CONTROL AND NATURE OF THE COMING WORLD ORDER
September 2004
Published in 2 Parts - Part 1
A Hornet's Nest Of Political Confusion And
Contradictions
Note carefully the above references and quotations;
not least the last two. Forget conventional party politics. What we
write here transcends simplistic, entrenched party political positions.
We are attempting to probe reality; the true world around us. Forget
the sources we quote for the same reasons of pre-emptive prejudice.
Think only of the truth and integrity of what these sources actually
convey. We all of us continue to witness brutality and genocide in the
Middle East and selective geopolitical concerns for, and reaction to,
equally serious scenarios elsewhere. The vast majority simply accept,
if not condone this and are resigned to live with it. Forget, too, the
ritually promoted concept of historical "Right-Wing" Imperialism,
or of Capitalism as a solely Right-Wing preserve. The United Kingdom
has been ruled for the last 7 years by a Left-Wing, International Socialist
Governments of so-called "New" Labour; government ostensibly
by ordinary people, of ordinary people for ordinary people. It is also
a Government that went to war, on blatantly falsified evidence, against
a Nation of ordinary people. Mark well, too, the naive, provocative,
cultural stupidity of United States President George W. Bush when he
invoked the term "Crusade".
That these were ordinary people in another land,
regardless of their religion, is irrelevant as well as a political "inconvenience"
for orthodox western political thought. One man and his personal iniquities,
Saddam Hussein, was the target. The devastation wrought by comparable,
concurrent iniquities inflicted on ordinary people by 12 years of insanely
draconian sanctions imposed by the Western Powers; ostensibly by the
United Nations, but essentially the United States and United Kingdom,
has been deliberately veiled from ordinary people in the West. One man,
Saddam Hussein, has now been removed from power for good. But what has
been "good" about the continuing oppression of 24,000,000
Iraqi people thereafter, ordinary people who simply want their country
and its natural resources back with the chance to rebuild their devastated
infrastructure themselves rather than under asset-stripping Haliburton
contracts? A country in which massive American military power continues
indiscriminately to smash down Iraqi nationalist resistance now united
across the religious divide - conveniently defined as "terrorism"
or "insurgency" - in the same way as America's Israeli mentor
continues to do with diplomatic impunity in the Occupied Territories
of Palestine?
Closer to home, we have written many times of a world of "poverty
amidst plenty", the observation of The Earl of Tankerville during
the 1930s(3). Under the people's Government of New Labour the rich continue
to get rich as the wealth and power that goes with this move off-shore,
the poor continue to get poorer, and the mass of the Middle Classes
get blamed and targeted. Lord Hewart of Bury, Lord Chief Justice of
England from 1922 to 1940, wrote as early as 1929 in The New Despotism(4)
that the right of people to govern themselves was being increasingly
subsumed by growing bureaucracy, and the autocracy of ministerial rule
through statutory, enabling legislation. That our edition of Lord Hewart's
book should have been published in New York suggests that he was potentially
encompassing a much wider audience. Controlled - selective and distorted
- coverage of the current conflict in Iraq, especially in the United
States, and increasingly restrictive legislation on the pretext of a
perceived "Terrorist" threat, is contemporary evidence of
how the public ethos, or psyche, has become one of growing diversion
from the reality of the progressive consolidation of power over the
minds of the people, and therefore their freedom to think and act for
themselves. Our great employers and suppliers, the manufacturing corporations;
major airlines afflicted by the current scenario of engineered military
conflict and "terrorism", may collapse, may come and go. Generally,
however, we witness the "two steps forward, one step backward"
of progressive global consolidation. But once again we have to state
that "Money" and its "creation" are the essential
stimulant and lubricant which give the system as a whole its lifeblood.
In just over 300 years since the Tonnage Act of 1694, through the World
Revolution of Karl Marx and Frederic Engels in the Nineteenth Century,
the Power of Money continued to be consolidated, as private property
and inheritance that brought independence for the individual began to
be targeted. The mechanisms of Money Power were developed during the
Twentieth Century and gathered enormous centralising momentum as the
Third Millennium approached. Think again of the analogy of lifeblood.
This is generated and regenerated according to the natural needs of
the human body as it grows and is sustained. What would happen if the
volume and regulation of this lifeblood became independent of the needs
of the body; in fact, developed a life of its own? Here are some extracts
from what Graham Seargeant, Financial Editor of The Times, wrote
on 13th August, 2004, under the heading "Top banks are the new
global hooligans":
On August 2nd a trader employed by Citigroup,
the world's largest banking enterprise, staged a coup that he will doubtless
talk about for many years to come. Over a two minute period, he blitzed
other traders in the eurozone government bond market with a plethora
of sales totalling more than £7,000,000,000. Prices plunged. He
then bought back about 40 per cent of the stock at lower prices. This
vignette, which you might have missed if you popped out for a cup of
tea, cost the rival traders an estimated £9,000,000. . . . The
M.T.S. electronic exchange, on which the bonds are usually traded, changed
the rules to limit the level of such short-term trading. Does it matter
to anyone else? Savers, and anxious members of pension schemes may be
shocked. It is hardly novel, however, to think of stock markets as casinos.
Speculative coups are as old as markets. . . . The legendary Nathan
Rothschild regularly staged coups on the London Stock Exchange. His
technique was to build up large positions secretly, by using a wide
network of brokers, before he struck. . . . From traders playing computer
games with other people's money to top-level operators organising pointless
takeovers to generate fees, those awfully nice, useful investment banks
have quietly become the overmighty subjects of the global community.
Philosophical And Practical "Fault Planes"
In The Global Scenario
That the lowly individual contemplating a 90
per cent reduction in a retirement pension when the pension fund into
which that individual has paid all his life collapses, or the mortgager
suddenly faced with negative equity on a property, are not even "Mickey
Mouse" factors in this scenario. How many city traders or directors
of banks have been imprisoned for this longstanding legalised robbery?
The United Kingdom Treasury and the City of London have been closely
interlinked during many years of government by both political parties,
and are linked in turn to the massive trade in "Money" on
a global scale. In our February edition of On Target we wrote of this
corrupt financial scenario in the context of the closure some 14 years
ago of a local hospital as part of a regional book-balancing exercise.
This important hospital had served a catchment of some 38,000 people
and the closure had severe penalties for those dependent on it. The
local Member of Parliament initiated what can only be seen as a largely
cosmetic campaign to restore improved medical "facilities".
We write this because neither he nor the Treasury Minister through whom
he processed the suggestion were to be drawn on the principle of seigniorage,
the right of a government to issue it own funds to meet the costs rather
than resort to public borrowing, even though this principle has the
support of a number of M.Ps. in the form of an Early Day Motion(5).
Meanwhile, under the part-privatisation of the Health Services; the
Public Finance Initiative (P.F.I.), devised by the "New" Labour
Government, financial institutions are making massive profits, if necessary
closing vital hospital facilities to ensure these profits.
The crux of these conflicts of interest between
ordinary people and the increasing globalisation of manufacturing and
financial power in the hands of an international oligarchy and their
functionaries, is that of the Nation; the Nation State. As long as people
can retain a common culture and tradition, they have a common identity
and are able to exist as a powerful, cohesive and motivated force against
this process. Thus it is possible for us to understand the true, diversionary
purpose of Multiculturalism and mass population movements that underlie
the veneer of Liberal-Left idealism, and that are exercised through
Political Correctness, restrictive Human Rights legislation and other
constraints on public expression and freedoms. We have frequently pointed
out that International Socialism is the essence of this erosion of national
identity. We have also observed on the frenzied reaction of the predominantly
International Socialist constituents of the European Union at the slightest
suspicion of so-called "Fascist" or "Right-Wing successes
in such countries as Austria or the Netherlands. The British Conservative
Party of traditional values and free enterprise is now trapped in this
artificial, arguably media-massaged vacuum. These contradictions arose
when the Financial Times reported "Far-right set for further
advances as S.P.D. falters" (7th August, 2004). Where is the logic
of a "neo-Nazi" or "Far-Right" cachet when it is
the National Democratic Party (N.P.D.), which defends the interests
of ordinary people in a world of commercial blackmail; of manufacture
scrambled across national boundaries, of imported labour and out sourced
jobs?
"We cannot bow before globalisation. The
state must recover its margins of manoeuvre," says Johannes Müller,
number three on the N.P.D. electoral list. "German corporate investment
must go to Germany first, and we must repatriate German industrial production."
Perhaps we should rise and say the same to British Governments of the
M.G.- Rover Car Company, the sole surviving nationally owned company
producing what are acknowledged to be generally an excellent range of
vehicles, but a company hampered by lack of investment; as the only
major manufacturer left after other once-proud marques have been sold
off to foreign ownership. But perhaps we should go back to the address
by Professor Arnold Toynbee, of the Royal Institute for International
Affairs for the seed-corn of this process. His words, in 1931, and published
in The Social Crediter fifty years afterwards in 1981, were that
there was a covert policy to destroy the sovereignty and independence
of the Nation State. Then, in 1947, the Design for Freedom Committee
of 24 leading public figures, including 10 Members of Parliament, produced
Design for Europe(6). In this we read the first signs of the internationalisation
of trade, and Anglo-American integration with Europe, with the caveat
that the people "must be led slowly and unconsciously into the
abandonment of their traditional economic defences, not asked, . . .
" Too many distinguished authorities have exposed this conspiracy
for it to be ignored. To name but two, the late C. Gordon Tether lost
his post as the "Lombard" columnist of the Financial Times
when he exposed the Bilderberg Group, and the plot for European integration(7).
Secondly, we have the momentous 1,348-page Tragedy and Hope from
Professor Carroll Quigley, himself a self-confessed insider(8).
CONSPIRACY OF POWER
We have written of "those who rule the world
behind the scenes"(9), so it is not without interest, en passant,
that Sir Evelyn de Rothschild, a descendant of Nathan Rothschild, is a
member of the Bilderberg Group. The foundation of the European Union,
or Community, with the diversion of a prospective European Economic Community
- from "E.E.C." to "E.C." - along the way, is undoubtedly
a part of the process of consolidation in which the United States played
a leading role in the post-1939-45 War years(10)(11). In conversation
with a person with considerable experience of the "corridors"
of Whitehall and Westminster, it was suggested that the destruction of
the Twin Towers of the World Trade Centre in New York, on 11th September,
2004, was a huge diversionary exercise. But a diversion from what? We
examined the destruction of the World Trade Centre in four successive
editions of On Target(12). Many questions appear to remain unanswered
to this day. We are aware of no meaningful inquiry, and of no unequivocal,
definitive evidence or explanation for the disaster. Press coverage beloved
of British Sunday broadsheets has remained speculative and as substantial
as wet blotting paper. "Diversion" is a well enough understood
dictionary term. As "Diversiya" it was also a carefully detailed
element of Soviet Politico-Military Doctrine geared to the destabilisation,
the weakening of an opponent. Diversion in this sense may be argued as
having Social, Logistical and Technological components that contribute
to the achievement of an ultimate operational objective. The destruction
of the World Trade Centre September 11th could have been initiated to
divert attention from, or progress, some greater strategic aim of which
we might not yet be aware.
We should also take account of the World Revolution,
to destroy the Existing Order. Despite the formal collapse of Soviet
Communism, with its continuity in the work of Marx and Engels, we know
that the teaching of the Eighteenth Century philosopher Jean-Jacques
Rousseau (1712-78), runs like a virus, however subconsciously or subliminally,
from the French Revolution of 1789 through society today(13):
Rousseau is best known for his contributions
to political philosophy, with his Social Contract (1762), being
generally regarded as his masterpiece. In that he argues for a version
of sovereignty of the whole citizen body over itself, expressing its
legislative intent through the general will, which is supposed to apply
to all equally because it comes from all alike. The general will tends
to promote liberty and equality, in Rousseau's view, and it both arises
from and promotes a spirit of fraternity. . . . One of Rousseau's most
memorable epigrams, "Man is born free; and everywhere he is in
chains", comes from the Social Contract and has been a rallying-cry
for revolutionaries and reformers ever since. Another central thought
in Rousseau's work is that man is by nature good, but he is corrupted
and depraved by society.
If we are to take all possible factors into account
we must also consider the spiritual dimension. The readership of On
Target includes subscribers of the three principle faiths; Islam, Christianity
and Judaism. We therefore avoid unnecessary controversy, especially,
for example, with Atheists or Humanists who deny the existence of a
superior Being, with the fundamental challenge that ultimate faith must
include the definition of Infinity in terms of space and time. There
is no answer. However, anyone who has encountered those who have been
associated with satanic possession or been acquainted with the supernatural
experiences of Dr Kenneth McAll who, with his wife was a missionary
doctor in Japanese-occupied China, will recognise the existence of the
transcendental forces of Good and Evil regardless of religious faith(14).
On a more earthly level, a certain species of engineers and scientists
manifests enormous intelligence and professional intensity whilst concurrently
lacking basic common sense in the real environment of life around them.
In uniform in the Armed Forces, such individuals have been humorously
referred to as the "men in white coats who work in padded cells".
There is more than a grain of truth in this. According to Lieutenant
Colonel Archibald Roberts, United States Army, retired, a "Mattoid"
is defined in Webster's Encyclopaedic Unabridged Dictionary of The English
Language as "A person of abnormal mentality bordering on insanity".
In the August, 2004 edition of his Newsletter, Bulletin - Committee
To Restore The Constitution, Lieutenant Colonel Roberts reproduced the
following article with the byline: "It is appallingly clear that
America the beautiful has fallen into the hands of political madmen!".
The article was taken from his The Anatomy Of A Revolution of 1968;
a self-documented research study to trace the origins of World Revolution
from Adam Weishaupt to David Rockefeller, and vital to understanding
forces underlying United States social, economic and political convulsions.
The Mattoid Syndrome
Our people are exploited and terrorized by coercive
domestic policy at home; our sons are betrayed in "no win"
military adventures abroad; and our national honour and integrity are
compromised all over the globe. An increasing number of United States
citizens, seeking recovery of national reason, recommend and endorse
a public examination of this strategy of defeat. They believe, as you
believe, that the peril of political madness can be ignored only on
pain of extinction of the State. Americans must, they warn, isolate
the psychology of those who promote rebellion and inspire a study of
the anatomy of revolution. One of these alarmed Americans is David O.
Woodbury, author of 23 books of science, who said in the Manchester
Union Leader, "We are confronted by a horde of mad-men. Mad
in the same sense that Hitler was mad a fact which the whole world accepts.
Mad in the sense that their conduct, their aspiration, their reasoning,
their actions are those of minds out of control, irrational, unsound,
blown by a hurricane of wilful insistence upon principles that civilization
has proved over and over again to be specious and often degenerate."
(15) It is also apparent that insanity has recruited a vast apparatus
of propaganda and employs a diabolical cleverness in posing as the protector
and benefactor of mankind while actually furthering nihilistic objectives.
[Nihilism: the rejection of all religious and moral principles; denial
of all reality; the overturn of all existing institutions of society
in order to build it up anew on different principles].
Contemporary history, in fact, convincingly suggests
that those who head the Federal Government are manipulated by mattoids
by men of unbalanced and dangerous brilliance. These hidden exploiters
of the United States power structure apply an inverted psycho eugenic
science as a weapon against the people. They have, seemingly, perfected
a sophisticated and systematised plan, incorporating brainwashing and
genetic prostitution, to achieve Soviet style control over the American
social order. To escape the dolorous fate of yesterday's people, Americans
can dispel this doctrine of darkness by disseminating definitive intelligence
and by adopting corrective political action. Power entrenched mattoids
can only be overthrown by an informed and indignant electorate. It is
proposed that the psychopathic malignancy threatening the American civilization
be examined in depth and the knowledge gained thereby be applied with
surgical finality. Let us begin by defining the nature of the foe: The
Mattoid. Sociologist Max Nordau has identified three classifications
of the mattoid. "A mattoid or half fool," Nordau said, "who
is full of organic feelings of dislike, generalises his subjective state
into a system of pessimism, of 'Weltschmertz' weariness of life. Another,
in whom a loveless egoism dominates all thought and feeling, so that
the whole exterior world seems to him hostile, organises his anti social
instincts into the theory of anarchism. A third, who suffers from moral
insensibility, so that no bond of sympathy links him with his fellow
man or with any living thing, and who is obsessed by vanity amounting
to megalomania, preaches a doctrine of the Superman, who is to know
no consideration and no compassion, be bound by no moral principle,
but 'live his own life' without regard for others."
"When these half fools, as often happens,
speak an excited language," said Nordau, "when their imaginations,
unbridled by logic or understanding, supplies them with odd, startling
fancies and surprising associations and images their writings make a
strong impression on thought in the cultivated circles of their times."
(16) Irrational political decisions at policy making levels force upon
perceptive Americans the conclusion that an invisible government of
men "unbridled by logic or understanding" has acquired ultimate
power and influence in the United States. Furthermore, the image building
manipulations of these mattoids favour the development of similar attitudes
in others and give thousands perhaps millions of normally well balanced
persons the courage to overtly engage in absurd or infamous acts. "Through
the influence of the teachings of degenerate half fools," Nordau
continued, "conditions arise which do not, like the cases of insanity
and crime, admit of expression in figures, but can nevertheless in the
end be defined through their political and social effects. We gradually
observe a general loosening of morality, a disappearance of logic from
thought and action, a morbid irritability and vacillation of public
opinion, a relaxation of character. Offences are treated with a frivolous
or sentimental indulgence which encourages rascals of all kinds. People
lose the power of moral indignation, and accustom themselves to despise
it as something banal, unadvanced, inelegant, unintelligent. Deeds that
would formerly have disqualified a man for ever from public life are
no longer an obstacle in his career, so that suspicious and tainted
personalities find it possible to rise to responsible positions. [May
we cite the failure to resign, and reinstatement of certain British
"New" Labour politicians here? - Ed.]. Nobody is shocked by
the most absurd proposals, measures, and fashions, and folly rules in
legislation, administration, domestic and foreign politics . Everybody
harps upon his 'rights' and rebels against every limitation of his arbitrary
desires by law or custom. Everybody tries to escape from the compulsion
of discipline and shake off the burden of duty." (17)
Published fifty six years ago, Nordau's commentary, The Degeneration
of Classes and Peoples, is a shocking prophecy of the mattoid directed
malaise besetting America today. The destructive social doctrines of
our own time, attractive on the surface but basically subversive, are
essentially the product of unsound reasoning by unsound brains. Sociologist
Nordau ably analysed the enormous harm done by such individuals preaching
negative dogma. They lead astray vast numbers of average people whose
intelligence is not high enough to protect them against clever fallacies
clothed in emotional appeal, and they arouse the degenerate elements
and primitive types in society. In his book, The Revolt Against Civilization,
Lothrop Stoddard indicts these political madmen and suggests the manner
in which protectors of the American civilization may meet the challenge
of our day. Stoddard observed, "Construction and destruction, progress
and regress, evolution and revolution, are alike the work of dynamic
minorities. Numerically small, talented élites create and advance
high civilizations; while Jacobin France and Bolshevik Russia prove
how a small but ruthless revolutionary faction can wreck a social order
and tyrannize a great population". "Of course," he said,
"these dynamic groups are composed primarily of leaders they are
the officers' corps of much larger armies which mobilize instinctively
when crises arise."(18) America need not become a land of 'yesterday's
people'. Transform 'spectatorship' to 'participation' in the patriotic
struggle to restore, defend and preserve freedoms of person and property
guaranteed to you by the Constitution of the United States. Join citizen
initiated, State legislative action to outlaw the men and the system
engaged in a conspiracy to overthrow the Constitution and erect a United
Nations "New World Order" on ruins of the Republic.
FOLLOWING THE SPORE OF WORLD REVOLUTION
The Foggy Path Of Revolution And Illusions Of
Democracy
We are still not clear about the true path, the
signs and portents of World Revolution; or what this has achieved in
practice for ordinary people. In the United Kingdom the Conservative
Party remains fatally mystified, as do virtually all political commentators
and self-appointed experts - the "talking heads" of the Media.
Warnings about the real internal threat from Communism in the early
post-war decades by experts such as former intelligence officer diplomat
George Young have largely been tactically obscured by specious allegations
of "Right"-Wing association(19). We have largely lost the
contemporary knowledge and observations of the crucial 1920s, 1930s
and 1940s, with the pragmatic writing of top-flight journalists and
analysts like Henry Wickham Steed, Malcolm Muggeridge, Douglas Reed,
General Fuller, Ivor Benson, and others, whom the establishment prefers
not to acknowledge today(20). Two important articles appeared in The
Times in 1989, the bi-centenary of the French Revolution. "So where's
the revolution?" by Edward Mortimer carried, significantly, caricatures
of Marx, Lenin, Stalin, François Mitterrand and Neil Kinnock.
Mortimer wrote of the eventual dichotomy between the Second, Socialist
International and the Third Communist International; the Comintern.
Of these three differing schools of Socialist thought, he wrote:
The Germans [the Social Democratic Party, S.P.D.
- Ed.] acted as guardians of Marxists orthodoxy, which meant preserving
social democracy as a "revolutionary" force (ie., rejecting
any form of collaboration with bourgeois parties or the bourgeois state),
but a highly organised and disciplined one, strongly opposed to any
anarchistic or insurrectionary tendencies that might give the bourgeoisie
a pretext for repression and violence. (Emphasis added)
Thus we have the term "Social Democracy"
as part of the world-wide Socialist construction. Mortimer also quoted
Marx's daughter, Eleanor, as writing about the "international brotherhood
of the working class". This, of course, was not what the Revolution
was about, any more than we see under the "New" Labour Government
today; the Proletariat were simply the vehicle to Power. We must also
remember that Socialism leached into the United States during visits
by Eleanor Marx and others during the 1880s, and that Joseph Pogany,
Hungarian agent of the Communist International, entered the United States
illegally in 1922 and, using several aliases, helped to set up various
Socialist agencies there, such as the American Civil Liberties Union
(A.C.L.U.)(21). As "John Pepper" Pogany also wrote that "The
Negro question in America must be treated in its relation to the liberation
struggle of the proletariat against American imperialism"(22) Hence
we see how genuine race issues could be exploited as part of the wider
whole of International Socialist Revolution. Roger Scruton writing in
The Times of 10th July, 1989, identified a clear path between
Rousseau, Robespierre, a Jacobin leader during the French Revolution,
and on to Karl Marx, when he pointed out the sense of frustration for
the ideals and fantasies of the revolutionary confronted with the realities
of the world at large. Scruton echoed Rousseau and Marx with a glimpse
of the state as the "universal Lord", and trends we may see
in the International Socialist bureaucracy of today:
Christianity was replaced with a creed which
was more suited to this new obedience, a creed which did not insist
so embarrassingly on the fact that the individual is answerable for
his soul to God alone, and is the property of the earthly master - not
even of the state. The Revolution therefore sought to rid the bonds
between people of their ancient sanctity, and at the same time to involve
the state, as a mystical presence, in all the deepest ties and aspirations.
It is to the Revolution that we owe the new kind of "civil marriage",
. . . as well as the idea that children belong neither to their parents,
but to the state. . . . Revolutionary sentimentality ensures, however,
that the goal remains unreal. While passionate in the pursuit of liberty,
the revolutionaries destroyed all the institutions through which liberty
is defined. (Emphasis added)
We can identify the unbroken thread of Godless
World Revolution running through society from the 18th century philosophy
of Jean-Jacques Rousseau. It should be possible to understand how issues
in which there may be a grain of justification, even compelling reasons
of social justice, such as race or mass population movements, becomes
vulnerable to underlying or even subconscious exploitation for revolutionary
ends. The ultimate purpose of Revolution, that of Power, becomes more
apparent when one relates an absence of the same revolutionary zeal
to selective military and economic exploitation on a global scale. We
may reel the story forward to the mechanisms of political Correctness
today. Thus we may see the implications of what it is Politically Correct
to teach, or the control of religious worship, in schools on both sides
of the Atlantic. We must go back to Marxism-Leninism and the correct
observation and interpretation of Marxist-Leninist Doctrine. In a single
term, we are talking about "Control Freakery", which is not
a million miles away from the mechanisms exercised by "New"
Labour Governments. We have taken the following extracts from a treatise
by Dr Frank Ellis. For continuity and ease of reading we have omitted
distinctions between various sources where these occur within the text.
Lenin had devised "Partiinost". For our purposes this can
be taken as ideological identification with the Party. We have added
emphasis as necessary (23):
Knowledge and truth, argues Lenin, are a product
of one's class. In fact, what is called objective knowledge is a part
of the bourgeois conspiracy to retain power and control so that the
working classes can be exploited. In non-Marxist thought truth and knowledge
are merely bourgeois biases. . . . Taking his lead from Lenin, Kunitsyn,
in his analysis of partiinost, repeatedly emphasises the correctness
of Leninist teachings. Thus, he refers to "the correctness of the
chosen path". Various supporters of the Bolsheviks are upbraided
for being "unable correctly" to understand Bolshevism. . .
. Colleagues who make ideological mistakes need to be the focus of "correct
work", and problems of culture are to be resolved in "a correct
Leninist way". . . . The ideology of class makes possible a powerful
new mechanism for interpreting the world, scientific socialism no less.
Science and scientific method, as it had evolved since Newton, could
not escape the need for a correct understanding of the world, one that
was congenial to Marxism-Leninism. Where science clashed with Marxist-Leninist
ideology, as it frequently did in the course of the twentieth century,
then scientists were expected to confess "errors" and recant
or were arrested. . . . Liberated from the burden of proof, Lenin and
his successors were allowed to claim superior insight. The consequences
were profound. By insisting on party unity at all costs and instilling
fear of factionalism, Lenin made serious intellectual discussion impossible.
. . . Consistent with the creation of a revolutionary élite to
guide the masses, great emphasis in Lenin's writings is attached to
ensuring that the right people work in the party press, that they be
thoroughly well versed in Leninist thought and they have an intuitive
understanding of what is Politically-Ideologically Correct. . . . By
the time of Lenin's death in 1924, and certainly no later than the end
of the 1920s, the concept of correctness was pervasive in ideology,
politics, psychiatry, education, literature, history, jurisprudence,
culture and economics. To be politically correct meant to be consistent
with, not deviating from, the party line on any given issue. . . . Socialist
realism demanded that artists depict the world as it ought to be not
as it was. Again, this principle has been thoroughly grasped by feminists
and appears to be the holy of holies among practitioners in our contemporary
broadcast and print media. It is, too, as any interested American parent
can confirm, crucial in the production and marketing of contemporary
textbooks, many abandoning any pretence of historical accuracy in the
name of "balance" and "fairness". Likewise affirmative
action and equal opportunities programmes are predicated on a theoretical
template that owes little to empirical data and human behaviour. . .
. [The] intention is to use language as a weapon. In this scenario language
is not primarily used to communicate ideas but rather to signal the
speaker's willingness to submit to the politically correct register
(gay, for example, in place of homosexual or gender in place of sex).
Language is power not for the masses but for the party intellectuals
who are to instruct us on correct usage. Contemporary political correctness
pursues the same policy by dominating public discourse and creating
a climate of fear such that "incorrect" opinion is declared
illegitimate, extreme or racist and so on.
The message contained in these few extracts should be plain. We should
also recognise how the Doctrine of the Revolution is being applied in
everyday life. Certain references are to the United States, although
they apply equally in the United Kingdom. One tends automatically to
regard America as the land of the free, but it is apparent that the
Marxist-Leninist "virus" infused by Eleanor Marx, Joseph Pogany
and others has corrupted the American psyche, however subtly. In the
following extracts from the original article, we witness the same revolutionary
virus in the corridors of Westminster. Emphasis has been addded where
necessary.
How Labour Ministers Lie About The World And
Their Opponents
By Peter Oborne, The Spectator, 21st August, 2004
One of the key reasons why New Labour has been successful for so long
is its ability to destroy or marginalise opponents. The techniques used
are ruthless. Those who challenge government orthodoxy are smeared,
discredited and rubbished as liars. Their motives are questioned and
their characters assassinated. Normally, in the quotidian frenzy of
political debate, there is no time to examine how ministers construct
their arguments. Life moves on, the smears and falsehoods remain hanging
in the air. . . . The last week has provided two interesting case studies.
One involves the claim made by Denis MacShane, Minister for Europe,
that Tory Eurosceptics are guilty of fostering racism. The second concerns
the Schools Minister David Miliband's eye catching assertion that A
level standards are as high as ever. First Miliband. It is interesting
to note that he kicked off his speech last Tuesday not by making a reasoned
argument, but by questioning the good faith of his opponents. He accused
those who argue that A level standards have fallen of wanting "to
defend the old order of things", and of putting up "barriers
of birth not merit" to the rise of hard working pupils from all
over the country. Miliband's method of argument is disgraceful. The
wave of protests against low standards in Britain's schools had not
come from the tiny section of British society supposing it still exists
in any meaningful way which continues to depend on so called "barriers
of birth". The complaints about failing standards in schools have
come from other quarters; employers, universities, and some of the examiners
themselves. An important series of articles in The Economist
has shown how a growing number of universities now regard A levels as
such a worthless measure of achievement that they are searching for
other methods of assessing potential students. In medical and veterinary
science, six of the top faculties in Britain now select through a special
biomedical admissions test. Eight law schools are now following suit
with a legal aptitude test. Other universities have simply given up
on A levels as a method of sorting out bright students. Leeds Metropolitan
and Huddersfield Universities, which have 20 applicants for each physiotherapy
place, just choose successful applicants randomly from those with the
right grades. Miliband believes that this oversupply reflects a heroic
improvement in teaching standards in the last 20 years. All the evidence
suggests the exact opposite.
This week a pamphlet published by the Bow Group
showed that nine out of ten academics believe A levels have been devalued.
A remarkable recent survey by Coventry University showed that those
with a B grade in mathematics have the same or possibly worse capacity
as those who actually failed the exam in 1991. Reports from employers
echo these concerns. The Economist has revealed how the Ministry
of Defence has been obliged to start a large remedial mathematics programme
after it emerged that soldiers with a C pass at G.C.S.E. are often baffled
by common fractions. Listen to this from the Engineering Council: "There
is strong evidence from diagnostic tests of a steady decline over the
past decade of fluency in basic mathematical skills and of the level
of mathematical preparation of students accepted on to degree courses".
One could go on and on. It is intellectually dishonest of Miliband to
ignore the massive amount of evidence showing that A level standards
have fallen sharply in the last 20 years, and utterly shameless to misrepresent
those who point this out as defenders of social privilege. Miliband's
refusal to acknowledge there is a problem can only lead directly to
false policy prescriptions, and in the long term do great damage. His
speech in complete defiance of independent research, academic opinion
and common sense. I don't think that Miliband is consciously lying.
My guess is he has very little understanding of the world outside Whitehall.
He is an intellectual who lives a tidy, well ordered life dedicated
to targets and statistics, animated in part by a sub Marxist ideology
of central control. In his tightly defined world, standards go up and
up, and anyone who claims otherwise is a myth maker, a reactionary and
a liar.
The case of Denis MacShane, Europe Minister, is similar in certain respects,
but more flagrant. MacShane too operates by trashing the characters
and misrepresenting the motives of his opponents. Two weeks ago, during
the course of an interview with The Daily Telegraph, Mac-Shane
insinuated that Eurosceptic newspapers and some Tory politicians were
encouraging racism. Later he went on the Today Programme to enlarge
on his proposition. He called for a "fact based" debate. Then
he denounced the Eurosceptic press for telling monstrous lies and myths
about Europe, citing in particular the case of one newspaper which had
described Eastern European immigrants as a "murderous horde".
MacShane told Ed Stourton, the Today programme interviewer, that this
sort of thing must stop. Afterwards I consulted a database to discover
which newspaper had used inflammatory language in this shameful and
probably illegal way. Nothing came up, so I rang the Foreign Office
News Department, which promised to get back with an answer. Five minutes
later, to my surprise, MacShane himself came on the line. When I asked
about the "murderous horde", MacShane became vague, changing
the subject by citing other stories, one by The Sun journalist
George Pascoe Watson and another by Ed Heathcoat Amory in the Daily
Mail, which he alleged to be false. I informed MacShane that I would
warn these journalists that he was blackening their reputations behind
their backs, then continued to press him about his "murderous horde".
MacShane started to wriggle, eventually denying that he had ever used
the phrase. "I never said it", he insisted.
Once our conversation was over, I listened again
to a tape of MacShane's Today Programme interview. This is what he said:
"You remember in the Winter there was all this hysteria about people
from Poland and Hungary coming into the country. They were described
in one of our papers as a murderous horde a murderous horde. These are
nurses and hospital workers from Poland. They are European citizens.
They are paying taxes here. When is somebody going to stand up to that
kind of language?" Millions of people were listening to that Today
Programme interview. They heard a senior Government Minister make a
charge of extreme gravity. He repeated it twice. Listeners were entitled
to assume that he was telling the truth. In fact he had made up the
quote. Government Ministers nowadays talk a great deal about the need
to recapture public trust in politics. But they themselves feel free
to smear their opponents and distort the truth. It is a horrible way
of conducting public debate. In their different ways David Miliband
and Denis MacShane are bringing democratic politics into contempt.
Tracking The Deadly Virus Of Revolution
With the pedigree of the Second International,
and continuity of the Ideological Struggle through the Institute for
Social Research in Frankfurt-am-Main, in Germany(24), we may safely
assume that Socialists such as David Milibrand and Denis MacShane have
assimilated the Socialist philosophy and methodology. Unlike political
activists from Southern Africa, for example, we are not aware of formal
training on any scale in Marxism-Leninism at establishments behind the
Iron Curtain. On the other hand, little publicity was given to a continuum
of official collaboration through-out the Cold war period between the
British and Eastern Bloc Governments. This was recorded in a series
of Government Command Papers. The fields of collaboration included Science,
Technology, Education, Culture (including the Media) and Industry. It
is very likely that among those who participated in these exchanges
were students who later went on to occupy official positions; not least
in Politics. Such activities were easy meat for the waiting K.G.B. and
the G.R.U. (Soviet Military Intelligence). George Young likewise detailed
the Left-Wing activities and affiliations of politically active students
and others in the United Kingdom(25). Dr Ellis described the continuity
of the World Revolution following the formal collapse of Soviet Communism
very well(26):
To conclude I offer an allegory. It is pessimistic
and belongs to the genre of low-budget horror films. Imagine a giant
arachnid, defeated and mortally wounded, which in its death throes,
manages to ejaculate a stream of spores. The victor, savouring his hard
won triumph, fails to see that the spores have landed on his body. If
not decontaminated they will begin the process of his metamorphosis
into the very monster he has just vanquished.
We should consider the Spectator article in the form of a template
over the relevant parts of the text, which have been highlighted. In
this way we should be able to interpret the words of the two Ministers.
That opponents might be "smeared" or "discredited"
is a denunciation of those who take an incorrect position. That Milibrand
went on to question "the good faith of his opponents" simply
reiterated the denunciation. When he accuses his opponents of defending
the "old order of things" it is to state the correct position;
this position being that A-level standards have not fallen regardless
of a wealth of "scientific" evidence to the contrary. In other
words, it is The Economist, the universities, the Engineering
Council and other critics that are in error, because they challenge
the correct position. "Barriers of birth not merit" is the
correct Marxist-Leninist position on the class system. This is the correct
position notwithstanding the apparently subjective nature of Milibrand's
statement, and regardless of any evidence to the contrary; in any case
that is not the point! Naturally there would have been no "problem"
as far as Milibrand was concerened because his was the correct position.
That over-supply indicates an "heroic improvement in teaching standards",
in Milibrand's words, simply reflects the correct position. Few, except
the politically motivated, who have studied the politicised turbulence
within the profession and the politicised control of Education would
readily agree. Conflict over standards and between ideals of independent,
grammar and state schooling are elements of the Ideological Struggle.
However, to suggest "intellectual dishonesty" or shamelessness;
to suggest that Milibrand was not "consciously lying" or has
"very little understanding" may be a literally true observation.
But if the interpretation of Milibrand's statements is valid, this is
a total misconception; Milibrand could have known exactly what he was
about in Marxists-Leninist terms.
In the case of Denis McShane, what he may have
said or not said is irrelevant in Marxist-Leninist terms. The truth
is that which accords with the interests of Marxism-Leninism. The "murderous
horde" story might well have been fabricated had this served the
correct Marxist-Leninist position. Neither Milibrand or McShane would
have "felt free" in their actions. Nor would either man be
"bringing democratic politics into contempt" in the accepted
sense. On the other hand, had such a move served some deeper diversionary
purpose, they would have conspired to this end. Interpreted in Marxist-Leninist
terms their words and actions would have been exactly in accordance
with Marxist-Leninist Doctrine.
If either Milibrand or MacShane were to be challenged on the basis of
these assessments, neither would be likely to concede the truth. It
is quite possible that they would have taken the line they did instinctively,
especially with their strong Left-Wing backgrounds. We must not over-look
the "virus" factor. Although limited generally, Marxism had
taken root in the South Wales coalfields by the beginning of the Twentieth
Century, and was strong during the Spanish Civil War of 1936-38. In
the 1920s a handful had attended the Lenin School, in Moscow. Hywel
Francis also recorded a "continuous tradition of Marxist education"
in the Rhondda Valley, and the Communist Party of Great Britain (C.P.G.B.),
was very active in the region(27). During the conflict with the Government
of Margaret Thatcher in the mid-1980s, the National Union of Mine-workers
(N.U.M.), was heavily influenced by Communists. This dispute, albeit
with considerable justification for the concerns of the miners, that
were validated by subsequent developments, was conducted on the basis
of the Armed Struggle. A Communist tactic, too, had always been that
a Communist conclave would take place prior to a formal trades union
meeting, to decide the line to be taken. In Education, we have the example
of Sir Cyril Burt, originator of the 11-plus examination and knighted
by a Labour Government. Unfortunately for Burt, his position on Education
had become incorrect, and in 1979 he was subjected to a vicious character
assassination, employing false evidence, by the B.B.C. This was no different
in principle to a formal Soviet Communist denunciation. Had this taken
place in the Soviet Union in the Stalinist 1930s or 1940s, Burt would
probably have been executed after a "show" trial. A decade
later, he might have been sent to a psychiatric hospital (The Sunday
Telegraph, 2nd August, 1987, and The Times, 15th February,
1992). Can we ignore the elusive thread of continuity indicated by the
article in The Spectator?
(To be continued)
|
