed martial related skills, styles, and lineages. Martial practice in peacetime became a cultural habit within Chinese culture, which acted not only as a vehicle for self-development (through the replication in training of the discipline required to fight on the battlefield), but acted as an insurance policy to enhance the chances of survival of the individual, should war ever breakout in reality. The acquisition and development of proficient martial skill in peacetime, equated with the ability to adequately manifest martial ability in wartime. The notion of nobility contained within martial practice, probably dates back to the time of Confucius, who pointed-out (through his philosophical teachings), that the concentration required for the practice of martial arts (and the seriousness of engaging in combat), is the same as that required by a scholar who has the task of studying the classical books of China in his attempt to pass the state examinations, with the intention of assuming public office. As an official and a soldier serve both the people and the government – their roles, although distinctive, share certain characteristics. Indeed, for Confucius a scholar was a warrior, and a warrior was a scholar, and this led to him using the Chinese ideogram ‘士’ (shi4), which means warrior, and knight, (as well as gentleman), to refer to a cultivated scholar. Progressive rationality, in whatever form it has taken throughout Chinese historicity, has been an important aspect of Chinese culture for thousands of years.

As a development of higher reason, Taijiquan is a distinct activity with a unique philosophy, which is indicative of an advanced rationality. This use of the human mind has developed a set of combat effective physical exercises that are designed to complement the anatomy and physiology of the human body. No movement exists within Taijiquan that has not evolved from the requirement of optimising the inner and outer physical structures of the body. Not only does this mean that there is no resistance to the natural structure or functioning of the body – which builds both health and strength – but through the requirement of aligning the bones and joints, and becoming aware of how gravity operates on (and through) the human body, the awareness of a great systemic power is realised that can be emitted through any part of the body without recourse to the excessive tensing of localised muscle groups. Muscles assist the alignment of the bones and joints, and operate in natural ripples up and down the body, unhindered by pockets of habitual tension usually found around the joints. All these attributes stem from the development of deep and full abdominal breathing that utilises the entire lung capacity, and which is designed to take in the maximum amount of oxygen with each breath, whilst cleansing the maximum amount of carbon dioxide (and excessive water vapour) from the body, through exhalation of the outer breath. The slow performance of the various techniques extends and expands the movements, opening the joints and strengthening the bones. Slow movement builds awareness of every part of the technique, thus building co-ordination through an advanced use of the neural network. The neural network is comprised of extensive nerve-fibre pathways that link the brain to every part of the inner and outer body. This means that by practicing slowly, and strengthening the neural network through experience, the foundations are laid for lightning fast reflexes should the situation require such a response. Slow practice builds awareness over a greater period of time through movements, which in regular martial arts, is executed so fast that awareness does not penetrate its inner structure. The fastness associated with regular martial arts diminishes with levels of fitness and age, but the fastness associated with Taijiquan is the product of the enhancing of mind-body co-ordination through the permanent development of the neural network. All Taijiquan movements are rounded – as are the bones and joints that form them. Nothing is wasted, health is enhanced, and martial ability is assured.

The Patriarch’s Ch’an Can Not Be Bought

75211031

Patriarch Ch’an, as a distinct concept, maybe defined as the method utilised by the Ch’an School of China, designed to convey the reality of the empty mind essence – here and now – without recourse to the expedient Buddhist teachings found in the sutras. This is because the expedient Buddhist teachings found in the sutras, are pointing to exactly the same empty mind essence. The human propensity for attachment to intellectual concepts influenced the Buddha to pass-on his realisation ‘mind to mind’, thus by-passing the requirement for intellectual engagement and sophistry. The strongest intellect, as it is unaware of the existence of its own historical conditioning, is not wise, and can not see beyond its own limitations. When the expedient teachings of the sutras are mediated through the intellect, they become dumb curiosities and part of the ignorant fetters that bind humanity to the suffering of existence. The wisdom contained within the sutras can free the mind, providing there is no attachment to its apparent ‘holiness’. The duality of ‘holiness’ on the one hand, and ‘ignorance’ on the other, makes fools of us all.

Pointing directly to the essence of the empty mind is exactly the Patriarch’s method of Ch’an. All Ch’an masters understand the sutras without effort, because the meaning of all sutras does not go beyond the realisation and comprehension of the empty mind ground. If a sutra goes beyond this, then it is not the true word of the Buddha, and is a fabrication of the ignorant mind. As ignorance knows no end, so do false sutras (and incorrect commentaries). This is doubly correct of true sutras interpreted incorrectly to justify this doctrinal view, or that political justification. The Patriarch’s method of teaching Ch’an does not go beyond the Tathagata method of teaching Ch’an, as one reflects the other free of delusion. When delusion is present, nothing works and no amount of effort will clear the way for effective self-development. A deluded interpretation of ‘enlightened words’, is still only ‘delusion’ and not the ‘wisdom’ it pretends to be.

The Fourth Ch’an Patriarch was the Great Teacher Dayi Daoxin. One day, as Daoxin was walking to Huangmei County, he encountered a young child on the road. The child was unusual looking and fine featured.

Daoxin asked the boy: “What is your name?”

The boy answered: “I have a name, but it is not a permanent nane.”

Daoxin said: “What name is it?”

The boy answered: “Buddha.”

Daoxin said: “You do not have a name?”

The boy said: “It is empty, so I do not possess it.”

Daoxin stared at this young Dharma-vessel. Later the boy became his student and eventually inherited the Dharma and became the Fifth Ch’an Patriarch – Hongren. Hongren would eventually choose an illiterate man for his successor, who would become the Sixth Patriarch of Ch’an – Hiuneng. This is a significant statement to humanity, because Hongren had many students who were affluent and well educated. These students had fully functioning intellects which were the consequence of their relatively good socio-economic backgrounds, and privileged upbringings. However, as the illiterate and poor Huineng proved, this kind of advantage in life means nothing if the empty essence of the mind is not fully realised here and now. The chatter of privilege means nothing to the Buddha, or his enlightened descendents.

British Supterfuge: Courtine & Katyn

aChurchill-01

Winston Churchill is depicted as a ‘hero’ of the bourgeoisie. This is not surprising as he continuously exhibited opinions (and behaviours) motivated through rightwing, nationalist ideology. This admirer of Adolf Hitler (prior to WWII), made no secret of his casually racist attitude, and inherent antipathy toward the communist regime of the USSR. Churchill, for instance, never eulogised Stalin, (or indeed recognised the many important achievements of the Soviet system), in the way that he was prepared to grant the benefit of the doubt toward Nazi Germany. This rotund, cigar puffing, middle class man, eventually would commit the British working class to a highly destructive modern war, and use them as pawns on the bourgeois battlefield – as two imperialist systems fought one another to near material destruction. Whilst avidly detesting any notion of working class hegemony, fairness, and justice, Winston Churchill (and his British bourgeois allies), actively courted the Soviet regime as it became clear that the British military forces were unable to check the advance of the well organised, highly motivated, and modern Nazi German war-machine. The German use of armoured spearheads in their ‘blitzkrieg’ (i.e. ‘lightning war’) strategy was new and innovative, and had the effect of simultaneously ‘piercing’ and ‘encircling’ enemy forces organised in conventional formations of static defence. The British imperialist system of military organisation was premised upon the idea that the ‘natives’ being controlled by it, were technologically and culturally unable to muster the systemic organisation required to successfully confront it. A modern, industrialised military force could merely ‘stand to’ in its defensive positions, and wipe-out any attack with immense and over-whelming fire-power. Following the defeat of imperialist Germany in 1918, and the failure of Britain, France and the USA, to successfully administer and influence the imposed ‘Weimar Republic’, German society collapsed and dichotomised into viciously competing far-left and far-right political camps – a situation that eventually led to the victory of the latter, and the rise of Adolf Hitler’s ‘National Socialist’ regime – a regime that Stalin would eventually describe as being neither ‘Nationalist’ nor ‘Socialist’, in origin, but rather a manifestation of the most vicious form of imperialism.

The bourgeois governments of Western Europe and the USA, caught in their usual indecision and hypocrisy, were opposed to communism of any kind, and were initially favourably indisposed toward the Hitlerite regime, as being very much the defender and saviour of European culture and tradition. Communism, on the other hand, represented the end of the power of the exploiting bourgeoisie and its transformation into the state of Socialism. The inherent conservatism of the bourgeoisie influenced and directed the policy of pre-WWII Western governments, and led to an official policy of resistance to the USSR, either demonstrated openly, or politically pursued behind the scenes. This duplicitous approach evolved after the 1917 Russian Revolution and the subsequent establishment of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR), but was also clearly evident in the devastated trenches of WWI France. The Csar had authorised the raising of a Russian Expeditionary Force of 20,000 men, which sailed for Marseilles via Singapore and the Suez Canal. These Russian men saw action at Laon, and Arras; and fought bravely alongside the British Army at Amiens. Following the Russian Revolutions of 1917, however, which saw the Bolshevik (Communist) regime under Lenin come to power, many troops of the Russian Expeditionary Force saw no reason to continue fighting (and dying) in a bourgeois war that Russia had officially withdrawn from. The French military authorities disarmed these men and herded them into a concentration camp at a place called Courtine. This unjust treatment led to further agitation amongst the Russian soldiers, which culminated in the French using artillery to open fire on the camp. This led to the death of between 300 – 400 Russian men. The British government and its military authorities in France, did nothing to assist their Russian allies. Those who survived the massacre at Courtine were eventually deported back to Soviet Russia, and their previous military contribution to the British and French victory of WWI, all but forgotten and ignored. Many of these men immediately enlisted in the new communist armed forces formed in Bolshevik Russia, and participated in the war against invading Western forces.

This war came about because the bourgeois West attempted to militarily destroy the Bolshevik regime during the Russian Civil War of 1918-1921 – a war that was eventually won by the newly formed ‘Red Army’. The West was defeated, and Lenin was able to spend his remaining years forging the Soviet State out of the ruins of the peasant Csarist regime he had inherited. Following this military defeat, the governments of the bourgeois West continued to smart and agitate against the USSR. This attitude of impotent hatred formed the central core of Hitlerite ideology, and provided the foundation of Churchillian rhetoric. Churchill opposed Hitler not because he was opposed to rightwing ideology – on the contrary, he was thoroughly rightwing himself – but simply because the dramatic rise of Nazi Germany represented an ‘imperial’ challenge to the declining British Empire. Churchill was defending the bourgeois notion of the British Empire, and not the rights of humanity, when he pitted the British working class against the German working class. Churchill believed that when the Nazis invaded the USSR, he could kill to birds with one stone, and whilst giving a tacit support to the Soviet resistance (and sacrifice), he could sit back and watch the Nazis and Soviets destroy one another’s regime. When both regimes were suitably weakened, Churchill could commit the British forces to consolidate military and political control over Germany and the USSR. In this task, Churchill sought to crush both German National Socialism, and Soviet Communism.

Part of this duplicitous policy pursued by Churchill was the supplying of the Soviet Union with small amounts of mostly obsolete military equipment, whilst forming the Polish Government in London. This ‘government’ was deliberately composed of ardent anti-Soviet Polish nationalists, who worked to continuously undermine any and all progressive Soviet initiatives, backed by the British authorities who remained ominously ‘silent’ with every unfounded criticism that emerged from these Poles in exile. In 1941, the Russian authorities established a Polish Army on Soviet soil under the command of the Polish General Anders. This army had been set-up with the agreement and permission of the London Polish Government with the understanding that in return, this Polish Army would fight alongside the Soviet armed forces in the Defense of Russia against the invading Germans. By December of that year this army numbered some 73,000 men, all were well fed, adequately clothed, professionally trained, and well looked after. This army would eventually number 96,000, but it became obvious that neither General Anders, nor the Polish government in exile, would honour their agreement to help defend the USSR. As the Nazi military machine moved toward Moscow, the London Poles (together with General Anders) refused to allow the Polish Army to go into action. Churchill, the man behind the duplicity, casually suggested that this army might leave the Soviet Union via Iran. At this time, many Russians felt uneasy about having a sizable ‘reactionary’ military force in the heart of the Soviet Union. As the situation could not be satisfactorily resolved, Stalin eventually agreed for General Anders and his Polish Army to leave Soviet territory and travel to Iran. Anders and his men left Soviet Russia on the 22nd of August, 1942 – the eve of the Battle of Stalingrad.This apparently cowardly behaviour of the Polish authorities in London (and the Polish Army in the USSR) can be compared and contrasted with the exemplary conduct of the de Gaulle’s French Normandie Squadron which fought bravely on the Russian front, and the famous Czechoslovak unit of between 2,000 – 3,000 men commanded by Colonel Svoboda. This Czech unit suffered substantial casualties in its first great engagement, but its stoicism and support for the Soviet homeland (whilst under fire) caught the attention of the Russian authorities and Svoboda received the Order of Lenin, whilst eighty-two of his men were decorated in acknowledgement for their service. The example of ‘internationalism’ set by these (and other foreigners) living in the Soviet Union, starkly contrasted with the attitude (and official policy) of bourgeois ‘nationalism’ pursued by the Polish Government of London exiles, and General Anders, who refused fight for the Soviet Union in its hour of greatest need. Soviet-Polish relations diminished further in the middle of April, 1943, when Goebbels’ propaganda machine announced that retreating Nazi forces had discovered a number of mass graves in the Katyn Forest area (near Smolensk), purportedly containing the bodies of thousands of men apparently dressed in Polish officer uniforms. All the bodies exhibited bullet wounds to the back of the head. The Polish nationalists in London had been making an issue of Polish prisoners of war captured by Soviet forces as they entered Eastern Poland in 1939. These prisoners – both officers and enlisted men – had been distributed throughout the Soviet Union, and many of them had enlisted in General Anders’ Polish Army before refusing to fight and leaving the USSR for Iran. In 1941, the Nazis had staged a similar ‘Victims of Bolshevik Terror’ exercise in Lwow, Poland, which was eventually discredited and disproven by hundreds of eye witnesses. The Katyn incident was different in that the London Poles immediately took the side of the accusing Nazi authorities and started disseminating the anti-Semitic myth that 10,000 Polish officers were murdered by a unit of ‘Jewish Commissars’ serving in the Red Army. This Nazi-type propaganda emanated from the London Poles completely unopposed by the British authorities in a time of war (and heightened security), and could only have done so through the expressed permission of the Prime Minister – Winston Churchill.

The propaganda offensive of the Nazis coincided with their military machine suffering one military reversal after another in Soviet Union, as the Red Army began to slowly make its way towards Berlin. The purpose of the fabricated Katyn incident was to discredit the Soviet Union in the eyes of the bourgeois West, and attempt to drive a wedge between the advancing Red Army, and its European and American Allies. The Russian authorities made it clear that there had never been any 10,000 ‘lost’ Polish officers, and that the London Poles were trying to undermine the Soviet regime with obvious lies. The same authorities stated that General Anders left the USSR in 1942 with 75,491 soldiers accompanied by 37,756 relatives, but that at this time there were still around 300,000 to 400,000 Poles still living in the Soviet Union. General Anders would later write a book repeating the Nazi German allegations, supporting the Hitlerite idea that the Soviets had massacred Polish officers in 1940. Despite factual evidence to the contrary, the narrative Anders established has been accepted in the bourgeois West as a ‘true’ and ‘accurate’ representation and recording of historical events that is copied without critical thought from one book to another, and from documentary to documentary. In many ways Hitler’s attempt to destabilise and dehumanise the Soviet regime found its greatest effectiveness through the betrayal manifested by General Anders himself, who along with his fellow nationalist Poles, did nothing to defend Russia whilst receiving free food, clothing and above all protection, when Soviet citizens were dying in their thousands due to Nazi aggression. The behaviour of the London Poles eventually led to the Russians ‘suspending’ direct political communication with their government in exile, claiming that it was unrepresentative of the Polish people and undemocratic in both its structure and operation. Instead, the Russian authorities acknowledged the pro-Soviet Union of Polish Patriots as the true representatives of the Polish people and set about (on May 9th, 1943), recruiting and training a new Polish Army on Soviet soil which became known as the Tadeusz Kosciuszko Division. The Soviet authorities made it clear that it was opposed to all forms of nationalism – particularly pan-Slavism – but pointed-out that all people were equal, and that nationalities were respected.

The new Polish Division had its pristine barracks in a pine forest on the banks of the Oka River, situated between Moscow and Riazan. The British BBC reporter (originally of Russian birth) – Alexander Werth – was one of the very few foreign journalists to be given exclusive access not only to frontline areas, but also recently ‘liberated’ villages, towns, and cities, and witnessed first-hand the barbarism of the Nazi German presence in the USSR. He visited the camp of the Tadeusz Kosciuszko Division on July the 15, and reported on its very good state and high moral. Unlike the secular Red Army, this Polish Army began its day with an open-air mass (facilitated by an attending catholic priest – one Father Kupsz – a Polish partisan), in front of an elaborate set of iconic panels depicting the integration of religious belief with the reality of Nazi atrocities committed in Poland. The Division numbered around 15,000 officers and men (including Jews), all drawn from volunteers who were displaced Poles living in the Soviet Union. This number included around 600 women who were technically termed ‘auxiliaries’, but whom carried-out not only tasks of labour, but in reality also served as frontline troops. Also present were nurses who served in the Division’s medical unit. Many of its members had been either partisans fighting behind the enemy lines, or had been soldiers in the Red Army and had fought in various important battles – including Stalingrad, etc. Every morning whilst on parade, the Division would sing the military oath which expressed the Polish nation’s gratitude toward the Soviet Union, pledging to liberate Poland whilst defending mother-Russia. Around the camp could be seen the flags of the Soviet Allies – the British, French, Polish, Czech, and the USA, etc. So important did the Soviet authorities consider this Division, that it was armed with exactly the same high standard military equipment usually issued to prestigious Soviet Guard Regiments. Around 80% of its weaponry was comprised of either ‘semi’, or ‘automatic’ infantry assault rifles. A number of companies also possessed ‘stove-pipe’ anti-tank rifles, and there were several machine-gun, mortar and artillery units, as well as T-34 tanks. All this equipment was Soviet made, except for the presence of one or two American-built trucks and jeeps. This Division was said to possess a fire-power seven times stronger than that of an average Polish infantry formation circa 1939.   The Tadeusz Kosciuszko Division later distinguished itself in battle fighting the Nazis in its ongoing attempts to liberate Poland, and defend the Soviet Union. In these tasks the Tadeusz Kosciuszko Division suffered heavy casualties fulfilling its duty toward the USSR, and remains a highly respected military formation.

In September 1943, the Red Army liberated Smolensk (and the Katyn area) from Nazi occupation. In April 1943, the German High Command had released its own findings on the Katyn incident – a version of events which was wholly supported and embraced by the London Poles, without recourse to objective and corroborating evidence. Indeed, this is how the German propaganda entered British (and Western) academia unopposed, and came to be accepted as ‘fact’, rather than the racially motivated fabrication that it undoubtedly was. Churchill, through his measured duplicity, was already preparing the groundwork for a future ideological and military conflict with the Communist Bloc. The London Poles became the voice of dissent and resistance for the British and Americans, to the existence of the Soviet Union in the world, perpetuated through the usual bourgeois notion of rabid, racially motivated nationalism. To counter the false allegations invented by the Nazi regime, and embraced by the London Poles, the Soviets conducted their own investigation into the events surrounding Katyn. This Russian report was finally published on January 15th, 1944 and a press conference held in the Katyn Forest attended by Western reporters, and other interesting individuals, including Kathie Harriman, the daughter of the US Ambassador Averell Harriman. There had been only a few hundred bodies discovered by the Russian authorities, buried in the Katyn Forest area, and not the 10,000 claimed by the Nazis or the London Poles. All were dressed as Polish officers and had been executed with a single shot delivered to the back of the head. The ammunition used was of German manufacture, a fact that even Goebbels had to acknowledge in his diary. He attempted to explain this inconvenient fact away by claiming that German ammunition was sold to pro-Nazi factions in the Baltic States, and that it was this ammunition which was captured and used by the Red Army in its murder of these men in March 1940. However, this is revealed as a ‘lie’ by the fact that the Red Army had not entered the Baltic States until three months after the alleged incident was supposed to have taken place in the Katyn Forest, and therefore did not have access to German ammunition. Another obvious inconsistency evolved around the apparent age of the bodies. Were the bodies killed in 1940 by the Russians as the Nazis suggested (and the London Poles believed), or after July 1941 by the German invaders (as the Soviet authorities alleged)? Until July 1941, the Katyn Forest area had been a well known picnicking place for the people of Smolensk. It was only after July 1941 that the Nazi occupiers placed barbed wire around the area and prevented free movement in and out. Prior to July 1941, there was certainly no reported evidence of the presence of massed graves in the forest. What adds weight to the Russian claims of a German initiated massacre is the relative ‘freshness’ of the corpses, even in early 1944, despite the claims of General Anders, who never visited the Katyn Forest, or made any mention of Soviet brutality toward either himself or his Polish men whilst in Russia. Anders was of the opinion that the ‘type’ of soil in the Katyn Forest had inadvertently ‘preserved’ the bodies, giving the false impression of their death being nearer in time to the examiners, than was really the case.

Many local witnesses came to give evidence to the Russian Committee of Enquiry. This testimony constituted a convincing body of evidence that the Germans had captured these Polish officers 1941 whilst rapidly advancing into the Soviet Union, and decided to eradicate them as surplus to requirement as they moved on. This decision was taken in part due to the fact that the railways were in great disarray as the Soviets retreated and the German set about destroying the area, and that there was no transport available to move the victims whilst still alive. Other witnesses suggested that some of the victims had been killed by the Germans elsewhere and had been transported by trucks to the Katyn Forest area for burial in mass graves, whilst other reported hearing gun-shots fired by Gestapo-men in the forest. It was also clearly established that the death of these men had been carried-out in a typically ‘Nazi-style’ fashion, an atrocity initiated by a regime that became well known for the millions of people it killed under Hitler’s reign. The British Embassy in Moscow at the time of the Russian Committee of Enquiry, sensing that the mounting evidence was proving the London Poles to be incorrect, concocted yet another version events which stated that it was true that the Russians had not killed the Poles in 1940, but rather in 1941 when the Red Army had been forced to retreat from the area due to the strength of the German onslaught! This was obviously a face-saving exercise in support of Winston Churchill’s anti-Soviet stance. The Soviet Union was the victim of Nazi terror, but due to the religiously inspired inverted consciousness inhabited by the bourgeois West, everything is turned upside down, and the wrong way around. The Soviets become the devilish perpetuators of the very terror they were victims of, and the aggressive Nazi regime was transformed into the angelic protector of Western morals and virtue. The fact that the Nazi regime killed these men in reality is inverted into the false idea that the Soviet authorities carried-out this callous act, and serves to demonise the Socialist and Communist cause. In effect, this deliberate distortion of history served as the foundation for the subsequent Western invention known as the ‘Cold War’, which justified its highly aggressive stance toward the Soviet Union as an act of self-defence against ‘imagined’ Russian violence and duplicity. The Katyn Forest massacre was just one of many carried-out by the Nazi regime whilst operating in the Soviet Union. This regime killed millions upon millions without conscience for its destructive actions. Blaming the Soviets for this crime is tantamount to blaming the slave for the ill-treatment he receives at the hands of his master. The bourgeois psychology of duplicity is easily identified and rectified when its inversion is understood and turned the right way around. It is only the ignorance of racially motivated nationalism that keeps the lie of the Katyn Forest massacre alive as being attributed to the very regime that was attempting to end nationalism for the betterment of all human society. The real question is why the hero of the British bourgeois – Winston Churchill – authorised the acceptance of Nazi propaganda as the factual interpretation of the Katyn Forest incident, at exactly the same time that thousands of British working class men were fighting and dying at the hands of the Nazi German regime?

How the BBC Supports Islamic Terrorism

DSC_0241

After the US and British led military illegally invaded the sovereign state of Iraq (in 2003), its legitimate government was over-thrown, and its leader – Saddam Hussein – was hung on television at the behest of the United States. By removing the essentially secular Arab Socialist Ba’ath Party from power, under the guise of (‘fighting terrorism’), the West, under the leadership of George Bush Jr and Tony Blair, effectively paved the way for extremists paramilitary groups that were once peripheral political entities in Ba’athist Iraq, to emerge into the bright light of equal armed competition in the country. These groups have brutally murdered, (in the name of god), thousands of Western soldiers, and tens of thousands of Iraqi citizens, (including men, women and children). As the Western military presence in Iraq was planned as a pretentious Judeo-Christian act of far-right power projection, and short-term military occupation, there was never any plan of ‘what should be done next’, after its demonstration of technological superiority, had finally achieved its aim of defeating the State Army of Iraq. This policy of short-termism led to the bizarre situation of British and US forces controlling small geographical areas of Iraq, such as main roads, major towns and cities, and prominent hills, etc, whilst the Taliban continued to control and terrorise everywhere else. As the invasion of Iraq was nothing other than a blatant act of neo-colonialism, the presence of Western troops in the Middle East galvanised young Muslim men across the globe, who were motivated in their tens of thousands by religious impulses, to sacrifice their lives in the cause of fighting the ‘infidels’, and attempting to drive them out of areas perceived as historically ‘Islamic’.

The highly industrialised and technologically advanced military forces of the West relied heavily upon their material superiority on the battlefield. This led invariably to the situation of the Taliban resorting to massed infantry attacks (of varying discipline and effectiveness) on relatively small numbers of Western soldiers utilising advanced weaponry. This led to the death of one or two Western soldiers every so often, but invariably to the death of hundreds or thousands of Taliban fighters. Although at the point of military contact the Taliban always lost more than it gained, this policy of pressure was sustained against the West by controlling a very large part of the civil population, either through genuine support, or through the use of terror. Whatever the case, as the West was unwilling to commit its ground forces into other areas, the Taliban could always give the propaganda impression that these ‘foreign’ men from the ‘Madrasa’ or ‘Islamic Colleges of Pakistan’ were welcome in Iraq by the indigenous population, and controlled vast areas through popular support. Of course, many other men from around the world, (including the West), flocked to the Taliban ranks, creating a Pakistani-led, internationalist, pan-Islamic movement, fuelled and sustained through the auspices of Western imperialism.

In 2003, and for many years after, the BBC clearly pursued a blanket ‘anti-Taliban’ policy in all its coverage. The death of every British soldier was treated with abject sorrow, and their loss was presented through an air of great respect. Britain is a relatively small island-country that draws its men and women for its foot-solders from its working class. These young people, who come through a modern education system, are then trained to fight in modern warfare, and then sent as combatants to far-flung areas of the world to act as cannon-fodder for political wars started and supported by the bourgeoisie. Today, the Western forces have withdrawn from Iraq and left its people open to attack from all sides. Nothing was achieved other than the removal of the Ba’ath Party, which in its time of tenure, served to keep in check all Islamist extremist tendencies. The Taliban was not defeated, and simply adopted the strategy of ‘out-lasting’ the enemy, which of course they did. The BBC, following the strictures of the current far-right government of the UK, is now pursuing the policy of eulogising the very terrorists they once reported against. To achieve this sleight of hand, the ‘Taliban’ has been renamed ‘Isis’, a catchy, media-friendly pseudonym that gives the false impression that a ‘new’ movement has suddenly, and spontaneously arisen, as if out of the ground, and is now spreading across Iraq and is threatening to wash away the Western founded and supported government, whose poorly trained, and poorly motivated soldiery are proving ineffective in the face of the enemy. Isis is the Taliban and tomorrow the media may well refer to it by another name. The BBC is now presenting ‘Isis’ as the ‘saviour’ of Iraq, even though the behaviour of Isis is no different to those Taliban fighters who killed hundreds of British soldiers. The hypocrisy of the BBC is palpable; as it continues its policy of obviously recannon-fodder, media, soldier-inventing history, which is nothing other than the manipulation of the people through a well established far-right policy.

 

Anti-Austerity March – London 21.6.14

DSC_0259

DSC_0234

(A version of this article appeared in the New Worker – the newspaper of the New Communist Party of Britain – No. 1781, dated 27.6.14, Page 3)

The current British government, a coalition of the Conservative and Liberal Democratic Party, is behaving in a thoroughly undemocratic fashion, and is riding rough-shod over the rights of the British working class, ethnic minorities, people with disabilities, carers, the vulnerable, migrants, asylum seekers, refugees, homosexuals, women, adherents of non-Christian religions, professionals who work in socialist institutions (such as schools and hospitals), animal rights supporters, environmental activists, and a plethora of other individuals and groups. This rightwing administration is of course, attacking the leftwing of the UK, and is encouraging racism, hatred toward the disabled, homophobia, sexism, and Christian fundamentalist extremism, and through its despicable policies, is trying to drive a wedge between all working class people and sympathetic campaigning groups and political movements. The ConDem Coalition has no democratic mandate as the British voter was not informed of their secret plan to eradicate Socialism within the UK. The ConDem Coalition came to power more or less by accident, and primarily due to ‘New’ Labour’s mishandling of their time in office. It has unleashed a vicious political regime of the people of Britain that has tried to separate and divide. The march through recent London march demonstrated that this policy has not worked and that the British people stand united against ‘Austerity’.

DSC_0240

DSC_0249

DSC_0276

Many thousands gathered gather around the vicinity of the BBC building in the Oxford Circus area of London, all campaigning about particular aspects of the current UK government’s vicious policy of Welfare State cuts, and National Health Service privatisation. Unions gathered to protest the further corrosion of workers rights throughout the British workforce, and the demise of pensions, safe working conditions, employers rights, benefits withdrawal, and the policy of those receiving unemployment benefit, having to work for ‘free’ in various capitalist corporations throughout the land. Teachers Unions also emphasised the tripling of tuition fees, and the witling away of educational standards (through government cuts), and the ever present threat of the complete eradication of free education throughout the British education system.

DSC_0254

The UK Communist Party movement was very well represented and proudly marched through the streets with red flags and banners prominently flying. One campaigner held up the flag of the International Brigade, (a voluntary leftwing military formation which contained many British Socialists), that fought in the Spanish Civil War. The communist presence within British politics continuously reminds the UK government of its responsibilities toward its own ordinary people, and that the direction of history lies with the workers and not the minority middle classes currently being privileged by a vicious, self-serving, rightwing administration, that is arbitrarily using its power to actively reverse all the progressive policies and institutions introduced into British society after WWII by a Socialist Labour Party.

DSC_0277

DSC_0278

The Conservative and Liberal Democratic Parties currently hold the reigns of power in the UK, through a technicality within the British ‘first past the post’ voting system. Many protestors made the point that although the progressive elements of the essentially leftwing British established were being systematically dismantled and destroyed, the actual government carry-out these policies, does not possess a truly democratic mandate to pursue such blatantly rightwing political policies, that are blatantly designed to attack the working class people of the UK who primarily relay upon these services. Time and again, placards and leaflets pointed out that no one voted for the privatisation of the NHS, or the dismantling of the Welfare State and the withdrawal of benefits paid to the vulnerable members of society.

DSC_0257

DSC_0279

Attention was drawn to the government’s policy of demonising people with disabilities, cutting or stopping their already meagre benefits, and instituting a policy of the dehumanising policy of making them disabled benefit claimants ‘compete’ for non-existing jobs, in an employment market that routinely discriminates against the employment of those with disabilities. Many others pointed-out the plight of migrants, refugees, and asylum seekers, who are treated as ‘non-human’ interlopers in the UK and often imprisoned without trial before being deported back to impoverished countries, many with a less than impressive human rights record, or controlled by extremist or highly unreliable governments. The hated Bedroom Tax was raised alongside the issue of the loss of social housing. The environmental damage inflicted by the method of ‘fracking’ was also a popular cause of discontent. These issues were presented in a broader context involving the removal of the civil rights UK workers, and the granting of ever more rights to the middle class and their managers. The successful march through London ended at Westminster, where there was a rally was held, pulling all the issues together. As usual, the rightwing dominated British media and press ignored this successful march, or gave it only minimal or cursory coverage.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Britain First – UK Christian Terrorism Exposed

aBritishFirst-01

On the face of it, the far-right in the UK has not only run-out of ideas, but has only ever really pursued the same singular idea during its inglorious history – namely the policy of hate filled intolerance that covers a wide range of prejudicial attitudes and discriminative behaviours. This base hatred is re-invented time and again, to re-emerge in the various economic circumstances that define the continuous cycle of capitalist expansion and contraction. Europe at the moment is in the grip of an economic contraction that sees the disempowered workers forced to pay the price of their manager’s deliberate incompetence and greed. The economic over-lords must retain the privileges they enjoy at the expense of the workers, regardless of how good or bad the economy is performing. In good times, the far-right attacks ethnic minorities, asylum seekers, refugees, and economic migrants, stating that it is ‘morally’ wrong that these people come to the UK and share in its affluence – an affluence the far-right believes they have not contributed to, and should not benefit from. In times of economic downturn, the far-right wheels out exactly the same rhetoric, albeit slightly modified for effect. In times of economic contraction, the far-right claim that ethnic minorities, asylum seekers, refugees, and economic migrants, should not come to the UK, and certainly shouldn’t stay, as they are a burden on the already over-stretched system. This simplistic view of the world omits the crucial fact that if it wasn’t for exploited foreign workers in the UK, Britain would not enjoy the economic prevalence that it does, as these people are forced to endure atrocious working conditions at the hands of unscrupulous managers who know the law, but choose to ignore it. It is the greedy bourgeois that threaten the prosperity of the UK, and not the exploited workers who generate the wealth through their labour, but enjoy none of its benefits. In reality, oppressed foreign workers are proletariats through and through, and form a marginalised and peripheral aspect of the British working class. The far-right of the UK targets workers because it is their intention to attack and destroy the international working class, and migrant workers are an easy target.

The discrimination does not stop with the workers, but is extended to include the perpetuation of hatred towards women, disabled people, national minorities, prominent leftwingers, naturalised UK citizens, and the British born descendents of those who originally migrated from countries that once comprised the odious British empire. The bourgeois state has always been aided and abetted by the Catholic and Protestant churches, indeed, Marx stated that all criticism of the bourgeois state begins with the criticism of religion – the Judeo-Christian tradition to be exact. The rise of the far-right is not a mystery but a product of deliberate political policy pursued in the UK, particularly by the neo-conservative administration of Tony Blair’s ‘New Labour’, which presented the ignorance of racism as an expression of legitimate thought, and freedom of speech. This lurch to the right prepared the ground for the current rightwing administration of the Conservative and Liberal Democrat Coalition. The demonization of the working class, the disabled, women, and migrants, has not only continued, but has intensified as the current government sets about dismantling the Welfare State (depriving millions of State Benefit), and privatising the National Health Service, so that treatment free at the point of use, will soon become a thing of the past. The government is assisted in its hate campaign by all the media outlets who routinely trumpet the latest irrational statement emanating from 10 Downing Street as if it where a statement from god himself!

These are the circumstances that have led to an intensification of far-right rhetoric on the streets of Britain. The Church of England – which is funded by the British taxpayer – continues to peddle the silly and bizarre imaginations of theology to anyone stupid enough to listen, whilst simultaneously supporting far-right movements such as the British National Party, the United Kingdom Independence Party, and lately the newly formed ‘Britain First’ movement which is currently engaged in an intensive internet offensive through public media websites such as Twitter and Facebook, amongst many others. A recent anti-fascist led investigation has revealed that this far-right faction is in fact a Christian fundamentalist movement, which draws its inspiration for the hatred it peddles from the teachings of Judeo-Christian theology and the bible. This movement has wide-spread support through the length and breadth of the UK, primarily from the many hundreds of churches that still attract congregations in cities, towns and villages. Support is particularly strong in rural areas where education standards are low and social development stunted through years of governmental neglect. The Church of England authorities refuse to censure its individual vicars who use their churches (and influence amongst local people), to openly support the far-right in its many different forms. Whilst their priests perpetuate race hatred and ignorance from the pulpit, the Church of England justifies this defiance of the very theology they claim to follow (Jesus supposedly taught peace and love amongst humanity), by taking the position that their vicars are exercising ‘freedom of speech’, and that they can not interfere. This obviously pretentious statement is from a vicious, monolithic, feudalistic, hierarchical, and top down institution, which otherwise ruthlessly controls every aspect of the lives of its ecclesiastical employees. This level of hypocrisy should not be surprising as it is well known that the Church of England holds shares in the industrial military complex that specialises in the development of ever more destructive weaponry, etc.

It is no coincidence that Britain First shares the English Defence League’s obsession with attacking mosques in the UK. Christianity has always been antagonistic toward the religion of its founder – Judaism – whilst perpetuating and sustaining anti-Semitism, and also toward Islam, a religion that recognises Jesus Christ as a prophet, if not actually the son of god, etc. The pure racial hatred that has always defined the far-right is being directed and targeted in the UK against obvious migrants, which attacks even those people born in the UK and who live quietly and peacefully. Britain First magnifies race hate through the filter of religious intolerance, whilst appealing to the mythology of British nationalism and patriotism. Britain First recently used a photograph of Princess Diana on their Facebook page which carried the message ‘If you love Princess Diana – donate at this link’. The ‘link’ was to a paypal account that asked for donations so that Britain First could continue its important work of eradicating migrants from the UK and destroy their heathen religions. This statement of far-right stupidity was accompanied by a photograph of over-weight British football supporters performing the straight-arm Hitler salute, whilst wearing ill-fitting jeans and Union Jack T-shirts probably made in China. Britain First, in its attempts to be popular, has even infiltrated animal rights websites and pretended to be interested in the well-being of animals, when in fact many of its members are pro-hunt and linked to the Countryside Alliance. Britain First is co-ordinated by Paul Golding who has openly broken UK law by storming mosques in Bradford, Glasgow, and Luton, as well as organising aggressive street gangs of rabid Christians who apparently ‘patrol’ the Tower Hamlets area of London. Despite the apparent illegality of Britain First, to date the UK police have refused to arrest or prosecute any of its members. This is because of the current atmosphere of intimidation and fear which exists in the UK which does not originate within the peaceful and tolerant migrant communities, but which has been generated by the current far-right government and its Christian lackeys. Britain First proves that it is Christianity that is out of control in the UK, and not the law abiding Islamic community.

Eurocentricism in the Contemporary British Left

aEvolution-01

In fact, the concept of Eurocentricism itself ought to be split into two distinct types. One may be designated as epistemic, i.e. a Eurocentric perspective that results from insurmountable epistemological limitations such as those that faced a nineteenth century observer without any direct experience of non-European societies. The other is supremacist, a type of Eurocentricism that is but a specific brand of ethnocentricism rooted in the global supremacy achieved by Western Europe starting from the nineteenth century.

(Marxism, Orientalism, Cosmopolitanism: By Gilbert Archer Pages 82-83)

When Karl Marx broke with the Western narrative of historical idealism, he permanently severed any essentialist and culturalist notions of viewing the perceived ‘other’ in a racially motivated and detrimental manner. This was at the time when bourgeois science was busying itself with the distortion of Darwin’s theory of evolution, giving the false impression that fair-skinned Europeans were the highest level of biological development on the planet, and that all other people, with their distinctive physical features and skin tones, were inherently inferior and represented a more primitive type of human being. Although Darwin disagreed with this notion of racism, it was a number of his followers who changed his science to reflect the bourgeois attitudes of the time. Above can be seen the effects of this misrepresentation with the European male striding purposely out of a primitive past and into an advanced future, with the other races symbolic of a more primitive past. Britain, as an island nation, had successfully transitioned into the industrial age, and was pursuing a ruthless policy of imperialist conquest and colonial domination around the world. This excursion into foreign parts was led by the Judeo-Christian church, the military and commercial interests, which were responsible for encountering, thoroughly exploiting, and then destroying native people and their cultures. The Christian church believed that Jesus was ‘white’ and that god was an ‘Englishman’; the military was armed with the best weaponry modern industry could provide, and the merchants were equipped with pure greed. This heady mix of old religion, modern military force, and advanced socio-economic conditions, led to the unbridled and rampant pursuance of the most despicable human traits related to human ignorance and greed, which resulted not only in the immense enriching of Europe, but also in the death of millions of indigenous people and the impoverishment of their homelands.

The British bourgeoisie perpetuated the myth that their dominance around the globe (and within the UK), emanated from a god who must be ‘white’ because he had blessed this small country with success and dominance. The reality that this fairy-tale had no basis in material fact was completely ignored. Britain became dominant due to its industrial development, and nothing else. The British working class had a stark choice; conform to bourgeois oppression and work for a pittance, or die of starvation. Impoverished working class men joined the British military to earn enough money to feed their families, and it is these men – the victims of the bourgeois – who became the unwitting agents of a brutal racism and exploitation through their use of arms. British working class men fought the indigenous people of the world, so that the bourgeois, the church and the merchants could walk in and reap all the benefits whilst making none of the effort, or taking any of the risks. The workers died whilst the priests and merchants got fat at the expense of their sacrifice. Oppressed workers killed native people, and were killed by native people in self-defense, whilst the bourgeois looked on and waited for the new ground to be conquered and cleared of resistance. The native people who managed to survive this vicious introduction into the capitalist system had no choice but to conform to their own demeaning through radicalisation. The pre-industrial level of socio-economic conditions encountered in these indigenous societies, was automatically reduced to the level of religious and biological myth. Europeans were superior because a white Christian god had created a physical universe that placed them at the apex of civilised development, and all other people at a subordinate level. It was god’s plan that the superior dominate the inferior at every level of life, and this ethos fuelled the colonial experiment, with its conversation, cultural destruction, murder, massacre, rape, and pillage, etc.

This ‘supremacist’ aspect of Eurocentricism is an ever present danger, not only in the rightwing – its natural home – but also in the leftwing of the British political system. Within the left it is a variant of the vicious bourgeois mentality that justified imperialism, (and that continues to fuel the far-right), but which is usually camouflaged and well hidden behind a thin veil of supposed Marxist rhetoric. This is an example of the penetration of the left by bourgeois thought – the very antithesis to point and purpose of philosophical Marxism. The presence of these vicious bourgeois attitudes within the left represents a serious failing to interpret and implement the correct meaning of Marx into the progressive movement of politics. It also demonstrates how the bourgeois rightwing has successfully penetrated the left, and has worked to bring it down from within. The message is clear; those human beings who happen to be of non-European descent, are viewed as ‘inferior’, but instead of admitting the real reason for this, the tenuous caveat is added that they are ‘inferior’ because of their ideology or mode of thought. The physicality of racism is transformed on the left of British politics into the ethereal ‘spirit’ of racism, whereby the perceived product of the human brain is judged as being of value, or indeed of no value at all. This value judgement is then used to physically exclude those who think the ‘wrong way’ from the respect and appreciation offered to those who possess ‘right thought’, all of whom happen to be of European descent. A clear example of the continuation of a racial paradigm on the British left, (disguised as ideological necessity), concerns the issue of how modern Russia is intellectually treated in political analysis, when compared to and with modern China. Modern Russia is of course, since the collapse and abolition of the Soviet Union in 1991, a rampant, free-market, capitalist system (with oligarchy tendencies), enwrapped in a bourgeois democratic framework. The British left, by and large, treats the subject of modern, capitalist Russia, with what can only be described as an attitude motivated by an enhanced sense of sentimentalism and nostalgia – both prominent bourgeois tendencies. Modern Russia is the antithesis of the Soviet Union and yet it receives in Western European narrative, a prestige not extended to any other non-Socialist or non-Communist regime. This may be juxtaposed with modern China, which since 1949 has been a Communist state. The People’s Republic of China has survived every single ideological attack aimed at it from the bourgeois, capitalist West, led by the USA. In 1989, when the USSR was falling apart physically and ideologically, Communist China stood alone. In 1956, China disagreed with Khrushchev’s so-called ‘Secret Speech’ condemning Stalin, (who had died in 1953), and instead confirmed its ideological adherence to the Marx-Lenin-Stalin line, which the Communist Party of China interpreted as the ‘correct’ path to follow. The USSR, after 1956, was viewed in China as betraying the 1917 Revolution (and the 27 million Soviets that died during WWII); a Chinese opinion that appears to have been vindicated by the collapse of the USSR just 33 years later. China now faces a USA that has tried (but failed) to bring it down with military force and ‘favoured nation’ trading. China also faces a Western Communist movement that takes a thoroughly bourgeois attitude towards both its people and its Communist regime. China is demeaned time and again in the Western leftist press, and yet it continues in its growth and development of Marxist thought. European leftists appear to be embroiled in a historical view of the perceived other, which racialises and demeans, as a method to gain oppressive control over others. This ignorant and non-Marxist attitude harks straight back to the days of the Opium Wars of the 1800’s, that Marx wrote about in his June 1853 article for the New York Tribune. Marx states:

Whether the ‘contact of extremes’ be such a universal principle or not, a striking illustration of it may be seen in the effect the Chinese revolution seems likely to exercise upon the civilised world. It may seem a very strange, and a very paradoxical assertion that the next uprising of the people of Europe, and their next movement for republican freedom and economy of government, may depend more probably on what is now passing in the Celestial Empire, – the very opposite of Europe, – than on any other political cause that now exists, – more even than on the menaces of Russia and the consequent likelihood of a general European war.

(Revolution in China and in Europe)

Marx goes on to say that it was the presence of the English cannon in China that ushered in the collapse of the old (and ancient) imperial system in the name of the importation of opium for (British) profit. This colonial presence initiated a historical process that eventually led directly to the Communist Revolution. These historical forces continue today as China continues the dialectical process of developing and advancing Marxist thought that can assist the development of humanity. China is a Communist regime, regardless of any and all criticism it may receive from a political left that exists within (and through) a bourgeois, liberal democratic, capitalist system. It is this bourgeois system that criticises China, using the European left as a mouthpiece.

People’s China Leads the World in the Development of Wisdom Studies

aLong-Hammer-Sickle

(This article appeared in the New Worker – the newspaper of the New Communist Party of Britain [NCPB], no. 1779, dated 13.6.14, Pages 6-7)

In the 21st century, with the ever deepening process of globalisation and the development of information technology, human society is facing new and challenging problems. Due to the unprecedented complexity of these problems, a superior (and outstanding) wisdom is required. However, as the development of information is at its height, knowledge can be retrieved at anytime. The rapid development of science and technology has led to unprecedented material growth, and this inturn has led to an accelerated rate of development of education in modern society. There is now an urgent need to develop the subject of Wisdom Studies so that society can benefit fully from its presence.  

(Zhangjiagang Wisdom Studies Declaration – 2013)

The human brain, through its capacity to think, analyse, assess, and logically organise, has given birth to two great outpourings of the intellect, namely religion and secular science. The former is represented by a mixture of imagination and environmental observation, whilst the latter abandons a priori the requirement for imagination, and strictly limits itself purely to the observation of natural processes. Although now perceived as two very different entities, which of course they are, religion and science have shared, to a lesser or greater degree, the capacity to generate ‘wisdom’. The concept of generating wise thoughts is signified by the ability to produce optimum psychological functioning that simultaneously combines the observation of the environment, with specific inner cognitive processes. In the case of religion, the various phases of environmental change, such as the passing of the seasons, weather conditions, natural catastrophes, the cycle of life, and conflict, etc, are used to reinforce the inner generation of religiously significant imagery. Whereas in the case of modern science, the environment is not just passively observed by a human mind standing in awe of its presence, but is dynamically ‘measured’ and ‘understood’ by a mind that actively seeks to reduce and remove imagination from the empirical process of information gathering. Both religious systems and modern science signify the development of the human mind (and its capacity to be ‘wise’) at various stages of its cognitive evolution, but it is interesting to note that ‘wisdom’ as a distinct capacity, appears to have been a prominent biological and physical attribute of humanity generated through the constant environmental pressures with regards for the need to survive as a species.

When wisdom is interpreted in this manner, it becomes a perennial capacity that has accompanied human evolutionary development, but the origin of which most likely lies in humanity’s pre-human ancestry. As soon as a functioning brain is aware of the environment, (and its place within it), perception is transformed from subject-object dichotomy to a subject-object-other perspective. In other words, from a strictly two dimensional, instinctively governed existence, to a three dimensional awareness that is able to ‘think’ beyond, round, and through its otherwise powerful instinctive programming. This is wisdom as self-awareness. As a capacity of thought generation and thought organisation, wisdom has had the task of formulating contingent responses to inner and outer stimuli, that is information derived from the experience of psycho-emotional and psycho-physical states of being. Wisdom answers the question as to ‘what does this sensory information mean’? This is a continuous path of human evolution that has no end, as it is an unfolding process of the continuous refinement of the observation and understanding of inner and outer processes. From this process has emerged the modern science that has benefitted the planet, albeit in an asymmetric manner due to the difference in socio-economic development around the globe. The wisdom manifest by those who live in economic poverty is of a more organic nature than those who exist in economically advanced societies, and whose wisdom is routinely augmented by technological assistance. In a poor country, the apex of wisdom may manifest as the ability to grow crops effectively and make obsolete machinery function despite a lack of spare parts or replacements, etc, whereas in a rich country, advanced wisdom builds space-rockets and devises ever more effective medicines, etc.

Wisdom is a human-wide phenomenon that is not linked to any one culture, ethnic group, or society, and it is clear from the observation that many great civilisations, such as the Egyptian, Chinese, Indian, Babylonian, Greek, Roman, Inca, Mayan, North American Indian, Celtic, and Modern European, amongst many others, have produced cultures and architectural constructs that contain an obviously advanced quota of developmental ‘wisdom’. This is why it is significant that on the 10th of December 2013, a group of eminent Chinese academics issued the Zhangjiagang Wisdom Studies Declaration, which simultaneously recognises the importance of the study (and development) of the theory of wisdom research, and the founding of the International Wisdom Society (IWS). This is an important recognition that will see the subject of wisdom studies advance and gain a greater depth of understanding. In recent years, knowledgeable people, both inside China and abroad, have started paying attention to this issue, and have begun to promote awareness of the emerging academic discipline of Wisdom Studies. In the United States, first there was the famous Psychologist Robert J. Steinberg who led a group of scholars in a spontaneous research programme in Wisdom Studies. Following this, there was the development of Wisdom Studies carried out at the University of Chicago. In Europe there is the ‘Berlin Wisdom Paradigm’ which has a group of Wisdom Study researchers. In China during the last 50 years of the 20th century there was the famous educator Luo Jia Lun who considered the relation between wisdom, learning, and knowledge. He produced a penetrating analysis of the three inter-related subjects.

The famous scientist named Qian Xue Sen, (as far back as the mid-1990’s), proposed a ‘Great Compendium of Wisdom Studies’ school of thought. In the 21st century, the famous educator Gu Ming Yuan, the President of the Chinese Association of Education, developed the academic subject of Wisdom Studies. Within China there has been the development of the Chinese Wisdom Project Research Council, together with the emergence of the International Chinese Wisdom Society in Hong Kong, as well as the Zhangjiagang City Wisdom Studies Project, and other similar academic institutes. As a consequence there have been a number of important academic conferences held, and many pioneering papers published on the subjects of wisdom, learning, and knowledge, which has led to the development of a practical curriculum designed specifically for Wisdom Studies. The academic brothers Zhang Qing Lin and Zhang Qing Song are credited with designing and implementing the first ‘Learning Wisdom in College’ courses, which have achieved many important results.

However, whether in China or the United States of America and despite the fact that leaders in both countries clearly advocate the development of wise thinking amongst the people, it has to be acknowledged that Wisdom Studies (and the ability to ‘think’ wisely) is an acquired skill, and that there must be appropriate planning if it is to be made socially acceptable and relevant to the masses. In this regard, Wisdom Studies remains in its initial stage of development. However, the fact that there are now ‘Wisdom Cities’, ‘Wisdom Tourism’, and ‘Wisdom Study Schools’ serves to illustrate the success of the project, and the willingness of people to embrace wisdom. In fact intelligence is the facility people use when choosing their words and actions – and it can be said that Wisdom Studies encourages the development of a clearer (and superior) thinking process. Wise thinking can be used to tackle the most difficult of problems with an innovation that is capable of producing new inventions. Amongst the workers, the use of wise thought is the foundation of the generation of all productive forces.

For further information regarding the International Wisdom Society:

 

RHACS – International Wisdom Society

http://wenshuchan-online.weebly.com/international-wisdom-society.html

The Dangerous Myth of Football

aFootball-Corrupt-01

(This article appeared in the New Worker – the newspaper of the New Communist Party of Britain, No. 1780, dated 20.June.14, Page 6-7)

The socio-economic structure of world football as controlled by the vicious bourgeois institution of the Federation of International Football Associations (FIFA), and the regional Football Associations it has spawned. The exploitative tentacles of FIFA spread far and wide into all poor and working class areas of the world. It spreads the myth that all poor people, if they can kick a ball, can become multi-millionaires over-night, if only they tried hard enough! The reality, however, is very different. A very small number of working class men (originating from advanced industrial, or industrialising nations), are chosen from a mass of applicants to be streamed into the exclusive training regimes that more or less ensure a job as a professional football player upon graduation. These men are taken out of their natural socio-economic (working class) conditions, and immediately thrust into a middle class, financial utopia, where they can earn millions of pounds a year working for just 90 minutes a week, and personifying a developmental, bourgeois myth. The reality is more brutal.

For a small number of working class men to be privileged in this manner, the majority of the working class (and the oppressed) around the world, must be kept firmly in their place. The majority of the masses (in the world) actually finance this gigantic money making machine that only benefits the minority – that is the middle class – which reaps all the financial benefits. Even after paying the individual players millions of pounds, there is still a tremendous amount of money leftover, which flows only from the working class toward the middle class, through a relentless process of accumulation. This process is maintained not only by the selling of associated merchandise such as football shirts, boots, flags, DVD’s, CD’s, and other paraphernalia, but relies heavily upon slave-labour, whereby very small children spend 12 to 16 hours a day, working in appalling conditions, in factories situated in the poorer areas of the world. This highly exploited workforce sews the shirts, footballs, and flags together, which are then played with by the rich adults and children of developed countries as a matter of leisure. This exploitative situation is compounded by working class males (in developed countries such as the UK), who spend hundreds of pounds of their hard earned money per week, in attending football matches of teams occupying the Premier League. The Premier League (and others like it), is the main money making device that FIFA uses to drain the poor people of the world of their wages. In the UK, a ticket for a single football match can cost more than the national government believes a family should live for a week, when in receipt of state benefits! In this regard, supporting football becomes an addiction that paradoxically destroys the very same working class that its mythos claims to be saving.

Modern football evolved during the industrialisation process of the UK from an ancient game played in and around villages. The bourgeois wanted the working class controlled during every part of their day, and this extended to the regulation of their leisure time. As factories closed for Saturday afternoons, the working class males were encouraged to attend football matches held in purpose built stadia, and spend a part of their earnings on the price of admission. Their wives and children were not yet welcome, and had to stay at home. The police patrolled the football stadia, ensuring that the euphoria of victory (or the disappointment of defeat), remained only amongst the working class, who were encouraged to fight amongst themselves. It was essential that this discontent never spread onto the streets. This harsh control was considered necessary wherever working class men congregated en masse, so as to prevent the possibility of the development of class consciousness, and of revolutionary fervour, as such a development threatened the over-throw of the bourgeoisie.

On the pitch, 22 working class men confront one another in two teams of 11 each, moderated by a referee and two linesmen. The game is played for 90 minutes, with a 15 minute break for half-time, when the two sides change the half of the pitch they have to defend. The time of 90 minutes is purely arbitrary, and together with the 15 minutes break, (as well as the time it takes the paying audience to assemble for the start, and disperse at the end), is designed simply to waste time on a Saturday afternoon – there is nothing special about this time, and indeed, compared to contemporary sports, seems a ridiculous length of time for anything significant to happen, or effectively hold an audience’s attention, etc. The football stadium (and the pitch), are microcosms of bourgeois society, within which the working class are allowed to exist providing they follow strict rules that benefit the bourgeois, but are detrimental to the working class. These rules, or ‘laws’ are taught as being beneficial for all, when obviously they are purely arbitrary and designed to maintain the highest level of exploitation. There is also the indication that all good laws originate with god, and have a mysterious origin, when in fact all these regulations emerge from the minds of fat capitalists who have probably never kicked a ball in their lives. The referee is the ‘judge’ who must be obeyed, and he is assisted by two assistant-judges (or ‘Linesmen’). A player who infringes a rule is ‘booked’ – similar to how a police officer records a suspect’s details – and receives a ‘yellow’ card which amounts to a ‘warning’ or a ‘fine’, whilst the ‘red’ card represents expulsion from the pitch, or the removal from society, as in being sent to prison, etc. The message is simple within modern football; the authorities must be obeyed, or there will be punishment. Quite often the working class resent these measures, but aim their discontent at perceived foreigners, rather than at their middle class over-lords and the Judeo-Christian system they represent. The middle class allows and encourages this deception, as it takes the working class attention away from what is really going on – such is the seductive power of modern football.

Footballs teams, with their distinctive, different coloured football kits, became the subject of a pseudo-regionalism that was used to infect the mind of the working class, and divert their attention away from the real enemy in society – the highly ruthless and exploitative bourgeoisie. It is the bourgeoisie that is the real enemy of the working class, but if working class men have their attention aimed at the supporting of a local football team, (a false construct), and pitching that support against another local football team, (another false construct), then true revolutionary knowledge is not developed. Modern football is used by the bourgeoisie to keep the working class in their place. This exploitation is more or less self-sustaining, just like any drug addiction. On the world level, the pseudo-regionalism of football is replaced with pseudo-nationalism. It is exactly the same psychological structure that expands its parameters out of regionalism, (i.e. disliking others because they come from a different local place), into the hating of others because of their different ethnic and cultural origin – i.e. racism. Modern football is both highly exploitative and addictive. In the minds of its victims – the working class – like any addiction it is rationalised as the ‘beautiful game’, and its inherent racism is viewed as an aberration rather than as a foundational structure of its history. Modern football today, at either its local, national, or international levels, serves as the bedrock of racism and far-right political parties. Aggressive young men meet at the football grounds to racially abuse other supporters or players, whilst exchanging extremist ideological information. FIFA knows that it can not stamp racism out of football, because to do so would destroy the highly lucrative financial structure that is in place. It is up to the working class to develop their class consciousness, and break the addiction that is modern football, that viciously holds them in psychological and financial servitude.

The UK’s Premier League is a very successful capitalist enterprise – and this is exactly what it is meant to be. The fact that it just so happens to be the game of football that is used to generate millions of pounds is irrelevant to the process of the accumulation of profit itself. As long as the money keeps flowing, the Premier League will be considered successful. Of course, this measure of success is purely fiscal, in as much as this ‘success’ has absolutely nothing to do with performance on the pitch. This explains why the financially ‘successful’ Premier League, has not been able to produce eleven English footballers (since its inception in 1992) that can dominate at the world level, for the simple reason that it does not have to. Playing well and winning games is irrelevant to the money making process. Expect another dismal performance at the 2014 World Cup in Brazil, with an early exit for England.  The only way the standard of play would increase is if there was a system-wide fall in financial income, created by people protesting en masse by not going to football matches. This scenario would generate a market force that would effect how the capitalists who run the Premier League, (that is the English FA), approach the game, but it is unlikely to happen due to the sustained mirage of tribalism, which is reinforced on the terraces every week, through a false sense of achievement and failure. The Bourgeois system of modern football is designed from top to bottom to prevent the working class from joining together in solidarity.

%d bloggers like this: