I Intend To Escape ......................And Come Back

To Follow On Twitter

You can follow me, this blog and the 9/11 Cultwatch blog on Twitter http://twitter.com/#!/MrPaulStott

A Tribute To Donna Summer

To everyone who ever said "electronic music will date really quickly" listen to this version of Donna Summer's best track "I Feel Love."

 

It still sounds as good to me as it ever did.

The Under The Pier Show

Like my old Class War chum Ian Bone, I have always had a fascination with England's piers and seaside towns.

Today I braved the cold weather and dragged the family to Walton-on-the-Naze, which boasts the second longest pier in England. Size of course is no guarantee of quality (compare Walton's whopper to Cromer's small but perfectly formed offering and you will see what I mean) but go for a stroll under Walton pier and things get a little more interesting, as these pictures hopefully attest.

Over the years the concerete pillars have become so weather beaten, in the distance they look like old timber supports jutting upwards out of the sand. Step under the pier, and it is easy to imagine you are in a tunnel, rather than on the Essex coast.

On one level, Walton has seen better days. Take a look behind the fading grandeur and dereliction though, and some real gems remain. 

How Puny The Olympic 2012 'Legacy' Looks

Going on the basis that politicians usually exaggerate, and that the reality is eventually somewhat different from rosy predictions, take a look at the text of the leaflet the London Mayor has delivered to homes in Hackney this week.

Point 7 of Boris Johnson's leaflet is headed "Ensuring a true Olympic legacy - 11,000 new homes and 10,000 new jobs". That is underwhelming - Hackney has 27,000 households on its council waiting list alone - 11,000 new homes, across 32 London boroughs with similar housing pressures? That is barely a drop in the ocean.
No further details are given on the 10,ooo new jobs - are they full-time, part-time, fixed term for the duration of the games itself, or for the wider period of the Olympic building project? How many have gone to local residents in east London, or to Londoners more generally?

I reproduce the rest of Boris' text in full:

"Boris johnson is ensuring we all benefit from the Olympic Games.

Boris has delivered the Games infrastructure on time and budget. A saving of £10 million was made on the building of the Olympic Stadium and he has ensured that existing facilities are upgraded and used wherever possible. Hackney will benefit from the lasting legacy of the Games as 12 organisations have received funding to offer free coaching and Boris has funded seven sports participation programmes".

So far, so modest. That really is it. Perhaps to make sure we do actually think there is some benefit to the whole 2012 shebang the leaflet then adds:

"Thanks to Boris, Londoners will benefit from the jobs created by a £5.2 billion economic boost from the Games."

A few points arise:

1. Boris seems to take all the credit for 'delivering' the Games. Clearly the hatred between the British Olympic Association and London Organising Commitee of the Olympic Games (LOCOG) has created a gap for one man to heroically organise the entire event.

2. If £10 million has been saved on building the stadium, what has that money been spent on? Where has it gone?

3. Which existing facilities have been upgraded? As a Hackney resident I should presumeably be able to name several - none spring to mind.

4. 12 organisations are getting free coaching out of this. Not much of a return from the biggest sporting event in the world coming here is it?

5. Boris has funded seven sports participation programmes. Again no details, but isn't that the sort of thing Mayor's are supposed to do anyway?

6. What and where is the £5.2 billion economic boost from the Games?All the economic news I seem to hear concerns a double dip recession.

All this is not to single out Boris Johnson as any worse than Ken Livingstone would have been (he isn't it) but to raise the single question:

If the projected gains from the Olympics are so modest now, how modest are the actual gains likely to be after the event?

 

Hackney Not United: Hackney Hustings Descends Into Chaos

I spent this evening at the Hackney Unites hustings for the London North East GLA constituency at the Arcola Theatre in Dalston.

Hackney Unites is a local pressure group which has grown out of the Hope Not Hate initiative, formed by the anti-fascist magazine Searchlight. Following a split in Searchlight in 2011, Hope Not Hate has continued as a separate body, and now finances Hackney Unites newspaper, which is currently being distributed across the borough.

The hustings came with a very fixed format. Firstly we had speeches from Hackney Unites Chair John Page, then Hackney Unites employee Andrea. After the starters came the main course. The politicians  selected to attend the hustings followed the format that has dominated media coverage in London – Labour, Lib Dem, Conservative and Green. Not invited, despite outpolling the Greens both nationally and in London were the UK Independence Party, nor were the Trade Unionist and Socialist Coalition selected for the top table. Both deserved a hearing.

Those who made it were the incumbent – Labour’s Jeanette Arnold, the Tory’s Naomi Newstead, the Lib Dems Farooq Quereshi and Green Caroline Allen. Those attending were invited to submit written questions, which were handed to Hackney Unites Jane Holgate, which were then shuffled into an order based around a preliminary discussion of the subjects the audience felt important. Questions were read out, and each politician given one minute to answer.

This format soon brought problems. Hustings means different things to different people, and what we most certainly did not have here was a debate. Politicians give politicians answers, and without the chance for the audience to come back on what was stated, events soon became stilted. For example Conservative Naomi Newstead claimed to be opposed to tuition fees – a somewhat unusual position for a Conservative politician, and certainly not one that appears in her election literature. This was the first time I had seen Labour’s Jeanette Arnold (perhaps best described as a poor man’s Diane Abbott) more impressive on a personal level were Lib Dem Farooq Quereshi and Green Caroline Allen. Interestingly Ms Allen rarely missed an opportunity to speak of Green MP Caroline Lucas, whilst barely mentioning the Green’s fluffy Mayoral candidate Jenny Jones.

As the meeting wore on, frustrations grew at the lack of real debate. One man who wanted to make a verbal contribution was repeatedly told by Chairman John Page to write it down, when it would have been far easier in such a small meeting to let him speak (at its peak I counted 47 present, including the candidates) It is also the case that not everyone is as confident at writing political views as they are at speaking them, and London North East – as with any constituency – will include people who may not be able to read and write as well as others.  Eventually after several calls for order from John Page, and a description of developments as “disgusting” the guy was allowed to ask his question “Why is it we never see you again when you get elected?”

This provoked a rambling answer from Ms Arnold that seemed to centre on how rarely she misses important events in the Greater London Assembly – which was not of course the question posed. Things got difficult when the Conservative candidate justified cuts, leading to anger in the audience, and calls from John Page for the audience to show some respect. Tactically, this was a big mistake – people have very little respect for the three main parties now – respect has to be earned, and the one thing the British political class has not done in recent years is earn our respect.

Sitting in the audience was ‘Hackney heroine’  Pauline Pearce, who came to fame arguing with anti-social elements during the August 2011 riots in Hackney. Pauline is standing for the Lib Dems this month, and clearly had come along expecting a debate, and to be able to cross-examine the candidates. When told to ‘show some respect’ by John Page, she announced she would leave – at which point the meeting boiled over. A dozen walked out – including nearly all the black people in the audience – and those remaining seated were treated to the bizarre spectacle of the tiny Jane Holgate trying to shepherd towards the door a black guy who must have been a good 15 or 16 stones. Pauline Pearce’s closing words were “You’re staunch Labourites”, whilst John Page accused the big guy of attending the meeting to disrupt it. With all that said, the door was closed behind those who had walked out.

The rest of the meeting was a bit of an anti-climax, although even here Hackney Unites inflexibility remained. With formal questions finished at 8.45pm, the meeting could have been thrown open to the floor – assuming the room had been booked until 9pm. Instead, the event closed, more with a whimper than a bang. The bang of course, had happened already.  

So what to make of it all? Well debate needs to happen. This was an example of how an attempt to structure a meeting in a particular way, with only particular candidates, can blow up badly in the faces of those with a particular agenda. It does not have to be like this………..

For the record the Trade Unionist and Socialist Coalition have a public meeting in Hackney on Tuesday 1 May at 7pm at the CLR James Library in Dalston. The campaign website of the UK Independence Party, whose Mayoral candidate  is Lawrence Webb, can be viewed here.

Ahmed Rashid On Pakistan Again, On The Brink - Again

Ahmed Rashid is probably the best writer, working in English, on the political and religious movements in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

All the more reason to tune into Radio 3 on Tuesday 17 April to hear him on Night Waves with Anne McElvoy, discussing his new book, Pakistan on the Brink.

London Met: Common Sense Bites Back

Ever since the Vice Chancellor of London Metropolitan University, Prof Malcolm Gillies, spoke of the need to respond to the rise in numbers of Muslim students by reducing the presence of alcohol and portrayl of sex on campus, a backlash was due. I am pleasantly surprised at how sophisticated, and encouraging, it has been.

All of the quotes below are taken from the Times Higher coverage of the case, and in particular the comments area below the article. One interesting response, from the trades union the UCU, is to see Gillies intervention as softening up London Met for cuts, using some old fashioned divide and rule tactics:

"Gillies is currently selling off large sections of the university estate, including 'The Hub' - the student union facility (inc student bar) at the City Campus. The VC's comments need to be seen in that light - i.e., they are simply a convenient cover for reducing student social facilities."

Similarly it seems London Met is hardly awash with wall to wall drinking anyway. From Rob Thoyts:

"Alchohol is currently offered for sale in only two of the University's eleven or so buildings, the "two fantastic (Student Union) bars" according the the Londonmet website, "which are regularly featured in the London Time Out magazine". Therefore the only part of the University where the sale of alcohol could credibly be banned would be in these SU bars. Umpteen canteens exist in the University which do not sell alcohol, therefore any suggestion that students who may disapprove of alcohol have nowhere to go, is entirely false."

Prof Gillies claim that some female students attend London Met only with an escort from a  chaperone also met a firey response:

"I find the sight of women in headscarves and veils who have to be chaperoned everywhere by men offensive. However, I would not expect them to be banned from certain parts of campus so that my strong political and moral sensibilities can be protected."

What seems so needless about this story is that there does not appear to be any evidence  Muslim students are agitating for any ban or restriction on alcohol. Instead this change is being offered to them, (and imposed) on others by the management's interpretation of cultural sensitivity. This is Niall:

"A great lesson, if you want one, in how to foster resentment, division and confusion. Muslims and other minorities so often get the blame for being 'over sensitive' but it's the ridiculous policies of institutions and politicians that are stirring up problems. I really hope all Met students stand up against this hideous proposition."

Dr David however feels a policy does need to be stated: 

"To be fair having areas which don't serve alcohol seems reasonable. For instance you could serve alcohol in bars but not in the lecture theaters. Or the other way round."

Perhaps the oddest section in Gillies quoted remarks was when he decided to talk about sex. Or rather he didn't:

The vice-chancellor also said that London Met was "much more cautious" about the portrayal of sex on campus than universities had been 30 to 40 years ago. "Now we've got a younger generation that are often exceedingly conservative, and we need to be much more cautious about [sex] too," he said.

No sex please we're British (and Muslim!) All of this is too much for sadtoworkatLondonMet

"Under what circumstances is Londonmet "portraying" sex on campus. I can think of only two possibilities; discussion of sex-related issues in classes, and sexual health information provided to students. So, in both of these areas we are supposed to exercise greater "caution" (whatever that means) than would have been the case in 1972? Yes, very progressive Malc!"

All too often discussions about race and religion (especially Islam) leave almost any reader feeling depressed and isolated. I have to say Prof Gillies has removed that depression at a stroke.  Reading the Times Higher comments I feel both invigorated and hopeful for the future - there actually seems to be a silent, sensible majority out there, and when pushed, they push back.

For that at least, we need to thank the Vice Chancellor!

 

 

 

Things Have Changed At London Met

The comments of Professor Malcolm Gillies of London Metropolitan University, that the University may restrict the presence of alcohol and take a more 'cautious' approach to sex, due to the rising number of Muslim students on campus, have produced a storm.

Things certainly seem to have changed since I worked in the library at what was then called the University of North London. The first job I had in the capital, from 1992-3, was as a 'Graduate Trainee Library Assistant' working a term each at the University's sites in Highbury, Holloway and Kentish Town. One of the main challenges library staff faced at the main site on Holloway Road was something politely referred to as "Asian students socialising in the library, especially in the evenings".

This 'problem' involved staff on the first floor in the evenings always having to make as much noise as possible before going into quiet corners of the library, in case we interrupted a couple who were either at it or heading in that direction. Older hands explained to me that as Asian students (we rarely used the term Muslim then) often could not take partners home, and tended not to go to pubs or clubs, the library was an important place for their liaisons. 

I am pleased to say the staff rather collaborated in all this. I do hope that Prof Gillies is respectful of such traditions, and that the science periodicals, especially on a Friday evening, still see a number of students hard at it..............

George Galloway: The Robert Kilroy-Silk of the Left?

I have been thinking recently of figures on the British left who have made some sort of 'breakthrough' in the past few decades. By breakthrough I mean in terms of electoral success and/or significant public recognition. And by 'the left' I mean to the left of Labour.

I can name only three - Derek Hatton of Militant, Tommy Sheridan of Militant and then the Scottish Socialist Party, and finally George Galloway of Respect. All three share certain characteristics - charisma, good looks, the ability to relate to and engage with working class voters when canvassing, a confidence in their own abilities and a belief in the justness of their cause. This continues - even taking into consideration the block vote of the mosques, in the Bradford West by-election Galloway utilised his attributes to relate to voters across the constituency in a manner few other contemporary politicians could.

I have never met George Galloway, but am in little doubt as to his ability to inspire those around him. Last year when interviewed by him on Press TV and Talk Sport (on 9/11 conspiracy theories) we spoke by telephone and he made me feel a million dollars by clearly having done some research into my writing and talking to me as if my ideas were important. I could well understand how previously loyal Socialist Workers Party hacks like Kevin Ovenden  could side with Galloway when Respect split between the SWP and Galloway loyalists in 2007. Yes you could go back to selling half a dozen copies of Socialist Worker on a Saturday lunchtime outside Tesco's, but why would you?

Of course the other element shared by Hatton, Sheridan and Galloway is that their political journeys, having united disparate elements on the left by the force of their personality, always end in tears. Anarchists in particular were to be found in Glasgow when the SSP was its peak, making awkward comments about "our Tommy" that fell on deaf ears. A bit of success can go to anyone's head. But on the left, success is so rare, no one wants to listen to tricky questions during the good times. By 2006 the Anarchists were to be found saying "I told you so" when the SSP split irrevocably, "Our Tommy" found to be not a latter day Lenin but a latter day Jeffrey Archer.

Over the past week I have been reading Mark Daniel's excellent history of the UK Independence Party "Cranks and Gadflies: The Story of UKIP". The most interesting passages concern UKIP's brief fling with the former BBC presenter Robert Kilroy-Silk, who rapidly became a UKIP MEP, and just as quickly left the party after a farcical leadership bid.

Reading the book reminded me how much George Galloway and Kilroy-Silk have in common. Both had substantial careers as Labour MP's in old Labour heartlands, yet rather underachieved in the party. Contrary to what some may expect, Kilroy was a well known champion of prisoners rights (especially women inmates at prisons like HMP Styal in Cheshire) and an articulate critic of the EEC from the left. Galloway survived, but did not prosper as a Labour MP in Scotland, whilst Kilroy eventually limped from the fray after being an MP from 1974-86, seen off by arguments with the far-left in his Merseyside constituency.
Both were at their best pressing the flesh with working class constituents (Kilroy's double barrel comes, not from the aristocracy, but from taking the names of his father, killed in the War, and his stepfather) and enjoyed the media spotlight at every opportunity. Galloway and Kilroy's careers were each greviously damaged by comments they made about the Arab world - Labour expelling Galloway for his words about British forces and the second Gulf War, the BBC sacking Kilroy for making sweeping comments about Arabs as a race.

What is fascinating about Daniel's analysis of Kilroy's time in UKIP is that it seems UKIP's leaders knew they could never control him, that he was not only a loose canon, but a canon that would eventually fire at them. Yet they still decided, on balance, to get into bed with Kilroy. Speak to leading members of the Socialist Workers Party about George Galloway, and you will have heard identical sentiments in 2005, and we are hearing them again, post his by-election success in 2012. A horse is running, and even if its known he is going to eventually throw his rider, people still bet money on it.

Spend five minutes on Twitter, or on certain blogs where the last century left discusses what passes for ideals, and there are only two shows in town - supporting Ken Livingstone's candidacy as Mayor of London (again) and the opportunity the Bradford West by-election offers to 'reforge' the left.
Already the Green Party candidate in that election, Dawud Islam, has defected to Respect. Plenty of others will no doubt follow, indeed in Tower Hamlets the period 2005-2011 saw some Muslim councillors switch between Respect, Labour and Independent almost annually (Yorkshire's Dawud Islam is ex-Labour, then Green, now Respect)
It is probably in such political versions of the okey-cokey that the roots of the next split in Respect will be found - those jostling to be the parties candidates in the next month will contain the principled but also the career driven, the crooked and the feckless. The left is unlikely to play any significant role in this process save for cheerleading those who deliver the votes - the Muslim 'community leaders', youth groups and Mosques. And as happened last time round in Respect, such currents will soon tire of the left if they begin to get in the way.

In the long term, UKIP had the last laugh over Robert Kilroy-Silk. When he flounced out of the party, his splinter, Veritas, came to nothing. He is political history. George Galloway is not - yet - but the roots of his parties downfall are all around us - if we could but see it.

 

Terrorism and the Olympics: Let The Silly Season Begin

The first in a series commenting on media stories about terrorist and public order 'threats' to the 2012 Olympics in London.

An impressive one to start with from the Sunday Telegraph of 1 April (and no it was not an April fool). Firstly the Telegraph's David Barrett did have the basis of an actual story. He reports that MI5 believe Akhmed Zakayev, who styles himself as the exiled Prime Minister of the Chechen Republic of Ichkeria,  is under threat of assassination in London. They understand his death has been ordered by Chechnya's Prime Minister Ramzan Kadyrov, and are attempting to deport a suspect, named only as E1, who was also involved in the plot. 

Then it gets silly. Firstly we have the move to attach Venessa Redgrave to the story, as she is apparently friends with Mr Zakayev. This leads to the tabloid style heading "MI5 warns of death plot against Redgrave friend", and a picture of Zakayev and Redgrave that corresponds nicely with Telegraph policy of having posh totty on the front cover at least once a week.
As a general rule of thumb I adopt the political position that it is nearly always correct to be on the opposite side, on any issue, to Vanessa Redgrave, so will say no more about the politics of Zakayev. What is noticeable however is that despite this being an explicity Chechen story - all those directly involved - Zakayev, E1 and Kadyrov being Chechens, Barrett decides that this is a story about Russia, and Russians in London.

This gets particularly silly when Barrett not only connects (albeit loosely) this alleged plot with the actual shooting of Russian banker German Gorbuntsov in east London last month, but worse, the Olympics. Try this nonsense on for size:

"And it comes amid growing concern among the security services over the number of Russians in Britain who could present a danger to security, particularly with the London Olympics, identified as the biggest single target for terrorists in British history, fast approaching".

No suggestion is actually made that Russian gunmen (or Chechen?) pose a direct threat to the Olympics - probably because to attempt to do so would make Barrett look even more silly. Instead possible targetted acts of violence amongst one or two exile communities in London are  placed in proximity to an entirely seperate issue - that of Olympic security - with the hope that readers will put two and two together and get 76.

There is now 114 days left until the Olympics. I am going to do my best to log and comment upon silly stories of this type - it surely cannot be long until the Evening Standard dusts off its usual scare stories about Anarchists and public order and places them somewhere in the direction of Stratford - and we can no doubt expect an English Defence League 'threat' to be hyped out of all proportion.

I would be grateful if readers could send me examples of silly season stories that you spot. David Barrett and the Sunday Telegraph have made the early running - plenty of other lame old nags will no doubt follow.

 

Why The Banks Have Money And Their Customers Have Debts

My experience this afternoon, which is replicated by thousands of people every day.

I tried to set up a standing order online. Despite going through the process four times, each time I was told the bank account I was trying to send money to was "non-existent". I checked - it is not.

I then phoned my bank, on their 0845 number. After going through a series of requests for information about me, I was told I had come through to the wrong section. I was transfered (from Liverpool to Belfast) More security questions. Some waiting. Then finally an outcome - you will have to go into branch and check the sort code.

12 minutes that took. It has made my bank money and it has made my telephone provider money. Tomorrow I will take time out from what I should have been doing, to join a queue in a bank.

The system must work for somebody. It does not work for me.

Why Trades Unionists Should Not Vote For Ken Livingstone

The quote below is taken from the Rail Maritime  and Transport Union's official history "Never on Our Knees: A History of the RMT, 1979-2006" (London: Pluto, 2006) by Mike Berlin:

"The issue of PPP became bound up with an increasingly acrimonious Labour party wrangle over the choice of candidate for the newly created office of London's mayor. The front-runner, former Greater London Council leader Ken Livingstone, was excluded from the post of Labour's candidate for the mayoralty by a mixture of chicanery and backroom manoeuvring and ran for the post and won as an independent on a ticket which explicitly rejected part privatisation of the London tubes. Livingstone's victory usehered in a year long battle with the government to stop the implementation of PPP in which the RMT gave him vocal support. It was even willing to work with Livingstone's transport czar, Bob Kiley, who had reputedly 'saved' the New York subway system but who also had a reputation for union busting and once worked for the CIA. The RMT gave fulsome support to Livingstone's camapign for the mayoralty and against PPP. Livingstone was to prove a false friend to the union, and on being readmitted to the Labour Party in April 2002 he moved rapidly to the right, calling on members to cross picket lines during the strikes on the Underground of July 2004." (p.139)

 

Anarchist Terrorists?

I have just spotted this little gem in the January 2012 issue of Searchlight magazine.

In a two page piece by Dr Matthew Feldman of the University of Northampton's Radicalism and New Media Group, "A 2011 Report card on the faces of the British far right" comes this claim:

"Whatever his insantity ruling by Norwegian courts, that Brevik could succesfully navigate the 'terrorist cycle' alone and undetected - while simultaneously writing a far-right manifesto in excess of 1,500 pages - demonstrates an ideological commitment and willing recourse to violence which is the hallmark of self-activating terrorism, whether undertaken by anarchists, jihadi Islamists or far-right extremists."

With the exception of state terrorism, surely all terrorism is 'self-activating'? Secondly where are all these Anarchist terrorists Feldman appears to see?

The Asian Youth Movements

Britain's Asian communities have a long and progressive political tradition - one often overlooked by contemporary controversies surrounding Islam, Islamism and Islamophobia.

The Asian Youth Movements of the 1970s and 80s have been discussed by academics like Anandi Ramamurthy and contemporary writers like Kenan Malik - now it is the BBC's turn, with a Radio 4 documentary by Zaiba Malik at 1100 on Monday 26 March. 

Ramamurthy's archive of the Asian Youth Movements literature, Tandana, is here.

For further reading on the AYM's I would also recommend her 2006 article ‘The Politics of Britain’s Asian Youth Movements’, Race and Class 48: 38-60 ISSN 03063965. It is remarkable (and a little depressing) how much has changed in such a short space of time..............

 

UDM Leaders In Court For Theft

Readers with long memories will recall Neil Greatrex, leader of the so-called Union of Democratic Mineworkers, which emerged in the attempts to crush the miners strike of 1984-5.

Greatrex, who was given the code name Silver Birch by the industrialists working for Mrs Thatcher, is currently on trial at Nottingham Crown Court, along with the Union's former General Secretary Mick Stevens.

They face 14 counts of stealing from the union between 2000 and 2006.

Anarchist Books From AK Press

Earlier this week I received the new AK Press 2012 catalogue in the post. 

I have been buying books from AK for over twenty years, and the AK catalogue seems to be getting bigger - it is now an A3 newspaper with some 76 pages. Anarchists do history well, and there were certainly new titles here on and by Nestor Makhno - to take one example - that I will buy. The million and one small pamphlets available - on subjects as diverse as anti-fascism to health and safety at work - are another reminder of the Anarchist movements strength (and its weakness?) -  its incredible diversity of ideas and approaches.

In the time AK has been going, it is noticeable that the Anarchist movements modest progress has been matched by the decline - arguably far greater decline - of the orthodox left in the shape of Marxist, Marxist-Leninist and Trotskyist parties. In part I would argue this is because Anarchists take self-education so seriously, and are thus better equipped to cope with a fast changing world than those still working through the required titles on their party's reading list and preparing for the weekly paper sale outside Tesco.

That is not to say AK Press are without faults. In Class War we used to have a bugger of a job getting money out of them, and there are some niggling clerical errors in this catalogue which could have been tackled by looking for what is now out of date, rather than simply adding the new titles in.
AK is US based, and it is probably from the American left and/or Anarchist movement that certain silly traits slip in. On the front page, amongst the list of subjects is 'indigenous' as in indigenous peoples struggles. This may have some relevance in 'settler' societies like the US or Canada, here in the UK it simply looks odd. I did look through in vain for a title on indigenous culture in London (perhaps a book on the Pearly Kings and Queens?)
More seriously in Europe it is now the far-right which talks of 'protecting indigenous communities' in the multi-cultural metropolises such as London, Paris or Brussels.  Those who would racialise politics from the left need to note how readily such an  approach can be turned around from the right.
AK has also adopted the left's obsession with the Palestinian question, fielding scores of such titles, whilst other Nationalist struggles - from Irish Republicanism to the Basques - are given the type of scant coverage you may expect from an Anarchist publishers and distributors.

Overall though, AK Press have been doing good work for a long time. Why not buy your books from them instead of Amazon?

 

 

A Thank You To The Hackney Gazette

It is not often I am surprised by anything that happens in Hackney.

I was delighted though to see the editorial in the 15 March issue of the Hackney Gazette not only mention this blog, but to use the article I wrote on gentrification in Hackney on 2 March, as the basis of their own  editorial.

Gentrification (or if you prefer development) is a process over which Hackney residents appear to have little or no control, and which almost seems to slide along without any real political debate. In many parts of the borough, it is community development without the community. It happens to us, not with or for us. And seeing a newspaper with the circulation of the Gazette talking about these issues is a small, but important step.

More please.

Class War Front Pages

One of the great things about Class War the newspaper was its front covers.

They made you think, made you laugh and even managed to sometimes capture the spirit of the time. Phil Gard, who designed and printed several of the best CW covers, is giving a talk about them on Sunday 18 March at 2pm at the Calthorpe Arms, Grays Inn Road, Kings Cross.

It beats reading the Sunday Sun!

Islamic Awareness Week Bingo

This is Islamic Awareness Week at Universities across the country.

I like to play ISOC Bingo at these events, trying to spot the most dubious and unpleasant leaflet in amongst the slick salesmanship and cups of tea. Congratulations should go to the University of East Anglia's Islamic Society for managing to slip some Saudi titles in amongst the usual Islamic Dawah Centre International material. I look forward to reading "Human Rights in Islam and Common Misconceptions" by Abdul-Rahman AlSheha writing from that shining beacon of human rights - Riyadh.

But what's this - bingo! Unpurged from the dawah leaflets is Dr Zakir Naik's contribution on "Islam and Terrorism." Memo to all University ISOCs - when trying to distance non-Muslims from any association they may have in their minds of Islam with terrorism and extremism, perhaps it is not a good idea to distribute leaflets written by a man banned from the UK by the Home Secretary for being............well a little bit extreme.

The theme of this Islamic Awareness Week is love. Go on You Tube and listen to Dr Zakir Naik - there's not a lot of love to be found, but there is certainly some hate! Just to finish, here is Islamic Awareness Week's expert on terrorism on why "9/11 was an Inside Job".

 

Customer Service Hackney Homes Style

Unknown to me, at the end of this week I was in rent arrears, to the tune of £41 - less than half a weeks rent.

A phone call or a letter from Hackney Homes would have nudged me into settling the arrears. Instead it has apparently provoked a "Saturday Visit: Rent Arrears Audit" from Hackney Homes. I write apparently because no one knocked at my door - a letter was simply slipped through my letterbox by an anonymous person who signs themselves Credit Control team. Better still an "urgent appointment" has been made for Monday to discuss my arrears - a meeting so urgent again there is no name given as to who I am supposed to see. Let no one be in doubt though that Hackney Homes is in charge of such meetings "You will need to bring proof of identity and proof of address".

I do hope Hackney Homes are not paying Mr or Ms Credit Control Team double time for this Saturday 'service'.  I have lived in Hackney for nearly twenty years now, and there has always been consistency from Hackney Council, and its agents like Hackney Homes - they expect far higher standards from their tenants and service users than they ever deliver themselves.

 

The Olympics Then And Now

From the interview in today's Sunday Times with Jimmy McColl, who played for the Great Britain football team at the 1948 London Olympics:

"For the 3rd/4th placed playoff with Denmark, the manager, Sir Matt Busby, asked the entire squad if those players who hadn't yet been picked could be in the starting XI, even if it was to the detriment of the result. Everybody, respectful of Busby's intentions, agreed with this, meaning we all had the chance to play at the Games".

For the record, Denmark won 5-3 at Wembley, to take the Bronze medal.