Former anarchist agitator Danny Cohn-Bendit, left and Agit-Prop Marxist film maker Jean- Luc Godard on the cover of Télérama, May, 2010. These days Godard has swapped his proletarian Gauloises for the plutocrat cigar. Now let’s see that again:
and again…..
and…..
Whoops, something’s not quite right. So back to the magazine:
and now the advertisement for the magazine in the Anver Metro station, Paris, May, 2010:
Où est Le Cigare?
___________________
Danny Cohn-Bendit, 1968.Jean-Luc Godard, 1960s
The anarchist of the 1960s, Danny Cohn-Bendit is a child of upper class parents.
The Marxist film maker, and Maoist (1968 – 1980) Jean-Luc Godard is also a child of upper class parents – very wealthy parents at that. His grandfather on his mother’s side was the founder of the Banque Paribas, now BNP Parabis that almost went under in 2015 and was restructured. The group describe themselves as “Global Corporate and Institutional Banking and Retail Banking and Services”.
Le Patron would not normally draw attention to their background were it not for the contempt that Cohn-Bendit and Godard have shown for their own class. In Soviet propaganda terms, or in a Moscow Pravda editorial they would themselves be described as classic “spawn of the bourgeoisie.”
For a while “Red Danny” (Cohn-Bendit) was almost as much a pin-up as Che Guevera. A recent news item (December 2015) that claimed Cohn-Bendit had, at age 70, got married, prompted broken hearted responses from would be suitors. They can recover their composure: it seems the story is untrue.
Cohn-Bendit became one of the photographic images of the May Days in Paris, and his fame was cemented as much by government supporting opponents highlighting the German origin of his family, and his Jewish background. The May, 1968 students took up the chant Nous sommes tous des Juifs allemande – ‘We are all German Jews’. The chanting didn’t prevent him being expelled from France as a “seditious alien” on 22 May, 1968.
During the 70s, initially living in the family home in Germany, he continued to be involved in the ‘movement’: working in the Karl Marx Buchandlung bookshop in Frankfurt. As most anarchists regard Karl Marx in the same way a Primitive Methodist would regard the Pope, it seems his theoretical ‘position’ was in flux.
He also worked as a member of a ‘radical’ nursery. He got a lot of erotic pleasure being with five and six year olds and wrote about it in Le Grande Bazar (1975), talking about engaging in sexual activities with the young children. The German Green Party into the 1980s had a tolerant attitude to paedophilia. Since then Cohn-Bendit has unconvincingly excused himself by saying he was being ‘deliberately provocative’ in La Grand Bazar. If so – to what end? To upset the ‘bourgeoisie’? To stay in the spotlight?
Staying in the spotlight seems to be his emotional need. It’s a Lights, Camera, Action scenario, whether on the Paris boulevards, or on a confrontation with a Czech president. And where ever he is, he is sure to make sure the media knows where he is, and are briefed to what he is going to say and do. His greatest love is himself. His website features the toddler Danny, Danny the boy, Danny the teenager, Danny the young activist. If he was in the nursery, instead of an adult having erotic feelings about a five year old, and was a child, a five year old, he’d be the one elbowing the other kids out of the way pushing himself to the front if the local media were visiting, or on a daily basis creating an upset to get attention.
In the late 1970s Federal German melting pot of opposition to nuclear power stations and other ‘green issues’ Cohn-Bendit was drawn into the movement that would eventually result in the emergence of the Green Party in Germany.
________________
The film maker Jean Luc Godard who had had a left sentiment prior to 1968 went the whole horrible hog and stuck his colours to Chairman Mao, at a time of appalling repression in the People’s Democratic Republic of China. This grotesque manifestation at this time effected some others in the ‘Arts’ in the West, particularly the performing arts.
Re-education on the land: Xinsheng commune, Qingan county, 4 November 1969. Photo Li Zhensheng, from Red-Colour News Soldier.
If Godard had been in China in 1969 given his class background he would have found himself being ‘re-educated’: forcibly sent to work on the land. He would be getting off lightly. Other perceived enemies of the People’s Democratic Republic got shot.
Photos Li Zhensheng, from Red-Colour News Soldier. ( 1.)
During the period of his support of Chairman Mao he denounced his former cameraman Raoul Coutard for being the cinematographer on a film that had American company backing. Raoul Coutard was one of the best things about watching Godard’s films in the early to mid sixties, for instance Pierrot Le Fou (1965). This was gesture, megaphone politics at its worst. (Is there any other kind?)
Cohn-Bendit, megaphone operative. May, 1968.Cohn-Bendit, 2010, supporter of the E.U. bureaucracy.
In August 1968 when Soviet Pact forces invaded Czechoslovakia, Cohn-Bendit was selling Lenin’s Left-Wing Communism, an Infantile Disorder in the Frankfurt bookshop, and Jean-Luc Godard was reading the Maoist People’s Cause in Paris.
An estimated 200,000 troops and 2,000 tanks (a higher figure of 5,000 tanks is sometimes quoted) invaded Czechoslovakia on the night of 20 August, 1968. It was the largest use of military force against a European country since the end of the Second World War, even exceeding the Soviet military force that invaded Hungary in 1956. The crime that Czechoslovakia had committed? To have a little bit of what citizens (including Cohn-Bendit and Godard) in Western Europe took for granted: the freedom to travel, freedom to express oneself, without being imprisoned, or having your passport taken away, or your children being prohibited from going to college. (Or in Mao’s China, being shot.)
‘A protestor holds a blood stained Czechoslovakian flag in front of a Soviet tank.’ Photo source Czech Press Agency archive.
The loosening of the Marxist straight jacket had started under Alexander Dubček when he was elected First Secretary of the Czechoslovakian Communist Party. Although he wanted the Czech Communist Party to be firmly in control of the State and the reforms – the economy was in a mess – the enthusiasm in the country for the change of direction was endangering the rule of the Communist Party. Dubček was reluctant to use force to reinforce the central role of the Communist Party. It was this that alarmed Moscow. The period was known as the Prague Spring. The winter came early, in August.
‘Protestors throw stones at the Soviet tanks entering Prague’. Photo source Czech Press Agency archive.
photo Josef Koudelka (2.)photo Josef Koudelka.‘Soviet tanks are surrounded by crowds of Czechs protesting against the invasion on Prague’s Wenceslas Square, August 21.’ Photo source Czech Press Agency archive.‘Soviet soldiers try to extinguish a burning tank set on fire by protestors near the Czechoslovak Radio headquarters in Prague.’ Photo source Czech Press Agency archive.
At Radio Prague, journalists refused to give up the station and twenty people were killed before it was captured by the occupying force. It is estimated that a further 100 protesting Czechoslovakians were killed by the occupying forces, upholding the power of Marxist-Leninists to continue the building of the Workers Utopia, not just in Czechoslavakia, but in the rest of central and eastern Europe and the Baltic. As late as 1980 the Central Committee of the German Democratic Republic (East German) were urging fellow Warsaw pact members to use military force to invade Poland and put down the Solidarity movement.
Protester confronts Soviet Tank, morning of 21 August, 1968. Main Square, Bratislava, Slovakia. photo Ladislav Bielik
Whilst Jean-Luc Godard remained committed to the Mao-ist version of Marxist Leninism, and Cohn-Bendit worked in the Karl Marx Buchandlung, the negatives of the photographs that Czech photographer Josef Koudelka took of the Soviet invasion were smuggled out of the country, and published anonymously in the British Sunday Times.
photo Josef Koudelka
Unaware that Josef Koudelka was the photographer who took the invasion photos, the Czechoslovakian authorities allowed him to travel to England on a 3 month working visa issued by the British government. Once there he applied for and was granted political asylum.
Czechoslovakian New Wave film directors and scriptwriters, such as Milos Forman (Loves of a Blonde, and The Firemens Ball) and Ivan Passer (Intimate Lighting) managed to escape to the West. (Foreman happened to be in Paris when the Soviets invaded.) The director of the Academy Award winning Closely Observed Trains, Jiri Menzel, was not so lucky. During 1968 and early 1969 he was shooting Larks on a String, set in a Stalin era industrial scrapyard where the male and female civil and political prisoners were forced to work, and lived in overcrowded, barbed wire surrounded huts. This was no political allegory. This was the reality of 1950s Czechoslovakia.
Larks on a String, Jiri Menzel, 1969.
Larks on a String, Jiri Menzel, 1969.
Film director Jiri Menzel, circa 1968. (3.)
Larks on a String, Jiri Menzel, 1969
Once the film was completed it was immediately banned, and was not seen until 1990, following the collapse of the Communist regime. In an interview recorded for the DVD release of Larks on a String Jiri Menzel said he was not able to leave the country – his passport had been taken away from him.
It was five years before he made another film, and seven years before he made Seclusion Near a Wood (1976). In 1985 My Sweet Little Village was released. These post Prague Spring years were the years of “Normalisation” as the Communist Central Committee, with First Secretary Gustáv Husák at the helm, called it.
Normal. Ostrava, 1974. Photo Viktor Kolár (4.)The years of ‘Normalisation’. Ostrava, 1984. photo Viktor Kolár.My Sweet Little Village, 1985. Jeri Menzil.
The Czech photographer Viktor Kolár covertly photographed the years of “Normalisation” in the industrial city of Ostrava, and the surrounding area, whilst earning a living, at one point, working as a labourer in the Nová Hut’ steelworks.
Jeri Menzil’s My Sweet Little Village still remains one of the Czech and Slovak Republic’s favourite films. Menzil had the ability, almost in a Good Soldier Švejk way in the period of “Normalisation” to get one past the authorities, by re-affirming what is best about being human. Both My Sweet Little Village and Seclusion Near a Wood are loving, and sometimes rye observations of human inter-action, irrespective of the political background of the time, typical of all his films from Closely Observed Trains onwards. It is an approach that Jean-Luc Godard would, at best, not understand, and at worst would dismiss as either ‘bourgeois’ sentimentality or of ‘not facing reality’.
The writer on Film, Ray Durgnat, said about Godard in 1967: “Godard keeps babbling on about the world being absurd because he can’t keep an intellectual hard on long enough to probe for any responsive warmth”.
Durgnat said a lot of pungent and insightful things about Godard in the essay the quote comes from Asides on Godard, in The Films of Jean-Luc Godard, Studio Vista 1967. As much as Le Patron likes Ray Durgnat’s writing, in this instance it isn’t intellect you need for responsive warmth, but an open heart. Godard’s shrivelled damaged little heart naturally leapt, a year later, into the sloganising Marxist-Leninist-Maoist rhetoric, where he found a sense of purpose, and with equally sloganising people, a sense of belonging. Despite supporting a Maoist paper called The People’s Cause, he (and the paper) had no understanding of ‘The People’ and loathed and rejected just about everything they, the people, enjoyed.
Theses days Godard is no longer a Maoist, but still identifies himself as a Marxist.
These days Danny Cohn-Bendit has travelled a long way from being a part player in Parisian street theatre. In the journey the anarchist ideal of a bottom up democracy has been replaced by a top down authoritarianism. Benito Mussolini took a similar journey, from Italian anarcho-syndicalism to the fascist corporate state. The journey that Cohn-Bendit embarked on in 1968 led to a grotesque position – equal to Godard becoming a Maoist – when, with other European MEPs he travelled in December, 2008 to Prague to meet and berate the Czech President Václav Klaus. More of this in a moment, but first some details to where he had arrived at in the 1990s and beyond.
In 1994 he became a Green MEP in the European Parliament, and has remained one since. He is a significant politician within the French and German Green movements, and his belief in the necessity of the European Union to force policies – environmental policies, for instance – on member states is authoritarian. In 2003 during the Convention that was preparing the text of the European constitution – which was to become known as the Lisbon Treaty – he demanded that EU member countries who voted No in referendums to the conditions of the constitution should be forced to hold a second referendum. If the result was still No, then those countries should be expelled from the E.U. The planned constitution (The Lisbon Treaty) was rejected by French and Dutch voters in 2005. Irish voters rejected it in June 2008, but accepted it in a second referendum in October 2009.
There are some significant differences between the Green Parties in Europe. The German Green Party, for instance, approved the rejection of Scottish Independence by voters in the 2014 Scottish Referendum on the question, at odds with the pro-independence position of the Green Party in Scotland. And although the Czech writer, dissident, thinker, and Czech President (1993 – 2003) Václav Havel supported the Czech Green Party from 2004, he remained committed to Direct Democracy, even though some Green Parties stance on environmental matters is authoritarian. A clash in democratic approaches resulted in Cohn-Bendit resigning from the French Greens. More of that in a moment.
______________
At the invitation of the then Czech President Váklav Klaus a group of MEPs who were members of the “Conference of Presidents of the European Parliament” flew to Prague on 5 December, 2008. To put what happened when they got there in a context, imagine any other President of an autonomous European nation – say Mary Robinson, President of the Republic of Ireland between 1990 and 1997 – getting this kind of drubbing from visiting politicians from Brussels.
Christopher Booker wrote about the extraordinary meeting for the British Daily Telegraph on 14 December, 2008.
“There was…… a remarkable recent meeting between the heads of the groups in the European Parliament and Václav Klaus, the Czech head of state, in his palace in Hradcany Castle, on a hill overlooking Prague. The aim was to discuss how the Czechs should handle the EU’s rotating six-monthly presidency when they take over from France on January 1.
The EU’s ruling elite view President Klaus…. with a mixture of bewilderment, hatred and contempt. As his country’s prime minister, he applied to join the EU in the days after the fall of Communism in the 1990s. But now Klaus is alone among European leaders in expressing openly Eurosceptic views, not least about the Lisbon Treaty, which the Czech parliament has yet to ratify.
Klaus was an outspoken dissident under the Communist regime, and he has come to regard the EU as dangerously anti-democratic. But he compounds this sin with highly sceptical views on global warming, on which he recently published a book, Blue Planet in Green Shackles…….
So when Klaus was due to meet the MEPs, one of them decided this was a moment to display the Euro-elite’s hostility to him. Daniel Cohn-Bendit, who is German born but lives in France, first came to prominence in Paris in 1968 as a student agitator. He is now leader of the Green MEPs. Talking loudly in the plane to Prague, he made no secret of his intentions, and briefed French journalists on how to get maximum publicity for his planned insults.
As Cohn-Bendit was aware, the only flag that flies over the castle is the presidential standard (though the “ring of stars” is much in evidence elsewhere in Prague, flown outside every government ministry).
As described to me by someone present, President Klaus greeted the MEPs with his usual genial courtesy. Whatever his own views, he assured them, his countrymen would conduct their presidency in fully “communautaire” fashion. (Communautaire: supporter of the principles of the European Community.)
Cohn-Bendit then staged his ambush. Brusquely plonking down his EU flag, which he observed sarcastically was so much in evidence around the palace. (Le Patron: News reports from many sources said that Cohn-Bendit went on to say that the European Flag should have been flying from the Presidential palace.)
(Cohn-Bendit) warned that the Czechs would be expected to put through the EU’s “climate change package” without interference. “You can believe what you want,” he scornfully told the president, “but I don’t believe, I know that global warming is a reality.” He added, “my view is based on scientific views and the majority approval of the EU Parliament”.
He then moved on to the Lisbon Treaty. “I don’t care about your opinions on it,” he said. If the Czech Parliament approves the treaty in February, he demanded, “Will you respect the will of the representatives of the people?”
He then reprimanded the president for his recent meeting in Ireland with Declan Ganley, the millionaire leader of the “No” campaign in the Irish referendum, claiming that it was improper for Klaus to have talked to someone whose “finances come from problematic sources”.
Visibly taken aback by this onslaught, Klaus observed: “I must say that no one has talked to me in such a style and tone in the past six years. You are not on the barricades in Paris here. I thought that such manners ended for us 19 years ago” (i.e when Communism fell). When Klaus suggested to Hans-Gert Pöttering, the president of the EU Parliament, who was present, that perhaps it was time for someone else to take the floor, Pöttering replied that “anyone from the members of the Parliament can ask you what he likes”, and invited Cohn-Bendit to continue.
“This is incredible, said Klaus. “I have never experienced anything like this before.”
After a further exchange, in which Cohn-Bendit compared Klaus unfavourably with his predecessor, President Hável, he gave way to an Irish MEP, Brian Crowley, who began by saying “all his life my father fought against the British domination [of Ireland]… That is why I dare to say that the Irish wish for the Lisbon Treaty. It was an insult, Mr President, to me and the Irish people what you said during your state visit to Ireland.” Klaus repeated that he had not experienced anything like this for 19 years and that it seemed we were no longer living in a democracy, but that it was “post-democracy which rules the EU”.
On the EU constitution, Klaus recalled that three countries had voted against it, and that if Mr Crowley wanted to talk about insults to the Irish people, “the biggest insult to the Irish people is not to accept the result of the Irish referendum”…..
Everntually Pöttering closed the meeting by saying that he wanted to leave the room “in good terms”, but it was quite unacceptable to compare himself and his colleagues with the Soviet Union. Klaus replied that he had not mentioned the Soviet Union: “I only said that I had not experienced such an atmosphere, such a style of debate, in the Czech Republic in the last 19 years.”
Czech Communist Secret Service (StB) surveillance files on future Czech President Váklav Klaus. Source Radio Praha. (Radio Prague.)
The hectoring nature of the meeting was reported in Czech media, and was a news item throughout the former Communist Eastern Bloc countries. It is reported that across all political sentiments in the Czech republic the reaction was similar: that the comments of Cohn-Bendit and the other MEPs was an “undue interference in Czech affairs”. The MEP and the leader of the United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP) Nigel Farage went further and compared Cohn-Bendit’s actions to a “German official from seventy years ago or a Soviet official from twenty years ago.”
______________
Cohn-Bendit’s contempt for democratic processes continues.
French Greens’ Cohn-Bendit quits party in fiscal Pact row.
European lawmaker Daniel Cohn-Bendit revoked his membership of the French Greens on Sunday (23 September) in protest at the party’s decision to oppose the ratification of the European Union’s budget discipline pact.
The move threatens to rob the Europe-Écologie Party of one of its most recognisable deputies – known for his rabble-rousing during 1968 student riots in Paris – and may exacerbate tensions within the group, which supports France’s Socialist-led government and has two ministerial posts.
The French Greens voted overwhelmingly against the terms of the pact at a grassroots assembly on Saturday, concluding that it would not provide long-term answers to the EU crisis nor help foster environmentally friendly policies.
France is expected to ratify the pact early next month, though a major revolt within the coalition could force the Socialists into an embarrassing reliance on the conservative opposition.
“Yesterday’s federal council was dramatic. Dramatically pathetic,” Cohn-Bendit told French television station i-Tele.
“I’ve decided to suspend my participation in this movement. It’s clear to me that deep down, things are finished between me and Europe-Ecologie.”
Cohn-Bendit said the French Green party’s position on the fiscal treaty was “completely inconsistent” arguing that the party should pull out of the French government and vote against the budget.
“I don’t want to endorse this leftist policy drift,” the Franco-German MEP further went on.
Cohn-Bendit, nicknamed “Danny the Red” for his student activism, has served as deputy for French Green parties since 1999 and is co-president of the European Parliament’s Greens group.
– Reuters, 24 September, 2012.
Just in case you missed it: it was a collective decision taken by a meeting of grassroots members. Paris, ’68 anyone?
______________
And, oh yes, that Disappearing Cigar.
It’s marvellous what you can do with Photoshop. Not only remove the cigar, but reposition the fingers. In France 2010 it was not permitted for advertising posters in public places to even inadvertently include cigarettes, cigars – (and goodness knows what has happened to Maigret’s pipe). Cohn-Bendit the Green politician would not have a problem with the Photoshopping out of his pal’s cigar. And Godard, like Cohn-Bendit is happy to comply with the distortion. He is, after all, promoting the product: himself. Anyway, as a Marxist who probably knows his Russian Revolution history, he will know that anything that offends the ruling elite gets removed. Long live the Revolution, Comrades.
Before: Lenin left, Trotsky circled right. After: Trotsky removed.
____________________
Sources and Notes
All photographs used in this Post: Copyright the respective owners.
Li Zhansheng is a photojournalist. He was a photographer with the Heilonjiang Newspaper, and photographed the Mao Cultural Revolution as part of his work with the newspaper. However, besides allowed ‘positive’ images of peasant meetings, etc, he managed to secretly take photographs of the realities behind the Cultural revolution, including those forcibly sent to the countryside to help the ‘revolution’ (hard labour camps), and executions without trial. These latter negatives he hid underneath the floorboards in his family one room flat in Harbin. He and his wife, Yingxia, were themselves sent to a hard labour camp for two years, in 1969.
Li Zhansheng with his wife Yingxia and children in their Harbin flat, September 1972. Taken with a self-timer.
The photographs he took during the Cultural revolution are published as Red-Colour News Soldier by Phaidon, 2003. It is still in print.
2. The photographs that Josef Koudelka took during the Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia are published as Invasion 68: Prague, Aperture, 2008. It is still in print.
3. Jiri Menzell’sLarks on a String and Closely Observed Trains are currently available DVDs, with English sub-titles, and an English Menu. Vesničko Má Stredisková (My Sweet Little Village) and Na Samoteu Lesa (Seclusion Near a Wood) are Czech DVDs, with English sub-titles and a Czech Menu. It is not too difficult to figure out from the Menu how to switch on the English sub-titles. subtitlescafedalston.co.uk sell by post or in person Na Samote u Lesa (Seclusion Near a Wood) which is how Le Patron got his copy. They also sell online a small selection of other Czech films, film posters and items. All the DVDs are otherwise available from amazon.co.uk
4 The photographs taken by Victor Kolár in Ostrava, during the period of Czech ‘Normalisation’ are in Viktor Kolár, Torst, Prague, 2002.
Viktor Kolár, published by Torst, Prague, 2002.
Unfortunately only very expensive second hand copies of this soft back are presently available, although a search through ebay might yield copies cheaper than the current asking price on abebooks, which varies between £111 to £207, at the time of writing (January, 2016). Fortunately Viktor Kolár does have a website where some of his work can be seen. victorkolar.com
Bodleian Library manipulation and distortion of Militargeographische Angaben uber England (1)One of three original documents that the Bodleian Library turns into the publication above. This original 1941 edition is in the Library of Congress, Washington.
Prior to Operation Sealion – the German name given to their planned invasion of Britain – military intelligence reports had already been prepared in Berlin. The documents were headed as Militärgeographische Angaben über England. (“Military Geographic Information about England”). They comprehensively described, from an invading military logistic perspective, region by region, the physical terrain, the transport infra- structure, the power stations, the national electricity grid, the location of large “grist” (flour) mills (for hungry troops), and so on. The amount of detail and photographs, and maps was extraordinary. The intelligence material also had a brief overview of the social and racial characterises of the English. In a strikingly doctored, cut down and misleading version of Militärgeographische Angaben über England, published by the Bodleian Library, Oxford, 2007 as German Invasion Plans for the British Isles 1940 (see their cover above) there is a section on the Social and Racial Characteristics of the English. It is reproduced here with the caution that in translation (commissioned by the Bodleian Library), or in the editing, it too may have been shortened or doctored in some way. However, the observations and sentiments expressed about English social classes will be accurate. (For further points about the distortion of the Bodleian “German Invasion Plans” see Footnote 1. below)
“England is… a land of opposites in social respects. The impact of this, however, is softened by the widespread emergence of similarities in lifestyle; and the differences, because they are considered traditional, do not have such a divisive effect as they would in less conservative countries.
The not inconsiderable upper class consists of rich families as well as the old and new aristocracy, whose assets together make up the main part of the nation’s wealth. Next, with its own elaborate hierarchy, comes the extensive working middle classes, whose members enjoy sizeable incomes and considerable prosperity; in general they have a considerably more comfortable lifestyle but lower level of education than in Germany.
There is also a lower class, fairly substantial in size, of workers on poor to average pay and the long-term unemployed, who have a surprisingly low material and intellectual standard of living. They inhabit the “slums” (homes of misery) with their poor sanitary conditions, filth, and at times morbid forms of social existence (e.g. child poverty), in a state of poor health and in some cases long-term malnutrition. Some of these negative developments must be put down not to undeserved poverty but wholly or in part to insufficient competence in domestic matters, specifically among women, as well as to a lack of mutual encouragement.
The most striking features displayed by the more disagreeable sections of this class include a lack of personal ambition, indifference to the demands of the community and nation, and interests that stop with sport and frivolity, the sensations of city life.
In some cases one is dealing here with the residue of an urban social group that has already been making its presence felt for over a hundred years and whose numbers make up an alarming proportion of the population as a whole.
Racially, the population is a mixture of Mediterranean, Alpine, and Nordic elements, with the latter predominant.
The west of England, above all Wales, is home to remnants of an indigenous population whose roots go back to Celtic times and beyond. Unlike the bright English, they are dark and small in stature. Even though they have largely abandoned their language, they have still retained a reasonably strong awareness of the distinctive heritage and culture to which they belong. Radical political aspirations are confined to narrow circles and are of no practical significance.”
National Socialist German Workers’ Party flagEngels, The Condition of the Working Class in England, 1845 edition
As the German National Socialist Adolf Hitler identified enemies and hindrances to his creation of a Thousand Year Reich, based on race, so too did InterNational Socialists Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels. Their “Utopia” was based not on race, but class, although race was significant for them, and many races were written off not only as not part of the Final Destiny, but as a hindrance to it. Here is some of what Engels had to say about the Irish in his The Condition of the Working Class in England, 1845 edition.
Friedrich Engels
“The southern facile character of the Irishman, his crudity, which places him but little above the savage, his contempt for all humane enjoyments, in which his very crudeness makes him incapable of sharing, his filth and poverty, all favour drunkeness. . . . the pressure of this race has done much to depress wages and lower the working-class. . . . That poverty manifests itself in Ireland thus and not otherwise, is owing to the character of the people, and to their historical development….
Aran islands
….. The Irish are a people related in their whole character to the Latin nations, to the French, and especially to the Italians…. With the Irish, feeling and passion predominate; reason must bow before them. Their sensuous, excitable nature prevents reflection and quiet, persevering activity from reaching development — such a nation is utterly unfit for manufacture as now conducted. . . . Irish distress cannot be removed by any Act of Repeal. Such an Act would, however, at once lay bare the fact that the cause of Irish misery, which now seems to come from abroad is really to be found at home” (2)
Engels assessment, written in the early 1840s of some of the reasons for the condition of the Irish peasantry is identical to the reasons given by the National Socialist assessment, written in 1939/1940 for the causes of poverty amongst some of the English working class in the 1930s. Engels assessment was primarily based not on political or economic criteria, but on race.
Friedrich Engels regarded all people of a Celtic background (he mentioned, for instance, the inhabitants of the Scottish Highlands) as an impediment to the forward march of an ‘enlightened proletariat’, whose heightened political consciousness would act as the force that would eventually lead to a proletarian paradise. His friend and political colleague Karl Marx believed, dogmatically, that he had discerned it as a scientific based historical fact.
Isle of HarrisSt. KildaSt.Kilda
Engels regarded Slavs and Basques as retrogressive elements, too, standing in the way of “progress” and that they would have to be dealt with, or would “perish in the revolutionary process.” (His words.)
Ambivalent about the people of France as a positive revolutionary force, he nevertheless approved of their Government’s subjugation of the inferior Arabs in their north African colonies.
Negro and Jew were untermenschen. (sub-human). Despite his Jewish background Marx was also dismissive of Jews and contemptuous of negroes.
The flag of the United Socialist Soviet Republics
Compared with the German National Socialists of the 1920s and 30s, Marxist socialists, years earlier theoretically, and then practically, embraced the removal of those who got in their way of arriving at their Messianic goal. Lenin wrote in 1918. “Ruthless war on the kulaks! Death to them!” (3) The programme/pogram against Kulaks in the USSR started in 1918, but reached its appalling climax in the early 1930s with Stalin remaining faithful to the tenents of Lenin.
Corpses, the Ukraine, 1922. (4)
Hundreds of thousands were uprooted and sent to gulags (concentration work camps) with hundreds of thousands, or more, worked to death on projects such as the White Sea Canal. Others were executed. Like the improvised gallows of the Nazis public hangings in occupied Europe eighteen years later as a warning to those who resist, some kulaks were hung and left on village gallows for the local population to take note of what happened to those who were perceived to be class “traitors”.
A translation of what is known as Lenin’s 1918 “Hanging Order”
11-8-18 Send to Penza
To Comrades Kuraev, Bosh, Minkin and other Penza communists
Comrades! The revolt by the five kulak volost’s must be suppressed without mercy. The interest of the entire revolution demands this, because we have now before us our final decisive battle “with the kulaks.” We need to set an example.
1) You need to hang (hang without fail, so that the public sees) at least 100 notorious kulaks, the rich, and the bloodsuckers. 2) Publish their names. 3) Take away all of their grain. 4) Execute the hostages – in accordance with yesterday’s telegram.
This needs to be accomplished in such a way, that people for hundreds of miles around will see, tremble, know and scream out: let’s choke and strangle those blood-sucking kulaks.
Telegraph us acknowledging receipt and execution of this.
Yours, Lenin
P.S. Use your toughest people for this. (5)
Definitions by the Soviet Marxist-Leninists of what constituted a kulak shifted sloppily, like an unsecured cargo in a boat’s hold. It is reported that in many villages, neither villagers or kulaks knew which was which, partly because the criteria was not clear. Being a perceived enemy of the revolution was often enough, even when the individual had no land, for he might be harbouring “kulak” thoughts. Bearing in mind land ownership and cultivation in Ireland in the 1920s, as a comparison, a kulak, very roughly, was considered to own one or two cows and five or six acres of land. Estimates range widely on the numbers of kulaks who died. A conservative estimate for the 1930 to 1940 period puts the figure at three quarters of a million. Others have put it much higher.
The Marx and Engels emphasis on “backward races” largely disappeared with the ascendency in Russia of the Bolshevik Party in the worlds’ first “proletarian” revolution. Ideologically it had to disappear because it was in economically backward countries such as Imperial Russia – contradicting Marx’s “scientific” law – that became the centres of Red Revolution. The sickle, the emblem of backward, peasant agricultural communities, now became, along with the proletarian hammer, the symbol on the red flag of the United Socialist Soviet Republics. Peasants vastly outnumbered industrial workers in the U.S.S.R. The next great “triumph’ of Red Revolution was in an even more “backward” country: China. Writing about the Chinese in the 19th century Mark and Engels had written of the “Heredity stupidity of the Chinese” (Marx, 1853); “The overbearing prejudice, stupidity, learned ignorance and pedantic barbarism” (Engels, 1857) (6)
Class, always central to Marxist ideology became foremost, in the ideological somersaults that had to be performed to rationalise the circumstances in which the revolutionary Marxist-Leninist parties found themselves in. Besides the obvious class enemy of the aristocracy and large land-owners, in the USSR the small land owning Kulaks were identified as one of the immediate “reactionary” elements to be wiped out.
In the backward peasant agricultural societies that existed in Pol Pot’s Cambodia and Mao Tse-Tung’s China the twisted Marxist ideology identified “intellectuals” (brain workers) as a class enemy, and hundreds of thousands of what they deemed intellectuals were either worked to death, or executed.
Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin, Mao Tse-Tung
Grotesquely, at the same time, revolutionary posters in both countries had images of classic intellectuals (brain workers) – Marx, Engels and Lenin – staring into the triumphant socialist future, whilst at the same time anyone wearing glasses and not reading Lenin or Chairman Mao was a potential suspect. As far is known neither Marx, Engels or Lenin ever picked up, or knew how to handle a hammer or a sickle. They were good with pens, though.
Unlike the Nazis who only started to plan for the Final Solution to exterminate their perceived race enemies, the Jews, in January, 1943, and kept very circumspect about their plans, and consequent activities, the nineteenth century writings of Engels clearly pointed the way, followed by Lenin proclaiming in 1918 death to the perceived class enemies of the United Socialist Soviet Republics in his Comrade Workers, Forward to the Last, Decisive Fight! (7)
The openness on how to deal with class enemies was characteristic of many who supported the Marxist revolutionary socialist government in the USSR in the 1920s and 1930s. The Irish playwright, reviewer, polemicist and socialist admirer of the U.S.S.R, George Bernard Shaw, writing a preface to a print edition of his play On The Rocks (1933) derided the principle of the sanctity of human life as an “absurdity to any good socialist” and called for extermination to be put ‘on a scientific basis’ and added that to kill off the acquisitive classes is ‘quite reasonable and very necessary’, since no punishment would ever cure them of their capitalist instincts. (8) He repeated a variation of his views on film in 1931, asking that a pain free way of killing people should be developed. In 1934 he called for the development of a “humane’ killing gas, writing in the British Broadcasting Corporation’s magazine The Listener of 7 February.
Sidney and Beatrice Webb travelling to the U.S.S.R., 1932.
His English Fabian socialist colleague Beatrice Webb was aware of, and approved of the campaign against the kulaks. In 1932 she was uneasy about what was happening to the kulaks getting known in Britain. She reportedly had said that it had been very poor stage management to allow a party of British visitors in the Ukraine to see cattle-trucks full of starving “enemies of the state” at a local station. She thought it was “ridiculous to let you see them. The English are always so sentimental”. (Recalled conversation by her niece Konradin Hobhouse, in a letter to the Manchester Guardian, February 1958.)
Soviet Communism – A New Civilisation, 1935. Historian A.J.P.Taylor described it as “The most preposterous book ever written about Russia.”
Besides his support for the USSR, there was a point in the 1930s when Shaw simultaneously admired Hitler’s National Socialist Germany, and the Italian fascist regime of Benito Mussolini. Before the first world war Mussolini was a prominent and active revolutionary socialist, influenced by syndicalist ideas, and edited, amongst other publications, Lotta di Class (The Class Struggle), and later Avanti!, the newspaper of the Italian Socialist Party. He took its weekly circulation from 20,000 to 100,000. Impatient with ‘reformist’ social democracy, and rejecting the historical determinism of Marxist he developed his own brand of national socialism, partly inspired by the writing of the German Friedrich Nietzsche. Mussolini’s Italy of the 1920s and 1930s, which was not based on racial theories, promoted syndicates between employers and employees. Shaw’s support for the national socialist regimes, besides the USSR, was not so illogical. George Orwell was aware of, and commented on Shaw’s position, in a footnote in his James Burnham and the Managerial Revolution article, 1946. (9).
Orwell, Franz Borkenau (author of the Spanish Cockpit) and Robert Bruce Lockhart, who had known Lenin and Trotsky, were three who understood at the time – at a deeper level – the ideological inter-connection between the United Socialist Soviet Republics, the German National Socialists and Mussolini’s corporate state. Musing in his diary on 18 May, 1933, Robert Bruce Lockhart wrote: “… Russia does not hate fascism so much as the jelly-bellied democracy of Britain. She prefers the fascist system of government: (1) because the Fascist form of rule justifies and is the same as her own; (2) because the corporate state is more akin to her own ideal and in the event of a change goes over en bloc to Communism; and (3) she understands exactly where she is with Mussolini: trade and no propaganda nonsense. Result is Mussolini is never attacked in Soviet Press. Gorky once wrote something against Musso. It did not go in.“(Diaries of Sir Robert Bruce Lockhart 1915 – 1938, edited by Kenneth Young.)
In a May, 1940, review of Franz Borkenau’s The Totalitarian Enemy, George Orwell wrote:
“….We cannot struggle against Fascism unless we are willing to understand it, a thing which both left-wingers and right-wingers have conspicuously failed to do – basically, of course, because they dared not.
Until the signing of the Russo-German Pact, the assumption made on both sides was that the Nazi régime was in no way revolutionary. National socialism was simply capitalism with the lid off, Hitler was a dummy with Thyssen pulling the strings – that was the official theory, proved in many a pamphlet by Mr John Strachey and tacitly accepted by The Times. Blimps and Left Book Club members alike swallowed it whole, both of them, so to speak, had a vested interest in ignoring the real facts. Quite naturally the propertied classes wanted to believe that Hitler would protect them against Bolshevism, and equally naturally the Socialists hated having to admit that the man who had slaughtered their comrades was a Socialist himself…… Then came the eye-opener of the Hitler-Stalin pact. Suddenly the scum of the earth and the blood-stained butcher of the workers (for so they had described each other) were marching arm in arm, their friendship ‘cemented in blood’, as Stalin cheerily expressed it. National Socialism is a form of Socialism, is emphatically revolutionary, does crush the property owner just as surely as it crushes the worker. The two régimes, having started from opposite ends, are rapidly evolving towards the same system – a form of oligarchical collectivism….”
(Volume 2, The Collected Essays, Journalism and Letters of George Orwell: My Country Right or Left, 1940 – 1943, Secker & Warburg, 1968)
The 1939 Russo-German Pact, as Orwell describes it, was often also called the Non-Aggression Pact. That is, non-agression between the German National Socialists and the United Socialist Soviet Republics. Their first, and joint aggression, was their invasion of Poland in September, 1939.
Soviet officer, giving a Nazi salute, left and German officers, Poland.German and Soviet Forces together, Poland, September, 1939.
Poland, September, 1939. German and Soviet officers and soldiers
The non-aggression pact held for three months short of two years. Whilst it did, the USSR attacked Finland in late November, 1939. The German Nazis attacked Denmark and Norway in April 1940, followed by attacking Holland, Belgium, Luxembourg and France in May 1940. The USSR attacked Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia two months later, in July 1940. Germany attacked Roumania October, 1940, and then Greece and Yugoslavia in April 1941.
And then, in Hitler’s biggest strategic military mistake (though not on National Socialist race ideology and geographical grounds) German forces attacked the USSR in June 1941.
Six months after the United Socialist Soviet Union had occupied their pre-agreed areas of Poland (agreed with the German National Socialists), the USSR systematically executed Polish “class enemies” in a short period, beginning on 3 April, 1940. The victims were executed in several Polish locations, including near the Katyn woods. 22,000 were shot in the back of the neck by a small team of NKVD executioners. The “pain free” way of killing the “acquisitive classes” that George Bernard Shaw asked for was reserved for the executioners. It was soon realised that the strong recoil on the Russian made pistols the NKVD executioners used caused hand and arm ache after 12 executions. They were therefore issued with German made Walther pistols, with a softer recoil. Vasilli Mikhailovich Blokhin, chief executioner for the NKVD, executed approximately 7,000 of the 20,000 who were killed. Besides Polish army officers – who were the largest group – Polish NCOs, university professors, physicians, lawyers, engineers, teachers, writers and journalists were also amongst those shot. The Polish film director Andrzej Wadja’s father was one of the executed. The bodies were buried in shallow mass graves in 1940, and were discovered and exhumed by the German National Socialists in 1943. In 1943 the USSR angrily denied they were responsible and broke off diplomatic relations with the exiled Polish Government in London, who had correctly accused them. The culprits, according to the USSR, were the German National Socialists. The USSR stuck to this story until 1990. And then blamed Stalin for the executions, and not Marxist theory.
NOT THE TRUTH but called “The Truth about Soviet Russia”, 1942. Sidney and Beatrice Webb, with an essay on the Webbs by George Bernard ShawEnemies of the People, Pol Pot’s Cambodia, 1975 – 1979.
“Accused peasants are kept under guard by local militia as they wait to be denounced at a mass rally as one of the ‘four elements’ – landlords, rich peasants, counter-revolutionaries, or ‘bad characters’ – as indicated by the sign.” – Red-Colour News Soldier: A Chinese Photographer’s Odyssey through the Cultural Revolution, Li Zhensheng, Phaidon, 2003. All photos copyright Li Zhensheng. (The above two photos are from one photo spanning two pages in the above publication. They have been reproduced as above because of the limitations of the photo scanner used in scanning the size of the original, and not for editorial reasons.)
“Counter-revolutionaries” China, April 1968. Photo: Li ZhenshengCounter Revolutionaries driven through Harbin, China, 5 April, 1968. Photos: Li Zhensheng
Counter-revolutionaries and “criminals”, near Harbin, 5 April, 1968. Photos: Li Zhensheng“Revolutionary Justice” Near Harbin, 5 April, 1968. Photo: Li ZhenshengFlag of the People’s Republic of ChinaFlag of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea
Flag of the (Ultra Nationalist) National Bolshevik Party, Russian Federation, 1995.Logo of the Communist Party of Great Britain, 2015.
Logo of the British Socialist Workers Party.
And so it goes on…….
At the time of writing, in 2015 the totalitarian left continues to meet the totalitarian right. The new Greek Foreign Minister, Nikos Kotzias in the Syriza dominant Greek Government was a previous member of the Central Committee of the Greek Communist Party. In the 1980s he applauded the attempted suppression of the Solidarity movement by the Polish communist government. The Economist magazine is reported to have said that he “enjoys cordial relations with the religious-nationalist segment of the Russian elite”. Indeed he does.
Aleksander Dugin, Russian ultra nationalist, speaking at Bolshevik National Party meeting, 1996. Note the BNP flag on the left hand side.American anti-semite and former leader of the Ku Klux Klan David Duke, left, with Russian ultra nationalist Aleksandr Dugin. Photo believed to be taken in 2004.Meeting of mutual interests: Nikos Kotzias (ex-communist and now Greek Foreign Minister) on the left, with Alexsandr Dugin, Russian ultra nationalist, centre. Unknown date, but believed to be post 2010.Greek Foreign Minister, Nikos Kotzias, 2015.
Russian TV online news story, 1 February, 2015:
“EU must stop ‘feverish’ anti-Russian steps, think long-term relations – Greek FM:The EU should consider long-term relations with Moscow, instead of making feverish anti-Russian moves, new Greek Foreign Minister Nikos Kotzias said, adding that his country does not want to give up its historic ties with Moscow…”
Besides social democrats, democratic socialists and green groups comprising the original elements in what became the “Coalition of the Radical Left” (SYRIZA), Greek Maoists, Trotskyists and Communists were also part of the original ‘radical’ mix.
1. The Oxford Bodleian Library is a ‘respectable’ library of rare manuscripts. Academic fidelity has gone out the window with their publication of German Invasion Plans for the British Isles 1940. No such title in the original German was produced in Berlin, nor were the original documents covered with the imprint of the National Socialist swastika. The Bodleian Libary’s editorial thinking is that swastika’s sell. And of course, they’re right. But that has nothing to do with academic fidelity to the original documents.
The Bodleian Library on the back cover of their publication claim the material they have translated is from “One of the only surviving copies found by Allied Forces…”. How many is One? Two? Three? Ten? Twenty? More? At the time of writing a seller on Abebooks is selling an original German edition of the Berlin documents from 1940, and 1941. “Two important items, 1, Militargeograhische angaben uber England prepared 15 August 1940, numerous photographs of the southcoast and coloured maps and profiles, designed to provide information for German forces invading Britain 446pp., coloured map, additional information at rear c.50pp., large folding map. Modest blemishes and chip to rear cover and modest stain to front else vgc. Also 2. Militargeographische angaben uber England. London 2 Auflage August 1941 Text und Bildheft 18pp., 51pp., Seperately in case 5 coloured folding maps, as called for, all vgc with interesting stamp to cover “First Canadian Army Documents 23 October 1944″ indicating when it was captured. In summary two seperate items, historically interesting and rare, German text. Bookseller Inventory # 18674”
Similar original documents are also available from David Archers Maps.
In the anonymous Editor’s Note to the Bodleian ‘fake’ he or she writes “The text for this edition has been abridged and some of the headings have been altered”. Abridged by how much is not discussed. No reasoning is given for the editorial guidelines in changing England to Britain, for instance. In a forward it is acknowledged (blink and you’ll miss it) that this fake is drawn from ‘Portfolio A” but doesn’t mention, to put it in a meaningful context, how many other Portfolios there were. The Bodleian Library has produced other small bite sized Second World War books in the same series, keenly priced and aimed at the impulse buyer. Just to add to the ‘period feel’ they have produced them in the stressed British Economy Standards wartime look. And that is a fake too, as the British Economy Standards didn’t come into force until later in the war, and weren’t, of course, on the original source material.
2. The complete Condition of the Working Class in England is online from various sources. Telling extracts from it, such as Engels’ view of the Irish, are available in English, with a link to the original German at jonjayray.tripod.com/engels.html
4. The authenticity of photographs can be questionable. When the advancing western Allied Forces in 1945 stumbled across the appalling scenes in slave work camps and concentration camps in Germany, photographers and cinematographers were advised to shoot establishing shots, besides close ups of corpses and dying inmates. The concern was that when seen by a viewing public some would not believe what they were seeing and would dismiss the photos and films as propaganda, unless there was a general establishing view first. The impact of the images reduced people to tears in cinemas, for instance, in Britain. Others, reasonably, covered their eyes, so horrific were the images. Others, who had believed that stories of Nazi atrocities were largely Allied propaganda, such as an active anarchist war-resister in wartime London, realised their mistake. (see You!, You! & You! Chapter 29 “Lets Face It – Who Cared About the Jews?”). Because the USSR was not over-run there is no irrefutable photographic evidence of the enormity and barbarity of the crimes committed by the Marxist-Leninist Bolsheviks. (The same reasons apply to what has happened in China, and is continuing to happen in North Korea). There are no photographs of cattle trucks loaded to bursting point with “kulaks” being sent to Siberian labour camps, for instance, with the dying strewn across the railway sidings. The very few photographs from the Ukraine, in the early 1920s and then the early 1930s, are sometimes difficult to authenticate.
Some of the photos from the Ukraine in the early 1930s cannot be refuted as they were taken by the Welsh journalist Gareth Jones. They usually show a dead malnourished clothed body, lying on the pavement, whilst pedestrians walk by. Photo evidence from the early 1920s is problematical, not only in the captions that over the years have been attached to them, but also in interpretation of what we are looking at. The photograph of naked corpses loaded on a cart, reproduced above, has appeared on the internet with either 1921 or 1922 or 1921-22. Photographs that document the Ukraine at this time were usually taken by Western Food Aid agencies. But what are we looking at? Those who have died from starvation? Why are they naked? Victor Kravchenko in his I Chose Freedom: The Personal and Political Life of A Soviet Official (1947) was enforcing policies against the Kulaks in the Ukraine in the early 1930s, and records how some peasants deliberately made themselves naked in their homes, in the mistaken belief that the NKVD would be too embarrassed by their nakedness to haul them out.
Another interpretation of the naked corspes is that they have been hung from gallows, on orders from Lenin. We just don’t know.
5. When the newly elected and first President of the new Russian Federation, Boris Yeltzin was elected in June 1991, he ordered in August that the files of the KGB be opened. It was from this time, for a while, that historians had relatively free access to study documents never seen before. Lenin’s ‘Hanging Order’ was one of those documents. There would have been many other damning documents from the pen of Lenin, but there had been several removals of politically sensitive documents over the years, usually following a power struggle within the Politburo. In other instances, some damning documents survived in the most strange of circumstances, such as the documentation discovered in a church in the Tambov area in 1982 detailing the orders of the suppression of the 1920 – 1921 organised peasant uprising a few hundred miles south east of Moscow in the Tambov area, where chemical warfare was used by the Marxist-Leninists. In 2004 the material was finally written up.