Archive | June 4th, 2012

Arab translation of Talmud includes anti-Israeli messages



It was just a few weeks ago that the first copy of the Talmud Bavli in Arabic landed in Israel and it seemed like this was the beginning of a beautiful friendship. Yet it has become apparent that the translation which was carried out by the Center for Middle Eastern Studies (CMES) in Jordan includes more than a few anti-Jewish and anti-Zionist political messages.

Dr. Raquel Ukeles, curator of the Israel’s National Library Arabic collection, who read the introduction in Arabic said that in the text, the Talmud is “very clearly accused of racism.” In fact, it is so clearly stated that one section of the introduction is simply titled “racism in the Talmud.”

The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) website presents quotes from the introduction to the text: “These texts confirm the racist and hostile perception toward the non-Jews, especially those who threaten the ‘chosen nation’ and stand in the way of its ambitions and hopes.

“There is no doubt that Israel is the best example of this racist position, both in the level of its daily crimes against the Palestinians and the level of its rejection and contempt for international resolutions and laws.

“For what applies to other countries in the world does not apply to contemporary Israel, as it is unique…Jews, according to this racist position (of the Talmud), are permitted to do what is not permitted for non-Jews.”

The conclusion states that: “The Talmudic heritage has a significant impact on the formulation of Jewish identity based on holy (principles of) racial isolation…It (the Talmud) also established the extreme positions that advocate hatred toward non-Jews, the violation of their rights and looting of their lands and property.”

The curator explains that what is especially intriguing about the introduction is the attempt to link Zionism and Judaism. “Up to now the Muslim approach was that Zionism is a variation on European nationality that made its way to the provinces of the Middle East,” she noted.

“In contrast, the introduction states that the deciphering of the Talmud will also help to better understand Zionism. Linking the two is a rather abnormal occurrence in the internal-Muslim debate.”

Yet in spite of the racist tone of the introduction Ukeles is not rushing to judge the translation on the basis of its introduction alone. “The translation itself is not bad, and when you take into consideration that the team of researchers who wrote it are not Talmud experts, then their work is not bad at all.

“Apparently the version they had before them was a copy of the Talmud in Aramaic but they often used the English Schottenstein translation to better understand the text. I believe there is a certain gap between the relative fairness of the translation itself and the problematic introduction.

“I believe the introduction is a kind of lip service meant to appease the Arab reader who has a set agenda on Israel. I believe that eventually after all the reservations, it seems that the results of the project will be positive as the translation itself is useful and will allow Arab speakers to become familiar with Judaism from a perspective disconnected of the Israel-Arab conflict.

“Today’s knowledge of Judaism in the Arab world is meager and filled with stereotypes. I believe these stereotypes will fade away for the reader who goes beyond the introduction.”

Posted in LiteratureComments Off on Arab translation of Talmud includes anti-Israeli messages

Gadafi throws papers in UN speech


Uploaded by  on Sep 23, 2009

Muammar Gaddafi, in his first address to the United Nations in 40 years as Libya’s ruler, accused major powers of betraying the principles of the UN charter, punctuating his umbrage by tossing papers from the podium.

Posted in LibyaComments Off on Gadafi throws papers in UN speech

Heroic Speech by pres. Mugabe in UN


Heroic Speech by pres. Mugabe in UN G.A. on Libya, Colonialism and NATO Aggression (Sept 22, 2011)

Uploaded by  on Sep 24, 2011

Original and more complete speech, including introduction can be found at…

Posted in AfricaComments Off on Heroic Speech by pres. Mugabe in UN

Join the Struggle: CPGB-ML


Uploaded by  on Aug 6, 2011

Delivered a few days before the London Riots, Ranjeet Brar touches on the themes of the world capitalist crisis, of the poverty and hopelessness that capitalism offers young people in Britain and the world, and the impossibility of reforming the system through parliamentary mechanisms and constitutional means.

This CPGB-ML message was delivered at the international BBQ held in Saklatvala Hall, Southall, on 30 July 2011.

The event celebrated the 58th anniversary both of the DPRK’s victory in the fatherland liberation war (25 June 1950 — 27 July 1953), which marked the first defeat of US imperialism, and of the storming of the Moncada barracks, by Cuban revolutionaries led by Fidel Castro, on 26 July 1953. The latter signaled the start of the Cuban revolution and gave its name to the Cuban revolutionary guerrilla movement (M 26-7).

Ranjeet, in his speech, draws upon the history of these two countries in struggle, their traditions, successes and problems and lessons for us. He shares the party’s ideas on the necessary strategy and tactics to build a Soviet Briatin, that can solve the problems of capitalist crisis and build a stable future for workers of Britain and the world.

Join the Party – Join the Struggle!

Harpal Brar:
Sol Chong Jang:
Mohammad Hassan:
Keith Bennett:
Ranjeet Brar:

Posted in Campaigns, PoliticsComments Off on Join the Struggle: CPGB-ML

OctRev – JB 1/3 – What does USSR mean to my generation?


Joti Brar, member of the CPGB-ML, Asks what does the USSR and October Revolution mean to the generation of ‘Thatcher’s Children’?

Part 1:
Part 2:
Part 3:

Uploader Comments ( ProletarianCPGBML )

  • On top of that any given system is dependant upon the people that it is built upon, if you have amoral people, well youre likely to have an amoral system and finally these faults are further projected by the state.

    perseverance8 2 years ago

  • Seriously, I think you’ve been watching too many movies. The Matrix, was it? Power corrupts… then give it to the masses. THat is communism. Anarchism begets capitalism begets monopoly perseverence. There is so much bourgeois, even religious, thought inside your ‘radical’ philosophy. It is never going to be a catalyst for positive change, just cynicism and scorn. Give it up!

    ProletarianCPGBML in reply to perseverance8 2 years ago 2 

  • Wasn’t it illegal for Soviet citiziens to leave the country? How does the CPGB-ML justify that?

    jumpnjza2 2 years ago 4 

  • This is a total red herring of an accusation!

    1) The vast majority under capitalism are forbidden from traveling.. not by any law that needs to be written; but by the iron law of economics, that impoverishes the vast masses.

    2) Travel within the socialist block was possible, but limited by needs of balanced development.

    3) the capitalist world did not allow free travel with right of return to socialist citizens

    the very question, as it is formulated, seeks to stand the truth on its head.

    ProletarianCPGBML in reply to jumpnjza2 2 years ago 6 

Top Comments

  • Workers of the world UNITE against fascist-capitalist monsters and Save our planet !!! LONG LIVE GREAT COMMUNISM= DEATH TO FASCISM AND CAPITALISM !!!!!

    workergirls 2 years ago 18 

see all

All Comments (116)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • the question is, what do you support, soviet communism, north korean communism, or chinese communism, please reply me.

    breizhcatalonia1993 3 weeks ago in playlist What does the Soviet Union mean to our generation? (speech)

  • Sorry, communism gives power to the masses, but a*********m is no power, is the chaos, i tolerate all ideas and though im a right winger i have kind of mental mix of left (communist) and right ideas so maybe in the future i become what your party defends.

    breizhcatalonia1993 in reply to ProletarianCPGBML (Show the comment) 3 weeks ago in playlist What does the Soviet Union mean to our generation? (speech)

  • I see what you mean? People do say Socialism/ Communism ”is a nice idea in theory, but not in practise”. To an exstend thats true, Socialism is not perfect, to be fair we never claimed it was. Moreover how could you ever bring about, forgive me proper socialism in a capitialist world?

    jmagowan12 1 month ago

  • And the Japan bombing wasn’t necessary because with armies like China and North Korea.

    They could’ve gone up to Japan and be like bye bitches.

    But they didn’t, they’re still somewhat moral and think they shouldn’t kill innocent 2 year olds.

    Lol, but fuck America did, didn’t they.

    CommieDemocraticMMD 2 months ago

  • I believe Stalin was an idiot.

    What’s fucked up is that they don’t talk about Lenin.

    The true Communists of the 20th century were Lenin and Mao!

    They don’t teach people anything about the Soviet Union saving everyone at all in WWII.

    Without the USSR we wouldn’t be the same today.

    All people hear is that USA gave goods and ended the war.

    Sorry, what.

    Why did Hitler kill himself?

    Because of the brave Russian people.

    Russians ended the war by making Hitler kill himself.

    CommieDemocraticMMD 2 months ago

  • look at our gouvernement now it’s all lie’s after lie’s

    6336ist 4 months ago

  • @sparky6952: Go live in Somalia – it’s an anarcho-capitalist paradise pretty close to Thatcher’s doctrine, with pirates, mafia, and a lower GDP per capita than North Korea. When you go and enjoy living in that laissez-faire capitalist heaven called Somalia, she’ll probably go to North Korea too… :)) If you think Thatcher stood for freedom, you are just as deluded as a Stalinist, so you should probably follow your own advise and move away from leftist Europe to the capitalist 3rd world. :))

    Vict0r1984 4 months ago

  • you are completly deluded.Those dictators on the wall killed millions, and made a totalitarian state.The workers demanded its end.Thatcher stood for freedom, and prosperity,Go and live in North Korea

Posted in PoliticsComments Off on OctRev – JB 1/3 – What does USSR mean to my generation?

Time to face it: capitalism must go!

Issued by: CPGB-ML
Time to face it: capitalism must go!The 30 November mass strike against the attack on public-sector pensions is a sign of working people’s anger at the austerity measures being demanded by the ConDem coalition.

The government wants ordinary people to pay the price of saving the bankers’ and billionaires’ dying system, but strikes, the student revolt, UK Uncut direct actions, the August youth uprisings and the Occupy movement are all signs that British workers are waking up to the fact that the price is simply too high. “Can’t pay, won’t pay” is the slogan that they are increasingly adopting.

Yet all the major parties – Tories, LibDems and Labour – agree that the system must be saved and cuts must be made. What other solution is there when economic crisis strikes?

Capitalism breeds crisis and war

In the 400 years of its existence, spurred on by the laws of capitalist competition, capitalism has enabled humanity to make immense progress very quickly. These same laws of capitalist competition, however, have a down side that, today, far outweighs any benefits capitalism is still able to confer.

At the heart of the system is the contradiction that, to win the battle of competition, the capitalists need to cut wages and benefits to the working masses as much as possible, while producing and selling ever more goods at ever lower cost.

The relatively impoverished working masses, however, are unable to buy all these goods, resulting in acrisis of overproduction, the bankruptcy and closure of thousands of businesses, massive redundancies and reduced wages for those still in work, all of which aggravate the crisis still further.

Despite the incredible amount of wealth generated by the workers of the world, unequal distribution means that nearly half the world’s children live in poverty and 22,000 of them die every single day as a direct consequence of that poverty. The huge rise in food prices caused by the economic crisis has exacerbated this already horrific situation.

The present financial meltdown was triggered by the failure of banks that tried to counter the impoverishment of the masses by lending them money they could never repay. This manoeuvre allowed people to keep spending and so disguised the overproduction crisis for years, but now that the device has collapsed, the crisis is worse than ever.

Until recently, the imperialists were able to use their control of the economies of the oppressed countries of Africa, Asia and Latin America to confine the worst effects of the worldwide crisis of overproduction to those places. This bought social peace at home, as even the poorest British workers remained somewhat sheltered.

Now, however, our relative immunity is coming to an end, and the working masses of Britain, Europe, the US and Japan are being plunged into third-world misery.

The present crisis is wiping out the purchasing power of the masses in many ways. Many jobs have gone and more will soon follow; the elderly are losing large chunks of their pensions; public spending and public-sector wages and pensions are being slashed to provide the funds for bank bailouts, etc.

The result of all this austerity can only be more failing capitalist enterprises, more redundancies, lower purchasing power and deeper crisis.

Besides mass poverty and insecurity, capitalism brings war on an industrial scale. The world has not been free of war since capitalism developed, and these wars are increasingly all-encompassing and vicious. The US and European capitalists’ need to control middle-eastern oil and supply routes led to the criminal wars in Yugoslavia, Iraq and Afghanistan.

Libya has been their most recent victim, and Syria and Iran could well be next. Whole countries are being laid waste in the never-ending quest for maximum profits, with no end in sight to this mad destruction.

Time to make a change

It is clear that capitalism has outlived its usefulness. The longer working people allow it to linger on, the more we will suffer.

That is why those who profit from the system are trying to convince the working masses that there is nothing wrong with capitalism; that the only problem is the greed of a few ‘fat cats’.

But this is like trying to blame blowflies and maggots for the rotten flesh off which they are feeding.
Instead, our attention needs to be focussed on getting rid of the stinking corpse of the capitalist system itself.

Working people must take possession of all means of production now owned by the bourgeoisie (factories, machines, raw materials etc) in order to start producing goods that directly meet the needs of the people, as opposed to the current system, in which even the most basic necessities of life are only produced or distributed if there is a profit to be made.

The bourgeois state has been perfected as a machine to prevent us challenging capitalist relations of production and it must be smashed. In its place we need to build a workers’ state, whose main job will be to stop the ousted exploiters returning to continue their reign of misery, war and destitution. This is the only way out of the mists of darkness.

The financial crisis is nothing to do with us; our work has created sufficient wealth for everybody to be able to live well. If capitalism will not produce or distribute because there’s no profit to be made, then the working class must step into the breach to take over the levers of production.

By spreading understanding about the real nature of the crisis among workers, the CPGB-ML seeks to help empower our class to fulfil its historic mission of killing off capitalism once and for all and building a new socialist society and a bright future for all our children, free of war and free of want.

Join us and help to make it happen!

Posted in Campaigns, PoliticsComments Off on Time to face it: capitalism must go!

Last chance to save the NHS



It’s time for Britain’s doctors to take a stand in support of public health care.

Itis not difficult to see the sorts of things that are crying out to be done to make the NHS a genuinely better and more efficient service: things like slashing the number of managers and putting clinicians back in charge; kicking the internal market into touch; ending the ridiculous business management-inspired culture of audit-for-audit’s-sake; scrapping PFI and cancelling related debt; nationalising the pharmaceutical industry.


I am a junior doctor currently working at Leigh Infirmary near Wigan in Greater Manchester. In early December I happened to read an article published in the latest edition of the British Medical Journal by one Nick Seddon – deputy director, apparently, of the ‘independent’ (ie, pro-business) think-tank ‘Reform’.

The article was entitled ‘Why shouldn’t private companies run failing hospitals?’, and it so incensed me that I felt compelled to respond in writing. Unfortunately the response quickly became a mini-essay that the BMJ were reluctant to print in full for reasons of space – although they did, in fairness, publish a shortened version online.[1]

Reading back over the unedited version of my reply (some 2,000 words), however, I feel it gives as clear, as concise, and as forthright an argument against the insidious privatisation and managerialism that are slowly throttling the NHS as I have seen. Many colleagues have told me that it puts into words what they themselves have felt for some time. For this reason I have been advised to submit my essay for publication in your journal, the better to circulate the argument as widely as possible.

It is hoped that in doing so, it will resonate with other doctors and other healthcare workers who doubtless feel, as I do, that the NHS is an institution worth fighting for, and that the regressive political direction of the last 30 years can and indeed must be reversed.

AM, Southport

SHO in psychiatry and CPGB-ML member

Replies welcome:

Reply to ‘Why shouldn’t private companies run failing hospitals?’

In Politics and the English Language, Orwell wrote that the purpose of what he called “political prose” was “to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind”, thereby allowing the writer to conceal his thoughts from himself and others. [2]

Though our bourgeois media invariably ascribe this tendency to ‘Stalinism’, it does not take a genius to identify that ‘political prose’ has in fact reached endemic proportions in the capitalist world, namely as what has come to be known – unofficially of course – as ‘management speak’.

Nick Seddon has given a fine example of the style with his November BMJ article ‘Why shouldn’t private companies run failing hospitals?’ Devoid of such trifling details as sources and context, Seddon cherry-picks facts and factoids alike apparently at random in support of his position, yet even then is clearly struggling to make the case.[ 1]

Perhaps, with his background in business management, he is unaccustomed to the standard requirement when writing in medical journals to tell the truth and to provide supporting evidence for your conclusions. I would be only too happy to enlighten him in these regards.

Seddon plucks a couple of examples that purportedly demonstrate the benefits of private-sector involvement in health care from Finland and Spain. This is disingenuous in the extreme, certainly in the case of Finland. To varying degrees, the continental western European economies have kept the social welfare provisions and business regulatory structures that have been decimated in the UK by three decades of Thatcherism.

When Seddon waxes lyrical about increasing private-sector involvement in the NHS, therefore, I very much doubt it is the strongly social-democratic Scandinavian model he has in mind. Rather, we catch a glimpse of his real vision of the future in the penultimate paragraph: “In the United States a range of organisations such as Kaiser Permanente, Intermountain, and Geisinger have long been leading the way,” he says, reassuringly …

The United States has the most expensive and inefficient healthcare system in the developed world. Well over 40 million Americans therefore still have no health insurance coverage at all, and millions more remain significantly under-insured [ 3] – a situation which, by the way, promises to remain essentially unchanged even if President Obama’s much-hyped healthcare ‘reforms’ are ever enacted, which now looks increasingly unlikely anyway [4]

A child of 5 could understand why this is the case: self-evidently, the more you bring profiteers into the running of a service – any service – the more expensive it’s going to be for the people who need to use it. That’s why, outside of the business community and the hard-right fringe, the desire of the majority of the American people has long been for more public funding and more public provision of health care.[ 5]

As regards the so-called Health Maintenance Organisations (HMOs) – the likes of Kaiser Permanente – that Seddon apparently considers to be ‘leading the way’, the feeling of the majority of Americans towards these institutions is probably best encapsulated by a memorable anecdote from Professor Allyson Pollock’s seminal 2004 book NHS plc – The Privatisation of Our Health Care. In the 1997 film As Good as It Gets, the female lead played by Helen Hunt reacts with outrage to the revelation that her insurance policy will not provide her severely asthmatic son with the inhalers he needs, declaring frustratedly: “F*cking HMO b*stard pieces of sh*t!!!” By all accounts, cinema audiences across the US famously broke into spontaneous applause at this outburst.[6] Enough said.

At the opposite end of the political spectrum you have socialist Cuba, whose entirely publicly-owned healthcare system “represents an important alternative example where modest infrastructure investments combined with a well-developed public health strategy have generated health status measures comparable with those of industrialised countries”.[ 7] In other words, Cuba – a third-world country – has built a healthcare system at a fraction of the cost of those of developed countries, yet with broadly similar – and in some cases actually better – outcomes.

Moreover, it has managed to achieve this despite 50 years of unceasing economic warfare and sabotage waged against it by the United States, and despite the devastating effect of the collapse in 1991 of its Soviet ally.

It is not difficult to see how such efficiency has been possible. Firstly, at no point in the Cuban system is there anybody who is driving up costs by making a profit out of it; and secondly, the fact that the state is the sole provider of health care avoids the wasteful duplication, cherry-picking, and poor coordination of services that inevitably arise when multiple inter-competing providers are involved.

On reflection, this all makes Nick Seddon’s call “to make care more joined up” by privatising it look even more bizarre.

Of course, as anyone who does any real clinical work in the NHS knows, there are ultimately two very good and interrelated reasons why private companies shouldn’t be permitted to run any hospitals, failing or otherwise: 1) Because the whole story of the involvement of the private sector in the NHS over the past 30 plus years has been an unmitigated disaster from start to finish; and 2) Because it’s precisely as a result of this private-sector involvement that we have such things as ‘failing hospitals’ in the first place.

The story has been a tragedy in five acts. First, the Thatcher government’s implementation of the findings of the 1983 Griffiths Report (headed by Sir Roy Griffiths, a former director of Monsanto and Sainsbury’s) brought business managers in to run the NHS.

Second, the NHS and Community Care Act 1990 – inspired by Alain Enthoven, formerly of the US Department of Defence – set up the so-called ‘internal market’ in the NHS: the designation of NHS hospitals as individual business units (NHS ‘Trusts’) that henceforth had to compete against one another for funding from ‘purchasers’ or ‘commissioners’. Those that were less ‘competitive’ were by definition ‘failing hospitals’.

Third, the huge expansion of the Private Finance Initiative (PFI) by the Blair government from 1997 led many Trusts to run up significant long-term debts to private banks and construction companies in their efforts to out-compete one another. Ironically, Trusts that were subsequently unable to service these debts – principally through asset sales, ward closures, and job cuts – would again by definition be labelled as ‘failing’.

Fourth, the launch of ‘foundation hospitals’ after 2002 effectively provided a template for the transformation of NHS Trusts into embryonic private hospitals.

And finally, the Health and Social Care Bill 2011, if and when enacted, will administer the coup de grace to the NHS as we knew it, removing the historic legal obligation of the Secretary of State to provide a comprehensive health service, dissolving the Strategic Health Authorities, and compelling all remaining NHS Trusts to become – or be subsumed into – Foundation Trusts.[8]

What has happened, bit by bit, to the NHS over the past 30 years thus becomes blindingly obvious. When the Thatcher government wanted to privatise council housing, it was able to appeal to tenants’ aspirations to social mobility through home ownership. When it wanted to privatise gas, telecommunications, electricity, and water, it was able to spin illusions of a ‘shareholder democracy’ where the laws of the free market would operate to ensure cheaper bills (seriously).

Even when the Major government was itself running out of steam in the mid-90s it was just about able to use years of underperformance (actually a result of chronic underinvestment) as justification for rushing through the privatisation of British Rail.

But quick and out-in-the-open sell-offs such as these would never have been possible in the case of the NHS: it was depended upon and highly regarded as a publicly-owned institution by the overwhelming majority of the British public. Instead the government would need a slow, covert, and incremental privatisation process that could never be revealed as a privatisation process (instead cloaking itself in such anodyne terms as ‘reform’ and ‘modernisation’) until the final endgame, by which time, of course, it would be a fait accompli.

Only now that the end is almost upon us do the likes of Nick Seddon dare to show their true colours and argue publicly for out-and-out privatisation. “Look,” they say, “the NHS is just too expensive to run in the old way any more; we need to bring in the efficiencies of the market!” – deliberately obscuring the fact that it is precisely the semi-privatised world of multiplying managers, insane internal market-related administrative costs, and spiralling PFI debt that they have created that has made the NHS so unnecessarily expensive to run in the first place.

Anyone who can seriously, in 2011, continue to ignore the evidence of their senses and trot out the lazy right-wing dogma of ‘public sector inefficient; private sector efficient’ is, quite frankly, either lying or stupid. Has the selling off of council homes resulted in more affordable housing? Has the selling off of the electricity, gas, and water boards resulted in more affordable utility bills? Has the selling off of the railways resulted in more affordable rail travel?

Of course, what the likes of Nick Seddon really mean when they talk of ‘efficiency’ is profitability. And here we get to the crux of the matter: The privateers simply do not care that privatisation inevitably results in a shoddy, inefficient, disorganised, expensive – and not to mention downright dangerous – service, because the sole purpose of it is to pour money into their pockets.

These people do not get involved with the NHS because they really fancy the challenge of delivering better health care, no matter what their glossy press releases may say. What they are after is a captive market – a guaranteed pot of taxpayers’ money with which they are free, and indeed are legally obliged, to boost their own profits.[9]

And if the shareholders demand more profits, no problem! By Seddon’s own admission, they can ‘reform’ the workforce and ‘renegotiate’ staff pay and conditions. But won’t cutting staff numbers potentially undermine the entire service? No problem there either – the Health and Social Care Bill promises to remove the Secretary of State’s legal obligation to ensure a comprehensive health service.

No doubt, if this response to Seddon’s article is published, I can expect a very polite rejoinder to the effect that ‘polemics that polarise debate are unhelpful’. To the charge that my argument against the privateers is a left-wing polemic, I am happy to plead guilty. After all, right-wing polemics dressed up in the politically neutral ‘professional’ language of management speak are still right-wing polemics, and deserve a response that brings the real terms of the debate out in the open.

Nothing has been more depressing in the NHS in recent years than the experience of senior doctors expressing their dismay and unease at the often bizarre edicts of corporate managers in private, yet feeling hamstrung into grudging acceptance by management’s claims to ‘professional’ authority in public.

It is not difficult to see the sorts of things that are crying out to be done to make the NHS a genuinelybetter and more efficient service: things like slashing the number of managers and putting clinicians back in charge; kicking the internal market into touch; ending the ridiculous business management-inspired culture of audit-for-audit’s-sake; scrapping PFI and cancelling related debt; nationalising the pharmaceutical industry.

The fact that these may seem like implausible dreams in these politically bleak times does not make them impossible and certainly does not make them wrong. After all, at one time the idea of an NHS itself must have seemed like an implausible dream.

Many doctors, despairing of the power of the managers, imagine that the way to fight managerialism is to become managers themselves. This is quite wrong; you might as well argue that the way to fight crime is to become a criminal yourself. On the contrary, the only way to counter the politically regressive aspirations of the privateers is to expose and oppose them at every turn.

Doctors must act not as managers and businessmen, but as workers and as citizens. Indeed, they must act as doctors. The NHS depends on it.


1. Why shouldnt private companies run failing hospitals?, 30 November 2010

2. G Orwell, Politics and the English Language, April1946

3. Health Insurance, US Census Bureau

4. ‘Obamas healthcare bill is enough to make you sick, by C Hedges, Truthdig, July 2010

5. Noam Chomsky interviewed by Amy Goodman Democracy Now, April 2009

6. AM Pollock, NHS plc – The Privatisation of our Health Care, 2004

7. ‘Health in Cuba’ by RS Cooper, JF Kennelly and P Ordunez-Garcia, International Journal of Epidemiology, 2006; 35: 817-824

8. Health and Social Care Bill 2011 

9. J Bakan, The Corporation: The Pathological Pursuit of Profit and Power, 2004

Posted in Campaigns, Health1 Comment

Who stole our future?


Issued by: Red Youth

Who stole our future?Why aren’t there any decent jobs? Why is it getting so expensive to go to college or university? Why is the future looking so bleak for young people? It’s natural to start asking these kinds of questions and to start getting angry with the usual answers.

Whatever part of the country you live in, the problems are the same. Unemployment and poverty appear to be the future for the poor, while the children of the rich get to live a life of luxury. Britain is the sixth wealthiest country in the world, so why is it that only a small section of the population has all the money, all the good jobs, all the advantages?

Class system

Our society is a capitalist society. A tiny number of people own all the wealth, while the rest of us have to work for them to make ends meet. In capitalist society, it’s okay for the rich to rob the poor – to give us bad wages and poor housing, to take away our education and benefits – but it’s illegal for the poor to take from the rich.

There are two main classes in capitalist society: the working class and the ruling class. Working-class youth have to find a job in order to have a life. If we don’t get into education or work we don’t have a future. We don’t have houses we can rent to other people, we don’t own factories or shops, and we can’t invest our millions on the stock exchange in London like the wealthy sons and daughters of the rich.

It doesn’t matter what Alan Sugar says on The Apprentice, it’s not possible for us to become multimillionaires – we just don’t have those opportunities. Our ‘choice’ is more likely to be between a life of poverty and a life of crime. But there is an alternative to this system; there is a change we can make. The change we need to make is called socialism, and Red Youth wants to organise working-class youth to make it happen.


Not only is the capitalist system inherently unfair, it has a catastrophic flaw built into it: economic crisis. Capitalism runs on profits – essentially, nothing gets made or done unless someone can make a profit out of it. So here’s the problem: the only way to keep making profits is to sell more and more goods to the masses, but the best way to keep production costs down is to employ fewer people on lower wages.

It doesn’t take a genius to see that if people’s wages are reduced and the numbers employed go down, there will be fewer people who are actually able to buy the stuff that the capitalists are trying to sell. And since capitalism went global, we now have a global economy, so the crisis isn’t just here, it’s everywhere. Vast masses of people are being pushed out of work because they can’t afford to buy all the stuff theymade and the capitalists are trying to sell back to them!

This leads to a vicious downward spiral, where people aren’t buying enough goods, so capitalists go out of business, leading to more job losses and fewer people able to buy – which leads to more job losses, and so on. In this crazy situation, food and essential goods of all kinds sit uselessly in warehouses or are destroyed, while the people who need them starve and go without.

There are well over 2 million unemployed in Britain today, even by official counting methods. Young people are the worst-hit section, accounting for nearly half of all those on Jobseekers Allowance. And that’s not counting the hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of young people who don’t sign on the dole for various reasons.

Any day down at the job centre it’s the usual rubbish; it’s even getting hard to get a job in Asda or Tesco. The entire experience makes thousands of young people ill and depressed every year. How often have you applied for a job but not even been given an interview? It’s not because you’re not good enough, or your application was bad; it’s because there were probably hundreds of other applicants, and yours, at the bottom of the pile, got put in the bin.

Don’t get depressed about it, get angry!


For millions of us, education offers the only way to a better future. But education doesn’t come cheap. Just as the government was scrapping the £30 a week EMA (Education Maintenance Allowance) they decided to give the banks £850bn! The ruling class believes that propping up a dying system is far more important than giving hundreds of thousands of working-class youth the chance to continue their education.

Not content with denying us the right to further education at college, the ruling class has now decided to shut the doors to higher education too. New degree students in England and Wales will need to find £9,000 every year for fees – and that’s on top of living expenses! The result is that even if you manage to stay in college, and even if you manage to get good grades, the chances of affording a university education are extremely slim.

It’s clear that the ruling class is cutting off our access to work and education – we’re being trapped in a cycle of endless poverty, desperation and degradation. No wonder that in these circumstances so many young people are driven to join the British army.


It seems that the ruling class gets all the benefits from war, while workers get nothing but injury or death. Films, TV and games glorify war and make it seem exciting, but the reality is different.

When you join the army you don’t get to learn a skill or do any of the really exciting stuff like fly a helicopter – that’s too important for the likes of us. All those cushy jobs go to the rich kids like Prince William, who are automatically put in charge. They’re the ‘officers’ whilst we (the ‘squaddies’) are expected just to take orders and do all the fighting – and dying.

They make us fight our foreign working-class brothers and sisters so that they and their ruling circles can plunder and steal all the wealth and natural resources (like oil) of the countries we attack. But why should we do their dirty work for them? Why should we steal and plunder other people’s wealth? If the rich want to steal the oil, let the prime minister and the bankers send their children to get killed while we stay here and look after our own interests.

In fact, if you think about it, we have more in common with the working-class youth of foreign countries than we do with the rich youth in Britain. When our foreign brothers resist our ruling class they are teaching us by example. We need to unite with our class brothers in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and elsewhere in order to defeat our common enemy – the British ruling class – and build a happy, prosperous and cultured existence, free from endless poverty and war.

Divide and rule

It’s obvious that this system isn’t in the interests of the vast majority of people, so how has it survived for so long?

On top of having a huge state machinery of coercion – police, courts, prisons etc – to keep people in line, the capitalists also control the media. From school textbooks to BBC and Sky news to the Sun and theGuardian, their ideas are pushed onto us every day: a way of looking at the world that teaches us that this system is inevitable and logical, and that cuts and wars are necessary to defend ‘our way of life’, as opposed to protecting their profit margins.

One of the biggest lies we are told is that the problems we face – lack of jobs, cuts in public services, no access to education or housing and so on – are caused by immigrants putting a ‘strain’ on Britain’s resources. But long before there were large numbers of immigrants in Britain there was mass unemployment and capitalist crisis!

Groups like EDL and the BNP pretend to be addressing workers’ problems, but by reinforcing the lies about immigration being the root cause of those problems, what they actually do is help the capitalists stay in power and keep the working class divided and weak.

What is to be done?

The fact is that the ruling class stays in power by encouraging those it rules over to fight each other – instead of getting together to fight the capitalists! The one thing that would really threaten our rulers’ grip on power is if the workers of Britain united and got organised. The police and the army combined couldn’t do much in the face of the masses of people once we decided to stop obeying their orders and believing their lies!

An understanding of society (theory) and a way of uniting to change it (organisation) are the two things that we need to make a socialist revolution. Young people have everything to gain by getting involved in this process sooner rather than later. This world isn’t working for us and we deserve better!

Not only do we need to campaign against the bad conditions and lack of prospects for the youth in Britain today, but we need to work for a completely different type of society – one where people’s needs decide everything.

So many problems face this world: environmental catastrophe, poverty, disease, racism and war. They’ll never be solved while capitalism remains, but they could all be sorted if society was set up for the benefit of the majority rather than the private gain of a few billionaires.

Posted in UKComments Off on Who stole our future?

Hands off Somalia Victory to the Resistance!

Issued by: CPGB-ML

Hands off Somalia
Victory to the Resistance!
The deeper imperialism sinks into crisis, the more desperately it takes to the path of war.

In its struggle to dominate all markets, especially energy markets, imperialism strives to suppress any expression of national independence that interferes with its ability to exploit. Meanwhile, rivalries are mounting between the imperialist gangs themselves – rivalries that will ultimately end in war. The exploiters cannot help turning to war to solve their problems. Yet when they do, they end up increasing the forces of resistance that will finally overthrow their bloodthirsty system.

The drive to war is particularly pronounced in Africa, that continent so wealthy in resources and so impoverished by imperialist robbery. The assault on Libya signalled a major new phase in the campaign to recolonise Africa. And that is how we must understand the turn now taken by imperialist meddling in Somalia.

Somalia fights back

Western imperialist policy on Somalia is nothing to do with pirates or kidnapping. It’s all about oil. Since the overthrow of Siad Barre in 1991, Washington has wanted to get its hands on the lucrative oil deals conceded by the president before his departure. This drew the US into one failed military adventure after another, each intended to install a government capable of delivering the country’s oil wealth into the hands of Uncle Sam.

In 1993, Washington used famine as a pretext for invasion, only to see its far better-armed forces humiliated and chased out by the Somali people. Since then, the US has been justifiably nervous about getting its boots on the ground.

Yet whilst the counter-revolutionary forces on the ground in Somalia have mostly been Ethiopian and Kenyan, supplemented by further cannon fodder drafted in by the African Union (AU) from Burundi, Uganda and Djibouti, the real interests for which these proxies are fighting are American, British and French.

It was French warships that covered Kenya’s back as she invaded the south in September. It is US drones that rain death on Somali fighters and civilians alike. And it is BP with whom the West-backed Transitional Federal Government (TFG) is already discussing “the future management of oil revenues”!

But these discussions are premature. With the sham ‘transitional’ government in control of little more than central Mogadishu and some parts of the north, and the influential islamist al-Shabaab resistance in control everywhere else, imperialism’s puppets are beleaguered on all sides.

Baidoa, the southern town forced to host the TFG’s joke ‘parliament’ until the resistance chased them out three years ago, was supposedly recaptured by Ethiopian troops in February. However, the puppet forces found themselves hemmed in by the resistance, which unleashed a salvo of bombings.

Elsewhere in the south, in Garbaharey, puppet soldiers and officials have also found themselves under attack, and al-Shabaab is confident in its ability to undermine the Ethiopian hold on the area by destroying key strategic facilities.

Thieves fall out

Unlike the forces defending Somalia’s unity, the TFG is only too happy to assist plans to fragment Somalia, the better to sell it out piecemeal to the multinationals. A recent WikiLeaks exposure revealed how the US spent two years grooming Kenya for its role in occupying the south, with the goal of carving out a separatist dependent region earmarked for ruthless exploitation. They even dreamed up a name for this: ‘Judaland’. Up in the north-east the TFG has now proclaimed a similar project, this time dubbed ‘Puntland’.

But the harder the imperialists try to divide Somalia, the faster the cracks multiply in their own ranks, prompting that Lady Macbeth of the US State Department, Hillary Clinton, to issue a stark warning to “people inside and outside the TFG who seek to undermine Somalia’s peace and security or even prevent the political transition”. This comment clearly reveals the imperialists’ frustration at their ongoing inability to create the ‘peaceful’ atmosphere required for ‘doing business’ in Somalia, despite all the political, economic and military muscle that has been thrown at the ‘problem’ of the people’s resistance.

And whilst politicians squabble, the hired muscle is also getting flabby. Ethiopia’s prime minister recently announced that the country’s troops will pull out soon. More cannon fodder is expected from Sierra Leone in June, but her government might with profit heed the words of senior al-Shabaab commander Sheik Hudeyfa, who warns them “not to dispatch their boys to Somalia, otherwise they will collect more bodies from here as the failed Kenyans did”, pointing out that if the invaders “were successful they would not have to call Sierra Leone troops to join them”.

Meanwhile, Kenya finds herself on the rack of an economic crisis. The government promised to free public-sector wages for three years in exchange for the IMF raising the country’s borrowing ceiling, only to be confronted by a massive wave of strikes by the country’s doctors, dentists and teachers. Now the government has reneged on the wage freeze, imperilling its IMF loan status. On top of all this, the cost of the war in Somalia has rocketed, with uncertainty over how much will be covered by funding from the UN.

If a cash-strapped and demoralised Kenya pulls out of Somalia whilst the TFG collapses under the weight of its own contradictions, imperialism could be looking at another defeat at the hands of the resistance on the scale of 1993 or worse.

Be that as it may, the words of the great revolutionary Kim Il Sung in 1968 will sooner or later be validated by history: “The great anti-imperialist revolutionary cause of the Asian, African and Latin-American peoples is invincible.” Giving support to all those forces which by their actions are making that cause invincible is the simple revolutionary duty of the British proletariat.

Victory to al-Shabaab!
Death to imperialism!

Posted in SomaliaComments Off on Hands off Somalia Victory to the Resistance!

TUT Pod-Broadcast June 4, 2012

TUT Pod-Broadcast June 4, 2012

by crescentandcross

IsraHell–a nuclear armed country with an apocalyptic mindset, and yet Germany gives her modern submarines and now–SURPRISE SURPRISE–we find out these subs are now being fitted with nuclear weapons that can be used to destroy/blackmail countries.

We are joined by Phil Giraldi, former CIA officer to discuss this and other pertinent issues.


Download Here

Posted in ZIO-NAZIComments Off on TUT Pod-Broadcast June 4, 2012

Shoah’s pages