This is wonderful, incredible. Norman Finkelstein especially knock it out of the park with a passionate and principled defense of free speech against charges of racism (starting about an hour in). Defending the rights of all, even so called Holocaust deniers, to speak. Jackie Walker describes that is indeed what wrongly expelled Labour MP's have been doing is trying to speak with everyone, it's the reactionary forces that refuse to let anyone speak with them.
Here's Tony Greenstein's blog post on the meeting (actually there are several) which includes another link if the above doesn't work.
One new point I'm firmly convinced of now. Jeremy Corbyn may have been a fine socialist at one time, but his recent failure to stand up for his like minded comrades in the Labour Party against charges he knew were false, a witch hunt against socialists, anti-imperialists and anti-Zionists using false charges of anti-Semitism, using a formula he should have never agreed to, was a leadership failure that shows he was, sadly, not qualified to actually be the People's PM. In the end, the witch hunt was about him, and failing to resist in the slightest in the beginning, he surely and rightly succumbed to it. There had been a longstanding principle in the Labour Party that no member could be sacked for speaking their mind about anything. Now, criticism of Israel is sufficient. We need feel no sympathy for such cowards, but rather for those who got sacked and continue to resist the creeping fascist-imperialism, as many on this panel are doing. And the people who need better government, which is everyone.
This shows we must never agree to fascist constraints even applied to "others," because next they'll be applied to us. Curiously, the Labour Party follows this principle regarding real well known anti-Semites, so long as they support Israel. Nobody bothers them.
Does this have anything to do with unaccountable intelligence agenices secretly running the world through blackmail, as the Epstein affair proved? I'm sure that was just the tip of the iceberg. But nobody pays attention to how and towards what ends the world is being controlled, because that's not discussed on TV.
Meanwhile, as Doug Henwood recently tweeted, Biden sucks, but Trump has to lose big. Even though, the reason why Biden is the leading Opposition Candidate, is that he is the one most trusted by the Masters, and the secret and unaccountable agencies who operate the whole apparatus on their behalf, to give us the choice between rational moderated imperialism and irrationally brutal imperialism. Anti-imperialists need not apply. The people preferred Bernie to any of the showcased non-Biden alternatives, who were showcased by the DNC in the hope that one of them would rise above Bernie, while still being acceptible to the Masters because of sufficient imperialism, but none did. Bernie, Tulsi, Gravel and Williamson were the four respectable People's anti-imperial more or less candidates, but those who run things couldn't let any of them win (even Bernie, who capitulated on Venezuela). Ultimately all the TV ads were rolled with longstanding secret agency manchurians like Bill Clinton and Barack Obama pushing all the newly "resigned" weak-alternative candidate supporters onto the Biden bus for the sake of defeating Trump, with Bernie--who the secret agency controlled media had spent months smearing as supposedly certain to lose. It was all so transparent, every legal strategy, and perhaps others, were deployed by the ... apparatus to deflect even the slightest electoral threat to empire. So we have a crappy choice, but it's still worth pulling the lever against Trump as hard as possible but choosing the Democratic Party candidate.
In Britain, a 3rd party is a more a potentiality, but re-taking the Labour Party with a more principled leadership may be more attainable, I don't know.
What we know now is the kind of principles we must never agree to, and perhaps to which reform in the Labour Party ought to focus on removing. That would be an important step.
Curiously, Gorabchev also sold out on longstanding Communist principles. In his Perestroika, he abolishted the longstanding job guarantee. He therefore similarly deserved to lose, which is not to endorse the extra constitutional process which drove him out, driven by secret and unaccountable agencies. I'm not sure of his ideas today, but there are other Communists--it is the second largest party in the Russian Federation. Putin's party leads because of, well you know by now.
Along with free speech, a job-or-income guarantee ought bo be central to socialists and communists, and is a key part of the best Green New Deal packages.
Here's Tony Greenstein's blog post on the meeting (actually there are several) which includes another link if the above doesn't work.
One new point I'm firmly convinced of now. Jeremy Corbyn may have been a fine socialist at one time, but his recent failure to stand up for his like minded comrades in the Labour Party against charges he knew were false, a witch hunt against socialists, anti-imperialists and anti-Zionists using false charges of anti-Semitism, using a formula he should have never agreed to, was a leadership failure that shows he was, sadly, not qualified to actually be the People's PM. In the end, the witch hunt was about him, and failing to resist in the slightest in the beginning, he surely and rightly succumbed to it. There had been a longstanding principle in the Labour Party that no member could be sacked for speaking their mind about anything. Now, criticism of Israel is sufficient. We need feel no sympathy for such cowards, but rather for those who got sacked and continue to resist the creeping fascist-imperialism, as many on this panel are doing. And the people who need better government, which is everyone.
This shows we must never agree to fascist constraints even applied to "others," because next they'll be applied to us. Curiously, the Labour Party follows this principle regarding real well known anti-Semites, so long as they support Israel. Nobody bothers them.
Does this have anything to do with unaccountable intelligence agenices secretly running the world through blackmail, as the Epstein affair proved? I'm sure that was just the tip of the iceberg. But nobody pays attention to how and towards what ends the world is being controlled, because that's not discussed on TV.
Meanwhile, as Doug Henwood recently tweeted, Biden sucks, but Trump has to lose big. Even though, the reason why Biden is the leading Opposition Candidate, is that he is the one most trusted by the Masters, and the secret and unaccountable agencies who operate the whole apparatus on their behalf, to give us the choice between rational moderated imperialism and irrationally brutal imperialism. Anti-imperialists need not apply. The people preferred Bernie to any of the showcased non-Biden alternatives, who were showcased by the DNC in the hope that one of them would rise above Bernie, while still being acceptible to the Masters because of sufficient imperialism, but none did. Bernie, Tulsi, Gravel and Williamson were the four respectable People's anti-imperial more or less candidates, but those who run things couldn't let any of them win (even Bernie, who capitulated on Venezuela). Ultimately all the TV ads were rolled with longstanding secret agency manchurians like Bill Clinton and Barack Obama pushing all the newly "resigned" weak-alternative candidate supporters onto the Biden bus for the sake of defeating Trump, with Bernie--who the secret agency controlled media had spent months smearing as supposedly certain to lose. It was all so transparent, every legal strategy, and perhaps others, were deployed by the ... apparatus to deflect even the slightest electoral threat to empire. So we have a crappy choice, but it's still worth pulling the lever against Trump as hard as possible but choosing the Democratic Party candidate.
In Britain, a 3rd party is a more a potentiality, but re-taking the Labour Party with a more principled leadership may be more attainable, I don't know.
What we know now is the kind of principles we must never agree to, and perhaps to which reform in the Labour Party ought to focus on removing. That would be an important step.
Curiously, Gorabchev also sold out on longstanding Communist principles. In his Perestroika, he abolishted the longstanding job guarantee. He therefore similarly deserved to lose, which is not to endorse the extra constitutional process which drove him out, driven by secret and unaccountable agencies. I'm not sure of his ideas today, but there are other Communists--it is the second largest party in the Russian Federation. Putin's party leads because of, well you know by now.
Along with free speech, a job-or-income guarantee ought bo be central to socialists and communists, and is a key part of the best Green New Deal packages.
No comments:
Post a Comment