Commentary and analysis of this week’s Prime Minister’s Questions in which Corbyn bashes May over the slave-labor economy the Tories have created (among many other things).
Blackjack – Alcohol
Links & references:
Commentary and analysis of this week’s Prime Minister’s Questions in which Corbyn bashes May over the slave-labor economy the Tories have created (among many other things).
Blackjack – Alcohol
Links & references:
Universal Credit (UC) is the name given by the government to its latest benefit cuts, assault on social security, the poor and the disabled: the most vulnerable groups in society, who, of course, have the least power.
The Tories have already pissed away billions on a completely pointless and chronically dysfunctional IT system for this “new” benefit.
The benefits UC will be replacing range from Child Tax Credit to other means-tested unemployment and disability benefits.
UC has already come under heavy fire with the Citizen’s Advice Bureau calling it a:
a disaster waiting to happen
As many claimants are forced to wait at least 6 weeks (with many waiting far, far longer) for their first payment—pushing families into debt, poverty, starvation and onto the street.
The name changes given to the benefits system over the years by different governments are all part of a wider propaganda campaign employed by the state to change the way we think about the benefits system, unemployment, and disability.
These name changes, along with the system changes they represent are part of a concerted attack on the most vulnerable in society through the use of propaganda that manufactures consent for the dehumanization, demonization, and brutality against the most vulnerable groups in society who have the least power.
The purpose of any name or phrase should be to accurately describe the thing it is trying to describe.
However, much of our modern language, names and phrases are actually used to mask the truth: to make sure we do not see in our minds an accurate description of the thing being described.
This is a well-known technique utilized by the modern propaganda system to great effect.
Edward Bernays, who was essentially the father of the modern Public Relations (PR)-marketing-propaganda industry, wrote in his 1928 book entitled (surprsingly honestly) Propaganda, that:
By playing upon an old cliche, or manipulating a new one, the propagandist can sometimes swing a whole mass of group emotions. In Great Britain, during the war, the evacuation hospitals came in for a considerable amount of criticism because of the summary way in which they handled their wounded.
It was assumed by the public that a hospital gives prolonged and conscientious attention to its patients. When the name was changed to evacuation posts the critical reaction vanished. No one expected more than an adequate emergency treatment from an institution so named.
The cliche hospital was indelibly associated in the public mind with a certain picture. To persuade the public to discriminate between one type of hospital and another, to dissociate the cliche from the picture it evoked, would have been an impossible task. Instead, a new cliche automatically conditioned the public emotion toward these hospitals.
As Bernay’s has made clear here: by changing the name of the evacuation hospitals to evacuation posts during World War 1, the public changed their expectations about these hospitals and the way they treated the wounded soldiers.
This kind of renaming is commonplace in PR and marketing and therefore propaganda and politics.
Universal Credit (UC) is a clear attempt at changing the way people think about benefits, unemployment, disability, poverty etc.
UC is not just a change in the way that benefits are delivered: indebting claimants from day one, decreasing the amounts they entitled too, and forcing them to work for less and less.
It is also about ridding the words that describe the reason for the benefit in the first place.
These are the benefits that Universal Credit is replacing—they are all means tested-income based:
Each one of these benefits to some degree describes (except ESA which we will get into later) why the person is receiving them.
By replacing all of these benefits with the name Universal Credit: you’re essentially ridding the system of the reasons why people are claiming those benefits. Therefore creating a totally different picture of the *social security system in the public’s mind: just as Bernay’s stated.
*The name social security itself was changed by Blair’s government to wefare and the Department of Social Security was changed to the Department for Work and Pensions as part of this propganda campaign.
The fact that you’re unemployed and need to sign-on, now replaced semantically. The fact that you’re ill or disabled and need to claim benefits to live now replaced too, and so on and so on.
Almost as if the Tories are trying to write out unemployment, poverty, and disability itself.
And therefore the way we think about benefits, unemployment, disability, and poverty.
After all, if somebody tells you: “I get universal credit” what does that mean? If somebody tells you: “I get JSA” that means something—that person is unemployed and needs a job.
Of course, this renaming of benefits is nothing new: in fact, the Blair government really started this Orwellian propaganda technique.
Post World War 2 we had Unemployment Benefit which Blair changed to Job Seeker’s Allowance. This was the beginning of the re-labeling: to be unemployed is serious: that person needs a job.
Calling someone a job seeker makes it sound like that person is running around looking far and wide for absolutely any job: a perfect description then of the way that New Labour changed the social security system-economy and how we think about work.
There is no such thing as unemployment within this description—only lazy unemployed people who aren’t motivated to take absolutely any job, for any amount of money, anywhere, doing anything.
Contrary to popular belief it was also Blair’s government who introduced the “welfare to work” propaganda and programs. Essentially the forefather to the Tories extreme assault on the unemployed and disabled introducing things like the dire, misery-inducing billion pounds, fraudulent corporate handout known as the “work program”: forcing ever greater numbers of people into what is essentially taxpayer-funded corporate slavery.
Disabled people have been some of the worst hit by this propaganda and renaming.
The name of disability benefits has changed from Invalidity Benefit (1971-1995) to Incapacity Benefit (95-2008) to Employment Support Allowance (2008-2016) and now into Universal Credit for those claiming the means-tested/income based one.
Just think about that: in the space of 40 years: disabled people have gone from being invalids to being incapable to being employed and supported to being universal credits.
You may feel slightly uncomfortable with the word ‘invalid’ to describe a disabled person: but the use of the word invalid, at least, conjures up images of somebody who needs protecting: who is weak, who is sick, who needs help, who deserves help.
Incapacity—while less severe—also conjures up similar images: they are incapable — the person is sick, so they are incapable of work.
Employment and Support Allowance: we are no longer speaking about disability in any way shape or form: if you didn’t know what this benefit was, you wouldn’t be able to guess from the name alone.
And finally into Universal Credit: non-descript and has nothing to do with the reason the claimant getting the benefit.
The same has happened with another disability benefit: In 1992 the Tories introduced Disability Living Allowance (DLA) which has now been changed to Personal Independence Payments (2013) (PIP).
Again: disability written out of the name and replaced by “independence”. The fact the PIP system is actually a real term benefit cut for many people with serious disabilities makes the use of the word “independence” all the more sickening.
Along with the name changes has been an increase in the amount of state testing and scrutiny of the severity of disability when people claim for them. Each renaming has also seen an added emphasis on driving disabled people into work.
This name changing and use of propaganda has an impact on the way that all of the events surrounding these benefits, and claimants are portrayed within the media and society at large.
If a newspaper headline says: “OVER 500,000 FAMILIES WORSE OFF FROM UNIVERSAL CREDIT CUTS” and the subsequent story is framed around the term Universal Credit, it is quite different from a headline that says “OVER 500,000 INVALIDS MADE POORER BY BENEFIT CUTS”.
This, of course, forms part of the wider propaganda attack by the state and the media on the poorest and most vulnerable in society itself.
An attack that has become so bad that the UN has actually condemned the Tories on several occasions for their treatment and portrayal of disabled people.
And hate crimes against disabled people have risen since the Tory propaganda campaign was launched in 2010—with many believing that the “benefit scrounger” narrative is responsible.
The techniques of dehumanization, demonization, the name changes—all of this is very much in the vein of the propaganda used by the Nazis when they were targeting the jews.
The Nazis printed and controlled many newspapers in the run-up to the war: spreading their propaganda, bile and hatred:
It should be no surprise then, that both Hitler and his minister of Propaganda Joseph Goebbels were both great admirers of British propaganda and imitated the techniques pioneered by Bernays and the British state.
In fact, in Mein Kampf, Hitler wrote that he believed the reason the Germans had lost World War 1 (WW1) was due to their inferior propaganda.
Hitler said that his experience with Allied propaganda:
spurred me to take up the question of propaganda even more deeply than before… What we failed to do, the enemy did with amazing skill and really brilliant calculation. I myself learned enormously from this enemy war propaganda
He also praised the skills used by the Allied forces in this propaganda, such as the manipulation of atrocity stories—concluding that Allied propganda was:
a weapon of the first order, while in our country it was the last resort of unemployed politicians and a haven for slackers
Anybody who takes the time to think about the language we use and the propaganda we are surrounded by will be able to see how all of this really does manufacture consent.
It is hard to know the exact amount of benefit claimants— disabled or otherwise who have died as a result of the Tories assault on the benefit system, but we can easily say that the figure at least 4000 disabled people—an exceptionally conservative estimate I am using only because any greater number would likely cause this entire article to be flagged as fake news by the Facebook-Google bots.
These deaths: hundreds of suicides and thousands simply because the system had beaten them down so much they were too sick to fight on, these deaths are the hallmark of a country that has become the most savage and brutal, careless, heartless and cruel of environments.
The deaths are a national outrage and should be a cause for social uprising and change: but the outrage carefully managed by the propaganda system that seeks to turn the needed changes into a defeated sense of inevitibility—these people—we have been conditioned to believe—deserved their fate and suffering.
We really are living in the Bernay’s world of manufactured consent—that accurate and telling phrase that Chomsky used as the title for his famous book in which he analyzed the modern propaganda system, and is taken from a phrase coined by another founding father or the public relations indusrty, Walter Lipman, in his book Public Opinion published in 1922.
The consent they are trying to manufacture here is the taking away of benefits from those that really do need them; rely on them as they have no choice. They are manufacturing the consent of the population for this barbarity and against strength and solidarity.
This is an ideological assault: as Chomsky has also noted previously: the attack on social security is also an attack on ideas and notions of solidarity. The fact that we as a society have a duty to care about people we have never met—just because it’s morally the right thing to do.
The Bush administration wants to “reform” Social Security — meaning dismantle it. A huge government-media propaganda campaign has concocted a “fiscal crisis” that doesn’t exist. If some problem does arise in the distant future, it could be overcome by trivial measures, such as raising the cap on the regressive payroll tax.
Social Security is based on an extremely dangerous principle: that you should care whether the disabled widow across town has food to eat. The Social Security “reformers” would rather have you concentrate on maximising your own consumption of goods and subordinating yourself to power. That’s life. Caring for other people, and taking community responsibility for things like health and retirement — that’s just deeply subversive.
Solidarity—caring about other people—the most basic of human instincts have to be driven out of our heads.
The reigning ideology must be—within the neoliberal system—everyman for himself: Fuck you!
This ideology: so far removed from caring nature present in the human species must be beaten out of us.
I don’t care—not my problem—fuck you!
We are taught to see those who are suffering as deserving of that suffering—we have no duty to care—all we have is the duty to blame the victim and ignore the problem.
The homeless man is homeless because he didn’t work hard enough in school and started taking drugs.
I pay my bills, why didn’t he?
The homeless prostitute is homeless because she’s addicted to drugs, irresponsible, etc.
Disabled people, again, have been attacked in the same kind of way.
The propaganda system renames disability and treats it as if it is a choice—not something in which you have no choice over as pretty much any disabled person will tell you.
IF only that disabled person made more effort—like I do!—then they could do some work, couldn’t they?!
Nobody helps me–I make my own money!
Where’s my handouts???!!!
From sufferer to scrounger—the noeliberal propaganda doctrine dictates.
This is the kind of society that such propaganda produces: one populated by selfish beliefs in which nobody must ever care about anybody else.
Luckily: some people see through the propaganda and this is increasingly the case.
BBC News reported on a recent large scale survey of British attitudes which found that:
For the first time in more than 30 years, pensions are not the public’s top priority for extra welfare spending, the survey says, and has been overtaken by support for more spending on benefits for people who are disabled
And the support for Jeremy Corbyn’s anti-austerity platform and his “unpredictable” success at the snap General Election is a testament to the fact that we can overcome the neoliberal-propagandists determination to turn us into the most selfish, heartless, greedy and cruel of beings.
This gives us faith for the future: the state may be determined to pit us all against each other in a neoliberal bloodbath in which the 99% are all losers.
But that doesn’t mean we have to let them.
The greatest rebellion against this system is to act with the basic human nature and decency we have evolved over hundreds of thousands of years to have and to actually care about the society and world we live in.
When you care about more than yourself: you are more powerful than someone who cares only about themselves: this is how solidarity works and it is the basis for all major social victories over oppressors, tyrants and totalitarian states throughout history.
And that will never change.
The neoliberals though are not the only ones that can change the language they use—we can alter our language to accurately describe who they are.
Rather than calling them “business tycoons”—a more fitting description would Plutocrat, Oligarch, or Corporate Benefit King/Queen—tax-payer funded millionaire scroungers.
Bankers: the professional corporate, tax-payer funded con men. Politicians: the professional corporate, tax-payer funded con men.
Perhaps it is time to start playing them at their own game and start reclaiming the language they are seeking to control our minds with.
A short film examining the way in which extreme right-wing nationalists have turned Brexit into a fundamentalist religion.
Based on the essay of the same published by Evolve Politics:
Produced by Chris Turnbull, Enemy In A State, 2017:
I don’t normally talk about the family members of politicians because I don’t think they should be used to make political points as they aren’t choosing to put themselves up for election and to be public figures, etc.
However, Theresa May, during her already, rapidly, notorious (for all the wrong reasons) speech today at Tory Conference briefly spoke about her upbringing.
I’ve been tempted to bring this subject up many times myself, given that both I and May have something quite unique in common.
I also do not usually speak much about my own personal life and upbringing—however, May’s speech today has so enraged me that I will make an exception.
Both myself and Theresa May have mothers who suffer from Multiple Sclerosis (MS)—a horrendous disease of the central nervous system, causing extreme pain, blindness, the loss of limb movement, memory loss, incontinence and many other awful disabling symptoms: sufferers on average die much earlier than healthy people. May’s mother died when May was only 25.
It is estimated that around 2,500,000 people have MS in the world.
Many MS sufferers cannot walk, and cannot look after themselves.
MS sufferers have “attacks” of MS and during these attacks are often completely bed bound: unable to move, bath, eat, go the toilet by themselves, etc.
Following the attacks, the sufferer takes months, and months to recovers to some degree, but they are left with a disability that is far worse than it was before the attack.
It is essentially a gradual, but severe decline ever further into crippling disability. Attacks can come at any time and are totally unpredictable.
There is no real treatment for the disease—there is certainly no cure for it, and unfortunately, it doesn’t look one will be found anytime soon.
Both myself and May grew up watching our mothers suffer from this horrendous illness.
May should know all too well the torture inflicted on people who have this disease—having grown up witnessing it with her own mother.
Yet, her government has punished, brutalized, tortured and killed off many disabled people: including MS sufferers.
The Tories have been condemned by the UN for their treatment of the disabled in this country on at least two occasions.
May opened her speech today, saying:
My grandmother was a domestic servant, who worked as a lady’s maid below stairs. She worked hard and made sacrifices because she believed in a better future for her family. And that servant – that lady’s maid – among her grandchildren boasts three professors and a prime minister.
That is why the British Dream inspires me. Why that dream of progress between the generations spurs me on. And it is why today at this conference, this Conservative Party must pledge to renew the British Dream in this country once again.
According to the Daily Mail, both of May’s grandmother’s were servants—May completely neglected to talk about her mother though, in fact, she never does……
She is picking and choosing at her own history here: and very conveniently leaving out her own mother’s disability.
I wonder why that might be? Could it be because unlike May’s grandmothers, her own mother would’ve had no choice but to live with a severe disability, and to suffer endlessly?
That doesn’t fit the deluded picture that the Tories like to present of the world does it?
The fact that so many disabled people have absolutely no choice about the way they live: they cannot simply “work hard” and succeed: for the most part they are thrown crumbs, demonized by the right-wing media, and terrorized by the state through the weaponization of social security.
May shows just how cold and nasty she is when she uses her family to justify the Tory delusions of meritocracy—completely ignoring her own mother’s suffering: as if it is a deep shame that must never be discussed: May denies her own reality.
The Tory Party millionaires-oligarchs-leeches love to preach down to us all the wonders of hard work and meritocracy.
HOW FUCKING DARE THEY!!!
Hard work is being a 7-year-old child who comes home from school and has to cook for a disabled parent, clean the house, go to the shops, look after your siblings—because they have suffered another MS attack and cannot get out of bed. And you have no choice but to work FUCKING hard. Your dad has to go out to work to get enough money to pay for food and rent—nobody else is there to help you—that’s hard FUCKING WORK!
That’s my “childhood”—not just mine. A conservative estimate says that there are a quarter of a million child carers in this country right now, who are going through exactly the same thing I went through.
However, for these children things will be much worse than they were even for me some 20 years ago.
The assault on the disabled and poor under May’s government will have done nothing but make the situation for not only many of these disabled people much worse, but also their children.
These children, I can guarantee you, do not need lectures in “hard work” from Tory Party elites.
They need and deserve fucking help.
For as bad as my situation was growing up, given the state the country is in today thanks to the Tory Party I can only imagine how awful it must be for so many poor and disabled people in this country: especially their children.
When I was growing up, at least, disabled people weren’t demonized and persecuted so openly, through the media and the state.
When I was growing up, at least, we went to schools in which we could learn, as opposed to being forced into completely pointless competition, with basically no hope of ever advancing in life.
We, at least, had something to help us—it is only because of all these things that I survived intact and was able to go to an (albeit bad) university, and have some degree of quality to my life.
May has made sure that only the children of the wealthy who grow up with disabled parents have any chance of succeeding in life.
She could use her position of power to help the people, the children, she must surely relate to in some way.
Yet, she is so cold, so broken, so removed from being a human being—she simply doesn’t care.
This is the key difference between myself and May—she may rationalize her success despite her mother’s illness, but that success had more to do with the advantages she was brought up with—some of which came through the socialist programs of the state.
Contrary to what May would have us believe, she didn’t grow-up in poverty at the bottom rung of the ladder: her father was very well connected to the British establishment (from what we can actually find out about him, much of the information on him has been mysteriously deleted online.)
How you can grow up watching the enduring pain and agony of an MS sufferer and then go on as an adult to terrorize and brutalize the disabled, poor and their children is beyond comprehension to me.
When you grow up in the kind of environment I did, and so many other have and do right now, you know who is important in this world, in this country: and it isn’t you and your community.
We are thrown into mass scale, poverty-ridden, rotting landscapes, where no hope is even allowed to exist: any hope or chance to advance in life is being cut away more and more and more by May’s government of elitists aristocrats.
I will never, EVER, be lectured on hard work, by a group of people who have absolutely no concept of what actual hard work is.
May is a disgrace: picking and choosing at her family background to justify the Tory fantasy of the “British dream”—the Tories latest favorite catchphrase, it seems.
Well, to paraphrase from the legendary comedian George Carlin:
The Tories “British dream” is exactly that: a dream— and it’s called a dream because you’d have to be asleep to actually believe it.
Today at Tory conference, Home Secretary Amber Rudd, announced plans that could see anyone who repeatedly watches “terror material online” imprisoned for up to 15 years—in a bid to stop them from “being radicalized”, the Telegraph reports.
This is, first of all, a strikingly harsh sentence even if the crime has actually been committed, but more worryingly, it is what the government refers to as “terror material” that causes the greatest concern.
This is an example of what the government defines as terror material—you tell me if you think it has anything to do with stopping the spread of terror?
Or if, in fact, the government is just using the label of anti-terrorism to protect its own crimes—crimes that we pay for through taxes and the spilled blood of many innocent civilians: both here and abroad.
Earlier this year, industry journal PR Week reported:
The case concerns Royal Marine, Sgt Alexander Blackman, who was sentenced to life for murder in 2013 after killing a “wounded” Taliban soldier in 2011.
Blackman subsequently had his sentenced reduced down to manslaughter and was released in May to great fanfare by the right-wing press.
While serving in Afghanistan footage recorded on a camera attached to Alexander’s helmet showed, graphically, the extent of brutality during the killing for which he was was sentenced to life.
PR Week reports that the footage:
showed British soldiers verbally abusing the wounded man, dragging him along the ground and throwing him onto his back, before eventually shooting him in the chest at point-blank range.
This is a clear war crime—as well as being a textbook case of state terrorism.
However, the Ministry of Defense (MOD) refused to release clips that showed the killing to the news media.
Many establishment news sources including The BBC, ITN, Times Newspapers, Sky, Guardian News and Media, and Associated Newspapers went to the Court of Appeal, seeking the release of the clips: essentially trying to force the government to hand them over.
Audio of the execution is available online—it is the video that has been banned by the state—this is truly horrific to even listen too.
Most tellingly after administering the fatal shot to the captured Afghan, Blackman says:
I’ve just broke the Geneva Convention.
Along with deeply offensive and disgusting, derotory remarks such as:
There you are, shuffle off this mortal coil you cunt.
After shooting the prisoner at point blank range in the chest.
Shockingly, the media lost their battle for the footage and the MOD won—meaning that the British public will never be able to see the true horror of what our soldiers really get up to in the Middle East.
The graphic brutality of the terror we inflict on others hidden away from the public’s eyes.
The reason for the court’s decision is even more shocking.
PR Week reports that:
Judges upheld the MoD’s decision and specifically referred to evidence given by Peter Wilson, head of the Research, Information and Communications Unit (RICU) – part of the Office of Security and Counter-Terrorism.
In his evidence, Mr Wilson warned: “The presentation of any of this footage will be used as compelling evidence for supporters [of violent Jihad] to act and respond immediately, specifically and violently.”
He added: “They will use it to evidence and justify the claim that the West is at war with Islam and that it operates outside its own legal restraints; it will trigger a tipping point for many sympathisers who may have been on the verge of active response into immediate violent action. It will in short create a real and immediate risk to life.”
In their ruling, judges stated: “The evidence before us from Mr Wilson was clear and compelling as to the threat.
This shows you how the government clearly abuses anti-terror legislation.
The very notion that the media should be banned from showing the footage is already so Orwellian that it is frightening—the fact they have been banned from showing it for “fear” that it may be used to radicalize jihadists is at best laughable, but ultimate deeply concerning and so far beyond Orwellian that I don’t really know how to describe it.
The news of the ruling was, of course, met with sheer delight by the government:
A Home Office spokesperson told PRWeek that the recent judgement demonstrates that the RICU is “considered to have expertise in CT (counter terrorism) related strategic communications”.
They did not elaborate, but it is understood that senior civil servants are delighted with the government comms team’s victory over the mainstream media in preventing the disturbing footage from being shown.
In other words if I, or you, or anybody, the mainstream media, the alternative media—anybody even views, let alone publishes or shares material that shows British troops committing war crimes in the Middle East (or anywhere else for that matter) we too can be considered to be viewing “terrorist material” and responsible for spreading jihadi radicalisation.
And given Rudd’s announcement today—who is to say that we couldn’t be imprisoned for up to 15 years for sharing this information that is vitally in the public’s interests.
The fact we have a long and deeply shameful record of supporting, arming and funding jihadists across the world apparently means nothing.
The ruling is also interesting in one other key way: the government has essentially admitted that the Middle East invasions actually can and do radicalize jihadists.
The government’s own defense is essentially stating that British troops brutality creates more terrorism….rather than the alleged goal of preventing the spread of it.
The fact they not only admit this but use it as a defense that the judge ruled in favor of—honestlty, words cannot describe how absurd this all is.
Apparently, the fact we spread terror ourselves and support so many terror regimes, again arming them to the teeth (see the Yemen crisis for details, in which we are training up the Saudi-led coalition as well as arming them to carry out their illegal massacres)—apparently though, the real threat of terrorism comes from the media reporting on the crimes of the British Army.
Clearly, this is completely farcical—the public has every right to know what their taxes are funding: including war crimes committed by our own government’s mass-scale terror campaign.
Of course, the invasion of Middle Eastern countries by the Western-Allied forces is a war crime to begin with.
However, for those who may still support it—showing them what our troops actually get up to could certainly sway their opinion against the wars.
The real radicalisation cannot be found in a media that actually tells the truth about our campaigns of war and terror—it occurs when they do nothing but propagate the lies of the state, and fail to challenge rulings such as this one.
Rudd’s announcement today that you, or I, or anybody could be sentenced to up to 15 years in prison for viewing whatever the government deems to be terrorist material is deeply disturbing and shocking.
We need to fight back against this proposal if we are to maintain any form of opposition to state brutality, terrorism, and violence.
If the footage had been released and shown to the public, then certainly it would’ve had an impact on the public: not by turning the country into jihadists overnight, but by waking them up the terror inflicted on so many innocents across the world, carried out in our name, funded by our taxes.
The only radicalization this would cause, is that of a population waking up to the horrors of state terror.
And that’s precisely what the court ruling was really about.
A quick note to readers: This WordPress has essentially been blacklisted by Google.
If you search Google for “Enemy In A State Chris Turnbull” my WordPress does not return any results (at least for the first 10 pages—I stopped looking after that.)
Compare this to the exact same search on Bing, or Duck Duck Go and you’ll see what I mean).
I am not the only alternative media journo to have their website restricted or removed from Google—far from it, many, many have at this point.
So as a result of this clear, unjustified, and targeted censorship please share now, more than ever if you support the work I (and many others) are doing in the alternative media.
Thank you for your support.
The establishment’s latest smear-job on Corbyn shows just how desperate they are getting—litterally inventing fake news and then demanding Corbyn apologize over said fake news —in order to try and kill Corbyn’s popularity with young people.
You really couldn’t make this shit up, could you?
The Tories are in a state and it’s frankly embarrassing and pathetic to watch them endlessly slap themselves in the face.
For weeks now the mainstream media (MSM)—from “left” to right has parroted the Tory line that Corbyn lied to young people about abolishing student debt during the general election (GE).
Framing the issue as a sort of “bribe” based on Corbyn “lies” to get young people to go out and vote for him in the GE.
As anybody who has been paying the slightest bit of attention to Labour’s manifesto would know, the proposal to abolish student debt wasn’t in the manifesto.
Corbyn did, however, say that he was planning to deal with the massive problem of burgeoning student debt in an interview with NME during the GE.
However, the Tories and MSM in their endless desperation have decided that this means he lied to young people. Apparently, we are all too stupid to understand the difference between what is in a manifesto (concrete pledges) and issues that Corbyn’s Labour is committed to dealing with in ways yet to be announced.
Yesterday, during an interview on Marr, Corbyn clarified the issue for the sake of the mainstream media dimwits who can’t seem to understand these simple points.
The Daily Mail then reacted as if something major had happened with this ridiculous headline today.
The headline may as well read: Corbyn Reminds Dimwits What He Actually Said About Student Debt.
The lunatics at the Sun called this a U-turn—although, at least, they had the decency to keep thier lie to a single column away from the front page, or maybe they were just too embarased to headline this? Whatever the case, it’s still pathetic and desperate.
Clearly, The Sun has lost all touch with reality at this point. How exactly is this a U-turn? Corbyn said he wants to deal with student debt before the GE, he said the same on Marr yesterday, so where is this fucking U-turn? Litterally creating a smear story out of nowhere based on pure lies.
Not content with this utter nonsense and Tory manufactured controversy—Tory HQ are now demanding that Corbyn apologise for breaking promises that he never made.
The Tories smack of desperation—it is frankly sad to see them try this.
As Corbyn pointed out yesterday on Marr the student debt bubble will burst at some point soon anyway—as many financial experts have also pointed out over the years.
Many student loans have been sold off on the cheap by the Tories to private companies, meaning that when the bubble does burst the whole thing will be underwritten by the taxpayer, just like the billion pound taxpayer bank bailouts of 2008.
Bailouts which we are still paying for, from a crash that we didn’t cause, for which austerity was imposed us leading to a 14% real-terms decline in wages.
The absolute nerve of the Tories here is truly shocking: they are the ones who literally hate young people, especially young people who want to go into higher education. One of the first things the Tory-Lib-Dem coalition done when they came into power in 2010 was to triple tuition fees from £3,000 to £9,000 a year and the figure just keeps rising…
Young people are now leaving uni with a debt of around £50,000, essentially imposing us in a life of debt bondage for the crime of wanting to learn.
This to me is the most shocking aspect of all this hatred thrown at Corbyn and young people about the student debt crisis: we are mocked and derided for fighting for an education, something that the whole country should agree is an important and vital part of any civilized country.
Why would you not want people to be highly educated? Why would you not want your children, grand children, yourself—whoever to not be able to receive an education?
It’s a form of insanity to fight against free higher education as it is something we all benefit from as a country.
The Tories who push this anti-education agenda would never, in a million years, apply the same standards to their own children.
They all send their kids to the best universities and schools that money can buy: they know it’s important, they just don’t want anybody else to have the opportunity.
Comparable countries such as Germany and even Scotland have what are essentially free universities—even countries in the third world do—places such as Mexico and Ecuador.
So essentially we are all sitting here waiting for this £100 billion student debt bubble to burst so that the banks can get yet another huge payday from the taxpayer, and until that point, we all have to pretend that nothing can be done about this debt. And then smear the one politician who is taking the issue seriously: absolutely absurd.
Student debt is the one form of debt it’s basically impossible to declare bankruptcy on: for many of us it will hang around our necks for our entire lives and probably follow us to the grave.
The Corbyn student-debt-Tory-lie is a clear and blatant attempt to kill Corbyn’s main support base of young people.
The Tories, of course, completely ignored and dismissed young people as voters: learning their lesson after the general election when we essentially en masse called their bluff.
Now, rather than actually coming up with any policies to appeal to young people the Tories are attempting to smear Corbyn’s policies aimed at helping them.
It is sad, it is desperate, it is pathetic, it is transparently stupid, it won’t work.
Yet, the Tories have nothing else, the MSM has nothing else—this just shows they have literally run out of ideas and have to resort to spending weeks inventing controversy, and then demand that Corbyn apologizes for said controversy.
Let me just end by demanding that the Tories apologize for their many lies: here’s just a few of them.
CCHQ, we’re waiting…..
Further to my post yesterday:
It has come to my attention that the mainstream media has all but blacked out one key fact about the fatal Grenfell Tower blaze. With the BBC, in particular, leading the way by silencing residents deeply embedded in the ongoing struggle against Kensington and Chelsea council.
Although barely reported in this country — the US’ CNN highlighted this key fact at the top of their article about the tragic, fatal blaze:
While it has commonly been reported that the building recently under went £8.6 million in upgrades, carried by private contractor Rydon Construction — the facts about the planned £67 million “jewels….of a regeneration scheme” have been — to the best of knowledge — mostly left out of UK coverage.
Apart from the few times it slipped through the MSM’s filtration net…..and when it did it was quickly covered up….
Nearby resident Piers Thompson, interviewed by the BBC here, also raised this point about the multi-million pound “regeneration” project — which would see the demolition of the estates. He says that the council have been managing a decline of the estate so as to justify regeneration which he describes (accurately) as code for “demolish” the estate. He describes how residents have been protesting against the plans, and organising against them.
The BBC are quick to move the conversation away from the demolition, resident’s struggle, and neglect and try to silence Piers by repeatedly stressing that these are just “allegations”. And that those accused need the right to reply.
They also do the same with Pilgrim Tucker from the Grenfell Action Group, who highlights the numerous struggles that the residents have had against the authorities — which includes residents being threatened with legal action for asking for essentiall — life saving — maintainence from the authorities.
She also says that this would never happen to the “Camerons” and that the residents were unable to get legal advice to help their battle against the authorities — due to the cuts to legal aid.
Again the BBC shuts her down by saying that these are “allegations”.
The BBC demonstrates just how beholden to power they really are in these clips. These people — the people embroiled in the battle for a number of years now — people who know the facts of the case better than anybody AND DESERVE TO HAVE THIER VOICES HEARD — who are witnessing and living through the most horrific event imaginable — are told repeatedly that they are making allegations as a way to silence them.
When it comes to reporting on Tory talking points — such as Corbyn being a “terrorist sympathizer” or a “national security threat” — I don’t think I once heard the BBC refer to these ridiculous accusations as “Tory allegations”.
Instead, they reported them as if they were factual. When it comes to challenging the powerful, however, the BBC do the opposite, they stress “allegations” time and time again and try to end or change the subject very quickly.
That the residents had been embroiled in a long time battle over the future of the estate — in what CNN described as one of the:
Jewels of an $85 million (£67 million) urban regeneration scheme carried out by the London Borough of Kensington and Chelsea.
A vital point that was articulated so vehemently and clearly by a nearby resident — who said this was code for demolishing the estate — should form a key part of the story.
As the Tower is in one of the richest parts of the country — where housing not too far away is sold for over £100 million, snapped up by Saudi princes and Russian oligarchs — the fact that the Tower was part of a multi-million demolition “regeneration plan” should again form a huge part of this story.
Of course, London itself has undergone a mass social cleansing since the Tories came into power (to be fair this can easily be traced back throughout Blair’s years as well and Thatcher and so on.)
But, it has become increasingly more severe as the Tories proceed to force councils to sell off land to private developers, re-house people on the other side of the country, impose housing benefit caps, strip away legal aid rights, oppose legislation to ensure basic safety and rights as a tenant, and so on the list goes.
Useless idiot Theresa May has announced a “public inquiry’ — I am absolutely FUKING SICK of inquiries in this country. Let’s just call them what they are: show trials. OK, fine have an inquiry, good I welcome it — but it’s only useful it leads to actual changes, convictions, prosecutions etc.
Just look at the damning Chilcot inquiry into Blair’s illegal Iraq war — what changed? what was the point? Chilcot said the war wasn’t justified — so now what happens? Is there any point in doing these inquiries unless justice is going to be served?
That’s like me being put on trial for murder, with enough evidence to convict me, the jury deliveing a unanimous verdict of my guilt, and the judge, upon delivering the verdict just says: “OK, you can go now….”
Real justice comes from systemic change, and the holding of the powerful to account as criminals. Which is what they are. These people are criminals and should be behind bars.
This government: run by millionaires, funded by millionaires and billionaires — writes policies exclusively tailored for the elite class at the fatal expense of everybody else. The whole world watches us now — one terror attack after another — now in the 5th richest country in the world — the sight of poor, neglected people whom the council and government were trying to banish from the area they call home — burned to death in their own homes, while their millionaire and billionaire neighbours sit in their mansions plotting yet more ways to fuck over the poor.
Welcome to Britain 2017, unless you’re part of the 1% you can burn to death in your own home for the Tories care — but don’t worry, from your grave you can always enjoy the ensuing public inquiry which will go nowhere.
Sick, the poor get punished just for showing up 0.1 seconds late to sign on at the Job Center. This heinous crime lands you with 4 weeks of no income (you’re still entitled to hardship and Housing Benefit BTW so don’t let them fuck you out of that too.) The punishment handed out without any form of due process….sick.
Meanwhile the wealthy kill us and they face no justice what so ever. If anything they get rewarded.
This country is controlled by sick parasites — how dare they throw us out of our houses, towns, and cities. We built this fucking city — this country runs because of our blood and sweat and tears — it has nothing to do with the elite rich bastards who are trying to take it all away from us.
Much of the media focus has been specualtion on the cause of the fire — this, in itself it just part of a much wider story. One which involves deep rooted divides betwen the ultra wealthy and everybody else. It’s about austerity, and the way the Tories treat the rich and everybody else.
That’s why I’m not specualting as to the cause of the fire, or anything that technical for which the experts are saying it is too early to declare a resonable opinion. I am sticking to the underpinning, root cause, facts of the case. Something which the BBC and the rest of MSM is detremined not to do.