Report; Posted on: 2003-12-16 01:35:48
A White Briton here comments on contemporary Trotskyism in the UK, which is well-embedded in the institutional apparatus of the state. The university-educated writer comes from a working class background; many of his relatives have been active in the Communist Party in England and his brother is a Stalinist. Leon Trotsky (1879-1940) (pictured), real name Lev Davidovich Bronstein, a Bolshevik mass murderer of Whites, was a typical bloodthirsty totalitarian Jew. A messiah figure for Jews and many Whites, he inspired the worldwide Communist sect named in his honor. The British author’s comments were inspired by observations on contemporary Trotskyism made by independent Australian Internet writer Peter Myers in an e-mail to Jewish author Israel Shamir. For that reason, I supply a brief introduction to Myers, who enjoys a wide readership among White nationalists, and a condensed version of Myers’s letter to Shamir. Paul Westman
Trotskyism and Trots [British slang for “Trotskyites”] are immune from criticism and sanctions. Indeed, not only do they get free passes for Soviet mass murder but they also get advocacy time for their views from the mainstream media, something denied both to Nationalists and Stalinists. Indeed, the major theme they are allowed to play is that Stalin derailed the "true" path which Trots are now pursuing with a vengeance.
A feature of the Trots is that at every level of tenured academic, teaching and other educational posts, and in the civil service, Trots hold posts without let or hindrance by the authorities, who would and do at every conceivable opportunity harass, pursue and dismiss anyone from any nationalist viewpoint that they can possibly remove.
It is often Trots themselves who lead these witch hunts, and for advocates of supposed "world Revolution" for the "oppressed" they seem to have carte blanche on the way they operate: an extreme grouping who have no fear of sanctions being applied to them and they are given prestigious teaching positions which they use to promote their agenda.
They can openly be followers of a man who was in the forefront of responsibility for eliminating entire classes from Russian society and eradicating opposition to the Bolsheviks, whether it came from alienated ex-supporters, as in the Kronstadt revolt, or from those presumed or suspected of being in sympathy with, or who had held responsible positions in, Tsarist society.
Some years ago the blind then-Education Cabinet Minister David Blunkett [now Labour Home Secretary in the Blair cabinet –PW] was besieged at a National Union of Teachers conference and was physically attacked by Trot "teachers" and was forced to take shelter in a small room which had to withstand the assault of these characters.
Yet none of those identified were sacked and any "disciplinary" measures were ridiculously light or non-existent. It is telling that people for whom such behaviour would be deemed "normal" can occupy teaching posts. I seem to remember they had to apologise and with that the matter was laid to rest.
Can you imagine nationalists behaving in such a manner and getting what amounted to a free pass from the bureaucracy that employed them and a broadcasting service that didn't use the opportunity to foam at the mouth at such attacks on freedom? Leading members of a Civil Service union are known Trots.
A well-known Trot from my university walked straight into a job as a Youth Worker on the "qualified" rate of pay granted by the Local Authority bureaucrat who was designated a "reactionary" prior to his appointment by a Trot himself.
This "qualified" rate was only supposed to be paid to those who had "Youth And Community Work Certificate" or equivalent. Recognising a "Politics" degree as such was stretching the meaning of “equivalent” beyond any sense. Though known for what he was, his politics were no barrier to a career in a state bureaucracy, in fact, it seemed to me more of a push than a pass. So these advocates of "world revolution" receive free passes and expensive pushes which a neutral observer of a capitalistic society might have thought would have thrown up barriers to penetration by people who claim to want to overthrow the established order.
Just how do they get away with it and why?
Whilst nationalists are marginalised and excluded by and through the connivance of the authorities and can be harassed with impunity by their enemies, the "Trots" have well-paid, secure and prestigious positions within the various state bureaucracies, yet their supposed avowed aim is the "overthrow" of capitalist society and the man they claim as their guide and mentor is not only protected from criticism, but his historical enemies are relentlessly smeared and hated.
Trotsky can it seems be called a "prophet," yet he was a power-hungry autocratic mass-murderer without a shred of conscience, whose adherents can be appointed to prestigious positions and then abuse those positions with impunity.
There is something very odd going on here.
Peter Myers is an ex-Catholic Australian, based in Canberra and apparently at least part Irish, who maintains a large website at http://users.cyberone.com.au/myers/index.html . Because he is critical of Zionism, and even of Jews, many Whites have discovered his site, which he acknowledges is “controversial.” Myers writes about himself here http://users.cyberone.com.au/myers/about-author.html and here http://users.cyberone.com.au/myers/about-me.html . As can be seen from his comments on Trotskyism, which follow, he possesses intelligence, discernment, and an independent mind. Raised a strict and observant Catholic, he was swept along by Leftist fashions when the Generation of Idiots assumed sway in the 60s. That fact is well reflected in his writings.
While Myers has much to offer, his severe moral limitations must be kept clearly in mind. He makes it very clear that he rejects our people. He is an avowed universalist, an exponent of “intermarriage” and “racial mixing” (his terms). Because everything occurs within a context, and because Myers’s values have been formulated and applied to the present concrete situation in which our population is unquestionably threatened with genetic annihilation, he is a de facto advocate of White genocide. He refuses to take responsibility for doing what is right under the circumstances, and even throws his weight behind the cause of group destruction. There is nothing moral about that.
He writes, “Nazis are obsessed with race and genetics, and oppose interracial marriage. The most dangerous Nazis are the intellectual kind, admirers of Dr. William Pierce.” Further comments here: http://users.cyberone.com.au/myers/pierce.html .
Peter Myers to Israel Shamir
My target is not Trotsky the Man—I am not an assassin, and he can’t be killed twice, anyway—but Trotsky the Icon. He’s dangerous because this Icon is protected from deconstruction (demythologising). For some other people, but not for me, Hitler is similarly an Icon. Renouncing him is mandatory, and constantly demanded in the documentaries and everyday discourse, yet Trotsky’s image shines brightly within our universities, untouchable.
The man who wrote the book called The Defence of Terrorism [i.e., Trotsky] (also published as Dictatorship vs. Democracy), justifying the Red Terror (against the criticisms of another Jew, Karl Kautsky), is the hero of those who lead the demos world-wide. Here in Canberra, the Australian National University offers a course called Classical Marxism, taught by Rick Kuhn of the ISO. Could it be anything but pro-Trotsky? I would not mind, if I were hired to teach a counter-course (yes, I am that open-minded!). But there is no course on offer, presenting the sort of material I feature.
Look at the central role in New Left Review, of [Jew] Isaac Deutscher, Trotsky’s leading interpreter in the West. The Deutscher Prize “is one of most prestigious in the English-speaking world”; its winners “are announced in the London Review of Books”; and each year the recipient presents “the Deutscher Memorial Lecture at the London School of Economics”. Deutscher lectures “often are published in New Left Review”:
James Holstun, a professor in the Department of English, has won this year's Isaac and Tamara Deutscher Memorial Prize, one of the most prestigious of its kind in the English-speaking world, for his book, "Ehud's Dagger: Class Struggle in the English Revolution," published last year by Verso Books. . . .http://www.buffalo.edu/reporter/vol33/vol33n13/n5.html
Look at the extent to which Trotskyist movements shape our thinking. All the major universities seem to have strong branches of the ISO, the Democratic Socialists, Socialist Alliance or similar. These bodies protest the [Iraq] War, but make sure that the Israel lobby is not mentioned as a causative factor—merely ancillary, as Uncle Sam’s sheriff. They thus distort the debate.
On every campus, they keep people like me ostracised. They influence Green and other New Left lobbies. Communism has "fallen", yet it seems to reign in our universities, courts, and the UN. Open Borders, Gay Marriage, Political Correctness . . . these are the signs.
The secret: what has fallen is Stalinism; that's all.
In its place, the New Left largely dominates our culture. The New Left is the heir to Trotsky and the vehicle of the Cultural Revolution. They portray Trotsky as an idealist who was betrayed; Deutscher calls him a “prophet”.
It’s as if Trotsky won the Cold War.
The Frankfurt School (devoted to Marx and Freud; opposed to Stalin as much as Hitler) has had a great impact. It has led to Deconstruction and Postmodernism, which are attacking the transmission of our civilizational heritage.
Despite New Left intellectuals' thinking of themselves as oppositionist "outsiders", Deutscher's material was published by such establishment bodies as The Economist and the BBC.
Consider the book by Isaac Deutscher called The Great Purges, edited by Tamara Deutscher (Basil Blackwell, Oxford, 1984). On p. 7, Tamara says that Isaac Deutscher wrote the text for the BBC. It was broadcast twice by the BBC in 1965, and also in Germany, Sweden and the USA.
“The text was originally written for the Home Service of the BBC, at the initiative of the late Lawrence Gilliam, head of Features Department, and transmitted twice in the course of 1965. It was also transmitted in Germany, Sweden and the USA.”
For more see http://users.cyberone.com.au/myers/deutscher.html
Can you name one production by the BBC, or any other documentary on free-to-air TV, which presents Troysky’s sins, such as his justification of the Red Terror and his role in the Kronstadt Massacre? http://users.cyberone.com.au/myers/kronstadt.html
( http://www.nationalvanguard.org/story.php?id=1439 )
National Vanguard • Box 5145 • Charlottesville • VA 22905 • USA