The Fabian Model_British Fabian Society dynastic banking families _ Fabian Ministers Our ££££££££££

The Fabian model

In Germany, behind the figure of Lassalle there shades off a series of ‘socialisms’ moving in an interesting direction.

The so-called academic socialists (‘socialists of the chair,’ Kathedersozialisten — a current of establishment academics) looked to Bismarck more openly than Lasalle, but their conception of state-socialism was not in principle alien to his. Only, Lassalle embarked on the risky expedient of calling into being a mass movement from below for the purpose — risky because once in motion it might get out of hand, as indeed it did more than once. Bismarck himself did not hesitate to represent his paternalistic economic policies as a kind of socialism, and books got written about ‘monarchical socialism,’ ‘Bismarckian state socialism,’ etc. Following further to the right, one comes to the ‘socialism’ of Friedrich List, a proto-Nazi, and to those circles where an anti-capitalist form of anti-Semitism (Dühring, A. Wagner, etc.) lays part of the basis for the movement that called itself socialism under Adolf Hitler.

The thread that unites this whole spectrum, through all the differences, is the conception of socialism as equivalent merely to state intervention in economic and social life. ‘Staat, greif zu!’ Lassalle called. ‘State, take hold of things!’ — this is the socialism of the whole lot.

This is why Schumpeter is correct in observing that the British equivalent of German state-socialism is Fabianism, the socialism of Sidney Webb.

The Fabians (more accurately, the Webbians) are, in the history of the socialist idea, that modern socialist current which developed in more complete divorcement from Marxism, the one most alien to Marxism. It was almost chemically-pure social-democratic reformism unalloyed, particularly before the rise of the mass labour and socialist movement in Britian, which it did not want and did not help to build (despite a common myth to the contrary). It is therefore a very important test, unlike most other reformist currents which paid their tribute to Marxism by adopting some of its language and distorting its substance.

The Fabians, deliberately middle-class in composition and appeal, were not for building any mass movement at all, least of all a Fabian one. They thought of themselves as a small elite of brain-trusters who would permeate the existing institutions of society, influence the real leaders in all spheres Tory or Liberal, and guide social development toward its collectivist goal with the ‘inevitability of gradualness.’ Since their conception of socialism was purely in terms of state intervention (national or municipal), and their theory told them that capitalism itself was being collectivised apace every day and had to move in this direction, their function was simply to hasten the process. The Fabian Society was designed in 1884 to be pilot-fish to a shark: at first the shark was the Liberal Party; but when the permeation of Liberalism failed miserably, and labour finally organised its own class party despite the Fabians, the pilot-fish simply reattached itself.

There is perhaps no other socialist tendency which so systematically and even consciously worked out its theory as a socialism-from-above. The nature of this movement was early recognised, though it was later obscured by the merging of Fabianism into the body of Labour reformism. The leading Christian socialist inside the Fabian Society once attacked Webb as ‘a bureaucratic collectivist’ (perhaps the first use of that term.) Hilaire Belloc’s once famous book of 1912 on The Servile State was largely triggered by the Webb type whose ‘collectivist ideal’ was basically bureaucratic. G D H Cole reminisced: ‘The Webb’s in those days, used to be fond of saying that everyone who was active in politics was either an ‘A’ or a ‘B’ — an anarchist or a bureaucrat — and that they were ‘Bs’…’

These characterisations scarcely convey the full flavour of the Webbian collectivism that was Fabianism. It was through-and-through managerial, technocratic, elitist, authoritarian, ‘plannist.’ Webb was fond of the term wirepulling almost as a synonym for politics. A Fabian publication wrote that they wished to be ‘the Jesuits of socialism.’ The gospel was order and efficiency. The people, who should be treated kindly, were fit to be run only by competent experts. Class struggle, revolution and popular turbulence were insanity. In Fabianism and the Empire imperialism was praised and embraced. If ever the socialist movement developed its own bureaucratic collectivism, this was it.

‘It may be thought that Socialism is essentially a movement from below, a class movement,’ wrote a Fabian spokesman, Sidney Ball, to disabuse the reader of this idea; but now socialists ‘approach the problem from the scientific rather than the popular view; they are middle class theorists,’ he boasted, going on to explain that there is ‘a distinct rupture between the socialism of the street and the socialism of the chair.’

The sequel is also known, though often glossed over. While Fabianism as a special tendency petered out into the larger stream of Labour Party reformism by 1918, the leading Fabians themselves went in another direction. Both Sidney and Beatrice Webb as well as Bernard Shaw — the top trio — became principled supporters of Stalinist totalitarianism in the 1930s. Even earlier, Shaw, who thought socialism needed a superman, had found more than one. In turn he embraced Mussolini and Hitler as benevolent despots to hand ‘socialism’ down to the Yahoos, and he was disappointed only that they did not actually abolish capitalism. In 1931 Shaw disclosed, after a visit to Russia, that the Stalin regime was really Fabianism in practice. The Webbs followed to Moscow, and found God. In their Soviet Communism: a New Civilization, they proved (right out of Moscow’s own documents and Stalin’s own claims, industriously researched) that Russia is the greatest democracy in the world; Stalin is no dictator; equality reigns for all; the one-party dictatorship is needed; the Communist Party is a thoroughly democratic elite bringing civilization to the Slavs and Mongols (but not Englishmen); political democracy has failed in the West anyway, and there is no reason why political parties should survive in our age…

They staunchly supported Stalin through the Moscow purge trials and the Hitler-Stalin Pact without a visible qualm, and died more uncritical pro-Stalinists than can now be found on the Politburo. As Shaw has explained, the Webbs had nothing but scorn for the Russian Revolution itself, but ‘the Webbs waited until the wreckage and ruin of the change was ended, its mistakes remedied, and the Communist state fairly launched.’ That is, they waited until the revolutionary masses had been straitjacketed, and the leaders of the revolution cashiered, the efficient tranquillity of dictatorship had settled on the scene, the counter-revolution firmly established; and then they came along to pronounce it the Ideal.

Was this really a gigantic misunderstanding, some incomprehensible blunder? Or were they not right in thinking that this indeed was the ‘socialism’ that matched their ideology, give or take a little blood? The swing of Fabianism from middle class permeation to Stalinism was the swing of a door that was hinged on socialism-from-above.

If we look back at the decades just before the turn of the century that launched Fabianism on the world, another figure looms, the antithesis of Webb: the leading personality of revolutionary socialism in that period, the poet and artist William Morris, who became a socialist and a Marxist in his late forties. Morris’ writings on socialism breathe from every pore the spirit of socialism-from-below, just as every line of Webb’s is the opposite. This is perhaps clearest in his sweeping attacks on Fabianism (for the right reasons); his dislike of the ‘Marxism’ of the British edition of Lassalle, the dictatorial H M Hyndman; his denunciations of state-socialism; and his repugnance at the bureaucratic-collectivist utopia of Bellamy’s Looking Backward. (The last moved him to remark: ‘If they brigaded me into a regiment of workers, I’d just lie on my back and kick.’)

Morris’ socialist writings are pervaded with his emphasis from every side on class struggle from below, in the present; and as for the socialist future, his News from Nowhere was written as the direct antithesis of Bellamy’s book. He warned

that individual men cannot shuffle off the business of life on to the shoulders of an abstraction called the state, but must deal with it in conscious association with each other… Variety of life is as much an aim of true communism as equality of condition, and … nothing but an union of these two will bring about real freedom.

‘Even some Socialists,’ he wrote, ‘are apt to confuse the cooperative machinery towards which modern life is tending with the essence of socialism itself.’ This meant ‘the danger of the community falling into bureaucracy.’ Therefore he expressed fear of a ‘collectivist bureaucracy’ lying ahead. Reacting violently against state-socialism and reformism, he fell backwards into anti-parliamentarism but he did not fall into the anarchist trap:

…people will have to associate in administration, and sometimes there will be differences of opinion… What is to be done? Which party is to give way? Our anarchist friends say that it must not be carried by a majority; in that case, then, it must be carried by a minority. And why? Is there any divine right in a minority?

This goes to the heart of anarchism far more deeply than the common opinion that the trouble with anarchism is that it is over-idealistic.

William Morris versus Sidney Webb: this is one way of summing up the story.

The next section is: » The ‘revisionist’ facade

http://www.swp.org.uk/swp_archive.php?article_id=5027

Britain in the hands of Fabianism..

The group, which favoured gradual incremental change rather than revolutionary change, was named – at the suggestion of Frank Podmore – in honour of the Roman general Quintus Fabius Maximus (nicknamed “Cunctator”, meaning “the Delayer”). His Fabian strategy advocated tactics of harassment and attrition rather than head-on battles against the Carthaginian army under the renowned general Hannibal Barca.

The society was founded on 4 January 1884 in London as an offshoot of a society founded in 1883 called The Fellowship of the New Life.[1] Fellowship members included poets Edward Carpenter and John Davidson, sexologist Havelock Ellis, and future Fabian secretary, Edward R. Pease. They wanted to transform society by setting an example of clean simplified living for others to follow. But when some members also wanted to become politically involved to aid society’s transformation, it was decided that a separate society, The Fabian Society, also be set up. All members were free to attend both societies. The Fabian Society additionally advocated renewal of Western European Renaissance ideas, and their promulgation throughout the rest of the world.

The Fellowship of the New Life was dissolved in 1898[2], but the Fabian Society grew to become the preeminent academic society in the United Kingdom in the Edwardian era, typified by the members of its vanguard Coefficients club.

Immediately upon its inception, the Fabian Society began attracting many prominent contemporary figures drawn to its socialist cause, including George Bernard Shaw, H. G. Wells, Annie Besant, Graham Wallas, Hubert Bland, Edith Nesbit, Sydney Olivier, Oliver Lodge, Leonard Woolf and Virginia Woolf, Ramsay MacDonald and Emmeline Pankhurst. Even Bertrand Russell briefly became a member, but resigned after he expressed his belief that the Society’s principle of entente (in this case, countries allying themselves against Germany) could lead to war.

At the core of the Fabian Society were Sidney and Beatrice Webb. Together, they wrote numerous studies of industrial Britain, including alternative co-operative economics that applied to ownership of capital as well as land.

The first Fabian Society pamphlets advocating tenets of Social justice coincided with the zeitgeist of Liberal reforms during the early 1900s. The Fabian proposals however were considerably more progressive than those that were enacted in the Liberal reform legislation. The Fabians lobbied for the introduction of a minimum wage in 1906, for the creation of a Universal healthcare system in 1911, and for the abolition of hereditary peerages in 1917[3].

Fabian socialists were in favour of an imperialist foreign policy as a conduit for internationalist reform and a welfare state modelled on the Bismarckian German model; they criticised Gladstonian liberalism both for its individualism at home and its internationalism abroad. They favoured a national minimum wage in order to stop British industries compensating for their inefficiency by lowering wages instead of investing in capital equipment; slum clearances and a health service in order for “the breeding of even a moderately Imperial race” which would be more productive and better militarily than the “stunted, anaemic, demoralised denizens…of our great cities”; and a national education system because “it is in the class-rooms that the future battles of the Empire for commercial prosperity are already being lost”[4].

The Fabians also favored the nationalization of land, believing that rents collected by landowners were unearned, an idea which drew heavily from the work of American economist Henry George.

Many Fabians participated in the formation of the Labour Party in 1900, and the group’s constitution, written by Sidney Webb, borrowed heavily from the founding documents of the Fabian Society. At the Labour Party Foundation Conference in 1900, the Fabian Society claimed 861 members and sent one delegate.

In the period between the two World Wars, the “Second Generation” Fabians, including the writers R. H. Tawney, G. D. H. Cole, and Harold Laski, continued to be a major influence on social-democratic thought.

It was at this time that many of the future leaders of the Third World were exposed to Fabian thought, most notably India’s Jawaharlal Nehru, who subsequently framed economic policy for India on Fabian social-democratic lines. Obafemi Awolowo who later became the premier of Nigeria’s defunct Western Region was also a Fabian member in the late 1940s. It was the Fabian ideology that Awolowo used to run the Western Region but was prevented from using it on a national level in Nigeria. It is a little-known fact that the founder of Pakistan, Barrister Muhammad Ali Jinnah, was an avid member of the Fabian Society in the early 1930s. Lee Kuan Yew, the first Prime Minister of Singapore, stated in his memoirs that his initial political philosophy was strongly influenced by the Fabian Society. However, he later altered his views, believing the Fabian ideal of socialism to be impractical.

Among many current and former Fabian academics are the political scientist Bernard Crick, the late economists Thomas Balogh and Nicholas Kaldor, and the sociologist Peter Townsend.

[edit] Legacy
Through the course of the 20th century the group has always been influential in Labour Party circles, with members including Ramsay MacDonald, Clement Attlee, Anthony Crosland, Richard Crossman, Tony Benn, Harold Wilson, and more recently Tony Blair and Gordon Brown. The late Ben Pimlott served as its Chairman in the 1990s. (A Pimlott Prize for Political Writing was organized in his memory by the Fabian Society and The Guardian in 2005, and continues annually). The Society is affiliated to the Party as a socialist society. In recent years the Young Fabian group, founded in 1960, has become an important networking and discussion organisation for younger (under 31) Labour Party activists and played a role in the 1994 election of Tony Blair as Labour Leader. Following a period of inactivity, the Scottish Young Fabians were reformed in 2005.

The society’s 2004 annual report showed that there were 5,810 individual members (down 70 from the previous year), of whom 1,010 were Young Fabians, and 294 institutional subscribers, of which 31 were Constituency Labour Parties, co-operative societies, or trade unions, 190 were libraries, 58 corporate, and 15 other—making 6,104 members in total. The society’s net assets were £86,057, its total income £486,456, and its total expenditure £475,425. There was an overall surplus for the year of £1,031.

On 21 April 2009 the Society’s website stated that it had 6,286 members: “Fabian national membership now stands at a 35 year high: it is over 20% higher than when the Labour Party came to office in May 1997. It is now double what it was when Clement Attlee left office in 1951.”

The latest edition of the Dictionary of National Biography (a reference work listing details of famous or significant Britons throughout history) includes 174 Fabians. Four Fabians, Beatrice and Sidney Webb, Graham Wallas, and George Bernard Shaw founded the London School of Economics with the money left to the Fabian Society by Henry Hutchinson. Supposedly the decision was made at a breakfast party on 4 August 1894. The founders are depicted in the Fabian Window[5] designed by George Bernard Shaw. The window was stolen in 1978 and reappeared at Sotheby’s in 2005. It was restored to display in the Shaw Library at the London School of Economics in 2006 at a ceremony over which Tony Blair presided.[6]

[edit] Young Fabians
Members aged under 31 years of age are also members of the Young Fabians. This group has its own elected Chair and executive and organizes conferences and events. It also publishes the quarterly magazine Anticipations. The Scottish Young Fabians, a Scottish branch of the group, reformed in 2005.

[edit] Influence on Labour government
Since Labour came to office in 1997, the Fabian Society has been a forum for New Labour ideas and for critical approaches from across the party. The most significant Fabian contribution to Labour’s policy agenda in government was Ed Balls’ 1992 pamphlet, advocating Bank of England independence. Balls had been a Financial Times journalist when he wrote this Fabian pamphlet, before going to work for Gordon Brown. BBC Business Editor Robert Peston, in his book Brown’s Britain, calls this an “essential tract” and concludes that Balls “deserves as much credit – probably more – than anyone else for the creation of the modern Bank of England”;[7] William Keegan offers a similar analysis of Balls’ Fabian pamphlet in his book on Labour’s economic policy,[8] which traces in detail the path leading up to this dramatic policy change after Labour’s first week in office.

The Fabian Society Tax Commission of 2000 was widely credited[9] with influencing the Labour government’s policy and political strategy for its one significant public tax increase: the National Insurance rise to raise £8 billion for National Health Service spending. (The Fabian Commission had in fact called for a directly hypothecated “NHS tax”[10] to cover the full cost of NHS spending, arguing that linking taxation more directly to spending was essential to make tax rise publicly acceptable. The 2001 National Insurance rise was not formally hypothecated, but the government committed itself to using the additional funds for health spending.) Several other recommendations, including a new top rate of income tax, were to the left of government policy and not accepted, though this comprehensive review of UK taxation was influential in economic policy and political circles.[11]

[edit] Criticism
Leon Trotsky, an influential 20th century revolutionary socialist, wrote that Fabianism was an attempt to save capitalism from the working class. He wrote that “throughout the whole history of the British Labour movement there has been pressure by the bourgeoisie upon the proletariat through the agency of radicals, intellectuals, drawing-room and church socialists and Owenites who reject the class struggle and advocate the principle of social solidarity, preach collaboration with the bourgeoisie, bridle, enfeeble and politically debase the proletariat.”[12]

In an article published in The Guardian on 14 February 2008, following the apology offered by Australian prime minister Kevin Rudd to the “stolen generations”, Geoffrey Robertson criticises Fabian socialists for providing the intellectual justification for the eugenics policy that led to the stolen generations scandal.[13]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fabian_Society

Ed Balls – Fabian Society – the UK’s oldest think-tank
The UK’s leading centre-left think-tank the Fabian Society has been recommending and researching policy for more than 100 years.
http://www.fabian-society.org.uk/executive-committee-mainmenu-64/executive

Ed Balls ‘Next Decade’ lecture: Britain’s Next Decade – Fabian …
The UK’s leading centre-left think-tank the Fabian Society has been recommending and researching policy for more than 100 years.
http://www.fabian-society.org.uk/events/events/stronger-europe-essential-s

Fabian Society – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The most significant Fabian contribution to Labour’s policy agenda in government was Ed Balls’ 1992 pamphlet, advocating Bank of England independence. …
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fabian_Society

Ed Balls – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Fabian Society – Narrowing the Gap: The final report of the Fabian Commission on Life Chances and Child Poverty; ^ Fabian Society – Ed Balls ‘Next …
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ed_Balls

Ed Balls backs a written constitution – Fabian Society – the UK’s …
Ed Balls backs a written constitution as a way to restore trust in politics, at a Fabian fringe event.
http://www.fabians.org.uk/general-news/general-news/ed-balls-backs-a-writt

Ed Balls launches new Fabian lecture series on education reform …
Schools secretary Ed Balls launches a Fabian Lecture series on education reform.
http://www.fabians.org.uk/events/events-news/balls-schoolage

Ed Balls: Articles: Read About the Fabian Life Chances Commission
It was a great honour to launch the Fabian Life Chances report with David Miliband MP. Every child in our society should have proper access to the resources …
http://www.edballs.co.uk/index.jsp?i=1529

Ed Balls, Caroline Lucas, Fabian, Caroline Flint, Totalpolitics …
Sep 30, 2009 … But the question of whether Ed Balls or Caroline Lucas has a sense of humour, or whether Dale’s little ficts rather than facts should rule …
http://www.britishblogs.co.uk/theme/ed-balls-caroline-lucas-fabian-carolin

Ed Balls: Facts, Discussion Forum, and Encyclopedia Article
Ask a question about ‘Ed Balls’. Start a new discussion about ‘Ed Balls’ …. Balls has played a prominent role in the Fabian Society. Fabian Society …
http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Ed_Balls

Ed_balls encyclopedia topics | Reference.com
Balls has played a prominent role in the Fabian Society, the think-tank and political society …. Ed Balls announces pilots to help children with dyslexia. …
http://www.reference.com/browse/wiki/Ed_Balls

 

Political activities
Balls has played a prominent role in the Fabian SocietyFabian Society
The Fabian Society is a United Kingdom intellectual socialist movement, whose purpose is to advance the principles of Social democracy via gradualist and reformist, rather than revolutionary means….
, the think tank and political society founded in 1884 which helped to found the Labour Party in 1900. In 1992 he authored a Fabian pamphlet advocating Bank of EnglandBank of England
The Bank of England is the central bank of the United Kingdom and is the model on which most modern, large central banks have been based. Since 1946 it has been a Nationalisation institution….
independence, a policy that was swiftly enacted when Gordon Brown became Chancellor in 1997.

Balls was elected Vice-Chair of the Fabian Society for 2006 and Chair of the Fabian Society for 2007. As Vice-Chair of the Fabian Society, he launched the Fabian Life Chances Commission report in April 2006 and opened the Society’s Next Decade lecture series in November 2006, arguing for closer European cooperation on the environment. Balls had previously been seen as being a eurosceptic, in Labour party terms, because of his opposition to the euro and the EU constitution.

Balls has been a central figure in New Labour’s economic reform agenda. But he and Gordon Brown have differed from the Blairites in being keen to stress their roots in Labour party intellectual traditions such as Fabianism and the co-operative movement as well as their modernising credentials in policy and electoral terms. In a New StatesmanNew Statesman
The New Statesman is a United Kingdom left-wing politics magazine published weekly in London. The current editor is Jason Cowley, whose appointment was announced on 16 May 2008….
interview in March 2006, Martin BrightMartin Bright
Martin Bright is a British journalist. He has worked for the BBC World Service and The Guardian before becoming The Observer’s Education Correspondent and then Home Affairs Editor….
writes that Balls “says the use of the term “socialist” is less of a problem for his generation than it has been for older politicians like Blair and Brown, who remain bruised by the ideological warfare of the 1970s and 1980s”.

“When I was at college, the economic system in eastern Europe was crumbling. We didn’t have to ask the question of whether we should adopt a globally integrated, market-based model. For me, it is now a question of what values you have. Socialism, as represented by the Labour Party, the Fabian Society, the Co-operative movement, is a tradition I can be proud of”, Balls told the New Statesman.

Allegation over allowances
In September 2007, with his wife Yvette CooperYvette Cooper
Yvette Cooper is a United Kingdom politician. She is the Labour Party Member of Parliament for Pontefract and Castleford and is the Chief Secretary to the Treasury, the first woman in that position, from 24 January 2008….
, he was accused of “breaking the spirit of Commons rules” by using MPs’ allowances to help pay for a £655,000 home in north London. It was alleged that they bought a four-bed house in Stoke NewingtonStoke Newington
Stoke Newington is a district in the London Borough of Hackney. It is north-east of Charing Cross….
, north London, and registered this as their second home (rather than their home in CastlefordCastleford
Castleford is one of the five towns within the metropolitan borough of the City of Wakefield, in West Yorkshire, England. It is near to Pontefract, and has a population of 37,525 according to the 2001 Census….
, West Yorkshire) in order to qualify for up to £44,000 a year to subsidise a reported £438,000 mortgage under the Commons Additional Costs Allowance. This is despite both spouses working in London full-time and their children attending local London schools. Through a spokesman, Balls and Cooper countered the allegation by saying “The whole family travel between their Yorkshire home and London each week when Parliament is sitting. As they are all in London during the week, their children have always attended the nearest school to their

http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Ed_Balls

Politicians speak of TRANSPARENCY yet not once has any member stood as a FABIAN!

ED MILIBAND IS A FABIAN – DOES HE STAND AS ONE FOR ELECTION?

BY THEIR OWN ADMISSION THE LAST TYRANNY HAD 300 MEMBERS OF THE FABIANS ON LABOUR BENCHES!!

The only difference between Fabian Socialism and Communism is that Communists take your house by directly sending in the “secret police” to knock your front door down Fabian Socialists do it much more subtly and cleverly by “gradually” taking your individual rights away, by “gradually” increasing property taxes and rates, and finally, when you can’t pay them, they send in their regional “council tax inspectors” to take your house away but the end result is the same.

British PM Tony Blair and President George Bush Junior’s globalist “war on terror” is a classic Fabian Socialist strategy.

The philosophy of the Fabian Society was written in 1887 and included the statement: “The Fabian Society acknowledges the principal tenet of Marxism the abolition of private property etc.” (Of course this does not apply to the elect oligarchy at the top who end up owning the lot!).

Fabian Socialism is a “mixture” of Fascism, Nazism, Marxism and Communism all bundled together.

However, it is much more deadly because it is much more clever and subtle. Sidney and Beatrice Webb published a book of 1143 pages in defense of Bolshevism. It was entitled Soviet Communism: A New Civilization.

In April 1952 the Webbs were exposed before a US Senate Committee on the judiciary when Soviet Colonel I. M. Bogolepov, a former Red Army officer stated that the entire text had been prepared by himself in the Soviet Foreign Office. Appropriately, the defiant coat of arms of the Fabian Society (commissioned by author/playwright co-founder George Bernard Shaw) today (now archived) is a “wolf in sheep’s clothing.”

Until recently it also appeared on the Fabian glass window (now removed) in the Beatrice Webb House at Dorking, Surrey. Today the Fabian Society is among other things the inDDEtellectual wing of the British Labour Party.

Before Tony Blair became British Prime Minister in May 1997, he was Chairman of the Fabian Society.

Since the 1997 British general election there have been around 200 Fabian MP’s in the House of Commons, some of whom have formed almost entire Labour Cabinets including Gordon Brown, Robin Cook, Jack Straw, David Blunkett, Peter Hain, Patricia Hewitt, John Reid, Ruth Kelly, Alan Milburn and Clare Short.

Headed by Tony Blair, Fabians now dominate the entire British government.

They are resident in all parties and sit on all important select committees, commissions and organizations allied to the government.

A good web-site on the subject is:

www.lindsayjenkins.com/

FABIAN
The Fabian Society literally controls the European Union. German-born Gisela Stuart, the Labour MP for Birmingham Edgbaston since 1997, and member of the House of Commons Foreign Affairs Select Committee, was one of two House of Commons’ Representatives on the European Convention and a member of the Presidium of the Convention on the Future of Europe.

The Presidium was the drafting body that created the draft Constitution for Europe. In her book, The Making of Europe’s Constitution, published in December 2003 by the Fabian Society, p. 20-21, Gisela writes: “In the early months, the Presidium members would meet in a small room in the Justus Lipsius Building some fifteen minute walk from the European Parliament.

Attendance was limited to the thirteen members, the Secretary General Sir John Kerr, his deputy and the press officer. Sir John Kerr, a former Permanent Secretary of the British Foreign Office, conducted the proceedings inside the Presidium and in the plenary sessions of the Convention with deft diplomatic skill as might be expected from someone who John Major called ‘Machiavelli’ in his autobiography.

The best description of his talents I heard was: ‘When Kerr comes up to you and asks for the time, you wonder why me and why now?’
http://www.gnosticliberationfront.com/city_of_london__the_fabian.htm
On sFeveral occasions, we would retreat to the Val Duchess a small palace used by the Belgian foreign minister. It was at one of the dinners at Val Duchess that the skeleton of the draft constitution was given to members of the presidium in sealed brown envelopes the weekend before the public presentation.

We were not allowed to take the documents away with us.

Just precisely who drafted the skeleton, and when, is still unclear to me, but I gather much of the work was done by Valery Giscard d’Estaing and Sir John Kerr over the summer.

There was little time for informed discussion, and even less scope for changes to be made.”

There is another important idea, a method more than a principle which becomes closely associated with Fabianism.

Sydney Webb called it ‘permeation.’ Today it would be called ‘consensus.’ Webb put it this way. Most reformers think that all they have to do in a political democracy is to obtain a majority. This is a profound mistake.

What has to be changed is not only the vote that is cast, but also the mental climate in which Parliament and Government both live and work.

That I find to be an accurate description of the approach I and my colleagues have tried to bring to the affairs of the nation in our first term of office.”

In the last century, members of the British Fabian Society dynastic banking families in the City of London financed the Communist takeover of Russia.

Trotsky in his biography refers to some of the loans from these British financiers going back as far as 1907.

By 1917 the major subsidies and funding for the Bolshevik Revolution were co- ordinated and arranged by Sir George Buchanan and Lord Alfred Milner.