Why I never supported Jeremy Corbyn in spite of being extremely left wing. Putin,Ukraine, Conspiracy.

Over the last few years I've been at odds with many of my really nice friends on the left of politics. When the Labour party elected a left wing leader they thought they had it made. They thought it was inevitable that such a good, decent, honest man would become our prime minister and everything would be wonderful after that. I'm reminded of a story M, my wife, tells. When she lived in Washington DC Jesse Jackson was trying to be president. All her black friends and colleagues thought he was bound to be selected and win as all the people they knew supported him. They were oblivious of the fact that if he was running against a pet rabbit in most of America the rabbit would win.

It was a similar situation for JC. Those who opposed him in his party, quite unreasonably I thought, were clearly seen as running dog capitalist revisionists. Following the new leader became something of a cult

and criticising his leadership and/or policies laid one out for vicious attacks, as I saw when one of my friends dared to suggest in a Facebook discussion that the Blair government did some good things (they did, but they were overshadowed by increasingly right wing policies and an illegal war).

JC is a very nice man, with a level of simplicity and naivete that makes him completely unsuitable to lead a party, let alone a country.

Back in the 1930s the Labour Party was led by another very nice man, George Lansbury. While Hitler was re-arming Germany he pushed for disarmament in Britain. He thought that the fascist threat could be alleviated by having nice chats with Hitler and Mussolini. One of my great heroes in history is Gandhi, but he thought that Hitler could be stopped by passive resistance. The problem with really nice people is that they cannot understand the mindset of a psychopath.

Negotiating with a Hitler or a Putin is like negotiating with an intelligent crocodile about its dietary requirements, when you are on the menu. They have no concept of compassion, no understanding of integrity.

I have often stated that I am far to the left of most people even on the left of the Labour Party. If I were dictator I would, for example, abolish private property. Aye, but there's the rub, dictator. I'm also a democrat. Trying to establish a utopia by dictat inevitably leads to the creation of a dystopia. Trying to establish the mildest form of socialism when most of the media outlets are owned by right wing billionaires is always going to be an uphill struggle and can only be achieved by a united team of very clever, media savvy politicians who are able to avoid own goals and can convincingly wash off the inevitable smears that they will be subjected to. Unfortunately, I don't see this at the moment. The best that we can hope for is a break from the corrupt, incompetent, cruel  and extreme bunch of media savvy buffoons who currently run the country.

The internet, combined with quite reasonable mistrust of the "MSM" has led to the growth of online news channels. Nowadays anyone with a laptop and a smartphone can become a 'citizen journalist' basically pushing their own prejudices. This leads, alongside social media, to people living their lives in an echo chamber where their views and the facts that support them are never challenged.

Facts are something that need discussing. When I were a lad the divide between fact and opinion was fairly clear. Nowadays, through the power of the internet many people believe some absolutely batshit crazy things as facts. The world is ruled by a cabal of satanic paedophilic cannabalistic reptilian Jews is one alleged fact that has gained traction across the political spectrum in recent times. Versions of this are believed with a religious zeal. Challenging it is like challenging the belief that Jesus died and rose again or that there is no God but Allah and Mohammed is His prophet, depending on your religious background. When alleged facts are challenged the fact checkers are attacked.

All this nonsense has spawned nothing but confusion in many people's minds. Many good people don't know if they're left wing or right wing, or they're left wing but support right wing causes, like the recent truckers "Freedom" convoy in Canada. M once had a very tense conversation with a Labour supporting friend who was recommending that she watch a film by Nazi apologist David Irving.

I 'believe' in a conspiracy. It's my theory. There seems to be increasing evidence of it. Wealthy far right Americans have collaborated with the FSB (successor to the KGB) to undermine western democratic politics ( I know, they're not perfect and I've long been a critic of the system) by using 'useful fools' on the internet, combined with paid creators of crazy stories and bots to multiply the effects. They've used clever algorythms to target their messages, fine tuned for each person. They've also been funding and otherwise assisting extreme nationalists, like the French National Front and the Brexit campaign. In fact, they've been helping anyone whose objective is to sow division and disorder.

Whatever could be the objective of all this? Well, it's not about freedom or taking back control. It's about libertarianism, which sounds good but it actually means that the strong rule and the weak are crushed. It's every man for himself. It's about overthrowing any semblance of democracy or rule of law.

Our global conspirators (who are not actual lizards but do tend to lack some of the characteristics of higher mammals) even managed to get their puppet into the United States presidency.

Interestingly, Mr Trump initially got off on the wrong foot with the current crisis in Ukraine. He praised his old pal Vlad (the impaler?) and attacked Ukraine for being full of "left wing Nazis" (!!!!????). When he saw the huge global surge of support for the brave Ukrainian people he changed tack and started criticising the past weakness of Democrat administrations (a rare point of agreement between me and him) in dealing with his old friend and financier in the Kremlin.

Sadly, the left of the Labour party also got it wrong. https://politics.co.uk/news-in-brief/shadow-defence-secretary-says-some-labour-mps-fell-for-some-of-putins-propaganda/

The orthodox left has always had a soft spot for Russia. Of course, the revolution in 1917 gave great hope of establishing global socialism. Gradually, many people started to understand that the USSR had morphed into something that more resembled National Socialism than the workers paradise that the propaganda portrayed. It's interesting that in Russia the second world war in known as the Great Patriotic War, not the Great anti Fascist War. Nevertheless, many retained their affection for the country, even after the collapse of the soviet empire and the increasing repression of the Putin regime.

It's interesting how in recent times references to Ukraine and the Orange Revolution have brought suggestions from certain people that it's full of fascists. If loving the land of your birth makes you a fascist, then I'm a fascist, but I see no sign of serious fascism in modern Ukrainian politics. Certainly, Volodomir Zelensky seems far from fascistic. Indeed, as a Jew he is unlikely to support Nazi racial ideology (which also saw Slavs as an inferior race). Certainly there are fascists in Ukraine, just as there are here, in France, in Greece, and in the USA (supporting Trump). Strangely, I recently learned that there is a fascist brigade in the Ukrainian army. At first I thought maybe I was wrong, perhaps Ukraine is fascist. When I looked into it (actually M did) I found that it was a pretty small group and for years they'd been deployed against the Putin supported breakaway regions. It seems to me that was a smart move. If you have a bunch of potentially troublesome ultra nationalists prepared to die for the country you can either let them cause trouble at home or send them off to fight where they've a good chance of getting killed.

I hate war. On a planet in imminent danger of boiling us because of our profligate exhalations of CO2 it's the last thing we need. However, I'm not a complete pacifist. There are powerful people in the world who only understand power and will crush anyone who eschews it. It's a sad thing that we have to keep spending money (and lots and lots of carbon) on constantly updating weapons. To stand still is to be overtaken and to be overtaken makes you prey for the world's carnivores. I didn't agree with a lot of the wars that our country has been involved in over my lifetime but it's with a heavy heart that I say I support the armed resistance of the Ukrainian people and hope the supply of modern weapons goes smoothly. Sadly, giving Putin a bloody nose, a phrase used by some of my friends, means lots of grief for parents, siblings, partners and friends of unwitting Russian conscripts who never expected to be sent to kill their friends in Ukraine.

I do hope the scales are falling from the eyes of some of my conspiracy minded friends. Have you ever been had?



War and Freedom (6th December 2013)

War and Freedom

I have lots of confusion around the business of armed conflict. Part of me is a pacifist hippy, hating all war, but another part of me challenges this as naive. I have a fascination with military hardware, especially aircraft, but I am saddened by the fact that so much human ingenuity goes into machines of destruction.

Is it just me or do other people see military aircraft differently depending on their origin. To me a Mescherschmidt has a nasty malevolent look, whereas a Spitfire, though a very similar aircraft, looks beautiful. I remember seeing B52s flying into Britain ready to begin operations against Iraq. To me they were like invaders from Mordor.

I've always been a great admirer of Ghandhi, but I once read his opinions of how Hitler should be resisted, non violently. Non violent resistance depends for its success on the humanity of your opponents. If you are dealing with psychopaths, who are incapable of compassion, it will not work. Sadly, there was no alternative to the second world war. Had my parents generation not fought then the whole world would probably be living under oppressive regimes. The freedoms that we have are easily eroded though, the main threat now coming not from governments but from corporations.

I've recently been reading some books about military leaders. Their psychology fascinates me. The first was Field Marshal Montgomery's autobiography. Though he was known for blowing his own trumpet, I think there is little doubt that his appointment in 1942 was crucial to turning the war around. I hadn't realised that his predecessor's only plan was to retreat when Rommel attacked at El Alemein. The question in my mind is what would have happened in the modern world. It seems to be widely accepted now that Monty was a paedophile. Some say that this only went as far as getting boys to strip naked to be inspected. My partner, who has dealt professionally with paedophiles, tells me that if he was doing this there is little doubt that he was going further. This, apparently was generally known about at the time and seen as an eccentricity. Today he would have been arrested, probably long before he rose to the rank of General. Would it be right to turn a blind eye to his predelictions in order to get the best man in the crucial position?

I'm now reading about Garibaldi. I never knew much about him, just that he founded Italy and had a biscuit named after him. He must have got a buzz out of battle. Beginning as a pirate off the South American coast he fought for liberation movements in Brazil and Uruguay before returning to his native Italy, then a hotch potch of monarchies, dukedoms, Papal states and parts of the Austrian empire. With a ragtag volunteer army, fiercely loyal to him, he frequently defeated bigger, better armed and more conventional forces until, eventually Italy became a constitutional monarchy with reasonable freedoms for its people. Garibaldi was obviously a brilliant and charismatic leader, but he also seems to have been a decent man who cared about others. He would not put up with maltreatment of prisoners and only fought for liberation causes, eschewing honours and money and with little time for politicians. Though he didn't go himself, some Garibaldinis fought on the Union side in the American civil war, but Garibaldi would not give his support until he was sure that a Northern victory would definitely mean emancipation for the slaves.

It worries me that the freedoms achieved at such great cost in the past by people like the Garibaldinis, trades unionists, mass trespassers etc can so easily be lost in an era when most information is controlled by a handful of wealthy people and the population seems to be taken in by bread, circuses and shopping.