Friday, 31 October 2014

National Zionism and Bundism - Not Contradictory but Complimentary


SWPE believes that every people has a right to live according to their own traditions, culture and ethnic predisposition.  This applies to the Jewish people as much as to every other.  The 'Jewish Question' is one which has plagued humanity for such a long time that it has become an obsession for Jews and non-Jews alike.

SWPE does not support the concept of Assimilation for any people into any other.  We oppose 'multi-culturalism' because we understand that it is the long-term objective of the global Ruling Class to destroy all vestiges of culture, sovereignty, nationhood and identity, which differentiate the peoples of the world.  We fully support global diversity and oppose the liberal Capitalist drive to create a world of slaves whose purpose is solely to create wealth for the self-appointed Masters.

The Jewish role in global Capitalism, especially Banking, has led many people to accuse the Jewish people as a whole of having an agenda to enslave non-Jews.  We do not accept this over-simple generalisation of the Jewish nation.  There are certainly Jewish elements in the Ruling Financial Oligarchy but there are also many non-Jews who exploit Jews and non-Jews in equal measure.  The religious Jews who believe in a Master Race ideology give credence to anti-Jewish propagandists, but the extent of influence of the supremacists in general Jewry is grossly exaggerated by many 'anti-Semites.'

SWPE support the concept of a Jewish State.  This is why we have a part of our ideology which we have chosen to call National Zionism.  It is Zionist insofar as it supports the right of the Jewish people to live amongst their own kind.  It is National Zionist because it opposes all imperialist tendencies, whether they are concerned with the financial exploitation of others, or as is the case with Israel and Palestine, with the theft of land which belongs to other people.

Historical support for Zionism from within Socialist circles include the following, which we gratefully quote from the site http://research.calvin.edu/german-propaganda-archive/gercke.htm (full written permission was obtained from the author Randall Bytwerk and can be seen on request):

Solving the Jewish Question 

by Dr. Achim Gercke


All proposals that include a permanent presence, a permanent regulation of the Jews in Germany, do not solve the Jewish Question, for they do not eliminate the Jews from Germany (denn sie lösen die Juden nicht von Deutschland). And that is what we want to do. If the Jews are able to exploit their host peoples forever, they will remain a constant source of the open, destructive flame of Bolshevism, making it easy to repeatedly kindle it again, not to mention the political uncertainties resulting from disunity within the people and the danger to racial unity. Let us swear off such thinking forever, whether it results from poor thinking or evil intentions. To summarize, the state can and must focus on systematical elimination, on emigration.

If we destroy any organizational cooperation of the Jews and expel the dangerous, subversive Jewish agitators who show any signs of conspiratorial activities, the Jews will still have the synagogue, the rabbi, to shield them. If we support Zionist plans and attempt an international solution by establishing a homeland for the Jews, we will be able to solve the Jewish Question not only in Germany, but in Europe and the entire world. The entire world has an interest in such a solution, on eliminating this source of disorder, which constantly proceeds from Bolshevism. We must establish that clearly.

Perhaps the Jews will be able to become a nation, a people. That would require that Jewish workers, craftsmen, and settlers would develop from the Jewish population. If we regulate this plan, they we will create new foundations for such a settlement. Scattering the Jews to the four winds does not solve the Jewish Question, but rather makes it worse. A systematic program of settlement, therefore, is the best solution.

Plans and programs must have a goal pointing to the future. They may not be focused only on a temporarily unpleasant situation. A better future demands the systematic solution of the Jewish Question, not the organization of the Jews.

We must build our state without the Jews. They can be only stateless foreigners among us, with no legal permanent standing. Only so will Ahasver [the legendary wandering Jew] be forced to take up his walking stick again, and then turn it into axes and spades.

The End of Jewish Migration

by Dr. Johann von Leers
The only imaginable, positive solution that will finally resolve the Jewish problem in Europe and at the same time provide the real possibility of becoming a people, of becoming rooted to land, and even perhaps allowing its less valuable elements to be influenced by the more valuable elements, is a healthy region outside Europe. The Dutchman von Dinghene, in his book Vollzionismus, has proposed the island of Madagascar, but one could also imagine certain other suitable African or South American regions. On the one hand, such a settlement area must give the Jewish people a space where they can work productively, within the framework of providing space for peoples who now lack space. On the other hand, in those countries where the Jews are being separated from the Gentile population, the Jews will lose a large number of jobs. They must today be trained in work groups, receiving education in practical skills and agriculture so that they will be prepared to settle in this area. Those major Western European colonial powers, who are always worked up about the Jewish Question and its effects in Eastern and Central Europe, without however really seeing the connections, would perform a work not only of humanity, but also statesmanlike wisdom that would bring peace to the world and the solution of one of its most serious problems were they to make such a settlement area available. That would not only relieve Europe of the Jewish problem, but also enable Jewry to become a people.

Of course, there is a danger that such a Jewish settlement area would become a world-famous El Dorado of criminality, given the deep moral decay of a large part of Jewry. There will have to be a force to provide just and honest supervision. This would also be possible, and details could be worked out. The danger may not hinder a broad solution of the Jewish Question by resettling Jewry to an appropriate settlement area outside of Europe. We propose this to the world: Give Ahasver a homeland, as far as possible from us, but sufficient and attractive. If he makes of it a garden he may keep it, and will be protected. If, however, he makes of it a den of thieves, then one will keep him there. However, we must attempt a decent solution to this question. Those Jews who for centuries have recognized the battle of the Jewish Question are called to contribute to a real solution, those Jews who recognize that the dream of Jewish world domination has failed, and who are therefore ready to become a people among peoples. Those peoples among whom the question burns the hottest because of the Jewish masses among them area also called, particularly the major Western European colonial powers with vast possessions, for it cannot be permitted that a decent solution be prevented by cheap humanitarian slogans. With a single blow the Jewish question, which has always surfaced, can be resolved.

The above historical justifications of Zionism are arguments we applaud and share.  However, there is another alternative to Assimilation which we need to give our attention to.  This alternative is Bundism.  At first glance, Bundism seems to be a half-way house between Assimilation and Zionism, and therefore a step back towards multi-culturalism.  This, it is not.  SWPE believes that Bundism offers an immediate solution to our woes, whereas National Zionism offers a long-term and final solution to the woes of Jews and non-Jews.  A new writer for SWPE will highlight this important area of discussion in depth.  It is no exaggeration to state that a synthesis of National Zionism and Bundism may be the long sought after peaceful and just solution to the Jewish Question.

Thursday, 30 October 2014

SWPE Recruitment and Policy Strategy

 
SWPE is not a conventional party.  We do not contest elections.  We do not seek mass membership.  We do not play the game of the 'democratic' overlords - we implement direct democracy at every level and every part of our organisation.  This naturally leads to the ability to manoeuvre being somewhat slow, but we prefer the stability of maintaining a close-knit organisation to the alleged advantage of fluidity which comes from a dictatorial leadership of from conferences in which people vote as they would for a television game show.  Our organisation may be slow to move, but it is equally difficult to infiltrate and wreck.

October is the traditional month for discussion in the SWPE.  We do not have AGMs but October is the month in which we really get stuck into issues which require deep and passionate debate.  As a party which is founded upon real democratic principles, rather than the fake democracy of the liberal system, our policies are subject to continuous change to reflect the will of the members.  Sometimes it seems that we are subject to endless debate over minute details, but in the end, the debate is healthy.  We do not preach Socialism in every aspect of life and then employ the methods of the Ruling Class to control our membership.  There is no abusive strategy to 'keep the members in line'.  Our Socialism is genuine and as such is one which thrives on open discussion about everything.

Our deep and free structure does not mean that we have no policies or purpose.  Quite the opposite is the case.  In order to ensure that our platform is not hijacked by hostile elements and destroyed from within, we do not recruit in the conventional manner of allowing anyone who is willing to pay up for membership to join.  We prefer to contact people who we think are of a like mind and to then add them to our family.  Our organisation is small, but it is strong.  We have seen movements come and go who have existed solely to recruit members.  There has been an endless cycle in every part of the political spectrum of parties poaching from one another.  People can be seen to move in circles, changing the names of the organisations they hold allegiance to, until inevitably they drop out, sickened by the pantomime circus and the expense of time, money and energy for nothing.  We do not take part in these circuses.  We will work with other organisations, but we will not pilfer their members. 

We have reached a decision that it may be time to offer probationary membership in the conventional means.  This will not weaken us or threaten what will become the inner party.  We have been approached by people who wish to know more about us and who may in time become full members of our organisation.  The outer party will be a channel to the inner party but will not have the same position as the organisation we have built up and protected.  We accept that new blood can be good, but we are not obsessed with gaining members at the cost of losing our direction and becoming yet another captured group doing the bidding of the Ruling Class.

If you are interested in joining the outer party, get in touch.

Monday, 13 October 2014

What now, after the Scotland NO vote?

SWPE firmly believes in the sanctity of National Sovereignty.  We oppose all forms of Imperialism and see the smallest viable Nation State as the best for the people.  To this end, we supported the Scottish Independence movement which promised to end the 300 year historical mistake which is called the United Kingdom.
The Independence Referendum was an opportunity for the peoples of Scotland and England to reach a new understanding as equals in free sovereign nations.  The anti-Independence propaganda was focused upon the personality of the SNP's Alex Salmond, but also pandered to the financial insecurities of the people.  We were appalled by the fear mongering of the UK nationalists, who argued that a free Scotland would be one in which the elderly people would not get their pensions and would be impoverished due to having to create a new currency (a nonsense argument which nevertheless intimidated many voters).  
The UK unity campaign only succeeded by offering unrealistic bribes of greater devolution if Scotland would remain under the UK yoke, backed by terrifying the electorate with imagery of a post-UK Scotland being a land of poverty and insecurity, as well as by suggesting that without London, Scotland would be swamped by mass immigration.  Why immigrants would seek to cross allegedly affluent England to live in poverty stricken Scotland, was not explained!
But for all this, the reality is that Scotland and England remain locked in the same prison which was forged for them by the Ruling Class in 1707.  Unlike the Act of Union, the continuing Union of 2014 has the approval of the electorate of the north of the UK, even if the approval of the rest is just assumed rather than verified by a popular vote.  The referendum to end or continue the UK was only held in Scotland, whereas there are three countries in the UK, plus the province of Northern Ireland.  For those of voting age in an area with a total of Seven Million people to have the say on the future of a group of countries totaling Seventy Million people, is clearly undemocratic.  Why were 90% of the people disenfranchised?  Possibly because the people of England could not be expected to support the Union, the people of Wales would most likely have wished to break away as well.  Northern Ireland is a more complex area, but would they too have wished to break from the UK (whether to unite with Ireland or to become a free Sovereign nation)?  All that is certain is that we were not allowed to have our say and our cousins in Scotland were coerced into voting for the status quo.
SWPE would have preferred for Scotland to regain full independence, but we have to accept that this did not happen.  Where does this leave us?  We hold to our conviction that a country of Seventy Million people is too large a unit to function in the manner which best suits the well being of the people.  We are federalists.  We support a return to the older nations which came before the creation of England, to a rebirth of Wessex, Mercia etc.  The Scottish NO vote offers the opportunity to join with our cousins in Wales and Scotland to strive for a federation of the British Isles which would end manufactured border disputes by allowing the people of each micro nation to have full control over their own affairs.  
We reject the narrow nationalism of those who pit Anglo-Saxons against Celts.  The UK has seen massive internal movement and mixing which makes the people of every corner of the British mainland and near islands united by blood.  One positive outcome of the Scottish referendum is the affirmation by many Scots of the bonds of kinship shared across the national frontiers.  SWPE does not oppose the single UK State due to any sympathy with outrageous hostility from some English, some Welsh, some Scots and some Irish to those outside their localities.  We support a return to smaller nations because we support the right of the people to rule over themselves, which is only achievable in smaller units of population.
SWPE recognises the cultural ties which unite the various peoples of England and set us apart from the peoples of Scotland and from the peoples of Wales.  We propose a federation of the English nations within a federation of the British nations.  The outcome of the dishonest Independence referendum is that the peoples of Great Britain must reassess our bonds and must take this opportunity to walk away from mutually destructive hatred of Sassenachs, Jocks, Taffies, Paddies, Woollybacks etc and cherish our familial ties.  We need to return to a healthy relationship with our cousins in different parts of the Isles, which enjoys jovial stereotyping but does not tolerate irrational hatred. 
On some levels the Referendum result is an opportunity lost, but in others it is new opportunities gained.  The desire for devolution in the North and West must be used to fuel demand for devolution to and in England as well.  The Ruling Class showed their despotism and disdain in the way they handled the UK dissolution vote (or lack of one!)  We must capitalise on this mistake and push for a new era of freedom in which the Ruling Class will have no place.  The money power had to bribe and intimidate to get its way. They had to deny 90% of the people a say.  They have no moral authority and can only rule by coercion.  The biggest loser in the Referendum was the Ruling Power.  The illegitimate elite is weakened and now it is time to kick this crippled scourge hard.