Invalidation of the Worker – Part II (4.12.2017)


My original article entitled The Invalidation of the Worker – A Study of Disability in Capitalist Society was published in October, 2013. It is logical to assume that as ‘Austerity’ has continued unabated, thousands of disabled who were alive to read it then, are nolonger with us now. The proliferation of articles that over-simplify and misrepresent ‘disability’ are common place within bourgeois society. Most miss the vital point of economic exclusion, and focus instead upon misguided notions of bourgeois individuality – making such puerile statements as ‘if only disabled people were viewed as individuals and not their disabilities’, or ‘disabled people should not be viewed as dysfunctional able-bodied’, and so on and so forth. It is not that there is no truth to statements such as these, but that this kind of narrative is entirely bourgeois in nature, and as such, does not address the central reality of economic exclusion. Why should a person with a disability be categorised as ‘disabled’, when ‘able-bodied’ people are only referred to in that manner, within a temporary discourse which distinguishes the non-disabled from the disabled (privileging the former and disempowering the latter). In reality this situation is a matter of Marxist-Leninist critique, and involves the exclusion of the disabled community not only from bourgeois society, but also from proletariat society. This discrimination manifests as economic and cultural impoverishment due to a permanent exclusion from the work-force. This has to be remedied as part of an ongoing Revolutionary struggle that rejects Trotskyism and fascism, and aims at the accomplishment of the ‘right to work’ in a suitable toiling environment. This means that the ‘right to work’ should be divorced from the immediate principle of blatant profit generation, and be redefined as an agency of psychological and physical self-development which is also a ‘Human Right’. All discrimination currently deployed by an indifferent bourgeois society should be immediately outlawed, and ‘new’ social, economic, political and cultural structures designed and put in place. Traditional unions should implement anti-discriminatory policies to tackle negative attitudes toward the disabled workers, held within the minds of their able-bodied membership. Finally, tha small number of disabled people who do work must be understood to be ‘privileged’ and something of a bourgeois ‘fetish’ that has no bearing on the experience of the majority of disabled people.

Any assessment of disability is incomplete, if it does not acknowledgement the total and permanent exclusion of people with disabilities from the job market, and therefore from the equal and fair ‘right’ to gain ‘dignity’ and ‘self-respect’ through participation in the process of earning a living and financially caring for themselves and a family, etc. The situation surrounding disability is made so opaque within the economies of the developed West, that whatever enquiry is made into the matter, it is invariably made by the able-bodied, and riddled with the very discriminative thinking that causes the problem in the first place. Many able-bodied people are so illiterate when it comes to discussing disability that they are not even aware that a problem exists, or hold prejudicial viewpoints to explain why disabled people are lacking in their particular work environments. This type of discrimination cuts through all classes and ethnic groupings, and possesses the potential to ‘unite’ disabled people of both genders, from incredibly varied backgrounds, but the problem exists of disabled people being condemned to a state of isolated individualism, where society forces them to sit outside of mainstream life, viewing themselves as somehow deficient and unworthy of inclusion. Another issue is that the term ‘disability’ includes a vast array of psychological and physical problems, that can stem from severe cognitive and behavioural issues, to an individual having poor eye-sight, or deafness in one ear, for example.

Unionization is lacking amongst disabled people in general (due to the hyper-individualism they are forced to endure), and because amongst certain strands of the disabled intelligentsia (evident online) there exists those who reject any notion of leftwing politics, and espouse a rightwing political rhetoric. This rhetoric, aligning itself with the far-right, explains the tens of thousands of disability deaths relating to the Tory (and LibDems) ‘Austerity’ measures since 2010, as arising from the presence of ‘migrants’ in the UK. This distorted and fascistic thinking imagines that benefits and medical services have been withdrawn from the disability community and re-diverted to migrant communities, and suggests that disabled people should ‘unite’ with the far-right and participate in attacks upon these migrant communities. The fact that the political far-right routinely targets the disabled community appears to be lost on these kind of mistaken individuals. Since I wrote ‘Invalidation of the Workers’ in 2013, the UK has been found Guilty of Crimes Against Humanity (2016) by the United Nations for the deaths of at least 10,000 disabled people (due to the sudden withdrawal of benefits, social services and medical treatment). The UN Report noted that the behaviour of the British press was reminiscent to that of the Hitlerite media operating in 1930’s Berlin, for its vicious rhetorical attack upon the disabled community, and for its unquestioning support of destructive Tory and LibDems policy. In a recent report, Oxford University has linked ‘Austerity’ to the deaths of 30,000 people in the UK, whilst an article in the rightwing Metro newspaper suggests the real figure is nearer 200,000.

Disabled people are in reality a ‘collective’ that has been disempowered and disenfranchised for centuries. Although they are made to exist excluded from the work-force and in a fabricated state of psychological and physical isolation, they cannot be ‘forced’ into a work-place that does not exist to accept them, as the work-place of the able-bodied is default set to treat the disabled worker as a liability to the firm, and a potential loss in earning power and profitability. It is this type of fascistic thinking that interprets a disabled human-being inhabiting a wheel-chair as being a ‘fire hazard’ and an ‘offense’ under Health and Safety legislation. This is in the same category of institutional discrimination that includes anti-discrimination legislation that is ‘voluntary’ to uphold. People with disabilities require ‘civil rights’ legislation – the kind promised by Tony Blair in 1997 prior to his reneging – and instead beginning the modern era of political attacks upon the disability community. It is only through a substantial change in the law that the permanent barriers to people with disabilities entering the work-force will be removed. Simply stopping benefits does not solve the problem, but it does lead to immense levels of poverty, starvation and suicide.

When Britain Ethnically Cleansed Its Chinese Populations

Racism from the Tory Party was an important ingredient for their political campaigns for London Mayor (Zach Goldsmith’s Islamophobia) and the recent EU Referendum for the UK (which saw Boris Johnson and Nigel Farage united through racial hysteria).  Indeed, the Tory Party is the natural party of choice for mainstream British racists, and when these ignorant individuals feel that the Tory Party is not doing enough to represent that racism, they migrate to the far-right off-shoots of the Tory Party – namely UKIP, BNP, NF and Britain First, etc.  So biased is the British political system at this present time, that an activist of the Christian-Nazi Britain First movement can murder a Labour MP – and the fascist organisation that spawned him (Britain First) continues to functions normally today (presumably creating more rightwing murderers).  The treatment of Britain First maybe compared to peaceful British Muslims groups that were ‘banned’ by David Cameron for stating that they thought the wars in the Middle East are wrong.  There is no doubt that British racism played its part in the recent Brexit ‘out’ vote, although I do not personally think it was a deciding factor.  Nevertheless, it would be wrong to all the victims of British racism – past and present – to deny that there is no racism in the UK.

I fully acknowledge that many ‘white’ British people are opposed to racism, and fight and resist it in their own ways (that are often unacknowledged).  This resistance to tyranny is the foundation of the true British people, and I believe, the essence of Brexit.  However, it is important to understand the past so that it is not repeated through ignorance.  According to police reports, racial hate crime was up by 57% following the Brexit vote – with apparently Polish people taking the brunt – although it is probably correct to state that ALL perceived foreigners in the UK (which includes British-born Black, Asian and Chinese people) have suffered increased racialised aggression.  A point missed by the UK media is that Polish people (who should be left in peace) are ‘white’, and that consequently, the hatred aimed at them by other white people is ‘prejudice’ and not ‘racism’.  True racism is aimed by white people (who possess all the power) at Black, Asian and Chinese people who do not.  Polish people may well be from another country, but their European ethnicity is the same as the ‘White’ ethnicity that culturally dominates the UK – albeit in its distinct British form.  I condemn any and all crimes against Polish people, but do not believe that they are the victims of post-Brexit  ‘racism’ in the manner that Black, Asian and Chinese people in the UK are (a subject the British media is quiet about).  To the British media it seems that hate-filled prejudice is only reportable if white people are suffering it.

After the British victories of WWI and WWII, the British government, aided and abetted by the rightwing press, encouraged a highly toxic racist and xenophobic attitude in the UK that called for the expulsion of all ‘foreigners’ from British soil.  This attitude of hate-filled ‘confidence’ was used to bind the country together and used non-white people as the scapegoat.  In 1919, the British government was concerned that the British working class would rise-up (like the Russians) and create a Socialist State in the UK (despite the fact that the UK invaded Russia n 1918 in an attempt to crush the successful Bolsheviks).  Thousands of Chinese people had fought alongside the British Army in France during WWI and many had settled in the UK.  However, n 1919, the British government sent the British Army into Liverpool and rounded-up 20,000 Chinese people at bayonet-point – to the general applause of the white British population.  These people were placed on boats and forcibly ‘returned’ to China.  This is why the population of Chinese people dropped to a few hundred.  Following the victory of WWI, the British government used the agency of ‘racism’ to divert the British working class from revolution.  Many people will be surprised to learn that the Labour Party of 1945 also rounded-up Chinese men from the streets of London in 1946 and forcibly returned them to China – breaking-up families, with those who remained never knowing what happened to their relatives.  English women who had married Chinese men were warned by the police and social services that they were sexually deviant, and that their ‘mixed’ children should be taken into care (as many were).  The descendants of those who suffered this ethnic cleansing in 1946 still live in the UK today, with their story being revealed by the BBC journalist George Alagiah in his documentary entitled ‘Mixed Britannia’.





Racism and Prejudice as False Consciousness


It is not a country or nation state that is racist, but rather a privileged class of people.  This class is the international bourgeoisie which is dominant throughout most countries in the world.  Countries are racist not because they are geographical entities, but because they are run by a class that continuously perpetuates the ideology of racism as part of its strategy to prevent the international working class from realising its predicament, and effectively uniting to do something about it.  Therefore racism is a false consciousness that destroys working class hegemony, and renders each working class person into the disempowered state of isolated individual.  As the international working class is composed of many different and distinct ethnicities, religious groups and cultural identities, the dominant bourgeoisie utilises racism as a means to create a false division in the minds of the workers, and to encourage those workers to exist in a constant state of antagonism and aggression toward one another.  If the workers are busy fighting amongst themselves because of the racism imported into their mind-set by the bourgeois media and education system, then they will be unable to cognise their true situation and realise that they in fact exist in a state of permanent subjugation at the hands of the bourgeoisie.  The function of racism is to prevent insight into the real nature of reality, and it has been justified by the bourgeoisie as a ‘science’ that supposedly links the apparent differences in physicality with differences in genetic structure, etc, which assumes (falsely) that skin-colour ascribes ‘superiority’ or ‘inferiority’ to an ethnic group.  This is not science, but mythology in the service of bourgeois privilege and its maintenance.

The international bourgeoisie developed historically in the West and has evolved to represent white, European power and privilege throughout the world.  The bourgeois dominance of different societies was spread from Europe into Africa, Asia and the Americas through the agency of empire, imperialism and colonisation.  This project saw the European bourgiesie extend its influence beyond the oppression of the European working class and into other areas of the world.  This seizing of political power in other countries was accomplished through the use of military force and the demonization of non-European cultures through the use of Western Christianity.  The bourgeoisie continued to oppress the European working class through political and cultural domination, but formulated the ideology of racism as a means to dominate the non-European peoples of other countries (many of whom had not yet formed a ‘working class’).  This ideology was then educated into the minds of the European working class by the bourgeois education system, and served as the primary means of interaction between Europeans and non-Europeans.  Although working class people were oppressed by the bourgeoisie, the new lie was that at least they were ‘white’ and therefore racially superior to the ‘non-white’ peoples of the world.  This developed from the bourgeoisie encountering different peoples who possessed differing complexions, and it was this apparent ‘difference’ in skin-colour that the bourgeoisie focused upon as the main distinguishing factor when dealing with other cultures, so much so, in fact, that a highly aggressive and destructive pseudo-science developed around it.

When the European bourgeoisie oppressed the European working class, skin-colour was not an issue as both classes were of the same ethnicity, and shared a common culture.  The development of racism is solely a bourgeois class interest and nothing more, but it has been made to infect the minds of the working class who have absolutely nothing to gain from it, as it prevents their uniting in such a manner that can challenge (and over-throw) the dominant bourgeoisie.  However, it must also be understood that ideological racism is a white, European invention that has been spread throughout the world through European imperialism, and that as an ideology, it only serves to empower white people (albeit of the middle class variety).  White working class people who are racist, do not gain any political or economic power from mimicking the bourgeoisie, but are so poorly educated they do not understand this reality.  In the meantime they continue to do the bourgeoisie’s dirty work (in the form of violence, rape and murder), by blaming anyone who is not ‘white’ for the problems the working class suffer at the hands of the bourgeoisie.  This is the essence of false consciousness, and a prime ingredient in the continuation of the maintenance of bourgeois hegemony.  Bourgeois racism can be defined as ‘prejudice’ manifest through economic and political power.  This means that no matter what ignorant white people think about ‘disempowerment’, white people as an ethnic group, possess all the power within European society, despite the fact that the white working class is oppressed by the white bourgeoisie.  As the historical roots of racism is white and European, it logically follows that racism serves the economic (and political) purposes of the white, European bourgeoisie, and that non-white people cannot be ‘racist’ because they are not ‘white’ or ‘European’.  Non-white people – being as they are – victims of historical European domination and oppression, can import European negative attitudes into their minds about other non-white peoples, but this does not mean that they are being ‘racist’ if they give vent to these views.  Black and Asian people in the West do not possess any significant collective economic or political power, and so are unable to make their viewpoints work to their advantage in a system that a priori favours ‘whiteness’ over any other cultural grouping, and this is the case even if non-white people express discriminatory views about white people.  White people cannot be the victims of a racism they invented, whilst living in a society which they fully control and manipulate to their collective benefit.

This observation counters the current trend in white society of the apparent ‘equality’ of racism, which falsely asserts that white people are victims of ‘racist’ crimes.  This is untrue and ‘ahistorical’.  In fact such an allegation is the continuation and development of the bourgeoisie’s ideology of racism under the new conditions of multiculturalism.  This is the maintenance of ‘white privilege’ which seeks to hide and deny the historical presence and existential functioning of white racism within European society.  So powerful is the bourgeois instinct to dominate at the point of contact, that even the ‘victim’ status of those non-white people who suffer under white tyranny, must be took off of them and rendered null and void.  This is because Eurocentric racism assumes that only ‘white’ suffering matters, and the suffering of non-white people is of a lesser order (because they are deemed racially ‘inferior’ and not able to perceive the world as white people do).  When white commenters state that racism is natural because all ethnic groups practice it, they are wrong.  European racism only exists in other non-European groups, because European imperialists placed it there!  When non-white ethnic groups in the West are seen to attack one another, they are not being ‘racist’ but rather ‘prejudicial’, and only then because they are living under the oppression of the white bourgeoisie.  Just as it is not in the class interests of the white working class to be racist, it is equally not in the class interests of the non-white working class.  It is bourgeoisie racism that separates the world into ‘white’ and ‘non-white’ and it is exactly this ideology that must be over-thrown through the development of non-inverted knowledge and insight by the constituent members of the international working class.



Factionalism in the British Communist Left

images (4)

Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels founded the First International Workingmen’s Association in the UK that lasted from 1864-1876.  Marx eventually dissolved this movement because he was of the opinion that circumstances were not yet right for world revolution.  Marx withdrew from direct confrontation with the establishment, and instead focused on the further theoretical development of his theory of Scientific Socialism.  This switched the emphasis for revolution from physical to the world of ideas and this is exactly what Marx advocated.  Although he called for the worldwide overthrowing of the bourgeoisie and the corrupt capitalism that it represented, he was very well aware of the power of ideas to inspire others to decisive physical actions.  Marx was wise and knew when physical action should be carried-out, and when it should not.  His method was the perfect integration of advanced and progressive thought carried-through by actions when the circumstances were right.  For Marx the pursuit of world revolution was often a smooth interchange between thought and action – with occasionally the two dramatically coinciding.  Marx (and Engels) developed their theory of Scientific Socialism with a definite long-view perspective which took into account the attempting and failing of world revolution many times, until the final accomplishment of the permanent replacement of capitalism with Socialism.

The Second Socialist International (1889–1916) was founded in Paris six years after the death of Marx and was essentially a trade union and labour movement.  This dissolved in 1916 because of a system failure of its constituent nation parties to hold a united, working class internationalist front in opposition to the bourgeois war that had developed in France and elsewhere.  As Marx was against nationalism, and taught that the bourgeoisie created nationalism and racism to prevent the international working class from uniting and working together to effectively confront and over-throw bourgeois oppression, and its corrupt capitalist system.  Competing royal houses in Europe (all of whom were blood related) encouraged their respective bourgeois governments to go to war, and in so doing, use the lives of their working class men as canon-fodder.  Although there did exist Socialist opposition to WWI, many prominent members of the Second International voted to support their national bourgeois governments, and instructed their working class membership to join national armies.  As the Second Socialist International completely failed to apply the Scientific Socialism of Marx, it was dissolved in 1916 at the height of the murder and savagery in France and Belgium (and elsewhere) which saw different groups of working class men pointlessly opposing one another for the class interests of the bourgeoisie.

Vladimir Lenin founded the Third Communist International which lasted from 1919 to 1943.  Lenin called all working class people around the world to come to the theoretical and practical aid of the fledgling Communist State in revolutionary Russia.  Since the successful taking of power (and its consolidation) by the Bolsheviks, the bourgeois Western powers (and their Japanese allies), ruthlessly attacked Russia and supported the counter-revolutionary movement.  This was an economic, military and rhetorical attack on Russia that was opposed to the international working class uniting in the pursuance of its best class interests.  The Third International sought to establish a worldwide, Communist movement in both theory and practice, and founded the International Communist Party which eventually had branches in virtually every other country.  These branches were part of the Soviet Union and represented a united proletariat throughout the world, and its purpose was to support (theoretically and practically) all working class movements throughout the world in preparation for the eventual world revolution.  During WWII, Joseph Stalin dissolved the Third Communist International in 1943, because its theoretical premise of working class unity throughout the world was impractical to pursue, whilst fascist Germany, Italy and Japan were unleashing total war and destruction across the globe.  Furthermore, Stalin understood that the Western (liberal) bourgeois States were then allies of a USSR (that was fighting for its very existence at the time, trying to stop and push back a very strong Nazi German invasion), were needed to provide material aid and moral support.  An uprising of working class movement at that time would have interrupted the direct material aid and internationally weakened the coalition against Nazi Germany and her fascist allies.  Of course, a working class uprising in the fascist countries could have immediately stopped their aggression – but such an uprising was considered unlikely due to the oppressive nature of the fascist States and the draconian measures taken against any refusal to toe the official rightwing line.  Instead, Stalin advised the International Communist Parties to work for world revolution in a manner that best suited their local conditions, and he called for the various Communist Branches to act in a more independent manner, whilst also trying to co-ordinate their local activities with the premise of international solidarity.  Although the USSR remained the central focus for International Communist action, the Communist Party branches were now given a new latitude in their functionality, which was designed to increase flexibility and effectiveness of action.

The first major trauma that tested this new climate of flexibility, was the betrayal of Joseph Stalin (and the International Communist Movement) by the Trotskyite traitor – Nikita Khrushchev.  Communist China under the guidance of Mao Zedong rejected the Khrushchev line, as did the famous Che Guevara, and many other Communists around the world.  Khrushchev – as a Trotskyite – sought to take power in the USSR after the death of Stalin in 1953, by courting the anti-Soviet rhetoric emanating from the USA and the UK, as these two countries attempted to build an anti-Communist front in Europe and beyond.  Many branches of the International Communist Party attempted to come to terms with Khrushchev’s so-called ‘Secret Speech’ in 1956, within which he issued an attack on Joseph Stalin that was a tissue of lies (see Grover Furr’s research in this area).  Khrushchev’s betrayal of Marxism, Marxist-Leninism, and the Soviet Union eventually led to the premiership of Mikhail Gorbachev and the final demise of the USSR through his pro-capitalist corruption.

Since the dissolution of the Soviet Union (and its Communist Party) in 1991, the International Communist Party branches were officially dissolved.  The Communist Party of Great Britain (CPGB) transitioned into a bourgeois left intellectual movement, with the ‘CPGB’ name being resurrected by a UK Trotskyite group that seeks to demonise and belittle the entire Soviet-era achievement.  In the late 1970’s, a group split from the CPGB regarding a dispute over the legacy of Joseph Stalin.  The CPGB was moving away from a position of support for Stalin, and as a consequence, the ‘New Communist Party’ (NCP) was formed and officially recognised.  Today, the NCP follows a position of supporting North Korea and its ‘Juche’ theory.  In 1988, another group split from the CPGB as it did not agree with the bourgeois liberalism emanating from Mikhail Gorbachev.  This group took the Morning Star newspaper with it and became the ‘Communist Party of Britain’ (CPB).  The CPB today follows a policy of unquestioning support for the Labour Party, and advocates the ‘British Road to Socialism’ – a premise it originally rejected in 1988, as it stemmed from a revisionist movement in the 1960’s in the original CPGB.  The CPB supports parliamentary Socialism and officially plays-down any ideas of direct revolutionary action.  The Communist Party of Great Britain (Marxist-Leninism) – CPGB (ML) – was formed out of the Socialist Movement in the early 2000’s, and has its historical roots in the parliamentary Labour Party.  Today it has a hard-left approach to Communism (that supports Stalin and Mao), and rejects the tyranny of Khrushchev.  The Revolutionary Communist Group (RCG) is a Marxist-Leninist and anti-imperialist group that grew out of the Trotskyite Socialist Workers Party – its current relationship with Trotskyism is unclear – but it does appear to support Joseph Stalin’s unconditional anti-imperialist struggles.  It follows a staunch anti-racist and anti-capitalist line.

There are many leftist groups, parties, associations, and movements in the UK and across the world.  All behave in a unilateral manner that presumes each faction is the ‘only’ faction in existence.  This means that a single world vision emanates from the many revolutionary steering committees that ignores all other movements and approaches.  This has led to a potential international communist movement scattered into tiny parts, with each behaving as if it possesses the power and moral right to lead the World Communist Movement, even though in reality each faction only possesses the immediate power of attracting only a few hundred supporters at any one time.  What a genuinely ‘Communist’ seeker must understand is that ‘Scientific Socialism’, and its development of ‘Marxist-Leninism’ are dialectical, historical trends that are not, (and cannot) be limited to any single group, party, or movement that claims to singularly represent it.  A dialectical and historical trend involves the entire international working class movement, irrespective of theoretical groups that claim to represent it.  In fact, a singular claim to exclusively represent a dialectical movement in history is in itself non-dialectical in nature and a hindrance to true internationalist development.  This would suggest that any genuine working class movement will represent itself spontaneously, and be simultaneously ‘free’ of artificial contrivance.  As things stand today, the Western Communist Left is riddled with ego, factionalism, fetishism, arrogance, lack of Marxist insight, and racist attitudes.  This demonstrates a remarkable infiltration of the Communist Left from Trotskyites and the broader right wing.  This demonstrates the paradox that whilst claiming to represent the International Communist Movement, many of these factions have in fact abandoned true ‘Internationalism’ and have – like Khrushchev – betrayed both Marxism and Marxist-Leninism.  Considering this current climate of corruption and dysfunction within the Communist Left, a genuine seeker of the Marxist path should personally study the works of Marx, Lenin, Stalin and Mao, and learn to understand dialectical materialism, and think independently in a progressive manner that is not being represented by the many factions that vie for their membership.  Marx, Engels and Lenin, advocated that the working class mind must be freed from its bourgeois oppression and its inversion cured through adopting a correct class consciousness that interprets events correctly.  Dialectical events will unfold regardless of how many factions come into being or pass out of existence.  When the truly Communist ground-work has been achieved through personal education, then a progressive individual may join (or not join) any faction that is useful, although it must be remembered that the Communist factions are currently failing in their presumed function of a) uniting the international working class, and 2) leading it correctly.  As Marx, Lenin, Stalin and Mao achieved these objectives, their example should be followed.




UN Anti-Racism Day – Refugees Welcome 19.3.2016


My family got-up early on Saturday morning and prepared ourselves for a day of leftwing political campaigning on the streets of wonderful London!  I suspect the current far-rightwing Tory government of the UK – that has murdered tens of thousands of its most vulnerable citizens since 2010 (aided and abetted by the Liberal Democrats) – would rather the UK did not celebrate an ‘anti-racist’ day initiated by the United Nations, particularly as it clashes with the UK position of supporting neo-Nazism in the Ukraine and other Eastern European States.  Boris Johnson – the current Tory Mayor of London made sure that many of the Tube lines were down for ‘planned’ engineering works, an that only one half of the roads were closed to traffic in Central London.  d Racism is but one symptom of the general hatred that inspires fascism and which leads into all other modes of discrimination. As matters transpired, tens of thousands of right minded and decent people made the journey to London – overcoming many difficulties to do so.  There was a Rally at the start in Portland Place before the march began, featuring rousing speeches from students, MP’s, disabled 0rganisations, civil rights campaigners, nurses, and many others.  Although scheduled to start at 12 noon – the march did move-off until 1:15pm.  By this time many elderly and disabled had been stood in one place for over two hours – but did not leave.  They put the broader principle of ‘equality’ before personal discomfort and we admired them greatly.  Various Communist and Socialist representatives appeared to gather together just behind the banners of the Public and Commercial Services Union (PSC) and this included the Communist Party of Britain (CPB) and the Communist Party of Great Britain (ML).  There was probably around 20 Red Flags of various descriptions all featuring the Hammer & Sickle motif of the International Workers.  We proudly carried an old flag from the Soviet Union to keep the spirit of Marxist-Leninism alive in the bourgeois, capitalist West, and our daughter – Mei-An – proudly carried a smaller Red Flag on a much shorter pole suitable for a determined 3 year old who managed to walk much of the route unaided.  The march ended in Trafalgar Square where there was a concluding rally with many important speakers talking about horrific racism in the UK – particularly those killed in Police or Prison custody since 2010 and the election of this Tory Junta!  Onward to Revolution!



































Dr Who Manchu

John Bennett

John Bennett

The Dr Who episodes entitled ‘The Talons of Weng-Chiang’ (Starring Tom Baker as Dr Who), was originally aired during early 1977, and receives regular repeating throughout the world on satellite and cable TV. In 2008, the British rightwing (and notoriously racist) newspaper – The Daily Telegraph – voted this particular series as one of the best Dr Who stories ever made. This is not surprising as it manages to encapsulate fully the negative British attitudes towards the Chinese people, and serves as an exact record of Eurocentric racism. Whilst white Europeans attempt to downplay and negate the anti-Chinese racism, the racism itself can be easily codified:

1) A white English actor – John Bennett – plays the lead ‘Chinese’ role of the maniacal character ‘Li H’sen Chang’.

2) Throughout the six part serial, very few of the other Chinese characters are listed in the end credits of the show. In the first episode, for instance, out of the 5 apparently real Chinese characters that appear on screen, only two are listed in the end credits – the character ‘Lee’ played by John Then, and the ‘Coolie’ character played by John Wu.

3) The word ‘Chink’ is mentioned by a character named ‘Professor Litefoot’ who had apparently spent time living in China.

4) All the (male) Chinese characters are negative and the product of blatant racial stereotyping that portrays Chinese people (and Chinese culture) as inherently inferior, frighteningly heathen, innately duplicitous, and the product of an evil – Judeo-Christian – devil.

5) The massage that all migrants into the British Isles are ‘criminals’ waiting to pounce on innocent (white) Britons is clear and unambiguous.

6) The Chinese people (and Chinese culture) are depicted as childish and yet dangerous.

7) It is assumed that no Chinese people can speak English, and obvious that no (white) English character can speak the Chinese language – although the non-human Timelord is seen in one seen attempting to speak very basic Putonghua (referred to in the script as ‘Mandarin’).

8) The Chinese people are depicted as ‘unfeeling’ and lacking basic human characteristics. This stems from the British Christian missionaries in China who taught that Chinese culture was an agency for the devil’s work, and consequently possesses no value as a civilised society.

9) The Chinese people are either non-responsive (to Eurocentric sentiment) or excessively violent in reaction.

10) With regard to this Dr Who storyline – Chinese women do not exist.

John Bennett, of course, is playing an Englishman’s imagination of a vague, gargoyle-like entity conveniently termed a ‘Chinese’ person – or ‘Celestial’ as one character refers to the Chinese people. This continues the ‘yellow peril’ racism from the USA (personified by the hideous ‘Fu Manchu’ and ‘Ming the Merciless’ characters of stage and screen) which was aimed at the Japanese up to and including WWII, but which was later turned on China following the Communist Revolution of 1949. The British racism aimed at the Chinese people has always had a Judeo-Christian basis and seeks to deny and destroy the Chinese culture and build a Christian Church upon its ashes.

©opyright: Adrian Chan-Wyles (ShiDaDao) 2015.

Norman Tebbit’s ‘Cricket Test’ Comes Home to Roost


(This article appeared in issue 1790 of the New Worker – the newspaper of the New Communist Party of Britain – dated 12th of September, 2014 – Page 5)

The bourgeois system has always divided to conquer – from the division of labour, to the constitution of ‘class’, all is separated into mutually excluding categories that are designed to favour the interests of the middle and upper classes, and play-down and ignore the interests of the working class. The working class is then subdivided into ever more increasing (and artificial) categories that are forced to pointlessly compete for ever dwindling resources. This status quo is fuelled through the auspices of a ‘false consciousness’, which sees the victims of the bourgeoissystem unwittingly internalising the psychology of oppression, and fighting amongst themselves as a consequence. The oppressed toilers of the world are programmed to blame one another for the deprivations they suffer a priori at the hands of the oppressors, and never turn their attention toward the real problem and cause of all their torment – namely the international bourgeoisie. This is why it is in the best interests of the bourgeoisie to ensure that the working class remains its own worst enemy, and continues to be riddled with internecine conflicts that do nothing for its historical progression and development into the stage of the advanced stage Socialism. Inshort, the bourgeois psychological and historical conditioning that has been inflicted upon the working class serves to dominate through separation, so that the working class is prevented from truly uniting under such conditions, and I unable to break this cycle of abuse through the development of true self-knowledge and insight.

Bourgeois nations compete for resources as a major bulwark of capitalist market forces. The powerful, but thoroughly redundant mythology of ‘race’ and ‘racism’ is part and parcel of this competition, which divides the international working class into mutually excluding racial categories. Although the notion of ‘race’ has been scientifically discredited, nevertheless, even in the 21st century it is often the first recourse for the oppressor over the oppressed.  The pseudoscience that is racism is an example of a living mythology that claims (mistakenly) to be self-evidently true.  Cultural and physical differences in people are believed to be the product of a distinct and different physical origination for each ethnic and cultural grouping. This gives the impression that humans beings ‘mysteriously appeared’ (as if from nowhere) in different places, with no historical or biological connection to one another.  Upon first inspection, this seems suspiciously like the theology of theistic religion masquerading as legitimate science. Not only this, but the Judeo-Christian Church in the West has been happy to perpetuate this false science of racial hierarchy over the last four hundred years or so, using its political power and authority to give credence to the myth that bourgeois white-Europeans constitute a superior racial grouping. This is not surprising, as both the pseudoscience associated with racism, and the theology of the Judeo-Christian Church, are both premised upon mythology mistaken as fact. This is the classic inverted psychology of Marx (and Feuerbach), which gives rise to a distorted impression of the physical world.

This inverted or distorted impression of the world serves as the basis for the psychology of the bourgeoisie, and has been expressed on a number of occasions by the former Conservative MP – and now House of Lords member – Norman Tebbit. He served under the notorious government of Margaret Thatcher throughout the 1980’s, holding a number of important ministerial posts, and actively participating in the devastation that regime inflicted upon the people and Socialistic institutions of the UK. In April, 1990, he made an extraordinary attack on the UK’s vibrant multicultural communities. He suggested (in a widely broadcast interview) that all the socials ills in Britain were not the product of capitalism, but rather the fault of the ethnic minorities who had come to settle in the country after WWII. As with all comments of a racial nature, Norman Tebbit did not present any well thought out academic argument for his bizarre outburst, but rather justified his far-reaching and destructive statement through the simplistic rhetoric that appeals to the infantile support surrounding sporting personalities, and competing sports teams – all of course the products of the ruthless and exploitative capitalist system. Tebbit – like all racists – reduces, denies, and attempts to negate the all-important historical conditioning of the past that has created the current situation, and which will continue to mould the future. Whilst denying ‘history’, the reality of (bourgeois) white-Eurocentric racism is completely ignored and not considered a contributing (and conditioning) factor of the attitudes expressed by multicultural communities who have been victims of this ignorance in the UK for decades. This is a clear expression of the denial with which the bourgeoisie treats its own (and thoroughly corrupt) presence in the world, and serves to continuously demonstrate the demeaning attitude it has toward its victims, be they the working class or migrant communities and their descendants. Tebbit, obviously appealing to the British right-wing, stated that Black and Asian citizens of the UK are not really ‘British’ because they have a tendency to support the cricket team of their cultural-ethnic origin, rather than the cricket team representing England. The UK media disseminated Tebbit’s outburst as if he were an Oxford don pontificating on some new and important scientific breakthrough. Tebbit’s ignorance has set the agenda for decades by continuing the justification of social and cultural exclusion toward migrant communities. It is this quintessentially bourgeois attitude of divide and conquer expressed by Tebbit that has caused many diverse communities to feel permanently excluded from mainstream British society, and to shy away from direct mainstream interaction.

The current far-right government of David Cameron has continued the project of social destruction and cultural disintegration started by his political idol Margaret Thatcher. Following the collapse and disintegration of the Soviet Union, the USA and its European NATO allies have desperately sought a new enemy and have found one in the form of militant Islam. Although not representative of mainstream Islam, this violent strand has its historical origins in 1980’s Afghanistan which saw the USA (and others) fund, arm, and encourage Osama Bin Laden and his Mujahedeen fighters as they rebelled against the Soviet attempt to support the Communist movement there, and liberate that country from the ignorance of feudalism and theistic religion. The problem the US had after the withdrawal of Soviet Forces from Afghanistan in the late 1980’s, is that the Mujahedeen changed the emphasis of its activities away from targeting the USSR and toward the US policy of neo-colonialism in the Middle East. As the West continues to destabilise and eradicate legitimate regimes throughout the world, the threat from a resisting militancy has obviously increased. It is an obvious hypocrisy within bourgeois thinking that to support the ally of the moment is considered a superb act of loyalty to Western hegemony, whilst to show an allegiance to a current enemy of the West, is to express a diabolical attitude similar to that of devil worship. For instance, American-born Ukrainians who travel to Kiev to support the new US backed (and armed) neo-Nazi government is eulogised throughout the Western media, whilst alleged British Asians who travel to the Middle East to fight against the forces of Western imperialism, are considered traitors of the highest degree. With this kind of double standard in operation, it can come as no surprise to learn that David Cameron has granted the British police the power to seize the passports of any British citizen ‘suspected’ of travelling abroad with the intent to join or fight for what the UK government considers to be a ‘terrorist group’. Cameron also explained that he has plans to expand this measure to include the exclusion of British citizens from entering the UK if it is believed that they have been involved with terrorists groups, and to have them relocated elsewhere. Echoing Norman Tebbit’s outburst of 24 years ago, the current prime minister – David Cameron – has stated that he finds it ‘abhorrent’ that those British citizens who express and demonstrate an allegiance elsewhere, should be allowed to return to the UK and pose a national security threat. The racially discriminative nature of this action is obvious as it is intended toward a particular ethnic group and no one else, despite the deliberate vagaries of its details. One is left wondering whether the same level of scrutiny is going to be exercised with regard to white Americans, South Afrikaners, Australians, and New Zealanders, etc., currently residing in the United Kingdom, who habitually express non-British attitudes toward sports and often disagree on political issues.

UK Disability – the New Holocaust 2014


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.

Britain First – UK Christian Terrorism Exposed


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.

Picassos Coffee Lounge (Torquay) Discriminates Against Disabled People!

This article appeared on page 5 of the New Worker Newspaper dated the 6.12.13 (No 1754).  I wrote this piece as an exposé to the continuing and shocking treatment received by People with Disabilities, from those who consider themselves ‘able bodied’, and typical of a bourgeois, rightwing attitude, physically superior.  The story below deals with the banning of a Disabled woman from a cafe in Torquay, Devon, UK.


(This follow-up article {below} appeared in the New Worker – the Newspaper of the NCP [No 1757] 10.1.14 – Page 7) Update: Mr Mark Lewis, the Manager of Picassos Coffee Lounge, (Torquay), was interviewed by Devon and Cornwall Police and stated that he banned the Disabled woman in question because he was of the opinion that she ‘smelt’, and that he was concerned that her presence in his establishment would put his able bodied customers off their food.  Devon and Cornwall Police are of the opinion that no crime has taken place, and have refused to record this incident as a ‘hate crime’ against a Disabled wheelchair user.  Devon and Cornwall Police have been officially criticised in the past for failing to react to crime in the area.


Obviously, with the Police appearing to condone his behaviour, Mr Mark Lewis remains unrepentant about the incident, and has written to the victim stating that his expressed opinion that she ‘smelt’, in no way was connected to the fact that she is a Disabled person confined to a wheelchair.  In the meantime, this Disabled person remains banned from the establishment in question and has received no assistance from her local MP – Liberal Democrat Adrian Sanders – despite numerous letters asking for his help.  It is important to note that with the ideologically led cuts to the NHS and Welfare system, (to fund a tax cut for the rich), it has been reported across the UK that Conservative and Liberal Democrat MP’s have conspired to initiate a policy of ‘not helping’ those of their constituents trapped in an ever downward spiral of poverty, sure in the knowledge that the most vulnerable members of society – that is to say, the victims of their policies – possess no resources to do anything about their behaviour.

As it stands, the medieval Judeo-Christian ignorance that defines Disability as a corruption from the devil, or a punishment from god, continuous to operate within UK secular society.  Disabled people are treated as outsiders and their particular personal needs as some form of inconvenience for the able bodied public.  Mr Mark Lewis, infected with this primitive mindset, appears to believe that he can discriminate against a Disabled person simply because his prejudice tells him that their different physical presence must equate with an infantile assumption that they ‘smell’.  His actions protect the ignorant masses from having to psychologically evolve beyond a primitive mind-set that four hundred years ago saw old ladies who owned cats, burnt to death in the name of god on the village heath.  Mr Mark Lewis has done the progressive cause a world of good by reminding it that through his shocking ignorance, there is still much to do to reform UK society in the Socialist model.  Religiosity is an ignorant poison that must be eradicated from the human psyche.  It is ironic that the artist Picasso was a life-long Communist and ardent supporter of Joseph Stalin.

%d bloggers like this: