Essays, latest
Comments 130

An Open Letter to the People of Britain, from Vasily Livanov MBE

This open letter, from iconic Russsian actor Vasily Livanov MBE, was first sent to The Guardian. They declined to publish it, we did not.

As with many of my compatriots, there are many things about Britain and the British people that I admire. As someone whose whole life has been linked with literature, cinema and theatre, I have the greatest appreciation for English literature and the arts, for its writers and playwrights, actors and directors. As someone who had the good fortune to have played the iconic Englishman Sherlock Holmes in a very successful Soviet film series, I was honoured to have been awarded an MBE by Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II. I am grateful for a chance to have been part of the mutually enriching cultural kinship and synergy of our two countries. As someone who has lived a long life, I vividly remember the years of WWII when the Soviet Union and Britain were staunch and proud allies in the fight against Nazism.

Many Russians feel an affinity with many things English – from pubs and gardens to Scotch whisky and Welsh singing and luscious valleys. Ascot races, Chelsea flower shows, London museums and Stonehenge – many will have been or at least seen them on TV. Perhaps surprisingly, many entertain a lively interest in the British monarchy and the Royal family, Russian television and papers carry stories about the Queen and her grandchildren and great-grandchildren. Flattering stereotypes of Britain still abide. But more and more this idyllic picture is being marred by the political developments of recent years.

Today, as many of my compatriots, I am sad to see the state to which the relationship between our two countries has been reduced. While conflict situations can seldom be blamed on one party alone, I am convinced that the current deplorable and deepening crisis is primarily of London’s making.

Please do not make the mistake of writing this view off as a casualty of devious Kremlin propaganda. On the contrary, the view I hold and share with the vast majority of Russians has been shaped and honed, paradoxically, by incessant anti-Russian propaganda emanating from London’s corridors of power and the media that seems to have lost all capacity for independent reasoning, at least for anything Russian. Many in Britain may be surprised that Russian audiences are kept well informed of the international media coverage, certainly insofar as it concerns their country.

I do not intend to dwell on the long list of geostrategic and political differences between Moscow and London. Surely, each of side has its own interests and reasons for acting the way it does. Understanding these reasons is the job of respective governments and their foreign policy thinktanks. Manifestly refusing to understand those reasons is an abject failure of government. And that, I am sad to say, is exactly what I am seeing at the top of the British government and in much of the British press.

What we have been witnessing is London’s – and, more generally, Western – consistent refusal to treat post-Soviet Russia as an equal partner in international affairs. The more hawkish Western capitals – notably, London – have been trying to condemn Russia to be the defeated party in the Cold War, and to behave like one. Mind you, this is a view taken by most Russians who are also increasingly convinced that the West’s attacks are not directed at Putin or the Kremlin, but at their country as such, at the people and state of Russia.

Many will point to Crimea as proof of Russia’s aggressiveness and threat to world peace. But they should consider that Crimea, rather than being the cause, is a consequence of the total collapse of East-West dialogue in which London has played a significant role and often been the cheerleader. More importantly, it is, in the final count, down to the people of Crimea to decide where they want to be, certainly not to London or Washington.

The accusations London has been flinging at Russia’s door fly in the face of every complimentary stereotype that Russians have of Britain and its allegedly gentlemanly culture. People at the top of the British government have been talking down to Russians as some kind of ‘lesser people’ in a language that invokes the less flattering pages of the not so distant British imperial history.

PM Theresa May accusing Russia in the Skripals poisoning without any serious evidence was downright shameless. Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson likening Russia’s upcoming World Cup to Hitler’s 1936 Olympics was the ultimate insult – not only to Russia, but to Britain itself and the rest of the anti-Hitler coalition. Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson telling Russia to ‘shut up and go away’- does he even realise whom he is trying to bully? You can criticise Moscow all you want but it has never stooped to this level in talking to sovereign nations, big or small. Is an acute crisis in British education the reason for this excuse for statesmanship? What sort of policy do they think they are pursuing, what kind of world they are shaping? I feel genuinely sorry for Her Majesty the Queen that she has to call this government her own.

The current explosion of Russophobia and anti-Russian hysteria in Britain has no precedent in living memory. Not even the Cold War saw such blatant disregard for the norms and conventions of inter-state diplomacy. Anyone who calls for a meaningful engagement with Russia is branded a dangerous radical or traitor. People who even agree to talk to the Russian media are ostracised and side-lined. Anyone who simply calls for restraint or caution is vilified as a Putin puppet. Is there a name for it already? Un-British activities? A curious yet deeply troubling throwback to the McCarthy era in modern-day enlightened Britain.

It’s hard to escape the timing of this latest chapter in London’s lengthy anti-Russian saga with a crucial stage of the North Stream 2 project, the football World Cup and of course the recent presidential election in Russia. Which only goes to show that the instigators are quite ignorant of what the Russian people are like. Any hostile moves from the outside will unite us, we come together and find a response. They wouldn’t have attempted it if they knew the first thing about what makes Russia tick. They have to realise that in their poisonous campaign they are engaging not just the Kremlin or Putin, they are taking on the whole of the Russian people, including its political class and business elite.

We have no beef with the people of Britain. From what we can glimpse, more and more of them are sceptical of the anti-Russian propaganda spewed by the hawks in government and much of the media. The current cold winds will die down and our two countries will revert to a civilised and respectful relationship which has so much to offer. As a proud recipient of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire I aspire to wise and dignified British statesmanship that will make it possible.

– Vasily Livanov

Vasily Livanov, is a legendary Russian actor, director and novelist, born in 1935. He was awarded an MBE by Queen Elizabeth in 2006 for his exceptional portrayal of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s Sherlock Holmes in the hugely successful Russian film series The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes and Dr Watson.

130 Comments

  1. USAma Bin Laden says

    Vasily Livanov may be well-intentioned but he is naive.

    The Anglo American Imperialist nations led by America and Britain are hostile to Russia (and others) because of fundamental geopolitical realities–regardless of what criminal regime resides in London and Washington DC or popular attitudes.

    In particular, the Anglo American imperialists are sea powers, which are fundamentally opposed to land powers like Russia (or China and Germany).

    19th-century British imperial strategist Halford MacKinder most famously argued that land and sea powers are thus essentially in competition because of the imperatives of geography. To assert British world hegemony, he advocated British encirclement and destabilization of Eurasia, with a particular focus on Russia.

    Today, the American Empire–which is the misbegotten spawn of the British Empire–adopts the same Anglo-American geopolitical worldview.

    Towards this end, US strategists like Zbig. Brzezinki in his work The Grand Chessboard, have asserted that American global dominance is fundamentally based on subjugating Eurasia in particular by preventing Eurasian integration and emergence.

    Indeed, it is not a coincidence that the Trump Regime’s National Security Strategy has targeted Eurasian powers of Russia and China as the American Empire’s primary opponents in the New Cold War.

    Moreover, the Pentagon openly admits US military doctrine is based upon Full Spectrum Dominance of the world allowing American imperial hegemony over land, air, sea, outerspace, and cyberspace.

    Since the fall of the Soviet Union, the Americans have been hellbent on world conquest in all but name, attempting to aggressively expand an American-dominated unipolar order–which they disguise behind a variety of deceptions like their fake “War on Terrorism,” humanitarian imperialism like their Responsibility to Protect doctrine, or their greatest lies of “defending freedom and democracy.”

    The so-called Liberal Democratic World Order that Anglo American propagandists defend is merely Orwellian Newspeak for the Anglo American Empire’s world dictatorship.

    Will the Anglo Americans tolerate the rise of Eurasia?

    Not a chance in hell.

    The Anglo Americans would have to accept their increasing irrelevance as Eurasia displaces their beloved Anglo American world order–something that is inconceivable for a people who openly proclaim themselves to be the “Exceptional nation,” “Leader of the Free World,” and “Shining City on a Hill” as part of their national identity.

    The Anglo Americans will risk nuclear war to maintain their grip on world hegemony.

    And the Russians are geographically pivotal to the Eurasian project and are also the only military power able to wipe out the American Heimat in an all-out nuclear exchange.

    2
    2
    • Um, he’s an Actor, FFS, writing about the good things he sees about the “English” culture, and maybe not aware of American geo-political designs. Rest assured, Kremlin military strategists ARE, hence their military buildup and new weapons systems at a fraction of the Pentagon’s budget. The American empire isn’t sustainable, so it will be a Russo-Chinese century.

      6
      1
    • In effect the patterns of conflict are ‘nothing personal’ so much as invested identity in the mask OF power struggle as THE prime directive. Or to put it another way, it is simply the logical output of programmed parameters as the consolidation of ‘power’ in powerlessness. The latter may not be apparent to those identified within the conflict believe in victory (and staving off defeat).

      ‘Soft’ power operates as ideas, as consensus ‘science’, as ‘medical’ hegemony and leverage of the deepest human fears.

      In the larger view I see the attempt to ‘escape’ or ‘eradicate’ the feared is exactly what fuels it and brings it on as a perpetuating re-enactment of a theme of exclusion, rejection that expresses as a positive act of denial – whether as act of overt war or covert war on others and on the very fabric of our living support – as both our consciousness (inner) and our environment (outer).

      Humans are not ‘just’ animals, in that we also live within and are co-creative of the imaged model of definition and belief THROUGH WHICH we experience and interact our ‘world’. We are also unjust or out of lawful relation and account, when we agree or comply in coercive deceit for the appearance or promise of a personally exclusive sense of self-illusion – that implicitly demands sacrifice of true.

      The cost of self-illusion is loss of true relation to anything, and thus loss of true function to a divisive and destructive fantasy gratification. It isn’t the 1% who ‘have’ this power at such cost to a living world – so much as as the 100% who agree to think, speak and act from such an ‘operating system’ – or indeed ‘hack’ made normal by its own self-reinforcing experience or results.

      If the Living Earth of our co-creative willingness is to wake from evil dreams, it will not be the achievement of all the King’s horses and all the King’s men – that operate the perpetuating futility of the attempt to regain or restore a fantasy of ‘order’ that rose concurrent to a sense of lack or loss as the attempt to rule out chaos or rule over chaos – where chaos becomes defined as anything NOT under or within the realm of control. Thus a War upon Life is the effect of a psychotic and dissociated mentality seeking to dominate and possess a life that it fears and hates and assigns its own guilt to. There is no victory over Life – but the power of death is the conviction of the wish to separate, define, predict and control Life.

      Of course those who are possessed by their own investments within the desire to possess have most to lose in fear of being exposed or dispossessed of their legitimacy or credibility and status and so forcefully assert that they or their structures of ‘control’ are too big to fail.

      The ‘Negative Economy’ is a house of cards with failure built in as a guarantee. It can of course be played out for all it is worth for whatever that is worth to you, but it is predicated on protecting who you are not in fear of what Life is and therefore You are. And in some sense the ‘Script’ or operating system hack plays out a collective context for our individual relational experience of the world in which we find (or lose) ourselves. But the willingness to no longer give auto-allegiance to such a ‘script’ is the opening for a movement of being to rise to a conscious attention that witnesses and aligns in wholeness of being. This is the basis for opening communications of a different order than the manipulative or masking intent to get or get away from coercive power. We cannot ‘meet’ in the old framing of mind, but we can release our grip on it so as to evolve it to serve the function of the true need of the moment at hand – rather than impose the needs of a past made in anger upon the presence of Life unrecognised. Our living World, on one Another other and our Self.

      No one speaks but to who is ‘listening’ and the focus of our thought and desire sets the frequency of our receiving.
      The first thing a usurping coup seeks to possess and control is the central or official broadcasting function. But the power is not in the broadcast so much as the habituated and almost locked in reception of minds to its signs and signals as true.

      Responsibility for what we accept true and then act upon, and have the experience of cannot be thrust upon our ‘educators’. But the recognition of an education is from the script of the willingness to truly know and to thus be transformed by learning. Change is associated with loss and control with defending against loss, but perhaps we have forgotten how to dance because we lost the ‘music’ of a wholeness of being.

  2. Bill McLean says

    “Scotch whisky” and Welsh singing” – part of English life????? Either the MBE, or more likely English propaganda, has addled your brain. In either case not your fault. Even some very clever have accepted a trinket from the Empire nonsense and even Goebbels admired London propaganda. Otherwise a fine letter.

    5
    34
    • He misspoke there which should have been obvious with the title of his letter. Most people of other countries mix “British” with “English” which perhaps only offends the little Englanders 🙂 When Andy Murray wins Wimbledon or England goes to the world cup semi-finals, the British still celebrate. But yes, a fine letter and one similar should have been written to the America as well.

      19
      3
      • On the other hand, it is not only the people of England who are susceptible to Pentagon propaganda… The Scottish also have a reputation for being inherently ‘conservative’, which means not rocking boats, or trying new ideas and the like, despite having a strong nationalist core, like the Welsh.
        If he misspoke, it is probably in overestimating the ability of Westminster to override Washington…

        2
        1
        • Bill McLean says

          Wardropper – i’m afraid you are in error. Scots have a reputation for innovation and invention which even those mighty innovators the Chinese recognize. An American author Arthur Herman wrote the book “How the Scots invented the modern world”. Voltaire wrote “We look to Scotland for all our ideas of civilization”. Scots, like the Welsh, are only conservative in their foolish subservience to England, brought about by hundreds of years of colonialism.. Hence the term the “Scottish cringe”. Very, very sad even for the English whom it has allows to imagine they still have an empire and importance, the level of which has been recognized again by the mighty Chinese, as trivial! Fortunately we are currently seeing a resurgence of the spirit of the people and once more invention and innovation are becoming prominent – all you need to do is get our from under!!!!!

          4
          5
          • The Scots also have a reputation for bigotry.

            Don’t worry, my mother is Scottish. She – being a Catholic – knows full well that what I say is true.

            2
            1
            • Hugh O'Neill says

              Being of Irish Catholic roots, though 3 generations of living in Scotland, my prejudiced perspective suggests that both the negative and positive comments about Scotland have weight. Scotland, from the time of Columba until the Reformation. The Reformation was the excuse for a power grab: it split the country and Mary Queen of Scots was thrown to the Tudor wolves. That Mary Stuart’s son James VI of Scotland became James I of England proves that his mother’s claim to the English throne was legitimate – but unacceptable because of her religion.
              RLS’s “Jeckyll & Hyde” has a split personality which fits Scotland: a Protestant hierarchy which ignores history before the Reformation, since that might mean they were once Catholic! The Union of Crowns 1707 only cemented the Protestant hierarchy such that Scottish Protestants are fierce Unionists/Royalists/conservatives. The English are the masters of Divide & Rule and play the game to perfection. Even in the secular era, old loyalties (and suspicions) run deep. But having said all that, I still believe that there is a Celtic open-ness, a sense of justice, a desire to defend the underdog and a distinct way of thinking about the world beyond the narrow dictates of Capitalism, alien to the Anglo-American Establishment. Left to themselves, Trident would be gone. They are more inclined to live at Peace with all their neighbours than their neighbours’ governments immediately South. (Never conflate the people with the crimes of their government).

            • Bill McLean says

              John2o2o – I too am of Scottish Catholic background but , and with the greatest of respect to your mother, it does not make me omniscient. I am now in my 70s and when I was young ,bigotry, used and encouraged by British nationalism, was fairly common in Scotland, although I have to say in all truth it never affected me as I could never take religion or Britain seriously. Religious bigotry in Scotland is now nowhere near what it was fifty years ago despite efforts by unionist politicians (mostly Tory) to fan the flames. Since my youth, and having travelled the world, I am still not omniscient ,but have learned that bigotry of all kinds is not unusual – see the huge increase in racism in England since the Brexit referendum! The most important thing I learned is that basically all peoples are the same except those who are convinced of their own superiority and importance. Finally, one the biggest lessons I learned is that arrogance and ignorance often walk hand in hand!

            • Robbobbobin says

              “The Scots also have a reputation for bigotry.”

              My Scottish paternal grandmother was one of the least bigoted people I have ever met*. Quite the opposite of my maternal family, a people chosen by God to be the genetic dustbin of all the failed miscegenations in human history, who all have an intense hostility both to any other of themselves and to anyone resembling any of themselves (in itself, the explanation).

              *Though she did hold a few pseudo-xenophobic prejudices – insisting, for instance, that there is no sound more stirring, life-enhancing and romantic than the sound of bagpipes across the water. Particularly across very large bodies of water such as the Atlantic or Pacific oceans.

          • Some anti-Scots sentiment here, but there’s always the Declaration of Arbroath of 1320;
            “For as long as but a hundred of us remain alive, never will we on any conditions be brought under English rule. It is not for glory, nor riches, nor honours that we are fighting, but for freedom — for that alone, which no honest man gives up but with life itself.”.

            My series of articles on Great Britain listed here based on the EU referendum chart and 1707 Acts of Union (warning, Astrology)
            Brexit, What? https://manfromatlan.blogspot.com/2017/04/brexit-what.html

            Conclusion: I don’t have to remind you can always cancel Brexit. That’s your decision.

            But if England leaves Europe, then Scotland must end this union, for its own good.

            So you see, Scotland DOES have a choice, even if the “English” sadly, do not.

          • Bill, of course you are right about Scottish inventiveness. I am very well aware of the magnificent individuals in Scottish history. My point is about Scotland as a voting nation, and in that respect the Scottish don’t appear to me to be any better informed than the English. Assuming the independence vote was not fixed, I would cite that as an example. That was really a chance for something new to happen. Otherwise I certainly don’t subscribe to the Scottish stereotyping of which many are guilty.

      • Vlad says

        Most people of other countries mix “Russia” with ‘Russian Federation’ or even the ‘USSR’.
        ‘Boris Yurinov, the Uzbek’ is more fun than ‘Andy Murray. the Englishman’.

    • DL says

      @Bill Maclean You are absolutely right. Obviously, a translator’s oversight. Indeed, in Russian ‘English’ and ‘British’ are almost always interchangeable (even though very wrong, especially in sensitive contexts such as this). My apologies for that. It was not Mr.Livanov’s fault, and certainly not his intention.
      Curiously, the English for ‘Russian’ is at least as confused. It uses one word ‘Russian’ for both “русский” and “российский” the first of which stands for ethnic Russian and the Russian language while the latter pertains to the Russian Federation and embraces any of the dozens of ethnicities and federative entities that make up the country.

      • No need to apologise. Some of the greatest writers from the British Isles have often used “England” to mean Great Britain or the United Kingdom, and two of the biggest “offenders” were bothe Scots: John Buchan and… Arthur Conan Doyle, creator of Sherloc Holmes.
        Anyway, thank you for printing Mr Livanov’s elegant and important letter.

  3. Of passing inteerest:
    “Guilty until innocent? Guardian columnist calls UK govt ‘clueless’ for blaming Russia for poisonings.Edited time: 7 Jul, 2018 08:27.Guilty until innocent? Guardian columnist calls UK govt ‘clueless’ for blaming Russia for poisonings
    © Henry Nicholls/ Reuters
    It is a basic tenet of British law that the accused are innocent until proven guilty. And yet when it’s Russia in the dock, that seems irrelevant.
    Top Tory ministers have squarely accused the Kremlin of the Novichok poisonings in Wiltshire, and the mainstream media has been awash with unknown sources and so-called “experts” claiming they have reasons to believe Russia is involved.
    In a refreshingly articulate piece in the Guardian, however, former Times editor Simon Jenkins called out the government over its baseless allegations.
    READ MORE: Amesbury poisoning is a terrorist attack, secondary contamination impossible – expert to RT
    While it is disappointing that it took a MSM journalist so long to reach such an elementary conclusion, it is still comforting that a piece entitled “If the Novichok was planted by Russia, where’s the evidence?” has finally made it to print.
    Jenkins, who also worked as an editor for the Evening Standard, raises points that, in truth, a primary school kid would conceive. Ergo, why on Earth would Russia attack its own citizens just before hosting the World Cup, which, Jenkins said, is of “mammoth chauvinist significance” to the country?
    “I suppose I can see why the Kremlin might want to kill an ex-spy such as Sergei Skripal and his daughter, so as to deter others from defecting,” the former Times and Evening Standard editor said.
    “But why wait so long after he has fled, and why during the build-up to so highly politicized an event as a World Cup in Russia?” Jenkins wrote.
    He also pointed out the close proximity of the poisonings to the UK’s secretive military research facility at Porton Down, and the inability of anyone to offer a reasonable explanation as to why Russia would carry out the alleged crimes.
    Dismissing Whitehall’s scaremongering campaign since the Salisbury attack in March, the columnist said that he will hold off from “capitulating to the politics of terror and fear” because he has “not a smidgen of an answer to any of these questions.”
    However he added that his reasoned stance isn’t shared by those in the corridors of power. “That clearly does not apply to government ministers, for whom ignorance is not a sufficient condition for silence,” he said.
    The column took aim at Home Secretary Sajid Javid, who said on Wednesday that it was time “the Russian state comes forward and explains exactly what has gone on,” despite having no evidence that the Kremlin was involved in the first place.
    The newly-appointed home secretary was speaking in the House of Commons after two people from the Wiltshire city of Amesbury – just nine miles from the site of the Skripal incident in Salisbury – fell ill on Saturday as a result of exposure to Novichok.Charlie Rowley and Dawn Sturgess remain critically ill in hospital after they were, police claim, poisoned by a contaminated object. The object has yet to be identified.
    Jenkins was echoing the words of Russian presidential spokesman Dmitry Peskov, who said at a press conference on Thursday that Britain had yet to deliver any convincing evidence of either incident….”

    18
    1
  4. HB says

    I LOVE Vasily Livanov – one of the most decent human beings, a superb actor, a legendary Sherlock Holmes! Wonderful letter. Take my hat off, bravo!

    27
    1
  5. June A. Van Orman says

    There is not much left to say, as all has been so eloquently stated. Thank you Vasily Livanov for this heart-felt and true letter. The Guardian refused to publish it. The truth is lost in England and she is no longer England as I know her, governed by those who no longer care for Patriotism. The many decades of propaganda and demonizing Russia is a Red Herring. What are they really hiding?

    23
    • Of course the Guardian refused to publish it. How could ideas and impressions so far at odds with the NATO agenda of Viner & Tisdall share a page with the scrawlings of Cohen and Nougayrède?

  6. Hope says

    Thank you, Vasily Livanov, for this calm analysis of the long, vicious campaign to mould the minds of the West into mindless hatred of the Russian people. I am very moved by the grace and wisdom of your response, speaking to British people directly about that campaign, and about what should be the relations between your two countries, and between Russia and the West generally.
    May God grant that this letter be shared widely, and that your wisdom prevails.

    48
    • Mulga Mumblebrain says

      The Right exist in a world of hatred-class hatred, racist hatred, misogyny, inter-generational hatred, sectarian hatred, and hatred of one another and themselves. A ‘society’ dominated by the Right, as the UK has been forever, is nothing but a maelstrom of hatreds, dragging the citizens down to Hell. If not Russia, it would be someone else.

      11
      2
      • To be fair, many sections of the modern Left are not a whole lot better. They’re just more conceited.

        As for myself, the only thing I am sure about is that I am anti-war and anti-imperialist. On some matters I am right wing and on others left.

  7. Bryan says

    Thank you Mr.Livanov. I’m a carpenter from Canada who’s lived here since the 80’s.If I can see the anti Russian sentiment being pressed by the western media I assume anyone can. My reasoning being I’m “joe average”.I’m not sure who the British media and government represent but it’s certainly not me nor I think the average British person.
    Take heart, I think you have more friends here than foes.

    76
    • Ian Beeby says

      The British people are not anti Russian it is only this very extreme so called Government. 99% of the British don’t believe in the so called nerve agent attacks. But the media refuse to enter into sensible discussions about it. When I tried to phone my local Radio station I was blocked from calling , probably by our so called security forces.
      Keep up the important work that you are doing.
      Cheers
      Ian

      46
    • Funny sort of world where most people world-wide support the Russian government than the UK’s, and indeed bear the Russian people no animus, but look at your self-destructive bloody-minded ways with alarm. I mean, Brexit, fake anti-Semitism allegations against the one party that opposes neo-liberal policies, xenophobia, your govt’s poodle
      relationship with America and Israel?

      9
      1
      • Brexit was opposed by a majority of the neoliberal establishment and financial institutions. The idea remaining in the IMF controlled free trade zone EU is an expression of people power seems like yet another propaganda meme.

        • bevin says

          You are correct. The real fight against the referendum result, which was a rejection of the EU
          “…Today, the European Union offers the fullest realization of the neoliberal political vision. There is no sovereign people of Europe; the authority of European institutions rests on a body of law and treaties. The European Union is not a nation, but it is not simply an agreement among nations either. Unlike international agreements, European regulations are directly binding on individuals and not only on the government signing them. In many areas, European regulations and authorities don’t merely constrain, but actually replace, their national equivalents. (This is what makes Brexit so difficult.)

          “Europe’s incomplete integration—with its confusing mix of powers delegated to Brussels and powers retained by national governments—is often seen as a design flaw. But to Slobodian’s globalists, partial integration is precisely the goal—it means that neither the national nor the international body have the legitimacy and capacity to direct the economy. ..”
          https://bostonreview.net/class-inequality/j-w-mason-market-police
          No doubt some racists voted for Brexit, just as many racists regard the EU as an Aryan bastion against ‘inferior’ peoples.’ Such is the nature of referenda. The propaganda that working class bigotry lay behind a vote to preserve the possibility of democracy from capitalists intent on thwarting popular power, is simply part of the information war designed to protect (stolen) property from democratic regulation.
          The Boston review article explains the reality, very well.

          • bevin says

            I forgot to add
            “You are correct. The real fight against the referendum result, which was a rejection of the EU is about to begin. The May plan is to preserve all the important parts of the EU in its ‘soft brexit’. And A substantial part of the Labour PLP will join the government to ensure that this neo-liberal’s wet dream continues to stand in the way of nationalisation and socialism.”

    • reinertorheit says

      Oxbridge WHAT. exactly? A bunch of privileged numpties studying Classical Literature In Translation, because mumsy and dadsy paid for their places? ‘Oxbridge’ that produced Johnson, Gove, and Rees-Mogg??

      Keep dreaming that your poxy little nation is a global player. Play up, play up, jolly good fellow, eh? Then round to the Presbytery after Evensong, to toast crumpets by the fire?? In your sad little Merchant-Ivory makebelieve world

      3
      8
  8. Coram Deo says

    “We have no beef with the people of Britain”
    Dear Mr Livanov,
    Thank you for your gracious letter.
    Please be advised, sir, that neither do the people of the UK have any ‘beef’ with Russia – the country, its people or its politicians. In my experience President Putin and FM Lavrov are held in the highest esteem in the UK as worldclass statesmen.
    The UK shares the same problem as Russia – namely, UK politicians, the BBC and dead journalism.
    The people of the UK are quite aware of what its politicians are doing – and we DO NOT approve.
    May God deliver us all from their thrall.
    Thank you again.

    64
  9. The often trotted out spectre of McCarthyism is actually the inverse of what is happening in recent years vis a vis the West vs Russia. Today, demonstrably false, and even ridiculous charges against the Russian federation and its leader are made, solely with the objective of demonising them for political purposes, ideally regime change, and most of the popular media are fully on board, seemingly speaking with One Voice. Conflating the Russian federation and the Soviet Union is the preferred device employed. No matter how outrageous the claims have been, the leadership of Russia has responded in a composed, rational, patient, and diplomatic manner, in their hope that the West will return to some semblance of sanity if or when the mania subsides.
    This coordinated assault is probably the greatest tragedy of the early 21st Century, when cultural exchange, investment, and appreciation for Russia and its people suddenly changed into vituperation for no apparent reason other that the wish that it be so.
    First, regarding ‘McCarthyism’. What McCarthy brought to attention was, with occasional unimportant quantitative discrepancies, proved to be true, including even the charge that evoked the hallowed ‘Have you no decency?’ comment, and which proved to be the pivot point of McCarthy’s final undoing – essentially, the only victim of McCarthyism was McCarthy, who ended up paying with his life. Yes, the US government was permeated by Soviet spies all the way up to and including the White House, and they were enabled and protected by the officials that should have defended the US from such treason., No less responsible was the overwhelmingly Soviet-compromised leftist media. The typical response of the US government was to move identified guilty parties to other positions in the government, or maybe do nothing. The publication of the Venona papers fully validated the charges brought forth by McCarthy, his predecessors, and various witnesses who testified in the investigations and revealed the defendants and their supporters to be liars under oath. Investigation can be harsh, but treason is harsher.
    Secondly, the so-called ‘witch hunt’ did not originate with McCarthy, but in the Congress, in the 1930s, almost 20 years before McCarthy, to counter espionage activity originating from the Soviet Union, and incidentally, Germany.
    It would be commendable to see this ‘McCarthy’ appellation be assigned to the ‘dustbin of history’ but that would be too much to hope for, however there is a scrupulously documented book, ‘Blacklisted by History’ to refer to for those interested in assessing his career.

    7
    25
    • bevin says

      “… the only victim of McCarthyism was McCarthy, who ended up paying with his life. Yes, the US government was permeated by Soviet spies all the way up to and including the White House, and they were enabled and protected by the officials that should have defended the US from such treason., No less responsible was the overwhelmingly Soviet-compromised leftist media….”
      This really is astonishingly stupid. there were few, if any, spies in the US government, unless by a spy one means a citizen with a critical mind who will on occasion differ from the official policies of the government. Or someone, such as Professor Lattimore, whose studies led him to views which have been entirely borne out by history. Or Trade Unionists who put the interests of their fellow workers over those of the oligarchy which actually dominated (s) the government. Dominates it yet, and whose power never raised the ire of McCarthy or his fascistic followers.
      On the other hand it is good to see that Off Guardian’s reach extends into the darker regions of that netherworld in which the spirits of Robert Conquest and Goebbels rule.

      35
      1
      • As Aristotle said of Plato: “Dear is Plato, but dearer is the truth” … and incidentally, more difficult to accept.

        >
        Lattimore? Really?
        Q.E.D.

      • As Aristotle said of Plato: “Dear is Plato, but dearer is the truth”.

        >
        Lattimore? Really?
        Q.E.D.

    • Gary Weglarz says

      Roberto – “the US government was permeated by Soviet spies all the way up to and including the White House, and they were enabled and protected by the officials that should have defended the US from such treason., No less responsible was the overwhelmingly Soviet-compromised leftist media.”

      Wow! I can only assume we’ve been living on different planets for some time now Roberto and that one of us has only recently dropped in to planet earth and unfortunately perhaps stumbled onto some reading materials from the old John Birch Society.

      I deduce that by the term – “Soviet spies” – you are euphemistically referring to otherwise patriotic American government employees who happened to be homosexual, or public figures so progressive as to support labor unions, or perhaps (god forbid) be publicly opposed nuclear arms and nuclear proliferation as Robert Oppenheimer and Einstein were. Yes, there were certainly plenty of such “Soviet spies” taken to task by McCarthy and company.

      I hope on your space future travels you are able to visit other portions of our galaxy and can report back equally remarkable information for us to digest with just a pinch of salt.

      14
      • ‘Soviet spies’, refers to Soviet spies, not people of particular persuasions, some of whom may also incidentally have been Soviet spies.
        Though we digress from the theme of Mr Livanov’s letter, you have brought up a point wanting response.
        From outer space to Earth, nothing to to with spies, just observing how popular public personae may differ from historical actions.
        Einstein’s letter to Roosevelt, proposing development of nuclear weapons, advocating deploying them in harbours of cities to destroy the surrounding area, presumably occupied by civilians. The development of nuclear weapons was later initiated by FDR, with the Manhattan Project, diligently led by Robert Oppenheimer to completion, the progress of which was fed to Soviet Russia in near real time by actors within the project. No wonder Stalin had no surprised reaction or curiosity when Truman ‘revealed’ to him at Potsdam that the US had a powerful secret weapon – he probably knew more than Truman about the project.
        Such irony is the stuff of history; actual history, not that which reduces events and eras to a catchphrase or a one-liner in the popular press according to the needs of propaganda.
        As you say, both Einstein and Oppenheimer are typically represented as advocates of anti-nuclear policy.

        August 2, 1939

        Albert Einstein
        Old Grove Rd.
        Nassau Point
        Paconic, Long Island, NY

        F. D. Roosevelt
        President of the United States
        White House
        Washington, DC

        Sir:

        Some recent work by E. Fermi and L. Szilard, which has been communicated to me in a manuscript, leads me to expect that the element uranium may be turned into a new and important source of energy in the immediate future. Certain aspects of the situation which has arisen seem to call for watchfulness and, if necessary, quick action on the part of the Administration. I believe therefore that it is my duty to bring to your attention the following facts and recommendations.

        In the course of the last four months it has been made probable - through the work of Joliot in France as well as Fermi and Szilard in America - that it may become possible to set up a nuclear chain reaction in a large mass of uranium, by which vast amounts of power and large quantities of new radium-like elements would be generated. Now it appears almost certain that this could be achieved in the immediate future.

        This new phenomenon would also lead to the construction of bombs, and it is conceivable - though much less certain - that extremely powerful bombs of a new type, may thus be constructed. A single bomb of this type, carried by boat and exploded in a port, might very well destroy the whole port together with some of the surrounding territory. However, such bombs might very well prove to be too heavy for transportation by air.

        … etc etc
        [Then comes the 1939 version of the Nigerian Yellowcake threat]
        I understand that Germany has actually stopped the sale of uranium from the Czechoslovakian mines which she has taken over. That she should have taken such hasty action might perhaps be understood on the ground that the son of the German Under-Secretary of State, von Weiznacker, is attached to the Kaiser-Wilhelm Institute in Berlin where some of the American work on uranium is now being repeated.

        S.
        Albert Einstein

  10. The Lowest Infamy of The Guardian is in its rejection of publishing this greatest, most significant letter of the 21st Century. Thank you to Off-Guardian for getting it out.

    61
  11. Well it isn’t between ‘Britain’ and Russia so much as those who have overbearing influence upon British institutions of governance
    .
    I watched a documentary on Napoleon last night.
    The British Mercantile Establishment bankrolled coalition after coalition of European monarchies to put down Napoleon (and the Revolution) as an active embodiment of breaking the ‘world order’ and the industrial development of a land based European influence that would seriously threaten the then British hegemony as both the dominant naval and trading power that also led in industrial development.

    Today.

    The global domination by an international cartel of financial and corporate interests that wields a technocracy as a broad spectrum dominance of every sphere of human influence is not British, nor US American – for these are but hosts, assets and proxies through which to operate. But whoever is pushing this agenda or aligned in support of it – knowingly or under a false narrative, is also a host, asset or proxy to the ideas of dominance or power over, which as a corruption of power, possesses the minds of those who believe they have it. That’s ‘how it works’.

    Thus far, to my knowing, an antipathy to making war in the people has never prevented their leaders, backers and initiators of war from inducing the population to make war by means of manipulative ploy.

    The conditioning and baiting of the mind into triggered emotional reaction by which we are then deceived is the art of manipulation of the unwary or unaware – the already captured hosts, assets, and proxies.

    “No one understood better than Stalin that the true object of propaganda is neither to convince nor even to persuade, but to produce a uniform pattern of public utterance in which the first trace of unorthodox thought immediately reveals itself as a jarring dissonance.”
    ~ Alan Bullock, in Hitler and Stalin: Parallel Lives

    In the appearances presented, President Putin is resisting a monopolar ‘US led’ world order and holding to traditional ideas of national sovereignty, identity, and of communication and negotiation of outcomes in considering mutual self interest. In this role he is breaking from compliance under the ‘new world order’ and is influencing others by example – and so ‘coalitions’ of assets and proxies are induced to align against Russia. Not so much bankrolled these days as bankrupted or brought down if they do not comply. But there is no shortage of carrots where the stick does not work.

    China is the unspoken element in this. China is building huge infrastructure of industrial expansion, not a wall. They will not leave their investments unprotected. I saw a pivot to the US by British power (captured assets), that has used and also hollowed out the US of A. Power cares only for itself and a pivot to the East would be like parasites jumping a dying host to shift to the a which is already long prepared. Corrupted power does not share or give except to get from, use and discard. For the corruption is the loss of the recognition of self in other and other in oneself. This is quite different from strategic evaluation of another in terms of your own proclivities. Those who give allegiance for personal privilege and protection only have what the establishment props up for its own agenda. In a major change only the elect are insider to what is happening and in the network of protection.

    The idea of a global cooperation is timely, but the resort to deceit and coercion in guise of communication undermines and works beneath the forms of ‘peace’ or ‘freedom’ or ‘security’ as a Trojan intent to destroy through manipulating such trust as can be induced to sacrifice unto words and posture without substance.

    Insofar as people are taken in by – and accept to be managed and led under a blame game instead of waking to their responsibility for their own consciousness, so will hate operate loveless agenda under whatever symbol or banner.

    Modern war is never between people so much as they are sacrificed to war. People are denied a true development of mind and character and also of a voice and framed by narrative control in their choices by manipulation and coercion -by hook or by crook. People may join in solidarity to fight for their lives against perceived and believed evils – but even this is used to capture a fear and hate bonded group intimacy and use it to a serve hidden agenda of private interests dressed up in national or ideological or religious framing.

    Is there any alternative to the submission or resort to corrupt power in a world of its making?
    “Give unto Caesar what is due unto Caesar and give unto God what is due unto God”.
    If you don’t use the term ‘God’ – intuit to what Jesus saw in others, honoured and served without being servile. It wasn’t a thought construct – hence the term ‘Living’.
    Worldly power is a worldly kingdom of power struggle under self-image.
    But the Soul is the creative that knows itself in all its parts but from a wholeness and not a war on Self.
    The urge to dominate or possess is a corrupted drive toward unity.
    But what if Humpty (fragmentation and loss) was a falsely flagged Self-attack?
    Of course all the king’s assets and proxies cannot restore wholeness of being within the fragmented framing of lack, limitation, grievance and self-vindicating vengeance.

    25
    2
  12. BigB says

    I care not a jot for the ‘facts’ of the latest Amesbury incident: they were ideologically predetermined to suit a cross party agenda. That agenda (as Vasily states) is the vilification of Russia: and the demonised Shadow persona is in the particular form of Vladimir Putin. This is a personalised animus.

    Why cross party: because I see the convenient ideological comfort veil surrounding the person of Jeremy Corbyn: isolating him from any part of the vilification agenda and scapegoating the ‘government’ …a hypothetical singularity from which Jeremy is perceptually excluded. Some timely remembrances from the original Skripal provocation (of which the current is a redux) – in the form of quotes:

    ” Based on the analysis conducted by Government scientists, there can be little doubt that the nerve agent used in this attack was military-grade Novichok of a type manufactured by Russia. Since that analysis was revealed by the Prime Minister two weeks ago, the Russian ​state has had every opportunity to offer a plausible explanation as to how a nerve agent stock of this type came to be used in this attack. It has offered nothing concrete in response except denials and diversion. Indeed, the only solid assertion that it has offered so far in its defence was that all stocks of nerve agents were destroyed many years ago—an assertion that has been contradicted by intelligence reports. That suggests that just over a decade ago Russia invested in the use of nerve agents and developed new stockpiles of Novichok to that end. There is clear evidence that the Russian state has a case to answer, and it has failed to do so. We can therefore draw no other conclusion than that Russia has a direct or indirect responsibility for this.”

    “I was talking about Russian oligarchs and their power. As the Prime Minister will know, it is not just the Labour party pressing for action. Alexei Navalny, a Russian opposition party leader who was barred from standing for the Russian presidency and has faced down intimidation of him, his family and his supporters at the hands of the Russian state, has made clear that the most important thing the UK could do to curb the power and punish the actions of Vladimir Putin is to hit his billionaire allies in their pockets. I hope the Prime Minister will listen to that advice.”

    https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2018-03-26/debates/B5EF4CEE-D0E9-4613-81C4-DDD9F03015EE/NationalSecurityAndRussia

    The rest of Jeremy’s speech went on to accuse the Russian Government (a metonym of V Putin) of every contrived Russophobic trope I can think of (including “the oppression of LGBT rights”). Therefore, there is no singular exclusion. Hence: cross party vilification.

    This bi-partisan vilification is clearly at odds with both reality, and – perhaps more importantly – public sentiment and opinion (which is not normally predicated on reality anyway). The question in my mind is: if the bi-partisan state is ideologically manufacturing its own pseudo-reality to generate its own political capital and confirm its own agenda; and that agenda ruptures the Social Contract and violates the General Will of the people – does this not constitute a ‘Legitimation Crisis’ in the general ruling apparatus of the state? If so, what is the recourse and legitimate response of the people to the blatantly ideological misrule?

    Jurgen Habermas’ theory of state rule is that the electorate form a ‘communal consensual constituency’ with the elected – sharing the same values, norms, ideals, priorities, and ideology as the elected (the constituent ‘Lifeworld’). The elected represent the moral executive of the people; in a mutually beneficial democratic power sharing arrangement. The electorate consent to be ruled by the proxy executive, who act in co-mutuality to manifest the common good. This is the basis of social integration.

    So much for sociological theory: I’m trying not to laugh at the obvious real world absurdity of the notion. I am not even including the austerity loving Toxic Tories – no one expects them to uphold anything other than prop up (with violence) the elite entitled minority. But Labour claim to aspire to rule for the Many, not the Few: so how does that claim stack up with the vilification of Russia?

    From the fictitious predicate of Novichok(ish): real world consequences have been and are being manufactured. These include the Labour endorsed expulsion of 23 diplomats: “building alliances” against the common (fictive) transgressor[s]; but more alarmingly, the strengthening of NATO against a non-existent projected and self-reified threat. Labour have been manufacturing their own political capital: determinedly pushing their Magnitsky sanctions agenda based on pure mendacious fantasy of the “extraterritorial violation of human rights”. Jeremy Corbyn has vilified the ‘Russian Government’ (of whom he has been a “robust critic” for “more than 20 years”) – channelling Navalny – and will no doubt sanction them given electoral mandate. Sanction: for what? Post-truth, post-democratic, evidence free assertions?

    And just as pertinent a question as “for what” is: for whom – the Many; or the (billionaire) Few?

    As I have pointed out before, we do not need another Magnitsky amendment. We already have one – and ‘Magnitsky’ powers (in the form of ‘Unexplained Wealth Orders’). So the Magnitsky sanctions agenda is another manufactured and extended vilification and denigration process in itself? [As is the “other 14” BuzzFeed dossier pushed by Cooper, Abbott, et al?] And the man they are representing this agenda for is Bill Browder: an unlikely marriage made in Hell. Who does he represent – the Many, or the Few?

    “We cannot allow the streets of ordinary British towns and communities to become killing fields for state actors” was how Diane Abbott summed up her uncritical support of Sajid Javid’s xenophobic statement about Amesbury yesterday. A redux of her “home counties killing fields” comments on the “From Russia with Blood” dossier. So in the supra-mundane mindset of the bi-partisan political elite – Russia is a ‘McMafia’ state?

    [Or do they need to look in, not through, the mirror …to see their own (projected) limitations and failures staring back?]

    I am am not going to speculate on why the determination as a ‘gangster state’ has transpired: only question – does this not expose the electorate to a double-bind? To legitimate the vilification of Russia and demonisation of V V Putin by either party is to join the ‘communal consensual constituency’ in support of an agenda that is manufactured to coerce the will of the people: against the will of the people? Legitimation involves a large degree of cognitive dissonance; or voluntarily and pragmatically believing the unreal to be real: the substitutive Realpolitik?

    Or else – the abdication of the personal and collective moral responsibility to decide; the suspension of the personal and collective social conscience; the surrender of the autonomy of perception, the sovereignty of thought, and the personal and collective right to identity creation; unto a trans-subjective, social constructivist, collective authority (a simulated Lifeworld?). This ‘communal consensual constituency’ decides what is and is not ‘real’ depending on its own mass psychological hypothetical criteria. This, in effect, lets others decide who you are; how you see; and how you act …which amounts to a cognitive jeopardy crisis in itself?

    It is not the proxy and absolved belief in the reality of the original Skripal provocation that is the issue now, especially with the redux. Personal belief is not in question: the issue becomes one of legitimation of the ‘communal consensual constituency’ of trans-subjective belief in the reality of perceptively unreal and ideologically predicated simulations and projections? If so: with the conferred, legitimated, bi-partisan mandate of the Unreal – where does that lead:

    “What sort of policy do they think they are pursuing, what kind of world they are shaping?”

    Not any sort of world that I want to legitimate or partake in.

    We, the People, have powers under the Constitution: is it not about time we exercised them …in the name of peace with Russia: a peace that our collective bi-partisan leadership clearly do not want us to have? They clearly want a legitimated consensual vilification process and mandated verification of the Unreal: which we must psychologically resist. Can we afford to legitimate and consent to such misrule? If so: we have nothing to lose but our freedom.

    43
    • Savorywill says

      I actually wasn’t aware that Corbyn had taken such a terrible position on the obviously fictitious Skirpal incident. Initially he seemed to express that there was no clear evidence that Russia was involved, but he caved to pressure, I guess and gave the ridiculous speech you quoted from here. Are there no proper people left in British politics (as George Galloway is no longer there)?

      32
      • mark says

        He has been tamed now by the Board of Deputies who were the prime mover of the smears against him.

        12
      • ZigZag Wanderer says

        Likewise , I am somewhat shocked at Corbyns’ response to the hysterical witch hunt that played out in the Commons on March 26 . I was reasonably happy with his response to the assault on him by the Jewish mafia but did not expect him to cave in so spectacularly on this issue.
        I live near to Porton Down so GE voting is pointless as a Tory is ALWAYS the winner here due to the large numbers of Army/MOD/Intelligence people living in the area. They’ve all got a spring in their step these days as Gavin is shaking the magic money tree for them.

        22
        • Mulga Mumblebrain says

          Corbyn’s reaction to the Zionist lynch-mob was, in my opinion, despicable, cowardly, and treacherous-just how the Zionists like them. Stabbing Wadsworth and Livingstone in the back won’t save him either, when the Zionists return for the next round.

      • @Savorywill.
        I have been a member of the Labour Party and momentum and I too was a fortnight behind the news since I won’t watch our corrupt media. I was disgusted when I finally learned the content of Corbyn’s fawning speech. As far as I am concerned he has betrayed everything he supposedly stood for and as such will not countenance his views henceforth. It was probably BigB who put the transcript out to social media, but there are others who had access to it. Galloway was a loss as was Wedgie and there are no others to replace them – that’s the sorry state of affairs within the halls of power leaving us with no real democracy at all.

        [edited by Admin to correct name]

    • Francis Lee says

      What has to be borne in mind about Corbyn is that he is the latest ex-social democratic to surrender to the Liberal International – the Libintern and its economic programme – neoliberalism, and its political programme – neoconservatism. The centre-left (including the Greens) have virtually collapsed all over Europe.

      The German SPD saw a historic bad result in the parliamentary elections. Its sister parties in France, the Netherlands and the Czech Republic have even sunk to single digit shares of the vote. European social democracy is fighting for its political survival: since the new millennium, its vote share has fallen in 15 of the 17 countries we examined – sometimes dramatically.

      Some major developments can be seen across Europe:

      In Germany, the SPD result in 2017 federal elections was the worst since the end of the Second World War (at 20.5 percent). But, at the turn of the millennium, it was the strongest party: Gerhard Schröder led it into government in 1998 with 40 percent of the vote; in 2002 it won 38.5 percent and again named the Chancellor. Since then, however, it has gone downhill. Particularly after the Grand Coalition from 2005 to 2009, when voters punished the SPD, the junior partner; its vote share collapsed by more than ten percentage points. After a slight increase in 2013, the downward trend has resumed.

      Last year in France, the Socialist Party (PS) entered its worst ever crisis. President François Hollande, the most unpopular person to hold the office in history, did not even stand for reelection. The party’s candidate, Benoît Hamon, finished in fifth place, with a mere six percent of the vote. A few weeks later came the vote for the National Assembly. In 2012, the PS became the strongest party, this time it fell by more than 20 points and won only seven percent of the vote.

      In the Netherlands and the Czech Republic, the social democratic parties also scored in the single figures for parliamentary elections last year. In comparison to the preceding elections, they dropped by 19 and 13 percentage points respectively.

      In Greece, the decline has already been underway for many years. After the start of the sovereign debt crisis, the ruling Pasok Party resoundingly lost its absolute majority in parliament. In the 2012 vote, it tumbled by more than 30 percentage points, in 2015 it lost even more trust, and today it barely plays any role at all.
      In Austria‘s recent vote, although SPÖ was able to match its results of four years ago, it nevertheless left the government and has lost almost ten percentage points over the past 15 years.

      In Italy, Spain and Portugal the social democratic parties were still scoring over 40 percent in elections held over the 2000s. They are far away from that today, with the Spanish PSOE reaching only 22 percent in the last election.
      In Sweden and Finland, too, the election results of the social democrats have been steadily worsening since the turn of the millenium.

      In Norway the workers party AP significantly recovered from its decline at the start of the millenium. In 2001, the AP lost more than ten points, winning only 24.3 percent of the vote and finding itself in opposition after more than 40 years in power. It was afterwards able to balance out those losses by shifting to the left. Since the 2009 vote, however, it has gone into reverse once again, winning 27.4 percent of the vote in 2017. While it is still the strongest party, the country is now governed by a conservative coalition.

      Until recently in the UK, the Labour Party was following the same downward trend, losing ten percentage points between 2001 and 2015. But Labour was able to recoup its losses in last year’s general election and clearly profited from the consequences of the Brexit vote earlier in the year.

      In every country there are of course differing, individual reasons for this development. But there are also common roots that can explain the crisis faced by socialists and social democrats in many countries. First, parties have lost many of their core voters. European social democracy, born out of the labour movement of the nineteenth century, had a large support base upon which it could rely for votes: the workers, above all people engaged in manual labour. It is now an ever shrinking demography: the working class is fragmented, the conditions that supported the social democrats for decades across Europe have disappeared. – First published by Spiegel Online with the European Data Journalism Network

      Apart from the Trente Glorieuses, the golden age of social-democracy, social-democrats have always been a pillar of the capitalist system throughout the west. A craven approval-craving second eleven, that collapsed like a house of cards when when faced with the neo-liberal counter-revolution. Blairism was the quintessence of the ‘if you can’t beat them, join them.’ Don’t expect an incoming Labour administration to be much different from the past ones. Blairism is firmly entrenched, particularly in the Parliamentary Labour party. So the NATO ‘socialism’ of the Labour party and Corbyn doesn’t surprise me in the least.

      16
      • bevin says

        ” Blairism is firmly entrenched, particularly in the Parliamentary Labour party. So the NATO ‘socialism’ of the Labour party and Corbyn doesn’t surprise me in the least.”

        The key here is the first sentence, with which nobody would disagree. And which only the democratic reform of the party can remedy.
        Where you are entirely wrong is in identifying Blair as a Social Democrat and Blairism-which is an unashamedly neo-liberal project- as a deviation from socialism. It is nothing of the sort. Corbyn represents the old Bevanite tradition in the Labour party, far from being a NATO socialist he represents that tradition which, in 1960, carried Conference on a policy of leaving NATO.
        The problem with the drift of this argument and that of Big B is that it echoes the TINA slogan of Blair and Thatcher. In fact there is an alternative and its time has come: it begins with the democratisation of the Labour Party and its systematic dismantling of the neo-liberal institutions-from privatised prisons to an NHS which is being destroyed lest its example be applied in the USA- and a breaking free from the dictatorship of US foreign policy and EU/WTO economic policy.
        It may not be credible to the sectarian mind, that enduring legacy of puritanism, but the ruling class in the UK and far beyond regards Corbyn and the movement which is being organised around him as a very dangerous opponent.
        To put these criticisms of Corbyn into perspective we should look back at the charges that Labour was reverting to anti-Palestinian policies in recent months. In fact Labour has recently made two highly principles and thoughtful statements affirming its opposition to the Israeli government’s policies.
        Quite properly Corbyn is insisting that the big questions facing the electorate are domestic: there is nothing to be gained by allowing the Tories to turn their ludicrous and transparently dishonest posturing into a ‘Corbyn is a Putinbot’ smear. This is a matter which an incredulous
        public is dealing with for itself. What Labour has to do is to make people aware of the dangers facing the NHS,, the collapsing finances of the PFI scams and the need for comprehensive re-nationalisation programmes, as well as a restoration of Labour’s rights in the workplace (where they exist).
        These, and housing and education are the big issues and Corbyn is quite right not to allow them to be obscured by irrelevances and stunts cobbled together by the spooks and their colleagues in the media.

        15
        1
        • Big B says

          Let me turn from the threat to Britain to the threat posed to allies in NATO, eastern Europe and the security of the world as a result of rising tensions in recent years. Now more than ever, it is vital that we stress to our European counterparts that their support is important in the wake of the Salisbury attack, that we wish to work with them to maximise the power of collective sanctions against violations of international law—whether from Russia or any other state—and that our commitment to such collective action will not be diminished by Brexit. Similarly, now more than ever, it is vital that the ​UK and all other NATO members make it clear to all our allies in the Baltic states and elsewhere that we want to protect peace and security on the borders, without ramping up tensions unnecessarily, and that such a commitment is not conditional on their levels of defence spending.

          Bevin: I’m not sure how many levels of hypocrisy you want to obfuscate – but it would help if you actually read the declarations of JC …because they very much read like NATO socialism to me?

          The best way not to ramp up tensions with Russia unnecessarily is NOT to camp an army on their Western flank; an army that exercises provocation 365 days a year; and has turned the occupied Baltic States into a military theme park – disinheriting, dehumanising, and dislocating the local population. A provocation strengthened by ‘military Schengen’; PESCO; CARD; and the unmentionable EU military unification. Something the Jeremy gives at least a sly nod to (“…our commitment to such collective action will not be diminished by Brexit”)?

          Another way not to ramp up tensions with Russia unnecessarily is NOT to collectively sanction them for non-existent imaginary violations of international law. Nor to invoke Navalny as anything other than an agent provocateur linked with the Western destabilisation cabal? Perhaps that would better foster the collective peace and security?

          Peace and security are not protected by fostering mutual mistrust, and greenlighting Operation Barbarossa and a new Cold War redux. Maintaining a “constructive dialogue” are weasel and hypocritical words when you have an occupying army camped on, and exercising right up to the border? Then there is the neo-Nazi Ukraine, where NATO are providing ‘defensively lethal’ assistance and training. Will that foster our peace and security? What about our collective morality, or is that subservient to the ‘peace’?

          And none of this is made OK by shifting focus to domestic policy: a consistent social democrat tactic. How do you square a bellicose foreign policy; the endorsement and arming of neo-Nazi Gauleiters and Reichsgau; manufactured from fictitious events; risking the provocation or accidental triggering of Armageddon …based on what? You have to question the grasp of reality and morality of anyone who could posit the Skripal provocation as anything that could be called ‘real’. Let alone manufacture a hyped political capital from?

          Essentially you are saying that this is an acceptable and workable ‘Lifeworld’ reality if it means the trains run on time and NHS waiting lists come down? Is that not a myopic and regurgitated TINA my friend? What I am saying is that the social and domestic polity of this country need not be contingent on a dangerously fictitious, elite serving Russophobia. How does that benefit the people; especially our comrades who once had a life in the now neo-Nazi Baltics? Do we not owe a debt of solidarity to those who have been dehumanised and displaced in the name of our collective ‘peace and security’?

          We do not need to be defended from a foe that only exists in the disassociated mindset of the political elite and their mentors. The trains can run on time, the NHS can be fully staffed and funded, we can have social housing, etc …all WITHOUT projecting an inimical, dangerously counterfeited, and mendacious agenda of hating Russia? This is an unacceptable and immoral trade off. A spurious supposition that inverts and subverts into an advertising slogan …for (the primary benefit of) the Few, not the Many?

          16
          • Big B says

            These, and housing and education are the big issues and Corbyn is quite right not to allow them to be obscured by irrelevances and stunts cobbled together by the spooks and their colleagues in the media.

            Those “irrelevances and stunts” have real world implications for some:
            https://www.rt.com/news/431992-ukraine-independence-allegiance-hitler/

            Housing and education need not be a subsidiary contingency on support for NATO and neo-Nazism. They could and should be primary and uncontingent priorities – or is that too radical a proposal?

            • Mulga Mumblebrain says

              One of the great mistakes the serfs make is to not face the fact that the ruling parasites HATE all others, particularly the class and economic enemy ie the 99% of ‘useless eaters’. They positively ENJOY treating the poor and weak with cruelty and savage indifference, and nothing pleases them more than slaughtering millions of the global untermenschen, particularly children. The refusal to acknowledge the diabolical Evil of the Western over-class, because of moral cowardice and willing ignorance, has proven our great existential flaw, one that has delivered us right to the Gates of Hell.

              • You are absolutely correct. The nature of power over the masses is indeed characterised by the pleasure they get from inflicting new deprivations, cruelties and hardships on the masses. Nowhere has this been more evident than in the justification and implementation of austerity policies that have led to perhaps a million earĺy deaths and countless personal tradgedies in the UK. What is striking is that the measurement indexes clearly show villified Russia to be on the mirror opposite trajectory. And it should not be forgotten that it is peasant president Putin working against elite corruption and channeling sovreign wealth to the people that really raises the ire of the Zionist neoliberal overlords.

            • Francis Lee says

              The fact of the matter, as Thucydides discovered, was that you can’t be an imperialist state and a democratic or let alone a socialist one. The UK has always been an imperialist state and is now a subordinate member of an imperialist bloc led by the United States. Do remind me of whose side the Labour government of 1945 took in the Greek civil war. In what was the most left wing of subsequent Labour governments their attachment to NATO imperialism remained unquestionable, as does it role as a centre for global finance. The model for the European social democracies, when the accumulation crisis of the post-war economies brought about their conversion to Third Way social-liberal parties. Their platform of ‘globalized neoliberalism with a social conscience’ then proved a fair-weather formula, the second term evaporating after the financial crisis. Their policies are based upon a Keynes/Beverige formulations which is not longer possible in the modern world. Social-democratic reforms and New Deal politics in the US required a prerequisite of a strong anti-capitalist movement which knew where it was going but which alas no longer exists.

              Labour’s problem along with its theoretical paucity is that along with its euro social democratic parties is that it wants to be seen as respectable/electable. In doing so the possibility of real change is negated. They can only fight on the enemies turf, and are guaranteed to lose, as has been the historical record.

              • BigB says

                Francis: your comment is spot on and heaped in erudition, as always.

                According to Jack Rasmus, the UK is a wholly owned shadow bank asset – which I can well believe. The City of London Corporation is the dominant force in Parliamentary policy making. They even have a permanent representative – the ‘Remembrancer’ – who sits behind the Speaker. Tony Blair was elected, in part, on the hollow promise of reforming the City. Instead, he let them reform themselves – giving the various Guilds and Corporations votes for ‘carpet squares’ – depending on how many employees they have within the Square Mile. There is also a revolving door between Labour and the City – Andrew Balls comes to mind. Tony and Gordon didn’t do half bad either!

                UK Column has started to hint that there is a secretive banking cabal – the Pearle Office – that is actively controlling the May government. This too, I can believe, as the early indications from Chequers yesterday are that we will remain in the EU – except for financial services. The bankers get their Brexit, so we get to remain the world’s capital for dark money laundering, and an unregulated onshore ‘offshore’ (the City is excluded by clause from much of UK law) ‘secrecy jurisdiction’ or tax haven. This accounts for 10-15% of our GDP ‘growth’ – or Gross Domestic Piracy (the rest of our ‘growth’ are various forms of rent and “taking in the washing” – services we provide each other).

                No government can reform the UK whilst there is an ‘offshore’ den of iniquity – steeped in other peoples blood, sweat, and tears – at the heart of its policy. We will remain parasitic financial imperialist terrorists in the meantime. And that meantime is forever, thanks to Blair’s (or Lord Falconer’s) ‘reforms’.

                Real change would require the incorporation of the City into UK regulation; enforcing transparency and ending tax evasion; asset seizing (using Unexplained Wealth Orders for assets over £50K); ending revolving doors with the corporations; democratising the Bank of England (but it is already democratised – yeah, right!) and the TBTF banking oligopoly; banking regulation and 100% reserve requirement; issuing a new currency (as sterling would be toast!); saying bon voyage to the banks; and don’t let the revolving door hit you on the arse on the way out!

                I might as well go the whole hog and say that we will reverse ‘primitive accumulation’ and reclaim generations of the peoples stolen wealth; introduce 100% inheritance tax; and a hefty Land Reform Tax; a substantial ‘Robin Hood’ or Tobin Tax (short term transaction or anti-speculation tax): end entitlement and the monarchy; declare a Republic …

                …I could go on, but it is not going to happen: especially not under a Corbyn government, or any other government. If the people want real change: they will have to be prepared to demand and organise for non-violent confrontation (that is, we will be non-violent – the state will not be). In the meantime, there will be a re-arranging of the lifeboats whilst the Titanic goes down (did I mention that our financial piracy was a function of rapidly diminishing cheap oil?) By the time the Unconscious masses realise, I will be too old for the barricades! O well, perhaps next time! 😀

                • Kathy says

                  Ah yes, The shadowy kingdom within a kingdom ,The City of London Corporation. There within lies so much of the worlds troubles. Has this City ever released the claws it forced in to the underbelly of the USA after its independence from the UK.or any where else it historically controlled. It manages to function under the radar on so many levels growing ever stronger. A real strong hold for the money lenders fleeing the temple.

          • Mulga Mumblebrain says

            It is easy to list the various individual Evils of the ruling Western psychopaths, in politics, economics, geo-strategy etc. They are Evil nonentities selected for their ability to serve a death-machine, neo-liberal capitalism, that only exists to enrich the few and impoverish the many while setting them at each others throats. They represent moral, intellectual and spiritual Evil, but also power, power that is besotted by destruction and murder.
            Yet, the corollary to rule by an Evil capitalist elite, ecological destruction, is more or less ignored, despite the rising (at last!) chorus of terror and despair from those in the scientific communities who are finally telling the dreadful truth of our terminal plight.
            Nothing now can avert an ecological Holocaust that will kill billions. The only possible ‘positive’ outcome would be, somehow, to save some significant portion of humanity and our ‘civilization’, such as it. Yet even that is simply denied by monsters encouraged further in their omnicidal madness by the rise of Trump, or ignored by greedy plebs too frightened, stupid, ignorant or complacent to open their eyes. Here in Austfailure the National Farmers Federation has, for instance, just recently deigned to ‘accept’ ‘ most’ of climate science, after decades of fanatic opposition. The pressure from actual farmers and graziers facing rapid climate and weather disruption proved too much, at last, to ignore for the sake of ideology.
            Yet the farmers’ putative representatives in our parliamentary bedlams cum moral lazar-houses still deny climate destabilisation frenetically, push coal like a religious obligation, and hate renewable energy and Greenies with venomous intensity. Meanwhile an El Nino brews, which will, on the balance of probabilities, either finish off the Great Barrier Reef this summer or next, or severely damage it. That disaster will occupy a few column inches and some band-width for a day or so, then the Great Undead will sink back into their pre-morbid torpor.

            4
            1
        • Mulga Mumblebrain says

          If Corbyn ever came to power and attempted a mildly social-democrat, anti neo-liberal parasitism and anything but utter craven obeisance to the USA and Israel Government, he would be destroyed. Either economically with runs on the pound, disinvestment etc or by an Establishment putsch, open or covert, or physical liquidation, possibly disguised as an acute illness. As a member of the Five Eyes plus Israel global Imperial forces, the UK can only exist as a member of the Imperium. Meanwhile, the ecological Holocaust hurries near, ever quicker and pitiless.

          4
          1
          • But of course, the whole idea of Corbyn is that he should never come to power. He is Controlled Opposition. The remote control device is in the hands of Likud, and he responds to it very much as poor Kyrano did in ‘Thunderbirds’, when remotely summoned by his Master to act against whatever feeble self-will he could still muster.

        • @Bevin.
          Your arument has some merit regarding the home front but so much Corbyn stood for, he himself has ridden rough shod over, to the point he really doesn’t stand for anything very much at all. NATO, Trident and back pedalling on his economic promises, now the wholly bigoted attack against Russia, how many examples of U turning do you need to have?

      • @Francis Lee
        Thanks for this depressing information. BTW, Blair was and always will be a far right, self serving, narcisistic, power/glory hungry red Tory and absolutely nothing to do with the original Labour Party which was a democratic socialist party until he got his hands on it.

    • Mulga Mumblebrain says

      Habermas is such an Imperial courtier, such a risible nonentity, that one almost pities him. The ruling regimes in capitalist democracies are elected dictatorships, that serve the rich only. That much is so plainly self-evident that the myths created to hide it must be contemptible, but they are also invariably laughable in their non-reality.
      ‘Elections’ under capitalism are farces. Voluntary voting applies in most jurisdictions, with falling turn-outs, particularly in the USA, but obedience to the ‘laws’ produced by ‘democracy’ is, of course, compulsory . In many states, like the UK, ‘first past the post’ delivers ‘landslides’ on small votes by zealots. Cameron gets a ‘great victory’ on 36% of the vote on a 60% or so turn-out, ie 25% or so of the electorate, not even the populace. Political bribes, laughably called ‘contributions’, corrupt the process entirely, and clearly explains the take-over of Western polities by Zionist, ‘Israel First, Last and Always’, interests.
      And the election process itself is a sordid cavalcade of lies, bribes, character assassination, fear and hate-mongering and ever increasing partisan hatred. As we saw in the USA, the Democrats nakedly cheated the true winner of their primary process, Sanders, of his victory, but he, being a sham candidate from the outset, happily rolled over to the feminazi psychopath, Clinton, the one candidate that could lose to the deranged imbecile, Trump. Whereupon he institutes a regime of unprecedented aggression, duplicity, racist viciousness and social sadism, and, in particular, subservience to Israel and King Bibi.
      On July Fourth I heard a sample of six or so Americans interviewed by the BBC, on the radio. The depths of stupidity, ignorance and brainwashed self-delusion were outright comical. Yet I had to remember that these mentally and morally obtunded drones, with their proclamation of US majesty and Exceptionalism, of the USA’s ‘goodness’ and virtue, will be screeching their jingo fanaticism as the Iranians are ‘shocked and awed’, or the next time the Holy Israelis decide to ritually sacrifice a few hundred more Gazan children. And this is a country that it is simply verboten to criticise here in Austfailure, where the entire political, military, intelligence and media establishment are unstintingly obedient to their American masters. Any hint of ‘anti-Americanism’ is treated alike to ‘antisemitism’, another universal crime. Meanwhile the climate destabilisation Holocaust worsens, not steadily, but exponentially. All our conceits, hypocrisies, lies, idiocies and banalities are about to be swept away.

      5
      1
    • HB says

      Shame that the British people are not generally aware that Navalny is widely detested in Russia, as is another recent female presidential candidate, they are not aware that many Russian so-called opposition figures and dissidents, who are treated as heroes in the UK, are in fact scum, bandits and murderers.

      • Navalny’s outbursts of ‘Russia for the ethnic Russians’ don’t get much play in The Graun, do they? He’d seem too much like Gobby Robinson, if they did.

        • Mulga Mumblebrain says

          The USA ALWAYS prefers fascist types as its pet stooges. As well as the vermin Navalny (portrayed here in Austfailure as a hero) you also have the White Knights, similar fascists, in Belarus. As the Zionist thug Gershman who heads the US NED operation to subvert societies around the world, asserted to Congress recently, they play the ‘long game’ in sabotaging societies and installing compliant stooges. And these are the scum who complain of non-existent ‘Russian meddling’ in their depraved society.

  13. “People at the top of the British government have been talking down to Russians as some kind of ‘lesser people’ in a language that invokes the less flattering pages of the not so distant British imperial history.” And in Britain we are coming to realise that they talk down to us in the same way.

    37
    1
    • reinertorheit says

      But in fact they don’t. Russians – as this letter shows – not only display the finest manners in discussing the peoples of other nations – they genuinely hold them in high respect. There has been no ‘talking down’ at all.

  14. JudyJ says

    Such an eloquent, beautifully composed and dignified open letter expressing superbly what many of us are thinking.

    62
  15. Michael Hartley says

    “Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth.”
    The Enemy of the UK lies within the UK – God Bless Russia – God Bless Vladimir Putin – God Bless the Russian People.

    48
  16. Guy THORNTON says

    I spent the last week on business near Baden-Baden. I hadn’t realised that it had such a historic Russian connection – the place is full of middle class Russians. I met about a dozen…and found them all to be …funny, intelligent, cynical, well-mannered, etc…just the sort of people you want to have a drink with. They all appeared politely bemused by the UK & USA governments….although several of them made the same remark…”the thing with USA is there is no-one with any memories of fighting a war on American soil….whereas in Russia and Germany every family has these memories…which is why the thought of war is totally anathema. But Americans see war through the eyes of Hollywood and Rambo.”

    66
    • BDS says

      “Americans see war through the eyes of Hollywood and Rambo.”

      and through:
      – vacuous exceptionalism
      – spilling the blood of brown skin people
      – arms manufacturers’ profits

      The quickest way to achieve peace is to close US embassies everywhere permanently, and quickly.

      20
      • uncle tungsten says

        And after closing the US embassies prohibit or tax all foreign investment banks.

  17. People are waking up to the fact that there is no enemy “out there2. The enemy is and always has been right here at home. The overclass who pull the strings of elected so-called “democratic” governments. Here’s hoping Putin is of some kind of different ilk, a genuine friend of his own people who seeks stability and economic progress within with desire for domination/occupation/theft re external states.
    Our real bosses (masters of international finance) are obviously the very devil.

    43
    • I wish I ßhared your confidence over this “waking up”. Seems to me Mr &Mrs Muggle of Muggleton Road, Muggletown and their transgenderised organic iphone operating hardware, (You can no longer call them chilďren), are petrified of even glancing at the truth.

    • But it keeps dear Mr Stoltenberg in a job, doesn’t it? Along with Gavin Williamson, Britain’s former door-to-door fireplace salesman turned dealer in Weapons Of Mass Destruction. Not to mention the British Ambassador in Moscow, Mr Laurie Bristow – whose public biography on the Embassy website boasts of his graduation from the ‘NATO Academy Of Defence’. Whom does His Excellency serve in Moscow? Since all Consular matters have now been hived off to private contractor, VFS Services Ltd.

  18. Dave m says

    At least Russians have the sense to look at their government’s actions and check the facts, where available(!)
    My U.K. lot are a total embarassment- When Corbyn suggested we wait for some proof re Skripals, he was shot down, not just by his enemies, who are legion, but also his own troops!!
    If QE11 had the power of Vaj the impaler here in Thailand, she could have May and her cabinet taken out and shot…

    26
    • @Dave M. As BigB consistently and meticulously points out, when it comes to dolloping out knee-jerk anti-Russian codswallop, Corbyn sings from the same hymn-sheet as St.Theresa. The only difference, StTheresa slops it out of a gin bottle, JC from a teapot.

      25
      1
  19. Dmitriy says

    I recommend everyone to watch this mini-series “Sherlock Holmes and Doctor Watson” in 1979. Probably, you can find it with an English translation.

    16
    • Mulga Mumblebrain says

      On Youtube-I just watched The Speckled Band, or, as the sub-titles said, the ‘Motley Ribbon’.

      • Ray Raven says

        Had a good laugh.
        “The Motley Ribbon”
        Lost in translation methinks,

  20. I for one apologise to the Russian people for the disgraceful behaviour of the British government towards Russia. As can be seen in the correspondence columns of the Guardian and other UK newspapers my apologies are widely shared. What motivates the British government’s actions is a mystery to me and I can only put it down to its slavishly following the efforts of the CIA in the US to depose President Putin in yet another pathetic US attempt at regime change and so to establish global US dominance by stirring up fake propaganda.
    I can only add that the British government today is composed of weak and foolish people who the British themselves would be happy to see removed as soon as possible. I truly hope that the forthcoming meeting between Presidents Putin and Trump reaches a conciliation of common sense of shared values for the sake of humanity and that the British government need eat its own words as result.

    51
    • pm says

      agreed,…the trouble is we don’t really have a government anymore, just a rabble of brain dead zombies, they’ve become so accustomed to being rude fucking twats to each other, over the dispatch box, that they think they can do the same to other countries

      i watched that disturbing slob mike gapes dishing it out yesterday, of course this vile specimen has voted for all the insane wars, but has absolutely no problems dishing it out about the Russians, they are truly living in some sort of dangerous bubble, as far as I’m concerned I’d jail everyone of them as war criminals and start again, its perhaps the only way Britain can move forward, a clean slate so to speak!

      21
      • JudyJ says

        “vile specimen…” – yep, if I’d been there I would have been first in the queue to wipe the contemptuous smirk off his face.

        • pm says

          ….at Nuremburg he’d have probably been condemned to death, along with his obscene boss, Blair!

      • mark says

        Absolutely right. Is there any British politician (even May and Johnson_more vile and obnoxious than that repulsive faux left toad Gapes? Even hysterical homos like Bradshaw and Bryant don’t seem too bad by comparison.

  21. Harry Stotle says

    You don’t know how lucky you are Vasily!

    Russians only has to deal with Britains corrupt corpo-kleptocracy every now and then – British citizens on the other hand have been getting fucked over on a daily basis ever since 1979.

    51
  22. I waited as a child for the promised hail of destruction from the red menace. I wondered how my school desk would protect me. Maybe from falling debris, but aren’t nuclear weapons supposed to be more of a horizontal thing? My question was answered in the military. If we noticed a nuclear blast, we were to lay facing it holding our steel pots on tightly, then turn quickly to avoid all the flying debris being sucked up into the cloud. I recall wondering how my fingers would hold up. Desks, steel pots? Do they think we are stupid? Yes they do and yes we are. I was warned not to do it, a very long time ago. I didn’t listen. I decided to think for myself and weather the storm. The storm is raging. Desks and steel pots are flying. Yet, with each passing day, I feel more and more deep respect for the Russian people and their current president.

    52
  23. Frankly Speaking says

    Very naive of anyone to think this would be published by the Guardian since “Agent Viner” took the helm and steered it to become yet another fascist mouthpiece with a bit of Identity Politics and Feminist articles thrown in to fool the punters to believe they’re trendy Trotskyists.

    For all intents and purposes Britain has declared a war upon Russia. People need to get their heads around this. The shooting hasn’t started, yet.

    The Peacemakers and Antiwar brigades need to finally pull their fingers out of their arses and peacefully protest en masse week after week after week. This letter needs to be sent to all MPs time after time after time. This letter needs debating in all Student Unions and radio Talk shows time after time after time. And more. Only then is there going to be some chance of avoiding the physical conflict which the fascists are marching towards.

    God help us.

    60
    • Frankly Speaking says

      Just to add that these same fascists have already declared a war upon China and the EU; i.e trade wars and Brexit. Trump and May most likely do not know that they’re representing two sides of the same coin, the coin being minted by the real people in charge behind the scenes.

      India will be the next target as they choose S400 defence systems. Turkey too, they’ve done the same, as they’ll try and knock off Emperor Erdogan off his perch once again next time he’s out of Ankara for a few days.

      Welcome to the “21st American Century”. Or will it be called World War 3 ?

      11
      2
      • Frankly Speaking says

        Most people won’t see Brexit in these terms, it’s been dressed up by the propagandists as freeing up from a dictatorial EU. Anyone who knows the slightest about how the EU works can see straight through this.

        The fascists may be trying to control the EU banking system but they don’t control the Parliament nor all the Commission, which is why they are now weakening the EU via Brexit on the western flank and Polish neoliberals agitating it on the eastern flank, a classic pincer movement.

        8
        8
    • Frankly Speaking says

      By the way, I don’t use the word “fascist” lightly. Some of my family were killed by this type of parasite. The classic defnition of fascism, not realised by many, is the collaboaration between the State and Corporations against the interests of the people. It’s not hyperbole, this is really happening again on our watch.

      17
      • bevin says

        “. The classic defnition of fascism, not realised by many, is the collaboration between the State and Corporations against the interests of the people. ..”

        In Athens that must seem like a pretty clear definition of the way that the EU works.

        18
      • BigB says

        Indeed: ‘inverted totalitarianism’ or ‘communitarianism’ is forming before our very eyes. This is a protectionist (autarchical) community of participation for the exclusive use of the supra-sovereign superclass; the Trans-National Corporations (TNCs); and the oligopoly of the central banking fraternity and the TBTF banks and shadow banking institutions. All finance is becoming circular within these trans-national money flows; making make-believe money from fictitious capital (a classic M-M’ self-maximising valorisation loop). All profit and growth becomes part of the self-maximising feedback loop: in the form of dividends, share buybacks, mergers and acquisitions. The rest is siphoned tax-free offshore. Virtually none finds its way into the general economy. That which does is in the form of liar-loans and odious debt. We are borrowing to spend money to make money. The people’s only function is as a financial Host and safety net: to have and to hold transferred ownership to pay off the unrepayable debt. Or for corrupt politicians to transfer state assets in lieu (privatisation).

        Some fictitious money which does enter the general economy is used to infiltrate and pay-off the think-tanks, the Fourth Estate of the media-culture-industrial complex; and the ‘Fifth Estate’ of the ‘charity’ sector of NGOs and CSOs. These form the inclusive ‘superstate ideological apparatuses’ along with the bought off political, academic, managerial, and theological classes. The ‘superstate repressive apparatuses’ need no explanation. The euphemism for the process is ‘global economic governance’ which intends to penetrate down to the ‘glocal’ level via the polis of the city-state. The more colloquial euphemism is ‘pro-business’. Pro-business is, ergo, pro-fascism.

        16
          • Frankly Speaking says

            I understand where you are coming from Mulga, and there’s a lot of overlap, but this strain of parasitic behaviour is somewhat wider in scope and sophistication and nastiness than what I’d label as neo-feudalism.

            • It is simply the substitution of ‘getting’ for the nature of giving and receiving that characterises a ‘private agenda’ at expense of another and the whole.
              Making scapegoat and hate object is the ‘magic’ by which to seem relatively guiltless and perhaps even divinely sanctioned to make ‘holy war’ – or in simple terms self-righteous ignorance and arrogance that knows not what it does.

    • JudyJ says

      In response to your comments I emailed this open letter to my (Labour) MP with the suggestion that he might wish to read it and pay attention to intelligent views expressed on this website rather than nonsensical and idiotic narratives which emanate from Westminster. I also put it to him that I would appreciate him suggesting to other Government representatives that they do not claim to be speaking on behalf of “the British people” in their condemnation of Russia. I have written to him twice before about Syria/Russia with no acknowledgement whatsoever so I am not expecting this to be any different – but it makes me feel better! Yes, Mr T, if you should happen to read this I am referring to you!

      12
      • Frankly Speaking says

        Well done! Try getting a meeting with him/her. Face to face is much more effective.

  24. Rob Simley says

    Why in the World wouldn’t the Guardian publish this letter? Are they so far into the UK government’s pockets that any kind of even just potential questioning of government propaganda is forbidden? What is the reason? It is no wonder that the general public no longer trusts the MSM!

    49
    • The reason is quite simple:
      The letter criticizes the media.
      And nowadays the Graun is as much ‘the media’ as are The Telegraph, The Daily Mail and Good Horse-keeping…
      Somewhere, in a memorandum which might be declassified after 30 years, one could probably even find precise instructions for how to deal with information and comment which does not fit in with the mainstream ‘narrative’.

      • JudyJ says

        “precise instructions…” For the media and politicians alike, those instructions will be very simple…”Ignore it”.

  25. Philip Nash says

    Russians and British are so much alike in regard to perceived bullying by other nations. When Obama threatened Britain over Brexit he inadvertently caused a backlash that led to the Brexit side victory. While it was no surprise that Obama was ill informed about the British reaction to US meddling, it is a surprise that British politicians follow the same behaviour in their attitude to Russia.

    31
  26. rilme says

    That was very good. Clear and civilised. Why wouldn’t Das Grauniad publish it?

    26
    • Jen says

      It was beyond their current level of reading ability and comprehension. No surprise there.

      23
      • Vien me says

        Clearly, it is not their reading ability that stops them from behaving humanely and stops them from publishing a wonderful letter/article like this one.

        It is the in-house war psychologists that infested their headquarters who refuse to publish good stories about Russia.

        It is the Faustian pact they made with the spooks who are agitating for more wars for profits.

        29
        • Mulga Mumblebrain says

          Here, in Austfailure, the veritable arse-hole of the world, I can recall very, very, few positive stories about the USSR, Russia under Putin or China, Iran, Cuba, Venezuela etc, EVER being published in the fakestream media-perhaps a handful, although I am at a loss to name one . A few grudging reports on the World Cup not being the predicted horror, hardly compensate for the scores beforehand demanding it be called off. Otherwise it is 99% negative, often, increasingly often, crazily, dementedly, hatefully, so. The Groupthink of the ‘Free Press’ is nothing if not totalitarian.

          26
          • Mulga Mumblebrain says

            Latest example, from the regime-run SBS, ‘multi-cultural’ TV station, HUGE supporters of the takfiri child beheaders in Syria-‘The latest on the UK novichok scandal-Britain demands answers. Russia WON’T give them’.

            17
          • Vien me says

            ” Airbus chief says [UK] ministers have ‘no clue’ on Brexit ”

            If that was said in Australia, they would arrest him and charge him with endangering the National Interest, wouldn’t they?.

            • uncle tungsten says

              Thank you Mulga Mumblebrain and Vien me, the aussie federal police tried that same type of staged BS on a Doctor in Queensland after they had been bullsh!ted by a visiting MI5 moron. After their farce was pilloried relentlessly in the independent blogosphere and a court appearance they paid millions in compensation. The MI5 moron got away free as it was likely a deep state stunt. It was a time of full tilt hysteria led by ALL mainstream media in oz and particularly the murdock muck sheets.

              Australia has amnesia on the subject of national interest, it only remembers USA interest and remains slavishly committed to it.

            • Mulga Mumblebrain says

              Oh, yeah-he’d no doubt be working for the Evil Chinese, the enemy du jour.

  27. Fair dinkum. says

    It’s far worse than “Un-British’ Vasily.
    It’s inhumane.
    Typical behaviour from the One Per Cent.

    44

Please note the opinions expressed in the comments do not necessarily reflect those of the editors or of OffG as a whole