Radical Talking Points - you will not like this much. Unless you do.

".

Violence and the trauma it causes cannot be treated without also treating the setting within which violence has occurred. It is not just about the individual and the assailant, it is also about the culture.

"The study of trauma is an inherently political exercise in that it brings attention to the experience of the oppressed." Judith Herman, writing about trauma and the aftermath, from domestic violence to state terror.

It is quite clear that the culture not as safe as it could be. What I mean is that the UN Declaration of Human Rights is a ratified treaty incorporated in to statute Law in a majority of States.

The meaning of the UNDHR is that part of resolving population level trauma is making the culture we live in a much safer culture than it is. Making an effort.

Arresting Derek Chauvin, and putting him on trial as a lone individual whilst ignoring the culture within which he lived and operated is inadequate to the task of addressing the issue of police violence and the issue of Racism, two issues that are intertwined in American policing and American culture and it's history.

Racism was invented. Misogyny was invented. Neither of these are naturally emergent behavioural characteristics. Some people claim that 'othering' is a natural enough behaviour. Their evidence is flimsy. Just because it can happen does not imply that it is naturally emergent.

Statistics do not tell the full story. Less people die as a result of lynching by an angry racist mob, whipped up locally in a fever of hatred and rage than in previous times, nonetheless Racism persists, the teachings of White Supremacy remain active, and there is no attempt made to counter that at it's root and so, for many people whose skin is dark, whose ancestral and ethnic roots are African, Racism today has a traumatic impact upon their lives.

That same can be said of Misogyny. 

To be a political radical is to look at the very roots of any subject and from there start to confront it's inequities from their origins, with as much honesty and clarity as one can gather. Blowing up a bridge or a parliament is not inherently radical  - indeed both actions are a continuation of the cycles of violence inherent in a violent hierarchy culture, and thus they are, to my mind at least,  the opposite to radical.  

They are not looking at the roots of violence in order to resolve the behaviours of violence. Jihadi's are not radical at all. White Supremacists are not radical. Both the Jihadist and White Supremacist deliberately avoid the roots of the problems of the world.  Political English is replete with misused language. Radicalisation? It is indoctrination, it is political grooming. It is not radicalisation. 

Racism.

It is the task of white people who understand the meaning, the history of systemic and personal Racism to confront it, to challenge it and to dismantle it among other white people.  This is not a task for the targets of Racism alone. Personal Racism is not a personal flaw. It is the internalisation of a weapons system thought form. Racism was invented. Racism had a purpose. To counter than, to in-invent it demands that we are honest as to how and why Racism was invented.

Racism was invented to protect the interests of a violent hierarchy - the plantation owners and the rulers of colonial America, while it was still a British colony and it's citizens British subjects. The Plantation owners were a minority who faced a majority they oppressed - indentured European and African workers, and the indigenous peoples. Racism was invented to set the European indentured workers as superior humans to the Africans, and the native peoples, and to set them as antagonists, one against the other.

At the time there was a substantial indentured worker population from Africa. British Privateers had been raiding Spanish Slavers for decades, capturing the enslaved Africans as booty, bringing them to the colonies, where they were indentured as workers. There was also some movement of free Africans who took up indentured work by choice. There was therefore significant population of free Africans who had worked their indentures and were considered citizens. There was a significant inter marriage between European and African, and a significant demographic of African farmers, artisans and other trades.

The creation of the legal category White Race, or White People, in 1681, was a critical step in that process. There is no such thing in biology, morality or historical precedent where skin colour denoted superiority or inferiority that was legalised.  It is a cultural definition. designed by an oppressor class to incite lateral violence among those they oppressed.

Then slowly bit by bit the Oligarchs passed laws limiting African's freedoms and rights, even banning inter marriage between Europeans and Africans. Slavery was introduced on the back of these new laws.

That is British and American History.

Misogyny.

It's the task of men who understand the meaning and history of systemic and personal  Misogyny to confront it, to challenge it and to dismantle it among other men. This is not a task for women alone.  Personal Misogyny is not a personal flaw. It is the internalisation of a weapons system thought form.

Misogyny is invented as part of a cultural belief set of Patriarchy. The anger of misogyny is that women do not submit. Patriarchy held that women were the chattels of men, that women should submit to the whims of men, that women were tools of patrilineal inheritance, breeders of dynasty. Greek Democracy was rooted in Patriarchy. The British Empire likewise. The American Constitution was a document drawn up by and for men of property.

System approved Feminism runs like this - if you are willing to operate the existing power system as it stands, as one of us, you are welcome. Join us. We call this 'equality'.

Genuine Feminism: we see and understand the violent hierarchy cult and we see it's inequity and we will, holding hands with one another, men and women, dismantle that violent hierarchy. we call this equity, justice, peace more than the absence of war.

Poverty.

It's the task of working class, middle class and wealthy people who understand poverty as imposed, as a structural pillar of the violent hierarchy system, to confront it, to challenge it and to dismantle all support for it among other working class, middle class and wealthy  people. And then to organise together to abolish poverty. This is not a task for the impoverished.  Personal poverty or hatred of the poor are not personal flaws. They are the internalisations of a weapons system thought form.

Wealth is God smiling on you, poverty is His disfavour. That is a lie.

Peace

It's the task of working class, middle class and wealthy people who understand that war is tool of a violent hierarchy, that it is imposed, structurally, and that our task is to confront war mongers, to challenge them at every turn and to dismantle the systemic use of war as a tool of a violent power, where ever we find it, starting with our immediate, local and national Governments.

Monarchy, Aristocracy, Rulers.

Monarchy is an evil. Monarchy is an invention. Monarchy is the original knife crime syndicate. The 'Stablishment. The history of Kings and Queens is a bloody mess.

Abolish Monarchy, abolish all titles. Remove all privileges. Hand the land and wealth back to the people from whom it was taken, as it was always taken at the point of a blade. Let the concept of a noble class fade into the mists. We are all noble, if any one is.

I say this and I say too that  we must not make the error of personalising this. 

It is not about the person who is Queen, it is not about the individual Lord, Lady or Prince, Duke or Earl - it's not about them as people, since mostly they are people trapped by accident of birth. They did not choose their parents. They were born into that position. .

It is about the institution and the systems of Hierarchy,  Power and Violence. 

The whole edifice of Monarchy is deeply rooted in Violent Abuse.

To praise or celebrate monarchs of the past is similar to praising or celebrating Jimmy Savile, after it has been disclosed he is a sexual predator, on the basis of his charity work. Henry the 8th was a psycho. most of the Kings and Queens have been dysfunctional, violent and abusive characters. Goes with the territory, I reckon.

"The knights were robbers, the Kings were crooks, see through the lies of our History books."

Monarchy is the original knife crime syndicate.

The Stablishment.

Monarchy is the original knife crime syndicate.

Stab you front, stab you back, stab you left, stab you right, stab you waking, stab you sleeping, in the night. Stab, stab, 'Stablishment. Just look at the history. Just look at the myriad movies that have celebrity actors cast as the Kings and Queens, and look at how the movies draw a veil over the psychopathy of monarchy.

Political Grooming Gangs undermine everybody's Freedom and Liberty by pretending to stand for Freedom and Liberty. They ask you to fight for Queen and Country, They ask you to fight for God and Country.

Monarchs play the same gambit. 

Kindest regards

Corneilius

"Do what you love, it is your gift to universe."

"It is too many men, too much of the time" , with too much impunity - it is the culture we live in.

If, as a male, a man, a person and my response or reaction to the calls of women on the issue of sexual harassment, sexual abuse, misogyny and gender prejudice is 'it's not all men" and if I make that statement to defend myself, if I make that statement because I feel personally insulted, slighted, labelled or that I am being made the object of prejudice, as one of a class, then it's pretty certain that I am missing the point.

More importantly it's clear that my reaction is about me, rather than the quality of the welfare, the health and and the safety of women who live with being mistreated by many men, within a culture of misogyny and sexism. women. Which is missing the point. I'm not the point here. The lived experience of women. Matters.

 A woman wanted to speak at the band stand and was impeded by police action.

The women have not said that it is all men, they have said it is too many men, too much of the time, with too much impunity.  Black Lives Matter do not say it is all white people, they said it is too many Racist police, too much of the time with too much impunity. And that is a fair point, because it is true. There are too many Racist policemen causing harm to black citizens because they hold wildly inaccurate views about Race, and too many of those who get away with the harm they are causing.

It is too many women, who too often endure gendered, sexist and sexualised abuse and never receive justice within a patriarchy rooted social power system.

Too many men, too much of the time, with too much impunity. It's not aimed at me, as a personal attack.

I know I am not that kind of person. and that it has nothing to do with the accident of my maleness.

Yes, I did not chose my born sex, nor did I chose the role dynamics the culture imposes.  It's an accident of birth. I can choose to reject those culturally imposed values and I do. Because the culture that imposes those 'values' is a rooted in patriarchal violence and bullying. I saw through that a long time ago.

That said,  I do und erstand that when meeting a woman who does not know me, that if her lived experience has shown her that some men are predators, that some men can make a predatory move when it is least expected, and that there is no accurate measure or means to predict this, and she has been hurt, wounded, terrorised by that behaviour, and she knows other women have similar experiences such that it is common place, then she will be wary of me. Well yes, of course.

If I were in her shoes, I'd be wary too.

I have been assaulted a number of times. I understand. I don't fully know what it is like to be subject to uninvited stares, sexual advances, lewd comments, 'banter' day in day out. It can't be comfortable.

-----

The men who react with "it's not all men!" have not heard the majority of women cry "It is all men!"

There may be a few women who do make that assertion. They are a minority. Elevating them to the majority in defence of a fragile sense of maleness is a logical error, and it is also a tactical play generated by the bully culture, the macho culture, the authoritarian culture. It's important to not to fall for that tactic.

"It's not all men!"  means that I am not listening and I am not hearing what is being said, and instead I am taking it personally. That aligns me away from the women who are making a fair and honest statement.

That inadvertently aligns me as a bystander, a faux neutral position that flows with the abusers and with the abuse system itself. Even if I oppose the abusers with all my heart. Unless I do so with action, I am mute.

I really must just listen to the women, and hear them, and be with that for a while. I need to understand that because most men are not active in confronting misogyny it continues. Just as most 'White' people are not actively confronting Racism, it continues. 

What women want is my fullest empathy, moral, practical and active support to confront this awful systemic misogyny. 

It is partly because I am a Survivor of childhood abuse and violence, and have also survived three physical attacks on my person in adulthood that I join with these women and say to those who are misogynists, sexual predators, gender bullies and otherwise violent men - there are too many of you, and what you do afflicts us all, too much of the time. Enough is enough. As a man I disavow your behaviour as evidence of maleness or of masculinity. It's abuse, that is all it is. Nothing more than abuse. Ugly. Dysfunctional. Harmful. Abuse.

The issue of dealing with too many men, too much of the time causing harm to women with such degrees of impunity  is also a Cultural Problem, because it is too many men, too much of the time.

And in that sense, the ubiquity of this harmful behavioural pattern means that all men and all women living within the culture are involved in this. 

Some men, too many men, are predators and bullies, other men are bystanders, they watch and do nothing, others are willing to stand with the victimised and the oppressed and a few are actively working to prevent the harm, by education, by presence, by their own learning and by seeking to enact better legislation and better practices in all areas this problem affects.

A cultural problem.

It is a cultural problem in that most incidents of sexual abuse are not reported and often that is because when they are reported, formally or informally, most reports of sexual abuse do not lead to justice. 

It is a cultural problem in that most police forces are still inadequately trained in trauma informed responses to this kind of harm causation being reported. It is a cultural problem in that known abusers of women can be elected into the highest positions of power in any democracy.

It is a cultural problem, in that the most honest histories are those that record the insight of ordinary folk who live through whatever historical patterns are driven by the decisions of the powerful -  the lived experience of those most harmed by Power tells the truth that Power dares not utter, and we see quite clearly that the Establishment narrative is blind to the truth of the lived experience. 

Johnson claims hundreds of thousands of avoidable fatalities from an infectious disease is a 'world beating' success. Keir Starmer decries the organic removal of Statues that celebrate historical abusers. Tony Blair claims Iraq is better of without Saddam Hussein, having caused more harm than Saddam Hussein could possibly have caused in Iraq and beyond. Osborne claims Austerity is a necessity. Iain Duncan Smith claims Universal Credit is a benign benefit system whilst extolling the need for sanctions against poor, disabled and vulnerable people to nudge them into better behaviour. Johnson claims the British Empire was a good experience for the world. His father claims that over population is the problem, and that the ideal population for England is 12 million.

Establishment history is a dishonest cultural hagiography.

The British Empire was a force for good. Invading Iraq was about bringing Democracy to the Middle East. The Hillsborough Fans were drunk and disorderly and caused their own deaths. The Police Forces are innocents, doing their very best to protect and serve the communities. These are all well known establishment lies promoted as truth.

Feminism?

Women joining in in the systemic abuse of Power already entrenched and dominated by a Patriarchy is not Feminism, it is not equity. 

It is compliance with and enabling of the Patriarchy systemic abuse system. In posing as Feminism it is another culturally approved establishment lie.

The so called glass ceiling is, de facto, a see through lid on the coffin of the natural and equitable aspiration of women and men who genuinely work towards an egalitarian culture. Theresa May, Priti Patel  and Cressida Dick are part of the power structure, they are not a challenge to the power structure nor do they confront problems of this power culture in any way, shape or form.

The Culture of Power

The policing of the vigil on Clapham Common is a case in point.  

A young woman disappears on a routine walk at late evening night time. The young woman was abducted off the streets of London. Calls go out to locate her. 

Then it is discovered, a week later, that she was abducted by a serving police officer, who was already known to be an serial sexual harasser and yet was still able to wear the uniform, do shifts.

When it became clear that he murdered this young woman, there arose an emergent sense of disgust, outrage and anger that became a coalescence of the feeling among women, who as a class are exposed to so much sexualised abuse that they feel oppressed within this culture  A feeling not alleviated in any way by the sheer frequency of harassment and assault, the rareness of a conviction when they report, the lightness of sentencing and a general indifference by bystander men to their plight.

Spend a day reviewing the statistics on ONS. Spend a day listening to women tell you the truth of their lived experience. There is a cultural problem here. 

Witness

A Vigil was called to express grief at the loss of another young life, to express a collective solidarity with all women who experience sexualised assault, who are subjected to physical, psychological and emotional harm at the hands of too many men, too much of the time, and for whom justice and prevention are a foreign land, bordered by a male dominated patriarchy on permanent guard duty.

The London Metropolitan Police, advised by the Home Office, objected. On the grounds of protecting people from spreading the virus. Whilst schools are forced to re-open without the necessary systems in place to detect and suppress outbreaks. Laughable. Irrational when subjected to a critical analysis.

The Vigil people went to court to assert their right to hold a well organised, covid19 safe Vigil. The Court asserted that the Vigil was indeed lawful, that the organisers had proven they could manage it in a covid19 secure manner, and that the London MetPol interpretation of covid19 regulations as permitting them to ban the vigil  was in error and thus unlawful.  

What a respectful Vigil looks like. Even without organisation. Just women calmly grieving.

source : New York Times

The organisers had 1 steward for every 30 attendees. They had PA systems and all the infrastructure to manage the Vigil well. Local Police (Lambeth) and Council agreed. The Home Office and Scotland Yard dissented.  The MetPol conceded the point in court, and then withdrew from the case in order to avoid a court declaration that the Vigil could proceed - they did this to allow for their own 'discretion'. 

They still opposed the Clapham Common Vigil. 

Media reported that as a stalemate. That was not quite true. It was more a matter of London MetPol stonewalling a legitimate gathering, using clever tactics to leave open an act of discretionary policing.

Tactics to obscure the truth, to mute the voices of survivors.

I remind readers of the recent tactical settling a case of unfair dismissal against a senior civil servant that would, if it had been allowed to proceed, proven that the Home Secretary had bullied her staff and others below her in rank. The settlement meant she could avoid the truth being publicised. A bit like the Vatican settling with survivors of child sexual abuse by clerics. "Here's some cash, take it or we will make your life hell. Good, take it and now just Sshhhsssshhut up!"

"We have an image and status to protect!" and Institutions will and do use every tactic to do that.

The London Met Police did not stand with the women who grieve in public - they did not openly criticise the murderous man who was a team member, a team player, one of their own, they do not decry alpha male ideology, they do not train in empathy and de-escalation, and they do not prevent sexual harassment and assault. They do close ranks when ever one of their own is exposed as an abusive bully.

"How many bad apples in that barrel, Inspector?" 

"You knew he was abusive?" 

"None of your business!"

The organisers of the Vigil proceeded to cancel the Clapham Common event, and others then moved ahead with well organised Vigils elsewhere in England, Wales and Scotland. They all went really well, and as far as we know they were facilitated with sensitivity. 

Bristol

Compare and Contrast

Rangers: No arrests at Ibrox as police urge fans to follow Covid restrictions.

Apart from the Vigil on Clapham Common.

That Vigil was a respectful gathering, and it was exercised without the infrastructure the RTS organisers had been ready to put in place. Police were told that, even as the RTS organisers used all means to cancel their Vigil, used their extensive media and online presence to communicate that their participation as an organiser would not go forward, that it would not prevent people who are grieving and upset and angry from gathering. The Police acknowledged that.

Therefore it looks very much like the Police tactic was to let the gathering happen, then to use force to break it up which, given the context of the court hearing and rulings, looks like a deliberate set up.

People gathered in the late afternoon, in daylight. Peacefully, respectfully.

People in the out doors with masks, taking care to reduce virus transmission to a minimum.

A peaceful and genuine Vigil, a public prayer meeting of sorts, that was an act of respectful, grieving solidarity. It was outdoors, people were all masked and everyone was being respectful.

"No, it's not all men. 

It is too many men, too often. 

It is too many women, too often."

The London MetPol could have stood by, they could have chosen to facilitate the gathering, they could have stayed there all night, in rotating shifts, to ensure that no harm would come to anyone.

They could have done that. Given the circumstance they really ought to have done that.

Think of the PR coup that might have represented. The Police standing with the people!

The London MetPol could have demonstrated solidarity with these women, these men, and thus by practical means have publicly condemned their team mate (and any others like him, lurking behind the cover of uniforms and institutional defence lawyers) and shown that they too stand with the people, as the protectors of the people.

Their Command chose not to do that.  They waited. Until it was dark. As people wanted to hear the speakers on the bandstand some moved in closer.  Social Distancing was reduced. Masks were being worn. People were chanting.



Witness: 

Writing in Bylinetimes Sian Norris gathered evidence of what happened during the Vigil on Saturday evening.

“There were more and more police around the bandstand and then they marched single-file into the bandstand,” she added. “That moment felt very uncomfortable. Very unnecessary. And it was not clear at all from a close bystander’s point of view why they were doing it.”

Flora told Byline Times that it was this moment when things started to shift. 

“Nothing was kicking off – it was very static, the atmosphere was unpleasant but nothing was changing,” she said. “Then, all of a sudden, they filed in – almost as if they had decided enough was enough, ‘let’s move things on’. They intervened and it changed because of their actions.” 

Sophia witnessed the police move onto the bandstand, “making themselves the focal point of our hurt and sadness,” she said. “Everyone was looking at the bandstand and then suddenly we were all looking at the police. I turned around and the police had also moved in behind this. We were caged in.”

“It was quite intimidating for the crowd,” said Katie.

Sisters Uncut said: “It’s important to be clear that the anger was felt in our bodies. It was not one we enacted. The people who were aggressive and weaponising anger were the police.”

Other Agendas

While the vast majority of women and men had come to Clapham Common, and to similar impromptu vigils across the UK, to pay their respects to women who have been killed and to make a statement against gender-based violence, “there were people there who hadn’t come to fight for women’s rights or against state violence,” Katie told Byline Times. 

“That really upset me,” she said, describing how some male attendees were aggressive towards the police or vandalised police vehicles. “It took away from what was happening.” 

This was typified by a man who took to the bandstand to give an uninvited speech against lockdown and the police more widely.

“The first person to speak was a man – no one asked him to,” Katie said. “People started chanting ‘not your place’.”

“As I was leaving, it became apparent that a lot of people were arriving who weren’t there for the reason I was,” Coleman said.

So what we see here is that there were people within the setting who were hijacking the event, (more about that below). People, men,  whose publicly stated opinions, beliefs and attitudes feed into more spread of the virus - anti-lockdown, anti-zerocovid,  which is aligned with the reality in outcome terms of UK Government strategic position - Herd Immunity is the way out of the Epidemic - and the Police, who are an arm of Government using force to break up a Vigil, claiming to wish to prevent the spread of the virus, whilst also citing the behaviour of the people who were hijacking the event, all co-inciding as part of the news and online media led protection of the policing as it was handled.

Power not wisdom.

What reason, what exactly gave the police the excuse to push through the crowd and break up the gathering on the bandstand, with 'reasonable force', in order 'to prevent spread of the virus'?

A gathering of mostly women, mostly in quiet mournful respect, quiet enough to listen to a non amplified female voice speaking from the bandstand, all wearing masks, all outdoors?

Was that a wise move? Who ordered it, on what basis?

Or was it because within the culture of power, to urge to be dominant (which is the driver of sexualised assault) also drives the command chain. Impose your will. Assert the Power of the command chain, from Home Office to the streets. The Home Secretary's power will not be challenged!

Compulsory Education is every child's introduction to the realities of Institutional Hierarchy, Authority and Power. 

You are compelled to be educated.

Compelled by a greater power than any parent or child can muster. Dominance.

No Child Left Behind.

Compulsion Education instructs children what to think, in ways that ensure that they never learn how to think. School children who leave secondary school and who do not know what the English Civil War was about. School children who leave secondary school and who do not know what their Human Rights are, and why and how they are enshrined in Law. School children who leave secondary school and who do not know that Racism was invented, as a legal instrument, in Virginia in 1681. That's just irresponsible in educational terms.

That is the utilitarian instrumentalization of education as a part of how oppressive bully cultures function.

Self education is every child's responsibility - removing that response ability by coercion is key to the maintenance of the bully cult. 

Bullying in schools.

1 in 5 school children in England report being bullied on School premises in 2018.

Compulsory Education is key to maintaining the practices of nationalist indoctrination, is key to sustaining the myth of a benign patriarchy and essential to the inculcation of approved gender role identifications and behaviours that separate men and women as persons, and classifies us as separate genders, with exclusive  lingo, behaviour and memes rather than unite us as persons.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poisonous_pedagogy

"Poisonous pedagogy, in Katharina Rutschky's definition, aims to inculcate a social superego in the child, to construct a basic defense against drives in the child's psyche, to toughen the child for later life, and to instrumentalize the body parts and senses in favor of socially defined functions. " Boy's don't dry. 

Thus compulsory education is a toxic mime of self directed education and it serves to undermine the person in favour of approved persona. Look to the celebrity role models. Persona. Images. Faux Reality.

Power and powerlessness entrenched by disempowering dynamic structures.

Hence the inability of parents, teachers and students to unite even as they are being abused by Government and News Media in the midst of an epidemic. Gavin Williamson bullies millions of people by virtue of the Office he holds and gets away with repeat offences that cause thousands of deaths.  The Media refuse to confront his obvious gaslighting. Starmer refuses that analysis and supports the Government.

Power

Sexualised Assault, Misogyny and Racism are all extreme bullying behaviours rooted in false premises. 

"I have a right to your female body because I have a Penis, Men are Superior to Women, White skinned people are Superior to Black skinned people, Disabled people are freaks, the Poor are lazy." All falsehoods.

This is all about power, a pecking order of who exercises power over others.

Co-opting the Vigil 

Bylinetimes published an article showing how some of the people attending the Vigil had other agenda's to promote, exploiting the situation for their political viewpoints. Anti-lockdown, anti-vaxxer, right Libertarians among them.

"Toby Young, general secretary of the Free Speech Union and editor of the Lockdown Sceptics site, has also used the events of Saturday night to promote an anti-lockdown narrative. 

Writing on Lockdown Sceptics, he said that the people criticising the police response were “the very same people who’ve enthusiastically supported the lockdowns, including the suspension of the right to protest, and who’ve condemned anti-lockdown protestors for being ‘selfish’ and ‘irresponsible’”. Young stated that the arrests of women in Clapham “were on you”.

A woman who attended Saturday’s vigil told Byline Times that the Metropolitan Police’s decision not to engage with the grassroots organisers of the event was, in part, responsible for how she believed it could be co-opted by those with different agendas.

“When the Metropolitan police refused to work with the organisers, and the organisers stepped back, that left a vacuum which was filled by people who had a different agenda,” she said.

Again the dishonesty of those who claim to oppose abuse of power yet whose own actions amount to an abuse of their position, status and power that favours more abuses of power is made clear. Misogyny is shameless.

We want to change the culture?

Tell the children the truth. Stop lying to the boys and girls.

Prevent people like Michael Gove and Gavin Williamson from leveraging institutional power to cause harm to our children, our teachers, our families.

Tell the truth about Power Hierarchy. Tell the truth about Oligarchy, Plutocracy, Externalised Costs, Patriarchy, Racism, Conquest, Misogyny and Gender Roles.

Make telling lies in Parliament a criminal offence, with a mandatory custodial sentence. Make publishing misinformation and lies as 'News' a criminal offence.

Thus we will be better situated to prevent the youth growing into the kinds of dysfunctional adults that are exploited by power, to sustain power over the people. Ensure children leave school equipped with critical analysis and thinking skills.

Brexit, the parachute that opens on impact - Brexit was of course a vast political grooming exercise, exploiting vulnerable people, exploiting people who lack accurate information. Austerity was a national scale act of deliberate abuse of vulnerable people, protected by gaslighting the public about lack of Government funds due to 'debt', which was a lie.

Zero Community Transmission is dismissed as 'impossible' - that is a lie.

 
Critical thinking would make such lies unlikely to survive more than a few days at most.

There is no truly single issue - there is one cultural issue, we are ruled over by bullies. That fact distorts all of our lives. 

Tell the truth.

The truth is essential to the Working of Mutual Democracy.  WMD.

Obviously lacking an equitable voice across English Institutional Power, obviously lacking an equitable voice in the English News Media, nonetheless the truth of the lived experience of the powerless is everywhere among the decent people, who stand apart from the minority of bullies, the politically groomed, the woo woo woolly eyed, the nativists, the xenophobes, the Racists and the misogynists who largely defer to the systems of power, who walk in our midst.

Kindest regards

Corneilius

Thank you for reading this blog.

"Do what you love, it is your gift to universe."

This blog, like all my other content creation work is not monetised via advertising. If you like what I present, consider sharing my content. If you can afford the price of a cup of coffee or a pint of beer/ale/cider for a few months, please donate via my Patreon account.

https://patreon.com/corneilius

https://www.reverbnation.com/corneilius

https://www.corneilius.net

https://www.soundcloud.com/coreluminous

Political Grooming Gangs - you should be appalled.

"The grooming (gaslighting) of human vulnerability is one of most vile things any human being can do to another."

“How can wealth persuade poverty to use its political power to keep wealth in power? Here lies the whole art of Conservative politics in the twentieth century.” ~ Aneurin Bevan 

 Let's be real here - we ought to be calling out the behaviour of political grooming gangsters.

Update : 6/11/19  An article by Aditya Chakraborrti in The Guardian exemplifies the grooming dynamic in action, in the hands of the Conservative Government. Labour was just as prone to exploiting similar tactics. 

Now We Have Proof : The Government Used Your Money to Lie About Poor People.

An article on Black Isle Media, which shows examples of the ad campaign itself. Very interesting background on this kind of nasty faux news 'journalism'. A government department posting materials posing as news paper articles designed to deflect from the actual harms that departments policy implementation are causing.

https://universalcreditsuffer.com/2019/11/06/advertising-watchdog-slams-dwp-for-misleading-universal-credit-adverts/

Advertising Watchdog Slams DWP for Misleading Universal Credit Adverts

The DWP ran an ad campaign in The Metro paper, with a budget £225,000 or so, over 9 weeks, that was designed to look like a series of journalistic articles, that were deployed to deflect from evidence that the DWP Sanctions policy was causing harm, that delays built into the way benefits were being run were causing real hardship, food poverty and distress to already vulnerable people - anyone who is faced with a week where they have not enough money to meet basic needs becomes vulnerable pretty quickly and if they are parents or carers, the vulnerability is heightened.

The aim of the campaign was to deflect responsibility away from the Policy just as a UN report on how Austerity policies were harming people who were in need of state support. The campaign mislead readers, by not so subtle blame shifting onto the very people being harmed, the no-income and low income poor, the disabled and the vulnerable in need of state assistance and support. Gaslighting the victimised in public, no less. This amounts to intentional psychological abuse.

From the Guardian article :

"Early this summer, a national newspaper published a string of curious articles. 

Under the logo Universal Credit Uncovered, the features promised readers of the Metro the truth about this most notorious of all benefits. 

The series began with a giant advert wrapped around the cover of the paper, coupled with a four-page spread right in its centre, and continued week upon week for nine weeks. 

Launched by the Department for Work and Pensions, it was an unprecedented attempt to salvage the reputation of a policy that had been attacked by MPs on all sides, plunged families into starvation and homelessness, and driven councils dealing with the fallout to call for its abolition.

That suffering across the country was dismissed by the DWP as “negativity and scaremongering” in an internal memo I saw and reported on here weeks beforehand.

 Signed by three top officials, it described the campaign to the Metro’s 2.5 million daily readers as “very different to anything that we’ve done before”. 

The civil servants crowed over how readers might be deceived into treating the advertorials as independent reporting: 

“The features won’t look or feel like DWP or UC [universal credit] – you won’t see our branding … We want to grab the readers’ attention and make them wonder who has done this ‘UC uncovered’ investigation.”

"What the government has effectively done is use public money to gaslight poor people, denying the reality of what has been done to them. 

In its eagerness to push its gargantuan failure of a welfare policy, it has swept aside the truth and peddled lies. 

Politicians, campaigners and journalists have all pointed out how Rudd and her DWP predecessor Iain Duncan Smith have done so – and each time we have faced breathtaking defensiveness from a Whitehall department that is meant to be working on our behalf, rather than for the Tories."

"We stand at the edge of an election campaign, a period traditionally marked by half-truths, plausible fibs and outright partisan lies.

Yet even amid the discursive sewage that is about to deluge us, this deceit is far different and vastly more serious.

First, that campaign was paid for by taxpayers like you and me. The DWP’s own filings show that £225,000 was paid to the Metro to run ads now declared “misleading”, “unsubstantiated” and “exaggerated”. Almost a quarter of million pounds was taken off us to lie to us."

In essence a tax payer funded operation of a Government Department deploying professional marketing techniques, huge budgets and deliberate tactics to mask a harm causing policy and to scapegoat the people the policy is purporting to serve, even as they are harmed by it.

Think again about the £100 million spent on marketing 'Get Ready for Brexit' - on all commercial radio stations, 24/7, in schools and in every access point they could muster. That budget is 400 times the budget for The Metro campaign.

Political grooming is big business, and big business is benefiting from it whilst ordinary folk are impoverished and dis-empowered by it.

Parliament is aware of this kind of behaviour with regards to 'fake news' yet remains silent when it comes to confronting the Government deployment of this kind of fake news.

Parliamentary Committee Report  into Disinformation and Fake News

"We have always experienced propaganda and politically-aligned bias, which purports to be news, but this activity has taken on new forms and has been hugely magnified by information technology and the ubiquity of social media. In this environment, people are able to accept and give credence to information that reinforces their views, no matter how distorted or inaccurate, while dismissing content with which they do not agree as ‘fake news’.

This has a polarising effect and reduces the common ground on which reasoned debate, based on objective facts, can take place. Much has been said about the coarsening of public debate, but when these factors are brought to bear directly in election campaigns then the very fabric of our democracy is threatened."

Political Grooming Gangsters.

Organised, well funded operations that  target and manipulate peoples cognitive biases, their social wounded-nesses, their insecurities, prejudices and worries, their misunderstandings, cultural conditioning and fears, and do that through public and social media , through marketing, propaganda and media campaigns operating on an industrial scale,  manipulating vulnerable people for ideological, religious, political or economic advantage.

“The fact that governments are paying – using taxpayers’ money – to attempt to manipulate the electorate – regardless of whether or not the methodologies used actually work – speaks volumes about government intentions, their lack of transparency, their disregard of citizens’ agency, their disdain for human rights, lack of respect for civil liberties and utter contempt for anything remotely resembling democratic accountability.”

from an article written by Kitty Jones

It is appalling behaviour. It is not new, we are all very well aware that the use of propaganda has a long and inglorious history.

What is fairly new is that this type of activity has been digitised, which means it has been individualised, it functions with precision targeting - micro targeting - and it has been scaled up in it's invasive and persuasive capabilities, to reach hundreds of millions of individuals, one by one, or in groups, to whisper carefully tested lies into their ears and eyes, based on close study of their fears and cognitive biases.

What is new is that we have a more detailed knowledge of how this works, a detailed paper and money trail.

The quote above is from an article written by Kitty Jones, on the blog 'Politics and Insights'.

map of countries where CA interfered with democratic elections source 

In this piece Kitty Jones has written out, in easy to read English, a wealth of detail on the many companies and shell companies which worked with Cambridge Analytica,  SCL and AggregateIQ as they 'served' various right wing political election campaigns across the Earth's countries.

From Trinidad to Hungary, from the UK to Nigeria, and onto the USA and Brazil, India and others, more than 100 elections. Foreign interference in National Elections. For the money, and the thrills.

Kitty Jone's blog ties it neatly into the pre-existing industry of psychological and emotional marketing, and it's well worth the read.

Good reliable, verified information. Proper journalism.

Edward Bernays

Looking back a century or just so, to New York in the 1920's.

Edward Bernays, a relative of Sigmund Freud,  organised a campaign for a cigarette company who wanted to create and then dominate a new female smoker market.

"Torches of Freedom" was a phrase used to encourage women's smoking by exploiting women's aspirations for a better life during the early twentieth century first-wave feminism in the United States. Cigarettes were described as symbols of emancipation and equality with men. 

The term was first used by psychoanalyst A. A. Brill when describing the natural desire for women to smoke and was used by Edward Bernays to encourage women to smoke in public despite social taboos. Bernays hired women to march while smoking their "torches of freedom" in the Easter Sunday Parade of 1929, which was a significant moment for fighting social barriers for women smokers.

Bill Hicks would have called it going after 'The Freedom Dollar'.

Women were engaged in the struggle to gain the vote, and to assert more rights as democratic equals, and thus women smoking was sold as an act of self liberation, and act of breaking a 'glass ceiling' of sorts. (edit - fast forward to 2020 - just as today, July 7th, refusing to wear a mask while shopping is touted as marker for Freedom Loving Libertarians, and wearing a mask is touted as submissive, sheep like behaviour. Same trick.)

The lady buys and smokes one pack, and the she is pretty much hooked for life. That is the aim of the campaign.

The addict dollar. Endless cash.

The Freedom dollar, endless lateral violence and social division barring the emergence of much needed solidarity.

Edward Bernays : "The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country.

We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. This is a logical result of the way in which our democratic society is organized."

The People must be instructed, trained, tamed and organised by wiser people.

This is, of course, a bully's rationalisation. It is bullshit - nasty, Machiavellian, dysfunctional, anti-social invasive abuse, a different strand of indoctrination.

Public Relations.

Marketing.


Cambridge Analytica, Foreign Office Psyops, The Bible, The Daily Mail,  The Daily Express, Indoctrination, Ideology, Nudge (punishment/reward operand conditioning in UK social welfare programs), Nationalism. War.

Peddling belief for political advantage.

Bill Hicks was correct. I have created this term for this behaviour in relation to political domains.

Political Grooming Gangsters

.
Deliberate, organised, time tabled....

Deliberate targeting known vulnerabilities, insecurities, prejudices, exacerbating them to elicit reactions that are then exploited for political and economic advantage .

Cynical and cruel.

The dehumanisation of poor and low income people who access state benefits and support... a deliberate narrative produced during the legislative process that instituted Austerity...

The wide spread fact of the operation of political grooming must be addressed.

I think was quite correct during the EUref, to be writing and publishing articles that were pointing out that altering legislation on the basis of opinion was unsound, and that the deliberate framing of the question in opinion, rather than evidence, was in fact a set up for politically motivated tactical grooming. 

We now have so much evidence to support this view.

We know that for many years now, political campaigns have targeted specific fringe demographics, including conspiracy theory, nationalism, inter-group perceptions of favour,  far right and xenophobic groups, targeting those groups who would rarely vote, where if one could trigger them into voting out of anger, then they would swing the outcome, if not just merely confuse the issues,

And it worked.

Just like all the other gags the Ruling class pull work. Religion needs your cash!

We cannot have a healthy Democracy when political grooming aimed at a vulnerable population is fully Institutionalised. We cannot have a healthy democracy when public deceit is enabled by sub standard Education, poverty, discrimination and social policy.

There is no healthy democracy where targeting known vulnerabilities to exploit emotional triggers for political gain is a common practice.

Grooming .

I am appalled at the lack of emotional intelligence within the more socialist members of the Labour Party, the Green Party and others, around this. Is it because it is so common place that it is like water to fish, for them?

You should be too. Be appalled, very appalled.

It is quite blatantly and obviously psychological and emotional bullying of the worst kind, with lethal results.

Here's a song I created to articulate the realities of political, social, economic and religious grooming.



Kindest regards

Corneilius

"Do what you love, it's Your Gift to Universe"

Thank you for reading this blog. All we need to do is be really honest, responsive to the evidence we find,and ready to reassess when new evidence emerges. The rest is easy.

Women reject the use of gender to silence legitimate political opposition: an open letter

An open letter by some active women folk looking at the basis of the accusations of misogynistic behaviours emerging from the Media, directed at Jeremy Corbyn and Momentum activists...

Women reject the use of gender to silence legitimate political opposition

"We, the undersigned, women Labour members or supporters from different backgrounds, ethnicities and regions, condemn attempts by some women MPs to blame the Leader of the Labour Party Jeremy Corbyn and shadow chancellor John McDonnell for alleged intimidation. The accusations are baseless and are part of an escalating witch-hunt against Corbyn and his supporters.

The tragic murder of Jo Cox MP, for which a right-wing racist with mental health problems has been charged, has been invoked as if it was connected with anti-racist, pro-refugee Corbyn. A brick through the side window of a building used by many groups, including the local MP, has been attributed to Corbyn followers without any proof. And we are warned against holding peaceful demonstrations outside MPs offices or calling for them to be deselected."

The full text of the letter is truly worth reading.

The core point is that to use such slurs demeans the entire political process, and does nothing to help confront and resolve the issues around power, sexualised violence, abuse and harm; if anything it undermines our efforts in this area.

It is clear, accurate, compassionate and written with utter integrity, by women activists engaged in intensive daily work to support women (and by extension, men and children).

It feeds back into my many blog postings about bullying in politics, violence in society, hierarchies of power, trauma related behaviour patterns, and much else besides...

Media Trolling

Media - Read and react, or read, analyse, check and respond.

We have a choice.

Our choices dictate outcomes, especially with regards to bringing about a healthy, sane, nurturant society.

The reactive mode is easily manipulated.

The responsive much less so, to the degree that any individual has worked through his or her own issues around power and sense of self - whether it is truly emergent or laced with internalized system values (shame, guilt, blame, praise, reward, punishment ... are all clues to where we still hold onto internalized system values).

Many people are making this choice, consciously, deliberately, and bringing that to the table of politics and governance.

And this choice gets far less attention and examination in the media than the justifications for war or for Corbyn's so-called 'unelectability'.

Established Power's self protection.

It would appear the established power does want to enable such choices by acknowledging the multitude of stories of those who do. The mainstream power establishment media is peppered with justifications of violence, with sexism, fantasy, ideology and sales pitches.

The Inquiry into Institutional Responses to Child Abuse underway in the UK has lost yet another chair-person. We do not yet know why. It is very sad and very, very worrying.

The Australian Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Abuse is revealing just how endemic cover-ups, mitigations, institutional desire to protect itself are in this area....

Ireland and the United States have had multiple Inquiries.

The evidence is immense and mounting all the time.

The response of Power is way behind what the evidence suggest would be appropriate.

"Houston, we have a problem."

The Astronauts fixed the problem with assistance from Ground Control.

They worked together.

The Government (and The Vatican) needs to work with and for Survivors, not try to get around them.

The Labour party MPs who are opposing Corbyn need to work with the grass roots of the party, not try to get around them.

It is the same pattern.

Violence.

Tribal is an odd word to use to describe violent systems.

Here's why.

This is a chart of social behavioural characteristics of different societies (tribes, sic) from a meta-analysis by James Prescott in the 1970s,  which looks at whether or not they are truly nurturant or controlling, and indicates the sets of behaviours associated with each.

www.violence.de/prescott/letters/Profiles_Peaceful_v_Violent.pdf

Societies with very different child relating modalities, and very different outcomes...

And the common link between the emergence of violence or nurturance appears to revolve around the way a given society relates to and treats the children.

If we want to resolve these problems, we start with parenting at the very base of society, as the very base of society.... which means the work women do for women is absolutely critical.
Here is an article I wrote expanding on the chart by James Prescott.

https://dwylcorneilius.blogspot.co.uk/2010/10/two-poles-of-society-everything-in.html

The website www.violence.de is very useful in exploring this issue.

The Neurobiology of Trauma.

Here is an example of one aspect of that work, related to the neurobiology of trauma, and trauma informed responses to sexual abuse which counter the 'traditional' responses which are the subject of numerous national inquiries. Informative, direct, clear and deeply compassionate, it also hints at the problems with inherited traditional approaches to sexual abuse allegations, which are indicators on the nature of our Society and it's power structures.

In another recent blog I posted a basic outline for anyone interested in this area of human exploration, knowledge and healing, with some links to key writers and researchers in this area..

These insights into the neurobiology of trauma indicate that in utero trauma can occur, if the mother is subjected to trauma events or chronic stress beyond her ability to control. They also feed into child development issues....

Everyone of us carries some of the bully psychology within us to one degree or another until we resolve it within ourselves. Social conditions and socialised conditioning tend to make it so.

That's why we become bystanders.

Resolve it with insight, evidence and self reflection.

Kindest regards

Corneilius

"Do what you love, it's Your Gift to Universe"

*If you like this post, if you found the themes resonant, if you agree in part, would you be kind enough to let others know about it? I would really appreciate that. You could drop a comment too, if you felt the urge. Or not. I will moderate contributions, and block any that are abusive. For obvious reasons. Thank you for reading.