Centrists Assemble! Progress mob fear Tory crisis will help Corbyn win an election

The Tories stirred the turds in the bowl yesterday.  A few were flushed, perhaps temporarily, and others were moved around pointlessly.  It was another messy day in the Tories’ messy Brexit anti-strategy. 

In response, professional political shock jocks on the far-right have been portending trouble for the government.  Reanimated by a team of Dr. Frankensteins, also known as TV producers, bags of hot air like Farage and Rees-Mogg mouthed off about betrayal and made various flaccid threats.  They are performing seals, acting out their self-assigned roles for the money.

Centrists Assemble!
The more interesting responses to the day of Tory disorder have been the comments from members of the centrist gloop.  The merest slither of a possibility of a general election this year – and the possibility of a Corbyn victory – horrified the centrists and they reacted promptly. 

Progress stalwart Mike Gapes rose in the House Of Commons to suggest a ‘unity government’ to help Theresa May survive the attacks from the dark-money-funded elements in her party. 

In an interview on LBC radio fellow Progress member Stephen Kinnock praised May’s “Chequers’ deal” – the “deal” that caused so many resignations – and he stated firmly that “it’s not the time for a general election.” 

Duplicitous deputy leader Tom Watson was also keen to not want to take advantage of the Tories’ internal strife: In a BBC radio interview he admitted that the Tories’ problems could help Labour politically but that he wanted to get the “best deal for the country.”  In a separate interview with Sky News, Watson declared that “it’s not a question of Labour trying to bring the government down, it’s actually a question of Labour trying to help the government get a good deal and try and stop the government bringing itself down.”  It is possible to do both: Election victory followed by whatever decision a new government thinks is right. 

Another Progress protagonist Caroline Flint was unreserved in her support for Theresa May’s shambolic leadership: “Face them down Theresa.  There isn’t a deal that will please either hardline Leavers or Remainers; both, for different reasons, want no deal.  We need a good workable deal for a smooth Brexit.”

The most absurd remarks were uttered by the second most successful Miliband brother, David Miliband.  Following an insult to Russian revolutionary Trotsky – Miliband appended the adjective “Trotskyist” to his description of the dark-money-funded hard right Brexiteers – he welcomed “the Tory governing gene reasserting itself.”  He blamed the Labour leadership for the Tories’ problems overshadowing Brexit: “Labour leadership line has allowed Brexit debate to be a Tory debate.”

The Progress mob don’t support May’s plan but the fear that the Tory government could collapse, and be followed by a Corbyn/Sturgeon alliance, is a scenario that frightens them much more than whatever nonsense the Tories can concoct.

Labour Say
Coincidently, during the resignation day, Progress had a little meeting called ‘Labour Say’ whereat they regurgitated their usual illogical commentary on Brexit.  Unsurprisingly, there was plenty of criticism of the Labour leadership:

“Brexit is being debated everywhere else, but not on the Labour Party conference floor.  Why shouldn’t conference be having a debate about Brexit. It’s happening in every other part of our party and our movement. Around our kitchen tables and in our communities. Brexit must be debated at our conference, we cannot be afraid” – Stephen Doughty

It is time that we, the Labour Party, stepped up” – Eda Cazimoğlu

We should endorse staying in the single market and saving our economy. If we don’t do that, we are implicit in the destruction of investment for our public services in the future.  We have got to have our people on the frontbench saying loudly and firmly that we have to stay in the single market for the wellbeing of the people in this country.  We must be prepared to do what is in the national interest of our country or future generations will never forgive us.” – Mike Gapes

There are a few oddities in the quotes above.  Labour leadership has not banned debates on Brexit at Labour party conferences.  Doughty’s claim that people are discussing Brexit in their daily lives is bunkum; people are flat-out bored senseless with it.  Who do Progress mean by “We?”  Eda Cazimoğlu said “we, the Labour Party” but Progress consistently fights against Labour, and none of the attendees at Labour Say are on the Labour front bench.  

Progress’ criticism of Labour on Brexit conveniently forgets that the Tories and DUP have a majority in parliament for any vote.  The only options to stop or reduce the effect of Brexit are an election or a split Tory party.  Progress knows this, but they persist in criticising the Labour leadership and hope that the public won’t notice the arithmetic, while actively campaigning against an election and in favour of a ‘unity government’, as shown in quotes above.

The second expected theme of Labour Say was the reaffirmation to continue astroturfing on the Remain campaign.  There were a few very obvious comments on Brexit’s problems, both on Brexit itself and on the Tories’ most recent fudge that led to some ministerial resignations, but the key point is that these comments were not Progress supporting Remain, they were Progress using Remain as a tool to promote Progress.  The ‘People’s Vote’ was mentioned; this is another Progress PR and marketing tool: People’s Vote website: A tool to promote Progress MPs.

Another Tory omnikerfuffle, an opportunity to put pressure on a rabid gang of corrupt Tory filth, frightens the hell out of the centrist Herberts so much that they even talk about a ‘unity government’ with the Tories because what they fear is socialism.  They will oppose socialism relentlessly, regardless of what the alternative is.



Centrists Assemble! Progress mob fear Tory crisis will help Corbyn win an election

Karen Pierce: Charlatan

The Tory government’s ambassador to the United Nations, Karen Pierce, delivered a speech at the UN’s Security Council last week entitled ‘Maintaining peace in the Middle East and North Africa.’

The speech was full of waffle and it omitted key facts on purpose.  The theme was to obscure British culpability while dishonestly claiming that the UN was stopping the British government from making progress on attaining peace.

At the start Pierce said “I think we all agree that many of the conflicts in this region share root causes and complex linkages.”  Yes, we can agree about that.  The root causes include:

  • States created artificially by previous colonial empires, especially Britain
  • Massive arms sales from US and UK to brutal dictatorships that control many of the states
  • Direct military action on the people in the region by NATO and by Russia
  • Arbitrary economic sanctions imposed by European and north American countries
  • Theft of fossil fuel revenues by US and European businesses

Pierce didn’t agree that the above are the “root causes.”  She proposed military action and economic sanctions as solutions, not causes: “Sanctions are a vital part of the Security Council’s arsenal.”

Omissions were the most visible facets of her speech.  She noted that 22 million in need of assistance in Yemen [and] 1.9 million in the Occupied Palestinian Territories” but did not utter one word about Saudi Arabia’s carpet bombing of Yemen or its blockade of Yemeni ports preventing food and medical supplies, and there was no mention of Israel’s naval blockade of Gaza and its control of vital food and medical supplies to Gaza. 

Bizarrely, Israel and Saudi Arabia were not mentioned at all by name anywhere in the speech.  “We continue to see examples of states restricting access to humanitarian agencies and we see attacks by armed groups on humanitarian workers” and “terrorist actors and state institutions in the region have been responsible for some of the worst persecutions in history,” noted Pierce.  Yes, Saudi Arabia and Israel routinely deny access to humanitarian agencies and target (and kill) members of those agencies, but Pierce never mentioned those countries by name.  Nor did she mention the direct military assistance that the Tory government gives to Saudi Arabia and to Israel.  In March this year, Saudi’s Crown Prince visited the UK to purchase more British military aircraft to continue the slaughter of Yemeni civilians; the deal was brokered by the Tories.


Without mentioning Israel, Pierce said “on the Middle East peace process we reiterate to our support for the two-state solution, and we look forward to the American proposals which we hope will be able to be issued soon.”  That was the only sentence in the speech that referred to the future of Palestine and Israel.  What American proposals?  The current US administration has no coherent policy on anything and is peopled by hawkish venal supporters of Israeli dominance.

Pierce said one of the “root causes” of conflict is “human rights persecutions in individual countries.”  Yes, there are gross, systematic violations of human rights in Bahrain, Saudi Arabia and Egypt, three non-democratic countries fully and directly supported by the UK, politically and militarily.  Pierce had to gall to quote sections of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights; that was shameless extreme hypocrisy.

Good governance from strong, stable state institutions is the best way to maintain peace and security.”  Given the Tories’ unconditional support for brutal dictatorships in the Middle East and North Africa, Pierce’s desire for “strong, stable state institutions” was an endorsement of authoritarianism.  But, she also stated that “we agree we need to strengthen democratic institutions,” a statement that is entirely at odds with the UK government’s active support for anti-democratic regimes.

Pierce took a long time to say nothing.  She tried, clumsily, to imply that Britain wanted to take some positive actions that she claimed the UN was preventing, but it was just waffling criticisms of the UN as Pierce advocated behaviour that the Tories don’t practice, and the deliberate omissions were neon-lit. 

The Tory government is directly helping military action against civilians.  The Tory government unconditionally supports the brutality of Saudi Arabia, of Bahrain and of Israel.  The Tory government does all it is able to enhance the profits of the arms industry.  Karen Pierce’s speech was intended as a con.  It was the work of a charlatan. 

Tory ambassador to the UN, Karen Pierce
Karen Pierce: Charlatan

100th anniversary of the execution of the Romanovs

Just after midnight on July 17th 1918 the members of the Romanov family were executed in Yekaterinburg by Bolshevik troops led by Yakov Mikhailovich Yurovsky.  

Yakov Mikhailovich Yurovsky

The order for the executions was issued by the Soviet Central Executive Committee including Lenin.  The decision to execute rather than send the former royals to exile was taken because of the possibility that the Czar or any of his descendents could act as catalysts for counter-revolution for many years ahead.  It was a practical and pragmatic decision; it removed a potential obstruction to the development of communist Russia.

Vladimir Ilyich Lenin

The Romanovs had been captured during the Bolshevik revolution and imprisoned since.  The nine month delay before their executions was never explained satisfactorily, partly because the Bolsheviks tended to destroy evidence of communication and issue routine denials of instructions.  Hindsight suggests that the delay complicated the aftermath of the executions and, coupled with a poor choice of location, caused the executions to be conducted messily.  Ideally, a bold cold decision should have been made as soon as the Bolsheviks took control of power.  Such a swift decision would have reduced inspection from enemies and, crucially, would have demonstrated clear intent.

For a century, the execution of the Romanov family has been used as a tool in different ways to promote a variety of political perspectives including royalist, woolly liberal and communist, and the hundredth anniversary will be a competition between opposed viewpoints, each trying to direct the narrative.  Communists and socialists must utter no apologetic or regretful comments about the executions.  A tactical decision was made due to reasonable concerns.  The only error was the delay.

Royal cousins
In Britain, there is a curious additional facet to the anniversary: The Romanovs were directly related to the current British royals.  As the truncated family tree below shows, Queen Elizabeth’s grandfather was the cousin of the Czarina, Alexandra.  
(The names in red were executed.)


100th anniversary of the execution of the Romanovs

BBC news and directional use of political descriptions

In the last couple of weeks, BBC news described extreme-right racist Italian Interior Minister Matteo Salvini as “populist” – Populist Salvini – and described left-leaning American Democrat Congressional candidate Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez as “millennial” – Millennial Cortez.

It is not unusual for the BBC to be too fearful to be bold with its political descriptions and it is also not unusual for it to use modern phraseology clumsily, but the word choices mentioned above are very deliberate with a related agenda. 

Populist” was chosen because it hid Salvini’s extreme right racist politics.  The agenda behind the BBC’s word choice is normalisation of extreme right anti-humanity views while deriding the concept of popular politics as different from establishment politics.

Equally, and simultaneously oppositely, “millennial” was chosen because it hid socialist tendencies of Cortez, but the BBC’s motivation to obscure such tendencies was to keep the word “socialism” out of discourse because it might otherwise be viewed positively.

These word choices by the BBC are considered very carefully in advance.  It is editorial policy to remove negative descriptions of the extreme right and it is editorial policy to not use the word socialism for fear that viewers and listeners might associate the word with political views they like.

BBC news and directional use of political descriptions

Be Incivil!

The far-right in the US government and at Fox News have been whining about some people being incivil toward the enablers and the supporters of Donald Trump’s relentless attacks on humanity and on society.  These plaintive cries for respect echo those of the Tory party in Britain via party chairman Brandon Lewis’ ‘Respect Pledge.’

Both governments’ requests for civility and respect for the architects of destruction should be met with aggressive, unfettered contempt.  Their demands for civility should receive the same physical response, altered for cultural popularity; that is, a middle finger in the US and two fingers in the UK.

No-one, who opposes the wealth terrorists’ gimps in the White House or in Downing Street, should ever waste a fraction of a second or a microjoule of energy on worrying whether their behaviour might diverge from normal civil polite discourse when dealing with these gimps.  Indeed, being incivil and showing no respect are absolutely necessary and merely the opening salvos in any interaction or combat with them.

Do not debate with Tories, Trumpists and the screaming heads at Fox.  Do not listen to their lies, obfuscations, misdirections and confidence tricks.  Do not pet their dead cats.  Do not take any notice of their false claims to the primacy of discourse, debate and reason because they have no interest in those activities.  They are charlatans, thieves and fraudsters.  Treat them as the filth they are.




Be Incivil!

People’s Vote website: A tool to promote Progress MPs


A current theme of the anti-Brexit campaign is a demand for a ‘people’s vote’ – a second referendum.  Unsurprisingly, many worthless politicians are pretending to be focussed on this demand in order to grab media time to promote themselves.  For example, the Liberal Democrats keep shoving their faces in front of TV cameras as desperate attempts to appear relevant while hoping that the public has forgotten the LibDems assisted the Tories for five years.

People’s Vote, another anti-Brexit lobby group housed at the infamous Millbank address in London, claims it has an objective that matches its name.  However, its slim website’s news section is a series of links to brief quotes from Progress MPs reacting to Brexit news or government statements.  Other politicians and activists have expressed similar views, including Labour MPs and including Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell, but the People’s Vote website has only Progress MPs’ comments.  

Clearly, the purpose of the lobby group is to promote the names of the Progress MPs.  The objective is to create a false narrative that Progress is something more than just a mob of right-wing activists whose aim is to stop Labour moving leftward.  Equally, the exclusivity of only Progress comments on the People’s Vote website is a false attempt to imply that only Progress is fighting against Brexit.

These progress types are too cowardly to leave Labour and form a new centrist party so they use other tactics to try to make themselves seem useful such as piggy-backing on the anti-Brexit campaign.  They are a sorry bunch whose remaining days in parliament are numbered and People’s Vote is just a subset of Progress.

Related blog: OFOC, FOFS: Centrist opportunists

People’s Vote website: A tool to promote Progress MPs

Theresa May grovels to a royal and defecates on Britain

During a visit to the Defence and National Rehabilitation Centre last week, Theresa May met one of the queen’s grandchildren, William.  Rather than just shake his hand and say ‘hello,’ the prime minster grovelled like a lickspittle lackey prostrate in front of filthy elite.


May contorted herself so much it looked like she’d just shat herself.

It was a grotesque spectacle.  May is supposed to be the leader of an elected government in a democracy but she chose to pay deference to a dim-witted, useless twerp whose only qualification for his role is that he is descended from a long line of dim-witted, useless twerps, a line that began with theft and murder.  

May’s grovelling behaviour revealed how little value she puts on democracy and how little respect she has for the people of this country. 

That single, vomit-inducing image showed a weak, dishonest, untrustworthy and venal person who is wholly unfit to be prime minister.

Theresa May grovels to a royal and defecates on Britain