Showing posts with label World War II. Show all posts
Showing posts with label World War II. Show all posts

Monday, 29 June 2020

Let's Talk About The War


by Les May

SIR John Hawkins is considered the first English trader to profit from the demand for African slaves in the Spanish colonies of Santo Domingo and Venezuela in the late 16th century.  In other words he, along with Sir Francis Drake, was a slave traders as well as privateer.

From 1577 onwards Hawkins was Treasurer of the English Navy.  He rebuilt older ship and helped design newer, faster, sleeker, more manoeuvrable race-built galleons’These were the ships that he and Drake commanded when with less than fifty ships they took on and defeated the 130 strong Spanish Armada in 1588.

The stories around this have sometimes been described as forming the ‘foundation myth’ of English identity; plucky little England standing up to more powerful bullies and giving them a ‘bloody nose’Nearly five hundred years later it was woven into another now British myth in Edward Shanks’ poem ‘The other little boats (see below)

On 13 July 1916 my uncle Tom died during the battle of the Somme, when ‘lions were led by donkeys’His name is on the war memorial in Littleborough near Rochdale. Somewhere in Germany there will be memorial with the name of a man who died the same day.  On the island of Tiree there is a tiny graveyard and in it are fifteen stones recording Merchant Seamen whose bodies washed up on its beaches in WW2.   Near Kiel is the Möltenort U-Boat Memorial it records the names of the 30,000 submariners who died in the same war.

In Europe we have learned to live with the knowledge that our past and those who peopled it, were imperfect.  We do not demand that the names of the U boat crew who fought for the Nazis be erased from memory.  We honour them as brave men, like we honour the imperfect men who ran up the beaches of Normandy in 1944.

It is that capacity, to not forget what happened, but also not to hold grudges about it, that gives me a sense of pride in being British.  Perhaps that is just something that my generation, who knew people on both sides who had lived through WW2 and are thankful it did not happen to them, can feel.  Particularly amongst students it seems that it is being replaced by an intolerant and puritanical insistence that only those whose views are deemed acceptable in the present should be remembered. Hawkins and Drake had better watch out.

If I take a somewhat jaundiced view of this it is nothing to how I feel about those privileged academics who, no doubt with an eye on furthering their careers, have decided that ‘the sins of the fathers shall be visited upon us even unto the third and fourth generation’Yes, Hawkins and Drake had better watch out.


The Other Little Boats
A pause came in the fighting and England held her breath
For the battle was not ended and the ending might be death
Then out they came, the little boats, from all the Channel shores
Free men were those who set the sails and laboured at the oars.
From Itchenor and Shoreham, from Deal and Winchelsea,
They put out into the Channel to keep their country free.

Not of Dunkirk this story, but of boatmen long ago,
When our Queen was Gloriana and King Philip was our foe,
And galleons rode the narrow seas, and Effingham and Drake
Were out of shot and powder, with all England still at stake.

They got the shot and powder, they charged the guns again,
The guns that guarded England from the galleons of Spain,
And the men that helped them do it, helped them still to hold the sea
Men from Itchenor and Shoreham, men from Deal and Winchelsea,
Looked out happily from heaven and cheered to see the work
Of their grandsons' grandsons' grandsons on the beaches of Dunkirk.

****************************

Tuesday, 19 May 2020

From whence did social welfare come?

 State Control or Social Initiatives?
 by Brian Bamford
LES MAY engaging with Carl Faulkner's comment and considering the founding of the NHS, writes:

'As my Libertarian friends endlessly remind me there were other schemes in operation even before the NHS was a gleam in anyone’s eye.
'Bevan would have been familiar with the Tredegar Medical Aid Society as he was the local MP. In return for contributions from its members it provided health care free at the point of use. (my emphasis)
'This model of funding was rejected by Bevan.'


Les clearly admires the Attlee government of 1945, which formed the first Labour majority government and in particular he favours its Keynesian approach to economic management aimed to maintain full employment, a mixed economy and a greatly enlarged system of social services provided by the state.  This amounts to a supreme faith in what in the 20th century amounted to Fabian managerialism.  It is a view that after the Second World War prevailed in which it was considered that as George Orwell observed in 1946:  'For quite fifty years past the general drift has almost certainly been towards oligarchy'*   (James Burnham & the Managerial Revolution [1946]).

At that time after the war it must have seemed that big government was onto a winner, and Orwell then felt able to write:  'The ever increasing concentration of industrial and financial power; the diminishing importance of the individual capitalist or shareholder, and the growth of the "managerial" class of scientists, technicians, and bureaucrats; the weakness of the proletariat against the centralized state; the increasing helplessness of small countries against big ones; the decay of representative institutions and the importance of one-party regimes...'

The problem with this approach is that it represented a shift from the capitalist and the dividend grabbers to a 'new boss class' of the technical elite functionaries blessed with cushy jobs and all on a generous state stipend.  As Orwell observed above it became 'the weakness of the proletariat against the centralized state'.  There was still the spirit of entitlement of the elite and the dependency of the working-class.

The difficulty is still that this analysis is too mechanical as well as managerial and top-down.  It lacks an evolutionary grasp of how the concept of social welfare entered and developed inside our culture.

Colin Ward described how the social concepts permeated sociologically:  'Anarchists are frequently told that their antipathy to the state is historically outmoded, since a main function of the modern state is the provision of social welfare.  They respond by stressing that social welfare in Britain did not originate from government, nor from the post-war National Insurance laws, nor with the the initiation of the National Health Service in 1948.'   **
 

Rather as Mr Ward argues:  'It evolved from the vast network of friendly societies and mutual aid organizations that sprung up through working-class self-help in the 19th century.'

This is what is implied by Carl Faulkner in his perceptive comment on this Blog:  'It could be argued that is was predictable that the NHS was established by a Labour government due to it being elected in 1945 - when plans for what was to be called the NHS were well advanced but lost in the mists of time.'

Indeed it was 'lost in the midst of time', as the anarchist Mr Ward explains:
'The founding father of the NHS was the then member of parliament for Tredegar in South Wales, Aneurin Bevan, the Labour Government's Minister of Health.  His constituency was the home of the Tredegar Medical Aid Society, founded in1870 and surviving until 1995.'

It gave medical care for the local employed workers, who were mostly miners and steelworkers, but also (unlike the pre-1948 National Health Insurance) for the needs of dependents, children, the old, the non-employed: everyone living in the district.

A retired miner told Peter Hennessey that when Bevan initiated the National Health Service, 'We thought he was turning the country into one big Tredegar.'  Alas, it was not to be, and as Mr. Ward observes in his brief book:  'In practice the Health Service has been in a state of continuous reorganization ever since its foundation, but has never submitted to a local and federalized approach to medical care.'

More seriously Ward argues 'ever since full employment and the system of PAYE (automatic deduction of tax as a duty of employers) was introduced during the Second World War, the central government's Treasury has creamed off the cash that once supported local initiatives.' 

Furthermore, in keeping with the spirit of local spontaneity Colin Ward suggests:   
'If the pattern of local self-taxation on the Tredegar model had become the general pattern for health provision, this permanent daily need would not have become the plaything of central government financial policy.'

There is a price to pay for the pattern of State funding medical care applied by Nye Bevan and approved by Les May, and it now being played out as different governments enact various outsourcing schemes promote what Ward called 'the virtues of profit-making private enterprise.'


What follows from this debate is what will be the consequences of the pandemic for the psychology of the general population?  Will people look to the state for salvation in fear of a repeat performance of another potential pandemic threat or second wave?  If so, I suspect it will represent a reactionary response to the politics of the pandemic.




* Oligarchy, government by the few, especially despotic power exercised by a small and privileged group for corrupt or selfish purposes. Oligarchies in which members of the ruling group are wealthy or exercise their power through their wealth are known as plutocracies.

**  'ANARCHISM: A Very Short Introduction' by Colin Ward (Oxford) 2004.

*******************

Saturday, 24 February 2018

Enough Said!

by Les May 
******
THE editors of 'Northern Voices' have decided to give this post by Les May below some prominance owing to a level of half-baked thinking, which appears to be developing today in the anglo-saxon world.  Sensing this following the open letter published in Le Monde in January offering an alternative view to the #MeToo campaign, and signed by Catherine Deneuve and 99 other prominent French women, Agnès Poirier last month wrote '...an insider’s guide to French feminism'. In this essay Agnès Poirier comments on the Catherine Deneuve letter thus:
 'In other words, these 100 French women, representing many more in France, argue that this new puritanism (of the #MeToo campaign) reeks of Stalinism and its “thought police”, not of true democracy.  What they refuse to countenance is an image of women “as poor little things, this Victorian idea that women are mere children who have to be protected”, the same one extolled by religious fundamentalists and reactionaries.'
****** 


A number of copycat actresses with an eye on some cheap publicity have announced they will wear black at the BAFTA awards on 18 February to support those ‘fighting’ sexual harassment.

On Tuesday 6 June 1944, 61,715 British men, 70,000 American men and 21,400 men from eleven other nations were landed on the beaches of Normandy.  They were there to start to liberate Europe and the World from the Nazi ideology.  By the end of the day 4,414 were dead and 5,500 wounded, in the fighting which followed.

Can anyone point me to any evidence that General Eisenhower was inundated with correspondence from outraged women demanding that every man accused of sexism, sexual harassment, misogyny, manplaining etc, should be withdrawn from the invading force? 
****** 

 Anonymous said...
This makes no sense whatsoever. So it's fine for men to sexually assault women because men at times have fought in wars? What has the entertainment industry to do with war anyway?
I've read better journalism in the Daily Mail.So now you've gone after women, who's next on your list?

Tuesday, 4 April 2017

Ken Livingstone suspended from Labour Party

KEN Livingstone, the former London Mayor, has been suspended from the Labour Party for another year as a consequence of his comments last April about Hitler and Zionism.  A Labour disciplinary panel found that he had breached the party's rules on three charges.
Some Labour MPs and Jewish bodies are critical of the decision not to expell him.  However, Mr Livingstone believes that he has been 'suspended for telling the truth'.
Livingstone has repeatedly defended his version of events, saying there had been 'real collaboration' between Nazis and Zionists before World War Two.
His case was decided by Labour's national constitution committee, which heard two days of evidence behind closed doors before adjourning on Friday.
A Labour Party spokesman said: 'The National Constitutional Committee of the Labour Party has today found that all three charges of a breach of the Labour Party's rule 2.1.8 by Ken Livingstone have been found proved.
'The NCC consequently determined that the sanction for the breach of Labour Party rules will be suspension from holding office and representation within the Labour Party for two years.
'Taking account of the period of administrative suspension already served the period of suspension will end on 27 April 2018.
'The Labour Party will make no further comment on this matter.'

Tuesday, 28 February 2017

Historian Antony Beevor Could Face Russian Jail

LAST week, the historian  Antony Beevor told  Kirsty Young on Desert Island Discs last week that he may face five years in a Russian prison for his account of the rape of millions of German women by Stalin’s armies at the end of World War Two.
His account, which stated that two million German women were raped, could land him behind bars after Russia made it illegal to criticise the Red Army. 
Interviewed on Desert Island Discs, which will be broadcast on Radio 4 today, Sir Beevor said: 'Technically, I am liable to five years’ imprisonment if I go back. 
'The ambassador explained that the (Russian) victory was scared and obviously the appalling accounts of the rapes undermined the sacred element of the victory.' 
The military historian, 70, incurred the wrath of the Russian government by writing in his 2002 book, 'Berlin: The Downfall 1945', about the mass rape committed by Red Army troops in a defeated Germany. 
The historian, who failed A-level English and history at Winchester College, chose Blondie song Union City Blue and Vivaldi’s Concerto in C Major as two of his discs and Fathers And Sons by Ivan Turgenev as his book.

Monday, 21 November 2016

Avaaz team analysis of 'Trumpism'


WE wanted to write from the heart about what just happened in the US, and what's happening around the world.

 The shock is justified - the most powerful nation in the world will be led by a breathtakingly ignorant, bigoted, violent, pathologically lying, sexually predatory, vengeful, authoritarian, corrupt reality TV star. Those aren't insults, they're facts.

 How is democracy coming to this? How do we deal with it? We want to offer 5 points:

1.Acceptance - we can't wisely change anything about the world or ourselves if we don't first accept it. So take a deep breath, and let's face it. President Trump. And Trumpism striving for power in many of our countries.

2.Holistic Evaluation - I can't find a better phrase for this idea, but our brains have a deep negativity bias. We are easily overwhelmed by fearful focus on the negative, and we make awful judgments when we are. This is how demagogues rise. We can't let it happen to us. So looking at the situation holistically, here's some reassuring points: ◦He's not all-powerful - The US President faces many checks and balances from Congress, the constitution, the courts, his own party, and foreign leaders.

◦He was recently a liberal! - Trump is dangerous, but not a maniac. He has praised Hillary Clinton and donated to her campaigns and many of his positions are more reasonable when you scrutinize them. "Building a wall" is just saying he will physically police the US border. It's distasteful, but not crazy. Much of his party opposed him because he wasn't conservative enough!

◦He's tapped into legitimate concerns - Trump's supporters are not simply a racist ignorant mob. Polls show at least half are people who are well aware of his faults but are desperate for change, hate Hillary Clinton, and are willing to gamble on him.

◦The "people" are not with him - Trump lost the popular vote in the election (he just won through the US's quirky 'electoral college' system). So don't think this was a landslide.

3.Focused Alarm - now that acceptance and holistic evaluation ensure we're not freaking out unproductively, let's focus our concern where it most needs to be: ◦Climate Change- Trump says it's a hoax and wants to tear up the Paris climate agreement. Climate Change threatens our species and we're running out of time - but IF we can make sure that world leaders don't slow down, but speed up, the US alone can't destroy us. The rest of the world will drive a clean energy revolution that will make renewable energy much cheaper than fossil fuels - the US will be forced to switch by simple economics.

◦Fascism - we just don't know what kind of leader Trump is. Is he a Berlusconi, the Trump-like Italian billionaire Prime Minister who was outrageously corrupt and ridiculous but not a fascist? Or is he a Mussolini? We will have to watch like hawks and respond fast to the tell-tale signs of eroding the rule of law, rigging the electoral system, intimidating the media, or promoting hatred of some minorities.

◦Terrorism and War - Trump's instincts in the campaign were to call for things like murdering the families of suspected terrorists and introducing widespread torture. This direction is a gift to ISIS and will fuel the global conflict with militant Islam. His ideas are mostly illegal, but we'll have to watch closely and push back hard - domestically and through US allies - if this erratic man-child uses the US military brutally.

4.It's the Media Stupid - Despite ALL evidence to the contrary, the American public overwhelmingly sees Hillary Clinton as MORE dishonest and corrupt than Donald Trump. This, by itself, is the reason why Trump is president. And it's the media's fault. US network news devoted more time to coverage of Clinton's totally BS email scandal than TO ALL POLICY ISSUES COMBINED. One the one side, we have ruthlessly sophisticated partisan propaganda media pushing Trump, and on the other an 'impartial' media that chases fake scandals and ratings and suggests false equivalence between the sides in the name of appearing balanced. This is the dynamic that gave us Brexit as well. We desperately need a smarter media. Very few organizations campaign on this, and Avaaz needs to.

5.This is a HUGE opportunity, let's rise to it - change doesn't happen in a steady, linear way. We human beings learn best from crisis and calamity. Our brightest lights emerge from our deepest darknesses. World War II gave us human rights and the United Nations. And the darknesses of Trumpism could help us build the most inspiring movement for human unity and progress the world has EVER seen, to not only beat back the Trumps in each of our countries, but to do so with a new, people-centered, high-integrity, inspiring politics that brings massive improvement to the status quo. Let's get to work on it :).

 With hope, and apologies for the long memo,

 Ricken and the Avaaz team. 

Monday, 17 October 2016

Alan Turing story at the Royal Exchange

MAJOR REVIVAL OF HUGH WHITEMORE’S CELEBRATED STORY OF ALAN TURING
 
The Royal Exchange Theatre presents
BREAKING THE CODE
By Hugh Whitemore
Directed by Robert Hastie
 
Friday 28 October - Saturday 19 November – The Theatre
Press Night: Wednesday 2 November, 7.30pm
 
IN a major revival of Hugh Whitemore’s Tony-nominated play BREAKING THE CODE BAFTA award-winning actor Daniel Rigby takes on the role of the mathematical genius Alan Turing. Manchester born Rigby leads a cast of eight in the Royal Exchange’s new production of this compelling play which brings Turing’s story back to Manchester, the city in which he lived, worked and died. Robert Hastie’s new production celebrates the mind of this incredible man revealing the infinite wonder of Turing’s mathematical world and the brutal constraints set against sexual freedom in post-war Britain. The production runs from 28 October – 19 November.
 
In the leafy surroundings of Bletchley Park at the height of the Second World War, a brilliant young mathematician called Alan Turing was working away at a problem. The creation of a machine. A machine that would crack the German Enigma code and win Britain the war. In the aftermath of victory, Turing arrived in Manchester with an even bigger task in mind – the development of the modern computer. It would be a task he left unfinished, publicly humiliated and destroyed by the revelation of his sexuality and prosecution for indecency.
 
Daniel Rigby, who makes his Royal Exchange debut, is a BAFTA Award-winning actor, comedian and writer who works across theatre, television and film. Daniel’s theatre credits include Alan Dangle in the original cast of ONE MAN, TWO GUVNORS (National Theatre/West End/Broadway), THE COUNT OF MONTE CRISTO (West Yorkshire Playhouse) HAMLET (Barbican and tour) and BURIAL AT THEBES (UK premiere Nottingham playhouse). Daniel’s television credits include FLOWERS and BLACK MIRROR: THE WALDO MOMENT (Channel 4), JERICHO (ITV), THAT DAY WE SANG (BBC) and UNDERCOVER (UKTV). In 2011, he won the Leading Actor BAFTA for his portrayal of Eric Morecambe in BBC2’s ERIC AND ERNIE.
 
This year Robert Hastie will take over as the new Artistic Director of Sheffield Theatres. Recent work includes HENRY V (Regents Park Open Air Theatre), CAT ON A HOT TIN ROOF (Theatr Clywd) for which he was nominated for Best Director at the UK Theatre Awards. As Associate Director of the Donmar Warehouse he directed SPLENDOUR by Abi Morgan, and MY NIGHT WITH REG by Kevin Elyot, which also ran at the Apollo Theatre, West End. Other productions include: A BREAKFAST OF EELS (Print Room), CARTHAGE and EVENTS WHILE GUARDING THE BOFORS GUN (Finborough Theatre) and SUNBURST by Tennessee Williams (UK Premiere, Holborn Grange Hotel).
 
The cast of BREAKING THE CODE is completed by Geraldine Alexander, Phil Cheadle, Natalie Dew, Harry Egan, Dimitri Gripari, Mark Oosterveen and Raad Rawi.
 
This Manchester story is supported by local business the King Street Townhouse

Tuesday, 31 May 2016

Is it time to Breed for Britain?


by Les May

IN a recent article I made reference to the fall in the UK birth rate since 1960, and the impact this will have on my children's generation.  But the UK is not alone in this regard.  A fall in the birth rate since 1960 is a phenomenon which is common to all 28 EU countries according to William Reville,  emeritus professor of biochemistry at University College Cork.

In an article headed 'Why is Europe losing the will to breed?' in last Thursday's Irish Times Reville points out that to keep the population of a country constant it is necessary for each woman to give birth to 2.1 children on average.  He provides data which shows that the mean birthrate throughout the EU is only 1.56.  Ireland has the highest birth rate of 1.94 and Portugal the lowest at 1.23, though there are four more countries where the birth rate is less than 1.4.  For comparison the present birth rate in the UK is 1.81.

He goes on to say :

'European societies increasingly are no longer self sustaining.  For example, if current trends continue, every new generation of Spaniards will be 40% smaller than the previous one.  In Italy the percentage of the population over 65 will increase from 2.7% now to 18.8% in 2050.  By 2060 the population of Germany is projected to drop from 81 millions to 67 millions and by 2030 the UN projects that by 2030 the percentage of Germans in the work force will drop by 7% to 54%.  In order to compensate for this shortage Germany needs to absorb 533,000 immigrants per year, which puts Angela Merkel's current immigration policy into context.'

As I have argued in an earlier article this matters because the non-working section of the population, children, older people, the sick and the disabled, rely upon the surplus generated by the fraction of the population which is working.  Such a situation is only sustainable if the fraction of the working, i.e. younger, population is sufficiently high both to support themselves and generate a large enough surplus.

But as Reville points out in the longer term this immigration is not a solution because when the birth rate falls to about 1.5 even immigration will not hold the population steady over time.

Whilst I have focussed upon the fact that for the immediate future there seems little alternative to continued immigration whichever side is victorious in the upcoming referendum, the economic case is only part of the picture.  Large scale migration has an impact upon the host society.

As Reville puts i:
 'European civilisation has given the world many cherished values, freedoms and institutions, including the classical legacy of Greece and Rome; the rule of law; the separation of church and state; modern science; individual freedom; a fabulous heritage of music, painting, sculpture and architecture, and more.'

This too matters, because quoting Reville again:
'European values are not universal and there is no necessary reason to expect other civilisations to adopt these values simply because they come to Europe to partake of the technical and commercial fruits of western civilisation.'  

It is fashionable to ignore such concerns and to dismiss those who raise them as 'xenophobic' or 'racist', but there is a good moral case to be made for taking a more robust approach to immigration.  

Immigration benefits the individual migrant;  immigrants make the journey in search of a better life. 

It benefits a receiving nation like the UK by adding to the workforce and helps produce that surplus which will pay the pensions of those retiring around the year 2030.  But it impoverishes the donor nation especially when the migrant is a well qualified young person who has been trained at the expense of the donor nation.

There is nothing new in this.  After the WW2 the UK needed to produce and export as much as possible, (and build the Welfare State on the surplus).  So immigration from countries like Ireland was encouraged. An elderly friend who died a year ago came from Ireland at the age of 26 in 1948 to work in a Castleton (Rochdale) mill and did not think it an indignity that a medical check was made to make sure she was not pregnant.  Being as she put it 'a big strong farm girl' she was given better paid 'men's work' and became a mule spinner.  And very happy she was to spend the rest of her life here.

In Germany, Angela Merkel's cabinet has approved new measures to help the country to deal with the influx of more than a million new immigrants.  In return for a package providing immigrants with better access to the job market and the creation of 100,000 government funded 'job opportunities', migrants will be expected to undertake orientation and language courses.  The cabinet statement said:
'Learning the German language quickly, rapid integration in training, studies and the labour market, and an understanding of and compliance with the principles of living together in our society and compliance with our laws are essential for successful integration... The newcomers are to become good neighbours and citizens, which will enable us to strengthen social cohesion and prevent parallel structures in our country.'

This contrast sharply with what to date has been the UK approach which has sometimes generated an exceptionalism in the name of multi-culturalism.  Recently Labour MP Chuka Umunna has launched a new All Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on social integration.  Whether it will 'bite the bullet' in quite the way that the German cabinet has I don't know.  Unless it argues the case for investment in integrating migrants into our way of life it may just prove to be another talking shop.

If you don't like my argument that immigration is necessary to pay the pensions of my children's generation the answer is in your own hands.  Go forth and multiply.