Corbyn: Out With The ‘New’ – In With The True Labour

If he was as concerned about human life as he claims, and actually believes his own propaganda, Jeremy Corbyn would whip the PLP without hesitation over allowing Daesh off the hook. And if that caused a historic split in the party, so much the better for him. A complete purge of the Blairite baggage would allow the long-overdue formation of a truly radical party eager to forge a massive continental alliance able to confront the horrors of Consumerism with appropriate firepower. Which is what I foolishly imagined would be the first thing on Corbyn’s to-do list. Instead, I hear he has not even met the leader of the SNP.
But he doesn’t seem to have the imagination or vision. He is apparently happy to carry on fighting the sterile battles of the past, to Jeremy-mander any action against blatant genocide, and for the root cause of the terrorist disease to live while refusing even to treat the symptoms. He is more concerned with protecting ISIS than fighting TTIP
He’s shaping up to be a Paper Tiger. But since all pacifists are reactionaries, that is only natural.

Corbysoxer Menace

As the Facebook frenzy of the last 3 weeks has shown, Corbyn’s worst enemies are his most fanatical disciples, who have no concept of critical analysis, and react like spoilt brats when their hero is subjected to routine media scrutiny – or any serious questioning. This Labour party has to be more self-critical, not less. The technology demands it. Whether Corbyn is light-footed enough to survive depends on how much he believes the hype of his disciples, and how little he rises to the media bait and throws tantrums when called nasty names.
If he can start a genuine debate rather than provoke knee-jerk anti-politics, then Labour may stand a chance of power, but only in co-operation (or even coalition) with other progressive parties. If Labour tries to take all the glory, boundary changes alone will defeat them.
But even then, the main legacy of Corbyn’s bedside manner may be a change in the tone of politics across the spectrum for at least a generation. All politicians will have to adopt his style to a certain extent.
Being the first suitless party leader is a start. Who will be the next to get informal? In an age when style is as powerful as substance, this is not as trivial a question as it sounds. And in any case, Corbyn’s main weapon so far has been his style, his policies are still unformed, as they always are at this stage of proceedings. But since he and his deputy disagree about major issues, and he will be forced to rethink his European policies inherited from Tony Benn, the final Labour platform will not be the one a lot of people voted for.
Bizarrely for a modern socialist, Corbyn (like UKIP) seems to still believe in the existence of the so-called ‘sovereign state’, not realising that it died as a coherent political entity over a generation ago with the advent of global communications, and was only ever a bi-product of the steam engine.
The first thing Corbyn will have to do is stop telling lies like “…the prime minister will soon again be asking us to bomb Syria. “.
Daesh is not ‘Syria’. It is a genocidal invasion of Syria and Iraq – ‘sovereign states’ according to Corbyn.
This Stop The War Coalition terminology is as transparent as it is perverted, and will force a U-turn, or lead Corby-Labour up a blind alley, where it will be seen as indifferent to the mass persecution which is creating refugees, and which can only be stopped with military action, and which would not have existed on this scale had decisive action been taken when needed.
If Corbyn insists on playing the Mahatma, he will also lose the respect of the British people, who do not like to sit back and watch the slaughter of millions.
He needs to ‘open his mind’ to preventing the genocides by Daesh and Assad which drive people from their homes.
Not talking about them, doing something about them. Not watching genocide, but stopping it. There is a time to fight, as the Chartists knew.
‘By moral force if we may. By physical force if we must’.
Daesh don’t listen to moral force.

Tom & Jerry Win Labour Leadership

A great day for Labour, electing its most socialist leader since Kier Hardie. And drawing in masses of young people eager to fight the obscenities of Osborne’s fundamentalist Consumerism. The politics of Hope is alive, especially for those in London terrified for their homes. A London Labour Mayor would reassure millions, and pave the way for other cities to fight the property pirates.
But the most interesting contribution so far is from the SNP, and it’s not as fraternal as it needs to be, given that on paper, there isn’t a sheet of political Bronco between CorbyLab and the SNP. And that between them, they could cripple the government in the Commons.

However, the reality today is that at a time when the country needs strong opposition to the Tories, Jeremy Corbyn leads a deeply, and very bitterly, divided party. Indeed, if Labour cannot quickly demonstrate that they have a credible chance of winning the next UK general election, many more people in Scotland are likely to conclude that independence is the only alternative to continued Tory government.
“In the meantime, it is clearer than ever that the only credible and united opposition to the Tories, north and south of the border, is the SNP.”

If the SNP won’t join with Tom Watson & Jerry Corbyn its ‘progressive’ credibility is blown. As is any reputation for political pragmatism. And it has to be remembered that the main reason for SNP popularity was the unpopularity of NuLabour in Scotland. Without that collapse Labour would probably have won the last two general elections. In a political sense, Nicola Sturgeon is the bastard child of Tony Blair.
With a decidedly anti-Blairite Labour in Scotland, will Sturgeon see sense and work with Corbyn, or allow the SNP to be eroded by an exodus of the same Labour exiles which put it in power?

The next interesting thing will be the announcement of Shadow Chancellor, which is where he will really put his cards on the table. John McDonnell would be the uncompromising choice.

See also. 2015 Election Tips

TTIP Caliphate

While British Islamophobes are still paranoid about ‘Sharia Law’, and halal butchery daring to cock a snook at local parish bi-laws in parts of Bradford, they don’t seem to worry about a genuine threat to Civilisation being hatched by the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP).
As well as pillaging vital social institutions like the NHS, it also intends to make business virtually immune from legal action through the ‘investor-state dispute settlement’ (ISDS). Which looks suspiciously like death of national sovereignty and democratic-credibility. The corporate takeover of the state would seem to be complete.
In this charming kangaroo court disobedient countries who have presumed to put the welfare of their people before the profit of the corporations will be made to answer before a self-selected judge and jury. No election manifesto post ISDS will be able to attempt to curtail the excesses of big business. Free politics will be shackled to the profit motive for the foreseeable future.


‘Je Suis Un Blasphémateur’

General Purpose Blasphemy

General Purpose Blasphemous Doggerel 1989

All Gods are Bastards.
And all of their Prophets are Shits.
Every Man-Jack’s a necrophiliac
Infested with maggots and nits.

Gods Love to Destroy and wreak Vengeance,
Dealing Pain with a flick of a wrist,
And what is more, every Son of a Whore
Doesn’t even Exist.

We invent and then fear these shadows
Like children afraid in the dark.
But we roast any wight who turns on the light
Or even who shows us a spark.

We cower in terror of Nothing,
And nothing we get for our Pains.
For the Heaven that we crave is a box in a grave.
Nothing where Nothingness reigns.

The silence of Death is no stranger.
We hear it each night in our bed,
And remember our Birth and the first smell of earth
When we wake up well slept and well fed.

It is then that we truly fear nothing
And Nothing fears us, by degrees.
But the day comes and then the cruel world again
Drives us down on to our knees.

It seems Death is fine (for a visit)
But we’d give it a miss – given the chance.
Because under the loam, the retirement home
‘Dunlivin’ is booked in advance.

While we frantically plan for our post-life:
‘All those things that we never could share.’
We all know that our fate is not God’s Estate
But a stain in a graveyard somewhere.

Our powerlessness in this contract
Festers Ultimate Grievance , with age.
So we yearn for a Being – Allmighty, All-Seeing.
ENTER: ‘God’ – (PUFF OF SMOKE) – Centre stage.

And show after show he screeches
One line from the Stalls to the flies:
‘Just you tell Man his life’s a short span.
And to put bums on pews – or he dies !’

Grant us only the temperate frenzy
To say what we feel with each breath.
We ask little more, no eternal encore:
One full life scares the Hell out of Death.

S.N.P. R.I.P.

The most interesting question from last night’s referendum is, why did the SNP heartland vote NO?
Why did the areas which were Salmonds best hope the first to betray him? Only the trendy metro-festival areas votes YES, and mainly it seems on the promise of the People’s Republic of Scotland. So either the SNP voters have been kidding us all along, and didn’t really mean it at the ballot blox. Or, being traditional tories at heart,they were terrified by the visions of Glastonbury on Clyde filling their Tv screens. By the promise of realistic taxes and a Scotland dedication to the welfare state.
Or the SNP were always just a gesture, an illusion courtesy of general political apathy. Elected on miserable turnouts, they were allowed to have their fun as long as they never achieved their stated purpose. And now they have no purpose, which leaves Salmond having to perform some nimble footwark if he doesn’t want his traditional vote reverting to their traditional party, the tories.
As a credible political project, Scottish Nationalism just disappeared in a dour puff of pragmatism.
The SNP could carry on chasing tartan rainbows for another 20 years. But far more likely is some kind of split, allowing tories and labour back into some seats. Salmond’s greatest achievements may still be ahead, but one of them won’t be Scottish independence. And he has nobody to blame but his own not so braveheartland, which bottled out en-masse. When the time came, these canny refugee tories who were the SNP simply didn’t fancy a People’s Republic Of Scotland, as touted by the Metro-Jock elite.
A nasty suspicious person might conclude that the entire independence campaign was just a publicity campaign in disguise for Scotland, a nasty suspicious person might. Lasting as long as it did, and reaching as many networks as it has, it surely has to be worth what, 2 Olympic Gameses in PR terms? And without much of the cost.
So whatever the result, the Scottish economy will benefit, or there’s no justice. And since other forms of prestige projects are last decade and costly, maybe campaigns to Realign the Political Demographic is the way forward for aspiring countries out to pull some free advertising. It’s just another example of TV becoming reality.  Strictly Independent. Big Britain Eviction Night. In 20 years elections may well be indistinguishable from today’s TV competitions.

Hurricane Politics 2014

It’s been compared to the Blitz by some victims, but to me, the Typhoon season of 2014  seems more like the Big Freeze of 1963, only with rain. And while the turbo-charged Jet-stream has brought a series of warm systems from the south this year, with a slight change of direction at source, next winter could bring two months of snow. One year hurricanes, the next, blizzards. Either would be consistent with a climate struggling to convert energy. Our traditional British seasons seem to be coming to an end.
Most intriguing of all is the fact that after two months, Britain still hasn’t thrown up a national charity to help the victims. In spite of such a thing never having been easier, and the obviously vast degree of sympathy, the predominant national response has been either fear, blame, or mean-spirited penny-pinching from those even worse off in the shape of demands to divert foreign aid to the stockbroker belt.
During emergencies it is natural and proper to expect support from the state, and even those ghastly people in Brussels. But how can this government now continue the farce of dogmatic opposition in principle to the role of the state, when it is plain to everyone that the banks and corporations aren’t going to help, either with the current national disaster, or with radical, expensive planning for an all too predictable future. I hear no tories demanding that the free market be allowed to solve the problem (yet) or that the taxpayer should not be required to pay the price. The Unseen Hand of the Market isn’t so all-knowing now, is it? And since good old Victorian philanthropy has also failed, and Global Warming Denialism lies in tatters, as does petty nationalism in the wake of the European aid on its way to devastated areas, what fig-leaf excuses for ideology do reactionaries have left? The steam age economics of climate change are obviously running out of steam.
When the chips are down, it seems all tories are socialists. Nevertheless, it won’t be surprising to see some Spectator nerd penning a column berating the government for rescuing flooded areas, and for planning for global warming, proposing instead that the fittest areas (and wisest market choices) be rewarded and the losers be thrown to the waves as a deterrent to folly and false bargains. The market will be the best protection against climate change. The solution and the cause of all life’s problems, as Homer Simpson says of beer.

Woolwich Social-Media Murder

There is little doubt that yesterday’s murder in Woolwich was partly driven by the new ability to bi-pass traditional media outlets. Mobile Social-Media Broadcasting. That’s why the murderers neither destroyed themselves nor ran away. The uncensored footage was the point, the killing was just the crowd-puller. Twenty years ago an attack like this, where the murderers talked to the public, would have been pointless since there would have been no direct exposure.
Obviously, it was also driven by the global war, and by the fact that these are people who have lost their traditional identity (in their case religious) and had to find a new one which expressed their rage. Just like the Boston bombers, Mick Philpott, Raol Moat, and every over Nutjob created by our hate-fuelled society. They are all broken on the same wheel. Insanity is just another word for total alienation.

Whatever the criminology turns out to be, the reasons for this murder are the same as for all the other mad human sacrifices  which turn up every week nowadays. It’s a sick society which creates sick people. Driven to insanity by being in constant competition for jobs, homes and services, while being expected to look and spend like millionaire filmstars, most people are only a few humiliations away from cracking up.

The reaction from the EDL was predictably deranged, and used the same technology. They clashed with police, having threatened reprisals in the area. Mosques were attacked last night in redneck strongholds like Braintree and Gillingham.
These people are fascists who are determined to destroy British culture and replace it with an intolerant fictional Neverland from a past they will not specify. Everything they say points to about 1933 in terms of uniformity and lack of social cohesion. Much before that and women don’t have the vote, and much after and we have the Windrush and everything that followed. Their ideal period of British history seems to be a permanent Great Depression without a functioning welfare state. In reality, they are merely exploiting the death of this soldier to push their twisted ultra-nationalist political agenda. Both EDL and the Islamicists are trying to foment the same war.

Bizarrely, many voices on forums are demanding that families of the murderers should be punished. Collective Guilt by Association, as practiced by the Third Reich in occupied countries. Punish the innocent families for the crimes of the individual – without trial, naturally. Which is a leap to almost pure totalitarianism, as both the Islamicists and fascists want. The murder of a British soldier on home territory somehow means that ‘We are second class citizens in our own country’ according to those who want to believe it. As if British soldiers and Britain itself were immune from the outside world and the consequences of its actions. This absurdity is being used to incite violence.

The great mistake is to swallow the line that this was anything to do with religion. People do not believe in religion any more, they identify with it for all they’re worth, which is a completely different matter and more like being a football fan than thinking and behaving as if an omnipotent Being were watching and judging and controlling everything in the cosmos. Only feudal cultures without mass-literacy truly ‘believe’ that. This is Zealotry, not Faith, and all about asserting the individuality of the person, not following any spiritual path. This perversion of religion is as blatant as the Spanish Inquisition.

The challenge is to provide a positive progressive ideology of peace to replace the current war-economy and dead myths of the past. But nothing Cameron or Boris Johnson or Barak Obama say today will offer any real hope of positive change, just more of the same. The same ‘narrative’, which will be a very popular word over the next few weeks. A different ‘narrative’ must be found to counter Islamism. Not a different ideology, which implies something real, but a different story, which is what a narrative is. Or ‘lie’, in plain English. Young people have to be found another fairytale other than genuine politics to identify with.

When a drone bombs a Pakistani  village of 200 people in pursuit of a star target, it merits a minor report in the media, if any. The casual justification for drone casualties is that war is war is hell. The Daily Mail uses it all the time. But it only ever applies one way. Which is a hypocrisy key to the perversion of young, alienated minds. If this attack helps redress the balance, and increases awareness of the reasons for hatred, it may even be judged by history to be a martyrdom, of sorts.

This was not the result of ‘radicalisation’ but psychosis, if a politicised species. To call it radical is to invert and insult the true, invigorating sense of the word, and pollute true radicalism by association, making every radical in history a murderer. An attempt to poison the word and the idea. This form of Islamism is an ideology of death imposed from above, not growth from the roots. But this particular act was essentially no different to any of the other murders committed by the deranged. The victim might just as well have been killed by any of them. The fact that his deranged killers were politicised Muslims just made it inevitable they would lash out at him. Those who go insane in the comfortable suburbs, or in country villages have nobody to lash out against other than those within reach, and their families.

Michael Pedersen was a soldier, who who rode the horse Sefton during the 1982 IRA Hyde Park bomb attack. Last October, for whatever reason, he calmly killed his two young children, and then himself. If an ex-soldier disintegrates, he is not likely to turn on symbols of the British state. If the same thing happens to a young politicised Muslim, a British soldier is the natural target. There is no difference between the two terrorisms.

If the British Identity is defined by anything it is by Tolerance, in spite of everything the Empire did. We  like tolerance, tolerance pays. All kinds of fascism are by nature intolerant. Which is why, in Britain, fascists have always been unanimously derided as lunatics and casualties. An implicit recognition of the truth that there is no such thing as a reactionary ‘intellectual tradition’ or ‘thought’, merely a neurotic phobia of change and equality. As the mad self-styled historian Dominique Venner demonstrated yesterday in Notre Dame cathedral when he destroyed the world he hated in the only way he knew how. Hardly surprising since we live in a society in love with hatred and only at peace when at war.

All the Fun of the Funeral

It wasn’t all weeping and wailing. Lots of people had a lovely day, for all sorts of reasons.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Spectator-Sport Religion

The Spectator’s Fraser Nelson tastefully chooses Easter to launch a political attack against the BBC in the name of religion. Tasteful, if obviously rushed and off-the shelf.

The more I find out about the history and practice of religion, partly through the BBC’s coverage, the more irreligious I become. There is no ‘Blind-spot’. The channel which produced the first British mainstream documentary on the history of Islam has nothing to be ashamed of. Not even its Olympic commentators failing to explain what a prayer is, which particularly annoyed Fraser Nelson –  apparently, American commentators had to.
What the reactionaries of the Spectator can’t understand is that Progress produces progressive, tolerant  Thoughts for the Day. And there is nothing they can do about it except rail impotently like the insane Lear at the world’s disobedience, while continuing their constant attempt to peddle selfishness as a spiritual virtue.
The saddest part about the protest is not its blatant advertising for Sky, or even its pathetically limp tone, but that like modern religion itself, it simply does not ring true as an expression of faith. It is just another desperate assertion of identity by a species which knows it is facing extinction, an attention-seeking exhibition psychologically identical to fundamentalist Jihad, another reactionary protest-too-much. Like all professions of belief in the incredible. ‘Which go the primrose way to the everlasting bonfire’, as it says in the play.
The truth about both religion and Fraser Nelson come out eventually when confronted with Thought For The Day, when religious figureheads go off-script for a few minutes. The problem is simply a lack of  enough good old-time reactionary religion on the BBC. What Nelson really wants is religious political ‘balance’  Fox News style, presumably.

The speakers are described as being ‘from across the world’s major faiths,’ but almost always from the political left. Their ‘thought’ can often be summed up as: ‘Jesus was left-wing, too.’

For someone claiming to represent religion, Nelson is sadly lacking in scriptural knowledge. Especially concerning the Sermon on the Mount, surely Christ’s definitive political statement. His attitude to private property, for instance, is perfectly clear.

‘Where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.’ (Matthew 6:29)

And is clarified even further by Orwell, a master of clarification often used as a smokescreen by the Spectator:

“It could be claimed, for example, that the most important part of Marx’s theory is contained in the saying:
‘Where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.’
But before Marx developed it, what force had that saying had? Who had paid any attention to it? Who had inferred from it — what it certainly implies — that laws, religions and moral codes are all a superstructure built over existing property relations? It was Christ, according to the Gospel, who uttered the text, but it was Marx who brought it to life. And ever since he did so the motives of politicians, priests, judges, moralists and millionaires have been under the deepest suspicion — which, of course, is why they hate him so much.” Tribune 1944

The thought of Christ and Marx working together to drive history away from selfishness, property-worship and competition and towards co-operation and community must be a constant terror for the reactionaries of the Spectator. So much so that they choose the holiest time of the Christian calendar to launch a political attack. Their political appetite side-lining their spiritual needs. But not their needs for a nice Easter break in the West Country, in Nelson’s case. I trust he will enjoy the intense spiritual rebirth every true Christian experiences at Easter, in whatever church he chooses. But I doubt it. Such a thing probably hasn’t happened in Britain for 100 years. Other more desperate societies may be different, but even in the most feudal degradation of the extreme past, religious belief was always a matter of constant enforcement and mutual doubt, as the existence of ancient Eygptian grave-robbers and the means used to deter them both prove. If grave-goods really did travel with the departed, there wouldn’t be anything to rob. Both poachers and gamekeepers knew the truth. Five thousand years later, blinded by its obedient middle-class intellectualism, The Spectator is still trying to catch up with what every thief and pope has know since before Moses.