How the NHS was Infiltrated by the Middle Class!

DSC_2321

The British National Health Service (NHS) was initiated in 1948 by the incumbant Labour Government as part of an extensive ‘Socialist’ reshaping of British culture following WWII. Although not a Socialist Revolution in essence or intention, this compromise with capitalism was designed to alleviate the greater burden of inequality that existed throughout the working class. The capitalist system and its class differentiations ensure that a minority middle and upper classes retain control of the means of production, the political system, the legal system, the police and the armed forces. The majority working class – which provides all the ‘labour’ that fuels society – suffers from poor wages, poor living conditions, poor education and shortened life expectancy. Through a radical re-distribution of wealth, welfare and medical resources were made available to the working class paid for through taxation, and provided ‘free’ at the point of use. The NHS worked on the principle that there were grave inequalities within capitalist society, and that when working class people presented themselves at their GP, it did not matter who they were or what their station in life was – they were entitled to top-notch and ‘free’ medical treatment delivered by healthcare professionals. The GP was not interested in the patient’s social background, but only in alleviating pain and suffering. Today, as the Tories continue to privatise the NHS, this situation has completely changed. Gone is the Socialist idea that inequalities within society cause psychological and physiological illnesses within the working class irrespective of lifestyle, and in its place is the bourgeois notion that illness is the consequence of personal lifestyle choices. This change marks the infiltration of the once Socialist NHS with a thoroughly middle class attitude formulated through centuries of privilege and arrogance. It ignores entirely that capitalist society is unequal and unfair, and that these destructive political, social and cultural forces conspire to adversely affect the psychological and physical health of the working class. If you are ill because of the manner in which society treats you, today’s GPs mark this as a personal failing on your part, caused by the bad decisions you make. Of course, middle class people who access the NHS already adhere to this hyper individualistic view of the world, and can afford to live stress-free lives whilst sipping their designer coffees down the local gym. For such people, their wealth and social status does indeed allow them to purchase a good and comfortable lifestyle, and if they do not like the attitude of their middle class GP, they can always ‘pay’ for a second opinion. GPs working in the modern NHS are nothing more than medicalised accountants tasked with excluding as many people from the NHS as possible as a means to save money. Instead of acknowledging that social pressure causes illnesses, these new GPs blame the individuals for the ailments they suffer. In this regard, these new GPs continue the centuries old bourgeois project of dominating the working class at the point contact.

Lenin, Stalin and the ‘Internationalist’ Nature of the Red Army

000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

The Red Army of Revolutionary Russia was officially formed on the 23rd of February, 1918, although elements of the Czarist Armed Forces had expressed support for the Bolshevik cause during the tumultuous events of late 1917. The October Revolution saw a transformation of the consciousness and labour of humanity. Never before had the working class successfully seized and held onto the means of production and political power. At the time of this remarkable transition, Czarist Russia was engaged in a nightmarish ‘mass war’ with Imperial Germany, but Lenin was well aware that in reality this conflict was between different sections of the International Bourgeoisie, which through its political power, was fighting an egotistical, imperialist war and using the International Working Class as cannon fodder. Whilst tens of thousands of men were murdering one another in Europe, the Heads of State and their middle class lackeys sat back in safety and watched the results come in. The very German working class men being sent to run at Czarist Russian machine guns were exactly the same Proletariat that were being forced to fire these machine guns in the Czarist Army! Lenin had to formulate a Socialist State that acted as a shield for the Soviet people, so that Socialist strength and power could be developed peacefully. Stalin was instrumental even before the death of Lenin (in 1924) in rejecting the ‘syndicalist’ views that abounded at the time, and which wanted to see disconnected and uncoordinated ‘Communes’ operating at a local level of concern and development. Stalin (with Lenin’s agreement) stated that as 90% of the Soviet people were illiterate and poverty striken, they could not be expected to spontaneously develop an advanced understanding of Revolutionary thinking, but needed to be protected and provided with the material conditions to develop their minds and bodies. As this development from nothing would take many decades, Stalin successfully argued, an interim Socialist State would have to be created that mimicked the outer power and strength of a Bourgeois State, but which was thoroughly different within. Eventually, as material conditions improved, and the thinking and physical existence of the Soviet people developed, the conditions for achieving Socialism would be generated that would eventually facilitate the transition into Communism – and the natural ‘dissolving’ of the Soviet State. In the meantime, as the capitalist world wanted to militarily attack and destroy Soviet Russia, a Red Army was needed premised not upon ‘conquering’ the enemy, but rather ‘liberating’ the working class men and women who comprised its rank and file. Whereas the bourgeois armies relied upon racism and nationalism to inspire people to fight for it, the Red Army relied upon the Scientific Socialism of Marx and Engels as interpreted by Lenin. This meant that the Red Army interpreted all ‘enemy’ soldiers as potential ‘Comrades’ temporarily imprisoned in the ranks of the bourgeoisie. The Soviet Red Army was originally a vehicle for working class self-defence, designed to ‘liberate’ the International Working Class, and in theory at least, spread the Socialist Revolution around the world. Lenin had to combat the Imperialist German threat in 1918, whilst striving to apply Socialist Thinking and minimising Russian and German working class deaths. As matters transpired, the Western world (including Japan and Nationalist China) invaded Revolutionary Russia in 1918, but these 14 countries were eventually defeated by the Red Army in 1921. This historical requirement demonstrates that even if an army is premised upon Socialist Thinking, its military ability must still remain top-notch until the danger to Socialism is thoroughly disarmed and removed. Even when fighting for survival, the Red Army never resorted to racism or hatefilled nationalism, this is why it represents a new era in the evolutionary development of humanity.

Reference:

The Bolshevik Revolution 1917-1923 – Volume One: By EH Carr, MacMillan, (1950), Pages 129-135. Stalin wrote a number of theses that successfully ‘rejected’ the ‘Syndicalist’ notions prevalent at the time (i.e. 1918).

Donetsk: 100th Anniversary of the Founding of the Soviet Red Army (1918-2018)

000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

Communist Party of Donetsk

Dear Comrades,

Exactly One hundred years ago today (23.2.1918), the heroic struggle of the Workers ‘and Peasants’ Red Army began for the liberation of humanity from exploitation. Thanks to the armed detachments of workers and peasants, Socialism prevailed not only in Russia, but also in many countries throughout the world. The Red Army soldiers defeated the White Guards, fascism, and fought against world imperialism.

Unfortunately, the temporary defeat of Socialism in the USSR led to the destruction of the Soviet Red Army, but although that battle was lost, the war is not yet over! Comrades, the great victories of the World Proletariat are still ahead, because the future is for the Victory of Socialism!

The Red Army continues to live today! The struggle against world imperialism did not stop even after the collapse of the Soviet Union. The workers and peasants of Latin America and South-East Asia are fighting this noble war. Contributing to this struggle are the military personnel of the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics!

Happy holiday, Comrades!

Central Committee of the Communist Party of Donetsk People’s Republic (CPDPR)

VOTE LABOUR: WEST SUTTON LABOUR MATTERS (3.5.2018)

000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

About an hour after a group of self-important Tories visited our street in Sutton (Southwest London), espousing their neo-liberal nonsense, a very much welcomed ‘Vote Labour’ leaflet fell through our letterbox! The Tories are privatising the NHS and dismantling the British Welfare System – only Jeremy Corbyn has promised to prevent this and returns things to a much better state. In the Sutton Council Election on the 3rd of May – Labour can win seats and Labour can take control of the Council! Ordinary, working class people must register to vote, and then vote for the Labour Party Council candidates. Remember – the Tory and LibDems Government of 2010-2015 was found Guilty of Crimes Against Humanity by the United Nations (UN), because ‘Austerity’ killed around 10,000 people with disabilities through welfare and health-cuts.

000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

 

Thomas Lynn Bradford (1873-1921) Explorer of Consciousness

000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

Thomas Lynn Bradford was just 48 years old when he took his own life. At a time following the mass murder that was WWI, Europeans had lost their belief in a god, and instead had turned toward a number of other philosophies, theologies and theosophy to explain existence and non-existence. As a consequence, Bradford’s death was well documented in the US newspapers of the time, as was the alleged subsequent happenings. Many people in the Western world were interested in spiritualism and the notion of a disembodied after-life, as was Thomas Bradford himself. However, what was different with Bradford was how he was willing to give his life in an empirical experiment to see whether he could communicate from the ‘other side’, with a living collaborator. If he had been proven successful, the world of material science would have been turned upside down, but there are many who think that he was successful, and did communicate if not exactly an after-life, certainly the continuation of conscious awareness.

After placing an advertisement in a local Detroit newspaper, a woman by the name of Ruth Doran came forward and volunteered to be the potential recipient of any post-death message conveyed by Bradford. On the night of the February 5th (around 9pm), 1921, Thomas Bradford returned to his boarding house and is said to have ‘sealed’ the place prior to blowing-out the pilot light on the gas supply. This successfully led to the physical death of Thomas Lynn Bradford. For a time, Bradford became very famous for both the manner and purpose of his self-imposed demise. Many self-proclaimed psychics and mediums dubiously claimed to have communicated with Bradford, with each presenting a narrative that supported their own particular religious or philosophical view of the world. In other words, such individuals were putting words into Bradford’s deceased mouth in the hope of reinforcing this or that view for popularity reasons.

Ruth Doran took a different position, Although she had only recently met Bradford, she often described herself as his ‘friend’. As Bradford was married, there is no indication that he and Doran were romantically involved, but this might not have been completely out of the question. On February 12th, Ruth Doran claimed to have heard Thomas Bradford’s voice which stated:

‘“I am the professor who speaks to you from the Beyond. I have broken through the veil. The help of the living has greatly assisted me.   I simply went to sleep. I woke up and at first did not realize that I had passed on. I find no great change apparent. I expected things to be much different. They are not. Human forms are retained in outline but not in the physical. I have not traveled far. I am still much in the darkness. I see many people. They appear natural.  There is a lightness of responsibility here unlike in life. One feels full of rapture and happiness. Persons of like natures associate. I am associated with other investigators. I do not repent my act.  My present plane is but the first series. I am still investigating the future planes regarding which we in this plane are as ignorant as are earthly beings of the life just beyond human life.’

What I find interesting is that if Thomas Lynn Bradford was of sound mind when he decided to extinguish his own life, and there is no evidence to suggest he wasn’t, then what a brave person he was! This is a man with no wealth who wasn’t very well-known prior to his death, who attempted what might be described as an ’empirical’ experiment into the after-life. It is further interesting to note that his message did not confirm the Judeo-Christian religious view of the after-life, but does seems to be one very similar to numerous spiritualist movements or that view of existence as described by the theosophy movement. Assuming that Bradford’s brain was nolonger functioning, and that his body was in a state of decay, the best that could be said for his life processes was that they were in a ‘dormant’ state. This is an important observation from the position of Cryogenics, where it is possible to ‘freeze the body and brain upon death, and prevent any further tissue damage that would occur as the body structure breaks down through natural decomposition. The next stage in this theoretical process is the defrosting of the corpse and the re-animation of the bodily functions. Again, there is no reason in theory why an intact body cannot be re-activated and brought back to life. Science can deep freeze a recently deceased body (or body parts), and science can defrost the body (or body parts), but as of yet the final stage of restoring life cannot be achieved. My point is this, if one day ‘life’ can be fully restored within a previously dead body, and if the personality of the individual automatically re-emerges and communicates clearly, then it is obvious that there is no after-life, and that all notions of such a journey are the figments of the imagination. At physical death, the life processes become dormant and non-functional – they do not travel as a disembodied entity to some other plane simply because these life process are the product of biological function and not spiritual transmigration. As and when Cryogenics solves the riddle of existence, the theistic religious view will be finally proven wrong. A person cannot simultaneously be in a heavenly and realm and STILL in their bodies. If the body of Thomas Lynn Bradford had been frozen and kept on ice for decades, perhaps if he was defrosted and brought back to life he would say that ‘nothing’ happened when he died, and that he had no awareness or ability to send any message whilst in the dormant state.

All European Countries Should Leave the EU!

000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

Why do some leftists think the EU is progressive and in the best interests of the workers? This is because of the Trotskyite left which dominates Labour. This inverted view holds that masses of disempowered workers being shunted from one economic zone to another (dependent upon the whim of the middle classes) equates to ‘internationalism’ and ‘multiculturalism’, when in fact it is the worst form of worker oppression. The dominant middle classes do not move en mass around Europe because they own the means of production, it is only the ‘de-Unionised’ workers that are forced to leave their homes and families in search of poorly paid work, long hours and no security. This is why the EU is nothing but a capitalist charter that advocates the abolishment of any and all national Welfare States and National Health Services. A worker can only be forced to migrate for work if there is no local unemployment benefit or Socialised healthcare available. Migratory workers arrive at their destination not as friends, students or inquisitive travellers, but rather as aggressive competitors conditioned to fight for every paid job and scrap of food. This destroys local economies, drives down wages, and reduces once habitable areas into barracks or dominators for migrant workers. This invariably effects working class areas which lose their distinctiveness, sense of community and economic stability, but does not affect the gated communities of the middle class who are protected from the effects of the system that they have established to enrich themselves further. What the working class must understand is that the enemy is the EU and not fellow workers from other countries (despite local pressures and conflicts). This situation has come about because the EU has destroyed strong Unions and pro-Union laws throughout Europe, and is attempting to turn Europe into the US. Racism is not the answer, but rather correct dialectical analysis and the exercising of good political judgement. Workers need to build their Unions domestically, and secure a future for their families wherever they happen to have been born. Ripping families apart is a terrible consequence of EU policy, and part of the desperate plight the workers are being placed within. The good news is that more and more international workers are becoming aware of what the EU is doing and are starting to oppose it. The only reason the anti-EU stance has become associated with racism is because that is exactly what the EU wants everyone to think. When the BBC (and media in general) use the fascistic UKIP as the only opposition to EU membership – excluding the Communist and Socialist left from the debate – the stage is set to brain-wash the workers into thinking that their comprehensive exploitation is the best path available to them, and to question the validity of the EU is tantamount to embracing neo-Nazism! The irony is that the EU historically grew-out of the US post-WWII meddling in European affairs, and the anti-Soviet, anti-Communist nature of that meddling. The EU is aggressively anti-working class and exercises the greatest racial exclusion of any political entity since the 1882 Chinese Exclusion Act in the US. This is because the EU is an exclusive rich White man’s club that does not want to see migrants from India, Africa, or China entering the EU Zone to compete for jobs. Those people who mistakenly believe that the EU is multicultural because it allows lots of different ‘White’ people to ‘mix’ should think again. The EU has a level of racism within its legislation the likes of which has not been seen since the times of Nazi Germany! Finally, in the Ukraine the EU is actively supporting the neo-Nazi ‘Maidan’ regime and seeks to spread EU domination into Russia.

Cheddar Man – a View from China (科学家还原出最古老的英国人 皮肤竟是黑色)

000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

Recently, researchers synthesized a face for one of Britain’s oldest modern humans – from the Cheddar Man skeletal remains (found within Gough Cave, Cheddar Gorge in 1903), which is 10,000 years of age – and found that his eyes were blue, and his skin and hair were Black.

Researchers at the Museum of Natural History in London released a newly restored model of what it is believed to be the actual appearance of Cheddar Man. They said that a scientific paper will be published later this month. According to their scientific study, the ancient DNA extracted from intact bones showed that he lacks the genetic variants of the light-colored skin inherited in many Europeans.

Researchers already know that some Europeans were dark-skinned and blue-eyed during this period, but Cheddar Man revealed that the assumptions previously made about the lighter complexions of the skin and hair of the early British Isles were wrong – and that around 4800 years ago, dark-skin was very much the norm in the UK.

Original Chinese Language Source:

http://3c.ycwb.com/2018-02/11/content_25992963.htm

科学家还原出最古老的英国人 皮肤竟是黑色

来源:封面新闻  发表时间:2018-02-11 13:59
近日,研究人员给英国最古老的现代人之一合成了一张脸——来自Cheddar峡谷Gough’s Cave年龄有10000岁的“Cheddar Man”——他们发现他的眼睛是蓝色的,皮肤和头发是黑色的。

伦敦自然历史博物馆的研究人员公布了一项新的复原计划。他们说,本月晚些时候,一份科学论文即将发表。根据他们的研究报告,科学家在完整的骨骼中鉴定出的古代DNA表明,他缺乏在欧洲人身上遗传的浅色皮肤的基因变异体。

研究人员已经知道,这一时期的一些欧洲人皮肤黝黑,眼睛蓝蓝的,但是Cheddar Man揭示了以前关于不列颠群岛早期居民皮肤和头发颜色较淡的假设是错误的——这些特征直到4800年前才在英国流行开来。

Gun Control Laws in the USSR

000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

Original Russian Language Article: http://www.online812.ru/2012/06/15/008/

(Research and Translated by Adrian Chan-Wyles PhD)

Translator’s Note: Although workers may defend themselves during Revolutionary periods within history, they do so as a ‘collective’ and once the Revolution is achieved, arms are removed from within civil society. Individuals using fire-arms to defend themselves from one is merely a bourgeois deception. Whilst killing one another over stupid things, the working class is prevented from uniting and over-throwing the bourgeoisie. I have translated here, only an extract of this modern, Russian language text regarding the history of weapon ownership from 1649 until the present time (post-1991). It concludes by stating that in 2000, Russia joined the European Convention on the Control of the Acquisition and Storage of Firearms by Individuals, but since it has not been ratified by the State Duma, the convention does not yet apply. The State Duma has been ratified due to te EU, US and UK actively encouraging and supporting neo-Nazism in Eastern Ukraine, and throughout Eastern Europe as a means to encroach upon Russian sovereignty and to attack and destroy Socialism throughout the Russian sphere of influence. However, this article argues that prior to the USSR, the ownership of weaponry in feudal Russia was far more liberal. This is true, but it has to be taken into account that only the nobility could afford to own proper weaponry, and as that nobility owned all the land, controlled the legal system, police and military, a rich person could kill an ordinary person with little legal consequence, whereas if a poor person killed a rich person, the State would apply torture and public execution as a punishment. Weapon ownership in pre-Soviet Russia was a direct result of class privilege used to oppress the masses. Following the 1917 October Revolution, the Bolsheviks took steps to control weapon ownership and remove most weapons from civil society. This action was carried-out to remove any and all weaponry from the hands of counter-revolutionaries, reactionaries, class enemies and foreign enemies. A Socialist Society uses science to develop a peaceful and safe civil society for all citizens to develop their psychological and physical abilities without fear of attack, injury or death. The defence of a Socialist Society lies with the State and the properly trained and disciplined Red Army. As a Socialist State only acts in the favour of the Working Class, and given that bourgeois notions of antagonistic individualism are no longer relevant or encouraged, there is no need for Soviet citizens to be armed to defend themselves from one another (as is the case in the capitalist USA). When the people needed to defend their Socialist Society from fascist attack, the Soviet State provided weaponry for use outside the Red Army (as seen with the Partizan Movement). Although gun-control legislation developed over many decades, the August 1st, 1983 ‘Criminal Code of the RSFSR’ gives Article 218 as stating:

‘Article 218: Illegal Carrying, Keeping, Acquisition, Making, or Marketing of Weapons, Ammunition, or Explosives.

The carrying, keeping, acquisition, making, or marketing of a firearm (except a smooth-bore hunting piece), ammunition, or explosives without the respective authorisation, shall be punished by deprivation of freedom for a term of up to five years.

A person who has voluntarily surrendered a firearm, ammunition, oe explosives which he has kept without the respective authorisation shall be relieved from criminal responsibility.

The carrying, making, or marketing of daggers, Finnish daggers, or other sidearms without the respective authorisation, except for those localities where the carrying of a sidearm is an appurtenance of national costume or connected with the hunting trade, shall be punished by deprivation of freedom for a term of up to two years, or by correctional tasks for the same term (as amended 11th July, 1974 and 3rd December, 1982.’

Basic Documents on the Soviet Legal System, by WE Butler, Oceana Publications, (1983), Pages 376-377

It is interesting to note that the UK and much of Europe retains a civil society free of fire-arm ownership, but retains the problem of bourgeois oppression through governmental agency such as the police and military, etc. Even in the UK – where it is a stereo-type to assume British police are unarmed – it is more and more a common sight to see heavily armed police officers patrolling the streets as part of the dubious US ‘War on Terror’. This observation must be interpreted as a spread of the violence inherent within US capitalism. ACW 19.2.2018

Gun Control Laws in the USSR

Already in the first days of Soviet power, one of the main tasks of the new regime was the complete withdrawal of weapons from private individual ownership. On December 10th, 1918, the Council of People’s Commissars issued a decree on the surrender of all arms, in which stated:

“1. As a means to benefit the entire population, all institutions within civil society, are to hand over all the serviceable and faulty rifles, machine guns and revolvers of all types, including cartridges and ammunition of any pattern;

2. For concealment of weapons, failure to surrender or opposition to the surrender of any guilty persons will result in imprisonment for a period of from one year to ten … ”

By this decree, all previously issued weapons storage permits were declared invalid, and persons who had weapons were required to surrender them. The weapons were not confiscated from members of the RCP (B.), but not more than one rifle and one revolver per person was allowed to be owned. In this case, the weapon was assigned to a specific owner.

According to the instructions in this decree, the right to store and carry weapons was given to ordinary party members. Thus, in Soviet Russia the right to arms acquired party affiliation.

On July 28, 1920, the decree “On hunting” limited the circle of persons entitled to possession of a hunting rifle. The issuance of certificates for the right to hunt was carried out by the organs of the People’s Commissariat of Agriculture, and the registration of weapons and the registration of cartridges to it – by the NKVD. In 1922, the first Criminal Code of the Russian Federation was adopted, which criminalized (up to 1 year) the possession of firearms without proper authorization (Article 220). The duty to issue permits for the storage of weapons, including hunting, was entrusted to the NKVD.

Decree of the Central Executive Committee of the USSR of 12 December 1924 “On the procedure for the production, trade, storage, use, recording and transportation of weapons, firearms, explosive shells and explosives”, all weapons were classified and divided into categories. From then on, the object of buying and selling for ordinary citizens was limited only to smooth-bore hunting weapons. The remaining categories of weapons became the prerogative of those who were put on various types of guard duty.

Illegal possession of weapons was severely punished. From March 1933, the manufacture, storage, purchase, sale of firearms (except hunting weapons) without proper authorization was punishable by imprisonment for up to five years. In 1935, a similar punishment was imposed for the storage of bladed weapons.

At the beginning of the Great Patriotic War, all citizens were invited to surrender the rifled and smoothbore firearms, as well as cold steel available for personal use to the police and local Soviets. With regards to trophy weapons seized by citizens living in the settlements liberated by the Red Army units, these were obliged to be “handed in within 24 hours to military units, NKVD organs or local authorities”. Persons who did not hand over weapons and ammunition in time were subject to criminal prosecution.

On August 17, 1953, by decree of the Council of Ministers of the USSR, citizens were granted the right to freely acquire hunting smooth-bore weapons. Prior to that, citizens were required to show hunting permits when buying. However, this order lasted only for a short time – less than 6 years – and by the decision of the Council of Ministers of the USSR on May 11, 1959, the free sale of hunting smooth-bore guns was canceled. Henceforth, the sale of hunting rifles could once again only be made upon presentation of membership cards of the hunters’ society.

During the same period, a draft law was planned, according to which it was intended to allow trustworthy citizens (mainly members of the CPSU and Komsomol) to acquire short-barreled firearms as their personal property. However, this law was not enacted.

In 1960, a new Criminal Code of the RSFSR was adopted. Article 218 was significantly relaxed: for illegally carrying, storing, manufacturing or selling firearms, a sentence of imprisonment of up to 2 years was determined. Storage of bladed weapons was excluded from the crime.

In 1974, Article 218 of the Criminal Code of the RSFSR was again tightened (up to 5 years of imprisonment). True, a note appeared: “A person who voluntarily surrenders firearms is released from criminal liability”.

China’s Governmental Position Regarding the Tobacco Industry

000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

Original Chinese Language Article: ‘烟草业’ (Tobacco Industry)

(Research and Translation by Adrian Chan-Wyles)

Translator’s Note: I came across an American Youtube video that presented the idea that China possessed a vibrant tobacco industry, and that this was ‘stupid’ and ‘deceitful’. The implication was that China has a duplicitous political system that does not have the best interests of the Chinese people at its heart. The European imperial presence in China from 17th – 20th century introduced the Western habit of modern smoking to China. This was particularly intense during the pro-Western Nationalist Government Era which lasted from 1912 – 1949. Today, the Communist Government of China has inherited a bad habit from the West that has now been transformed into an advantage for the Chinese people. China has developed its own unique tobacco industry, even though the rate of smokers in China remains half of that found in the West. The tobacco industry in China is State Owned and pays substantial amounts in taxes and other forms of finance. It provides jobs for millions of people, and has helped impoverished areas to become affluent. So robust is this industry that it voluntarily finances projects such as the building of schools and advanced scientific facilities. Despite this, whilst developing new types of risk-free cigarettes, the Government of China continuously warns its citizens of the health risks associated with smoking conventional cigarettes. The following article explains why the Communist Party of China allows the tobacco industry to exist, when Chinese culture generally advocates healthy living. The tobacco industry in China is highly developed from a scientific and TCM point of view, which means cigarettes are being developed in China not only with minimal health risks, but also with some health benefits. ACW 18.2.2018

The Tobacco Industry in China

As the community realizes that smoking is harmful to health, the tobacco industry constantly makes use of science and technology to reduce the harm caused by cigarettes. This effort has not only achieved remarkable results, but is an ongoing process. One may wonder why the tobacco industry still exists and continues to develop in China today, when the unhealthy aspects of smoking have yet to be solved. This is because, fundamentally, the tobacco industry as it exists outweighs the disadvantages that a) already exist within society, or b) it might cause to society.

The social benefits generated by the tobacco industry outweigh the disadvantages – this is the standard that must be used. Three points must be clarified: First, the tobacco industry’s advantages outweigh the disadvantages. Society is an organic whole formed by multiple elements that are based upon interrelated material production activities. The angle of view should be multidimensional. Second, the tobacco industry’s social benefits outweigh the disadvantages within existential space-time conditions, that is, the tobacco industry is neither good nor bad. Its usefulness should be interpreted in a country-specific manner, through the stage of socio-economic development within which it is located. We hold that we should evaluate our country’s tobacco industry from the material reality of our country and oppose empty generalities. Thirdly, starting from the material reality of our country, we can measure whether an act, process or product outweighs any disadvantages. The most fundamental consideration depends upon whether it is conducive to the development of social productive forces, whether it is conducive to raising the overall national strength, and whether it is conducive to raising the living standards of the people. In our country, the tobacco industry has the function of accelerating the accumulation of funds and increasing the financial capacity of the country, whilst also supporting other industries. Why do governments in all countries promote tobacco cessation without canceling the tobacco industry at the same time? This is because all development costs money and the tobacco industry generates substantial income. The development of our country is now at an urgent period. We cannot let any chance go by for development of the economy. The tobacco industry accumulates large amounts of funds for the promotion of China’s economic construction, and as such represents a firm material reality.

Our country is a developing country. The tobacco industry’s tax revenue accounts for about one-ninth of our country’s tax revenue. Without this one-ninth revenue, there would be shortage of basic industries and infrastructural development, and local businesses would suffer.  This means that the gross national product of our country, the development of our country, and the improvement of our people’s living standard would all be seriously affected. This is by no means alarmist. There are 1.3 million tobacco farmers, 500,000 tobacco workers in the tobacco industry, and 5 million merchants who sell cigarettes. People as statistics in society are also people in reality. Only when we look at people from the position of social reality, can we determine the pros and cons, and assess the best direction of travel. What is good for society, in fact, is good for the people. Our country aims not only at developing economic strength, but also enhancing national power. The material reality which is the basis of society can only be strengthened through economic development.

First, smoking is harmful to our health. However, any disease has a multi-cause. It is unscientific and unfair to blame the loss caused by the disease on the tobacco industry. Smoking may cause cancer, but smoking is not the only cause of cancer.

Second, the economic benefits created by the tobacco industry are by no means limited to taxes and profits turned over to the State. For example, during the period of the 7th Five-Year Plan, more than 2 billion yuan of the peasants’ income in our country came from the cultivation of tobacco. In many places, poverty has been lifted by relying on the production of tobacco leaves.

Thirdly, 1.3 million peasants in our country farm tobacco and there are over hundreds of thousands of people closely linked with the tobacco industry. This is an unavoidable objective reality in our country. If the conclusion was reached that the tobacco industry was doing more harm than good to our society and it was abolished, then the jobs of 1.3 million farmers wuold be lost, and the lives of hundreds of thousands of people would be directly and negatively affected. As matters stand, the existence of the tobacco industry in China at this present time contributes to both the social and economic stability of the country.

Fourthly, there are nearly 300 million people smoking in our country. In view of the fact that smoking is harmful to health, and that the Government of China cannot get rid of smoking habits simply through issuing administrative orders, our government reminds smokers that this habit is bad for their health. On the other hand, the tobacco industry has been ordered to use scientific development to make cigarettes as harmless as possible.

At present, China’s per capita consumption of cigarettes is low, less than half of that in Western countries. Rural population accounts for 80% of the country’s consumption, and its sales of cigarettes account for 60% of the national total. There are a lot of handmade cigarettes and other forms of smoke consumption in rural areas. As people’s incomes continue to grow, they will be able to afford good quality filtered cigarettes.  As smoking certainly has negative health related issues associated with it, the tobacco industry in China has been transformed into a facility seeking healthier methods of smoking. This technical transformation has three aspects:

1) Gradually adopt internationally accepted approaches to research. For example: increase the filter, improve the roll paper, improve tobacco quality, tobacco sheets, ventilation and dilution, and reduce the amount of cigarette tar.

2) Explore a selective focus on ways to reduce harmful substances in tar. For example, in 1986, Huazhong Institute of Technology and Wuhan Cigarette Factory carried-out research into trace elements within tobacco additives. According to foreign data, low incidences of lung cancer has been linked to 0.46ppm of selenium content in cigarettes, whilst high incidences of lung cancer linked to 0.16ppm of selenium content in cigarette. The tobacco used in the Wuhan Factory has a selenium content of 0.22ppm. According to the advice of China’s nutritionists, the intake of selenium for Chinese adults should be 70 micrograms / person · per day, whilst the actual average intake is deficient and stands at 30 grams / person · per day. This shows that adding an appropriate amount of selenium is beneficial.

3) Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) has a long history and is a treasure trove of knowledge. The tobacco industry has been working with TCM experts to develop a distinctly Chinese cigarette that does not contain any of the health risks associated with its foreign counter-part. At the moment, hybrid cigarettes are being developed that will eventually evolve away from all harmful health implications. Thanks to the joint efforts of experts and scholars from the medical and health sector and the tobacco industry, some new mixed cigarette products have successively been put on the market and exported through a series of tests and accreditation, which have been well received by consumers. New hybrid cigarettes have to go through extensive clinical trials within medical and health departments, to test the pharmacology and toxicity of drugs and chemicals used, and to further analyse and review procedures. China’s medicinal resources are very rich. The Ming Dynasty Pharmacist Li Shizhen compiled a ‘Compendium of Native Chinese Medicinal Plants’, containing up to 1892 different kinds of medicinal plants, used to generate 11000 prescriptions. Different drugs are used to treat different conditions, and today there are currently more than 40 cigarette factories in China producing more than 50 kinds of TCM-derived cigarettes, containing different natural TCM ingredients.

At present, the tobacco industry is facing new situations and challenges. As people’s living standards improve, the effects of smoking upon people’s health is gaining more attention. Although there are different opinions, most countries are promoting cessation of smoking, with May 31st of each year being designated as ‘World No Tobacco Day,’ This general trend around the world restricts smoking in public places, with some countries passing laws prohibiting smoking altogether, and causing huge losses to tobacco companies (often settled with compensation payouts). Even the world’s largest tobacco company – Philip Morris of the United States – also recognises the harm caused by smoking. with the numbers of smokers in the United States and Britain has been reduced by more than 20%, and Singapore seeking to become a completely non-smoking country. Smoking being harmful to health seems to be the conclusion. Smoking is harmful to health because of the tar content produced during the combustion process of tobacco. This negatively affects the human trachea and is linked to lung carcinogens. In order to protect people’s health there must be produced low-tar cigarettes. Improving the safety of smoking has swept the countries in the world and is the direction of development for the tobacco industry in the future. Flue-cured tobacco tar content is high, drying tobacco tar content is low. If flue-cured tobacco leaves are mixed with 30% to 40% of sun-cured tobacco, then an effective hybrid cigarette is produced. This is one of the more effective measures to produce low tar cigarettes. Foreign hybrid cigarettes have been developed earlier, with faster progress, containing more brands and better quality. The tar content has dropped below 12mg / per cigarette, accounting for more than 70% of the total cigarette market. Ultra-low tar cigarettes (below 6mg / cigarette) are also being developed. The gap between our country and this foreign development is substantial, as the development of blended cigarettes is relatively new, whilst there is less brands, a poorer quality, and poorer sales, accounting for only 5% of the market. Tobacco-fueled cigarettes still dominate the market with less than 15 mg / of tar, implying poorer safety. After China’s accession to the WTO, foreign low-tar hybrid cigarettes will surely enter China in large quantities, and the cigarette market in China will be seriously affected. Vigorously developing low tar cigarettes to improve the safety of smoking and enhance the competitiveness with foreign cigarettes to keep the domestic market and prevent financial outflows is China’s direction of movement.

Original Chinese Language Article:

https://baike.baidu.com/item/烟草业/752153

UK: A Tale of Two Disappearances Under New Labour

When Socialist structures such as the Welfare State and National Health Service (NHS) are initiated within a society that retains its predatory capitalist nature, then the fundamental inequalities of the capitalist system are retained. People may be prevented from starving, dying of disease, and receive a rudimentary education, but still occupy an ‘alienated’ position within society that can lead to social isolation and exclusion from the mainstream. This is the reality of capitalism and not any weaknesses of the Socialist System. If capitalism is allowed to continue so as to enrich and empower the middle and upper classes, many are born into a working class that has projected upon it, highly dysfunctional psychological and behavioural modes of existence. It is exactly this dysfunctionality that people Jeremy Kyle (and others in the entertainment industry) encourage and take advantage of. Yes, individuals are responsible for their actions, but it would be incorrect to ignore the effect of social conditioning upon character formation, or the responsibility that the capitalist system must take for much aberrant behaviour. The following BBC Panorama programme aired in 2008 during the times of the New Labour attacks on the Welfare State and NHS. Notice how police officers are allowed to voice highly rightwing attitudes about the Welfare State – and be allowed to package these views as being part of effecting policing. This unsympathetic ‘working class’ disappearance (and deception) about Shannon Matthews may be compared to the highly sympathetic manner in which the White, middle class McCann family are treated.

Portuguese police are of the opinion that the McCanns killed their daughter and hid the body. However, because of their association with the New Labour Government, Tony Blair had diplomatic passports issued that allowed the McCanns to leave Portugal and escape arrest and prosecution – despite the fact that both parents lied to the police. In the UK, there has been nothing but official praise for the McCanns who were so distraught about their daughter’s disappearance that they felt they had to sell their story to the rightwing and racist Sun newspaper. The British Government basically set the stage for every doubt and inconsistency in the McCann’s story to be ignored and replaced with an overly sentimental sympathy that obliterates logic and reason. These two examples demonstrate ‘class’ within British society and show how even in 2007 and  2008 journalistic standards were slipping at the BBC.

Following the Shannon Matthews case, the rightwing and racist Daily Mail and Daily Telegraph newspapers initiated a wide=spread attack upon the principle of the Welfare State – linking the receipt of benefits with ‘greed’ and ‘criminality’ (without ever providing any reliable academic evidence). The rightwing press never addressed the inequalities within capitalist society, but instead attacked the very Socialist principles designed to alleviate such social problems. As soon as New Labour had come into power in 1997, disabled people were attacked for receiving Disability Living Allowance (DLA). This attack upon the vulnerable within British society was extended into all areas, and a colleague of mine who worked for the Audit Commission, attended a meeting in 2009 with a New Labour Minister, and was informed that the Labour Party was going to abolish the Welfare State and privatize the NHS over a 15 year period – providing they won all the subsequent elections. Of course, Gordon Brown lost the 2010 General Election, and the Tory-LibDems Coalition took power and immediately set about putting the New Labour policies into practice. The BBC Panorama documentary about Shannon Matthews looks very much like New Labour anti-Welfare State propaganda.

%d bloggers like this: