'If Liberty Means Anything!'

EDITORIAL STATEMENT: A STATUE of George Orwell stands outside Broadcasting House, the headquarters of the BBC, in London. The wall behind the statue is inscribed with Orwell's words 'If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear'. Although the statue was not unveiled until 7 November 2017, the Northern Voices blog, and before that the magazine of the same name, was established to be a concrete manifestation of that same sentiment. We do not have an alignment with any political party and have a scepticism about the activities of many politicians. It will be apparent to readers that our contributors have left of centre allegiances. This covers a spectrum of libertarians, trades unionists and democratic socialists. We believe that everyone has the right to have a different viewpoint from ourselves and from others, irrespective of who they are, and no one should be prevented from expressing that viewpoint, even if we or others disagree with it. This does not place upon us any obligation to publish material which is abusive, unsubstantiated or merely an assertion. However often an assertion is repeated, it does not make it true. In commenting on the views of others we avoid overused terms like, racist, sexist, homo-phobic, trans-phobic, islamo-phobic, anti-semitic, fascist, nazi etc, and object to their use in contexts where they are little more than abuse intended to intimidate others into remaining silent and so stifle debate on contentious issues. If anyone reading this blog objects to what one of our contributors has to say then we encourage them to write a comment. Unless they can provide some evidence more substantial than their own opinion about the nature of the content, it is unlikely that it will be taken down or altered.

Who is now 'The Left' and what about the workers?

beware long angry rant

by Dave Douglass
  
David Douglass worked as a coalminer in the coalfields of Durham and South Yorkshire, and was NUM Branch Delegate for Hatfield Colliery from 1979.  He appears in the documentary The Miner's Campaign Tapes to discuss the role of the popular media in the strike of 1984–85. In 1994–95 he was Branch Secretary at Hatfield Main, but after the pit was privatised the NUM no longer had any recognition there.  Dave was also until the 12th, August 2019 a Friend of Freedom Press, the anarchist publisher.   
*************************

SINCE Thatcher and Major decimated Britain's industrial base there has been a seismic change in 'left' perceptions, and who exactly speaks for 'the left'.  Consistently the working class itself, self-consciously advancing its own interests not only embraced the politics of social change, anti-capitalism, and socialism, it determined for itself the how and what of strategy, tactics and general social outlooks.  The middle class 'left' the liberals the paper sellers in general stood in awe at the mighty columns of organised labour and respected 'the workers' as people who knew what was best for the class but knew who the class was and how it thought.  All other struggles and oppressions and individual hardships suffered by this or that specific, sexism or racism as symptoms of capitalism not necessarily overthrown by the end of capitalism were nonetheless subsumed into the overall class struggle, that being the struggle of the working class itself.

Some tectonic plates however have shifted, and we find now on issue after issue 'the left' is not by enlarge represented by horny handed sons and daughters of labour, nor yet the mass of intellectual or technical white-collar workers.  Almost at every stage 'the left' now confronts the opinions and politics of the working class , by 'the working class'  I am not talking figuratively here, I mean literally the folk who labour by hand and by brain , the working class communities, though mostly these are now post-industrial centers of unemployment and social deprivation.  These are the heartland of the working-class traditions with conscious class struggle halls of fame.  The left now isn’t us, not these people, the left is now the army of middle-class liberal leftists who deem to speak on our behalf and know what’s best for us. In order to do this they have of course to confront our own attitudes and outlooks and conclusions, so consistently over the last twenty years 'the left' has defacto become 'anti the working class' at least how we express our opinions and outlooks and conclusions.  

Any collection of normal working-class folk expressing opposition to what currently passes as left politics, is likely to be designated 'far right' or any of the numerous 'isms' which separate us out from the shining paths of liberal agendas.   Often the aspiration of the 'left' is synonymous with that of the state itself, on issues such as remain or leave the EU, or racism, transism, censorship, safe spaces etc.  So often the 'left' has become the cheerleader of the state singing off the same hymn sheet and forgetting the most fundamental principle of class warfare, to keep an independent identity from the state and its interests. The bleating of the 'left' over social distancing, scooting folk out of the parks or beaches, crying for harsher and longer curfews and abandoning any notion of civil liberties and social freedoms.

The Trade Union movement now that the big militant industrial unions like the miners and shipyard and heavy engineering proletariat have gone and construction workers and car and others have paled into insignificance, it is the white collar and professional unions which dominate.  Not that the nature of the work union members do, or even our opinions matter too much.  The unions and the TUC are now dominated by middle class liberal agenda's, re-education classes, PC speak schools, and making policy fit the liberal middle class left agenda is now the dominant 'culture' of the TUC. it is doubtful how far workers are actually allowed to express their opinions on subject like Brexit with unions like UNITE and GMB swinging in behind leave agenda's despite their rank and file's opinions (RMT and ASLEF were exceptions).  The passing of anti-radical feminist policies denying the existence of women as a biological sex, even in the Women’s Commission of the TUC is a case in PC point.  You could cite almost any major issue over the last twenty years and the so-called left will have drawn the opposite conclusion to the bulk of the actual working class and particularly the traditional working class, postindustrial communities and regions.  Brexit comes to mind, but then also the degree of hysteria and anti-industrialization in response to climate change is another, the remain position of the PLP and NEC and host of bright young mainly southern middle class liberals in the Labour Party itself, Identity politics and the trans impositions, and oddly the lock down and attitudes to withdraw of civil liberties and rights . There is now a miss match between those who see themselves as the left leaders of the working class and the working class itself.  The attitude of the current left tends be one of 'fuck em' if they won’t do as we tell them, they are all Tory, racist, xenophobic, sexist, transphobic, fascists anyway.  They appear to find the working class and engaging with our politics at large, entirely superfluous. In one way, it was this contempt for the opinions of the working class communities which led to the surprising victory of the Tories, the belief that Brexit- committed communities in the rust belts who were the heartlands of Labour support would never vote Tory and could therefore be ignored.  Actually I was one who swore they would never vote Tory too I knew they were never going to vote for Labour on a remain anti-industry program, but the degree of their anger transcended for the space of time it took to put the cross on their deep hatred of the Tories over generations of struggles.  The left is now expert at painting the working class into corners charging us with racism, and empire loyalism monarchism and patriotism and other such absurdities.

The statue toppling hysteria sweeping the nation, no I understand not many are being knocked over by groups of Simon pure iconoclasts, but the fear that they will and the fear of being regarded as reactionary, or racist has panicked City Councils into the pre-emptively felling them themselves. Let’s be clear I have no attachment to any of the victim statues thus far and I doubt that I will shed any tears for any on the secret hit list. What rattles us is that someone else has come along and imposed these judgements upon us, that without public discussion and debate a group of unelected vigilantes can decide what is 'appropriate' for us to continue to view.  

Cities are being scoured.for offending masonry and brass and any obscure imperialist lackey can now pay the price. This is an attempt to sanitize history it is an attempt to make the nasty history go away and remove memory of it, when clearly we should be doing the opposite. They were erected within a social and political context and thankfully that context has now changed , the statue though is a reminder of social attitudes and politics of the past , as long as there is adequate information boards alongside there is no reason why they need to be removed.  The statue of Nelson in Trafalgar Square is a case in point, was Nelson a distinctive character of history who served the state and the cause of his country as he would have seen it at the time?  Obviously, nobody today including the ruling class would aspire to empire building and defense and colonialism which they did at the time, almost anyone with a brain cell knows this is a historical monument in a historical context.  Actually it is quite interesting from a social history point of view, walk round the base plinth and look at the images of the seafarers in the height of the battle, look at the racial composition of the crew and the ages of the lads running through bombardments with gun powder for the guns, there is a clear presence of black seamen and boys, volunteers earning their freedom from slavery serving 'their' country.  Statues and plaques are interesting platforms for discussing history and understanding it.  Following the logic of the liberal iconoclast would surely see the pyramids fall and the colosseum?   There are already moves afoot to move the statue of the emperor Constantine from York, it appears the guardians have suddenly found out Roman Society was based on slavery, there noo !   I think most of us knew that, it really doesn’t make us want to run through the country uprooting all the many Roman monuments and remains for fear we upset.  Well who exactly?

Churchill and the miners existed in mutual hatred and class warfare, as miners children right through the post war period and before we were raised on stories not so much of Goldilocks and three bears, but Churchill and Tonypandy, and 26, and his hatred toward us.  Was he due his distinctive Mohican grass haircut and spray-paint during the class war protest of a few years ago?  Of course, he was.  Was he a distinguished member of the British ruling class and a memorable character from history, of course he was.  A statue of him in the coalfields would be blown to kingdom come, but outside parliament is fine by me, of course when we the miners pass it, our tale our history in regard to him is somewhat different than the ones told by the tour guides (incidentally see:  'The Day Britain Said No' a more clear sighted history of Churchill) and dauntless any demonstration by the working class or radical movements will find expressions of class war on the statue and plinth, no problem here.

Can I warn against allowing a simple 'hit list' of statues and monuments and plaques as this will always favour those opposed to and rarely those who defend, not least because the defenders won’t know whether or not they need to do any defending or whether someone is attacking something they think is valuable. Can I also warn against taking at face value accusations against particular historic figures, these may well come down to poor research or a particular political or cultural or class interpretation.  Scratching around for something to link Tyneside and the river and the region with the Slave Trade in order that we too might be suitably contrite and consumed with self-guilt, on the day of the first, BLM demonstration in Newcastle,  Look North focused on Blackett Street.  Repeating a poorly researched piece in I think the Journal, talking about Newcastle and the slave trade, the author firstly couldn’t even spell Fredrick Douglass's name right ! But then went on to talk about Blackett having made his fortune in an offshoot of the slave trade by importing Rum.  A totally misguided image was thus conjured up enough that now the name Blackett Street is now on some hit lists. Let’s be clear Blackett was a Liverpudlian , Liverpool being certainly a center of the slave trade though also strongly working class opponent of it. Blackett had started as a young merchant apprentice to his Cousin who did make his fortune in slaves, but he himself didn’t. The fortune and business and wealth of the river, city and region was coal not slaves. Of course, at this time boy miners from six years old worked in the mines, bonded to the coal owners and not allowed to run away or be employed elsewhere on pain of imprisonment the blacklist and starvation. This is the wrong sort of slavery of course, since these children who happened to be sometimes white, if they found time between the 18 hour shifts to get bathed and eat and sleep.  Doubtless some middle-class liberal PC wit will tell us they had 'white privilege' although I’ve never discovered just what that was.  It’s almost certainly true Blackett would have received cases or barrels of rum from his cousin, all rum consumed worldwide was based on the slave trade , as was tea, and cotton and much else, but this wasn’t how fortunes were made on the Tyne or Newcastle which were NOT part of the slave trade other than living in a country and state which overall was.  We had no specific connection and the penitents ought to stop scraping the bottom of (rum) barrels to find one.

The problem with a witch hunt is once you start looking, the world is full of witches.  All Judeo-Christian traditions including Islam have condoned slavery.  Neither Mohamad or Jesus condemned it or banned it or spoke or instructed against it, the bible euphemistically refers to master’s 'servants' rather than the slaves they actually were.  Paul went further and instructed the slaves not to disobey their masters and work hard for them.  This means all religious statues, churches, temples in that tradition Islam, Judaism, and Christianity could be charged with complicity and excusing slavery worldwide and therefore should be removed and shut down.

Modern morality imposes strict age limitations on sexual relationships, courtship and marriage, all sorts of outrage and repudiation is heaped upon those who breach the law or the consensus, but history had no restrictions especially on kings and queens.  If the trend is to take modern values and mores back into ancient history regardless of context and understanding of past society, the censorship of past artifacts could be unlimited.  How many kings and queens have been under 16 or were not even teenagers when they married,?  How many preteens and even on occasion babies, were married?  The whole of European history as it is represented could be shut down.

So, buildings, paintings and statues and books and even the history of such times could be banned and removed from view or knowledge.  The young comrades of the Chinese Red Guard during the so called 'cultural revolution' in their enthusiasm for change, destroyed swathes of ancient Chinese heritage believing it was keeping China in the past. it wasn’t of course, as the miner’s slogan says 'the past we inherit the future we build'.

 We have to acknowledge that Britain was a long time Imperialist and colonialist state, it invaded other countries, it imposed empires it suppressed other cultures and peoples, throughout that long period of the 'empire of which the sun never set' statutes and heroes of the time were built and commemorated. If the attempt is to be allowed to remove all markers to these people and any attempt to see them in historic context then essentially any appreciation of history will be impossible. All statues of Victoria and all other imperial monarchs, generals, wars , must be removed, Lord Collinwood springs to mind, certainly no Mr Nice Guy to his crews. Baden Powell the founder of the scout movement, unsurprisingly an imperialist empire loyalist, was not put up for that reason, but for founding the international scouting movement.  Shock horror they now discover he condemned homosexuality, but society condemned homosexuality, it was highly illegal and poor souls rotten in jails, were beaten and murdered for the offence, that was the injustice of the period in which he lived. Also as man trying to found an organization of little boys would hardly be a public advocate of same sex relationships would he ?, pedophilia being synonymous with homosexuality in those days.

A controversial figure in history, not particular Mr Nice Guy might well still be important corner stones of history and events and worthy of marking. I would expect that if Adolf Hitler had been born on Pilgrim Street Newcastle a plaque at least would mark this fact, that would simply be a historic marker and not some celebration or badge of honour.

The miners have particular reason to remember our slavery and oppression and see in the character of Lord Londonderry in Durham City Centre a monument worthy of removal, but how would that serve our history?  That statue allows us to tell that story, and to demonstrate that the same history can have at least two versions and two sets of facts.  I use it often given on the stump lectures.

 ******************************

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

Would the election of Long-Bailey lead to witch-hunts in the Labour Party?

Rebecca Long-Bailey
By Derek Pattison

Rebecca Long-Bailey is Unite's choice for Labour's next leader. In their Spring 2020 issue of 'unite Works' the magazine for Unite members, Long-Bailey, a 40-year-old Roman Catholic Salfordian, is described by Unite general secretary, Len McCluskey, as having both "Brains and brilliance." 

The article, or should I say, panegyric, tells us that Long-Bailey, the daughter of a dockworker, grew up in working-class Salford and before going to university (to study politics and sociology) and becoming a solicitor, had worked in various odd jobs including a pawn shop, call centre, furniture factory, and as a postwoman. You might say that 'Becky' has pulled herself up by her own bootstraps, or that is what we're led to believe. Unite members are told of her gastronomic delights, a Chinese takeaway, sweet and sour chicken balls, fried rice, chips and curry sauce. According to Long-Bailey, what distinguishes her from the other Labour leadership candidates, is "her deeply-held socialist beliefs." She says:

"My politics are very specific. I've always been true what I've believed in. I was one of the first MPs in 2015 to give a speech where I said I was proud socialist. At that time, that was unheard of."

Rebecca Long-Bailey became the Member of Parliament for Salford and Eccles at the 2015 General Election. She has served as Shadow Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy in Jeremy Corbyn's Shadow Cabinet since 2017. Many of her more controversial comments and views were not dealt with in the Unite interview with her, so here are some key facts to focus on when holding your nose and voting for Long-Bailey.

Long-Bailey would like to see Luciana Berger return to the Labour fold even though she stood unsuccessfully for a rival party, the Liberal Democrats, at the last general election. She would also like to see Alistair Campbell, Tony Blair's former spin doctor, return to the party even though Campbell publicly admitted to voting Liberal Democrat at the last election. 

During the campaign for Labour leader, Long-Bailey announced that she had signed up to the Board of Deputies of British Jews ten pledges, or 'Ten Commandments', aimed ostensibly at tackling anti-Semitism within the Labour Party. Thousands 0f people called on her to oppose the 10 pledges which they fear is aimed at censoring criticism of Israel. During an interview with Robert Peston in February, Long-Bailey was asked by Peston: 

"Do you regard it as anti-Semitic, to describe Israel, its policies or the circumstances around its foundation as racist because of their discriminatory impact? Is that an anti-Semitic statement?

Long-Bailey replied, "Yes," and then Peston pointed out that the Labour Leader, Jeremy Corbyn, had said that statement is not anti-Semitic.

A Roman Catholic, Long-Bailey has said that she opposes the law on abortion after 24 weeks on the grounds of disability arguing that disability and none disability should be treated equally. She's also said that though she believes in a woman's right to choose, she "would never contemplate abortion." What seems curious, is why a Roman Catholic, should be in favour of abortion at all and why Long-Bailey should support same-sex marriage which many Christian's consider reprehensible and contrary to scripture.

Among her other pledges, which Long-Bailey took on board and signed up for, was the bizarre '12-point plan' initiated by a group called 'Labour Campaign for Trans Rights'. The plan, (which is likely to lead to women Labour Party members leaving the party in droves if it ever becomes Labour policy) demands the expulsion of anyone deemed to be espousing "bigoted transphobic views" and names 'Women's Place UK' and 'LGB Alliance' as 'transphobic organisations' that must be opposed. Women's Place, which is comprised of Labour Party members, wants to keep 'women-only' spaces' and denies being transphobic and says the accusation is defamatory.

As a member of Unite the Union, I emailed Rebecca Long-Bailey on 9 March 2020, to give her the opportunity to explain what she really understood by 'bigoted transphobic views' and sought her view on some aspects of the transgender issue (see below). I was curious why a Roman Catholic would want to expel Labour Party members who insist that a person's sexuality is biological and not something that can be self-assigned or embrace such ideological idiocy. To date, I have not had a response to my email.

Long Bailey has called on Unite members to vote for her in the Labour leadership election and says that "Labour will need a leader (who) will be able to tackle Boris Johnson at the dispatch box", and told Unite members: "I don't think he'll be able to handle a northern, working-class woman with a forensic eye for detail."

Len McCluskey believes that Long-Bailey "has the brains and brilliance to beat Boris Johnson", but if Long-Bailey cannot face or avoids answering a couple of questions from a fellow Unite member, I don't think Mr Johnson has much to fear from facing Ms Long-Bailey at the dispatch box. No wonder up to 50 MPs have threatened to resign if Rebecca Long-Bailey is elected Labour leader, which now seems highly unlikely.


Dear Rebecca Long Bailey,
I am a member of Unite the Union and have a vote in the forthcoming Labour election contest. My union has given support to you but I am not sure that I share their confidence in you as a possible and credible leader of the Labour Party.
You recently signed up to a campaign (a 12 point plan), that calls for the "expulsion from the Labour Party of those who express bigoted transphobic views", and you called on Labour Party members to support this campaign that deems the organisation 'Woman's Place UK' to be a trans-exclusionist hate group.
As I am rather concerned with the way in which ideological madness and the denial of objective reality seems to have gained a foothold in the Labour Party, I would be grateful if you would answer the following:
If a Labour Party member was to declare that a man cannot be a woman because he has a penis, and cannot be a woman because he cannot menstruate, give birth, or go through the menopause, would you as Leader of the Labour Party, call these views 'bigoted and transphobic' and would you support the expulsion of this person from the Labour Party?

Can I also ask if you also support the view that if a man self identifies as woman and commits sexual offences against women, he should be treated as a woman offender and if convicted, sent to a woman's prison?
Yours sincerely,
Derek Pattison

Labour’s betrayal of women,

 children and homosexuals.

What do you do if you abhor Tory politics but there’s nobody else to vote for?

Bea Jaspert

Feb 16 · 6 min read

Illustration by Ailin Rojas Bondarczuk

WHAT do you do if you are appalled by the imposition of austerity on the poorest and most vulnerable alongside tax breaks, perks and freebies for the rich, inherited wealth and big business? If you are sickened by the scapegoating of immigrants, the demonisation of foreigners, the denigration of the poor, the criminalisation of black people, the cronyism, the profit motive as god over all other considerations etc — but the only opposition party with any hope of ever beating the Tories at the polls has signed up to a misogynistic, homophobic cult?

That is the Hobson’s choice facing women, and those who support child safeguarding, women’s sex-based rights, and the sex-based rights of homosexual people.

It is also the choice facing anyone who believes in freedom of speech and freedom of expression as fundamental democratic rights.

Labour Campaign for Trans Rights last week issued a contentious series of pledges — contentious for a number of reasons:
1. They define “transphobia” as dissent with ‘gender identity ideology’.
2. They slander Womans Place UK — a grassroots group campaigning for female sex-based rights, and LGB Alliance — who campaign for homosexual/bisexual rights, as “transphobic hate groups”.
3. They call for the expulsion from the Labour Party of all dissenters.

READ MORE:   https://medium.com/@BeaJaspert/labours-betrayal-of-women-children-and-homosexuals-90c724c1c0d0?fbclid=IwAR0XL_LVfRUKt3AH_ly1RAjeCr9iWZkKB2gFAm6OCutRo5VwvO-vJc1cyNc

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

Freedom of Expression & the High Court Decision

from Steve Starlord

A CLASH between the Right to Freedom of Expression in relation to Harry Miller's alleged transphobic tweets recorded by the police as a 'non-crime Hate Speech'.

Police officer’s ‘transphobic’ tweets were lawful, high court rules in landmark case (14 February 2020)

https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2020/02/14/harry-miller-police-officer-transphobic-tweets-lawful-high-court-trans-media-watch/

Police officer’s ‘transphobic’ tweets were lawful, high court rules in l... Harry Miller, an ex-police officer accused of 'transphobic' tweets, has won a partial victory after a High Court... "Police officer’s ‘transphobic’ tweets were lawful, high court rules in landmark case" Not yet spotted anything else online about this apart from this article on Pink News. I've just seen it announced on BBCNews24 on TV. I mentioned this website the other day when we were chatting in IKEA. Police transgender rules breach right to free speech, court told (20 November 2019) https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/nov/20/police-transgender-rules-breach-right-to-free-speech-court-told Police transgender rules breach right to free speech, court told Owen Bowcott Ex-officer Harry Miller taking legal action after being accused of hate incident "Police transgender rules breach right to free speech, court told Ex-officer Harry Miller taking legal action after being accused of hate incident" ********************************************

WITCH-HUNTS! or WHICH-CUNTS?

Echoing Big Mick Bakunin, JOHN COOPER CLARK might say:  
'Distruction is a Creative Urge 
'Transgender is the way of the World! 
'August is the silly season,
'So do away with the patriarchal penis, 
'Cultivate a matriarchal cunny-become a Cool Dude!
'Distruction is a Creative Urge!
'So let's have a bit of a Purge!'
 **************
CONSTRUCTIVE DISMISSAL ON THE FREEDOM CENTRAL COMMITTEE
Trans-maniac Trauma Grips Friends of Freedom
by Brian Bamford

THE WEEKEND in the run-up to the Glorious Twelfth day of August, and the start of the shooting season for red grouse (Lagopus lagopus scotica), was this year a busy and anxious time for the secretary of the Friends of Freedom Press Steve Sorba.  On Friday  the 9th, August Secrretary Sorba sent out a message to all of his fellow directors urging them all to give some thought to some facebook comments of one of their colleagues which he thought 'transphobic'.

 Here Comes a Dynamic Duo: Batman & Robin

FREEDOM since the departure of the wayward, Andy Meinke last year, has been run as a kind of Sorba and Saunders' show, with seemingly Simon Saunders pulling the Director of the Friends of Freedom, Steve Sorba's strings.   They could be likened to Batman and Robin staring in a matinee Comic Opera, the problem for the average commentator is deciding which is which.  

It this latest case the allegations of 'transphobia' against the distinguished former militant miner, Dave Douglass, has been made by the posh East Anglian former public schoolboy (in the USA this means 'private schoolboy') Simon Saunders, who now presides over the so-called 'Freedom collective', which busies itself with day-to-day management at Freedom Press.  Some both here and abroad will think this odd.   On the 9th, August an e-mail from Secretary Sorba, based on a complaint from posh boy Simon Saunders, spells out the dilemma in Steve Sorba's communique to his fellow Freedom Friends of Freedom Directors: 

'Hi Everyone,'

'I have received a message from Simon [Saunders] that we may well need to reflect on over the weekend. Sorry for the short notice.

'Apologies to David as I would have liked to speak to him in advance but there is no time now so I pass it on below.

'I don’t pick up work emails at the weekend but copy me in using my personal email above if you need to.

'I paraphrase:

'It has been brought to my attention that Dave Douglas has made public comments supporting a pamphlet which is fundamentally transphobic (and in places homophobic as well). Describing trans people as "cocks in frocks", and all just men with mental health issues etc and describes their supporters as a "gang of ponces", which rather than encouraging nuanced or sensitive debate, actively undermines it. (https://tinyurl.com/y3msflq6 )

'The Freedom Collective has a public pro-trans position and has committed to defending trans people against what has become increasingly a form of moral panic where even rights which have already stood for years without comment are being attacked. Having someone who agrees with that pamphlet's approach, which blames trans people for the sum of recent bookfair confrontations and finds transphobic bullying funny elected to the board would place us in an extremely difficult situation.

'Dave's post has been picked up by trans people and he's been accused of having a transphobic position. This means that if he's elected to a Freedom-related post there is every chance the Friends will come in for a lot of criticism and it will stir up yet another useless argument to no good end that I can see. This topic is an extremely febrile one in the movement at large, and essentially by appointing him we'd be causing enormous drama that we (and probably Dave too) really don't need right now.

'No doubt David would like to reply to these comments as I am sure that he is being misrepresented.

I suggest that we await this reply and discuss the matter further on Monday when we all meet up.'

 Readers must judge for themselves who is pulling the strings here?

********

 Saddle Skedaddlers Squeeze Thoughtful Analysis

THE significant paragraph (underlined by me) that gives away Secretary Sorba's own attitude and character is the next to the last one in which he shows his own clear lack of personality:  How can an anarchist with a true spirit of independence run away from a drama or a moral controversy, as Secretary Sorba is proposing here?  It is the spirit of the skedaddler rather than the political radical.  Sorba's own facebook interests show a fondness for cycling, which he shares with his fellow 'Director Friend' Carolyn Wilson.  The Saddle Skedaddlers, if you like are far from noble.

Ofcourse, Mr. Sorba is first and foremost a publisher, a businessman, and not an anarchist, his main relationship with Vernon Richards seems to have been that they both shared a passion for Italian opera.  Sorba  it turned out had the most to gain by the closure of Freedom as a hard copy publication and it is he who wants to keep the premises in Angel Alley as it fits better with his own business interests as a publisher

Posh boy Simon Saunders, who provoked the dismissal and no-platforming of Dave Douglass a retired miner from South Sheilds, has acted in a similar way to the recent pressure put on Hong Kong business community by China's ruling communist party in Beijing when on August 9th (the same day Sorba sent out his message) the Chinese aviation authority [CAAC] accused management at Cathay Pacific of not doing enough to discipline their employees who have been alleged to have been involved in the demos that have hit the territory over the last couple of months.  

The warning from CAAC came shortly after John Slosar, Cathay's non executive chairman, said the airline 'wouldn't dream of telling [employees] what they have to think about something' as it reported profits of HK$1.35 billion ($172m) after two years of losses.

The latest reports from Hong Kong suggest that the pilot, 30-year old Liu Chung-yin, who was arrested with 16 others for allegedly having participated in a violent demo on the 28th, July, has now been detained. 

“If you’re a boss, you’re thinking, ‘Oh my God!’” said Carol Ng of the Hong Kong Cabin Crew Federation, a union that represents airline workers. “‘I just want to do business here.  Now they’re screening my staff.’”

This kind of fear could do real damage to Hong Kong’s economy, Ms. Ng said, “much more than the protests or rallies themselves.” 

The attentive reader will detect the parallels between the Freedom episode with Dave Douglass, a tough northern workingman living in South Shields being witch-hunted and no-platformed by a self righteous middle-class southerner, to the mind control now being applied by the Beijing communists bosses on the workers on Hong Kong.  This may be giving Mr. Saunders at Freedom, a little too much credit, because he merely spends most of his time fiddling with his smart phone and going on Face book like some demented Internet Nosey Parker who is on record of creating a blacklist of veteran anarchists who he thinks should be declared persona-non-grata.  Yet he has been quick to complain when others have described him as a paid Morning Star hack.

I use these terms advisably based both on my own observations of Simon Saunders' body language behaviour when he aided Andy Meinke in bungling me into Angel Alley outside the Anarchist HQ, while the Friends of Freedom sat on their butts upstairs, on reports of his general attitude of entitlement, and overall pushy demeanour in which he comes over as a bit of a boss, and also as a conversational analyst I'm curious about his form of language.  But when considering the recent predilection at Freedom Press for appointing folk who to put bluntly are 'a slate short'.  Readers here and in the USA, should consider the history of Freedom as presented by Chris Draper in his history of Freedom*:  Toby Crowe took the editor's chair around 2000 when Charles Crute (apprenticed by Vernon Richards) was forced out, Mr Crute had looked to involve the Northern Anarchist Network in Freedom so as to broaden both the paper's geographical appeal or to as the anarchist Peter Neville said handing over part of Freedom to the writings and reports of 'Northern workingmen'.  In the end Toby, who was for a time Secretary of the Marxist Socialist Party of Great Britain soon fell-out with the NAN and the solidly northern writers like Derek Pattison; Harold Sculthorpe (a Friend of Freedom); me (Brian Bamford) who was at the time the Northern Editor of Freedom, and quite separately with Chris Draper in North Wales.  In truth Toby came over as a bit supercillious he'd been an infant school teacher giving stars to toddlers, and he eventually moved on and took to the cloth, perhaps the editors that followed Charles Crute felt a little insecure in the editor's chair because monomania seemed to become a feature of the these later editors.  They seemed to be uncomfortable in their own skin  Later when he realised that people in the Anarchist Federation like Gerry Spenser, a civil servant in Liverpool, couldn't deliver the reports or stories from the North he came back to me and begged me to send his stuff:  as Harold Sculthorpe told me at the time: 'Toby wants to be friends, Brian'.  Chris Draper had similar appeals from Toby Crowe to deliver him material. By that time we had lost confidence in him as an editor and Northern Voices was by then being produced by the anarchists up North.

What followed the departure of Toby Crowe has been generally agreed to be a poor editorial effort.  So what began with Toby Crowe ended up with Charlotte Dingle as editor, who at one time boasted that she had 'a border-line personality disorder'.   One of the current Freedom Friends who knew her told me a little while ago that Charlotte was indeed really being modest in describing her condition as 'border-line'.  When recently I described Simon Saunders as having 'a totalitarian mind set' the historian, Dave Goodway, another Freedom Friend director, said: 'many anarchists have totalitarian mind sets'.  Simon too with the aid of his mum has used his somewhat disoriented condition to advance his career.  First at the Ipswich Star and later at the communist Morning Star.* 


During the Spanish Civil War the Spanish communists accused the Spanish anarcho-syndicalist CNT of admitting anyone into their organisation including Fascist sympathisers.  Well, after 2000 Freedom under the influence of Donald Rooum began an open doors policy which quickly led to its decline as a serious publication.   Vernon Richards who had retired to Suffolk told the anarchist carpenter Peter Turner that he was impressed by Toby owing to his IT skills.  These events have been well documented on the NV Blog by Chris Draper.**   

All this reminds me of what Malcolm Muggeridge had said about people like Kim Philby, the Russian spy, when he helped him get a job on The Observer in the 1950s. Of this the journalist Clive Irving wrote:

'Malcolm Muggeridge, a highly entertaining political commentator in print and on television, who had worked with Philby at MI6 during the war. Muggeridge advised Philby to contact the editor of The Observer, a left-leaning Sunday paper that, Muggeridge told Philby, “is that Salvation Army for the ideological drunks and bums of our time”.'

Has Freedom Press in the end become a kind of rest home for 'the ideological drunks and bums of our time'?  Andy Meinke memorably described Freedom as a 'hangout' declaring boastfully that 'Kropotkin started it (Freedom), but we fucking finished it!' 

Why is Secretary Sorba so enslaved by Posh Simon?

Why did he make such a fuss over 'a storm in a teacup'?

SECRETARY Sorba desperately wants to hang onto the Freedom property at 84A, Angel Alley because he wants an address in central London that he can use to promote own business interests in publishing.  Some would regard this as conflict of interest.  But unless one of the other Directors question this he is safe in his key position at the top.  Thus the Freedom show will stay on the road because there is no sign of any challenge from the rather subservient Directors.

None-the-less it is understood that a new Director Nick Heath failed to turn-up at the crucial Freedom Friends meeting dealing with Dave Douglass on the Glorious Twelfth, and it is understood that he stayed away because he resents how he was previously hounded-out as leader of the Anarchist Federation by his Trans community critics only last year.***

Furthermore it seems that three other Friends had concluded before the meeting the the whole complaint about Dave Douglass Facebook comment was 'a storm in a teacup'.  Yet the prime movers on this occasion challenging Dave Douglass was Simon Saunders and his Trans mates, and Steve Sorba wants to keep-in with Simon so what we had here in trade union terms is a case of 'Constructive Dismissal' in which Dave Douglass was elbowed out by Secretary Sorba who told Dave that he had 'Embarassed the Committee (Friends) by his "transphobic remarks".'

Dave in response said that he refuted the claim that he was not 'transphobic', but said that as he didn't want to embarrass the committee of anyone.  Hence he agreed to stand down.

    

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

*  

https://www.ipswichstar.co.uk › news › my-struggle-with-adhd-1-110117

**

northernvoicesmag.blogspot.com › 2016/08 › a-year-in-death-of-freedom

***
northernvoicesmag.blogspot.com › 2018/01 › anarchist-federation-splits

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

Helen is a feminist who holds beliefs based on basic biology

Backing Helen Steel

Letter

Cath Bann, Rikki Blue, Beatrix Campbell, Kate Evans, Simon Fairlie, Peter Le Mare, Rebecca Lush, Dave Morris, Diana Shelley, Theo Simon, Jo Wilding and 363 others

Last weekend [10–13 May], Helen Steel was forced off a protest walk across moors at a camp organised by the Land Justice Network. This happened not because of anything that Helen had done or said at the actual camp, but because individuals objected to views she had previously expressed regarding the impact of gender identity theory on women’s rights. She was told that a decision had been made prior to the camp starting that she would not be welcome.

Although Helen had been at the camp from the first day, she was only told she wasn’t welcome after the ‘action’ ramble had left the camp – leaving her to walk back across the moor alone. Fortunately two comrades walked in solidarity with her, one of them (like Helen) a founder member of the Land Justice Network.

Whether calculated or not, the impact of this treatment was to give a very public and demeaning punishment to someone who has voiced opinions which differ from those of the activists who inflicted it.

None of the small subset of the organisers who were involved in making this decision were prepared to either publicly explain themselves or to give Helen a right of response.

There were others on the site who shared opinions similar to Helen’s who were not asked to leave.

The claimed justification for treating Helen so shabbily was that she is a hateful transphobic bigot. We do not believe that Helen is a bigot.

Helen is a feminist who holds beliefs based on basic biology, that humans are a dimorphic species and it is not possible to biologically change sex. Her view prioritises objective facts above personal subjective feelings when looking at how we should try to change society and dismantle oppressive social constructs such as gender stereotypes.

This was the third time that Helen has been threatened or evicted from political events in this way and others have received similar treatment.

The idea that questioning gender identity theory amounts to bigotry and ‘hatred’ of trans people is justifying the exclusion of people from the movement. The effect of this is that many are afraid to express an opinion on the issue or even to ask any questions about it, and the end result is that most do not understand different perspectives on the issue.

Progressive movements are supposed to work on the basis of mass participation; it is only through the honest exchange of views and varied life experiences that we are able to understand the implications of power dynamics, policies and laws and able to ensure that everyone’s rights are protected.

It is out of order to single out one individual to be excommunicated, hounded, physically assaulted and humiliated for views which many other progressive people in our radical networks share. No comrade deserves to be treated so shabbily, much less comrades whose commitment to social justice is undoubted and who have suffered so many attacks from both corporate and state power.

This has to stop. It is time to make up your mind. Do you really think Helen Steel is a bigot?

Even if we disagree with some of her views, wouldn’t you agree that her motivation is not hatred, but her experiences of sexism and wanting to dismantle it?

Maybe you need to look into the issues and do some reading and thinking before you can decide. Fair enough. But now is the time to do this.

As we’ve said many times before – an attack on one is an attack on all.

If you don’t think Helen is a bigot then you must acknowledge that the way she is being treated by people in our movement is wrong.

We need to talk about this. It is time to speak up.
www.tinyurl.com/peacenews3272

Editor Response: 

PN did ask the Land Justice Network for a response, but none had been received by the time of going to press.

'BOOKFAIRS & BULLSHIT'

a critical review by Christopher Draper

THIS shocking booklet should be read and acted upon by everyone claiming allegiance to anarchism for there are no innocent bystanders.  I was intimately involved when the author was thrown out of last year’s 'Liverpool Anarchist Bookfair' and I witnessed the appallingly authoritarian behaviour of the organisers.  As he observes this was but a single incident in a growing catalogue of oppressive, exclusionary and often violent acts perpetrated by bigots claiming to be anarchists.  The author fairly concludes that, 'Anarchism has pretty much become a Wendy house for children to play in'.

The central argument is that the key role of class in the everyday oppression of millions of people has been displaced by the adolescent politics of personal identity and doctrinaire opinion is imposed and enforced by censorious authoritarians.  'The massive attention paid to identity politics has utterly distracted from attention to real problems and issues in the world – capitalist greed, poverty, injustice, war etc. In this respect, identity politics is the ultimate counter-revolutionary ideology and has utterly divided the left.  Much worse, people are now afraid to say what they think and are being turned off politics for good by this laughable charade.'

The author accurately identifies the takeover of anarchism by poseurs exploiting gender issues to gain a dominant role that enables them to define the limits of permitted opinion, dictate what’s labelled 'hate speech' and who’s excluded for imperilling their self-declared 'safe spaces'.  A determined, dominating minority has been allowed to take over as pusillanimous comrades refuse to challenge bullying behaviour.  I witnessed this lack of solidarity at Liverpool and previously saw the same cowardice at a 'Manchester Anarchist Bookfair' from which other comrades were unjustly excluded.

At the Liverpool workshop from which the author was expelled, as the 'Inquisition' burst in I requested that they circulate amongst comrades present the leaflet the 'excluders' claimed comprised 'hate speech' so vile that their 'victim' be immediately thrown out.  It seemed to me that those attending the workshop should judge whether he needed to be excluded or not but the 'Witchfinders' insisted that he go and the rest of us passively defer to their authority. I objected that this was hardly, 'anarchism in action' and managed to retrieve a copy of the banned leaflet from our 'blasphemous' author before he was led away.

The author accurately observes, 'Anarchist bookfairs have become social occasions for marginalised reality shy people.  They are not progressive or libertarian and are isolated from the real world by maintaining "door policies".  This keeps them and their delusional self-importance safe from most of us outside their social scene.'

And it’s certainly true that, 'This publication is in sharp contrast to the jokers patting themselves on their back in London, who remain – as ever – isolated from the real world but hope to be seen as a credible mouthpiece for current anarchist thinking.'

But the shocking contents of this pamphlet are not entirely warranted or welcome.  Like the author, I am also a 'northern working class anarchist', and can claim even longer allegiance to the cause (approx 50 years) yet I don’t like his language.  Authoritarian behaviour comes in different guises and labelling people, 'ponces', 'idiots' and 'creepy-looking fucked up men' is intimidatory and undermines the persuasiveness of his argument.  I don’t think people should be excluded for not conforming to middle class modes of expression but I do believe anarchists should empathise with others and not needlessly offend. Instead, this pamphlet rejoices in the use of aggressive, macho language; 'cocks in frocks', 'confused fuckers', 'couldn’t give a shit', 'What a fuckin’ joke'!  I personally challenged Pablo, one of the 'excluders' at the Liverpool Bookfair and found him utterly robotic in his narrow-minded bigotry but I don’t think it’s fair, funny or clever for the pamphlet to depict Pablo with, 'I love Franco' and a swastika added to his photograph.

The author is wrong to insist that, 'When people politicise irrelevant lifestyle choices the bigger picture of dealing with class oppression as an argument is just pushed to one side by them as they politicise their insignificant individual decisions as radical positions – such as veganism…' Unpicking the myriad authoritarian, exploitative threads that bind together our oppressive society is an essential, complex, ongoing task that would need to continue even beyond any successful revolution.  I fully acknowledge the political importance of class but I also believe that 'the personal is political' and it is wrong to dismiss other people’s experience of oppression as trivial, irrelevant or less important than our own perception of class.  After all, Russia destroyed Capitalism but maintained authoritarian control.

Anarchism requires more than turning the other cheek or looking the other way and though hundreds signed a petition supporting Helen Steel many more (including some of the signatories to Helen’s petition) looked the other way when less well-known or popular comrades were victimised. Anarchists must take personal responsibility and I regret that the author (or authors) of this publication choose to remain as anonymous as most of the exclusionary 'Witchfinders' they deplore. There’s much of interest and importance in this pamphlet and I would urge comrades to read it and respond by intervening everywhere and on every occasion that you witness authoritarian, exclusionary behaviour.  As this publication never said, for evil to triumph it only takes good men, women and those of gender-fluid identity to do nothing.

 _________________________________________________________________________

 "Shit Wigs and Steroids: Anarchism's (and the left's) Tolerance of Delusion" 

 'BOOKFAIRS & BULLSHIT'

This booklet is an A5 size 24-page critique of identity politics which challenges what it sees as the dominant politics of a 'wannabe' London based elite who are setting themselves up as a mouthpiece for current anarchist thought in the UK.  It claims to be rooted in a northern working-class perspective based on anti-authoritatianism.  It is a collective project that questions what it sees as the 'bogus claims of the transgender headcases' ; it entitles itself under the e-mail address:  newoffensive01@gmail.com

 Price £2 including postage & packing.

_______________________________________________________________________

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