Save our Service: Put the National back into NHS

In London today people have been using its 70th anniversary as a focal point for marching to save the NHS from privatisation.  Considering the decay of the NHS and the culture of shoddiness which has pushed out the traditional caring approach to the people who need health care, this march - as well intentioned as the marchers may be - has come too late.  There are many professional staff in the NHS who genuinely have the best interests of the people at heart, but that they have been joined by careerists who do not see their roles as a vocation, but rather as a means of paying bills - and no more than that.

The UK's National Health Service was created as a socialised system of care for the British people.  It was funded from the outset by the British people, and its intended usage was for the British people.  Not only was the NHS for and of the people, it was staffed by the people as well.  Now in these days of multi-culti political correctness, this has all changed; this is to the detriment of the service as a whole.

To experience an NHS hospital is to experience the carnage of globalism.  A vast number of the staff have very poor spoken English, thus making diagnoses much harder for the patients who do not share their languages.  It is truly outrageous to see the Working Class who cannot afford private healthcare treated like cattle; left in corridors with absolutely no privacy or means to call nursing staff, should they need help.  Even more galling, is that whilst our own people lay ignored in public spaces, free-loading healthcare tourists and economic migrants (illegals) who have paid nothing into the system, receive full medical care on wards paid for by the British Working Class whose beds they are occupying. 

Do the illegals and healthcare tourists even consider for a moment that it is immoral for people to use a service which they have not paid into?  Do they give a damn that their presence is crippling the NHS?  Do they have any remorse about their part in depriving the British Working Class of treatment which can literally mean the difference between life and death?  Considering that they have no qualms about displacing our culture, perverting our legal system in their favour, sponging off the tax-payer to fund their livelihoods whilst contributing nothing, it would be very surprising if they even considered the harm they are doing to our country.

The presence of staff who are not 100% fluent in English is not only a danger to patients who do not share their language, it is also detrimental to the countries from which they have come.  It is unforgivable that at a time in which the UK is suffering from mass unemployment, rather than train our own people to take up health-care provision, the government would rather import immigrant labour to not only take jobs that our own people could do, but at the same time condemn the home countries of those who come to work here, to poor healthcare due to taking from them people who could improve their own countries if they were not snatched by the unscrupulous globalists, resident in Westminster.

The NHS  has been transformed into an International Ill-Health Service.  For the benefit of all people everywhere, the theft of health care staff from countries which desperately need them must be stopped; so must the free access to services for anyone citizens of the Isles.  If nothing is done, the NHS will further deteriorate.  Of course, the destruction of the NHS is a deliberate policy of the traitors who brought us liberal globalism in the first place.  No amount of tinkering will restore to us a service which genuinely is for the benefit of our people; the salvation of the NHS must be seen as part of a wider restoration of the British Isles.  Those who created this sorry state of affairs must be made to pay for their treachery.  Radical surgery is called for to fix the NHS; the Ruling Class and their bourgeois partners-in-crime must be cut out, root and branch.

The NHS is collapsing under the weight of patient abuse.  The illegals and healthcare tourists are a part of the problem.  But what of the politically trendy ailments which take up beds, operating theatres and resources?  FGM, Circumcision, other forms of Genital Mutilation on patients who think they have a right to cosmetic surgery to suit their media-induced feelings - none of this is necessary. Yet at a time when medicines on prescription are being reduced, and surgery is being withheld for a growing number of ailments, liberal fetishism and outlandish absurdities are not only not being stopped, they are being promoted.

The NHS was founded on the principle of free healthcare for all who were eligible to be part of the scheme by virtue of being British.  Over the years, Dentistry has been privatised, Opticians have gone the same way, Private Healthcare has sprung up even in the form of Hospitals.  SMPBI would reverse this, by re-socialising all healthcare, and banning private medicine.  We would of course see mental health provision improved so that people with identity issues can have their minds readjusted to suit their bodies, not the lunatic other way around as at present!

The NHS is a marvellous thing. And once the sjw liberal rubbish is done away with, and t goes back to being a NATIONAL Health Service, which all British people and only British people, rely upon for treatment and preventative care, it will be a marvel once more.

British Working Class Socialism is the Answer to Globalism

If one had to ponder what is the greatest lie of the 'Multi-culti Politically Correct' era, one would be hard-pressed to do so, as every aspect of Political Correctness is a lie.  From the 'Feminism' which speaks of liberating women from the 'chore' of Motherhood, and into the servitude of the wage slave, to the anti-Racism which promotes the notion that we must cherish our equal opportunities to become slaves in a materialistic Hell-on-Earth, political correctness leads invariably to economic bondage and loss of humanity.

For many people, the conquest of Europe (at home and overseas) by those with ideologies diametrically opposed to the well-being of the people, has led to the conclusion that Europe and much of the European world has succumbed to socialism.  This is perhaps the greatest lie of all.  What people tend to view as Socialism is nothing of the sort; it is Trotskyism, and the greatest deception of those who misrule us is that Trotskyism and Socialism are one and the same.  In truth, they are opposites.

What is Socialism?

Socialism is the natural desire to protect one's own.  It is identical with Working Class Nationalism.  Those who call themselves Socialists, but argue against sovereignty and borders, are not Socialists, but Globalists.  Likewise those who profess to fight for the people, yet endorse Free Market Capitalism, are but another variety of Globalist.  Free Market Capitalism and Open Borders Socialism belong in one camp; they both embrace the central pillars of the cosmopolitan materialistic ideology, and whether they call themselves left or right is really of no consequence.  By virtue of refusing to face up to the reality that the Nation is the People, and that the economy must serve the people, rather than the people serve it, they cannot in any way justify using the interchangeable terms of Nationalism and Socialism, which define everything they stand against.

Socialism is an ideology which by its very goes beyond mere economics.  The essence of Socialism is the belief that people matter, and that the economic system under which they live, must be tailored so as to give them the greatest practicable amount of freedom and contentment.  To this end, Socialism is the pursuit of happiness through self-reliance and mutual support; it is not a belief in an all-powerful State directing the lives of the people, which, of course is what the corruption known as Fabian Socialism is all about.

The great confusion concerning the use of the term Socialism for its ideological opposite, arose with the Marxist takeover of the joint French and British Trades Union initiative, known as the International Working Men's Association, aka, the First International.  That organisation was set up with the sole purpose of preventing employers in France and Britain importing cheap foreign labour in order to lower wage demands.  The IWMA would today be labelled by modern-day Marxists as a 'fascistic' and 'xenophobic' organisation due to its demand that people in and of the respective nations, should be given absolute priority in the workplace.  Ironically, Marx himself was the General Secretary of the IWMA, although it was only after he successfully expelled his main rival, Mikhail Bakunin, that the rot set in.

Socialism is a belief that the Nation is the People, and that only that which is good for the people is permissible in the nation.  To this end, the economy of the country must be fully nationalised.  Again, the liberals and trots have used linguistic chicanery to impose their agenda whilst hiding behind the label which means its exact opposite.  The 'Socialisation of the Means of Production' has to be the transfer of power from the obscenely wealthy to the people as a whole - as the term implies -  but for the trots, it is Globalisation through bureaucratic control; giving more power, not less to the Usurers.  True Socialism unifies the Nation.  Fabianism and Trotskyism in no way undermine the Ruling Class, who retain their grip on power behind the scenes.  State Capitalism abolishes private property, giving absolute control to the State.  Socialism, in contrast, supports private property at the lowest practicable scale, and for the larger concerns employs profit-sharing amongst the workers and management, as a means of encouraging productivity.  Distributism, Syndicalism, Social Credit etc are all Socialist.

The goal of Fabianism and Trotskyism is for a Global State in which all the workers are equal; having lost their symbolic chains and having gained total servitude in their place.  For the Middle Class 'book socialists', there is no such thing as Culture, Nation, etc, only the 'right' to work as a part of the global slave plantation.  This is Capitalism.  The abolition of Trade Tariffs, the end to restrictions on the movement of labour, and the steady demise of other elements of national sovereignty are all under way in order to create more wealth for the Ruling Class, and to reduce the masses to absolute servitude.  That is not Socialism, but unbridled Capitalism, and the Trotskyite fake socialism has exactly the same aims.

Globalism is Capitalism

Karl Marx's friend and sponsor, Engels, was so sincere in his Feminism, that not only did he have servants to do his every bidding; he even raped them.  Far from liberating the oppressed classes, Engels and his cabal oppressed all who they could.  Capitalism garners wealth and power for the self-Chosen 'elite'; the Trotskyite interpretation of Marxism ensures that the masses are kept so impoverished that they cannot see through the political lies and liberate themselves. 

Liberalism walks hand-in-hand with Capitalism.  Liberalism destroys the building blocks of society, and in its wake leaves total individualists who cannot comprehend the need for a strong society, let alone take their place in it.  Margaret Thatcher notoriously stated that 'there is no such thing as society, only the individual'.  This perverse thinking is political correctness in practice and would be applauded by all who believe in the unrestricted hedonism and self-important materialism which has wrecked Europe.  Trotsky would not have used such a hideous phrase, but his ideology has led directly to that diseased view of the world becoming the norm for many people.

Freedom comes with a restoration of National Freedom, and Social Justice.  Socialism is Nationalism and Nationalism is Socialism.  Anything else is a fraud concocted to keep us in fear of our only hope of salvation.  Don't let the enemy confuse you or scare you away from ideas which will free us all.   If these ideas were not so dangerous to the global enemy, they would bother attacking them at every opportunity.

Marxism is of another time

One important thing to remember is that Marxism, at least in its original form, was a nineteenth century ideology. Much has changed in terms of living standards since the nineteenth century. We have far better standards today, at least in the West. In other parts of the world, there is still some desperate poverty. Look at this video:

Would you like to be one of those boys? It's still similar to child labour in Britain during the nineteenth century, in coal mines and so on, in the form that it takes.

British Socialism

We need to get away from the strait jacket of seeing Socialism as Marxism or derivatives of Marxism.

In Britain the first place to raise the Red flag was Merthyr in 1831: it was a symbol for 'Caws a bara' (cheese and bread) and 'I lawr â'r Brenin' (Republicanism - down with the king).  At that time the men of Wales were raising the Red Flag, Marx was a mere 13-year old! Socialism is Society-ism; what is good for the people, not what is good for the moneyed oppressors.  As Socialists fighting for the best for the Motherland of the British Isles, we can learn much by looking at our own people. We can - of course - look at examples of ideologies further afield, but nothing speaks to the soul of the British Working Class more than the British Working Class itself.

Wat Tyler on the Bourgeois SWP

by Wat Tyler

The Socialist Workers Party are the product of the British education system and the media. Their obsession with the trials and tribulations of the Soviet Union in the 20th century. The Good Communist versus the Bad Nazi mantra used by our media and education system has its base in WW2.

In the 1920 - 1935 period the British establishment was far more likely to wipe out the Soviet Union than subservient Germany. The spread of Soviet influence was a threat to British trade, capitalism and empire. However a strong Germany arming for the very same reason, to wipe out the Soviet aggression and reclaim a pre Versaille balance of power in the east, a balance they believed they had rightly won in WW1, was sold to the British working class as Germany wanting world domination. Yes, by the British ruling class that HAD world domination with their Imperial Empire.

WW2 should have been German Nationalism v Soviet Nationalism, a German ruling class fighting a Russian ruling class over post WW1 issues. But the British ruling class feared whichever side it thought the stronger.

The post WW2 British middle class and media love of good Soviet communism, no matter how many of the working class it actually killed had to be reasoned with a hate of the alternative in their view, bad nazi. OUR British Empire war with German nationalism had to be GOOD V BAD. Soviet nationalism, which was all Soviet communism had become by WW2, had to be defended and praise as a saviour to mankind, as our British Empire war had to be portrayed as Good v Bad.  The World dominating British Empire fighting to save the world from little Germany.

All wars are the wars of the ruling class and the bankers. Your Grandad fought and died for the British ruling class who had declared war against the German ruling class. The British working class are still being sold 1939 lies. Soviet Trotsky communism that had marched on the west pre WW2 only to be stopped at Warsaw and Brutal Stalinism are still the darlings of the British middle class from Corbyn, momentum and the Socialist Workers Party.

We are the British Working Class - Stop this nonsense now. It is now being used by globalist capitalism and liberal multiculturalism to kill the British working class once again. Thank you SMBPI for offering a true British Working class socialist option. You have my full support.


Editor's comment:

Thank You Wat Tyler!  It is good to have a reminder of the fact that the likes of the SWP are student-types (actual students, or those who have never progressed from the student mindset of idolising texts and historical figures), who have a distorted and obsessive view of history, and no grip on the reality of the present.  Most annoyingly, these 'crusaders for the Working Class' are nearly in every case, trendy middle class egomaniacs, who actually hate the Working Class, and see us as a threat to their globalist utopia of open borders and endless cheap labour to supply their exotic coffees as they pontificate about the importance of what Trotsky said to his man-servant on a wet afternoon in Mexico!  We don't need these pretentious toffs.  We need Working Class solidarity, and to do things our own way.

Wilberg on Wednesday - A recap of the last year of WoWs

Wilberg on Wednesday has been a regular part of this site for over a year now.  Beginning on the 7th June 2017, WoW has covered a lot of subjects and explored a range of ideas which are well worth looking back into.  In addition to the Wilberg on Wednesday posts, there is a dedicated playlist on our youtube site, entitled: Peter Wilberg's Choices.

But as today is Wednesday, it is fitting to look back at the past year of WoW, and to have the opportunity to dive back into them to further explore, areas of thought which are diverse and stimulating:

Introducing Wilberg on Wednesday

Totally Left. Totally Right.

Universal Basic Income

On the Question of Culture

Brexit: Endgame for the English Ruling Caste?

The Immigration Question

The Ruling Caste's Manipulation of Brexit

A Message to Socialists and Social Nationalists in England and the U.K.

The Problems of, and Solutions to, Money

Thinking and the Concept of Time

Stalinism, the Occult and the Fetishism of the Sign

4PT - On the Need for a ‘Fourth Political Theory’

Marxism for the 21st Century

The Barcelona Attack - Another MOSSAD Job?

A further constructive suggestion for refining the SMPBI (SWPE) Policy Outline

The ‘Scientific’ and ‘Spiritual’ Annihilation of Philosophy

Capitalism's Big Lie

The Empire of Money

Socialism in an Era of Social Psychosis

The New Socialism

'Scientific Socialism' as Soul Science

New Gnostic Politics

SPIRITUALITY AND COMMUNISM - TOWARDS A NEW 'GIFT ECONOMY'

THE FICTIONS THAT KEEP US IN CHAINS

Soul-Science and Social Change

Leaflets and Useful Information

The Illness is the Cure.

Leaflets and other Useful Information to Reach the People

Against Globalist multiculturalism, For Real Cultures which can exist side-by-side

Meditating Ordinary Things – on ‘the question of Being’

Books by Peter Wilberg

Poverty in the UK - not new and not going away

Some New Year's outrage - and some humour too

Death by Prescription

In Honour of Martin Heidegger

Inner Universe: Fundamental Science or Fundamentalism

Some more critical historical questions relating to the Brexit debate

On 'The Protocols of the Elders of Zion'

The Question of 'Rootlessness' - and 'Identity Politics'

A Response to the debate on the Journal of Progressive Nationalism

A Sensible Approach to Refugee Repatriation

Fundamental Science and Theology

DAMAGED BRAINS

What is a Philosopher?

New World Order’? ‘Globalisation’? A Marxian-Heideggerian Analysis

Notes on Globalism and its Counter-Power

Fishing - blame Westminster not the EU

Speak Out For Palestine

Fight Zionist Lies with Scientific Truth

'axe, tax or borrow' - toxic belief or global 'big lie'?

Karl Marx - Visionary

Karl Marx - the David Icke of his day

Thoughts on China's Economic Agenda for 2018

The Metaphysics of Dark Matter

The SCIENCE Delusion

Uniting Hegel, Husserl and Heidegger

On the Innately Capitalist Character of Modern Technology and its ‘Science’


The following although not part of the WoW series, are still the work of Peter Wilberg (with the exception of the Warm Welcome article!):

A Warm Welcome to Peter Wilberg

Another perspective on the Calais crisis

Leave Russia Alone! The Brutish Empire is at it again.

THE CONFRONTATION BETWEEN THE WEST AND RUSSIA: A DELIBERATE PLAN BY THERESA MAY, JEAN CLAUDE JUNCKER AND THE EU ESTABLISHMENT TO DERAIL BREXIT. - An alternative view

The Massace in Gaza unfolds as the Zionist-led USA spits on Palestine in Embassy move to Al Quds

SMPBI, formerly SWPE, Never SWP

SMPBI has come under criticism for being a Trotskyite-Fascist organisation, like its parent, the SWP!  This is nonsense.  The SMPBI was previously called the SWPE (Socialist Workers' Party of England), but it has at no time been a part of, or splinter from, the SWP (Socialist Workers Party).  The confusion with the name isn't helped by the main website and some of the others still having the SWPE name.  This is something which admittedly we do need to sort out.

In the UK, there is a political party which is always present at industrial disputes and protest gatherings.  This party is the SWP. 

Laughingly claiming to be against the Establishment, the Socialist Workers Party is very much a part of the Establishment.  It has front groups such as United Against Fascism which exist for the sole purpose of libelling all opponents as Nazis, and thereby silencing criticism.  The SWP, far from being a party for the 'Workers' is a party which advances the interests of international finance, and uses the genuine grievances of the people as an excuse to push its globalist agenda.

The Socialist Worker is always a good source for anyone who cares to look into the damaged mind of the trotskyite materialistic pseudo-anti-Capitalists.  The underlying opposition to economic deprivation is laudable, however, the solutions offered only bolster the stranglehold of the common enemy.

Immigration is touted as a solution to the economic problems of the world.  According to the ideology of the SWP, the exploitation of the poorer nations by the richer ones has created the economic hardship the people therein endure. So far so good; global imperialism is indeed a key factor in the destruction of the conquered nations (is rather than was, because it still goes on under corporate rather than national banners).  However, the ideology then falters by ignoring the fact that migration away from the conquered nations has been a result of economic imperialism, and goes on to argue that the movement of people is a good thing.

In the SWP's 'Where We Stand' section, can be found the following pearls of wisdom:

• Workers create all the wealth under capitalism. A new society can only be constructed when they collectively seize control of that wealth and plan its production and distribution according to need.

Yes, the people do create the wealth, but it is the materialist system itself which has to be overturned.  As the people of China can testify to, the replacement of a monopoly of private owners by a monopoly of bureaucrats has not made their plight any easier.  The increased efficiency of the means of production has allowed for the creation of ever more junk products, by an army of slaves.  The SWP argue that this is due to the Chinese states being State Capitalist, but this is a purely semantic argument.  The refusal to respect culture, tradition, race and faith, inevitably leads to the depersonalisation of the people.  This is one of the inherent flaws of Trotskyism.

• We oppose all immigration controls and campaign for solidarity with workers in other countries. 

How exactly are the people to gain, when they have to compete for resources with unlimited immigration?  The SWP would doubtless claim that there would be no need for immigration controls after the global revolution; this in itself highlights their failure to get beyond academic theories and deal with the real world.  Certainly supporting all people who strive for freedom is vital, but the SWP are not fighting for freedom, but for economic control; they seek to replace the corporate despots with themselves, and that has nothing to do with freedom.

• We support the right of black people and other oppressed groups to organise their own defence and we support all genuine national liberation movements. 

This point betrays the mentality of the SWP.  They view Black people as oppressed in a way that White people are not.  For all the talk of being anti-racist, the SWP do treat the races differently.  It is interesting that Blacks and 'other oppressed groups' are encouraged to organise separately.  So the SWP envisage Black groups, homosexual groups, and all manner of exclusive groups, but Heterosexual Whites must be organised as parts of mixed groups (mixed with whom, remains a mystery!) 

The notion of 'genuine' national liberation movements is also one which we share.  However, as supporters of borders, SMPBI accepts the right of individual nations to exist, and to work together Inter-Nationally as free sovereign entities.  The issue is problematic for the SWP as their borders-abolishing globalism does not support a future in which any nations exist.

• We campaign for real social, political and economic equality for woman and for an end to all forms of discrimination against lesbians, gay men, bisexual and transgender people.

The 'right to work' is a common theme of the SWP.  This is because, production is the sole purpose of the individual in the Trotskyite mind.  Social equality is simply globalist multi-cultural dogma; Economic equality means the right to work.  Women are especially singled out due to a fanatical hatred of the family structure.  To the SWP, it is a woman's right to be a part of the servile labour force.  The traditional role of women as the principle child nurturers is viewed as patriarchal tyranny; indeed the idea of families raising their own children is a threat to the State.  Women have the right to have their children raised by the State whilst they work to produce and consume as good wage-slave robots.  The lumping together of women and people separated due to sexuality is a variation of the more common linking of women and 'ethnic minorities', but continues the theme of splitting women away from their menfolk.  Men and women together form a strong natural bond which the SWP seeks to break apart.  The horrific protection of the rapist, 'Comrade Delta' Martin Smith, was only possible due to this unhealthy obsession with treating women as being a special class of Comrades - sadly, a class which can be patronised, objectified and abused.  SMPBI has a membership requirement that all prospective members declare any sex offences - these automatically bar anyone from membership.  The SWP could do well to adopt a similar policy.

The Socialist Worker presents itself as fighting for the workers.  As can be seen in their Where We Stand summary, their policies, if ever implemented, would reduce the worker to the level of a slave.  The attack on everything wholesome and natural is identical to the tactics of the Capitalist entity they purport to oppose.  The objective of the people who control the SWP is to establish a single global materialist State in which all people are the same; a State in which there is no place for culture, family, sovereignty, tradition, customs, or indeed any of the many aspects of humanity which make us more than economic producer-consumers.  They claim to oppose the current drive to a global State ruled by a financial oligarchy, but only because they do not understand that the people who control them ARE the financiers they protest against.

The SWP exist to herd anti-Capitalists into fighting for the very oppressors they instinctively oppose.  Social Justice cannot exist except within a strong and free nation.  A nation is more than an economy; it is a people unified by experience and by kinship.  To ignore the bonds of land and people is to ignore nature.  Genuine Socialists put their own people first; globalism is anti-society, and therefore anti-Socialist.

Supporters of the SWP have been lied to by their leaders.  They have swallowed all manner of trotskyite drivel, but just as humanity as a whole is awakening to the lunacy of globalism, so too will the genuine and decent Socialists awaken to the lies of those who would lead them.  SMPBI has no dealings with the SWP, other than to hold out a hand to Working Class SWP members and ex-members who know deep inside that Socialism Needs Borders; it serves us well to exploit those doubts and break the good few away from the middle class trotskyite enemy.  To be classed alongside the bourgeois trots is not helpful, and we have to work on ways of making it clear that this lumping together is counter-productive.

The Rev'd David Parry - Odinism & The Tradition of Dissent

A fascinating speech. David talks about  the revival of the natural religion of Heathenry as a potent weapon for opposing corporate globalisation,.  A return to nature - to the Pagan Heathenry - as a means of moving away from the Globalised Monotheism which is the justification of Capitalist Exploitation and the Hierarchical Class System.

Socialist Quotes for Sunday Reflection pt 16

"And now I am obliged to tell you what it is that clearly distinguishes Futurism from anarchism.

The latter, denying the infinite principle of human evolution, brings its forward-looking viewpoint to a halt in the ideal of universal peace, a stupid paradise of people caressing in open fields or beneath billowing palm trees.

We, instead, affirm that one of Futurism’s absolute principles is the continuous development and unending progress, both bodily and intellectual, of man."

F.T. Marinetti, War, the Only Hygiene of the World

..............................

An accomplished modern life (that is to say conforming to the criteria of developed capitalism) must, logically, reduce itself to a series of ruptures and displacements (in the logic of Laurence Parisot we will say everything is precarious). This explains why the “migrant” has progressively become the central redeeming figure of all ideological constructions of the liberal new left. And in place of the archaic proletarian, always suspected of not being indifferent enough to his community of origin, or, even more so, the peasant whose constituent bond with the earth destined him to become the most despised - and most mocked - figure of capitalist culture (hicks, yokels, bumpkins, rednecks, terroni, etc).

Jean-Claude Michéa, Le complexe d’Orphée – La gauche, les gens ordinaires et la religion du progrès

............................

“We need a mass cleansing, street by street, piazza by piazza, neighbourhood by neighbourhood,” Mr Salvini, who is also Italy’s deputy prime minister, said in an interview last year. “We need to be tough because there are entire parts of our cities, entire parts of Italy, that are out of control.”

.............................

It (Prussian uniform) is an emblem of public service, not of private existence. Rather than symbolizing the success gained by diligent activity it stands for that activity itself. "I am the first servant of my state," said the Prussian king whose father had made the wearing of uniforms a customary practice among the nobility. How many have fully understood the significance of the phrase "the king’s mantle"?

— Oswald Spengler, Prussianism and Socialism

...............................

“The history of Latin American nations has been marked by the imperialist pendulum that functions on the basis of aggression and fears. I say aggression because we know of past marine landings in the Dominican Republic and Nicaragua, the aggressions against Mexico and the brutal expansion through Central America in an attempt to conquer it through the big-stick policy. The aggression is no different now. Now, there is psychological aggression and brutal economic aggression.

Only the methods, the system, have changed. But the imperialist doctrine of aggression persists, and it has now become more sophisticated because it is aimed at the hunger of the Latin American peoples and the hunger of the Panamanian people... We support democracy. We support a participatory, independent, people ’s democracy. We do not support a democracy that has elections and lets the people die of hunger. That is the kind of democracy (the USA) wanted to impose on us at the last talks. ..Our democracy must work in terms of this people ’s and this country ’s needs. It must work in terms of this country ’s destiny. We must not and cannot accept democracies that have foreign tutors and porters. We do not want or accept democracies''

Comandante Manuel Antonio Noriega.

...............................

“No one any longer knows who will live in this steel-hard casing and whether entirely new prophets or a mighty rebirth of ancient ideas and ideals will stand at the end of this prodigious development. Or, however, if neither, whether a mechanized ossification, embellished with a sort of rigidly compelled sense of self-importance, will arise. Then, indeed, if ossification appears, the saying might be true for the ‘last humans’ in this long civilizational development: narrow specialists without mind, pleasure-seekers without heart; in its conceit, this nothingness imagines it has climbed to a level of humanity never before attained.”

I imagine that if you look around you and are not merely disheartened by what you see, but are actually sickened by it then the above quote by Weber, from his “The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism,” resonates with you in the same way that it does with me; on a deep, soul level.

This isn’t how we were meant to live. We know that, we feel it instinctively. Something is wrong with our societies, our lifestyles, our lives. At the risk of making a pedantic observation most of us spend the great majority of our time per week doing something that we hate or, at best, tolerate, for the sake of being able to pay rent, bills, buy food, clothes and provide for ourselves and our families and loved ones.

But it doesn’t stop there. The “Protestant Ethic” that Weber so masterfully dissected and deconstructed is, quite literally, making us hate ourselves and is killing us.

Those of us who have grown up and lived most of our lives in the West have been completely indoctrinated with this “Protestant work ethic,” “keep your nose to the grindstone,” “work is its own reward” mentality. It’s not all hogwash and I’m not here to make a case for throwing the baby out with the bathwater. A culture that idealizes hard work and a strong work ethic is also a culture that will go further in the world than others; particularly if that same culture is the one laying down the parameters for how the whole world operates.

The real problem arises when “The Protestant Ethic” meets the following things:

• Post-industrial/deindustrialized society
• Imposed austerity
• Anglo-Saxon Hyper-individualization / “Bootstraps” Culture
• The Reign of Finance Capital

 The neuroses that arises when one lives in a society where work and the ability to be able to stand on one’s two feet are valued over just about everything else, and yet good-paying jobs that actually allow anyone to be able to “stand on their own two feet” are scarce outside of highly specialized segments of the economy that are almost always tied in to the government in some way, shape or form eat away and tear at our souls and foster deep-seated feelings of inadequacy and self-loathing which almost always leads to depression.

Even the things that we have been conditioned to believe are fundamentally good, decent and progressive, like “pluralism,” contribute to this sickness:

“…the pluralizing effects of modernity lead to “relativism” (Berger 1973; 1992), because co-existing belief systems challenge each others’ credibility. Berger states: “The world view that until now was taken for granted is opened up, very slightly at first, to a glimmer of doubt. This opening has a way of expanding rapidly. The end point may then be a pervasive relativism” (1992, 39). Berger goes on to  argue that relativism is a consequence of “cognitive contamination,” which is fueled by pluralism (1992). Put differently, the process of pluralization divides the social world into little sectors. It places individuals into situations in which they have to admit or accept unfamiliar or different people, practices, or beliefs.

Pluralization, then, pushes the individual more and more out of the familiar world, to depart into and journey across a fragmented world. Roughly speaking, the modern man continuously alternates temporally, spatially or cognitively through diverse sectors (Berger 1973, 184). Once on this journey, the individual begins to reflect on his familiar world. That is the first step towards suspicion, which leads individuals to begin questioning the familiar world. Pluralism, as Berger and Luckmann nicely sum up, “encourages both skepticism and innovation and is thus inherently subversive of the taken-for-granted reality of the traditional status quo ” (1966, 125).

Because his journey never ends, modern man is doomed to recurring suspicion. This is the very same phenomenon which the German sociologist Helmut Schelsky calls “Dauerreflektion” (permanent reflectiveness) (Zijderveld 1979) and which Anthony Giddens speaks of as “wholesale reflexivity” or “widespread scepticism” (1991, 27). With  suspicion, the things (or worlds) taken for granted are put into question, and their ontological status becomes shaken, and then blurred. In other words, pluralism “undermines all certainties” (Berger 1992, 211). What this means can be put quite simply; the pluralized world is filled with discrepancies and lacks all consistency, which is a necessary precondition for certainty. Modernity leads the modern man into a pluralized world characterized by “a multiplicity of  incongruencies” (Berger 1997, 202).

Because the modern individual continuously alternates between highly fragmented and discrepant social sectors, he comes to feel that he is hanging around on the outskirts of the world. This feeling results from a lack of attachment. To put this in a different way, in modern society the individual more and more feels he is relegated to a marginal region of the world, inhabiting borderlines between segmented social contexts. Due to his suspicion and continuous migration, modern man finds no place to anchor himself anymore, and he wanders here and there, prone to distance himself from societies, social sectors, and individuals.”

In other words, “alienation;” the feeling of never truly belonging anywhere, of never belonging to anything more or greater than oneself, no matter how much one bounces from job to job, moves from one city or town to another, or even resettles in some corner of the world where life for the indigenous population is relatively laid back and the cost of living is, comparatively speaking, very low. This also is part of Modern Man’s condition, part of what contributes to depression, lack of self-worth, lack of meaning.

And it’s not just the U.S. nor even just the West where we’re seeing all this play out:

 “In nations as diverse as Taiwan, Lebanon and New Zealand each successive generation is growing more vulnerable to the malady. Although rates of depression rise with age, the study found increases among young people. In some countries the likelihood that people born after 1955 will suffer a major depression — not just sadness, but a paralyzing listlessness, dejection and self-deprecation, as well as an overwhelming sense of hopelessness — at some point in life is more than three times greater than for their grandparents’ generation.”

[…]

“There’s been a tremendous erosion of the nuclear family — a doubling of the divorce rate, a drop in parents’ time available to children and an increase in mobility” in this country, with similar changes in other developed nations, Dr. Goodwin added. “You don’t grow up knowing your extended family anymore. The losses of these stable sources of self-identification mean a greater susceptibility to depression.”

The loss of family stability can lead to depression in several ways. “With the spread of industrialization after World War II, in a sense, nobody was home anymore,” said Dr. David Kupfer, chairman of the psychiatry department at the University of Pittsburgh Medical School and chairman of a research network on depression sponsored by the MacArthur Foundation. “In more and more families there has been growing parental indifference to children’s needs as they grow up. This is not a direct cause of depression, but it sets up a vulnerability in later life. Early emotional stressors may affect neuron development, which can lead to a depression when you are under great stress decades later.”

[…]

“For the last 30 or 40 years we’ve seen the ascendance of individualism and a waning of larger beliefs in religion, and in supports from the community and the extended family,” said Dr. Martin Seligman, a psychologist at the University of Pennsylvania. “That means a loss of resources that can buffer you against setbacks and failures.”

One cause of depression is a tendency to magnify the effects of setbacks, Dr. Seligman said. “To the extent you see a failure as something that is lasting and which you magnify to taint everything in your life, you are prone to let a momentary defeat become a lasting sense of hopelessness,” he said. “But if you have a larger perspective, like a belief in God and an afterlife, and you lose your job, it’s just a temporary defeat. You know that justice will prevail in the long run and you don’t plummet into depression.”

What all this means is that the societal glues that many of us grew up believing to be oppressive and backwards institutions that were only holding us back from achieving our true potential: our families, our religious beliefs and institutions, actually served to stabilize us, anchor us, and help us realize that small setbacks are not the end of our world but merely a slight misstep on the path that we’ve chosen to tread and that has been chosen for us.

Furthermore, as at least one important study published in the Journal of Affective Disorders indicates, our bodies haven’t evolutionarily caught up to the changes in our environment, diet, work habits, decreased sleep patterns, decreased physical socialization, etc.

We’re literally killing ourselves to live while simultaneously allowing ourselves to believe that we live in mankind’s greatest golden age and the very pinnacle of history and civilization.

We need to return to the source, as it were — physically, spiritually, economically, in every way imaginable — if we’re to survive as a species, and if we don’t intend on destroying all of our habitats in the name of “progress.”

But I’m not a guide, I’m a seeker like all of you, and I can’t give you hard and fast answers as to what to do. The one suggestion I have is to look at yourself and see what you can do to improve your life, to make yourself more satisfied and fulfilled and then branch out from there — if you don’t know your neighbors get to know them, knock on their doors, introduce yourself, invite them over, form mutual support networks with the people in your immediate vicinity if at all possible, and if not broaden your circle outward incrementally.

And cultivate friendships with like-minded folks, if you haven’t already. The modern world has a tendency to make those of us who don’t belong in it and don’t fit in feel as though we’re “crazy.” Isolation only exacerbates this. Build with like-minded groups and individuals wherever you are and then expand outward.

Have faith in yourself, in your community and in something greater than yourself. Remember that every religious and historical tradition has talked about this age and its dominant dogmas, ideologies and forces and every one of them has foretold an ignominious end for all of these forces. Stay strong.

Navid Nasr, Fort Russ.com

Happy Independence Day 2018: Now to Make Brexit Happen

Today is the Second Anniversary of the historic vote by the British People to reclaim our sovereignty and get out of the capitalist empire, the EU.  By rights, had the result been honoured, rather than the pathetic triggering of Article 50, and the 'negotiation' of our relationship with the tyranny of Brussels, today would be the day for us to celebrate two years of freedom.  The EUrophile traitors in Westminster are doing all they can to thwart the democratic will of the people. The paid lackeys of George Soros are attacking people for wanting to be free. The Media ignores us, or if it does refer to the 17.4 million people who voted for freedom, it calls us thick, bigoted, xenophobic and all other manner of insults - insults which if aimed at anyone other than the British Working Class, would result in police attention.

Today, the People marched again to demand that the government shred the Article 50 trap, repeal the European Communities Act (1972), and get us out of the EU immediately.  The march was - of course - ignored by the media, although amusingly the BBC briefly covered it by accident.  Video footage of some of the pro-Brexit demonstrations:

An interesting article on the machinations of the enemies of democracy who are struggling to keep us trapped in the EU, can be found at https://theblueanchor.wordpress.com, alongside other articles which are worth reading.  The article 'How to Spot the Democracy Haters', by Sebastian Handley, is reproduced below:

As I’ve written before, EU supporters are engaged in total war against democracy. Their dream is to dismantle British democracy before the eyes of the world and reduce us to a society where no meaningful votes are ever held; where voting only exists to confirm decisions already made by a ruling elite, and where the biggest vote in our history is indefinitely disregarded.

Because they don’t have the courage or integrity to come right out and admit this, they endlessly devise ways of attacking democracy by stealth, with dog-whistle phrases like ‘populism‘. This essay is about how they seek to destroy democracy whilst pretending to be simply concerned with mundane trade technicalities.

After they lost the referendum EU supporters sought to keep us in the Single Market. When it was gently pointed out that would mean us not democratically governing ourselves they called for us to instead remain in the EEA but that was open to the same objection; so then it was The Customs Union, then a customs union, then ‘a customs partnership‘ and so on. They continually call for ‘full access‘, ‘frictionless trade‘, ‘harmonisation‘ and ‘alignment‘. And what could be wrong with that? Having ‘access‘ sounds like a good thing right? And friction sounds like a bad thing? And who could object to ‘harmonising‘ things to make them all nice and harmonious? I will explain:

I live in East Sussex. East Sussex has ‘fully aligned‘, ‘frictionless‘ trade with West Sussex. Between the two there is free movement of goods, services, labour and capital. People from East Sussex can work in West Sussex. Goods and services traded in one can be traded in the other just as easily. This is because they are part of the same nation. We can be an independent nation or we can have ‘fully aligned frictionless trade‘ but not both. To be independent is to have your own system. To have the same system is to be not independent.

It is therefore oxymoronic to claim to respect the referendum result whilst calling for ‘alignment‘, ‘full access‘ or ‘frictionless trade‘: to have these things is to not have the independence we voted for. And to campaign for them is to campaign against honouring the democratic vote.

Seriously, is their offer that we would still be able to vote for better laws – just so long as those laws have nothing to do with goods, services, labour and capital? But that’s everything!

So don’t think calls for ‘harmonisation‘ are innocuous technicalities. They are not. The EU seeks to control how we trade in order to achieve their ultimate goal of controlling every aspect of our society. Their calls for ‘aligned, frictionless, harmonised, access‘ are a mendacious attempt to achieve through technocratic stealth what they cannot achieve through democratic vote.

Brexit – How the Nobodies Beat the Somebodies, by Sebastian J Handley, is available from Amazon.

Gender Politics is an assault on Sanity

Gender Politics is a form of madness which is being pushed on society by people who understand that attacking common sense, nature and the most basic of scientific facts, is a way of attacking the very fabric of society.  Placing feelings above facts, fiction above facts, opinions above facts, is an attack on reality. This assault is another way of breaking down society and atomising individuals.  People who have no connection with society cannot defend that society. A society which is incapable and unwilling to defend itself, is easy prey to the machinations of the tyrants of commerce.  Just as National Borders protect us from hostile forces, so a sense of belonging, is a defence.

The Tory government in 1962 began to call for an end to Mental Asylums, with the Minister of Health, Enoch Powell, spearheading the propaganda against them. In the 1980s, the Tory Government under Thatcher, began closing down the last of the Lunatic Asylums, pushing the mentally ill into society.  The dogma of 'Care in the Community' was motivated by cost cutting, and it was an instant failure. Today, seriously mentally ill people are living amongst us, and the walls which separated the sick from the well are no longer there to keep us apart.

The walls of the Asylums allowed the mentally ill to live their lives in the fantasies of their creations, free from ridicule and fear.  For those outside the Asylums, the same was true, with well people left to live their lives free from fear and free from the disturbing impact of people who were a danger to themselves and/or others.  If a man wanted to pretend to be a woman, he could do so in his cosy hospital setting - interacting with others who had similar delusions. For the rest of us, the delusions of the sick were not a problem, because the deluded were looked after where their fantasies did not conflict with reality.

The Tories began the rot, and now the Social Justice Warriors have taken the baton of cruelty and are using the mentally ill to push their individualistic agenda.  From the right, society is under attack because it is an obstacle to global open borders business.  From the trotskyite left, it is under attack because it is an obstacle to the nonsense of a one world anarchic hippy utopia.  The Middle Class parasites of every political opinion are doing all they can to normalise mental illness.  It is up to the Working Class to stop this abuse of the mentally ill, and to bring back the sanctuaries for the insane.

The decline of Britain at the hands of globalisers and liberal fantasists can be highlighted by the fact that a seriously mentally ill woman, Christie Elan Cane, has taken her delusion through the court system in an attempt to have passports changed so that there are three options to place when asked what sex you are!  With the exception of a very small number of hermaphrodites, there are only two sexes - Male and Female.  If a man wants to wear a frock, then so be it, but it doesn't make him a woman.  If a woman wants to dress in a way which she considers masculine, then that is her choice, but it doesn't make her a man.

Christie Elan-Cane (note the pretentious bourgeois double-barrelled surname) made the following video, which anyone with a grip on reality can clearly see is the rantings of someone in need of help:

Cane suffers from serious delusions. In her 20s, she had a double mastectomy, which she considered doing to herself when reputable surgeons were not happy to assist in this act of gross self-harm. (A surgeon with a weaker moral view, and a lust for money performed the operation for a hefty profit.) She later underwent a hysterectomy.  These are not the actions of a sane individual.  In a Society in which the sick are cared for, Cane would have been admitted to hospital where she could live her fantasies in every way except mutilation.

Cane has the support of Liberal Party MPs, and has wasted a vast amount of tax-payers money in the court cases she has fought to impose her delusions on the rest of us. She hasn't accepted that she is delusional, and will continue her campaign to have her madness classified as fact, until a liberal SJW judge concurs.

Socialism is about looking after the people.  Without National Borders, there is nothing to stop harmful outside influences wrecking the lives of the Working Class.  Without the walls of Mental Hospitals, there is nothing to stop the destructive obsessions of the insane from polluting the society of the normal.

SMPBI pities Cane. She needs help.  In a Socialist Republic, she would be given the best of Mental Health treatment in a secure Mental Hospital.  We respect nature, and we respect the right of those who need help, to be given the best care available.  It is the greedy middle class Tory parasites who created this mess, and the self-important middle class SJW scum who have made a bad situation worse.  To protect the Working Class, we need to smash the Middle Class and end their ridiculous and dangerous identity politics.  Today it is Cane who is calling for legal documents to have three genders. If this isn't stopped, tomorrow the education system and media will use this nonsense to attack our children, encouraging more people to undergo mutilation in the pursuit of changing reality to suit their feelings: Feelings created for them by the liberal globalist media.

Family is the Foundation Stone of Socialism

In an age of liberal egocentrism, with the traditional family structure under attack from every perceivable angle, a practical application of Working Class Solidarity has to begin with the solidarity of the family.  Speaking by telephone is no substitute for real face-to-face contact.  Being aware of the forces behind the drive into selfishness, decadence and societal atomisation, is a futile exercise if we do not ensure that we fight those forces in our everyday lives.  Re-connecting with loved ones helps to provide a much-needed boost to the vital determination to fight our enemies and restore the nation to its natural path.

The globalists despise everything which roots the people in reality.  Family is the key target for those who would create an atomised world of self-isolating, cultureless, materialistic producer-consumers.  Family is especially targeted because it is the hearth in which we are formed.

Liberal education exists to break children from the family.  Promiscuity, divorce, abortion, adultery, in place of marriage and children raised in two parent homes; all these factors are aimed at destroying the stability a child needs in order to grow and become a rounded individual, fully connected to the natural organic society. 

Home-schooling threatens the power of the Establishment to brainwash children into supporting it.  A moral family with values and decency is a bulwark against the libertine poison of the globalist commodity order.  A family which fails to shield its younger members from the lies of the media is a collaborator in the mental destruction of our youth. 

It is good to maintain personal contact with friends and family.  The inappropriately named 'social media networks' undermine real contact, and perhaps exist partly for that reason.  Spending positive quality time with family, without the distraction of television, energises and revitalises. 

The line in the sand must be the refusal to let anyone harm our class: our kin.  Let us ensure that this isn't a mantra but a way of life.  We must take time to see loved ones and to look after and nurture our own.  The traditional and real Family is under attack by the liberal establishment because they understand how strong we are when we keep their influence at bay.

Let us take the struggle from the remote sphere of the internet into the real world and defend what cannot be allowed to fall.  Family must be our focus.  The Line in the Sand doesn't have to be the last line of defence; rather it can be the advance line of attack.  Let us take the battle to the enemy and strengthen our bonds so they cannot destroy our future.

The trots who have infested the Socialist Movement with their degenerate revisionist bile, are partners with the capitalists in their campaign to wreck the family. The far-right with their obsession with Islam, are useful idiots, campaigning to undermine the family in Muslim communities, just as family has been undermined in traditional British communities.  The bigotry of the latter is easier to dismiss than the stupidity of the former, because the trots hide behind the label Socialist.  We have to reclaim the sanctity of Family, and to do so in our own lives by defending and strengthening our own family bonds.  Family and Comradeship are the bulwark against Capitalism.  Just as we have to keep our National Borders secure, we cannot let our enemies undermine the boundaries which keep hearth and home safe.

On the Innately Capitalist Character of Modern Technology and its ‘Science’ - Wilberg on Wednesday

Why did the rise of modern science and technology go hand in hand with the rise of capitalism?
Why did modern science technology ‘take off’ with capitalism and vice versa?

One basic and obvious Marxist answer is that it was new production technologies (from the steam engine to electricity) that first made capitalist forms of mass production in industry possible - and with them capitalist relations of production.

On a deeper level however, I see a connection between the particular character of modern science and technology and the rise and development of capitalism. In particular, what is notable is that in no earlier, pre-capitalist understandings and uses of nature is there anything remotely resembling the ruling conceptions of modern science - in particular the concept of energy that came to dominate both modern scientific discourse and ‘New Age’ pseudoscience (‘energy medicine’ etc.)

      As I have mentioned in several of my books, including The Science Delusion, in his essay entitled ‘Power vs Energy - The Difference Between Dynamis and Energeia’, Johnathon Tennenbaum shows clearly the geo-political use that the ‘energy’ concept was first promoted to serve:

“… the ‘Energeticist Movement’ associated with Wilhelm Ostwald around the turn of the 19th century advocated a World Government based on the use of ‘energy’ as the universal, unifying concept not only for all of physical science, but also for economics, psychology, sociology and the arts … Not accidentally, the Kelvin-Helmholtz doctrine of ‘energy’ became a key feature of Anglo-American geopolitics, from the British launching of Middle East ‘oil politics’ at the beginning of the 20th century … to a new Middle East war.” 

Even here however, I believe we are still only touching the geopolitical surface of the question. A deeper connection between capitalism and the concept of ‘energy’ can be found in Marx’s concept of exchange value as an intangible “universal equivalent” relating all commodities - one that has its source in what he called “abstract labour”.

Marx argued that abstract labour - labour stripped of all its concrete, tangible human forms - is the sole true source of economic value in capitalism. Yet the idea of abstract labour is, by definition, an abstraction - a pure ideality - albeit one that has become realised  or made manifest in the economic life of capitalism. The Hegelian idea of ‘real abstractions’ - abstractions that take on an actual life of their own in society - can also be applied to modern science. This applies particularly to the abstract concept of ‘energy’ - which also has the character of a ‘universal equivalent’ - since it is seen not only as that which universally equates and relates all natural phenomena, but also as something more fundamentally ‘real’ than all its concrete and sensuous manifestations - for example as heat, light, electricity, magnetism etc., all which are no longer experienced as having any independent soul.

But the rabbit hole linking science and capitalism goes deeper still. For as well as having its linguistic roots in the Greek word for ‘work’, the term  ‘energy’ is still defined today as ‘the capacity to perform work’ - exactly the same definition that Marx gives to human labour power.  I argue therefore that a principal role played by the concept of energy - in what can well be called capitalist science - is to facilitate a view of nature too, as something that can be made to perform work, i.e. to be quite literally ‘put to work’, ‘set to work’ or ‘pressed into work’ in just the same way as human labour is within the capitalist system (as well as being exploited in the same way as human labour power).

So just as one can talk, in Marxist terms, of wage-slavery and the exploitation of labour, so one can also talk of enslaving and exploiting nature - by setting or pressing it to work through the technologies of capitalism. Similarly, just as, according to Marx, the abstraction called ‘value’ necessarily circulates in a number of different economic spheres of economic activity  - production capital, commodity capital and money capital etc. so also is ‘energy’ (and now also ‘information’) seen as circulating throughout its many concrete forms of manifestation in nature.

What also unites ‘energy’, ‘abstract labour’ and economic ‘value’ is, of course, that they are purely quantitative abstractions - and that their ‘working’ (Greek energeia) is essentially heedless and even destructive of all their sensuous, qualitative forms - for example by undermining the concrete, sensuous labour of the artisan or through the despoliation of the earth.  The notion that what is ‘real’ is only that which is quantitatively measurable has a long history going back to Galileo, but it found its most developed expression in the philosopher of capitalism par excellence - John Locke. For it was he who reduced all immediate sensuous qualities dimensions of human experience to a mere by-product of measurable quantities such as mass, motion etc.

Marx saw also how the human activity of pressing nature into work through production technologies went along with the pressing of human beings into work as mere servants or “appendages” of these technologies.

“All our invention and progress seem to result in endowing material forces with intellectual life, and in stultifying human life into a material force.”

Here we see a convergence of Marxist and Heideggerian thinking on the question of modern technology and its ‘sciences’ - which, as Heidegger points out, are themselves already based on the use of technical apparatus. Heidegger also emphasised strongly how science and technology force nature to reveal itself (theoretically and in practice) solely according to modern scientific preconceptions. In doing so however, nature does not actually reveal its essential nature or ‘truth’ to humanity, but rather is forced to conceal its essential truth or  innermost soul - like a slave being ordered to mutely obey its master’s commands - or a victim of torture being forced to ‘confess’ under interrogation something which has nothing to do with truth at all - a truth which remains all the more hidden and concealed the more successful the torturer is in forcing a confession of falsities.

Besides speaking, as Marx did, of commodity-fetishism, I think there are good grounds for speaking also of the techno-fetishism of modern capitalism. It was this techno-fetishism, along with the concept and geopolitics of ‘energy’ - that first led Heidegger to see technology as turning the planet into nothing but “a giant gasoline station”. It is the same fetishism of technology that sees it as holding the answers to all the world’s problems - but without so much as asking (as both Marx and Heidegger did) what the deepest questions are that lie behind these problems. 

The biggest question has to do with capitalism itself, and in particular its innate need for the infinite self-expansion of abstract economic ‘value’ - at the expense of all authentic human values. That is why, as the globalisation of capitalism across the planet advances to its ultimate limits, capitalism now seeks to use technologies of space-travel to the moon and other planets as offering  new, trans-terrestrial sources of value exploitation and expansion to save itself from collapse. Yet the in-built necessity for the growth and self-expansion of economic value is never questioned - instead it is just meekly accepted as a ‘law of nature’ that corporations have to record an expansion in their sales and profits.

At the beginning of this essay I mentioned that the ruling concepts of modern science and technology had no place in pre-capitalist cultures and civilisations. And yet what monumental ‘technological’ wonders did they accomplish, achievements which were not measured by their exchange value or even by their use-value alone - but also by their beauty (such as the beautiful Indian temple complexes carved entirely out of and within a single rock face). Today we content ourselves with megacities characterised by totally soulless steel and glass skyscrapers - and all our technologies together seem incapable of creating anything of authentic beauty - anything with soul.  It is also standard for the monumental megalithic works of earlier civilisations - such as the the pyramids of Egypt and South America to been seen simple as a work of hordes of slaves. Yet how can this be, since even today there is still no existing human technology that can come even close to achieving the precision of cutting and drilling of granite that we see in many of the temples, tunnels and dug out rock chambers of early Mesoamerican and Egyptian - to mention but two. So instead of speaking of concrete and ‘concrete labour’ we might better speak of ‘granite labour’ and of granite - which seems to have been cut, drilled, shaped and sculpted to impossible perfection in the past - as if it was butter and not one of the hardest of rocks.

From this and many other forms of evidence available I believe we can come to no other conclusion than that many of the monumental works of prehistoric civilisations were indeed the work of those ‘gods’ which so many ancient myths report as coming down from ‘the skies’ or ‘heaven’, i.e. advanced extra-terrestrial species of consciousness who were understandably worshipped as ‘god-kings’ - and which seeded all great historic civilisations. True, these god-kings, as a ruling elite, were given a portion of the surplus created by the otherwise free productive activity of their peoples (what Marx called ‘The Asiatic Mode of Production’). But the people in turn got something back from their ‘god-kings’ in the form of practical use values of immense importance such as irrigation systems of the most sophisticated sort. For as elites they were, at least at the start and for a time, true cognitive elites - until they degenerated into decadent royal dynasties or ruling class parasites resting their authority on ‘the divine right of kings’.

Looking back into prehistory then, it is as if, through its techno-fetishism, today’s global capitalism is, in effect, attempting to catch up with what was once a global network of prehistoric civilisations sharing technologies far more advanced than our own. What these ancient peoples knew, we have long forgotten - so blinded have we become by the products of our current science and technology, all of which are commodities produced to feed the endless spiral of value creation, and not created as use values to serve human material and spiritual needs. True, the peoples of  prehistoric global civilisations did not have gadgets like cars, televisions, smartphones or drones. On the other hand, it is likely they had no need of them - for human consciousness itself still had highly developed capacities of distance vision, and a level of empathic-telepathic resonance with others of a sort that made any need for ‘messaging’ redundant. There is ample evidence also that is was not ‘energy’ but sonic resonance - realised through music, tuned chanting and singing - and amplified by natural piezoelectric materials - that was the essential ‘scientific’ principle of those prehistoric and pre-capitalist societies and technologies, used for example, for the sonic drilling, carving and acoustic levitation of huge blocks of stone. In contrast, today’s technologies however largely substitute for or simulate what used to be natural powers of resonant human consciousness and communication - although technologies of sonic drilling are now industrially produced and applied - and the possibility of sonic levitation has been laboratory proven. (see the YouTube channel called Ancient Architects).

As for the true purpose of today’s newest, latest and most heavily funded technologies - such as AI-driven Genetics, Nanotechnology and Robotics (GNR), what will they be capable of creating for humanity? Nothing but tools for both the military-industrial complex and the medical-industrial complex, with its promise of genetically eliminating diseases which in reality are created by the alienation of labour - by capitalism itself. And what could be more obscene than use of technologies to replace human-human relations, including sexual relations, with human-robot relations. Yet already we see the development and marketing of robotic sex partners - and even robotic parenting products - ‘cute’ robots that will sing bedtime songs to children and act as their principal playmates.

Finally we have the sinister ideological phenomenon known as ‘trans-humanism’, with its intentional purpose of using GNR to technically ‘upgrade’ biological human beings to the supposedly ‘higher’ status of cyborgs and ‘spiritual machines’ through technologies of so-called ‘Artificial Intelligence’ - something which, in reality, bears no relation to conscious human ‘intelligence’ at all - let alone anything resembling human subjectivity - but takes the form only of ‘quantum computing’ and its higher capacities for pure and impersonal calculation.

The in-built dynamic of capitalism requires, as Marx saw, an endless self-expansion for its own sake of abstract economic ‘value’ - itself seen as an impersonal driving ‘energy’. This capitalist ‘law of value’, is today being realised through new technological commodities which increasingly serve no meaningful human use value at all. It also stands in stark contrast to what Marx envisaged as the free self-expansion of human human subjectivity and consciousness in a post-capitalist era.


“...it seems as if modern humanity were rushing headlong towards this goal of producing itself technologically. If humanity achieves this, it will have exploded itself, i.e. its essence qua subjectivity, into thin air, into a region where the absolutely meaningless is valued as the one and only ‘meaning’ and where preserving this value appears as the human ‘domination’ of the globe.”

Martin Heidegger




Further reading:

Heidegger, Martin The Question Concerning Technology
Wilberg, P. The Science Delusion
Wilberg, P. From New Age to a New Gnosis - towards a new gnostic spirituality
Wilberg, P. The Qualia Revolution - from quantum physics to cosmic qualia science
For a further critique of the ‘energy’ concept see my essay on Matter, Energy and General Relativity


Images thanks to Paul A Philips

Thoughts on Marx and the Free Press

Thoughts on Marx and the Free Press 
by Carl Barjer

Matter is the precondition of mind's possibility; and vice versa. As Marx well knew, the Bible was a balm, with a god made up by men to make life more tolerable. In the beginning was the word of men, with which they wrote god into mental existence; 'He' resides exclusively in the minds of the men who created 'Him'.

Marx was right about some stuff, wrong about others; but his work is shot through with honest endeavour. Communism was to come at the end of a process that would've dissolved corporations and withered away the state.

Marx adamantly, explicitly supported press freedom. What later came to be called 'Communism' perverted Marx's ideas.


What Marx knew, and we're seeing today, is that capitalists, when left to their devices, will create a system where power and wealth becomes concentrated in fewer and fewer hands.

'The World’s 8 Richest Men Are Now as Wealthy as Half the World’s Population'
http://fortune.com/2017/01/16/world-richest-men-income-equality/

That means a small minority enjoy considerable freedom, while a large majority are constrained, restrained, chained. One thing Marx failed to foresee, is how major a role debt would come to play in later stage 'capitalism'. Most of the masses are enslaved by new masters: mortgages, credit owners, loan sharks, etc.

Big bank takes little bank; the latter's now suborned to the former.

Marx's support for "press freedom" was principled and practical. As subsequent revolutions showed, unless you take the people with you - by educating and freeing them to achieve class consciousness - the a 'socialist' state will soon become as oppressive as the one it replaced.


EVERY society that attempted a premature and violent revolution, soon abandoned Marx's ideas, and imposed new variants on age old forms of oppression. Monarchs, aristos and priests were replaced by 'strongmen', tyrants and dictators. Instead of 'dictatorship' of the proletariat, new elites were formed to dictate to, and reimpose oppression over, the proles.

Marx opposed property. Communal living means everything is there for everyone to enjoy, as and when they need it. They are collectively and individually free; the one facilitates the other. For 'socialism' to transform into 'communism', the state (and the oppression that goes with it) must whither away


'Communism' refers to a post state, communal society, where people collectively make use of the products of their work; and control the means they collectively produce goods and services with.

'Corporatism' refers to control by certain groups, in their interests, at the expense of society in general.

Bourgeois 'capitalism' refers to control of the means of production by a minority, who own property.


All isms are impossible, in a sense; such is the nature of ideals. But those who used the term 'Communism' in reference to their regimes, abused it absolutely.

'Corporatism' was established as a reaction, and opposition, to supposed 'Communism' and 'socialism'.

'In the last half of the 19th century people of the working class in Europe were beginning to show interest in the ideas of socialism and syndicalism. Some members of the intelligentsia, particularly the Catholic intelligentsia, decided to formulate an alternative to socialism which would emphasise social justice without the radical solution of the abolition of private property. The result was called Corporatism.

'The basic idea of corporatism is that the society and economy of a country should be organised into major interest groups (sometimes called corporations) and representatives of those interest groups settle any problems through negotiation and joint agreement. In contrast to a market economy, which operates through competition, a corporate economic works through collective bargaining..

'Under corporatism the labour force and management in an industry belong to an industrial organisation. The representatives of labour and management settle wage issues through collective negotiation. While this was the theory in practice the corporatist states were largely ruled according to the dictates of the supreme leader.'

Examples: 'Fascist' Italy, Nazi Germany, Franco's Spain, Peron's Argentina, New Deal USA (under Roosevelt).


“Freedom of the press… is a kind of beauty, which one must have loved to be able to defend. It is something which I love truly, whose existence I feel to be essential, to be necessary to me so that without it I cannot live at peace, or live a full life”.

But does this follow?

“ Hence we not only opposed censorship of the workers’ and radical press, but would also have ‘made objections no less earnestly’ to bans on the reactionary, monarchist and anti-Semitic press. “

The press, for Marx, was to be of the people, for the people, by the people. Most of what masquerades as the press today would be rejected as a mockery of the term. To quote Lenin:

““Freedom of the press” … is a deception while the best printing presses and the biggest stocks of paper are appropriated by the capitalists and while capitalist rule over the press remains, a rule that is manifested throughout the world all the more strikingly, sharply, and cynically, the more democracy and the republican system are developed, as in America for example.

“The first thing to do to win real equality and genuine democracy for the working people, for the workers and peasants, is to DEPRIVE CAPITAL OF THE POSSIBILITY OF HIRING WRITERS, BUYING UP PUBLISHING HOUSES AND HIRING NEWSPAPERS. And to do that the capitalists and exploiters have to be overthrown and their resistance suppressed.

"In capitalist usage, freedom of the press means freedom of the rich to bribe the press, freedom to use their wealth to shape and fabricate so-called public opinion.

“In this respect. too, the defenders of ‘pure democracy’ prove to be defenders of an utterly foul and venal system that gives the rich control over the mass media. They prove to be deceivers of the people who, with the aid of plausible, fine-sounding, but thoroughly false phrases, divert them from the concrete historical task of liberating the press from capitalist enslavement.

“Genuine freedom and equality will be embodied in the system which the communists are building and in which there will be no opportunity for amassing wealth at the expense of others, no objective opportunities for putting the press under the direct or indirect power of money, and no impediments in the way of any working man (or groups of working men, in any numbers) for enjoying and practising equal rights in the use of public printing presses and public stocks of paper.””

In a Marx/Lenin sense, what we mostly have in the UK is a press more akin to a capitalist state-controlled one, than a free one. It needs replacing, rather than regulating. Creating a free press would require proactive, revolutionary and sustained effort.