Rome (March 2019)

"In the beginning

was the Word,
And the Word
was with God,
And the Word
was God"

God gave you,

The words
And the authority
To trap me?
To control me?
To kill me?

For I am

Your ancestral spirit,
I live deep down inside,
All of it,
Beyond any one life,
I live in the moment,

I am the beast,

The reflexes you fear,

You pretend not to know me,
But I am watching,
Waiting,
To make my move,

I am the light

The fire that is burning
In your life
The eternal flame
As old as Rome
And His Vestal Virgins

You are waiting,

For me too,
You will show me,
Love and kindness,
And then,
You will undress,

Exposing

Your tender flesh,
Your marbled skin,
To the flame,
And I,
I might eat you,

In that moment,

We will be one,
The Father,
Via the Son,
And His Holy Spirit,
And so, His work endures.

The Brexit Spectrum

The prism of the UK Parliament has, this week, has spilt the white light of the Anti-EU referendum into a spectrum of Pro-Brexit colour rivals. Being Anti-EU can no longer equate to any single Pro-Brexit position. In doing so, Theresa May's premiership has also been deconstructed. It has been revealed to be a hapless coalition founded on political opportunism and erroneous logic, from start to finish. 

If the recent impasse in the UK Parliament has taught us anything, it's that the much vaunted anti-EU majority only ever equated to a number of pro-Brexit minorities that were in conflict with one another. It is a political truism that in our democracy, it is much easier to unite in a vote against something, than to figure out exactly what it is we want to vote for. This disease has infected our democracy since ever we were more interested in voting out a ruling party than voting someone in. All newly elected candidates begin with a full tank of public trust, a sort of fuel based on human capital, which is slowly spent, often in words per printed page per scandal, over the course of their political careers, until it eventually runs out of ink, or trust, or scandals.

The PM has not been able to negotiate a deal that unifies the various factions of the pro-Brexit minorities. Why? In theory it is because she drew her red lines around the UK Economy rather then around UK Sovereignty. This was a mistake. 

In my view, the anti-EU vote was a vote for the UK's Sovereignty, for its currency and for its unwritten constitution, i.e. the Symbolic Monarchy. The evidence for this is that plenty of immigrants from the old Commonwealth countries voted for Brexit. The Empire is dead in administrative terms. But there are significant gains to be had for the Old Commonwealth countries who still have significant invested interests in the UK. The infrastructure of Colonial capitalism survives, exporting its English language and Anglo-Saxon economics, through a global currency of educational, religious and class practices. 

It was a vote against ever increasing federal union with the EU, against the single currency, and against further devolution of the UK's legislative powers to its constituent Nation states and regions. A vote against immigration from the EU but for increased immigration from the Commonwealth. The Sovereignty of the UK still has some trading status in these terms.

Anything less would have led to a serious weakening of one of the most important Monarchic dynasties in Europe; the Commonwealth has been a necessary part of the jigsaw that has kept peace and stability throughout Europe since the war. 

However, I think it was a mistake for Theresa May to stake her premiership on it's success. This is because there was no unity among the pro-Brexit minorities. Right-wing fascists from the Farming communities, in bed with migrant landlords from the Provisional municipalities, a.k.a. UKIP?, was always going to be a recipe for disaster. 

To draw her red-lines around the economy in such circumstances was a foolish endeavour. No-one can predict the post-Brexit economy in the necessary detail to be able to make any sensible decisions. Based on the political evidence, and voting records of MPs, May's red lines now need to be redrawn around the UK's Sovereignty. For instance, as a Sovereign country we would always retain our rights to defend our borders with the ultimate force if necessary. So the clause to commit the UK to having "no hard border" with the EU is, and always was, a complete farce. 

The ploitical declaration was taken off the table a day after I first posted this article. Any future attempts in that direction need to answer questions like: how can the UK Parliament protect the UK against "ever increasing Federal union within the EU" without destroying any of the benefits of trading with/within the single market?

This includes questions that have not really been answered on:

1) devolving executive powers to the parliaments of Northern Ireland, Wales and Scotland. 

2) maintaining legislative autonomy in the face of the overwhelming economic competition from the EU.

3) regulating Sterling in relation to the Euro and/or the world's financial markets.

4) negotiating access with international competitors across a range of economic markets.

Because the UK Government, i.e. Theresa May's government, has so far failed to dictate a coherent policy strategy in these areas, the only conclusion can be that the UK has already conceded so much of its Sovereignty in these areas to the EU, that the EU still effectively retains its  Sovereignty over us. The only "deal" left to be made, is the terms of the UK's surrender, or rather the terms of the UK's anti-EU majority's surrender, to the EU/pro-EU UK, recognising it as it's Sovereign power. 

There is an alternative, which is obviously about going to war with the EU (and the pro-EU UK), but in reality the anti-EU majority is likely to be split on this issue as well. Years of austerity have left the necessary will, among civil and public servants, if not the general public, severely wanting. May has effectively exhausted her troops and squandered the political capital of the referendum. She may not have had many alternatives to chose from during her time in office, but the choices she did have to make were bad ones. History has spoken and her supporters in Parliament now need to listen. 

Carnaby Street

The Suez Syndrome

The symbols of Empire and the silver tipped, three pipped, furry lipped master race, that was the English Establishment. Top hatted Etonians, defenders of a class system, defeated over two World Wars. Poppies in Afghanistan and Flanders. For all the tea in China. Old colonial tobacco, rubber and sugar cane plantations lost in the turning tides of global capital. Churchill's after-dinner speeches in America. Breaking Blighty's chalky bones down into little pieces; rebranding those tattooed blue Britons as 'never will be slaves'.Single-skinned cardboard boxes stamped UK plc.

I Was Lord Kitchener's Valet

Reprocessed through the liberalising free-market razzamatazz churn of pop-music, fashion, football, newspaper scandals, celebrity, club-life and street-drugs: the post-war engine manufacturing working class identities for the consumption of the masses. Not for us the bespoke tailors of Saville Row and family physicians of Harley Street. Marks and Sparks and the National Health Service have arrived. The Messershmitts have been replaced by Vespas. The Volkswagens have become campervans. Cheap holidays abroad, Rioja red sunburn, with Fish and Chip vinegar, skinheads on the Costa del Sol. Mary Quant hemlines flirting with Paul McCartney baselines. Patent leather boots, plastic jewels and Prince Buster on the dance floor. 

Flamingo Jazz

Post-war power devolving to the bourgeois middle-class; the Knightsbridge, Whitehall and Mayfair mafia. The reassuring critics of a Empire under blood red skies: spies, mobsters and civil servants clustering under the mosquito nets, plotting on vodka martinis, a khaki coloured politics. The white, navy and chrome grey aluminium of the BOAC VC-10, James Bond, and Rule Britannia. A starchy white linen suit daubbed with a saucy red liquid lipstick kiss in some far away field. Strawberries, cream and hot chilli sauce. The tingling heat of humid tropical fever cooling naked skin under the inky diamond studded night sky. Sweating guilty secrets in the evening breeze around the glowing gauze of the gas lamp. The insects swarm. Never forgotten, forever England. The world service, cricket commentaries, all night long. Ex-patriots: strangely boorish, rude and obnoxious; grandiose, narcisstic; pathetic, hilarious bully-buddies; making saints out of all us sinners; we all sit down to all their dinners; now not another a word about it; that will be all. [Amen].

Granny Takes a Trip

Love is all you need. The counter-culture, being and becoming permanent revolution, funded by rock and rollers in rose-gold Rolls Royses. The regimental bandsmen of the next generation, raising their festival flags for freedom, preaching to the converted, peacenik hippie capitalists, psychedelic warriors, fighting a war against fascism, with Hammond organs, American blues, and sexy sax solos sold in the back streets of Soho. Magazine men marching off to neverland. Marxist-Lenninist guerrillas invading distant Banana sands. All members of the same Gentlemen's club. Palm courts aplenty. The occasional desertion to Moscow. With no state pension and no name. But Her Majesty has asked that they should all still retain their seats in the House of Lords. God forgive us our sins.

"Man's Search for Meaning"....

Everyone is deeply engaged in living their lives - but like fishes swimming in the sea we can never see the water that surrounds us because we are totally immersed in it. In the same way, only some of us ever get to understand the true meaning of our lives, because we only see it in its parts and not its wholes, the meaning of things is rather patchy.

As a mental health nurse this is important to me because I work with people who have lost the meaning of their lives; the definition of being and staying well almost seems to be "knowing what your life means". 

However, my studies tell me that, for the majority of us, that meaning is a received meaning. By that I mean, it is not a meaning that we have had to discover for ourselves. Being "a mum", being "a postman", being "a president", are all titles with roles and actions attached to them, a bit like actors in a play, society has written the script for us in the history of our interactions. 

These words that we use to describe the people that we are, that are supposed to give our lives 'meaning' are actually only generic tokens for specific things. Thus, while I may "love my dog", by calling it "a dog", I relegate it to a class of things, that are infinite in number, that I have no connection to, that I could not love, at least not in the same way that I love this being that I know, and therefore, "my love" ceases to have the same meaning that it had for me before I used language to describe it.   

Language is said to "carve nature at the joints" in the same way that Dad carves up the Turkey at Christmas dinner. It goes for the easy bits first, and makes the incision to break the world up into natural categories of things to make things simple. For instance, it carves the "sexes" up into "girls" and "boys", and conveniently forgets about the problems of "transgendered" and "hermaphrodite" people.

Thus, it is easy to see how language has become the natural repository for ideology, the vehicle for the communication of ideas, for the benefit of some and detriment of others! What is left behind, and is often managed out of the picture by clever editing and production, is the ‘umwelt’ of the embedded and embodied emotions.

Ideology controls others through language. Ideology controls others by having them control their emotions. The more meaningless the emotions are, the less they have value from an ideological point of view, the less they are talked about or even recognised as existing. Like people who do not fit the ideology, they will eventually cease to exist.

But when you do not fit the ideology, and your meaningless emotions are all you have left; when your ideology has been destroyed; when another has destroyed everything that you are; then, you will have no capacity to decode the information of your senses; you will not be able to explain your reactions to events; you will not be able to externalise your emotions; and you will be mad. And you will be outside your own head wondering how you can get back in. And you will wonder if you have ceased to exist. And you will not exist.

Although you will still be deeply engaged in living your life. Some of you will realise that your lives still have meaning, beyond the received meaning, beyond the ideology, beyond the normative assumptions. You will develop a capacity to find meaning. The difference will be in whether others find that meaning with you; and share it with you; and live it with you. Without you. As it were.

Local Elections 2018: Fortress Britain

Interesting set of results last night which are widely being reported by the national media as no change. This translates into the Corbyn bandwagon running out of steam and the Tories not being as badly affected as they might be by their recent bad press over the Windrush generation.

From a coastal Essex town I would say the results are more revealing of the widening political and economic divide behind the haves and have nots in the UK.

The wards that have crept towards more Labour councillors are also those more likely to have properties being converted to flats or houses of multiple occupation (HMOs). This is creating increased pressure on schools, GP surgeries, transport and other public services in these areas that central and local government are slow to respond to. The sort of working class voters UKIP might also have gone after.

The wards that are creeping towards more Independent, Green or Liberal Democrat  councillors are those going through the now familiar "gentrification" process. This is related to young professionals, commuting to and from inner City areas, with good credit histories, large deposits, and assured shorthold tenancies and landlords with large portfolios investing in  property hotspots altogether stimulating a flourishing high street of small independent taders and artisans.

The wards that are creeping back towards Conservative from a flirtation with UKIP or Labour are generally populated by properties that have bought by tenants from landlords in the last 50 years. This would be "Thatchers Generation" of "Basildon Man" - those that bought their council houses at knock down prices as a way out of 'the ghetto'. The same people that Blair tried to appeal to as the aspirational working and left-leaning middle class homeowners. The reason that "Jerusalem" replaced "the Red Flag" as the Labour Party's anthem for a while.

It is no lie to say that there is a homeless person in nearly every shop doorway when I walk through town to get my sandwich at lunchtime. The white beggars seem to be drinking more and chasing the European homeless out of town. 1 in 3 shopfronts is boarded up. The high rise office blocks have been empty for 10 years now. The Tory council have finally agreed for their conversion to residential property. They are being reclad Grenfell style and marketed to young professionals and property investors. There is a policy to disrupt any large public gathering where political descent could become contagious. Car parks are closing in favour of more residential developments. There is a clear political agenda quietly being developed under May's regime.

So this is the future of, what shall we call it, "Fortress Britain" would suit. There is a very British feeling to it: quietly determined and gentile; but ultimately, utterly ruthless. "Doing what we have to do to get the business done. This is what we do. No need to ask why." Chances are you wouldn't get an answer anyway. 

On Corbyn v Berger

A few words on the current row between two highly respected left-wingers. What appears to be behind it is the misapplication and misreading of iconography and stereotypes of a pretty mediocre piece of street graffiti.

The way I see it...

Corbyn's original comments seem to reference the anti-globalisation anti-capitalism movement.

This would be infered from the US dollar symbol that is known as 'God's all seeing eye' that sits atop a pyramid (a piece of iconography normally associated with the largely Christian history of the Freemasons); and a monopoly board (which I think was first designed by a Socialist as an educational tool); being supported on the backs of what appear to be anonymous slaves.

In a hasty tweet Corbyn makes some glib comment about a similar piece of street art depicting Lenin having being threatened with erasure in the same way that this piece is; he makes some claim to political solidarity.

Berger draws attention to the racist stereotypes used in the street art some time later, when Corbyn has become leader of the Party because his tweets have become important news.

Indeed sat round the monopoly board are a number of what might be loosely described as 'Dickensian' stereotypes of a Victorian-era Jewish bourgeois. In terms of narrative there doesn't seem to be any reason for these figures to be there apart from to reinforce a 1930s Nazi style propaganda. That is, as some sort of racial targets for anti-capitalists, which is a highly suspect political message.

So Lucianna is absolutely correct to bring attention to the sinister nature of the message being communicated to those who would not necessarily be able to read its disturbing language and demand an apology from a leader who should know better.

Corbyn apologised for being an artistic 'philistine' and agreed he had misinterpreted the whole thing. End of.

But no. Since then the opportunity to make a massive news story out of a stupid mistake has been too good to miss. Such is politics.

One has to wonder whether who wins from dragging race and religion into politics in such a way but who am I to judge? 

BREXIT!: The End-Game

So Nigel Farage stands up in the European Parliament to defend the right of Catalonians to self-rule and self-determination. In doing so he tries to portray himself as a defender of people’s rights; he is nothing of the sort. On social media I see many people believing in his rhetoric: the great White Knight of Christendom come to rid us of of the Evil (?Arab, etc.) invaders.

His devotees easily ignore the fact that, as leader of the United Kingdon Independence Party (UKIP), he never stood up for the rights of the people of Scotland, Ireland or Wales in their struggle for self-rule and self-determination. His ‘victory’ was their defeat. He never won an election. He is only famous for recruiting a large fascist malitia (from BNP, NF, EDL, etc.) to put down the insurrection of the UK’s break-away states in exactly the same way that he now accuses the Spanish state of doing.

There is no logic or justification to Farage’s actions from a moral or legal point of view; his only logic is the blind fervour of ‘the Patriot’. This, he feels, entitles him to do anything that serves his own interests; he shares the same narcissistic trait as Hitler, he broadly interprets his interests as the interests of ‘the country’, or ‘the (?real) European people’, etc.

In the end, the only interest Nigel Farage has in the internal politics of Spain (apart from a small increase in arms sales) is to create instability in the region, and thereby promote the UK’s claim to the sovereignty of Gibraltar. This is a key negotiating point. He will, of course, be covertly supported in this endeavour by the UK Conservatives, through the exercise of the traditional triumvirate of their military, financial and petroleum assets.

No doubt Boris Johnson is busy briefing his officials in Whitehall on this subject; one assumes that we MUST protect our trade routes to the old British Empire via. the Mediterranean Sea; we MUST never let something like the Suez Crisis happen again; therefore, we MUST sell more arms to Syrian, Egyptian and Kurdish rebels to stem the ISIS infidels; we MUST never let the Freinds of Israel down; and we MAY ALWAYS recite ‘the Road to Manadaly’ without fear of retribution when we visit Buddhist Temples in Burma.

At the same time the Brexit negotiations conducted by the FCO have ground down to their inevitable ‘bureaucratic impasse’; NO DEAL is beginning to look like THE ONLY DEAL we were ever likely to reach with the EU. I can’t think anyone but Nigel Farage is happy about this. The Conservatives have suffered some huge casualties to get this stage of crippling nihilistic inertia; it seems like the trench warfare of the Somme all over again, with Christmas fast approaching.

It is now the time we should be asking ourselves, is this what we voted for in the referendum? Because, however we voted, I think we were voting for a solution to our problems, not more problems. Hopefully we can all now see that there are no solutions lying in the direction that Nigel Farage wants to take us. If we want solutions, rather than creating more intractable problems for each other, we must think again.

Here is a suggestion:

1) the problems we had with the EU were the same problems that all the member states had with the EU;

2) the solutions that we seek are the same solutions that all member states were seeking

3) therefore, the solution is not exiting the EU but reforming the EU using the Brexit negotiations as a tool

4) the main problem with the EU as it was, was the lack of control member states had over taxing the imports of other member states (including the taxing of 'the free-movement' of labour)

5) independent taxation and trading tariffs within the internal market is necessay to balance the different economies of the various member states, based on their political-geography, population needs and ownership of the means of production

6) as an example, look at the USA as a model of a succesful trading block; it has individual member States that share a currency but are still able to set their own trade tariffs (i.e. taxes) on the products of other member states within an internal market

7) this system creates an internal gearing mechanism that enables the internal market to find its own levels between demand and supply chains, in much the same way that having different currencies does, without the hassle and potential conflicts (?over Sovereignty) caused by having different currencies

8) during the financial crisis currency itself became a comodity; the printing of money during 'quantitative easing' effectively reduced its value through increasing the supply of money to meet the demands of those private stakeholders the country was in debt to.

9) This effectively reduced our debt burden but it would have reduced the value of our economic products too, leading to an escalating spiral of inflation, if other currencies had not also been going through the same devaluation, keeping the prices of our products relatively stable.

10) the problems the Euro-zone faced during that time was that it couldn’t find a rate of exchange with external currencies that was suitable for all areas of its internal economy and conflicting political-geographic agendas

11) Therefore, ‘Brexit’ is a direct result of, and political metaphor for, the problems the UK and EU faced during the financial crisis: the relative strength of the GBP within the same internal market as the Euro created a tension that had to be resolved, at some point in the future.

12) the restructuring of the UK economy as a result of Brexit seems to be heading in the direction of a lower-wage, larger manufacturing sector (relative to service sector). It will have less reliance on the financial services sector which will mean a huge loss of taxation revenue. This will necessitate a smaller government with less military power. In addition to calls for Scottish independence within the EU, North Sea oil is running out.

13) Therefore, the UK’s old right-wing triumvirate, that grew through the industrial revolution, created a British Empire that stretched around the globe, and essentially won the Cold-War, will finally be dead. A Russian/German alliance will likely see the rise of a subsequent Euro-centric empire (something like the Austro-Hungarian Empire without its religious hang-ups); but this will inevitably create problems for the other EU member states.

14) The only way the UK can avoid its own demise is to remain in the EU but only if the EU agrees to reform as was suggested above; this would require an EU wide referendum that the UK would also be signatories

15) What would happen if it was rejected by the electorate? In theory, financial services and other large businesses, such as the energy and armaments industries, will relocate to the EU in order to maintain their place within the single market. The UK will be forced to cut taxation even further in order to attract what busineses they can. The UK will get weaker militarily, financially and technologically relative to the EU. Eventually the UK would have to reintegrate with the EU.

16) That's what everyone said before the referendum but it hasn't happened yet? The rebalancing of the UK economy has already begun. Manufacturers are able to export more to the EU given the weakness in the GBP. However, the rising cost of importing the raw materials has squeezed margins. Thus, incomes have remained at their pre-Brexit levels while prices of imported goods (i.e. food) has steadily risen. Consequently, things like property has become more expensive to UK residents, whilst it has become cheaper for international investors. Over a period of time; these disparities are only going to increase.


The above a proposal would clearly require some political maneouvering by all parties involved. It is unlikely to be a final product. However, it is a proposal for an 'End Game' that is notably lacking at the moment. Games that have no-end tend to be parked by politicians in deadlock. The trenches of the first world war were a solution to a similar sort of problem. Thus, although some may consider No Deal is better than Any Deal, I urge all the others to disagree.