I am in Tbilisi at the moment, where I spent this early morning drinking tea with some of the 2,000 strong Yazidi community. They see their religion as much more closely descended from Zoroastrianism than appears in most accounts I have read.
I very much enjoyed a visit to Tsinandali which was most useful for gaining a Russian perspective of the Great Game. I don’t have my books with me and am suffering a mental block as to whether it was Connoly, Abbott or Malcolm who visited Tsinandali. I had not realised that Griboyedov was married to a daughter of the house, Nina Chavchavadze. The murder of Griboyedov, Russian Ambassador in Tehran, by a mob rates little more than a footnote in British accounts of the Great Game, even though the British had bribed the religious authority to stir up the riots. What revisionist history there has been, has come from the Iranian side and falsely tried to obscure the fact that the refugees Griboyedov was sheltering were runaway slaves from harems.
This is a neglected recurring theme. When Shuja agreed the treaty already negotiated between Macnaghten and Ranjit Singh, the main stipulation he sought to add was that the British would return to him any runaway slave girls. The immediate motive for the ringleader of the attack on Alexander Burnes was that Burnes had refused to intervene to return a runaway slave girl who had sought the protection of another British officer. My fellow anti-imperialist historians have in general been guilty of emphasising rapaciousness by the British in these incidents and overlooking or excusing the slave status of the girls. Both aspects need to be faced squarely to write honestly the full facts of history. Tellingly, it is generally impossible to recover names of the girls involved.
Griboyedov deserves to be remembered for much more than his murder. An accomplished playwright and poet, he was a friend of Pushkin and had links to the dissident groups who attempted revolution in 1825. His murder left Nina a widow at either 17 or 19 by different accounts, and pregnant. She lost the child on hearing of her husband’s death, and never remarried. It is a tragic story which came alive to me in visiting the family home.
Griboyedov had fought Napoleon in the 1812 campaign, but had helped those Napoleonic adventurers Allard and Ventura evade a British blockade and go into service with Ranjit Singh. Griboyedov’s successor as Russian Ambassador to Tehran, Simonicz, had actually fought on the Napoleonic side against Russia, presumably in the Polish Legion. Nina’s sister was to marry a Murad nephew of Napoleon. The political elites of Europe melded quickly after the convulsion.
With which clumsy segue I shall note that the battle against the entrenched political elites of the UK appears to be going extremely well without me. I cannot express without a welling up of real emotion how happy I am that all I have been saying about the stultifying neo-liberal consensus and exclusion of dissent, and appalling burgeoning wealth gap between rich and poor, has found such massive traction between Jeremy Corbyn in England and the SNP in Scotland. I may have gone AWOL for a few days, but the cause of social justice appears in extremely safe hands.
@MJ
9 Aug, 2015 – 3:13 pm
And the public now pay out of their own pockets for devices which allow the state to spy on them 24/7.
Eric Blair would have passed out at the thought of it.
And Anon1 – I’m such a “loser”, but at least I can spell “phlegm” 🙂
Habbabkuk, do please reply to my point about political choice if you can. I would be interested in how the Right sees the problem of Left choice in a capitalist society.
N_, one other thought: some people who would oppose your platform are “aspirational working class”. We might call it false consciousness, but the positivity of DIY entrepreneurialism is appealing, and I think a Left platform needs to appeal to these people too. (When people like Liz Kendall talk about being comfortable about wealth creation, of course they mean it in the Peter Mandelson sense. I mean it in the sense that some wealth discrepancy is acceptable, and will never entirely be erased).
Anon1: no, I didn’t feel any anti-Jewish hatred from N_’s post, and I don’t think anyone here needs to be told how to think. However, you are welcome to your opinion. Your difficulty, now having marked out N_ as spiteful, is that your attack reads as rather spiteful too.
Thus, if you can mount an interesting challenge to what has actually been said – as I did – that would be much more productive. Can you “play the ball and not the man”?
Bevin
If Corbyn wants a mixed economy why does he want to revert back to Clause IV which contains no mention of the private sector unlike the current aims and values of the Labour Party which want to see a thriving private sector?
As for your selective misquotation of RH Tawney, who was clearly a supporter of the mixed economy, might I recommend that you read his works in full rather than using them to support your flimsy case. Mixed economies exist everywhere – with a whole variety of different mixes. Perhaps if you wish to engage in honest debate you might wish to spell out what role if any you see for the price mechanism and markets as a means of allocating resources?
I’m not sure Britain will be allowed to embark upon the very sensble policies N_ and others have outlined, unless of course the Western consensus is collapsing.
I think that’s what Corbyn’s nuLab critics mean when they say he’s unelectable.
They don’t mean that the mass of people wouldn’t vote for Corby as PM.
They just mean that currently powerful elite interests wouldn’t allow it.
But yeah. They sure are looking very wobbly, and becoming ever more and more ridiculous as each day passes.
Perhaps N_ could explain how he would get democratic consent for his programme – or perhaps whether he wouldn’t bother?
There are also a lot of terms in his programme where he doen’t actually spell out the nature of his measures e.g. control, crackdown, high rates, very top high rates, smash the shit, face control which all suggest an underlying violent tendency – does he really think he has any sort of mandate for such an approach? Perhaps he also might wish to reflect on the history of those he came to power using similar language?
Since not surprisingly Herbie supports N_’s platform he could also answer the same questions as I addressed to Herbie.
@Jon – The main ways that some working class people make more money than is usual for people from that background, and get hold of what that money can buy, are education and crime. Showing commercial acumen and running some reasonably harmless small business is a less common route.
I am in favour of encouraging education, including by getting rid of tuition fees and paying students non-means-tested large grants and also housing benefit so that they don’t have to get into debt and so that university education will be an attractive option, not just for what it can bring later but for itself.
There have been several US and British politicians who have praised the “entrepreneurialism” of criminal gang leaders and said if only they put their efforts into legal business they’d be great guys. I find such an attitude abhorrent because what criminal gang leaders do – what makes them criminal gang leaders – is oppress and rip off working class people using violence and terror. They are absolutely not Robin Hoods. The fact that they put some effort into it is neither here nor there. I would like to see stronger policies against this type of crime. What these polticians say inverts the truth. If these criminals weren’t oppressing them, it’s their victims who could put more effort into decent life-enriching activities.
I am not in favour of encouraging commercial acumen.
I’d support an effort by the public authorities in the other direction, encouraging people to decommercialise parts of their lives, e.g. by growing food on allotments (a good policy in that area alone could have a major beneficial effect on the general atmosphere in the country), and by building a culture of community mutual aid – including assistance for the elderly and disabled – that isn’t mediated by money.
Why is Res Diss wittering on about a mandate.
Perhaps Res Diss doesn’t understand the difference between being elected leader of a party in opposition and a program for govt.
Wouldn’t surprise me at all.
He doesn’t even seem to appreciate the difference between N_’s policies and Corby’s policies.
Anyway. Nice to see all these thieves getting a bit rattled. Anon1’s effort was quite a giveaway.
The times they are a changin…
Or not, as the case may be.
re 5.04
He doesn’t. It was spin from the journos in the Indie (and the Telegraph?), to make it look like Corbyn is an unreconstructed survival from ancient times. It was denied by Corbyn’s campaign at lunchtime.
One thing I like about Corbyn is that he is very responsive when attacked. Milband was no good at that – in my view it was why Labour lost. M. failed to react to the Tory ploy of the threat of Sturgeon marching on London hand in hand with Labour. Corbyn however always reacts, and has something up to the minute to say. That’s why I don’t believe Habbabkuk’s dinosaur remarks about unelectability. He should go and make them on the Guardian, where he’ll find plenty of right-wing friends.
@ResidentDissident
I guess if we talk about Clause 4 we have to go back to the 1910s. You are right that the only ownership that the clause talked about was common ownership. Nonetheless some have theorised a division between “social democracy” as in Germany and Russia and “labourism” as in Britain and Australia.
The German Social Democratic Party opposed the revolutionary movement in Germany that pitted itself against the ruling class in 1918-21 but even so its ideology was Bernstein’s one of the reformist or gradualist abolition of capitalism.
The British Labour Party and the Australian Labour Party (the latter forming a majority government in 1910) have never said they want to abolish capitalism (and therefore wage-labour), even gradually, even if Clause 4 might, interpreted on its own, give the contrary impression.
PS Does anyone know if the Co-operative Party types are supporting Corbyn and if so, how strongly?
Jon, good, balanced stuff as always though as always it never comes out on my side. N_ never fails to register a business tycoon’s Jewishness when he wishes to make a racially-based slur against Jews. His posts about Israel are full of filthy innuendo about Jews. I wasn’t referring to today’s series from him, though he can’t help shoehorning in a bit about Israel in most posts and appears to have been particularly active of late. A complete loser and arsehole who seeks to explain away his own failures in life by constant reference to the Jews. Anyone who uses the term “ZioNazis” as much as he does is a guaranteed anti-Semitic tosser.
“The British Labour Party and the Australian Labour Party (the latter forming a majority government in 1910) have never said they want to abolish capitalism (and therefore wage-labour), even gradually, even if Clause 4 might, interpreted on its own, give the contrary impression.”
So why does Corbett want to revert to it – nostalgia alone doesn’t seem to make a lot of sense.
Laguerre – he was quoted about it not being a priority when challenged – though I agree that he has been good at responding to attacks – just as was Mandelson with his rapid rebuttal unit.
Interesting essay (wrt Craig’s forthcoming book on Burnes). I’ve also just read Dalrymple’s ‘Return of a King’, which also concerns the ‘First Anglo-Afghan War’.
One thing which perplexed me was Dalrymple’s assertion that the sons of Shah Shuja died in poverty in Ludhiana. Yet I am aware that the entire family was rewarded by the British with lots of land around Lahore. They – the descendants – lived the lives of the idle rich, with their concubines and so on, or else were commissioners/majors/judges, etc. in the Raj, until the mid-C20th they continued to marry into the (rival, Barakzai) Afghan Royal family and kept their Afghan passports until the Partition/Independence of India/Pakistan in 1947.
After prolonged Dickensian court-battles, the last of the lands were only sold in the late 1970s. We even got a little money from that, enough for my father in Scotland to buy a Datsun. From the Durrani Empire to hot pants and Donna Summer. Not all empires end in Romantic desolation a la Ozymandias. Many simply ease into the democratic domesticity.
https://samaj.revues.org/3384
Why is Res Diss wittering on about a mandate.
Because unless N_ or Corbyn ( and I can appreciate the difference in their policies) have an idea about how to get their policies implemented then all they are engaging in is ideological wanking.
Herbie, I read Resident Dissident’s point about democratic consent as genuine – I appreciate there are interpersonal histories on this board I don’t know about, but it nevertheless deserves an answer. I think the Left is quite capable of supplying one. (I posited the same question some posts prior, at 4:27).
My solution is to adopt a gentler and more diplomatic version of N_’s program, and if the public votes for it, hold public hustings and debates around the country to try to move to a more radical view. As I said earlier, this needs to be done gently, and if the democratic agreement cannot be found, despite trying to persuade people – then it is either wrong or too early.
That’s not right. Yazidism is a 12th century Sufi sect which got out of hand, and finally left Islam around the 17th century. It is heavily dominated by the Islamic elements, and was even founded by a Syrian Arab, Shaykh ‘Adī ibn Musafir.
However, it’s now become very fashionable to become anti-Islamic among Kurds, who currently maintain that they were forced to convert to Islam (very far from the truth). It’s all part of the nationalist identity thing, and setting them off from Arabs.
That’s why you get the mythic Zoroastrian bit. I am sure there are some Zoroastrian elements somewhere, though I don’t remember peacocks in Zoroastrianism.
“The leading candidate to lead Scottish Labour Kezia Dugdale, has joined in with the Blairite rubbishing of Corbyn. Never heard of the other chap.”
__________________________
Craig before Ken Macintosh became a MSP he worked for the BBC, in the news department.
He was a aide to Labour FM Jack McConnell.
The wannabe branch manager of London Labour in Scotland towed the party line when he said, Scotland shouldn’t get anymore powers, because Scotland is a reactionary country.
MacIntosh and Dugdale, will make the Labour branch office in Scotland about as appealing as a fart in a full elevator.
“Herbie, I read Resident Dissident’s point about democratic consent as genuine”
Really.
I’d have thought it fairly obvious that you put your program to the electorate and they either vote for it or for something else.
When has this been in question, in terms of Corbyn’s candidacy for Labour leader?
Why raise something like that, at this time.
I mean it’s not as if we’re currently living in an economic and political climate that the peeps have knowingly voted in favour of, is it.
You’d have thought that democratic deficit of much more pressing urgency.
But no. Res Diss raises the non-issue.
RD 5.58
That’s not right. The actual interview has not been published. Only a quote out of context, where obviously the expression “Clause IV” was introduced by the journo (but not mentioned), and JC gave a slightly awkward response where he widened the issue to state control of some functions, like the railways. And the journo jumped on the response and span it. The Corbyn campaign statement today was a clarification, not a retractation, because there was nothing to retract. But there was effectively a big climb-down by the Guardian, who’d copied the Indie word-for-word.
“I spent this early morning drinking tea with some of the 2,000 strong Yazidi community. They see their religion as much more closely descended from Zoroastrianism than appears in most accounts I have read.”
__________________________
I found some aspects of Zoroastrianism quite appealing, like the belt that they wrap around their waists three times, the significance of which is, think good thoughts, say good things and do good deeds.
Their god Ahura Mazada, even has a car company named in his or her, honour.
Anon1, thanks. My point was not that N_ cannot be motivated by racism, just that I did not detect it. I think he or she sees Israeli’s occupation and ongoing flouting of international law, and is correctly angry at the death and destruction. I think all people are, really, unless they have a specific ideological reason to deny Israel ever does anything bad (I’m thinking of the hard American Right here).
My point was that if you regard him or her as “a complete loser and arsehole” then they’ll see you in much the same terms, and neither of you have learned anything, nor had an honest go at persuading someone towards a more productive position. Indeed, if you believe N_ has such objectionable views, and that they are harmful, that is all the more reason you need to stop insulting each other and start talking.
I do agree that the view of ‘Jewish influence’ always being malign can open one up to charges of discrimination. People on the Left do need to be as anti-racist as they can, especially since Israel frequently misuses the existence of anti-Jewish sentiment to paint itself as a perpetual victim. The paradox is that whilst a good deal of anti-Semitism has historical roots that are hundreds of years old, some of it is caused by Israel’s recent behaviour and the lack of effective international sanction against it.
“There seems to be collective amnesia over just how bad British Rail was.”
It’s bizarre that a company deprived of any investment and subject to twice yearly management restructuring, a company where budget surpluses run by ‘profitable’ departments were forced to be returned to the treasury instead of being re-invested in those departments, where the core part of the infrastructure, the rolling stock hadn’t been refreshed for 30 years were sometimes seen as poorly performing.
That changed upon nationalisation when fares went up, services were cut, punctuality fell and cancellations rose. This is all recorded in the OPRAF numbers who had been collecting data for four years prior to privatisation in order to be establish such parameters.
Since then fares rose more, money was invested in rolling stock, the people who could run maintenance ‘retired’ and the shambles of east coast failure and kings cross closures came to pass. Nowadays you can hardly catch a train from north to south or vice versa on a bank holiday weekend. Train drivers salaries soared as the privatised companies first cut costs sacking drivers and then realised that cancelled trains were bad publicity so chasing the few drivers left.
The rails to the south west are a disgrace for an industrialised nation and the commuter trans to the south of london are appalling.
“There seems to be collective amnesia over just how bad British Rail was.”
People don’t forget. Dig up the OPRAF reports and shadow reports pre-1997 and see how service levels compared versus the subsidies invested pre and post nationalisation.
From their iconography Zoroastrians revered the bull, I seem to recall. But the peacock is an important symbol in all the cultures with a strong Zoroastrian heritage, including Uzbek.
Interesting, Suhail. The Brits kept a diverse pensioner population at Ludiana. If I were to criticise William, it would be that the power of his (brilliant) writing is sometimes assisted by not allowing inconvenient fact to disturb the narrative flow.
This is a old article 2013, but it does seem to prove that nationalised railways can work.
The nationalised railway company operating the East Coast main line handed £208.7 million back to taxpayers last year, fuelling fresh criticism over Government plans to reprivatise the London to Scotland route.
Directly Operated Railways took over the East Coast line four years ago, when National Express controversially handed it back to the Government. Its turnover for the year to April rose 4.2% to £693.8 million, as ticket sales, catering and parking fees ticked up, generating that £208.7 million profit.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/nationalised-east-coast-rail-line-returns-209m-to-taxpayers-8866157.html
Yes, Chris.
The transition from post-war consensus to Washington consensus was never about making services better.
It was about gorging upon the fatted calf.
And, we all live with the dire consequences of that today.
Laguerre
” That’s why I don’t believe Habbabkuk’s dinosaur remarks about unelectability.”
__________________________
Well, I don’t see why my remarks should have been seen as “dinosaur”.
I merely predicted that a Labour Party which espoused Mr Corbyn’s declared policies would have no chance of being elected.
Now, I have no way of proving that this side of a Corbyn-led Labour Party contestting the next election.
However, I do believe I have precedent on my side. The last time a Labour Party came out with a leader and manifesto even remotely close to what commenters like N_ and consorts are proposing was in 1983 under Michael Foot. Despite the apparent unpopularity of Mrs Thatcher’s 1979-1983 govt, the Conservatives wiped the floor with Labour.
“This is a old article 2013, but it does seem to prove that nationalised railways can work.”
So can nationalised west coast ferries.
“But the peacock is an important symbol in all the cultures with a strong Zoroastrian”
___________________
You mention the Peacock Craig and I’m reminded that it featured in Greek mythology as well, when Zeus had the hundred eyed Argus killed by Hermes to prevent his wife Hera spying on his infidelities.
Hera took the eyes of Argus and set them on the tail of the Peacock, as a sign of affection to her loyal servant.