Wednesday, 16 August 2017

4PT - On the Need for a ‘Fourth Political Theory’... Wilberg on Wednesday

It is my firm belief, shared with Stalin, that Marxism is not a dogma but must undergo constant development. It is also my belief, shared with Alexander Dugin, that political theory and its language - whilst drawing on their best elements - must now go beyond all three principal ideologies of the 20th century - namely bourgeois liberalism and individualism (i.e. egotism), Marxism-Leninism-Stalinism and what he calls ‘fascism’. I believe it would be more accurate to speak of National Socialism rather than ‘fascism’, since this shared a number of common features with Stalin’s ‘Socialism in one Country’ and the Russo-German tradition of ‘National Bolshevism’ that both influenced Stalin and survived his death. Though Stalin held to the language of Marxism-Leninism and Hitler’s economic success was inspired by Gottfried Feder’s analysis of usury capital, both leaders were forced by circumstance to place geopolitical considerations at the core of their practical policies. Recognising this, Dugin’s great contribution to political thought has been to rescue geopolitics from the margins of political theory and place it at its centre. In doing so he also returned to and recognised the central significance of McKinder’s model of global geopolitics which, since 1904, had been the foundation of Western imperialist foreign policy and the basis of its central agenda - to create a unipolar global hegemony of the ‘arc’ of oceanic capitalist ‘crescent’ states and their culture by using all possible means, not least the instigation of multi-front wars, to prevent the rise of a ‘multi-polar’ world, i.e. one based on an axis of regions and countries belonging to the Eurasian ‘heartland’ - and based on mutual respect for each other’s cultures. From this perspective the war between Stalin’s Russia and Hitler’s Germany - Russia and Germany having been the most important countries of the Heartland - was a catastrophic success for U.S. hegemonic imperial interests and ambitions. For despite military victory at enormous human cost, the Soviet Union and its Red Empire ultimately did not survive this war - West Germany having been turned into an vassal state of the U.S. Empire - to be followed, after the fall of the USSR and DDR - by all the countries of Eastern Europe. Thankfully, nations such as Russia and China have, after faltering during the post-Mao and Yeltsin eras, since refused to bow to the hegemonic unipolar model of Western global capitalism and geopolitics - though like the USSR and National Socialist Germany - and Iran, North Korea and China today - they are both now targets of Zionist backed US-NATO military expansionism, aggression and political-cultural subversion. Of course there is far more to Dugin’s Fourth Political Theory than ‘mere’ geopolitics, not least since it argues that, historically, politically - and philosophically - there is far more to ‘geopolitics’ itself than meets the eye. And though he does not present his book as a dogma but as an invitation to a new form of meta-political discussion and discourse, I concur with his basic thesis that neither Marxism-Leninism-Stalinism nor National Socialism, neither purely class nor race-based ideologies any longer offer an adequate, comprehensive and deep enough philosophical and theoretical foundation for our era - and that whatever vital and highly relevant elements they both still retain. It is Dugin’s recognition of these still relevant elements, together with his foundational Heideggerian philosophy, that have led to him becoming, like Martin Heidegger, a thinker reviled in the West - accused of promoting a toxic and veritably ‘Satanic’ Stalino-Nazi ideology, being Putin’s ‘Rasputin’ etc. So whilst, as a philosopher, I have both sympathy for and also question certain aspects of Dugin’s brand of 4PT, I am most certainly of the view that a ‘Fourth Political Theory’ is necessary - and that such a theory can only come to fruition through a constructive critical and questioning response to both Dugin and Heidegger.
Note: This is also the reason why, whilst in sympathy with many of the policies of SWPE, I see my role as one of contributing to a rethinking of their ‘classical’ political-theoretical foundations - elements of which I see as either partly contradicting or at least as not helpful in opening the way for a far deeper and more detailed philosophical, theoretical and practical articulation of these policies in the historical and geopolitical context of our times.

Tuesday, 15 August 2017

Brexit: A Cynical Manipulation

On the 23rd of June 2016, the people of England, Cymru and Kernow voted to leave the EU. Alba and the British-occupied north of Ireland voted to remain, as did the nation of Gibraltar, and the globalised city of London.  Due to the sparsity of people in the Remain-voting areas, other than London, the result of the Independence Referendum was for the UK as a whole to strike out on the path of Sovereignty and Freedom.

The referendum Voting patterns showed a clear division between the Ruling Caste and their bourgeois lackeys on the one side, who voted to keep the UK inside the EU, and the Working Class who voted for the UK to regain control of its own destiny.  The political divide was equally stark, with the globalising liberals lining up in defence of their beloved EU superstate, and the anti-Capitalists of every political stream joining together to break the UK out of the clutches of the despots of finance capitalism.

A year after the vote, with the ludicrous Article 50 negotiations crawling along, it is evident that the people were lied to.  The implication given by David Cameron and his partners-in-crime, was that once the votes were counted, the UK would either continue as a part of the EU, or it would be outside the bloc and would be an independent country.  If the vote had been pro-EU, that would have been the case, and nobody would have heard of Article 50 at all.

The procrastination following the vote has led people to the logical conclusion that the government expected the people to do the bidding of Brussels, London and the Bankers/Corporations who control them, and that with the rebellion of the Working Class was completely unexpected. This is quite possible.

The level of propaganda thrown at us included the useful execution of the MP Jo Cox, who was an outspoken advocate of EU power-grabbing.  We were supposed to vote to stay in prison out of a sense of respect for a dead politician. A few pathetic liberals may have been swayed by the killing, and probably more by the sickening celebrations by the State-stooges of the now thankfully illegal National Action, but the impact on the EU vote was negligible.

The Ruling Caste only allowed the EU Referendum because whatever the result, they would win.  If we had voted to stay in the EU, we would have voted to accept an EU Army, the Euro as our currency, complete metrication, a single legal system, and through rapid stages, the end of all the countries of the EU, with the UK divided into nominally distinct areas with as much influence on EU policy-making as a current local authorities have on Westminster.

Total standardisation of the economy would have meant the UK as a sovereign entity, would have ceased to exist.  This would have been catastrophic for the Working Class, but would have been a glorious victory for the corporate despots who would have had all barriers to their accumulation of wealth and power, removed.  The Referendum split the people into the decent family-centred freedom-loving Proletariat on one side, and the vile self-obsessed individualistic bourgeois capitalist scum on the other. The fact that we won the vote proves that the flame of Revolutionary Socialism burns brightly in our people.

The immediate resignation of the fake populist leader of UKIP, Farage, allowed the media and Establishment to push their Article 50 nonsense onto the people. The bourgeois filth who took to the streets to demand the EU vote be ignored, stood as counter revolutionaries, defying the people.  The time to push forward the revolution was missed, and the UK has languished as a prisoner in the EU prison ever since.

The departure of the Prime Minister and the subsequent calling of an election by his replacement on a platform of more austerity, pay freezes, benefits cuts, the confiscation of homes of the elderly, was all designed to give more authority to the EUphile MPs, mocking the Working Class vote. The situation we have now is of a government serving business, riding roughshod over the wishes of the Working Class.  This is as it always has been, but now much more transparently than since the vote was grudgingly given to us, which came about only within the last hundred years.

With the likes of Trilateral Commission member, David Miliband joining the choir of Globalist Dictatorship, the Referendum is being more and more openly ignored.  We voted for Sovereignty, for total control of our borders, for total control of our territory (including the seas of the UK), for total control of the economy.  What we are getting is a pledge to keep or seas as places open for all factory fishing environmental terrorists.  Our borders will not be closed until after an open-ended transition period, which will no doubt be extended and extended until with the help of the media, and the reality of vast numbers of people brought in as cheap labour, will become irrelevant.

The refusal to respect the will of the Working Class proves that the Ruling Caste and their Middle Class lackeys, are the enemies of the people.  It is so obvious that only the most brainwashed of the media-consumers can fail to see it.  The problem, of course, is that apathy is the greatest tool of the Ruling Caste, with the failure of the people to rise up, being taken as an excuse to push ahead with the globalist agenda regardless of what the people have stated they demand be done.

The bleak situation we find ourselves in is one in which we have voted to leave the EU, and the corrupt globalising political class is manipulating our decision in order to make sure that we do not gain the sovereignty we demand, but rather fall further into the web of global control.  The probability of the UK moving from the EU to the EEA, will mean that the UK does not achieve the ability to renationalise and rebuild heavy industry and our vital transport infrastructure.  The government has stated that if there is no EU Trade Deal, the default position will be for the UK to become a tax haven for the rich, with the Working Class becoming even more the subjects of tyranny than we already are.  The party of government would be happy to govern the UK according to World Trade Organisation rules, which also prohibit the implementation of policies which protect the people from multinational exploitation.  WTO vs EEA really is a false division - in both scenarios, the Working Class are used as fodder for the profits of the rich, with sovereignty eroded to make sure the capitalists in charge can gain more wealth and power with no fear of the people getting in their way.

The only solution to the Brexit trap, is for the Working Class to stand up against the Ruling Class and their bourgeois collaborators, and demand that the UK gain complete sovereignty, leaving not only the EU, but the WTO, IMF, NATO, UN, WHO, World Bank and all other branches of the global capitalist system.  The solution to the capitalist EU is not for a continuation of the capitalist UK in a different structure, but for a complete break from the bankers' economy and the establishment of a free federal Socialist Workers' Republic, in which 'trade' with other countries is not a priority, but rather the welfare of the British Working Class is the absolute focus of government.  We need the full implementation of Socialism in One Country, and the long-term goal of assisting other countries to do the same, so that ultimately capitalism will collapse everywhere and the whole world will be free.

Join us. Make a difference. Don't let the capitalists turn our Brexit victory into their victory.

Wednesday, 9 August 2017

Stalinism, the Occult and the Fetishism of the Sign - Wilberg on Wednesday

Despite the official declaration of materialist science as the only true Soviet religion, the so-called Stalinist ‘cult of personality’ that was launched in 1935-6 effectively imbued Stalin with singular ‘theurgical’ powers of omnipotence and omniscience. “Official rhetoric praised the magic and miracles wrought by the cadres (as opposed to the impersonal magic wrought by science and technology) and made it clear they owed their effectiveness to Stalin. Other people shared in his mana, a supernatural force that is concentrated in particular persons of object”, his portrait was a religious icon and the very utterance of his name regarded as a mantra for heroes of labour - even though such terms as mana and mantra were known only by ethnographers and occultists. Specially composed folklore specifically invested Stalin with magical powers…” and among esotericists “a legend circulated among them that Stalin knew something which no one else could ever discover and that he was an incarnation of Manu.” In contrast, failures in the 5-years plans were filmically portrayed as the work of saboteurs and wreckers - who in turn were presented as evil sorcerers or black magicians. As for censorship in the Soviet era, this was nothing uniquely ‘Stalinist’, nor merely an Orwellian activity of deletion or erasure, but an active and above all conscious use of specific sets of authorised and official phrases or ‘memes’. This is an activity comparable in principle to the occult elevation of the magical power of The Word - and the elevation of Semiotic theories of language and of Symbolist theories of art to a position almost above Marxism-Leninism. For now, the verbal signifier’ or artistic symbol achieved dominance over and displaced sensuously experienced reality. Such theoretical and theurgical understandings of Stalinism were not only recognised but given theological and philosophical praise and affirmation by thinkers such as Maxim Gorky - the founder of ‘Socialist Realism’ - and in his own way by Stalin himself. Hence his recognition of the significance of Semantics and Semiotics and his declaration that “ the sphere of action of language, which embraces all fields of man's activity, is far broader and more comprehensive than the sphere of action of the superstructure. More, it is practically unlimited…”

In the West however, the fetishism of the name or image, symbol or ‘signifier’ over experienced reality, serving purely capitalist purposes, has now created its own globalised ‘virtual’ reality - reflected in everything from commercial ‘logos’ to religious and political symbols, the images imprinted on coins and paper currencies, the barcode and pin number, digital ‘coding’, ‘user-friendly’ computer or smartphone ‘icons’ and ‘profile images’, ‘virtual’ imagery, the carefully selected media headline or photograph, and, last but not least, the unquestioned terms and jargonsof the sciences and of New Age ‘spirituality’ and pseudo-science. A fetishism of the sign can thus now be said to dominate over the fetishism of the commodity and the worship of money as analysed by Marx, money being itself a signifier and nothing of intrinsic value. But signs have now themselves become ‘money’ - in the form of new and fetishised currencies of human interaction, relationships and exchange - for example psycho-babble, New Age speak, and the multiple jargons of the sciences - now taken as more real than the experienced realities they claim to explain. Language is also constantly reshaped by technical developments in the means of production and ‘economic base’ - hence along the machine age came a mechanistic language that reduced the human being to a biological machine, the era of competition for oil as a principally ‘energy resource’ went along with the deliberate promotion of a ‘cult of energy’ (rather than ‘matter’) making it the highest scientific concept of reality - and allowing Californian-based New Age cults to use the new jargons or ‘energy’ to colonise, commercialise, corrupt and effectively marginalise the languages of both philosophy and of ethnic-national spiritual traditions. Similarly the language of the computer age not only sees but also actively seeks to reduce the human being to a technically controllable biological computer (the philosophy of so-called ‘trans-humanism’).

Wednesday, 2 August 2017

Thinking and the Concept of Time - Wilberg On Wednesday

The End of Thinking?

This first set of reflections is designed to point to a larger and more complex phenomenon - one which can be characterised in its essence by an almost universal sense of threat and insecurity based on a fear of and failure to recognise and handle complexity and contradictions. The result is an almost universal attempt - not least, but not only on the part of the English ruling caste - to use failed or failing attempts at simplification or ‘magical thinking’ to retreat from or avoid facing them (for example the complexities and contradictions involved in leaving the E.U). But I see this is part of a much broader phenomenon - albeit one particularly manifest in the U.K. and U.S. The phenomenon is one of governments, movements and parties of all colours and many nations showing, almost on a day-by-day basis, how they can no longer even get a proper grasp on what they themselves are doing - except through these failed attempts at simplifying their own thinking - and that of others. This fear-induced drive to simplify not just political thinking but thinking as such poses, in my view, an even greater threat than all the apparent ‘issues’ that human beings and society face on both an individual, national and global level - issues that are themselves perceived in an already preconceived, decontextualised, dehistoricised and therefore also over-simplified way. This was why, when asked about how his own thinking might benefit or change the world, Martin Heidegger responded by questioning whether thinking itself and as such still had any chance of surviving - except through the birth of wholly new type of thinking - not a simplified or magical thinking but one based on a new awareness of and relation to language - not least fetished religious, scientific and political terminologies and jargons. As for now, as Heidegger saw it: “Man is in flight from thinking.”

Awareness-based economics - rethinking ‘the labour theory of value’

Thinking is itself a conscious activity. More precisely it is an activity of, and arising from awareness. The question is, how much awareness or attention? One defect of Marx’s labour theory of value is that it made no distinction between quantity and quality of labour time: that is to say, between the quantity of time expended in labour, i.e. in productive and creative activity or ‘labour’ of any sort, ‘manual’ or ‘mental’, and the quality of awareness that goes into that labour. It is the failure to make this distinction that allows economies to arise in which a low-paid nurse, for example, may be wholly unpaid for the qualities of awareness she or he gives to her patients, whereas a high-paid boss may be paid millions for bad management i.e. for not giving proper awareness and attention to their job, whilst a multi-billionaire can make tens of millions each week, simply through investments handled by others, without needing to do a thing, i.e. without needing to contribute either any quantity or awareness quality of labour. The distinction between labour time and its awareness quality is reflected in the crass division of labour and gross inequality of earnings in both industrial and service sectors of capitalist economies. The performance of repetitive labour tasks that require little or no awareness can only accrue value and generate surplus value for employers through long hours of work - through mere quantity of labour time. Here too, however, a contradiction lurks. For it has now been shown in many countries that in any forms of labour in which a certain quality of awareness is both a necessary and significant source of value, the awareness quality given to labour - and hence also its value - can actually be significantly increased by reducing the number of working hours. In other words, productivity can be increased by reducing working hours - but only if these more productive hours are properly remunerated. The problem with the whole concept of ‘productivity’ however, is that it too remains a purely quantitative measure, designed to exploit labour even further by extracting more surplus value from their labour with the same number of working hours. The distinction between labour time and labour quality - the quality of awareness and attention given to any productive activity, including thought itself, is essential to considering how different types of labour should be remunerated in a socialist economy. In my view there should only be one basis for any pay differentials for a given quantity of labour time - a differential totally independent of the type of labour and based solely on the quality of awareness and attention invested in it, what I call its ‘awareness value’. For ultimately it is both the time quantity and the quality of awareness given to human activity or labour of any sort that is the foundation and source of its value - and not simply the abstraction of labour time. Were this not the case, it would be impossible to conceive how high civilisations, cultures and craftsmen of the past achieved all that they did without need even for any precise measure of time of the sort introduced by the relatively recent invention of clock time - a measure of time which itself ignores variations in time quality. The very fact that the term ‘quality time’ hasbecome part of our ‘modern’ vocabulary is, paradoxically, an indicator of the extent to which the human being’s natural relation to time itself and natural sense for different subjective qualities of time - something that needed no name in the past - has been distorted by the domination of a uniform measure of objectified time - clock time. There was a time when people knew that ‘slower is faster’, that ‘taking one’s time’ adds quality and value to both thought and labour, whereas speediness and manic busy-ness deprives them of quality and value - and deprives individuals of the sense of value fulfilment that should be both the motive force and prime source of satisfaction in all human activity - the sense of fulfilling, for both their own good and that of others, their individual values and creative potentials.

Tuesday, 1 August 2017

The PSFMA: The American Partner of SWPE

SWPE is an organisation which seeks to end the Capitalist State in the UK, and to build a Socialist Society of mutual cooperation.  SWPE stands under the banner of victory over the exploiters, of victory for Class and Nation.

To achieve a Socialist Society, means to take a stand against Global Capitalism, and by doing so to invite the attention of the terrorists of NATO, who are used by the Ruling Caste to murder all who stand in the way of the march of the financial imperialists and corporate oppressors.  It would be naive to the point of stupidity to imagine that we could achieve Socialism In One Country, without Socialists in other countries also achieving victory over the tyranny of capitalism.

SWPE is very pleased to be linking up with Socialists in other countries.  We believe in borders, and in the right of every people to control and own everything within their own lands.  We have been asked to recommend kindred spirits in the USA, for our Brothers and Sisters in that country to join. We have forged links to this end with the People Social Freedom Movement: America (PSFMA), which we urge all Socialists in the USA to support.  Their struggle is our struggle.

The following is the 11 Point Plan of the PSFMA

1) We call for community empowerment and grassroots democracy in order to allow for the people to express their freedom and destinies free from the control of the oligarchs that has divided the people and ripped freedom from our hands.

2) We call for full employment in quality jobs that are owned and managed by the workers themselves free from the exploitation of one class over another. As true freedom can not be expressed through poverty.

3)We call for universal healthcare and housing for all American citizens as you can not express your freedom while sick or homeless.

4) We call for a modern education system that focuses on history, literacy, mathematics, and cooperation to end the capitalist system that has produced children that know only enough to be cogs in a machine.

5) We call for the abolition of the Federal Reserve and break up the IMF and the creation of a democratic banking system modeled after the credit unions and an end to debt slavery (usury).

6) We call for the abolition of the CIA and the NSA as they have been doing nothing but infringing on the rights of the American people as well as all of their pet bills.

7) We call for the Federal legalization of Marijuana on both medical and recreational as there has been no evidence that has been provided that it has any negative impact on the human body and instead all of the evidence provided has proven it to provide many benefits.

8) We call for the separation of Church and State as promoted by our founding fathers and the reversal of the Republican attempts to force their religious beliefs down the throats of the American public.

9) We must respect autonomy within Native American land and communities, respect their Tribal Police and Tribal Courts and the reinforcement of the treaties signed throughout the ages.

10) We must promote the growth of renewable energies as seen in Southern Arizona and promote natural gas as well as the discontinuing of practices such as fracking in order to tackle Climate Change aka Sabotage.

11) We want an immediate end of all wars for oil and the end of the funding of terrorists around the world.

In addition to the 11 Points, the PSFMA has a policy of reaching out to others, in order to build Socialist Unity in practise.  This is a strategy we share, and it is refreshing to work with others who realise the futility of trying to make the various factions of the Left fall in line behind a single leadership structure - something which those who have any knowledge of the reality of politics will know is an unachievable dream, as long as the leaders of the many competing groups are unwilling to abandon their positions of authority in minuscule ghettoised organisations.

Again from the PSFMA:

We want to unite all people who are serious about creating socialism through our philosophy of community first
  • You have been told that socialism can only be created in some distant future and only after the capitalist system has reached this or that stage or when the proletariat has been organized for this or that union or party we say that socialism can only come if we build it from the ground up through the radicalization and organization of our communities through service to the people, education, and art and the creation of a federation of these communities.
  • There are those of you who say that revolution must come first however if I toss a penny amongst you each “vanguard” party among you will argue wither or not the coin landed heads or tails and such is your definition of revolution and socialism. We say that yes an insurrection maybe important in the future but as of right now we need to focus on the building of communities against the state and teaching the people about socialism through example and through practice. We say this that we believe in the realization of socialism in order to bring about the revolution!
We want unity amongst the Proletariat;
  • We uphold Revolutionary Intercommunalism and as such we hold that unity must be achieved amongst all strata of the Working Class however we hold to the ideas of Bookchin that the consciousness of the Proletariat has became a clone to that of the Capitalist class and that the new consciousness must be communal in nature.
We want an active general strike not one that is reliant on just the factory workers but one that is also in the communities.
  • This general strike not only focuses on labor but also a strike against the cultural and political life of the Capitalist Class and restores the autonomy of the Proletariat
We are socialists cloaked in the green of our communities and the red of labor we hold dear to these simple principles and to the need to engage in immediate action against capital and its forces.

The website of the PSFMA can be found at:

Wednesday, 26 July 2017

The Problems of, and Solutions to, Money - Wilberg on Wednesday

The History of Money Power - Usury versus Fiat Money
Gods, religions, tribes, cultures, cities, civilisations and empires have been around for untold millennia. So also have wars, violence, destruction, plunder, slavery and the forced occupations or migrations of peoples. All these phenomena are interrelated . Marx and Engels were among the first to cease using the religious or cultural paradigms of good and evil to seek a particular scapegoat for these phenomena - or to blame one on the other - but instead to seek to analyse their dialectical interconnection and development. Everyone who has read the Communist Manifesto knows of the historic line of social-economic development that they traced - from primitive communism to slavery, feudalism and industrial capitalism. Few readers, even of Das Kapital , are as knowledgeable of their - and particularly Engel’s analysis - of the history and nature of money and usury. Yes there are the formulae relating commodities to Money. C-C (barter), C-M-C (selling in order to buy, and obtain use values), M-C-M (buying in order to sell and accumulate surplus exchange value - or M for money. Yet what is considered far less, even by Marxists, as well as academic historians in general, is the history and nature of money itself - both in the ancient past and in the present day - where a quite different formula ruled and now rules also: M-M-M. Making money from nothing, and then making money, with money from that money - and all this quite independent of any use-values, commodities or even labour - but purely through money in the form of what is now called ‘fractional reserve banking’ i.e. the multiplication of promissory notes or numismata, whether in the form of clay tablets, letters of credit, paper money or figures keyed into an electronic account - but not based on any actual reserves of either simple commodities such as grain or precious metals such as silver or gold. This brings us to the nature of money, not simply as an accounting unit, exchange value or capital - but as debt. Immediately we have a relation established to religion via the notions of sin, guilt and ‘redemption’. The words for debt and guilt are actually identical in German ( Schuld ) and closely related in many religious cultures. The sinner is the debtor. Therefore ‘forgiveness’ related initially and primarily to debt. Debt forgiveness or ‘redemption’ for the peasantry and lower castes was an annual event in early Sumerian civilisation, in which money - as in many other hierarchical and theocratic civilisations such as Egypt - ruled by divine god-kings from the heavens - was an accounting unit defined, created and quantified by law - fiat, which meant also divine law. The institution of state accounted and state issued fiat money and non-interest bearing credit began in the form of a generalised use-value or commodity such as grain or cattle - both of which can be repaid by reproducing themselves biologically. If this proved impossible, there was debt forgiveness to maintain stability and social well-being.

Before, Behind and Beyond Marx
In his pamphlet “Critique of the Gotha Program,” Marx advocated exactly the same alternative to money as the Welsh socialist Robert Owen - to get rid of money and replace it with labour vouchers, as Hitler did. Yet if one famous Marxist thesis declares that “The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles”, another, hidden thesis, asserts something quite different, namely that “The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of money” - and in particular the long history of a struggle between state money, accounted, quantified and valued by law or fiat on the one hand, and privately accrued debt- and interest-bearing money, created from nothing. Crucial in the evolution of this form of money was the introduction of metal coinage. Aristotle: “Men called bankers we shall hate, for they enrich themselves while doing nothing.” But Plato and Aristotle also disagreed. Plato, unlike Aristotle, was an opponent of private property, and believed in the ‘Chartalist’ principle that money should take the form of a mere token or symbol. Here he anticipated the argument of John Law that “Silver that serves as money with no other use than to buy goods might just as well be replaced by a cheaper material, in the limit, by one that has no commodity value at all, such as printed paper” because “Money is not the Value for which Goods are exchanged, but the Value by which they are exchanged.” On the other hand, what Joseph P. Farrell called the “Babylon’s Banksters” - bullion banksters - went for the ‘Metallist’ thesis that the value of money is and should be intrinsic - based on its own hard won labour-value and its market-value as a commodity. Hence the brutal ancient and modern slave-mines for gold - the conversion of slave ownership from a relatively benign cultural custom into an important source of booty from war, and one which also offers the state rulers and temple priesthoods both a new form of monetary power - and could be used to build up more powerful and well-equipped armies, albeit only through debt to the bullion bankers and slave drivers - who therefore naturally had an innate interest in fostering wars, and all their dire consequences - destruction and destitution that led either to physical slavery or to debt slavery to the same banksters. Engels was more aware of the danger of usury capital than Marx, noting that it was “the principal means for suppressing the common liberty, breaking apart the old communal bonds of the Greek gens, and reinforcing the inequalities and exploitation of the newly emerging class society of the Athenian state”.

“... the growing money economy penetrated like corrosive acid into the old traditional life of the rural communities founded on natural economy … Hence the money rule of the aristocracy now in full flood of expansion also created a new customary law to secure the creditor against the debtor and to sanction the exploitation of the small peasant by the possessor of money…”

“...when men invented money, they did not think that they were again creating a new social power, the one general power before which the whole of society must bow . And it was this new power, suddenly sprung to life without knowledge or will of its creators, which now, in all the brutality of its youth, gave the Athenians the first taste of its might.”

Resistance to the power and rule of bullion and debt-based money in Athens and Persia came only from Sparta - which deliberately used degraded iron as money to defend its fiat currency against silver and gold from the East. In Rome resistance was restored by Julius Caesar, thereby challenging the power of the patrician plutocracy over an impoverished populace. In England it was maintained by the pre-Cromwellian Monarchs (with the exception of King John) who issued tally sticks from the 11th to the 15th century as debt- and interest-free currency. Rejection of the Rothschild banksters was enforced by Napoleon - and, yes, by Tsarist Russia.

In modern times, the battle for fiat money was maintained by the (assassinated) U.S. Presidents Lincoln, Jackson, Garfield and J.F.K. and through the Social Credit movement. State banking and fiat money was used with incredible success by Japan before WW2 (under the influence of the Social Credit Movement), by Germany under Adolf Hitler (under the influence of Gottfried Feder) and by Libya under Gaddafi. It is still maintained by the Isle of Guernsey! Unknown to many is that one of the secrets of Germany’s post-war e conomic success (along with its maintenance and modernisation of its traditional craft and trades apprenticeship system) was its revival, protection and expansion of a significant number of regionally and communally devolved cooperative, public banks - with a share of 40% of total banking assets in Germany. These ‘saving banks’ or Sparkassen are regionally or communally controlled, rather than state controlled, though they operate under state law. They have no owners, but are non-profit savings and credit organisations, designed to serve their local communities, providing low-interest loans for farmers, small and medium-sized businesses, and not engaging in speculative transactions. The attempt to disrupt and destroy rather than replicate this successful regional and communal public banking system, which withstood the 2008 banking crisis, has been an aim of Anglo-American financial and banking interests since the Thatcher-Reagan era.

Some Notes on English History

“In the thirteenth century … the agriculturalist over nearly the whole of Europe was a freer man … England for example, was even in the fifteenth century almost entirely in the hands of thousands of farmers, who were not only legal owners of their land, but possessed in addition far-reaching free rights to common pastures and woodland.” 
Anglo-German philosopher Stuart Houston Chamberlain

From ‘The History of Central Banking’ by Stephen Mitford Goodson:
With the banishment of the money-lenders (Edward III in 1364) and the abolition of usury, taxes were moderate and there was no state debt … Tally sticks were first introduced by Henry II (1100-1135) and would remain in circulation until 1873 …
… With tolerable taxes, no state debt and no interest to pay, England enjoyed a period of almost unparalleled growth and prosperity. The average labourer worked only 14 weeks and enjoyed 140 to 160 holidays. According to Lord Leverhulme, a writer of that time, “The men of the 15th century were very well paid” … a labourer could provide for all the necessities his family required. They were well-clothed in good woollen cloth and had plenty of meat and bread…During their spare hours many craftsmen volunteered their skills in building some of England’s magnificent cathedrals, which reinforces one of the basic tenets of Western Civilisation that without leisure time, the fostering of culture is not possible … The York Minster was completed in 1472 and has the largest expanse of stained glass in the world.

This golden period came to an end with Cromwell - whose Puritanism was financed by Jewish
money (the Jewish usurers even told him he was the Messiah!).

Thirty-three years after Cromwell had let the Jews (back) into Britain, a Dutch prince arrived from Amsterdam, surrounded by a whole swarm of Jews from that financial centre … six years later the Bank of England was established for the purpose of lending money to the Crown. 
A.N. Field All These Things

Henceforth a pattern would emerge where unnecessary wars would be embarked upon which simultaneously increased the national debt and the profit of the usurers. Significantly, most of these wars were started against countries that had implemented interest-free state banking systems, as was the case in the North American colonies and France under Napoleon. This pattern of attacking and enforcing the bankers’ system of usury … includes the defeats of Imperial Russia … Germany, Italy and Japan in WWII, and most recently, Libya in 2011. Goodson

The Great Paradox
The same breed of Jewish money-lenders that heralded from Holland are now freely financing
white nationalist movements such as that of Geert Wilders in Holland! Mr Horowitz’s organisation, Freedom Centre, has paid out $150,000 (£125,000). Some $120,000 of that was given in 2015, making it the largest individual contribution to the political system in The Netherlands in a year. The conservative Zionist think-tank Middle East Forum paid a substantial sum into a legal fund set up for Mr Wilders after he was accused of making racist statements. Two US right-wing foundations, the Gatestone Institute and the International Freedom Alliance Foundation, have sponsored his trips to America. I pray that social nationalist parties in England do not fall prey to this hidden international game - and become mere red-painted Trotskyist or Stalinist pawns in that game.

Fiat Money and ‘Free Energy’ - where Finance meets Physics
There are important and intimate connections between finance and physic s, fiat money and 'free energy '. The 'alchemy' of creating money from nothing can be likened to creating energy from 'nothing'. The question, of course is whether this power rests in the hands of a people’s state or of a tiny elite of private banksters. Another connection between finance and physics is that national financial sovereignty on the one hand, and national energy sovereignty or ‘autarky’ necessarily go together. This is why, in addition to Hitler defying the banksters with state-issued fiat money - but then being forced to fight a war despite trade boycotts and lack of petroleum and rubber - there was also intensive research in Germany into 'free energy' under special departments of the S.S. This in order to ensure energy autarchy in the face of trade boycotts and petroleum shortages. This secret research challenged the established fictions and shibboleths of relativity and quantum mechanics. It also combined conventional with occult science and physics - deriving from earlier pre-war secret societies such as the Vril society (the ‘All-German Metaphysical Society’). Going back even further in history, Joseph P. Farrell claims that a war between god kings, rulers and states issuing their own money, and those wishing to subvert these rulers and their temples and priests using debt-based money and ruthlessly slave-mined silver and gold (to be used purely as money and to finance wars) has not only been going on right through known history , starting with ancient Sumerian, Assyrian, Egyptian and many other civilisations - but has perhaps a 100 million year old pre-history going back to Atlantis - a subject of such great interest to the S.S. that it was intensively researched through expeditions to Tibet and many other countries. This civilisation may have destroyed itself through its advanced sound- and resonance based physics, as a result of which this science was first lost - and preserved only in fragments by secret societies and esoteric thinkers. I believe a sound metaphysical basis for this science can be I found in what I call The Awareness Principle - a principle which has applications in fields as diverse as economics, medicine and the sciences. The Awareness Principle is a unified field theory of awareness - one which denies that awareness is either a product or the private property of any localised body or being, and has an essentially non-local or field character. A physics based on this principle would recognises awareness itself as that universal ‘aether’ (much spoken of by free-energy physicists) which is the very source of all ‘matter’ and all ‘energy’ - and the very stuff’ of which, like dreams “they are made on” (Shakespeare). This new philosophy I call ‘dialectical trans-materialism’. It follows Marx’s insight ( Theses on Feuerbach ) that all previous materialisms have denied the subjective dimension of human sensuous activity and labour.

The chief defect of all previous materialism (including Feuerbach’s) is that the object, actuality, sensuousness, is conceived only in the form of the object of perception, but not as sensuous human activity, practice [Praxis], not subjectively . Karl Marx

Sunday, 23 July 2017

Open letter to the open-minded people trapped on Stormfront

SWPE is a party of revolutionaries.  Although few in number, we are steadily building the Vanguard, with the aim to grouping together people of quality, rather than going the 'normal' path of political parties, which is in recruiting anybody at all in order to build a mass membership.

We employ a strategy of open cooperation with all who oppose global capitalism.  We do not limit ourselves to only working with people who are already on an ideological path which is almost indistinguishable from our own.  Self-ghettoising is a form of self-destruction, and we see no reason to help our class enemies by playing the games of division which they have created to contain and control dissent.

SWPE activists have reached out to potential comrades across the spectrum.  We have found that our open approach has led to problems as well as opportunities.  This does not mean that we should halt our approaches, but perhaps that we need to be more selective in who we attempt to enter into dialogue with.


The following is an exchange on the far right forum 'Stormfront', although the answer in point 4 has been updated to fit with potential changes in tactics:

Questions by 'Patriot93', followed by responses
  1. SWPE view of Worker's Ownership, Syndicalism and European Socialism as advocated by Oswald Mosley's post-fascist Union Movement (UM) during the 1950's?
  2. SWPE view of National Socialism?
  3. SWPE view of the National-Anarchist Movement?
  4. Any SWPE plans to register with the Electoral Commission and contest elections, or do you stand for Revolution?
1. Workers ownership is vital.  SWPE policy is to make the people the owners of everything.  We would abolish the stock market and socialise the entire economy.  Overseas ownership and outsourcing of labour would come to an end.  The economy must be organised so that it is for the benefit of the people.  We would abolish income tax and in place would price goods so that they would generate profits which would be used to fund the nation.  We have members who favour Guild Socialism and others who favour Workers' Cooperatives.  For larger concerns, Syndicalism is a worthwhile economic ideology.  Our underlying policy is to abolish ownership as it is currently understood and to make all people partners in the economy as a whole.  European Socialism is an ideal to fight for, but not Europe A Nation.  We want freedom.  European cooperation is one thing, European statehood another.

2. National Socialism.  This was an ideology which didn't have a chance to get off the ground.  We prefer the Strasserite model to the Hitlerian one, but see both as foreign ideologies based in the period around WW2.  They are worth studying to see where they had strengths and where they failed, but they should not become fetishes.  Living in the past won't win the victory in the present which is needed to secure the future.

3.  NAM. National Anarchy has its good points.  Defence of nature, initiative, self reliance, family etc are all good.  The problem is that the vision of Kropoktin, (and to a degree Bakunin) etc relies upon people being decent, unselfish and saintlike.  SWPE is fighting against tyranny, greed and selfishness.  If the Ruling Class were overthrown and no measures put in place to prevent their return, the victory would be short lived.  National Anarchists call us Statists because we believe that we need a strong state to stop exploiters rising up and replacing one set of tyrants with another.  We have good relations with some National Anarchists.  We disagree with their view of human nature.  Perhaps we are more cynical and less trusting.

4. We are revolutionaries.  We are in the process of considering the option of registering with the electoral commission.  We support the efforts of people who join in the democratic process on a seat by seat basis.  We have publicly endorsed the Populist Party and we are supportive of the Wessex Regionalists.  We would not stand against people who advocate policies which we can broadly support, because if we did, this would inevitable join in the frenzy of vote splitting.  By not standing we can give support to candidates who promote similar ideals and in this way spread the ideals to the general electorate.  A lose coalition of small parties campaigning in areas of strength is much better than them fighting one another.  In Parliamentary elections, parties have to give the government £1000 per seat and all their membership information to stand.  If everyone is doing this the government will hold on to a lot of deposits and get a lot of information about who opposes their corruption.  We can see little merit in handing over members' hard-earned cash in contests which are rigged to begin with.  Local elections are different - they are free to stand in for one thing!  It makes sense to stand in local elections as a way of gaining publicity and in this way helping to develop the party by attracting activists who might otherwise not be aware of us.  This is something which we are considering doing in the future.

(Comment to anti-Socialist post attacking SWPE) Now to turn to the statement that should the Stormfront writer meet any of us with our Sword and Sickle badges, he should consider us just another bunch of red tossers, if you do meet any of us wouldn't it make more sense to strike up a conversation?  To the poster in question, you may be a capitalist (I don't know, its just an assumption), you may hate people because you have fallen for the right wing good left wing bad tool of the Ruling Class (sorry if I'm wrong but your post suggests this), but regardless you will find SWPE activists to be happy to speak to people of all political persuasions.

The problems we face are global in dimension and we need to work together.  You may not agree with us on many issues, but even if we can unite one issue at a time that is better than fighting each other.


As a result of this discourse and a few other posts calling for the Stormfront community to wake up to the lies of national capitalism, globalism and the highly divisive identity politics which so-called white nationalists indulge in to the point of obsession, complaints were made and the administrators saw fit to disable our active account there.  They did this so that the account still looks like it is in use, just inactive - which indicates that the censors at work are keen to not lower the number of registered users, but to make sure people who are a threat to their cosy self-adulation forum, are silenced.  Interestingly the poster (one of a handful) who bucked the trend and engaged in intelligent conversation, 'Patriot93', is also listed as no longer active...

There are good people in most political arenas.  For a myriad of reasons, people can become loyal to causes which are not worth supporting, and which in many cases, really deserve to be opposed. The reactionaries who run Stormfront are doubtless aware that alongside people with a fetishistic attachment to 1930s imagery, a lot of the people who use their forum are simply confused individuals who know that Globalisation is a problem, but have no idea what the solution is. The administrators cannot afford to have Revolutionary Socialists shining a light on the false solutions of fascism, and going into their domain to rescue those who have not been totally indoctrinated into the path of futile 'larp' rebellion. This is bad news for them. Our active account has been disrupted, but there are others, and the light of Socialism cannot be eclipsed by the darkness of reaction.

For those who have come across us in the most unexpected of places, and have taken the time to seek out more information, the next step is ask yourself if we are really the bogeymen you have been warned about. Are you awake to the harmful nature of globalisation? Are you awake to the reality of war without end all for the sake of corporate imperialism? Are you awake to the fact that Capitalism is the economics of death? If the answer is Yes, but there is something holding you back from becoming fully conscious of the lies of the Ruling Class; something preventing you from finally breaking through the wall of propaganda which paints Socialism as the enemy, and all the aforementioned as the protection from such 'evil' people as us, then you need to take a step back and consider that the ideological crutch which gives you strength, is actually taking your strength away and giving it to those who are destroying the world you love.

If your path to awakening has seen the idols of false rebellion fall, and you are ready to take your side with the only solution to Global Capitalism, Socialism In One Country. If you are ready to join the fight for Class and Nation, then get in touch.