This is more than a family tragedy. The family of the victims had been featured widely in organs of the gutter press such as the Daily Express. A Sun article on the family was headlined “Ex bans scrounger’s kids”.

But it is not only the press at fault. Even worse are the politicians. In 1905-6 agents of the Russian Czar organised pogroms of the Jewish population of Russia to distract popular attention from a lost war abroad and waves of economic and political strife at home. They would not necessarily get their hands dirty but would put out pamphlets encouraging others to take part in orgies of murder and looting.

Today, some Tory and Labour politicians alike frequently use terms designed to demonise those in receipt of benefits – welfare dependent, scroungers, parasites etc. We are told that they breed like rats and take our homes, especially if they are “gypsies” or “foreigners”. It is hinted that they are worthless, and the less of them the better.

Then a minority of people take these politicians at their word, people who perhaps did not enjoy the sophistication an education at Eton brings, those who are made to feel a sense of burning resentment towards those with a slightly bigger house on the estate and are taught not to question why they live on a council estate and others live in an estate of many square miles.

Meanwhile in the City of London the investment bankers, hedge fund managers and private equity bosses see their fortunes rise into the stratosphere.

Syriza rally in Greece

The coalition parties in Britain were heavily defeated from Plymouth to the Central Belt of Scotland (if not in Tunbridge Wells and Maidstone, the two local authorities in our part of the world that held elections). With most voters now recognising that Britain’s return to recession was a matter of choice rather than external factors, the Tories look set to lose in 2015.

In France, the Socialist candidate Hollande narrowly beat Sarkozy on an anti-austerity platform. Most impressively, in Greece, a society torn to pieces by cuts, a left-wing coalition Syriza took second place. The two governing parties, New Democracy and PASOK (the equivalent to the Tories and New Labour) saw their vote crumble despite promising to ‘amend’ the austerity programme if re-elected.

For democracy to triumph over the powers of capital, however, needs more than victories at the ballot box. The power and wealth of the City, Frankfurt, Wall Street and the Gnomes of Zurich will work to undermine any government that threatens them. Ultimately, serious money may well flow into the pockets of fascists, who did very well in Greece though were utterly defeated in the UK. To oppose both the financial elite and those they may start to fund, it is time to build networks of resistance on the street and in the workplace that will enable the will of the majority to prevail, as well as networks of local, national and international solidarity that put socialist politics into action in our communities.

However, bliss it was that dawn to be alive!

The jack's frame

Today we started work on Jack for Saturday’s Beating the Bounds. By Friday he should be covered in leaves and given a crown of May blossom. He will be seen in Tunbridge Wells Town Centre from about 10.30 on Saturday 5th May, walk in procession around the Commons of Rusthall and Tunbridge Wells and then be slain to bring the Summer. Accompanying him will be one or more drums and he will be flanked by a red flag and a flag of Kent.

More surprises can be expected, so join us on Saturday as it feels that we need to give the birth of the Summer as much help as possible this year!

A Garland for May (Walter Crane, from Justice, 1895)

West Kent Palestine Solidarity Campaign

Lord Ahmed, Labour peer

Labour Peer Lord Ahmed has attracted a fair degree of controversy today in saying that he would raise money to see Tony Blair and George W Bush indicted for war crimes. He is far from perfect, with his conviction for dangerous driving and, more worryingly, seems somewhat in thrall to some religious groups.

Positively though he doesn’t claim to be doing the work of a deity, speaking to a deity on a regular basis, or planning to start a war in the hope that he can boost his retirement income as a result. He is also a lifelong Labour Party supporter, rather than a smarmy chancer (and political son of Thatcher) on the make.

No act imaginable could unite the country more successfully than throwing Call Me Tony and Mr George W into a cell at the Hague. I volunteer my services to write an economic policy for his future government, starting with the City (free one-way flights to Zurich and 150% tax on profits from financial speculation, naturally)

With a team like this, how could Middle England refuse?

We will be holding a meeting in a place with convivial atmosphere this Saturday (7th April) at 2pm. This will follow on from a stall before lunch. More details will be posted shortly.

Big Brother is Watching YOU !

The government is soon to announce its intention to introduce new legislation which would enable the monitoring of all phone calls, e-mails, texts and website visits of everyone in the UK. The proposals are due to be announced in the forthcoming Queen’s Speech, in May.

Under the new draconian powers, Internet firms would be required by law to give the intelligence agency ‘GCHQ’ access to communications data on demand, and in real time. Until now, anyone wishing to monitor communications has been required to gain permission from a magistrate.

Although the new law would not allow GCHQ to access the specific content of e-mails, calls or messages without a warrant, it would still enable intelligence officers to identify who an individual or group is in contact with, how often, and for how long. They would also be able to see which websites someone had visited.

The Home Office has attempted to justify the new draconian powers, by stating that “…the move is necessary in order to tackle terrorism and serious crime”. In a statement, the Home Office said “action was needed to maintain the continued availability of communications data as technology changes.” A Home Office spokesman said: “It is vital that police and security services are able to obtain communications data in certain circumstances to investigate serious crime and terrorism and to protect the public. As set out in the Strategic Defence and Security Review we will legislate as soon as parliamentary time allows, to ensure that the use of communications data is compatible with the government’s approach to civil liberties.”

Conservative MP and former shadow home secretary David Davis said it would “make it easier for the government to eavesdrop on vast numbers of people”. He called it “an unnecessary extension of the ability of the state to snoop on ordinary people.” He went on to say, “The government will be able to get at the information with no ‘by or leave’ from anybody. What this is talking about doing is not focusing on terrorists or criminals; it’s absolutely everybody’s e-mails, phone calls and web access… All that’s got to be recorded for two years and the government will be able to get at it with no ‘by your leave’ from anybody. You shouldn’t go beyond that in a decent civilised society, but that’s what’s being proposed.”

Civil liberties groups have criticised the proposal. Nick Pickles, director of the ‘Big Brother Watch’ campaign group, called the move “an unprecedented step that will see Britain adopt the same kind of surveillance seen in China and Iran”.

Shami Chakrabarti, director of the campaign group ‘Liberty’ stated: “It is a pretty drastic step in a democracy. This is an absolute attack on privacy online and it is far from clear this will actually improve public safety, while adding significant costs to internet businesses. This is more ambitious than anything that has been done before. It is a pretty drastic step in a democracy.”

The Internet Service Providers Association said any change in the law must be “proportionate, and respect the freedom of expression and privacy of users”. An industry official warned it would be “expensive, intrusive and a nightmare to run legally”.

Even if the move is announced in the Queen’s Speech, any new law would still have to make it through Parliament, potentially in the face of opposition in both the Commons and the Lords.

The previous Labour government also attempted to introduce similar, draconian legislation during its tenure but failed, after facing huge opposition from across all parties, including the Tories. At that time, Labour attempted to introduce a central, government-run database of everyone’s phone calls and e-mails, but eventually dropped the bid after widespread anger. The then Home Secretary Jacqui Smith pursued efforts similar to those being revisited now, but at that time the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats continued to voice their concerns. The then shadow home secretary, Chris Grayling, opposed the move at the time, stating the government had “built a culture of surveillance which goes far beyond countering terrorism and serious crime”. Also at that time, Chris Huhne, then the Lib Dem home affairs spokesman, said, “…any legislation requiring communications providers to keep records of contact would need strong safeguards on access. A careful balance will have to be struck between investigative powers and the right to privacy.”

Dingleburp Crumpeydump

The jibe in the West when I was young was that in the USSR the state pretended to pay the people and the people pretended to work. Certainly after 1991 a lot of workers were paid in kind for many years. If only the British worker was so lucky!

I’m sure that top executives at the firm will be paid in full, with bonuses etc. Yet cleaners, often from ethnic minorities and paid little more than the minimum wage, have had precisely nothing to live on.

The lessons are clear. We should put an end to outsourcing these services to the spivs of the City. It is time to break with the failed economics of Thatcher, Blair and Osborne.

George a Winner !

The most positive news story of this past week has been the landslide victory by George Galloway of the Bradford West by-election, a supposedly ‘safe’ Labour seat.

George Galloway’s surprise victory shows the alienation of voters from the main political parties. The Respect Party politician truly reflects concerns about jobs and the economy, issues that affect us all, not just Asians or Muslims.

Some reductionist thinkers (and propagandists) would have us believe that Mr Galloway somehow panders to and only stands for the concerns of Muslim and Asian voters. The truth is that these issues affect us all.

Unfortunately, other parties have played the ‘race card’, suggesting Mr Galloway depended on support from Asian voters in the city, with many Muslim voters attracted to his opposition to the war in Iraq and his call for troops to withdraw from Afghanistan immediately.

However, when people spout these fallacies against minority ethnic groups, they neglect to acknowledge that Asians are as much British as Jews, Christians or Muslims. We are all British and we all have the same rights and most of us share the same concerns. These sorts of statements, in the final analysis, are analogous to claiming that Asian voters are ‘2^nd Class Citizens’ whose concerns are somehow at odds with so-called ‘white’ middle England, which is fallacious. I would counter this incitement to religious and minority hatred by reminding these narrow-minded thinkers that most of the UK population, not just Muslims or Asians, are united in our opposition to the UK’s involvement in the Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. These issues are not just the concern of Muslims or Asians, but of all of us (or at least they should be). Why shouldn’t Mr Galloway appeal to Asian voters? They have the same rights as all of us, because, thankfully, we are a cohesive and inclusive multi-cultural society.

Meanwhile, all that Lib Dem MP David Ward had to say, (representing neighbouring Bradford East), was that ‘white voters in the constituency “washed their hands” of the campaign’. Surely one would hope that such people educated enough to be our politicians should know better than spouting this sort of reductionist (and for that matter RACIST) clap-trap?

Ed Miliband said the loss of the seat was “incredibly disappointing”. He said “local factors” were partly to blame but pledged to “learn lessons” from the defeat. These sorts of platitudes sound so hollow and clichéd, it is questionable whether Mr Miliband is even convinced himself by his own rhetoric.

The poll should have been a “stroll in the park” and there are questions whether the Labour leadership can connect with its core supporters.

Mr Galloway, expelled by Labour in 2003, won the by-election by 10,140 votes, in the process of overturning a Labour majority of more than 5,000 at the 2010 general election.

His win represents a peaceful democratic uprising against the established political parties and their leaders. It is a tidal wave and, furthermore, one waiting to break all over the country because of the growing disaffection towards the three main parties. It is well known now there are very large numbers of people completely disenchanted and alienated from the political process and from the mainstream political parties. There is no difference between the Tories, the Lib Dems and New Labour, or at least not a sufficient difference for anyone to notice or care.

George, being the shrewd politician he is, has focused his campaign on tackling Bradford’s economic problems, suggesting the city had “gone backwards” during Labour’s years in government. There is a great deal of concern about mass unemployment, poverty, poor educational statistics, poor health and a general sense of abandonment in post-industrial cities like Bradford. 

Turnout in the by-election was just over 50%, compared with 64.9% in the general election.

Dingleburp Crumpeydump