Wednesday, 25 May 2011

UAF/SWP is Racist and Neo-Colonialist



‘... the normal tendency to treat Third World nations... as neurotic children or, at best, retarded adolescents to be humoured and cared for but not taken seriously... the fashionable feeling of guilt, with its arrogant assumption of ultimate responsibility for all that goes wrong as well as right, and its patronising tendency to treat smaller and weaker nations as smaller and weaker beings.’ - Bernard Lewis, Interpreting the Middle East, pages 334, 337/8
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The SWP’s Racist and Neo-Colonialist Posh Boys

There is a long tradition of Leftist (mainly Trotskyist but sometimes Communist) posh boys and girls condescending towards the Brown Exotic. (Prince Charles, who’s not a Trot, also indulges in this pastime with all things Islamic and Arabic; just as Richard Burton, another aristo in the 19th century, did.)

Since the SWP is big on ‘class analysis’, they can hardly fault me for my approach to the thoroughly middle-class, and often even upper middle-class, nature of the SWP/UAF - or, at the least, of its leaders and theorists over the years.

Since its birth, and into the next few decades, the Central Committee of the SWP was, if anything, more upper middle class, or even aristocratic, than middle class. It certainly wasn’t a good example of the plain and much-hated, by Trots, ‘petite bourgeoisie’.

In other words, many SWP leaders, both today and in the past, have been to public schools. Indeed two current leaders (i.e., members of the SWP Central Committee), Alex Callinicos and Charlie Kimber, have aristocratic backgrounds.

[Left: Lord Acton. Underneath: Alex Callinicos of the SWP. A descendant of Lord Acton. Private school in Zimbabwe. Balliol College, Oxford.]




Let’s start with Alex Callinicos of the SWP Central Committee. He’s a descendant, through his mother, of the 19th century Englishman, Lord Acton. His mother was the Hon. Aedgyth Bertha Milburg Mary Antonia Frances Lyon-Dalberg-Acton, was the daughter of the 2nd Lord Acton, and grand daughter of Lord Acton, the historian. Callinicos himself was educated at a private school, St George's College, in Zimbabwe (colonialist style) and he then went to Balliol College, Oxford.

[Left: Sir Henry Kimber, 1st Baronet. Charlie Kimber, SWP Central Committe, is his descendent.]

Then there's ‘Charlie' Kimber, the new kid in the SWP Central Committee. Who's he related to? He’s related to Sir Henry Kimber, 1st Baronet.

Now for Chris Nineham. Also SWP Central Committee. He was educated at Westminster public school.

But, admittedly, it's not all about private schools and aristocratic backgrounds. The point is that this neo-colonial mindset has been passed on to all those SWP automatons who literally memorise the party line before they let themselves loose on the streets

We also have John Rees. I’m not sure if he’s yet another posh-boy Trot. (He’s ex-SWP, now Counterfire.) However, he’s certainly another neo-colonialist who’s so far up the arse of Islamism, Islamists and Arabs that he’s even been allowed to present ‘anti-Zionist’ historico-docs (on the Islam Channel) on how uniquely evil Israel is when compared to the sweetness and light of the Sudanese Jangaweed, the Pakistani Deobandi, and even the Taliban, al-Qaeda and Hamas.
If it not all SWP, it's certainly all posh neo-colonialism. Take two non-SWP lovers of the Brown Exotic, Seumas Milne and the ‘right wing' Peter Oborne.


[Left: Seumas Milne. Son of a BBC Director-General. Winchester College (a top public school). Balliol College, Oxford. (Was he there with Alex Callinicos?)]

Seumus Milne is formerly of the Guardian (though he still writes for it). He’s the younger son of the former BBC Director-General Alasdair Milne. This Stalinist attended Winchester College and read Philosophy, Politics and Economics at Balliol College, Oxford . Seumas is more Stalinist/Communist than SWP-Trot. But he's still a very posh boy . He’s always writing in defence of Muslims. Then again, he has also written in defence of Stalinism, the IRA, Saddam Hussein, etc. Basically, he will defend any individual or group that doesn’t remind him too much of his privileged background and the people who crossed him as a kid or when he was growing up. He’ll defend anyone - or anything - non-Establishment in order to cleanse the Establishment within himself.

Then there’s Peter Oborne of the Daily Telegraph. He’s perhaps noticeable for being a ‘right-wing’ defender of all things Islamic and Muslim. But the important point is that he too, along with his new-found Leftist friends, is yet another Islamophile posh boy. He was educated at Sherborne boys' Public School and then Christ’s College, Cambridge. He too is a perfect neo-colonialist in the tradition, bizarrely enough, of the upper-class Trots of the SWP who also simply adore the Brown Exotic.

[Left: Sue Blackwell of Birmingham University. She has made it her life's work to care deeply for the Brown Exotic and Oppressed Palestinians and to ignore all the other people who suffer in the world.]

Finally, let’s take an Islamophile (or Dhimmi) who’s a ‘former member of the SWP’ but only a lowly university professor. Her name is Sue Blackwell. She’s the supreme anti-Zionist of the UK. She works at Birmingham University. I have included her because she graphically displays the hypocrisy and condescension of Trotskyists towards Muslims.

Let me explain. In one breath Trots/SWP/UAF patronise or condescend towards Muslims. On the other hand, they argue, or Trotskyism/Marxism does, that Islam, being a religion, is a ‘mere epiphenomenon of the socio-economic substructure’ devoid of any intrinsic truth or even merit and, in fact, ‘deeply illusory’ in nature. (Marx’s ‘religion is the opium of the people’ and all that.)

Blackwell exudes this hypocritical or even schizophrenic approach to Islam/Muslims too.

On the one hand, she tells us that she ‘admires Muslims and Islam’. But does she also tell these very same Muslims (some whom are ‘her friends’) that she thinks Islam ‘is a mere epiphenomenon of the socio-economic substructure which underpins it’? Of course she doesn’t! How does the SWP and Sue Blackwell sustain this deeply cynical and opportunistic attitude towards Muslims and Islam?

Again, on the one hand, Islam is ‘mere empty superstructure’ and the religious words of Muslims simply ‘disguise deeper socio-political realities’. On the other hand, Blackwell and other Trots pretend that they admire Muslims, their religion and their spiritual ‘fight for Justice’. Sue Blackwell, being the atheistic materialist that she is, even goes so far as to say she admires Islam and the Koran itself.

It is the case that certain SWP leaders or theorists were indeed brought up in ‘working-class backgrounds' (there are a couple), as Wiki accounts (usually written by SWP) put it. However, a massive distinction needs to be made between those who were brought up in working-class families, and what these people actually are now and what they have been more or less since university days (if not before). The other thing is, I would argue, that this neo-colonialist SWP position and mindset has been passed onto even those SWP with ‘working-class backgrounds’; just as the SWP argue that ‘capitalist ideology’ is passed onto the working class.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SWP/UAF's Neo- Colonialist Racism

I use the term ‘neo-colonialist’ for two reasons.



One: most of the Leftist/Trotskyist posh boys who have led Leftist groups, formulated their policies and written their doctrines, had rich, upper middle-class or even aristocratic upbringings and backgrounds. Indeed many of their forebears either ruled or were part of the British Empire and were therefore ‘colonialists’ of some kind.

Two: these people, and their rather less posh student-automaton followers, have resurrected a kind of colonialism. Instead of talking about ‘foreign Johnnies’ and ‘the white man’s burden’, they invert such things and patronise, or ‘simply adore’, the Brown Exotic. Is is exactly the same kind of racist and colonialist mindset they are supposed to be against. However, they patronise rather than belittle.

Both the original colonialists and our own Leftist neo-colonialists treated and treat the Brown Exotic Muslim (as well as other examples of the exotic) as a child. In the first instance, colonialism, as a child who should be punished for being a bad child. In the Leftist case, neo-colonialism, as a child who must never be punished because he is not responsible for what he does - even if what he does is blow innocent civilians up.

The terrible thing about the Leftist/Trotskyist alliance with Islam, Islamists and Muslims is how obviously patronising it is. Indeed there is a lot of evidence to suggest that most Muslims, especially the hard-core Islamists, are well aware of this. However, because this is an affair of mutual use, that doesn’t really matter. The Trots are attempting ‘to tap into the revolutionary potential’ of Muslims, and Muslims are grateful for all the help they can get in their goal of Islamising Britain and getting the state, councils, the police not to offend Muslims in any way whatsoever.


The Leftists are doing a massive and great job for Islam and Muslims.

Will Muslims one day return the favour by becoming Marxist revolutionaries? Not a chance in hell!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Marxist/Trotskyist Theories Underneath It All

SWP/UAF/Trotskyists will never uncover Brown Exotic wrong or even speak about it. Instead they concentrate entirely on ‘white Israelis’ (or White Zionists), white Western leaders and the white working class of the UK – those terrible bugbears of London dinner parties and the very same class formerly despised by the eugenist and Leftist Fabians (who once wanted to castrate the entire working class).

No Brown Exotic Muslim can ever do wrong in the middle-class Trot’s eyes.

Their racism is inverted. (But why 'inverted’?) Browns can never do wrong – only EDL ‘chavs’ and ‘knuckle-draggers’ can do wrong. (They say ‘EDL’ when they nearly always mean the white working class.) Do Trots believe that Muslims, because they are the Brown Exotic Oppressed, can never do wrong?

The answer is ‘yes’. This is because Trot/Marxist theory takes you out of the realms of the actual and into Theory Land. But a little bit, or even a lot, of unreality (as well as downright and obvious lies and distortion) doesn’t matter. Only Radicalisation and Revolution matter.


Yet Trots can be as against religion as anyone - well, they are as against White Christianity as anyone! That’s because Christianity is a White Oppressor Religion. Christianity is white. (Trots are Deeply Brown, even if they’re from the Home Counties of the SWP.)

So why does the SWP/UAF ‘simply adore’ a religion, Islam, which can be, and often is, deeply reactionary, fascist, misogynist, expansionist, brutal, authoritarian, hierarchical and the rest?

At the heart of this Leftist mindset is a hatred of their own country and the Sins of Their Fathers, as well as of their own identity and their own civilisation.

And that’s one reason why Leftists take such a soft position on Islam. Islam, in the present period of history, has been perceived as the main enemy of Western civilisation.


Leftism is the politics of self-hatred, as well of a hatred of their own privileged class and upbringing as well as what many of their forebears did in the British Empire and elsewhere.

That's why SWP/UAF is against 'anti-fascist organisation’ and why it ‘campaigns against all right wing and fascist organisations’. It is against all examples of fascism... except brown fascism, black fascism, Islamofascism, Arab fascism, and, of course their very own red fascism.

It basically argues, though not, of course, in these precise words, that brown oppressed people can never be fascist or racist and that only white people can be fascists and racists. (The Israelis are ‘white’, apparently.)

These people are still rebelling against a Western imperialism which only existed many, many years ago. And that imperialism was led by white people who weren’t that unlike their own grandparents, great-grandparents, etc.


Thus they must embrace the Brown Exotic. Other exotics, of course, are not as loud as Muslims. Muslims get the most ear-time and have all their ideological work, which is needed to defend the indefensible, done by white graduates either long out of university or just out of university.

SWP/UAF student initiates will have been taught about how uniquely evil ‘the West’ is. How uniquely evil the British Empire was. They would have been taught this by middle-class white people who are really not that unlike their parents, grandparents and their relations further back. Not that much unlike them, in fact.

All this, of course, is pure racism. Patronising brown Muslims is pure racism. Saying they can't be racist or fascist simply because they are brown and part of the platonic Oppressed can’t be anything else but a kind of racism - perhaps we shouldn’t even elevate it with the prefix ‘inverted’.

Do Muslims actually realise how these Trots are patronising them? Leftists are indirectly arguing that Muslims are incapable of morality. They argue that, because they are brown and Muslim, they can do things no white person would ever be allowed to do.

Don't Muslims realise that the SWP/UAF has exactly the same patronising attitude to the Brown Exotic as the British Empire?

Though this time the Leftist colonialists think they are on the side of the Muslims; they are still patronising Muslims. Still trying to make them take part in a Trot Revolution that has very little to do with anyone outside UK universities and the LSE.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Left’s Fight Against Racism

And my God, doesn’t the Left, and those hordes of professional ‘anti-racists’, make a song and a dance about mainly fictitious or imagined racism? It’s the be all and end all for them; coming just behind ‘smashing fascism’ (which, of course, they neatly connect together).


In the anti-racist/anti-fascist case, it is entirely understandable that they see racism and racists around every corner - their careers and political legitimacy depend on their finding a multitude of racists before breakfast.

Thus the definitions of ‘racist’ become looser and looser as well as broader and broader.

The other point is that in order to accept the Leftist/SWP definition ‘racist’, and also accept the very many groups and individuals it classifies as ‘racist’, a person must take in a huge catechism of theories and diktats without which the multitude of racists deemed so by the Left would simply not end up being racists. In other, more simple, words. In order to accept that all these people and groups are truly racist, you must end up being a Trotskyist or Communist. The classifications of ‘racism’ would simply not work for a person without a prior acceptance of Trotskyist or Communist theories and stipulations.

Take Israel. No one, I can securely argue, could accept the accusations of Israel being ‘racist’ and ‘fascist’ without buying into the vast cottage industry of Marxist/Leftist theories and diktats which make Israel racist and fascist. The whole enterprise of accusing Israel of being racist and fascist is a Leftist invention. It partly started with the Soviet Union’s official categorisation of Israel as ‘fascist’ and ‘racist’ round about 1967 (though perhaps before that). The USSR, of course, used accusations of ‘fascism’ and ‘racism’ as a very convenient weapon which it used to destroy each and every ‘enemy’ - both domestic and foreign. (Many of which, incidentally, were ‘Muslim republics’ rebelling against Communist imperialism.) As for Trotskyists, if anything they use the weapon of ‘racism’ and ‘fascism’ even more frequently than the Russian Communists. (Luckily, the Trots have rarely even had a sniff of real state power.) So much for differences between Trotskyism and Communism!

The same blanket and utterly Trotskyist/Communist (mainly Trot) condemnations and accusations of EDL ‘racism’ and ‘fascism’ can be seen in the EDL case. They too are literally turned into a fascist and racist group only by an acceptance of the many prior theories and diktats from the Trotskyist leadership and its theorists. Without accepting this big Leftist package, which makes the EDL ‘racist’ and ‘fascist’, the EDL simply could not be seen as, or be, racist and fascist. So if you buy into the idea that the EDL is racist and fascist, you must be a Leftist - even though many people may indeed reject that definition when aimed at themselves.

That’s why the EDL accuses regional newspapers, local councillors, mainstream politicians, etc. of being ‘Leftist’. They may not be members of Leftist groups like the SWP/UAF, they may not even know much about them, but without the vast amount of SWP/UAF/Trot propaganda, with its many theories and diktats, there is no way on earth a councillor, journalists, etc. could with any sense classify the EDL as racist or fascist. That can only be done because of a prior acceptance of the theories, soundbites, etc. which the SWP/UAF uses in order to miraculously turn the EDL into a fascist and racist organisation. (As indeed the SWP did to the ‘fascist’ Conservative Party in the 1980s.)

So, as most people know, the SWP/UAF, and Far Leftists generally, are utterly obsessed with fascism and racism. They see it everywhere - exclusively within their enemies and never within their pure and pious selves.

They ‘despise racism’. Yet they clearly do not despise the (inverted) racism within themselves. Also, isn’t all this tosh about racism a bit pious and self-righteous? As is well known, the Puritans of old were often the worst sinners.

1 comment:

  1. These "communists" are reproducing what Ayaan Hirsi Ali (black, ex-muslim) calls: "the racism of low expectations". Their racism is such that they hold muslims (and other brown exotics) as incapable of tolerance and incapable of even grasping the concept of "universal human rights" and incapable of defending it or living up to it. Such racist left-wingers literally hold out two different sets of "civilised behaviour" - the moral standards to which they hold countries like Israel, and then a much lower set of moral standards to which they hold the surrounding muslim countries. The racist communists prove over and over again, that they believe muslims are inferior human beings.

    ReplyDelete