The Modern Day Martin Luther King, My Ass

There's this nutty preacher, Harry Jackson who is being called "The Modern Day Martin Luther King" by fellow nutters. Why all the nuts? Because Harry Jackson is campaigning against the civil rights of gay people - and somehow that makes him just like a guy who campaigned for civil rights? Ok, so they are both black and religious; but other than that? Come on, is it just me or is that bizarro world?

Harry, just so you know the kind of people 'in your camp' - they are calling for the deportation of gay people from their homes and jail terms for people who might try to hide them to protect them from the vision of a repressive state.

I don't want to fall foul of Godwin's Law, by stating it, but you can see where they are going with this....

Anti-Nazi Resistance Hero Dies

From the Hope Not Hate blog...

The world lost one of the heroes of the anti-Nazi resistance yesterday with the death of Marek Edelman, the last surviving leader of the Warsaw Ghetto uprising. Marek was one of 200 Jews who battled German troops for a month in 1943 before the Ghetto was razed to the ground. It was the single largest revolt during the Holocaust.

The Warsaw Ghetto was set up by the Nazis in 1940, as part of a wider operation to round up Jews across occupied Eastern Europe. Between 300,000 and 400,000 people were crowded into the Warsaw Ghetto, the largest of its kind in Europe.

In the summer of 1942 the Nazis began the forcible transportation of Jews from the Ghetto to the Treblinka death camp, in an operation codenamed Grossaktion Warschau.

In mid-January 1943, the Germans began their second wave of deportation, but this time it was met by an armed insurgency within the ghetto. While Jewish families hid in their "bunkers", Jewish Military League (Żydowski Związek Wojskowy, ŻZW) fighters, joined by elements of the Jewish Combat Organisation (Żydowska Organizacja Bojowa, ŻOB) engaged the Germans in two direct clashes. Hundreds of people took up small arms to fight the Nazis. They took control of much of the Ghetto, built defences and executed collaborators.

Framing Concepts - How to Force Your Ideas on Others

Politics is a dirty business and you can see this in action in the facinating discussion about how politicians use the idea of 'framing concepts' to shape what we think - so for example, the War on Terror - is a war on a state of mind and so by definition all the normal concepts of a war are shifted so the people waging that war can amass power over us against a nebulous foe and with uncertain outcomes.



I have noted these before; Derrick Jensen talks about this in his work; about how big concepts are slipped past us in the framing of questions, so he says a news anchor says "How can we get the US economy to grow?" in that are framed a number of assumptions - that you want the economy to grow, that you want there to event be and economy and that you want there to even be a US at all.

You also hear it where the media refers to Israeli Settlers' whereas the word for somebody moving into another persons land is actually 'Colonisers' and so changes the framing of the debate.

The Nature of Evil: It's In Us!!

A must-listen talk by the social psychologist Phillip Zimbardo on the nature of evil...



In a nutshell, evil is less within us and more within the structures we live within - normal people who are not sadists, in the wrong circumstances, in a matter of days can become the sadists we see in Abu Graib. It is mindless obedience to hierarchy that kills more people than disobedience to laws. The people at the top of a hierarchy create the system that breeds evil in people who would not otherwise do so. The irony is that Bu$h and Bliar in their war on evil, created a system of evil in the process. (A point John Gray warns us of!)

But there is also message that none of us know what we will do if faced with the same situation - we all have this capacity for evil. Our protection is to ensure that we do not allow the hierarchy systems and/or personality cults that encourage it.

On the plus side heroism is the same - we all have the capacity to do good in such situations...

Overseas Development: $2 Trillion in 50 Years - Banks: $18 Trillion in 1 Year

Says it all really:

"Since the inception of aid (overseas development assistance) almost 50 years ago, donor countries have given some $2 trillion in aid. And yet over the past year, $18 trillion has been found globally to bail out banks and other financial institutions. The amount of total aid over the past 49 years represents just eleven percent of the money found for financial institutions in one year.

The UN Millennium Campaign is urgently calling on rich countries gathering at this week's high-level summit on the economic crisis to make no further excuses that they lack resources and to urgently deliver on their aid commitments."

more at: http://www.endpoverty2015.org

Gaza Moves Towards Endgame

As you will probably know, ground forces are now in Gaza and the fighting is intense. While Israel used it's air-power there was little Hamas could do other then fling inaccurate rockets in their general direction, but now there are boots on the ground - Hamas is in a position to strike back: so the situation reaches it's end-game. However this is still an asymmetric war where Israel has the advantage of armour, air-power, better weapons and better financing for its forces. Hamas has the ground and a willingness to embrace death.

The global fallout continues: on Friday in Kabul 3000 protesters took to the streets;

In the capital Kabul, up to 3,000 protesters gathered for several hours outside a key mosque where they shouted "Death to Israel", "Death to infidels" and Islamic chants such as "God is greater," an AFP reporter witnessed.

This is key because of the 'hearts-and-minds' that the West is trying to win over. This is a huge blow for that campaign and you can be sure the Taliban will be making hay out of this. So to more links of interest:

Very interesting essay from Juan Cole on the situation, history and most importantly the longer-term political and population demographics;

The main immediate problem for the Israelis is that simply preventing Hamas from waging an ever more sophisticated microwar is an extremely short-term and technical objective. It may or may not be achievable by the methods of the current war, which appear so far to be conventional methods. Its outcome is not very material to a settlement of the larger issues.

Helena Cobban writes on the options open to Isreal now - remember the famous von Clausewitz quote; 'war is a continuation of politics by other means' - so when the fighting stops (or indeed grinds on) - where next? Unlike a conventional war, all Hamas have to do to win is survive whereas the unclear aims of the Israelis seem not lead to definitive outcomes;

At the end of the day, to extricate itself from the uber-quagmire that Gaza represents, both physically in itself and politically throughout the region and the world, Israel will still have to engage in a negotiation with Hamas. Here's why....

Also of note is the use of micro-blogging like Twitter to follow events;

Here's the main Twitter #Gaza feed which the IDF are posting to) and Al Jazeera's one. Both are worth a look.

The Role of Violence

Its the big thing that polarises political debates, the role of violence in political change. I have seen the debate go on and on. However, which is disturbing is the tendency of mainstream history to airbrush out certain types of violence, as can be seen in the Guardian today. Before we get into this point, lets start with what we mean by violence - Derrick Jensen writes that the difficult thing about violence is that we have but one word for many things. He writes that we have to use the same word for a mother bear defending her cubs from attack as a rapist; both are forms of violence. I agree; there are degrees of physical action are are distinct. So damage to property is not the same thing as damage to living things. Self-defence is not the same thing as starting a fight.

Once we have finished defining it we then need to recognise it. For example, today the Guardian had a bit piece on the Putney Debates:

By summer 1647, the Roundheads were winning the English civil war. At Marston Moor and Naseby, Oliver Cromwell's New Model Army had crushed the Cavaliers and King Charles I himself was now in custody. But among the victorious soldiers there was a gnawing fear that parliament and the army generals (or "grandees") were preparing to sell them out. Some MPs, fearing the religious militancy of the army and keen for a settlement with the king, wanted to cut soldiers' pay, disband regiments, refuse indemnity for war damage and pack them off to Ireland...Their grievances were taken up by Leveller agitators within the army rank and file. The Levellers ("who declared that all degrees of men should be levelled, and an equality should be established", according to critics) put forward a postwar manifesto entitled the Agreement of the People....It urged religious toleration ("The ways of God's worship are not at all entrusted by us to any human power"); a general amnesty and an end to conscription; a system of laws that must be "no respecter of persons but apply equally to everyone: there must be no discrimination on grounds of tenure, estate, charter, degree, birth or place"; regular, two-yearly parliaments and an equal distribution of MPs' seats by number of inhabitants. At its heart was a profound belief in human liberty and a conviction that politicians were as dangerous as princes when it came to undermining personal freedom. It was the people who were sovereign.

What the piece does not say is why these people were listened to - I would say because they were an army. What I think was missing is the very fact that ordinary people were able to push for such a radical agenda - because they had power, as Ian Bone noted in his book Bash the Rich:

Cromwell and Fairfax are increasingly exasperated by the leveller's demands for equality – not apparently made with any reference to religion, Christ, or god, as was the custom.
“By what right or power do you make these demands?” Inquires Fairfax. After a pause the reply came.
“By the power of the sword, Master Fairfax, by the power of the sword.” Whoops! Jesus Christ! What did he fucking say? Stick that up your warty old nose master Master Cromwell!

Bash the Rich

Well I've just finished reading 'Bash the Rich' by Class War co-founder Ian Bone. Bone was touted by the Sunday People as 'the most dangerous man in Britain'. Wow! Nice accolade. Bone has also been a major character in the Bristol political scene. I was going to write a short prece about what he has been up to, but I was beaten to it by the discovery that he has a wikipedia entry!

In 2001 Bone started the Vote Nobody campaign which encouraged residents in Easton, Bristol to turn out for the local election and vote for 'Nobody'...In that same year he started The Bristolian, a scandal-sheet that purported to give "independent news from Bristol that the other papers won't touch". Freely distributed throughout the bars and pubs of Bristol -- and by Bone himself in Bristol's Corn Street -- the newssheet gained a weekly circulation of over 15000. ...The Bristolian gave way to the Bristolian Party, which stood in the local elections in an attempt to mobilise widespread discontent with Bristol City Council's policies...On 1 May 2003 a total of 2560 people voted for the Bristolian Party, which gained an 8% share of the vote within the 12 wards they contested. The Bristolian was runner-up for the Paul Foot Award for investigative journalism in 2005....

Unfortunately the book only goes up to the mid/late 80s and does not cover his time in Bristol. 'Bash the Rich' is his account of his radicalisation in the 60s up to the end of the miners strike in the 80s. The book draws on Bone's considerable experience of street level politics and while a trawl through history, always sounds current. For example while describing the momentous events of '68 during protests against the Vietnam war, he remarks;

Indeed 35 years later the same Oxbridge crowd – Tariq, Pinter, the redgraves, Ken Loach – have led the anti-Iraq war movement into the same cul-de-sac of mind-numbingly boring rallies in Hyde Park instead of direct action on the streets to bring effective opposition to the war. The new generation of anti-war activists have had themselves saddled with the very same movement leaders so effectively bottled it in Grosvenor Square in 1968.

Many have critisised Bone for a lack of 'theory' to his politics. I think the book, while an easy read and very funny, does offer a pretty sharp political insight. Take this example, from his days in Swansea in the 1970s;

What we discovered with the Swansea Mafia pamphlet [about council corruption] was that it was possible to engage the political attention of the punters by concentrating on local issues but not presenting it in an overtly political way. People told us that the pamphlet wasn't political because it was 'the truth'....now what was needed was something that wouldn't just gain their interest in a passive way but would encourage them to organise and act now for themselves...

Bone also spends the last chapter on a jaunt through history to expalin his personal ideology. This is, I think, the best section of the book. Take this example as Bone describes a pivital moment from the Putney Debates:

Cromwell and Fairfax are increasingly exasperated by the leveller's demands for equality – not apparently made with any reference to religion, Christ, or god, as was the custom.
“By what right or power do you make these demands?” Inquires Fairfax. After a pause the reply came.
“By the power of the sword, Master Fairfax, by the power of the sword.” Whoops! Jesus Christ! What did he fucking say? Stick that up your warty old nose master Master Cromwell!

As you can see, the book is full of swearing. Would you expect otherwise? No! The book is a funny, brutal honest, often self-critical and absorbing account of Bone life from birth to the mid 80s. Once I got going with it, the momentum of his tale takes over and before you know it, it's all over. The book claims not to be a 'dry tome destined to gather dust in leftie bookshops' – an opinion I would concur with. A great read and I hope Bone writes a volume two. And some kids books too!

The March of Religion

I went along to the re-enactment today of James Nayler’s ride into Bristol in October 1656 (part of the Bristol Radical History week). I knew nothing of Nayler before the radical history crew put the spotlight on him. It's an interesting tale; Nayler was a former soldier in the civil war who, after God spoke to him, became an itinerant preacher. Here are some of his radical ideas;

He said no man or King had a divine right to rule. He was a fighter for democracy...He spoke out against the slave trade, "Where can the innocent go out and not a trap laid to bring him into bondage and slavery?"...He criticised the wealthy for taking the common land from the people...He denied that the Bible was the word of God and said that people had the 'spirit of Christ' within them.

Far from being a lone voice, he connected with people and his ideas had resonance and were a threat to the rich and powerful;

Sent to London where he was the subject of a full Parliamentary debate for ten days, and found guilty of "horrid blasphemy," he received over three hundred lashes, a brand of the letter B on the forehead, and finally a red-hot iron through his tongue. He was placed in solitary confinement for three years in Bridewell until 1659. He died a year after this.

It was great to see important parts of our past being commemorated. Nice one Bristol Radical History people!

Shoot the Rich

I was reading the paper today and noticed this little snippit;

But the Communist MP Viktor Ilyukhin commented recently: "We need such fairs so that we can place snipers near by and shoot their visitors as parasites. None of them earned their money honestly. Such events are sheer savagery."

On the subject of having it in for the rich, Ian Bone's book 'Bash the Rich' is out now.