Narcissism is not a Third Gender

             by Arthur Brick & friends 

                  

Editorial Note:  We publish the report below after

some consideration.  It raises some serious questions

about the standards of debate on the libertarian left.

We have long been aware of a deficiency among the
British left with regard to addressing truth to power,
but we would have expected the anarchists to hold to
a better quality of journalistic standards.  Yet, our
experience has been that the anarchist media blog put 
out under the title 'Freedom News' has a sadly depressing
tone in the way that it has become a mere megaphone for
a 'trans' tendency, and is too fashionably trendy 
for its own good.  The small 'Solidarity Federation' grouping 
has become yet another addict to this politics of the absurd,
its members Ron Marsden and Phil Dickens are mentioned below 
in dispatches: we know nothing of Mr Dickens but Mr Marsden
was in attendance when 'Arthur Brick' was roughly removed by a gang from a  meeting discussing blacklisting at the Liverpool Anarchist Bookfair on the 7 April, 2018.  

Knowing Ron Marsden we are not surprised to learn that he was cagey and even furtive about supplying help to this victim of discrimination & blacklisting.  

Sitting next to the passive Mr. Marsden someone tried hard to get 
the exclusion of 'Mr Brick' discussed, but to no avail.

This silencing of free debate is becoming a cancer that lies at the
heart of the politics of the far left in the UK.

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

Open letter to Sol Fed’s Keyboard Warrior from 'Arthur Brick'& friends:

Phil Dickens: 'The conflicted tax collector'?

THIS article is in relation to the use of abusive terms adopted by some left wing and anarchist political groups to put down anyone who does not take their opinions on the subject of transgender seriously.  The name calling and abuse of socialists, anarchists, activists etc. living outside their freaky social scenes is a way of them avoiding debate, through fear of their claims being scrutinised.
The article also deals with a pretty insignificant group called ‘Sol Fed’.  We are not sure what they are federated to, as they are almost invisible on a street level, yet they do a great job of discrediting class politics with their absurd adoption of transgender identity politics.  So here we will shed a light on the keyboard warrior.

I was recently asked by a feminist friend of mine if I knew an individual named Phil Dickens. I should point out that Phil Dickens is already a somewhat conflicted individual and I found it amusing to discover that whilst being an
‘anarchist’ he also works at the tax office!   On the one hand ‘smashing the state’ for purely theatrical effect but on the other being a servile state functionary.  I think we can safely call that contradiction and hypocrisy, but it does reveal the level of insincerity regarding the bogus claims of this keyboard warrior.

2. Response to my question.

I was sent a link to his social media outpourings and decided to challenge
him. No sooner had I done so, Phil Dickens blocked me and backed out of answering my question.  After further investigation it would appear that
SolfFed has no platform in which to redress the behaviour of its members.
For example there are no positions in the group such as regional or
national secretary in which you can voice your concerns.

Ron Marsden of Manchester Sol Fed was asked about this when people wanted to address the behaviour of Liverpool SolFed member Pablo who disrupted a blacklisted workers meeting, as it was considered somebody attending did not hold the correct opinions on gender self identification (such was the outrage he saw fit to disrupt the meeting).  This is covered in depth in the booklet 'Shit Wigs and Steroids'.

1. Phil Dickens post and my question.  This makes any external or internal grievance of Sol Fed members go unanswered or conveniently ignored.  Any ‘difficult issue’ is swept under the carpet with the hope it will not raise its ‘ugly head’.  So when we see these ‘members’ (scuse phallic pun!!) advertise ‘women’s meetings’ but are also calling women TERFs (trans exclusionary radical feminists) in public, how are we to take that?

It could be said the SolFed is nothing more than an obscure social group with
a supposed ’workerist’ base. Its older members seem happy with its utter failure to grow into anything meaningful but lets put that comical issue to one side.

However, the issue here is that the term TERF is aimed at women, which is an
affront to working class women who have suffered at the hands of men.  What we are seeing displayed by Liverpool SolFed who perhaps number four people is crude bullying of those not towing a line that is being widely scrutinised elsewhere.  Another example of bullying in full effect is when Liverpool SolFed recently ousted one of their own members who sought discussion on the issue. Members of Sol Fed are clearly cowardly on this issue.

It really does show SolFed’s absurd contradiction on women’s rights. It shows the complete denial of women’s voices over their concerns of men identifying as women and, comically, as lesbians.  The use of TERF as a slur by tax official Dickson shows his contempt for those of us not falling into line with the male
perspective that transgender activists peddle.  It looks like Liverpool
SolFed / Mersey SolFed (all four of them) are sinking in the mire of their own introverted identity politics bullshit. The adoption of a pro trans narrative does not seem to be swelling the ranks of their “disorganisation”.  When we see SolFed publishing articles on class and women, we really are left scratching our heads to the clear contradiction and absurdity of their “politics”.

Will Phil Dickens answer this question:

What names have you got for us Northern Working Class blokes who do not swallow the idea that our fathers, brothers, sons can miraculously be ‘actual women’ through the power of thought, medicine, body modification etc.? What you are holding up as transgender, Phil Dickens, as you insult women (with critical opinions), is transvestism,  Autogynephilia* and a whole set of other
issues.  But you are good at calling people things they are not.  If you had a grasp of radical feminism you would see the people you are abusing are not ‘radical feminists’ merely people with the capacity to consider issues well outside of your narrow field of understanding on issues whilst working for the state in your little tax office.

Ron Marsden:  'Hay que malalingua!'

I see you have had 4 views on your Youtube videos.  I think we can help boost that for you.  Being angry on behalf of others, whilst not looking at the issues, leaves people open to responses like ours.  We politely suggest that the 'toxic tax worker' has a read of this:  https://uncommongroundmedia.com/as-a-transsexual-i-support-dr-eva-poen/ the trans activists.

It is easy to overlook the significance of the arguments adopted by these fringe groups, but tomboys are now pushed into identifying as male, effeminate men are getting swept along with the idea they are female, straight men who identify as women claim to be lesbians.  All kinds of absurd ideas and contradictory thinking are marketed as ‘transgender’.  There is a considerable backlash from
many people in wider society against the absurdity of claims from the trans activists.


There has been a substantial ground shift against the claim of transgender activists because what is actually happening is that many of the young people and significantly young women over the last number of years are detransitioning.  The publicity this is rightly receiving are collapsing the arguments that ‘trans activists’ put forward.  Many young people leaving the ‘trans cult’ are left physically and emotionally scarred by the process of conditioning that led them to consider themselves ‘trapped in the wrong body’.  The physical impact on some has had a catastrophic effect.

When we look at the small groups of individuals who claim to be ‘anarchists/ socialists’ etc. who promote the transgender narrative, what we are seeing is the very clear closing down of actual debate on the subject.  One facet of opinion (they want to personally profit from) is ridiculously over emphasized by them, but any challenging opinion of that one facet is shut out.  How can you claim
to support issues around gender but then do all you can to keep the debate massively reduced.

This is done by abusing people who are a part of that debate, dehumanising intelligent people with insults and shutting down supposedly public events like bookfairs, conferences etc.  What we have seen are people like Phil Dickens, Ian Bone, Freedom Press, Simon Saunders, Alice Flebotte, Dave Downes etc. promoting the idea they are concerned about an issue, ‘gender identity politics’,
but under scrutiny, and without doubt, they are showing no compassion or empathy for those who struggle with gender identity issues.

To use 'TERF' to put critics down is beyond sloppy.  It is weak and derogatory.  You have got to hand it to them that they arrogantly believe they can avoid being pulled up on their contradiction and lack of sincerity.  When people take such an abusive line by calling strangers TERFs or bigots etc. they will be in for a shock when their words are drawn into public debate.  We hope to add to this article and we will by looking at particular individuals who hope to avoid any personal responsibility and publicity for the farcical ideology they push from behind their
keyboards.


* autogynephilia

A sexuality that consists of someone being aroused by the idea of themselves being the opposite sex. Not to be confused with transsexualism, which is a medical condition defined by sex dysphoria.

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

This was written before Covid 19 happened.  As in all negative situations we are seeing positive initiatives come from the chaos:
LGB Alliance https://lgballiance.org.uk/
LGB activists standing up to the transgender nonsense
Boxer Ceiling https://www.facebook.com/BoxerCeili

How We Can Keep the ‘r’ As Low As Possible?

by Les May

WHILST talking on Sky News about the rallies being held in London today the presenter managed to convey the impression, inadvertently I hope, that we should vary our behaviour in accordance with the ‘r’ number, the average number of people that a person infected with the virus causing Covid 19 will themselves go on to infect.

This is a classic case of ‘putting the cart before the horse’ because it is OUR behaviour which will influence the ‘r’ value.  It is what WE do which will determine whether the number of infections will continue to fall or grows exponentially.  Exponential growth will follow even if the ‘r’ number only just creeps above 1.0.

For example if the ‘r’ number is only very slightly higher at 1.01 over a period of two months 1,000 infected people will result in more than eleven thousand new infections, but if it is very slightly lower at 0.99 the number of new infections each week will decline. If you have difficulty in appreciating how small is the difference between these two numbers think of having 99p in your pocket and having £1.01p.  Smaller ‘r’ values will result in fewer new infections and a more rapid decline in the numbers.  In the north-west of England we are balanced on such a knife edge because the ‘r’ value is estimated to be about 1.01.

Based on an analysis of about 20,000 people in 9,000 households it is estimated that in the two week period 17-30^th May, one in one thousand people (0.1%) in the non-hospitalised population were infected with the virus and potentially able to infect others.   In the previous fourteen day period 3-16^th May the estimate was 0.25% of the population.  We can interpret these figures to mean that if we meet one thousand people we can expect at least one of them to be infectious. But there is a ‘gotcha’ in viewing it like this.  We do not know if the infected person will be the first, second…. person we meet, or if we are that one infected person.

Keeping the ‘r’ number below 1.0, and preferably well below this figure, is a job for us. It cannot be palmed off onto Boris Johnson, Dominic Cummings, Matt Hancock or anyone else, as someone who was billed as the shadow minister for health tried to imply in an interview with Sky News.

So what can we do to get and keep the reinfection rate below 1.0? Quite a lot if few are willing to make the effort. For the moment ‘making the effort’ means

not just sanitising hands and surfaces regularly, but also ensuring that we meet up with as few people as possible. That means anyone who we do not share a house with. If we are forced to come into contact with people we don’t live with then we can physically distance ourselves from them so that any spittle that comes from the mouth as they talk will not land on us and we can avoid eating, drinking or sharing utensils with them. Just in case we are the ‘one in a thousand’ who is infected and shedding virus particles we can wear a face covering. Even a home made mask will be effective in preventing your spittle reaching anyone nearby.  To steal a phrase I first heard used by the biologist Jared Diamond, we need to behave with ‘constructive paranoia’ in mind.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/prevent-getting-sick/how-to-make-cloth-face-covering.html

Step by step instructions for making a cloth face mask can be found here:

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/prevent-getting-sick/how-to-make-cloth-face-covering.html

The survey results for 17-30^th May, and earlier, can be found at:

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/bulletins/coronaviruscovid19infectionsurveypilot/latest#number-of-people-in-england-who-had-covid-19

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

Why the ‘r’ Matters

by Les May

IN the context of discussions about the so called ‘r’ value; it is the number of people that one person suffering from Covid19 will infect on average.  In other words some sufferers will infect no one else, others will infect a number of people.  It can be calculated from the accumulated number of infections and how these accumulated numbers change with time, making it a value which applies to populations of potential sufferers.  It could be calculated by tracking of individual cases, but this is not usually done. The two methods may not yield the same value for ‘r’.  The population based method may produce a range of values. Numerically the difference between these values for ‘r’ may be small, 0.7 to 0.9 for Covid19, but the outcomes over say a two month period can be important.

In what follows I have assumed that the average time between someone becoming infected and being able to pass the disease on to others is six days. This is equivalent to ten generations of the virus in two months.

As can be seen from the above table, which has the starting point of 1000 infections and shows the number of new cases each week, the exact value of ‘r’ matters a great deal to the outcome after two months.  An ‘r’ value of 0.9 yields about two and a half times as many new infections as an ‘r’ value of 0.7. An ‘r’ value of 0.5 leads to the virus having no one to infect and dying out within two months.  The actual values for the number of new infections would differ from the calculated values due to the fact that they do not take into account the differing numbers of people a single Covid19 sufferer might themselves infect. This will also mean that when the number of new cases is very low none of them may go on to infect others so the number of new cases would fall abruptly to zero.

For comparison purposes the number of new confirmed cases was reported as 1653 on 2 June 2020.  The total number of cases, confirmed and unconfirmed is estimated to be five times higher.   If correct that would translate into about 18,000 new cases in the next two months if ‘r’ is 0.7 and about 50,000 new cases if the ‘r’ is 0.9 unless ‘test, track and trace’ leads to a considerable decline in ‘r’.

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

Bridgwater Royal Mail Postal Strike

 From Bridgwater Trades Union Council:

100 postman and women at Bridgwater Royal Mail Delivery Office walked out on unofficial strike this morning.

The CWU members are angry that Royal Mail are using the Covid 19 crisis as a screen to attack the strong trade union organisation at the Friarn St office.

Specific grievances are:

1. A manager who has previously twice been removed from Bridgwater DO has been put back in charge.Staff believe this manager's aggressive and anti-union behaviour make him the worst possible choice, when they just want the support of managers to get out and deliver letters and packets to local people as best they can, with many staff on self-isolation and/or sick, and working with, and supporting, some inexperienced casuals.  

2. Staff have been threatened with disciplinary action for "Wilful delay of the mail", which could lead to dismissal, when all they have done is work to their contracted finishing time.

3. Union activists have been followed around the building by managers who have tried to prevent them talking to members at work. 

4. Royal Mail have given notice they wish to rip up all current local agreements with the CWU-agreements that give local postman and women some of the best conditions in the country.

5. The current manager has deliberately tried to provoke trouble by removing the majority of cycles from the office-Bridgwater is the last office in the UK to use them.

The action this morning was supported by 100% of the union members at Bridgwater-a workplace where 99.7% of postman and women are union members

They have taken this action as a last resort-Royal Mail must now re-consider their whole management strategy at Bridgwater and appoint managers who are prepared to work with the union, not try and destroy it.

At 12.30pm this afternoon CWU members voted to go home for the rest of the day.

The strike will now go into its second day.

Senior CWU Officials are now involved to try and resolve this serious situation."

Further info Dave Chapple, Bridgwater Trades Union Council  on 07707869144

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

The Dress Rehearsal Not The Show?

by Les May

EVERY year we have a ‘flu season’.  It runs from week 40 of one year to week 20 of the next. There are two peaks, one before Christmas and the other after. Sometimes these are caused by different influenza ‘types’.  People like me toddle off to the medical centre and get a ‘jab’ each October which gives us short term immunity to the strains circulating in the world that year.  It’s all well understood. Some years it is worse than other, but by and large the system works.

• But it only works so long as the influenza virus behaves itself reasonably well. It didn’t in mid 1917 or early 1918.  Somewhere in the middle of America a new, more virulent strain emerged which was more deadly to the youngish than the old.   It spread through the training camps preparing young American men to fight in the Great War.   Woodrow Wilson despatched 300,000 of them to Europe in crowded troop ships.  The rest, as they say, is ‘history’.

No one could foresee the emergence of Covid19, so the need for massive quantities of PPE and the death traps that care homes became could not be foreseen either.  Or so the story goes.

But what we do know is that every so often the influenza virus ceases to behave in manner we have found a way of dealing with. When it will do this cannot be predicted, but that at some time it will is a certainty.  It is, in that famous phrase, ‘a known unknown’.  We know it will happen, but we don’t know when.  In the past century this has happened four times; Spanish flu 1918-20, Asian flu 1957-58, Hong Kong flu 1968-69, Swine flu 2009-10.

Had the virus which emerged in China last year been a new and more virulent form of our old enemy, the influenza virus, something akin to the 1918 form, Johnson and the Tories would have been equally deep in the ‘do-do’, because they still would not have had enough PPE.

The fact that the virus causing Covid19 is ‘new’ has allowed the government to shield itself from the more serious criticism that it had become complacent about the possibility of having to deal with an influenza pandemic, not just ‘seasonal flu’.   It is not only the government which has become complacent, we, the public, have as well.

Every year we have reminders of the slaughter in the Great War, we have memorials to those killed and many of us will remember the names of relatives who were amongst them.  The people who might have known the names of relatives who died of Spanish flu themselves died in the 1980s and 90s, so it has never embedded itself in the public consciousness.

Influenza usually has a mortality rate in the region of 1 to 2 people in a thousand which is probably slightly less than that of Covid19.  Spanish flu had a mortality rate estimated as high as 1-200 per thousand people infected in some areas. Even at low mortality rates if enough people become infected the number of deaths will be large; so far more than 300,000 people are thought to have died from Covid19. Spanish flu killed some 50 million people.

Equally important is the social disruption a flu pandemic will cause.  The means by which the person to person transmission can be reduced are identical to those which have been applied to combat the spread of Covid19, social distancing, good hand/nose/mouth hygiene school closures, work from home etc.

Politicians who are capable of thinking strategically would recognise that a flu variant equal in killing power to that which caused the 1918-20 pandemic could arise at any time and would have in place strategies for coping with it.  On this basis the Johnson government, and perhaps the people advising it on public health matters, have failed miserably, but would any recent government have done any better?   Once you are in thrall to market forces you buy where things are cheapest.

Such strategies would include not just larger stocks of PPE, but would include support for a national garment sector making such PPE which could increase production rapidly in case of need, ditto manufacturers of face masks, ventilators, anti-viral drugs, realistic assessment of the capacity of care homes and similar facilities to isolate sick residents, etc.  Had these already been in place because someone had recognised the possibility of a new and more virulent form of influenza arising, the number of deaths from Covid19 would probably have been lower.

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

A Scots Take On The Johnson Cummings Love In

by Les May

BELOW are some extracts from an article by Mandy Rhodes the editor of Holyrood Magazine which appeared in The Sunday Post today.

‘Just over two months ago, we forged a very special agreement with our government when we signed away our freedoms.  Such was the trust that we invested in the democratically elected powers-that-be, that we did as we were told.  We complied, like sheep, on the understanding that the sacrifice was for the greater good.

'But Dominic Cummings, the Prime Minister’s closest aide, has made us out to be fools.  He has humiliated us and opened my son’s eyes to the debasement of democracy and etched something into his brain about the ugliness of political motivation that will never heal.

'He has seen for himself the way the truth gets twisted, how easily elected politician are prepared to eschew honour, how government ministers willingly operate as sock puppets and he has seen a government prepared to mock its own people for their servility.  Cummings’ circumstance were not exceptional, they were ordinary.  He (Cummings) was blind to the fact that in this pandemic, his situation was no different, no more ‘tricky’ or ‘complicated that it is for the rest of us.’

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