FUCK YOUR FEELINGS: YOU ARE TRASH AND SO IS YOUR WAR

Warmongerers chatting bare shit again. 

Over the past month, we’ve received an early Christmas gift: a barrage of weak-chinned, privately-educated, Middle England journalists and politicians getting moist and sticky over bombing yet another Middle-Eastern state for democracy, much like we did to Gaddaffi, then Saddam, then Gaddaffi again, now ISIS.

This time, however, after having their arguments already decimated during the hugely unpopular Iraq war, they have instead decided to cry about it.

The artist formerly known as the Middle East, now a piece of concept art made of glass, dead bodies and rubble, has long since been one of the West’s favourite things to meddle in when it runs out of money, oil, or both. We used to do it in Africa, but now we let the ANC do it for us. ISIS, a modern, murderous death cult often equated with fascism, though its similarities end only in that both are products of the current and most modern variation of capitalism, have provided the perfect pretext for ramping up the violence Syrians and Iraqis already face on a day to day basis.

This has been well supported by absolutely no-one but well-off journalists and the right wing of the Labour party, who have surpassed even a few Tories, who were reluctant to extend the decade-long campaign of bloodshed. The reasons against British involvement in Syria are endless: first off, it is already being blown up by Russia and America. When I say ‘it’, of course I refer to Syria itself as opposed to ISIS, as the bombs seem to have a selective trajectory and only fall on hospitals, schools and homes.

Second of all, ISIS itself is a product of intervention. When it first arrived on the scene and began to tear up the Iraqi countryside, before the western media suddenly decided it cared, it was countered with very little resistance from the Iraqi people, exhausted by war, with no infrastructure to care for them. In Mosul, soldiers abandoned their posts instead of defending the city from ISIS’s brutality. The gaping power vacuum swallowing up Iraqi politics, as it bounced from Ayad Alawi to Maliki, as well as the fact schools, hospitals, power stations, workplaces had been bombed to rubble, only strengthened the possibilities for ISIS to gain control of various regions, which they have. This isn’t the first time intervention has failed, in fact, it is just one example in a long line of failures, from Chechnya to Vietnam. And, if ISIS’ amassing influence is anything to go by, it is still failing.

You’d almost think that the war was some last-ditch attempt at garnering some financial spoils in a country where economic growth, which despite all the cuts to services by both the Labour Party and the Tories which has led to numerous deaths and Dickensian levels of poverty, is practically non-existent. So instead of aiding our own failing hospitals, schools and services, we’ll use what little revenue we have in the public arena to fund a war bombing another nation’s already-obliterated hospitals, schools, services and civilians in order to take out dictators we armed in the first place.

As if bombing Syria wasn’t enough, hundreds of Iraqis have now been banned from taking the British government to court should any abuse of Iraqis by the British army occur, in what is being heralded by a British army colonel as a ‘triumph of common sense’ as it might be stressful for the soldiers who have been accused. The Express and its subscribers can be forgiven for not knowing the meaning of common sense, as none of them possess a shred of it.

In fact the whole media onslaught around this fresh wave of ‘democracy-from-above’ has been centred on emotions rather than rationality, and the emotions of those doing the bombing no less. At the same time, they have been viciously and vehemently attacking the soft left, which, in either their psycho-sexual liberal bloodlust or general stupidity, they have curiously mistaken for the hard left.

Eustonite weirdos, such as Nick Cohen, have declared the left as doing nothing more than moral finger waving in response to, you know, not bombing people. Cohen, who has spent the past 20 years lost in the wilderness of his own imagined intellectual prowess, is like a dog that keeps shagging your kitchen table and getting splinters in its penis by fucking your furniture up. You take it to the vet, get a new kitchen table and hope it’s learnt its lesson, but when you turn around, Jesus Christ, it’s doing it again. From his ivory tower, Cohen has not helped the Iraqi people following the war he so passionately was in favour for in the aftermath, neither have the rest of the Eustonites who seem to believe that if you’re not for aggressive American and European imperialism, you’re essentially George Galloway and a supporter of Hezbollah, obviously. Sadly, we’re a bit smarter than that, Nick. And leave my damn table alone.

12366982_765008463642886_1232520425_n

           ‘Wow, this picture arouses me.’- Majority of British journalists, 2015

He, and the rest of his merry band of largely and horrendously middle class, male, over-pampered, misguided and emotionally stunted gang of Eustonite pals have also logically worked themselves into a strange position: the left is awful, disorganized and idiotic, yet somehow powerful enough to convince a large majority of the British population war is a bad idea. I suppose such rational fallacies occur when you make your erotic imperialist fantasies your political standpoint.

In addition, the hypocrisy of the the liberal right is such that they too, moralise, only theirs is a disingenuous morality which is shaped by whatever dribbling, ostentatious article they are torturing us with. Whereas the majority of British anti-war sentiment comes from a place of concern for the welfare of the people in those countries (as well as the sons and daughters of the working class being enticed by Call of Duty-style propaganda into a seriously underfunded army which can’t offer them the basic physical protection, which often leading to them coming home in body bags, because of course it is not Cohen et al who are enlisting however much we wish they would) for the right, on the other hand, their selective passion for the safety of LGBTQI people or women seems to only reveal itself with regards to Muslims, nothing else. For years following the war, the daily violence in the lives of Iraqis, Syrians, and people all over the Middle-East was barely newsworthy.

Thankfully, the right discredit themselves not just by being politically immature and contradictory, but just being themselves. John Rentoul has a picture of himself giggling with Blair as his Facebook timeline banner and has liked his own page on Facebook. Yes, you read that right. He liked his own page on Facebook. He also posted that genuinely terrible Hilary Benn speech three times in three days, which is the Blairite equivalent of sharing your favourite fisting video on Porn Hub to your friends and family on social media: i.e. fam, keep it to yourself, some of us don’t want to know.

Asides from the Eustonites and Blairites and their crazy, irrational war fetish, journalists have also accused the left on twitter, which amounts to about 8 of us (If I want some balding, pasty-faced, 40-something geezer venting his sexual inadequacy on me by shouting me down I’ll step outside my own front door, thank you very much) launching a tirade of abuse against MPs. There are many examples, and by many, I mean two. One, a particularly nasty twitter troll tweeted to Caroline Flint ‘”I hope you will feel collective guilt when hundreds of innocent people die as a result of that decision. Have a nice day.”’

  1. Jesus Christ.
  2. “Have a nice day”- the most British abuse ever. One can only aspire to such levels of passive aggression.

It shouldn’t need to be said that bombing a country itself is not only a form of bullying, it is peak bullying: you couldn’t bully anyone more, even if you tried. Does Flint really believe that innocent people won’t suffer as a result of airstrikes?

British military strength is laughable, particularly in comparison to the might of our American and Russian counterparts. One only needs to look at our transport system to realise that, even though both Labour and the Tories may insist on it, the chances of our airstrikes accurately taking out ISIS fighters with little collateral damage are minimal.

There have also complaints that twitter trolls, the hard left by which they mean the soft left, are in fact raging sexists for challenging female Labour MPs instead of limiting them to the remits of their gender and thereby patronizingly accepting everything they do as virtuous. The same female MPs who have voted for cuts to women’s services and the NHS, and who are now bombing the women of the Middle East and their children, the largest group to be victims of intervention airstrikes. Let’s be clear: the MPs and media darlings who have suddenly decided upon feminism as a way of defending their terrible politics only demand feminism of the liberal variety for their own: if you’re a working class woman, a working class woman of colour, or god forbid, an Arab woman, then you need to shut your mouth before they shut it for you. A very one-sided sisterhood indeed.

Following that, the attacks on the left, including rather nasty and peculiar attacks on individuals, the left as collective, attacks on Muslims as a collective, and indeed, the entire working class by the government and media mysteriously vanishes when it comes to their own sensibilities being on the receiving end. Freedom of speech for those who have the most freedom, it seems, while the British, Syrian and Iraqi population has to make do with physical, systematic, emotional and institutional attacks on ourselves as individuals and as a community.

Attacks which make very little sense, like Alan Johnson, former student leftwinger and communist attacking Left Unity member Simon Hardy for being a student leftwinger and communist. Like Batman vs the Joker in Dark Knight, only Johnson lacks the Joker’s gravitas, charisma, charm and wit.

Unlike the mild-mannered peaceniks on Twitter, we need to ramp up the aggression and severity of our criticisms. We are unable to do physically, systematically, emotionally and institutionally at the moment, so we must use every channel available to us in the meantime. We should not let them rest one minute as they have not let us rest either. They are weak, exasperatedly out of touch, politically and intellectually redundant, cowardly, inept, disgusting human beings who have never suffered and deserve nothing more than to be reminded of their inadequacy.

By treating them with the respect they sorely do not deserve, we are passively bending over backwards for these people. They have been spat out into existence, constantly told their opinions are worth more than us, they are worth more than us, given a far better standard of living than us, more opportunities than us, and now we let them insult us, bully us and send us to war for them. The reality is, they are, in fact, beneath us. Their extensive educations have clearly no bearing on their actual intellectual platforms, their journalism is appalling, and they act for us rather than be our elected representatives.

Whereas we were once oppressed by towering, bearded dictators like Henry the Eighth or Genghis Khan, we’re presented with the absolute worst of the English middle and upper classes, which, frankly, is a bit of an insult. Instead of the grand old warlords of yore, we now have fucking Hilary Benn. It’s like a circus, but instead of clowns we have wastemen.

So to the British government and media, fuck you right back.

 

BACK TO THE OLD SCHOOL: A CASE FOR A RETURN TO COMMUNISM

‘Doing politics differently’ is a massive scam.

So, at the last Momentum meeting in North London that I attended, I had the misfortune of sitting through an endless parade of bullshit. That is, constant insistence upon this idea that we need to ‘do politics differently’- what this entails, no one is quite sure, but as one person commented ‘We should knit a quilt for Jeremy Corbyn’.

Oh god no.

This drive towards finding a new alternative is not so new and has been around for at least a couple of years. I remember sitting at Occupy Stock Exchange, for my sins, many moons ago, watching the hippies ‘send vibration waves’ to parliament to physically shake the brickwork and bring it crashing down. Fair play to them, if it had actually worked, it would have been rather novel. But, to everyone’s surprise, it failed. Perhaps there was a misalignment in someone’s chakras.

It is understandable why people are frustrated. The common A-B march, one day strike action, endless meetings where, due to the heavy secteriana, no motions are passed, rampant triumphalism after every shit demo and fetishisation of action (usually an SWPer in corduroy and sallow skin demanding we ‘take it to the streets’ or some anarchist infatuated with their own machismo and rebelliousness setting a bin on fire) has created a crisis in the British left; the outcome of which are hundreds of disillusioned ex-Trots and anarchists with god-awful and confused politics floating around and tailgating every and any movement that springs from toxic and rotting ground. Especially if the said movement appears to offer an alternative to their Trotskyist past.

It is not Marxism or communist politics that are to blame for the intellectually defunct Trotsky cults, or at least not fully to blame; in fact, most Trots on the British left seem to actually have a limited understanding of communist politics, due to the lack of cadreisation and political education within these groups. This isn’t an accident, of course. By focusing solely on functional duties as opposed to raising the bar of their member’s understanding of leftwing discourse, these groups have created willing, unquestioning, and blind footsoldiers to do the bidding of their manipulative and egocentric leaders. In anarchist groups, while there is no formal structure, either the most masculine or the most loud, brash and rude become de facto leader, even if their position is not solidified in a party structure.

And as a result, methods of ‘doing politics differently’ actually differ very little from the tactics of the Trot groups: one only has to look at the laughable disaster that is Left Unity, with its different factions slyly trying to surpass each other, abysmal leadership and certain members abhorrent dismissal of Worker’s Power and the Communist Platform shows that the game pretty much remains the same. The same is the case for the Trots at large, whether aligned to a specific sect or not.

Of course, it is not just a question of tactics. The influence of liberal intersectionality and radical feminism, both of which, in my opinion, seem to actually despise women and their autonomy almost as much as some of the old boys in the unions do, has had an overwhelmingly negative effect. Instead of solidarity, you now have isolationism. Instead of being bullied by your full-timer or party EC, you’re being bullied by a middle-class student type who thinks dying your hair increases your radical potential, and you will be called out even when you haven’t actually done anything problematic. This has even spread outside the tiny, insular, irrelevant student union left bubbles. At the last Left Unity conference, they decided to demand Labour make their meetings accessible, even though that is already apart of Labour’s programme. Any efforts to point this out were met by accusations of ‘ableism’.

That’s just embarrassing and to be honest we should be collectively ashamed of what we’ve become.

We are all perfectly aware of exactly how some left wing men, often rather alienated men with the social skills of a 13 year old, only unlike a 13 year old they have less sexual shame, behave. However, standing up in a meeting and bellowing ‘LET A WOMAN SPEAK’ when no woman has their hand up is not going to magically transform the left as a part of society. It is interesting that often the most pious, intersectional, holier than thou, are often doing so either to bully, shut down debate, or worse. Looking at the implosion of intersectional “safe spaces” as they torment one another and call each other out into non-existence, and the fact that their politics ultimately has lead a lot of them into ideological dead ends, it would appear bottom of the barrel, bargain basement, cack-handed identity politics is also no alternative.

Another argument for ‘doing politics differently’ is that it will engage the working classes and young people who would otherwise be deterred by boring meetings and debates. Which just demonstrates how out of touch these people are that they think knitting a patchwork quilt of Jeremy Corbyn’s face will attract ‘da yoof’. Sure, I would be more so inclined to turn up to a left wing event if there was free MDMA involved, and maybe a bouncy castle. But, unbeknownst to the saggy, dour Trots and ext-Trots at Momentum meetings, young people are fully aware that life is dull. Their lives especially so, the drudgery of Zero Hour contracts and prospect of retiring at the ripe old age of 112 looming in the distance. And if meetings and debates produce fruitful outcomes, which they fully have the possibility to do, then here, substance trumps fun. I suppose it’s nice to come from a class where left wing politics is more of a pastime rather than a fight for our collective future, but some of us don’t have that luxury, unfortunately. For some of us, it’s war.

They also hide and conceal any evidence of radicalism, refusing to include the word ‘revolution’ for example, as it may scare the working class off. There is more radical promise in a takeaway menu than in the ‘OUR DEMANDS’ section at the back of the Socialist Party’s paper, only you have to pay £1 for the insult while reading the former is free. It makes it seem as if the working class is a nubile young fawn, delicate and shy, that needs to be coaxed into the arms of a hunter, when in reality the fawn has grown up and turned into a bashed up bitter old stag which votes Tory. The kind that hang around Richmond park and charge small dogs. Trot groups and groups made of ex-Trot fallout maintain that we should engage the masses with softly, softly, catch monkey rhetoric, pander to the British public’s piss-poor levels of political acumen by making gentle demands and wrapping our politics in SocDem, centre-left politics. Then, when the working masses inevitably reveal their revolutionary potential, the British left can jump out of a massive cake and yell ‘SURPRISE! We were communist all along!’ to gasps, then chuckles. ‘Oh, you guys,’ Barry, bricklayer from Essex who was once a member of the EDL will say, standing over the decapitated body of George Osbourne. Then we’ll all go dancing off into a red sunset singing ‘Aquarius’ from the musical Hair.

The terrible, terrible, terrible approach above needs to cease and desist if the left wants to survive. The British public are probably more rightwing and apathetic than they’ve ever been. Your masses aren’t climbing up the walls and banging on Kate Hudson and Andrew Burgin’s doors, sorry. Left Unity is known among most people as ‘LOL Unity’. The less said about Stop the War coalition and TUSC the better. Momentum wants to ban radical left groups, despite it being made of radical left groups pretending they’re not radical left groups, in its efforts to back Corbyn who was elected on left-of-centre principles, thereby Momentum not letting any of his supporters be left-of-centre because that’ll scare away the same people who voted for Corbyn’s left-of-centre principles in the first place. Intersectionality has eaten itself. Okay, fine, Laurie Penny was always a bit of an embarrassment. Collectively, whether communist, anarchist or socialist, we are losing.

Instead, it is my suggestion that we return to Marxism and its foundations. We should review materialism, the history of the communist internationals, study, read, proceed from there, instead of exploring liberal, left-centrist tactics and ideologies.

To those who dismiss communist, socialist and anarchist philosophy as nothing more than vanity projects of ‘dead white men’: you are essentially erasing the agency of many non-white, non-male communists worldwide, as well as their body of work. It was the women, including sex workers, who initiated the French Revolution, for example.

Those who remove class from their political outlook should be removed from the left as a) you are essentially admitting that the current political climate can be tweaked within the system, and that it is somehow disconnected from the current toxic framework it reproduces on various societal levels, and b) you are a liberal. So abandon your radical militant chic, move on from here and don’t come back. At least until you properly grasp left wing politics. A ‘Male Tears’ mug selfie doesn’t make you a massive rebel if your politics are sorely lacking.

Those who think that the hard left has, at least partly, contributed to its own demise, then yes, you’re absolutely right. Britain’s proclivity for Trotskyism and Stalinism is part of the problem; bad ideas like the Transitional Programme among others have only hindered its development into an effective tool of class struggle. British anarchists are more inclined to watch Riot Porn on their Apple Macs and smoke dope and whinge as opposed to their proactive European counterparts. Class War has come full circle and become a teeny bit dodgy in terms of race and gender, but hey, that’s what happens with reductive workerist politics based on culture alone without further analysis on the economic. Thankfully, Stalinism seems to be dying out here, quite literally due to the age of its members. Socialist groups are just a mess. Yes, the British left is shit, but to completely and utterly sever yourself off from the basics in favour of baseless, destructive liberal strategies and politics is and will continue to destroy what little remains. It was a departure from the basic essence and schema of communist politics which got us here in the first place.

As far as I can tell, even the American left, while typically over-dramatic, very upper middle-class and openly downright rude to each other, is besting the British left in terms of political ability, organization and philosophical groundwork right now. Yes, that’s right, the American left.

That’s a whole lot of ‘nope’ right there.

Charlie Hebdo

A lot more people are experiencing mixed feelings over the Charlie Hebdo massacre on Wednesday, after the immediate reaction of absolute horror had worn off, myself included. While the right-wing pundits wax lyrical about Muslim fanatics, and the liberal Guardianistas change their Facebook profile pictures to ‘Je Suis Charlie’, there seems to be more issues raised by the shooting than answered by the press.

On the one hand, I’m a staunch believer in ‘freedom of speech’ (or the fallacy of which, as in the West our freedom of speech isn’t as far reaching as the liberal elites tell us it is). The cartoonists were from the left wing institutions, involved in Paris ’68 and pro-migrant organizations and probably enemies of a lot of the rightwing presses iconizing them right now as martyrs against “Muslim tyranny”, when in fact this is a small, very violent, reactionary sect.

Ive also lost extended family in the bowels of Abu Grahib prison to a censorious, murderous dictatorship, and wouldn’t be alive today if my family hadn’t managed to flee from political persecution.  Like many who are often intimidated by the twiterrati cliques, I find the post-modernist liberal tumblr often violent tirades against ‘offensive’ and ‘problematic’ politically baseless, reactionary and redundant. There is a lot of discussion raging right now at the topical and off-the-mark nature of the Hebdo cartoonist’s work, but the conclusions all seem to boil down to silencing potentially offensive material as a pre-emptive measure against people getting offended, hurt and upset- as if Hebdo was acting separately to mainstream discourse. As if the cartoonists were ‘asking for trouble’.

The media reflects what is already present in society. I think therefore I am. ‘Being’ determines ‘consciousness’. While the media is also a separate tool which the upper classes use to influence and impose hegemony and dominance, it is merely one of its facets, not its malignant core, and is in constant state of flux depending on the direction in which its subscribers lean to at different points in time. Such as the BBC is neither right nor left orientated per se, but will change which way it’s facing depending on where British society stands. In addition, material conditions and a complete removal of the current system change society, not banning words or images. In such, it is a liberal notion that you can just tweak the nasty bits of capitalism through policies and minor cultural shifts (or violence, for that matter) to make a more pleasant society- the schema behind ‘conscientious consumerism’ and the ‘capitalism with a human face’. You need to challenge the source, and Charlie Hebdo’s more ‘problematic’ (apologies for using liberal intersectionalist language) cartoons reflect attitudes in that society- arguably in all of society. While you can criticize them openly and challenge them on that basis, to ascertain that they are ultimately a cause and not a symptom too, that they deserved to be shot for causing offense or shouldn’t have incited that offense, while those tensions bubbled away underneath anyway, is lacking in historical and material understanding of how society works. The media stokes fires but there has to be a flame already there beforehand. And in any case, Hebdo were hardly a neo-nazi organization- and even if they were- they have the right to position themselves without threat of violence. It’s a nice liberal idea- and one the gunmen, ISIS and other terrorist groups as well as left wing “ultras” using machismo posturing- that you can stop an idea by destroying those who speak it aloud without challenging what causes that idea to arise in the first place.

Also Muslims aren’t a homogeneous group who exist permanently in a state offense, on the contrary. Like every other section of society, members react differently to different stimuli. Many have defended Charlie Hebdo and see the cartoons as a reflection of the regressive issues within a particular, and very minor in comparison, subset of the Islamic world. On that note, the whole of Islam isn’t responsible for what happened in the Hebdo offices. Religion isn’t just some oppressive force or fairy tales- it is a social vehicle. It is society speaking to itself. There are millions of Muslims worldwide who will differ hugely even within their readings of the Qu’ran.

ISIS and Al Quaeda are power-hungry thugs looking to capitalize on the widening gap between Middle Eastern and south Asian society. They are charlatans getting blinded angry young men to do their bidding for them.

The reason this has stuck with me is due to the fact my mother was also accused of drawing a ‘racist’ cartoon by Britain’s biggest union, Unison, who at the time was witchhunting socialists and hardline leftwing shop stewards, in a ludicrous case. Not least as my mother and one other member of the four accused aren’t white and the cartoon was only deemed to be racist by the union executive body and a handful of other people (members of Unison’s black caucus told my mum they hadn’t even seen the cartoon until after they’d got angry about it, as Unison told them it was ‘too offensive’ to even show it to them, then they saw it and realized Unison had well and truly played them). A lot of the cartoons being reported as racist, such as the Quenelle image, aren’t, but haven’t been properly translated or completely misunderstood. Some are clearly very racially-charged and this deserves to be pointed out, perhaps not the day after the shooting as common courtesy dictates. Either way, as I said above, it is a reflection on society at large and not deserving of death or censorship.

On the other hand, Charlie Hebdo were a select group of highly educated and predominantly white men with illustrious careers rubbing elbows with a very dogmatic and conservative elite. France, like most other European nations, is institutionally racist and has a brutal colonial past which the establishment is not one least bit apologetic about. The conditions of black and arab French migrants living in squalid ghettos outside of Paris is deplorable. The FN got 20% of the vote in the past government elections and France is one of the heavyweights on the ‘Belt of Bigotry’. Even the French left themselves aren’t distant from racist and anti-immigrant rhetoric, though seemingly it takes form in Hitchen’s/Dawkin’s ‘anti-religion, pro- middle class white guys criticising religion from lofty pillars’ and ‘oh, but Islam isn’t a race’ guff.  The cartoon of the Boko Haram girls which was disgusting and pathetic is really not becoming of a supposedly leftwing rag. While I don’t believe the Charlie Hebdo journalists have swatzika tattoos and goose step by the banks of the Rhine, they certainly aren’t exempt from any criticism at all. I don’t wish they had to die and suffer as they did, but if there is any introspection to be gained here, and I argue there is more than people think, a point is one has to be concerning the prevalence of racism in society.

However, the debate on freedom of speech is a shallow representation of what really went down at the Charlie Hebdo’s offices yesterday, and ties into why ISIS is recruiting so heavily from the west- which is the isolation, ghettoization, poverty, institutional racism and gaping inequality within capitalism. I’m not trying to portray the gunmen as innocent victims, as they were clearly murderous and maligned individuals with a distinct lack of empathy and blinded by some twisted logic bordering on the psychotic, but someone who feels included in a society isn’t going to take up arms and vow to burn it down. Just as middle class white boys get their mental health makeup analysed when they shoot full lecture halls of university students, or when they kill people because they haven’t got a girlfriend and are in the “friendzone” we get told it’s all down to ‘society’s ills’- why isn’t the same applied here? Does society wash its hands of all responsibility of creating incredibly destructive situations if the monsters which arise from them are the subaltern?

If you really want to get rid of the plant you get to its roots- these aren’t senseless killings born out of thin air. They were mediated, constructed and come from a very dark place which the west has just as much responsibility in creating. The iscolation and impoverishment, alienation and distortion of reality, which make prime breeding ground for violence and fanaticism. Ive seen it happen in the grey concrete suburbs of London’s East End- the lack of hope, the bashing down of immigrants and people of colour by the establishment, by the media, by advertising, by various institutions such as schools and prisons. Anyone raised in a negative and stilting environment begins to absorb the instability and destructive nature around them. Poverty and its following social ailments are more than just ‘having no money’- it’s a mindset, it gets adopted into who you are, your very nature.

I’m sure the media and establishment are going to make this about ‘big bad Muslims vs the nice, peaceful liberal west’ but this goes much deeper, and is only going to get worse as racial tensions, oppression and the global political swing to the right continues. It has provided excellent fodder for the parties riding above the waves of anti-immigration racist sentiment, such as Front Nationale, Perdiga, UKIP, Golden Dawn, etc. What happened at the Charlie Hebdo site was deplorable, but if we really want a ceasefire in the war on terror, we need to take a look inward too.

Above all, I have a lot of solidarity with the families of the Charlie Hebdo cartoonists and the Muslims suffering revenge attacks that are being reported in France right now. They must feel wracked with uncertainty and sorrow.

And we thought 2015 would be a better year.