For Muslims And Fabians Oil Pipelines- Another 5 British Soldiers Are DEAD….184- Still Acceptable As Brown THE FABIAN THINKS?

 

REST IN PEACE LADS- WE SHALL COLLECT THE DEBT OWED!!

Repatriated dead!!

WARMONGERING LYING FABIAN BASTARD!!

American Thinker

Obama and the triumph of the Fabians.

In 1945, the United Kingdom implemented a program of change at the hands of a new left wing government. The structure of support built up in previous decades, the way change was sold to the public, outcomes themselves have much to teach us about America’s future.

 

To most Americans, the iconic image of British strength, resolve, and power is that of the cigar-chomping, bulldog-faced Winston Churchill defiantly growling “we shall never surrender” and “this is our finest hour” as Nazi bombs rained down on London every night during the summer of 1940.

 

Churchill almost single-handedly saved Britain from defeat at the hands of the Nazis, stepping up to become Prime Minister after Neville Chamberlain resigned in disgrace after diplomatic attempts to achieve “peace in our time” with Hitler proved folly.

 

But relatively few Americans may be aware that, despite his historic victory over one of the most evil regimes in history, Churchill was unceremoniously booted by British voters when his Conservative Party was defeated within weeks of Germany’s surrender.

 

What followed marked the beginning of the end for the greatest empire since Rome.

 

The election of 1945 was a decisive victory for Britain’s Labour Party. Labour gained 394 seats in the 640-seat House of Commons, named Clement Attlee as Prime Minister, and implemented historic changes in Britain, turning a once-great empire into a second-rate socialist welfare state in a span of 20 years.

 

The Labour government nationalized key industries in Britain, including rail, mining, air transport, utilities, and communications. Labour also created a “cradle-to-grave” welfare state and nationalized medicine with the creation of the National Health Service. Oppressive taxation was enacted to pay for the massive increase in government spending; by the 1970s income and estate taxes on the wealthy had skyrocketed to 80%.

 

In foreign policy, the Labour government engaged in wholesale decolonization, and the world is much worse off as a result. In 1947 British India was decolonized and partitioned into Hindu India and Muslim Pakistan. The resulting chaos displaced 12 million refugees and caused a million deaths. Sixty years and several wars later the former colonies are nuclear-armed powers, still locked in chronic tension over control of the mountain region of Kashmir. 

 

Burma, Ceylon, and the Palestinian Mandate were also decolonized in the immediate postwar period. Burma — now Myanmar — is home to one of the most repressive military dictatorships in the world. Ceylon, now Sri Lanka, is experiencing a decades-long guerrilla war, and the 60-year Arab-Israeli conflict in the former Palestinian Mandate knows no end. In subsequent decades, Britain also withdrew from East Africa, leaving in its wake the oppressive 30-year dictatorship of Robert Mugabe in Zimbabwe and a tribally-divided Kenya, recently wracked by election violence. Sudan, another former East African possession of the British Empire, is home to the ongoing genocide in Darfur.

 

By the 1960s, the Labour Party had overturned nearly all of the traditional aspects of a British culture that had been historically staid, stoic, and reserved. Prime Minister Harold Wilson’s government decriminalized abortion and homosexuality, abolished capital punishment, and revised immigration laws to allow large numbers of Third World emigrants to Britain for the first time. Consequently, today’s Britain is a land of social dysfunction, including high rates of drunkenness, property crime, welfare dependency, racial strife, promiscuity and irreligiosity. The illegitimate birth rate in the U.K. hit 50% in 2008, while a mere 10% of the population regularly attends church. Such behavior would have been unimaginable in prim Victorian society a century ago.

 

Although Britain’s Conservatives managed to form governments in the postwar period, they were unable to fully reverse the changes implemented by Labour. Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher did manage to lower tax rates and privatize some industries in the 1980s, but Conservatives never abolished the welfare state, the NHS, or reversed the social decline that had taken place in the postwar period.

 

The Britain that strode across the world as an economic and military colossus during the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries – bringing technology, learning, literature, order, and an unprecedented creation of wealth — was gone forever by the 1960s, its culture replaced by a trite and ephemeral trendiness epitomized by Beatlemania, punk rock, and “Cool Britannia.”

 

The Ideological Clique Behind the Change

 

These changes did not take place by accident. They were planned by British cultural elites, particularly by members of the Fabian Society, who had worked for over a half-century to promote the policies finally implemented by Labour governments after 1945.

 

The Fabians advocated a gradual, democratic socialist takeover rather than violent revolution. Fabians sought control over more banal aspects of life — transport, utilities, medicine — that were far less threatening to the general public than the prospect of armed revolution.

 

The society was named after the Roman general Fabius Maximus, whose tactic was to wait for the ideal opportunity. The society’s motto — “For the right moment you must wait… but when the right moment comes you must strike hard” — is eerily similar to White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel’s sentiment that “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste,” because “crisis provides the opportunity for us to do things that [we] could not do before.”

 

Fabian Society membership was a Who’s Who of prewar British intellectuals, writers and artists who had rejected classical free-market economics, traditional religion, nationalism and imperialism. They included nerdy academic socialists like Harold Laski and G.D.H. Cole, as well as a motley collection of misfits, pacifists, deviants and utopian radicals.

 

The writer H.G. Wells, advocate of eugenics and a utopian global state, was a Fabian. Noted for his infidelity, he had an affair with the American eugenicist and founder of Planned Parenthood, Margaret Sanger. Playwright and critic George Bernard Shaw, an advocate of feminism, socialism, and vegetarianism, was a Fabian; he opposed British involvement in World War I but became an admirer of the USSR in the 1930s. “Sexologist” Havelock Ellis, who married a lesbian and was said to only become aroused when watching women urinate, was a member, as was Edward Carpenter, a vegan gay-rights activist and nudist. Economist John Maynard Keynes, whose theories influenced the policies of nearly all Western governments since the 1930s and are in vogue in the Obama administration today, was briefly a member.

 

The Fabian Society was disproportionately influential in the Labour government of 1945; though the Society numbered only several thousand, more than half of the Labour Party MPs were members. Nearly all leaders of the postwar Labour Party have been members, including Attlee, Harold Wilson, James Callaghan, Neil Kinnock and Tony Blair.

 

Just as the Fabians influenced the Labour Party agenda, today’s Democratic Party reflects the disproportionate influence of a clique of elite cultural and academic leftists now seeking to implement a socialist agenda they have been promoting since the 1960s. This agenda includes nationalized health care, taxpayer-funded abortion, federal control of education, gay marriage, openly-practicing homosexuals in the military, and much, much higher taxes.

 

Like the Fabian-influenced Labour government, the Obama administration has embarked on a course to “remake” America. The administration will effectively nationalize transportation and utilities through its “green energy” initiatives (indeed, Congresswoman Maxine Waters recently advocated nationalizing the oil industry) openly seeks to nationalize health care (the $787 billion “stimulus” bill includes billions of dollars to begin centralizing health care records) and is using the mortgage and banking crisis to effectively nationalize the financial services and banking sector.

 

In foreign policy, the Obama administration has announced a deadline to withdraw all combat troops from Iraq, and indicated a willingness to cease implementation of a missile-defense shield in Europe. Obama, who campaigned as a “citizen of the world” and effectively apologized to Middle Eastern audiences for the U.S. invasion of Iraq in his first televised interview as president, seeks to curtail American military hegemony and replace it with reliance upon global institutions such as the U.N.

 

On immigration, Obama and the Democratic Party support citizenship for 12 million mostly Spanish-speaking illegal aliens currently residing in the U.S.; such a plan would invariably allow those new citizens to sponsor even more non-English speaking family members to emigrate to the U.S.

 

The agenda of the American Left bears an uncomfortable similarity to that of the Fabian Society intellectuals that reshaped British society. If this agenda is successfully implemented by Barack Obama, the election of 2008 in the United States will be a watershed event, much like the British election of 1945.

 

But this analogy is not an optimistic one. If one wants to know what the United States will look like fifty years after Obama, one need only look at the fall of Britain from its imperial height in 1945 to the Britain of today — a second-rate, secularized “nanny state” whose disarmed citizens are monitored by thousands of police cameras and whose police actively prosecute “hate crimes” and offenses against “multiculturalism.”

 

Like Britain, the United States will almost certainly remain an important financial center and regional power several decades from now, but the center of global gravity will long since have shifted to the Chinese as the United States abandons it global dominance and becomes preoccupied with a liberal, postmodern, domestic agenda. It does not have to be this way — the United States can still assert itself as global hegemon if it has the will to do so – but the successful implementation of the Obama agenda will assure that it does not.

 

If Obama achieves the goals articulated in his campaign, his presidency will surely mark the end of  “the American Century” just as the election of 1945 signaled the end of Victorian and Edwardian British global dominance.

WHO ARE WE-ASK’S THE FABIANS—THIS IN THEIR OWN WORDS NOT MINE–ALL THEIRS…THE FABIAN FASCISTS’

All Labour Prime Ministers have been members of the Fabian Society, while the Young Fabians have been influential in creating debate and as an arena for young people with an interest in politics to both influence and learn from influential political figures.

 

Fabian Women

From its beginning the Fabian Society has offered a forum for women to discuss and debate the issues of the day. Well before women won the vote, Fabian women were at the forefront of the arguments for gender equality. Fabian women formed their own group in 1908 and there continues to be a Fabian Women’s Network.

 White male haters…

http://www.fabians.org.uk/about-the-fabian-society

120 years of Fabianism

Fabian General Secretary Sunder Katwala introduces the Fabian Thinkers collection by asking what the Fabian Society’s illustrious history means today.    Nobody can know exactly what George Bernard Shaw, HG Wells or Sidney and Beatrice Webb would make of the world of Tony Blair, low-cost airlines and the internet. But then their Britain seems quite alien to us too. The Britain of 1884 was one in which most working men were denied the vote – along with all women – while wives were merely the property of their husbands. The British empire was at the height of its powers and its eclipse seemed unthinkable. The narrow political battle was between Gladstonian liberalism and Toryism. These must hardly have seemed auspicious circumstances for the small and idealistic group, which met in solicitor Edward Pease’s house in London to form the Fabian Society and declared their ambition to “help in the reconstruction of society in accordance with the highest moral possibilities”. Yet the Fabians were confident that their ideas could change the world, They were – though they would not have recognised the term – creating the world’s first “thinktank” and surely the most influential in the world of practical politics. Armed with facts, arguments and political persuasion, the Fabians created a uniquely practical utopianism. It was not just that they were able to “imagine things that never were and ask ‘why not’” (a Shaw soundbite later adopted by Bobby Kennedy). It was also that the Fabians educated and organised to make it happen in practice. They were first to propose many influential ideas – a national medical service and a welfare state funded by progressive taxation, equal rights for women and decolonisation. In addition to their ideas, publications and lectures, they created a highly impressive institutional legacy to create pressure for these reforms. Fabians advocated for and helped to create the Labour party in 1900. Convinced of the need for evidence-based social science, the Webbs created the London School of Economics, and the New Statesman to provide an outlet for political debate and ideas. Are these achievements anything more than a historical curiousity today? The fame and enduring reputation of many of the early Fabians could, after all, prove a burden as well as an asset for a thriving contemporary thinktank and political society, which will naturally be judged on its ability to shape the political debates of today and tomorrow, not those of yesterday. The Fabian Society’s central role is to lead debate in defining the future ideas, politics and policies of the left and to show that progressives can win the next battle of political ideas. Yet, in doing so, we can take inspiration from our roots. After all, what is most striking about the early Fabians is not that they provide a roll call of many of the most eminent thinkers of the Victorian and Edwardian age – the Webbs, Shaw and William Morris, Oscar Wilde, HG Wells, Rubert Brooke, Emmeline Pankhurst and many more – but the extent to which they were prepared to think ahead of the seemingly immutable features of the politics and society of their own times. Most importantly, they demonstrated that ideas matter in politics. The impact of ideas is often disguised and understated. After all, ideas, however revolutionary when proposed, quickly become part of the political furniture. Yet it is often the battle of ideas – with its intellectual revolutions and counter-revolutions – which reshape the boundaries of what is politically possible at any given time. And it is the ability of governments not just to legislate for their programmes but to shift their political opponents on to new territory which define a lasting political legacy. The battle of ideas cannot be taken for granted. Few today, especially on the left, would share the early Fabians’ characteristically Victorian certainty in “the inevitability of gradualness”. Rather, today it is common for neo-conservatives and neo-liberals to believe that history is preordained to go their way. Yet this too is disingenuous. Ideas need political champions to succeed. Richard Cockett’s definitive book Thinking the Unthinkable on the rise of the “new right” (a label first applied by a Fabian critique) shows how the neo-liberal counter-revolution was explicitly modelled on the influence of Fabianism, which it sought to to emulate, and counter, through institutions such as the Institute of Economic Affairs. For political ideas to be effective, they must be constantly rethought. A good Fabian slogan might be “Revisionists revise”. The Fabian ability to influence across political generations has been achieved through the pluralism and diversity of Fabian thinking – a constant rethinking for every political generation what it is to be progressive and on the left. Every time there has been an important renewal of left-of-centre thinking, Fabians have been central to those debates. So Sidney Webb wrote the Labour Party’s constitution in 1918, including the famous clause 4 commitment to nationalisation. But Fabians also played a central role in the debates which led to the Labour party rewriting its statement of aims and values in 1995 as it sought to escape its years in the electoral wilderness, particularly through Giles Radice’s highly influential Southern Discomfort pamphlets examining what stopped voters disenchanted with the Conservatives switching to Labour. And the time has come to renew again – we must re-examine the founding myths and fears of New Labour as we seek to ensure a radical Labour third term. As the 12 essays in this collection show, disagreement and debate is built into the fabric of the Fabian approach – underpinned by the lack of any collective Fabian “line” on policy issues. The ideal of open-minded, rational disagreement has not always been achieved in practice – HG Wells stormed out of the Society and lampooned the Webbs in his satire The New Machiavelli while the formation of the SDP created deep divisions a generation ago. And few would claim that Fabians have got everything right – the early Fabian claim that markets were inefficient simply by virtue of being unplanned was clearly a mistake, and the Webbs in particular have been much criticised for their grey statist approach and their naivety, late in life, about the Soviet Union. But many of the most telling critiques have come from within the Fabian fold. Tony Crosland’s famous claim in The Future of Socialism, easily the most influential book for the postwar left, that “Total abstinence and a good filing system are not now the right sign-posts to the socialist Utopia: or at least, if they are, some of us will fall by the wayside”. And his call for a greater emphasis on “freedom and dissent, on culture, beauty, leisure, and even frivolity” still stands among the most eloquent expressions of an attractive ethical, democratic and participatory vision of what it is to be on the left. The values and ideas of William Morris, RH Tawney, GDH Cole and many others can similarly still influence contemporary political debates too. A long Fabian history has inevitably contained low as well as high points – the Society’s non-sectarian approach was somewhat out of time with the political mood of both the 1930s and 1970s. Yet we Fabians enter our 13th decade in particularly good health. Two Labour landslides have seen more Fabians returned to the House of Commons than there are Conservatives and Lib Dems MPs put together – their number including Stephen Twigg whose shock defeat of Michael Portillo on election night 1997 meant he had to give up his post as Fabian general secretary.today the membership of the Society is twice what it was 30 years ago and stands at its highest level since Clement Attlee was prime minister. While under previous Labour governments Fabian membership has fallen, it has continued to rise steadily each year since 1997 – just one sign that, for all of the talk of apathy, there is immense interest in politics today, though increasingly often this is taking place outside formal political party structures. The great questions which will shape the next era of political debate – revitalising democracy and political participation; reshaping the relationship between citizens and the state; making environmentalism central to mainstream politics and creating an effective internationalism which can hold power to political account in a global age – will require new and innovative thinking to create a progressive politics for our own age. Yet the early Fabians would still find much that was recognisable in our contributions to these debates. The traditions of gradualism remain strong – especially the tactic of breaking political taboos to open up new ground in debates, as with our influential Commissions on Taxation and on the Monarchy. Our next major Commission, to be launched early this year, on Life Chances including setting out a road-map for the Labour government’s ambitious goal of abolishing child poverty by 2020, returns to a perennial Fabian theme of social justice, and indeed contains echoes of the Society’s very first pamphlet, titled Why are the many poor. Whether they would be, on balance, more encouraged or dismayed by the condition of contemporary Britain, those who founded the Fabian Society in 1884 would perhaps be surprised to find it still going strong 120 years on. In his essay on Sixty Years of Fabianism, George Bernard Shaw, then aged 90, concluded that he must “retire to make room for the Fabians of 60 years hence, by whatever name they will then be called. For the name may perish, but not the species”. We can do no more than commend his thought to the future Fabians of 2064.

http://www.fabians.org.uk/publications/extracts/120-years-of-fabianism

Yet we Fabians enter our 13th decade in particularly good health. Two Labour landslides have seen more Fabians returned to the House of Commons than there are Conservatives and Lib Dems MPs put together – their number including Stephen Twigg whose shock defeat of Michael Portillo on election night 1997 meant he had to give up his post as Fabian general secretary.

DECEPTION- APART FROM USING DECEPTION TO NICK OUR MONEY–THESE FABIANS USE THE TERM LABOUR TO FOOL THE GENERAL PUBLIC–WORKING MANS PARTY–MY ARSE!!

THEIR BEGINNINGS HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH WORKERS- JUST A MEANS TO SPREAD THEIR SOVIET STYLE COMMIE SHIT!!

Labour Party, UK The main progressive party in Britain since 1918. On 27 February 1900, the Labour Representation Committee was formed in a conference at Memorial Hall, Farringdon Street, London. It was a federation of socialist societies, such as the Independent Labour Party, the Fabian Society, and trade unions. Initially it had only two MPs, but in 1906, partly as the result of an electoral pact with the Liberal Party, it gained 30 seats, and became the Labour Party. Its first leader was Keir Hardie, who was succeeded by Arthur Henderson (1908–10) and George Barnes (1910–11). The prewar high point of support for the Labour Party at a general election was 7.6 per cent in January 1910, and it was concerned to shore up its support in seats won. The party split in 1914, when its leader (since 1911), MacDonald, resigned in opposition to World War I, whilst some of its prominent members, such as Henderson (leader again in 1914–17), supported the war effort.

http://encyclopedia2.thefreedictionary.com/Labour+Party

Origins

The Labour party was founded in 1900 after several generations of preparatory trade union politics made possible by the Reform Bills of 1867 and 1884, which enfranchised urban workers. Although the Labour Representation League, organized in 1869, elected parliamentary representatives, they were absorbed into the Liberal party Liberal party, former British political party, the dominant political party in Great Britain for much of the period from the mid-1800s to World War I. . A Marxist organization, the Social Democratic Federation, was founded by H. M. Hyndman Hyndman, Henry Mayers (hīnd`mən), 1842–1921, English Socialist, an early advocate of Marxism in England.
….. Click the link for more information.  in 1881; but more important for the history of the Labour party was the founding of the Fabian Society Fabian Society, British socialist society. An outgrowth of the Fellowship of the New Life (founded 1883 under the influence of Thomas Davidson), the society was developed the following year by Frank Podmore and Edward Pease.
….. Click the link for more information.  (1883) and the Independent Labour party (ILP; 1893). With the help of the Fabian Society and the Trades Union Congress, the ILP in 1900 set up the Labour Representation Committee, renamed the Labour party in 1906. The new party elected 29 members to Parliament in 1906; in the two elections of 1910 it elected 40 and 42. Its strength lay in the industrial North and in Welsh mining areas; the evolutionary socialism espoused by the Fabians was the dominant ideology.

OLD FABIAN PARTY….TRANSPARENCY….

All Labour Prime Ministers have been members of the Fabian Society, while the Young Fabians have been influential in creating debate and as an arena for young people with an interest in politics to both influence and learn from influential political figures.

 Two Labour landslides have seen more Fabians returned to the House of Commons than there are Conservatives and Lib Dems MPs put together – their number including Stephen Twigg whose shock defeat of Michael Portillo on election night 1997 meant he had to give up his post as Fabian general secretary.

ALL STOOD AS LABOUR CANDIDATES–DECEPTION!!

Lessons from America

To mark Barack Obama’s 100th day in office, the Young Fabians and the Labour Staff Network have released three new publications setting out the most important lessons for UK activists, from America.           In October 2008, 80 members of the Young Fabians and the Labour Staff Network joined Barack Obama’s campaign in the swing state of Ohio, for the final days of one of the most exciting political campaigns in recent history. The publications below are borne from their first hand experiences on the ground and offer practical suggestions to help reinvigorate Labour Party campaigning in the UK.

http://www.youngfabians.org.uk/content/view/191/5/ ANY OTHER BRITISH PARTY DID THIS INTERFERING IN AMERICAN ELECTIONS—WE’D NEVER HEAR THE END OF IT–BBC COLLECTED FOR OBAMA AND FABIANS AIDED HIM AT THE DOORS————-HOPE THIS WASN’T TAX PAYERS FUNDED?

 

---

Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)