There is an epic struggle occurring in British politics at the moment, which could have major repercussions for the country, and perhaps even the whole world. At first glance this may appear to be an exaggeration, yet the prospect of a real ‘socialist’ – Jeremy Corbyn – becoming Labour party leader is potentially very significant.

As well as exposing and undermining the efforts of the architects of ‘New’ Labour to destroy traditional, socialist values, it also affords us a microcosmic view of a larger battle being fought. US hegemony, in the form of the global capitalist system – which just isn’t working (unless, of course, you are one of the psychopathic elite), versus a more socialist alternative, as represented by Russia, China and other BRICS countries, who are striving to create a ‘multi-polar’ world order.

There is ample evidence that the divide between the few who ‘have’ and the vast majority who ‘have not’ is increasing. The repeated claims by government officials and shills that more ‘austerity measures’ are necessary ‘for economic prosperity’ and the UK Tory party rhetoric that “we are all in this together” is nothing more than destructive propaganda and lies. New figures have emerged this week showing Britain has 41% more millionaires than it did five years ago. All this at a time of soaring inequality, rising house prices and in-work poverty. Britain really is the “European capital of inequality”, and is even more polarized between rich and poor than the United States!

The sudden popularity of anti-austerity advocate Jeremy Corbyn is, therefore, no surprise, because more and more people in the UK are waking up to the fact that the ruling ‘elite’, presently incarnated in the political form of the Conservative party (and the Liberal Democrats in the previous coalition government, and ‘New’ Labour before them), do NOT actually represent the majority of British people.

Voting for the next Labour party leader has already begun, with the results to be announced on Saturday 12th September 2015. This realization of entrenched inequality is not limited to the UK, with anti-austerity parties in other countries (such as Syriza in Greece, and Podemos in Spain) gaining more prominence.

    

But didn’t the people have their ‘democratic right’ to vote for whoever they chose in the recent UK general election? Sure, if your definition of democracy is a complete lack of any true opposition. What is becoming increasingly evident in Britain is that what passes for ‘democracy’ is actually a farcical distortion of the concept, and actually demeans the intelligence of the electorate by effectively offering them different colors to vote for. There is no real choice. Just as the there is no ‘real democracy’ in the US, with republicans and democrats giving the illusion of being in opposition when essentially they are both paid up members of the same ‘psychopathic elite’ ruling the country.

    

The ‘elite’ in this world are made up of psychopaths and seriously character disturbed individuals. The ‘consensus reality’ of greed and supreme narcissism that they have created is very much the ‘elephant in the global living room’. Because this topic is rather uncomfortable for most people to seriously consider, it has been omitted from the dominant discourse by most political commentators, and people remain generally ignorant of the intra-species predators who prey on us all.

For an overview of this process of ‘ponerization’ of society, read this SoTT Focus article titled ‘Political Ponerology: A Science on The Nature of Evil adjusted for Political Purposes‘, writen by Laura Knight-Jadczyk, an excerpt from which notes:

The actions of [pathocracy] affect an entire society, starting with the leaders and infiltrating every town, business, and institution. The pathological social structure gradually covers the entire country creating a “new class” within that nation. This privileged class [of pathocrats] feels permanently threatened by the “others”, i.e. by the majority of normal people. Neither do the pathocrats entertain any illusions about their personal fate should there be a return to the system of normal man.

The book Political Ponerology is available from QFG Publishing.

‘Corbynmania’

    

Corbyn’s anti-austerity stance is certainly one major factor in his popularity, as the aforementioned figures clearly show, austerity measures negatively impact the poorest in society, while rewarding the richest. As stated in this article:

“People keep comparing the Corbyn campaign to 1983. But surely the more apt comparison is with 2001. Back then, everyone in the country – apart a few hundred politicians – knew that there were no Weapons of Mass Destruction, that the invasion of Iraq was a harebrained folly that would end in tragedy. In 2015, everyone – except a few hundred politicians – can see that austerity is a harebrained folly that could end in tragedy.

A humorous take from Huff Post UK Comedy – Corbynmania hits the UK – reflects the renewed political activism that is sweeping Britain, particularly with the younger generation. Such popularity in such a ‘radical’ is very unpopular to those who cherish the ‘status quo’.


The 3 step ‘character assassination’ plan for Jeremy Corbyn:

A former British ambassador to Uzbekistan, Craig Murray, succinctly explained the dangers of ‘Corbynmania’ and why he is “terrifying the London elite” thus provoking personal attacks from politicians and the government-owned mainstream media.

For a decade, I have argued that democracy in the UK is dysfunctional because an entrenched party system offers no real choice. The major parties offer political programmes which are virtually indistinguishable.

1. Trial by mainstream media

You might think that a truly ‘leftist’ politician like Corbyn would be supported by the UK’s supposedly ‘leftist’ newspapers, but recent headlines from both the UK Guardian and the Independent show just how wrong you would be. In the image below, The Guardian promotes former PM Gordan Brown’s threat that ‘extreme’ measures must be taken against Corbyn:

    

Another former PM, Tony Blair, was slightly more direct in his assessment and described the Labour party as “heading for the precipice” and facing “annihilation” should Corbyn become leader.

    

Jeremy Corbyn has since launched a dignified fightback against the ‘deliberate misrepresentation’ and ‘hysteria’ over his policies, such as being completely misquoted on the idea of women-only train carriages.

2. ‘Deep politics’ and implied guilt by association

    

With a majority of British politicians being compliant, spineless, sycophants, it is no wonder that those anomalies who promote normal, rational, humanitarian ideals are targeted and subsequently side-lined by the ‘elite’ of British society. Even as far back as the 1990’s, Jeremy Corbyn was seen as a threat, particularly for his pro-Palestinian (therefore perceived as anti-Israel) sentiments. At that time, the trio of James Purnell, Stephen Twigg and Tal Michael attempted an inept NUS (National Union of Students)-type putsch to remove Corbyn from politics.

Incidentally, the New Labour machine quickly found winnable seats for Purnell and Twigg, and both soon became active in the Labour Friends of Israel (LFI), an outfit that is currently begging party members not to vote for Corbyn despite his open and all-inclusive stance on Middle East issues and repeated stating of the obvious: “There is not going to be a peace process unless there are talks involving Israel, Hezbollah and Hamas – and I think everyone knows that.”

3. How to spot ‘psychopathic projection’ – it’s as easy as ABC

    

To understand the baseless nature of the dire predictions being made if Corbyn becomes Labour party leader, we need only look at the language being used to slander and defame him.

Tony Blair, whose murderous legacy still haunts ‘New’ Labour, said that “People who say their heart is with Corbyn, get a transplant”. Ironic words indeed, from a heartless war criminal.

In another blistering attack, Blair’s former chief spin doctor/attack dog, Alastair Campbell – the man largely responsible for the murder of Dr. David Kelly – said a victory for Jeremy Corbyn would be a ‘car crash’ which would guarantee the Tories another five years in power, and pleaded for Labour supporters to sign up to vote for ‘anyone but Corbyn’ – warning that the leadership contest was now a battle to save the party. The truth, however, is that Campbell and Blair are engaged in a battle to maintain the status quo – where the self-serving, psychopathic political offerings and constant warmongering and slaughter of innocents abroad are served up as British politics.

Writing on his blog, Campbell went on to say:

“The two main parties, when choosing a leader, are picking the person they intend thereafter to try to persuade the people of the UK ‘this is who should be your Prime Minister. And yet the Labour Party, if it elects Jeremy Corbyn as leader, is selecting someone that every piece of political intelligence, experience and analysis tells you will never be elected Prime Minister.”

The disingenuous statement was echoed by former Cabinet minister Alan Johnson who claimed that “the madness of flirting with the idea of Corbyn as leader has to stop”. Before clarifying, just for good measure, “That means no first preferences, no second preferences, no any preferences. It frankly means ABC, Anyone But Corbyn.”

    

As a psychiatrist captivated by the reaction to Corbynites in the Labour leadership contest, Russell Razzaque provides some useful input into the mentality of those behind such emotionally driven, intellectually bereft, rabid rhetoric. He says:

“Those who back Corbyn are being labelled by other Labour party members as more emotionally volatile and less predictable, grounded by the elder statesmen on the leadership side of the divide who see backing Anyone But Corbyn as a sign of maturity and calm. The Corbyn backers are said to be “in trauma” and their reaction is an “emotional spasm” to the shock of the general election. Less charitably they have sometimes been described as “not normal”, “narcissistic” or even “mad”.”

This type of psychological labelling of the “out group” is a form of classic psychological projection, a defence mechanism whereby people deny unpleasant impulses in themselves and attribute them to others. He further adds:

“This is why I am concerned when we hear from certain politicians and commentators that those backing Corbyn are the ones who are going through some kind of meltdown, while the rest have somehow risen above emotional reactions. Ironically, their immediate reactions to Corbyn’s rise are perhaps the most emotional of all. The assessment by the Anyone But Corbyn camp is as subject to assumptions and wish fulfilment as anyone else’s.

The idea that Labour could swing far enough to the right to win enough Tory voters in England to form a majority, without winning back any support in Scotland – and without simultaneously losing a swathe of seats in its remaining heartlands, as a result of the disillusionment it evokes – is based on just as much wishful thinking as others accuse Corbyn supporters of using. They have no more right to describe themselves as “realists” than anyone on the other side.

For me, the healthiest debate is one in which people bring their emotions to the table – rather than resist them in the suffocating pretence that they can be supressed. For that, a space needs to be created in which all can speak freely, without fear of being ridiculed, side-lined or pathologised, for it is through such discourse that real and creative change can emerge.”

‘Wishful thinking’ is a well known indicator of pathological types. Essentially, they cannot ‘see’ anything beyond their own myopic view of reality, and they have no concern about the consequences of their actions to others. Without Conscience – The Disturbing World of the Psychopaths Among Us by Robert D. Hare is an excellent book that covers this crucially important topic. The ruthless, relentless and insatiable greed for ‘food’ – power, money, control etc. make such psychopathic individuals very dangerous, particularly if they assume influential positions of power – which of course they do!

‘Entryism’ or a ‘Purge’ of Labour supporters?

    

According to the definition in the Oxford Dictionary, Entryism is “the infiltration of a political party by members of another group, with the intention of subverting its policies or objectives”.

One of these ‘infiltrators’ is Kerry-anne Mendoza, who explains how Labour Party leaders have banned her and many others from voting for Jeremy Corbyn.

“The first wave of the UK Labour Party’s purge of registered supporters has begun, and I and many others outside of the Blairite wing of the Labour movement were disenfranchised by our own party on Thursday.

At a little after 5:00 am yesterday, an email arrived in my inbox from Labour HQ.”

    

Rather than “subverting its policies or objectives” Kerry-anne Mendoza seems to have bone fide Labour party credentials. She is the author of Austerity – The Demolition of the Welfare State and the Rise of the Zombie Economy. She’s not a Tory mischief-maker or a Militant entryist, she’s an old-fashioned Labour supporter. Her mistake, it seems, was to tweet her local Labour MP before the last election to say she would be voting Green after becoming fed up with the neoliberal takeover of Labour. That decision was apparently the pretext to bar her from the coming leadership vote.

As she points out, she’s exactly the kind of voter the Labour party needs if it ever wants to form a government again. Instead she’s been cast out. Countless other Labour supporters such as comedians Mark Steel and Jeremy Hardy, along with renowned author Marcus Chown and ‘Spirit of ’45’ director Ken Loach – have all been banned from voting by the Labour purge.

Hundreds took to the #LabourPurge hashtag to share their stories of rejection. Ms Mendoza summed up the frustrations of the ‘purged’ – “While we stayed true to the ‘aims and values’ of the Labour Party, others ran it as a neoliberal Conservative-lite option.” As Mark Steel so aptly put it: ‘Labour – you can’t join as a new member unless you’re already a member.’

There have already been suggestions of ‘meddling’ in the outcome which is very reminiscent of the rigging of the Scottish Referendum.

An article titled, ‘Purge of Corbyn voters unmasks Labour’ by Jonathon Cook, reveals more unpleasant truths about the main British so-called ‘opposition’ party:

“The problem is that, if Labour admits Corbyn is actually harnessing massive support from the real left, it would also have to concede that long ago it departed from its roots, becoming just another wing of the neoliberal elite. And more significantly, it would also have to be prepared to contemplate changing course, opening itself up to the possibility that someone with social democratic convictions might again lead the party.

Neither is about to happen, so Labour is finding the flimsiest of excuses to purge itself of any voters it can identify as likely to back Corbyn in the leadership vote. Farcically, among those is Mark Serwotka, the leader of one of the UK’s biggest trade unions, after he said he would consider affiliating his PCS civil servants union with Labour if Corbyn wins.”

Behind the ‘red threat’ – the spectre of Socialism back on the British political agenda

    

Judging by the comments of politicians, political commentators and the British press recently, you’d think Corbyn was leading a flotilla of Russian warships up the river Thames, distributing copies of the Communist Manifesto in an attempt to brainwash us all.

Amid near-hysterical fears that it has experienced a mass infiltration by communists and left-wing “extremists”, interim Labour leader Harriet Harman has defended her party’s leadership election system. Procedures deemed “rigorous” had been put in place to vet new applicants to the party, which include checking peoples Facebook accounts, to ensure they share “the aims and values of the Labour Party.”

Several Labour MPs have expressed fears the party has become infested with hard-left entryists seeking to boost Corbyn’s chances. An unnamed senior Labour figure even described the influx of socialists as a “very serious threat to the democracy of the party” and called for the election race to be scrapped.

Labour MP John Mann said:

“It is becoming a farce with long-standing members … in danger of getting trumped by people who have opposed the Labour Party and want to break it up – expressly want to break it up,”

…”Some of it is the Militant Tendency types coming back in.”

According to the Labour party’s own website its values include:

  • social justice
  • strong community and strong values
  • reward for hard work
  • decency
  • rights matched by responsibilities

So how can people who actually adhere to the ‘values’ of the Labour party – people who want to vote for a leadership candidate with these same ‘values’ – be described as a “very serious threat to the democracy of the party”?

    

The answer, of course, is that the original core Labour party values have been deliberately and systematically eroded and subverted by the real infiltrators – the British intelligence architects of Tony Blair’s ‘New Labour’ who brought us perpetual war for corporate and private profit. Beginning in 1997, the heart and soul of the Labour party was removed, Frankenstein-like, by Blair, Brown, Mandelson, Campbell et al. Using the excuse of much needed ‘reform’, they made the Labour party the party of fascism, just like the Conservatives.

Cui bono? The aforementioned data on inequality makes it clear that the majority have not benefited – on the contrary their benefits are being continually cut. Those who have gained most from this change in the political landscape are the corporations, the ‘elite’, the ‘establishment’, the Powers That Be or whatever you prefer to call them. These are the same cabal who continue to reap such huge rewards under the Conservative party now, just as they did under ‘New’ Labour. This isn’t some ‘conspiracy theory’, it’s self evident.

The interesting aspect of all of this is that it was a reform of the Labour party’s election system that, for the first time in many decades, actually allowed true Labour party supporters to have their say and someone like Corbyn to lead the race:

“It is ironic that it is their own destruction of the Labour Party’s democratic structures that have inadvertently created this situation,”

“By turning the Labour Party leadership into a kind of US-style ‘primary’ where anyone can vote for £3, they aimed to further marginalize the trade unions and the left in the Labour Party, but they have accidentally let in the voice of the many people who were totally disillusioned by Labour’s endless austerity-lite mantra.”

British McCarthyism

    

The fear mongering about infiltration by socialists is reminiscent of McCarthyism in the Unites States during the 1950/60’s, a term used today to describe reckless, unsubstantiated accusations, as well as demagogic attacks on the character or patriotism of political adversaries.

It now appears that anyone with (or suspected of having) left wing sympathies is being ousted from the Labour party. Twitter user Rebecca Day reported this appeal among members of the Oxford University Labour club:

    

“You too could be called a ‘Star’ by the Compliance Unit”, how very Orwellian! The purge is being referred to internally as ‘Operation: Ice Pick’, a particularly sick joke that references the weapon used in the 1940 assassination of Leon Trotsky by Stalinists. Supporters of Corbyn have been consistently derided as ‘Trots’ throughout the campaign. So, what is this completely irrational fear of socialist ideology all about?

What is socialism?

Socialism is:

an economic system characterized by public ownership and centralized planning of all major industries (manufacturing, services, and energy), banks and insurance companies, agribusiness, transportation, the media, and medical facilities. Under capitalism, these giant enterprises dominate the economy but are privately owned and operated for the purpose of generating wealth for their owners by extracting it from working people who are paid only a small fraction of what their labor produces. Socialism turns this around so that the class that produces the wealth can collectively decide how it will be used for the benefit of all.

Although there are different types, Real socialism is, by definition, democratic. It is economic as well as political democracy. Many capitalist countries boast of their democratic institutions, but this is an illusion because all the political power is in the hands of those who hold the wealth. Socialism prioritizes human needs and eliminates the profit motive that drives war, ecological destruction, and inequalities based on gender, race, nationality and sexuality.

Like capitalism, socialism must be international so that global resources can be shared. No country can be truly independent of the global economy because until capitalism is defeated internationally it will continue to sabotage efforts to build socialism. Achieving socialism in the United States, the wealthiest and most powerful country in the world, is necessary to any country being able to determine its own destiny.

On the Labour party website it states: “As a democratic, socialist party we welcome people to join the party from all walks of life, have their say and influence policy.”

Maybe I’m missing something, but the recent purge of genuine supporters of ‘democratic socialism’ seems to run counter to this statement.

The desperate, juvenile, emotionally charged rhetoric being used in this leadership campaign indicate an elite who are insanely protective of their ‘food’ source i.e. the working people of any society. History shows us that individuals who get in the way of the ‘elite’ and refuse to ‘toe the psycho party line’ are relentlessly attacked and ‘removed’, by one means or another. The modus operandi include “dirty tricks”, bribery, blackmail and murder.

More information = more choice

    

When I last voted (in my ignorance and naivety) for New Labour back in 1997, it was primarily a ‘protest’ vote against the Conservative party. I thought that choosing the ‘lesser of two evils’ was preferable to not voting at all. But I was missing crucial information.

Information can help resolve uncertainty. Our choices, expressions of free will essentially, are effectively governed by:

1. Access to information

2. Our ability to process that information

Therefore, in order to make more informed choices, effort needs to be applied to search for information that is as objective as possible, and to work on ourselves to understand the cognitive bias we all have. Science actually shows us “How We Support Our False Beliefs”. By a process of self-observation and self-awareness we can change ourselves. If enough people engage in this process, society can change in a non-linear macroscopic way.

According to Bob Altemeyer, in his book The Authoritarians, he says :

“Authoritarians are highly submissive to established authority, aggressive in the name of that authority, and conventional to the point of insisting everyone should behave as their authorities decide. They are fearful and self-righteous and have a lot of hostility in them that they readily direct toward various outgroups. They are easily incited, easily led, rather un-inclined to think for themselves, largely impervious to facts and reason, and rely instead on social support to maintain their beliefs. They bring strong loyalty to their in-groups, have thick-walled, highly compartmentalized minds, use lots of double standards in their judgments, are surprisingly unprincipled at times, and are often hypocrites. But they are also Teflon-coated when it comes to guilt. They are blind to themselves, ethnocentric and prejudiced, and as close-minded as they are narrow-minded.”

Jeremy Corbyn’s attackers are authoritarians or authoritarian followers.

Despite the character assassination of Jeremy Corbyn and the political forecasting that the Labour party under his leadership would be “unelectable” in 2020, having ‘real opposition’ can only be healthy for British politics. In addition, the vitriolic personal attacks and the ‘purge’ on Labour supporters has given us a valuable and timely insight into what really goes on behind the political scenes..

Even if the invasive, ‘virus-like’ culture of psychopathy has infected Britain and most other ‘Western’ countries to the extent that a global socialist utopia is no longer a reality, aligning ourselves with those people, countries and systems that reflect sane, human values is still a worthy aim. Those people who can think independently, who admit their mistakes and biases, who accept responsibility for themselves, who value personal and national sovereignty, who act appropriately with a conscience, who care for others and who make efforts to overcome their limitations and gain more knowledge – bring more order to help counter the increasing chaos being created as a result of the destructive policies of psychopaths in positions of power.