Government of the People, by the People, for the People.

This is a definition of ‘democracy’, but what is ‘democracy’? What, indeed, is meant by ‘government of the people, by the people, for the people’?

Perhaps the most apt description would be what Lenin and the Bolsheviks handed to the people with their motto ‘all power to the soviets!’ In principle, this was the most democratic government of all time. Marxist-Leninist theory handed power over directly to the toiling masses, to the ordinary people.

This explains why there was felt to be no need for opposition parties in the Soviet Union and the People’s Democracies of Central and Eastern Europe. Some of these countries just had one political party – the Communist Party or whatever the national Marxist-Leninist party was called in that country. Others like the GDR (East Germany) and the CSSR (Czechoslovakia) had a coalition government of many parties, led by the Marxist-Leninist party.

How it was supposed to work, according to Marxist-Leninist theory, was for the people to govern themselves directly thru these political parties and other organizations, such as the trade unions, the young people’s organizations, women’s organizations, etc.. The ordinary people were expected to join these political parties and organizations, and get thoroughly involved in the day-to-day running of society. Inside these organizations, under the principle of democratic centralism, they would discuss policies, make decisions, nominate representatives to local and national government, and then present these to the electorate as a whole who would simply endorse (or reject) the democratic choice of the people’s democratic organizations. There was felt to be no need for rival candidates, since these had been eliminated in the nomination round inside the political organizations, of which all people were expected to be active members.

The whole of the people, or at least the working-class and its allies which form the broad majority, would therefore be democratically governing themselves. This was also known as the democratic Dictatorship of the Proletariat. Only the former ruling-class, the dispossessed and ousted aristocracy and capitalists, would be excluded from this people’s democracy. But even they would be re-educated, and eventually assimilated into the classless, Stateless, self-governing society of Communism proper, in which everybody would participate – ‘from each according to their ability, to each according to their needs’.

It was to prepare people for the absolute democracy of Communism that it was felt unnecessary to have opposition parties. One party was really all that was needed, indeed it was necessary to have one political party at the helm, the people’s party, where the masses would collectively take decisions and govern themselves. The only way to build this utopian, classless, self-governing democracy of Communism was by uniting the people first under the leadership of the Marxist-Leninist party, and getting the broad masses actively involved in people’s democracy.

Of course we now know this didn’t work, and for the same reason the similar aspirations of Syndicalist Anarchists won’t ever work. The majority of people are not interested in politics and never will be. They DON’T want to get actively involved in endless meetings, in membership of political organizations, and certainly not in the responsibilities of directly taking decisions and governing themselves.

So the people who joined these organizations tended to be dedicated Communists, but also, unfortunately, the former capitalist class and other careerists and opportunists who saw that the only way to further their careers and regain control of the economy and society was to join and become actively involved in the Marxist-Leninist party, paying lipservice to Socialism and the ideal utopian society of Communism. So this is exactly what happened – dedicated Communists were soon out-numbered in the Party and other political organizations by these careerists and opportunists, with no loyalty to Socialist/Communist principles at all.

In no time at all, the democratic Dictatorship of the Proletariat became the very opposite – the undemocratic Dictatorship of the new ruling class OVER the proletariat and the broad masses of the people.

Aiding in this process were the unfortunate events which immediately followed the Great October Socialist Revolution of 1917. First the intervention of the White Armies and Western powers to try to crush the fledgling Soviet state, then the attempted assassination and later early death of Lenin and his succession by the paranoid egomaniac Stalin. In his famous ‘Last Testament’ Lenin warned the Party about the dangers of electing ‘Comrade Stalin’ as General Secretary, saying he had a tendency to be autocratic and too much power placed in his hands would be dangerous. This warning was ignored, and Stalin took over the reigns on Lenin’s death and remained in power for almost 30 years. And absolute power, such as he had, tends to corrupt absolutely.

But even before the death of Lenin, the Revolution was starting to stray from its original principles. Elected officials and representatives were starting to award themselves higher salaries and special privileges in return for taking on these responsibilities, and some of the original supporters of the Revolution staged a revolt, known as the Kronstadt uprising or rebellion. The demands of these sailors and others were not unreasonable, and would indeed have put the Revolution back on course. They included the demand for other leftwing political parties, free multi-candidate elections, and an end to the dominance of the Bolshevik Party, and also the right of artisans and others to continue their craft provided they worked themselves and did not sit back and exploit wage labor to do it for them.

Lenin, and Trotsky who led the Red Army, put down this rebellion, suspecting a plot by the White Armies and Western powers to reverse the Revolution and reinstate the old Tsarist or a new capitalist regime. The civil war following the Revolution made them suspicious.

In the dark years of his ‘cult of the personality’, after the split with Trotsky, Stalin became suspicious and paranoid about what he saw as Trotskyite plots to undermine and destabilize the Soviet state. Trotskyite propaganda about the need for permanent revolution and workers’ control not only threatened the status quo and the privileges acquired by the new ruling clique of Communist Party members, but Stalin no doubt suspected the Trotskyites were being used by anti-Communist factions and the Western powers to overthrow the Soviet government and establish a capitalist system to replace the former Tsarist autocracy. In view of what happened after the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, Stalin was probably right in this suspicion. The vast mass of the people were simply not mature or politically aware enough to take on the huge responsibilities needed to govern the Soviet Socialist state thru the process of permanent revolution, and it would have no doubt led to a reactionary counter-revolution. So Stalin took more and more power into his personal hands, and became the Father (or Dictator) of the Soviet Peoples, trusting nobody but himself.

This is the danger of all one-party states or societies where there is no credible opposition. Absolute power not only corrupts absolutely, but tends to lead to delusions of ‘we know what’s best’ from people at the top, suppression of all opposition and factions even inside the Party, and eventually to the autocratic dictatorship of one person.

Old comrades will immediately recognize the Party jargon used in this article, and that I am an old Party member. We did indeed believe we knew what was best, having studied Marx and dialalectical and historical materialism, and we actually described ourselves, i.e. the Marxist-Leninist Party, as ‘the vanguard of the proletariat’. We believed we had the historical right to rule on behalf of the working-class as we represented the most politically aware and mature sections of that class. This was why in countries like the GDR all other political parties had to accept the leadership of the Marxist-Leninist Party, which was the SED (Socialist Unity Party) in the GDR, and why in the Soviet Union the CPSU (Communist Party of the Soviet Union) had sole right to rule. We Communists, the vanguard of the working-class, would lead and as the masses became more politically mature, they would gradually join us and people’s democracy would grow and flourish.

What we failed to see was that this Dictatorship of the (vanguard of the) Proletariat also provided a very convenient route for the former ruling class and would-be capitalists to gain power for themselves. All they have to do is pay lip-service to the Great Leader, join the Party and faithfully toe the current Party line. They then will get all the privileges of power, including the higher salaries and perks which come with it. These usurpers were most certainly not ‘vanguards of the proletariat’ but rather the vanguard of the corrupt, selfish and even criminal elements of society, the would-be capitalists, seizing control of the Party and other organs of State power to distort Socialism and cream off the best of its products for themselves. They not only did this, but by appointing themselves to managerial positions they caused the huge State industries and services to be inefficient. So long as they provided basic needs for the masses, and luxuries for the new ruling class of bureaucrats and Party officials supplied through special shops, then it didn’t matter how inefficient they were. There was no profit motive to spur them on, and also little or no workers’ democracy.

The sole exception was Tito’s Yugoslavia, which DID achieve a remarkably successful system of competing publicly owned companies and worker/consumer cooperatives operating in a Socialist Market economy under workers’ control. But the one party state in Yugoslavia meant there too the Communist Party was infiltrated by careerists, opportunists and criminal elements who soon promoted themselves to positions of power, as can be seen by the rapid breakdown of the federation into warring nationalist camps led by genocidal monsters who can never have had any loyalty to Socialism.

So Tito achieved something akin to true Socialism in the economic sphere, but alas not in the political sphere. In the economy there was democratic control by the workers and also fierce competition which was a spur to efficiency, but there was no such competition or democratic control in the political arena. Here criminal elements were able to rule unopposed once they had control of the Party, and by appealing to the baser instincts of petty bourgeois nationalism were able to cling on to this power when the Soviet Union and Socialist countries of Central and Eastern Europe started to collapse. Sensing Socialism would now be unpopular even in Yugoslavia where it had been successful, they became nationalists overnight with disastrous results: the terrible wars and ethnic conflicts which tore Yugoslavia apart, and saw the worst genocide since the Second World War. 

So much for Soviet or people’s democracy. It has been tried and doesn’t work. So what are the other forms of democracy; of government of the people, by the people, for the people?

There are the various forms of democracy we know today, but some of these are more democratic than others. Basically, all of them involve, rather than the people governing themselves directly, admitting that they are not mature or politically aware enough to do this, and are not willing to do so. They are therefore invited to elect representatives to do this for them, at local and national level, or indeed at international level in bodies like the European Parliament.

This system has the great advantage of free elections with opposition candidates and opposition parties, but the details vary from country to country. In places like the USA and UK, for instance, we have the strong governments produced by the ‘first-past-the-post’ electoral system. But a close examination of this system reveals that it is far from democratic. It often leads, in fact, to a government elected by a minority of the people voting;  to a government which most people have voted against.

It also means most of the people in the country don’t have a vote that carries any weight. They are, effectively, disenfranchized. In fact only a tiny handful of the electorate have any say in which government or President is elected – those who just happen to live in marginal seats or states. The rest of us have no real say at all, no matter how we vote it won’t make the slightest difference.

This is because, although all votes are counted, in first-past-the-post you only need a majority of 1 over your nearest rival candidate to win the election. All other votes for the winning candidate are therefore wasted, as are all votes for the rival losing candidates. If the area where you live is not a marginal seat, then you have very little chance of ejecting the majority party or candidate. Even in marginal seats, once the majority of 1 vote has been achieved over the nearest rival, all votes for the winning candidate are wasted ones, as are all votes for the losing candidates. None of these votes are counted up and used to elect other candidates.

Other systems of democracy exist and are widely used in Continental Europe, such as some form of proportional representation, in which all votes are counted and topped up nationally. In this system the losing parties in each seat have their votes counted, and if they achieve a certain percentage of the total vote, then national representatives of that party are elected.

Another system is the alternative/transferrable vote or elimination rounds. In these systems voters either indicate their second and perhaps third choice on their ballot papers, or else there is a second and possibly third round of elections. In both these systems the candidates with the lowest votes are eliminated, and the electors are then able to vote for their second or third choice. So, as with proportional representation, all the electorate has an opportunity to fully express their choice of candidate if their first choice is eliminated.

The only possible drawback with these more democratic electoral systems is that they usually produce hung or coalition governments rather than ones with a strong majority of one party over all the others. But this in itself is more democratic, in that coalition governments, i.e. parties working together and coming to compromises, are what most of the electorate probably want. At least most people get part of what they voted for, though perhaps not everything. It also gives minority parties and their supporters some say in the policies finally decided on, and increased opportunity for these ideas to gain popularity. Since every vote counts, even a vote for a minority party will not feel to be a wasted one.

So government of the people, by the people, for the people is best implemented thru some form of proportional representation, alternative/transferrable vote, or several rounds of elimination elections. This is the best way that representative government can reflect the wishes of most of the electorate.

Ultimately, as the electorate and people generally become more politically aware and mature, then it may be possible to move to a more direct form of democracy, along the lines envisaged by Marxist-Leninists and Syndico-Anarchists. But this, if ever achievable, would be a very long time coming, probably hundreds of years away. Meanwhile it can perhaps be seen in practice in small communes, such as the original Israeli kibbutzum. On a nationwide or worldwide scale, however, I have doubts it will ever be achievable. Football and other past-times, and the desire to make easy money, may always preoccupy the majority of people rather than shouldering the day-to-day responsibilities of attending endless political meetings and governing themselves.

Lady Lobelia Lives!


Lady Snobbo at a party (click picture to enlarge it)

All my life, since a kid, I have been either mimicking real characters, or inventing ones. A real character I mimicked was a Polish woman who lived next door and was studying to be a doctor. My brother and I called her ‘Mrs Do-not-shout’ because when we were playing (and screaming as kids do) in our garden, she’d inevitably open her upstairs window, poke her head out and say in a sing-song voice with a thick Polish accent: ‘You-oo muh nor shou-owt!’  (‘You must not shout!’) Of course this just incited us to scream even louder, so we could watch the whole hilarious cabaret again. In the end the poor woman was forced to seek refuge at the end of her garden by the wall behind our chicken shed, where my grandfather thought she was saying her prayers. In fact she was reciting out loud her medical books, trying to learn both English and ‘How to be Doktor’ at the same time. Yes, that was another little thing I invented – foreigners studying books with titles like that and using the trial and error method of practising medicine, reading the book in broken English paragraph by paragraph and then practising on some hapless patient. No doubt this was all xenophobic, but we thought it was hilarious. And after all we mixed with foreigners all the time, since my dad and all relations on his side of the family were foreigners – Greek-Cypriots.

I took the piss out of them mercilessly, my favorite half-made-up characters being Granny Nina and Granny Athena, women dressed from head to toe in black who sold anything they could get their hands on including their grand-daughters, and who invited outraged upper-class English women to ‘come to Kypros and sleep with Kostas, he no mind – give you good time!’ Kostas being a gigolo of course, who slept with women for money. All this was invented by me as an adult, and shared with my life-partner, George, when I put on a funny voice, which I thought sounded like some of my Greek-Cypriot relations, the old women (any female over 40 according to my dad) who dressed in black for the rest of their lives.

But it was not just foreigners who came in for lampooning, my favorite character of all was Lady Lobelia Snobbo, an upper class English member of the aristocracy. I’d put on this posh woman’s voice, dress in drag and entertain guests at our parties. George would also be in drag, but playing a prostitute. The hapless Lady Snobbo would be standing outside Covent Garden Opera House or somewhere like that waiting for her husband Lord Snobbo, and this hooker would come up and tell her:

‘Piss off out of it you f**king old cow, this is my patch. Stop trying to pinch my punters!’

Suitable upper-class outrage from Lady Lobelia would follow along the lines:

‘How dare you! I am Lady Lobelia Snobbo, and I am waiting for my husband to join me at the opera.’

A long banter would follow between the two, with insults flying both ways, the hooker telling the aristocrat that her make-up consisted of Pollyfilla, Vidal Sassoon must have been ‘f**king pissed’ when he styled her hair, and that her gown, far from being an exclusive Christian Dior creation, came out of an Oxfam shop. Lady Snobbo would retort that in India the memsahibs didn’t mix with riff-raff like her, and the poor people there would go and find a sewer pipe to live in, adding: ‘that’s where you belong, with the sewage!’

I have this, and some other sketches, on DVD. Filmed with an old black-and-white video camera we once owned, which was attached with a lead to the VCR and couldn’t film anything more than a few feet away from the machine.

Lady Lobelia Snobbo was a favorite of my life-partner George and guests at our New Year and other parties, where she always appeared in cabarets performed by myself and George. But her origins can be traced way back to my childhood, when my mother would describe any woman with a refined voice as a ‘posh old bean’. I picked up on this phrase, and in my attempt to draw cartoons, or mimic a woman’s posh voice, would call this refined character Mrs Posh-o-Bean, though I suppose the Irish-looking surname of Mrs Posh O’Bean would have looked more credible.

So Lady Lobelia Snobbo developed from Mrs Posh O’Bean, and has had many guises since. It was her, indeed, who rang St James’s Palace when Sarah Ferguson married Andrew and was given the title the Duchess of York. My partner and I had heard that she once slummed it near us in Clapham Junction, so with my partner stifling sniggers beside me, I picked up the phone, put on Lady Snobbo’s voice and spoke to someone at St James’s Palace (can’t remember where I found the phone number) and told them it was an absolute disgrace to call this woman the Duchess of York. ‘The Duchess of Clapham Junction, that’s what she should be called!’ I informed the person the other end before slamming down the phone. In those days it was harder to trace phone calls, and so another time, at the encouragement of George, I rang his boss putting on my posh Lady Snobbo voice with some complaint, and she was saying to me: ‘I’m so sorry madam’, not realizing she was speaking to a man.

Another time I rang my own work, and left a message on the answering machine in this posh woman’s voice, complaining about some maid they had supposedly sent me. When I got into work my colleague, an old man, said he’d had some mad duchess on the answering machine, who’d obviously got the wrong number. Putting on my Greek-Cypriot granny voice, I rang another workplace of mine at night and left a message on their answering service saying if they paid for a trip to Cyprus and back, I’d do some research for them. My work colleague thought it sounded very strange, and her boss told her it must be someone playing a joke!

These phone calls remind me of the tricks Joe Orton and his life-partner Kenneth Halliwell got up to in Islington, though we never went so far as defacing public library books with obscene graffitti like they did.

A later incarnation of Lady Snobbo was a character in a Christmas pantomime I was in at work. The very latest appeared as Charmaine in a sketch written by myself called ‘Tea For Two’ and performed twice for senior citizens’ clubs.

In this sketch the Charmaine character and the Duchess of Clapham (which sounds a bit more refined than the Duchess of Clapham Junction) are ordering Earl Grey and cucumber sandwiches in an old English tea room, and bemoaning how the country started going downhill when the Queen was forced to open Buckingham Palace to the ‘wretched tourists’.

The Duchess was played by my mother, now 94 but still game for a laugh, and the top half of me at least was in drag complete with a woman’s hat, a mauve or purple wig, woman’s spectacles, and a gold and black shawl worn under a fake fur coat. Edna Everage would have been proud of me, though Charmaine spoke of course with Lady Snobbo’s upper-crust English cut-glass accent, not the Antipodean one of Edna.

So from Mrs Posh O’Bean, thru Lady Lobelia Snobbo, to Charmaine, the character lives on. She has appeared in badly drawn cartoons I’ve drawn, in black-and-white sketches on videotape and now on DVD filmed with our old video camera, in countless party sketches, in Christmas pantomimes and now in two performances for senior citizens.

My partner so loved Lady Snobbo, and another character who was based on a neighbor of my grandmother’s. This character was a black woman from Barbados we named Noreen. Although Noreen hasn’t been seen for years, George would be pleased to know Lady Lobelia Snobbo is still very much alive and kicking, still deploring the decline in upper-class values and in English society in general as the ‘prols’ and ‘wretched tourists’ march into the stately homes of England, even having the audacity to hold a ‘dreadful pop concert’ in the gardens of Buckingham Palace. Charmaine’s comment being that the Queen ‘won’t allow THAT again!’

Dear old Lady Lobelia. Under whatever name you go, we love you and your antiquated but hilarious outraged English snobbery. Hyacinth Bucket (pronounced Bouquet) would admire you and be very proud to invite you to one of her candlelight suppers!

Another phone call from Diana!

Yes, I have received another phone call from Diana, former Princess of Wales. Today’s was shorter, and she rang me principally so I could hear her higher pitched voice as channeled through Andrew Russell-Davis, her voice channel. The change happened today, when he was inspired to pick up The Bible. This is Spirit working to convince the skeptical that this is indeed the real Diana speaking through Andrew, and her mission now is to contact those who knew her in life. Many of these already know it is really Diana speaking, but have up to now preferred to keep it to themselves.

Also there is another Podcast, possibly first of a new series, which can be listened to on Diana’s new site on this page, under Channeled Messages:

This Podcast interview with Rose Campbell and Diana (speaking through Andrew) was of course recorded before the change of pitch in her voice which happened today. Future Podcasts will no doubt become available later featuring the new voice, and certainly people who knew Diana in life will get to hear and recognize her voice now even if they had doubts before. They should contact Diana through Andrew if they wish to hear this new evidence, and talk with Diana. I have to say, whatever the pitch of the voice, it is undoubtedly Diana talking through Andrew, but some people pick on the slightest straw to cling on to their disbelief.

Exciting things are happening in the form of radio and TV interviews, a film, etc. all featuring Diana speaking through Andrew Russell-Davis. And all this is to prove there there is life-after-death, and that humankind needs to change its ways and realize there is more to life than making money, that we must learn to live in peace and harmony together with each other and with Nature, without destroying our planet with wars and environmental damage.

Karmic Law rules!

Do you shed a tear, or have sympathy, for those guys, and possibly gals, making Al Quaida’s bombs to blow up innocent civilians? Do you worry about them breathing in those dangerous fumes, handling those dangerous chemicals, getting their hands stained with explosives and always risking a premature detonation? No?

Then why are we expected to feel sympathy for all those women working in bomb-making and munitions factories in World War II, as depicted in a recent TV documentary which I caught the end of? These women were making bombs to drop on innocent little babies and children in Germany and occupied Europe, on men and women like themselves. Or else they were making munitions to tear young men apart on the battlefields, no doubt singing happily away as they daily made their instruments of death to create more misery, more widows, more mothers without children, children without mothers and fathers, and so little kids could burn alive or suffocate to death in the firestorms and blasts caused by the illegal and horrific RAF bombing which engulfed cities like Hamburg and which destroyed Berlin and Dresden.

I couldn’t help let out a comment which visibly shocked my mother, who lived thru the Second World War and accepted these things as normal, when watching these women in the munitions factories on that TV clip. I said: ‘Well if they were making bombs, they deserve everything they got!’. Same applies to those RAF pilots flying bombing missions over Germany and occupied Europe, which my aunt, then in the WRAF, cried for when they never came back. Pacifist as I am, the lesser of two evils is obviously to shoot down bombers preparing to blow up or burn to death innocent civilians. And the pilots at least had a chance to bail out and land safely by parachute. The Luftwaffe of course were just as bad, and also deserve what they got if they were shot down.

I know it was war, but war is no excuse. War is the breakdown of civilization, and solves nothing. It just creates more misery, more evil, and turns all participants into evil, inhumane savages.

When we die, we have to re-live everything we did in an instant life review or flashback, and feel the consequences of our actions on others. Think about that for a moment – those women singing happily in the bomb factories, the Al Quaida and IRA bomb-makers, the RAF, Luftwaffe, American and other pilots who dropped bombs, including A-bombs, on innocent civilians – they will have to feel the effects of their actions, as will torturers, murderers and everyone else. The good effects, and the bad effects, and they will then have to make reparations or reap their rewards thru the law of karma.

If this doesn’t make us stop and think about how our actions are affecting others, then it should do. It’s no excuse to say ‘they started it’ or ‘they were doing the same to us’. It takes at least two to make war, and it’s not as if it solves anything. Think about that for a moment – this great so-called ‘success’ of the Second World War. Hitler survived to the very end, and died by his own hand. Many Nazis were then recruited by the Soviet Union and USA to work for their governments, such as Dr Wernher Von Braun who contributed so much to the NASA mission to land a man on the Moon, having created V2 rockets to bomb London and other cities.

Britain went to war with Germany when Poland was invaded. The Sudetenland in Czechoslovakia had already been annexed the previous year, and Hitler appeased by Chamberlain in Munich. So now Chamberlain decided, reluctantly, that war was the only option. At the end of this war was Poland or Czechoslovakia free and independent? Was even Austria, first to be incorporated in the Third Reich, free and independent? No! The whole of Poland and Czechoslovakia, and much of Eastern and Central Europe, including Eastern Austria, was handed over by the victorious allies to another dictator, Stalin, leader of the Soviet Union. Then Churchill had the audacity to make his ‘Iron Curtain’ speech, as if this all came as a big surprise, when he had been at the conferences at which the post-war division of Europe was agreed between the ‘victors’ of World War II. In actual fact there are no ‘victors’ in war, ultimately only losers.

Of course it was inevitable Eastern and Central Europe should come under Soviet dominance; the USSR had suffered some 17 million dead in the War and was determined to have friendly Socialist buffer states to prevent such a thing happening again. It all goes to prove that war solves nothing.

What about the Nazi extermination camps – yes, what about them? Did the war save 6 million Jews, Communists, Gipsies, homosexuals, cripples and others who perished in these camps? Or did it in fact seal their fate? There were no extermination camps in the Third Reich in the 6 years Hitler and the Nazis were in power between 1933 and the outbreak of war in September 1939. All these horrors took place in the 6 years following this, when Germans and others in occupied Europe were more concerned with being bombed daily by RAF and other Allied planes, and about their men fighting and dying on the front lines. It just goes to show how civilization breaks down during wartime, and horrors such as the Nazi exermination camps become possible. The German people and those of occupied Europe had the survival of themselves and their loved ones to think of, rather than what was happening to unrelated people who disappeared. How were they to know the full horror of the Nazi extermination camps, when even we didn’t know till after the war?

Take a more recent example, the cowardly NATO bombing of Serbia during the Balkan wars, supposedly to defend ethnic Albanians in Kosovo province. In actual fact this bombing from high altitude not only probably killed many ethnic Albanians directly, but it enraged the Serbs who, unable to reach the bomber pilots high above the clouds, took revenge on the Albanians who they saw as responsible for bringing this rain of death from the skies. So the bombing of Serbia actually made the persecution, ethnic cleansing, torture and genocide of ethnic Albanians in Kosovo much worse, just as the Second World War sealed the fate of Jews and other minorities in the Third Reich.

The UN defenders on the ground in Kosovo shamefully neglected their duties, and let the ethnic cleansing and genocide carry on under their noses, or else they ran away to save their own skins. This tame UN response on the ground has also happened in many other wars and ethnic conflicts. It has to stop! When I describe myself as a pacifist, I mean I’m against all war and would never fight in one. But I reluctantly support armed policing-type actions in extreme situations to prevent torture, genocide or murder of innocent people, provided the minimum violence necessary is used and that it is targeted at the perpertrators, and is not just indiscriminate. Non-lethal as well as lethal weapons can be developed and used for this purpose.

War solves nothing, and the bombing and killing of innocent civilians is never justified. Tough police-type actions to defend innocent civilians, prevent genocide and to arrest or eliminate war criminals and dictators can be carried out without resorting to barbaric full-scale war on whole countries and their civilian populations. Without setting armies of conscripted young men against each other, and teaching them to kill each other.

If the generals and politicians really want such a blood-letting contest, if they find it exciting, then let them and any who wish to join them feel free to go to some desert or uninhabited island and fight it out among themselves. Same goes for gangs who want to fight on our streets. They can all kill each other for all I care, the gangs, the generals and the bloody politicians who start these wars! Oh and let the arms manufacturers join in too, they should after all test that their products work, and what better way than test them on themselves?!!

The United Nations should have a permanent armed security force in place around the world under the control of a free vote in the General Assembly. The Security Council, which hampers the UN by giving a permanent veto to five of the world’s nuclear terrorist powers, should be abolished. All weapons of mass destruction, from hand grenades, landmines, machine guns, regular bombs right thru to nuclear weapons, should be abolished worldwide.

Ultimately, the only solution to war and in defense of freedom is the emergence of super-states like the USA, the old (but a democratized) Soviet Union, the fledgling super-state of the European Union, etc. which need then to join together in a United Nations Confederation under a world government, with power and democracy devolved down to state, regional and local level. But national armies – no! A permanent armed UN security force should occupy every country on the planet, each state on Earth should contribute to this force, and it should use police rather than indiscriminate military methods to preserve peace and democracy.

It can be done, but the truth is there is more money, much more money, to be made out of war. Out of armaments and the arms trade. But just think about it once again. When the US or any other major power wants to use other methods, they do so very successfully. So Salvadore Allende, democratically elected President of Chile, considered too leftwing by the US government of the time and its rightwing allies in Chile, made sure he was assassinated.

Hitler escaped such a fate, maybe because the failing world economy needed a timely boost to shake it out of recession, so a war was organized to galvanize the economy through the arms industry. All the available fit men who were not COs were sent to the front by both sides, and women were employed happily making bombs and other weapons of mass destruction. Many were employed in this killing industry, and the rich got richer still. Marvelous solution! Except for the millions who died under bombs and shells from both sides, and those poor Jews and other minorities who died in the Nazi concentration camps.

Had the War not happened, Hitler could have been dealt with by the world’s security and intelligence services. Even had he remained German Chancellor, his rule, like Stalin’s and other dictators, was limited. And Hitler would have been only too glad to get rid of the Jewish problem by sending them to occupy Palestine, kicking the local inhabitants out, since the USA, UK, Soviet Union and other countries seemed so reluctant to take these would-be refugees.

This was another consequence of the Second World War – another racist state arose, this time not in Europe, but in the Middle East. A state which declared it was a haven for the ‘chosen race’ of persecuted Jewish people, rather than the ‘master race’ of Hitler’s Aryans, and which, like the Third Reich, had to conduct wars with all its neighbors to create more ‘living room’ or ‘lebensraum’ as Hitler called it. The similarities with both regimes are remarkable. And many of the Jewish people living on occupied Palestinian land were never persecuted, they are simply American, British and other colonists who happen to be Jewish. Ironically they are far less safe in modern day Israel, under constant threat from Palestinian and other Arab militants determined to drive these settlers from their lands, than they were in their homelands of USA, UK, etc..

All states based on religion or race are undemocratic and should be abolished, or turned into secular, non-racist states where everyone of all races and all creeds or none are equal and have equal rights. Israel, the Islamic republics and so-called Christian states like the UK where bishops still sit in the House of Lords and the Head of State is also head of the Church of England are not secular, democratic states where everyone has equal rights, though some are more democratic than others of course.

A worldwide secular confederation of states and supra-national federations is the way forward to a peaceful and democratic world, where individual states and even regions can have great local autonomy.

England was once a battleground of warring kingdoms. We had to unite and get rid of this nonsense, but the danger now is that ethnic rivalries are tearing us apart again even here at home, and that the police force created to maintain law and order is incapable, or unwilling, to do just that.

It is not acceptable for gangs to rule certain no-go areas of our cities whilst the police, and indeed the army, do nothing to break them up and arrest all their members. Membership of gangs should be made illegal. Stop and search should be conducted regularly to insure people, especially teenagers, are not carrying guns and knives. Law and order needs to be maintained by a strong and I’m afraid armed police force both here at home, and throughout the world. The alternative at home is anarchy and gang warfare on the streets with innocent people and others becoming victims of violence. The alternative on a world scale is anarchy and international warfare, again with innocent people and others becoming victims of the violence.

All this is insane. We have a police force here at home, internationally we have the United Nations with its General Assembly (a fledgling world government), we even have UN security forces, but they need beefing up and given authority to act decisivly.

Unfortunately we also have nation states which refuse to merge their armies into a UN security force under UN control and we still have belligerent outdated alliances like NATO which threaten and surround countries like the Russian Federation and create tension and fuel wars in places like Georgia. We also still have the nuclear armed terrorist states (the UK, USA, Russia, China, France, Israel, Pakistan, India plus possibly North Korea) which threaten innocent civilians with genocide thereby creating precedents and bad examples for terrorists like the old IRA, Bin Laden and Al Quaida. Countries like the USA refuse to recognize the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice in The Hague or to sign up to things like the Kyoto Treaty to preserve the environment. Other agreements, such as the Nuclear Non-Ploriferation Treaty committing all states to abandon nuclear weapons, are ignored by the major nuclear powers who are now developing a new generation of totally illegal and useless nuclear weapons. These horrific illegal weapons of mass destruction have not managed to stop one war or deter one would-be aggressor in the past 50 or so years, in fact they have caused us to come dangerously near to nuclear war, as with the Cuba Missile Crisis of 1962. Was Argentina deterred from reclaiming the Malvinas/Falklands? Did nuclear weapons help the Americans to win in Vietnam, or the Soviets in Afghanistan? Did they deter 9/11 or 7/7? No, totally useless and dangerous, and clearly not a deterrent, just a status symbol. A ticket to the UN Security Council.

Let’s hope the Barack Obama era in the United States heralds a new and better dawn for mankind, and that in the 21st Century we will at last start being mature enough to unite and settle political problems without resorting to nuclear threats, wars and other anarchic practices which only have the end result of making armament manufacturers rich, de-stabilizing the world, killing many innocent people and creating the conditions and circumstances for even more wars, dictatorships and struggles for national liberation.

The world of Spirit is watching us in despair but also in hope, as also are highly advanced alien civilizations from elsewhere in the multi-universe. UFO visitations increased after the first atomic bomb explosions and continue to this present day, admitted now by at least one NASA scientist and astronaut, Ed Mitchell. It is time we took action to lift the Earth to a new level of spiritual development, and made it into a planet worthy of joining any interplanetary/interdimensional federation or confederation which may exist and deem us at present to be too primitive and barbaric to be admitted as a member. In other words, they are observing us to see if we destroy our planet or learn how to preserve it and live together in peace, before they will show themselves openly and invite us to join them in the civilized multi-universe.

As for Spirit, well that moves in mysterious ways. The world is becoming more cognizant of the world of Spirit as the old organized religions, largely based on superstition and created by humans to control others, gradually lose their hold. We are all here to learn from past mistakes and evolve, and Spirit will help us do so if we listen to our consciences. Religious people will know in their hearts that great spiritual leaders like Mahatma Gandhi, Jesus, The Buddha, etc. would not be dropping bombs on people or threatening whole populations with nuclear annihilation. And if we don’t listen to this message from Spirit, from our own consciences or higher spiritual selves, then we must pay the price in this world and the next. Karmic law awaits all of us, we will truly reap whatever we sow.

Mediumship, Channeling and ITC

I am still learning about these various forms of apparently connecting with other dimensions, often called the Spiritual Planes of Existence or quantum parallel universes/alternative realities, beyond our known physical world.

Channeling is a form of mediumship becoming increasingly popular with New Age philosophies and followers, particularly in America. It involves a medium or channeler repeatedly passing on messages of wisdom and philosophy, usually from what they claim are highly developed Spiritual entitites or even from aspects of God. The spirit of the entity usually takes over the channeler’s mind and body to some extent during this process, although the channeler is often wide awake and aware of what is being said but cannot interject or comment until the spirit entity has finished speaking. In other cases the channeler goes into a trance state.

The various forms of clairaudient, clairvoyant and other clairsensitive mediumships are more common in the UK and are demonstrated regularly at Spiritualist chuches, etc. They are much more mundane in the messages they convey, allegedly from the spirits of the deceased who are usually relatives, spouses or friends of the person or persons being given the message. TV mediums such as Colin Fry, Tony Stockwell and Sally Morgan demonstrate this type of mediumship.

Physical mediumship is where the medium produces physical phenomena such as raps, taps, levitation, apports, voices and full or partial materializations, usually in darkened rooms or greatly subdued lighting. Props include cabinets, tapes and gags to bind the medium to a chair inside a cabinet, trumpets, illuminated plaques, etc.. It was more popular in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, but is still demonstrated by a few mediums, such as David Thompson in Australia, today.

With all these forms of mediumship and channeling there is wide scope for fraud and tricks, similar to those used by stage magicians, conjurors and so-called mind readers. Physical mediumship in particular suffered because mediums were sometimes found to be using fraudulent tricks to produce the phenomena, although often usually only when the real phenomena failed to occur (repeatability being one of the problems with all psychic phenomena) in order not to disappoint the sitters. Several mediums have been caught out using such tricks, but interestingly these same mediums have also been tested and often found to be producing real physical phenomena at other times.

With clairsensitive, clairaudient and clairvoyant mediums, the accusation of ‘cold reading’ is often asserted. In other words good guesses, assisted by body language, appearance of the sitter and other clever skills acquired by the medium. While this may be true in some cases, it is perfectly obvious when the medium has real skills as they are able to pass on specific detailed knowledge of things they could not possibly have guessed or obtained by cold reading, or previous research.

Channeling is also wide open to fraud, probably more so than the other forms of mediumship. It is all too easy for somebody to claim to be channeling a higher spiritual entity which nobody knows and so can’t identify, and pass on general wisdom and philosophy such as it would be a good idea not to destroy the Earth, and to take steps to protect the environment, to develop ourselves spiritually, and to listen to great spiritual teachers like the Buddha, Jesus Christ, Mahatma Gandhi, etc..

Although there are opportunities for charlatans, fraud and trickery in all forms of mediumship, the phenomena is very consistent over the decades, and many remarkable messages and physical phenomena have occurred which cannot be easily explained away except by genuine communication with another reality or spiritual dimension. Mediums like Colin Fry could not achieve the specific messages they give sitters on TV, in private sittings and in theaters just by cold reading and research, and were they using and paying ‘plants’ to sit in their audiences, then they would by now have been exposed by some of these mercenary people who would have sold their stories to the tabloids. I myself have received a very specific message indeed from my maternal grandmother via Colin Fry in a packed Fairfields Hall. There is no way he could have got this specific information by cold reading, research or guesswork, and he had no way of knowing I was in the audience, or indeed who the message was for. It was so very specific, it could have been for nobody but myself.

Physical mediums like David Thompson are apparently producing real materializations and other psychic phenomena, and this is confirmed by people like engineer/quantum physicist Ronald Pearson and after-life researcher, former lawyer Victor Zammit.

Channelers are more difficult to test, as the entities they channel are usually higher spirits, some of whom may never even have lived on Earth, so it is almost impossible to identify them. Although the messages they give may seem of a much less mundane nature than other forms of mediumship, such as ‘Great Aunt Flo died of a blow to the head at the age of 86, but has now fully recovered in the spirit world, and by the way she doesn’t like that beige jumper you bought last week, the color doesn’t suit you’. However it is mundane messages such as this (which is fictional by the way) which prove the reality of life-after-death to the sitters, whereas unknown entities with names like Xia saying the human race will destroy itself unless we stop wars and protect the environment do nothing to prove life-after-death.

However there are some channelers who do provide real evidence, the most notable being Andrew Russell-Davis who currently is the voice channel for Diana, former Princess of Wales. Russell-Davis originally channeled a higher entity known as Cheng, but in September 1997, a few weeks after her death in the Paris car crash, Diana started coming through, and she has been speaking through Andrew Russell-Davis in something remarkably similar to her voice in life, though an octave or so lower, in podcasts available on the Net and now in TV and radio interviews around the world. The mannerisms, voice, method of speech, the emotions in the voice especially when speaking of traumatic events such as the crash or her two boys Wills and Harry, the specific detailed knowledge she gives and the consistency of the communications, all testify that this really is Diana speaking and communicating through her chosen channeler. Even transcribed messages, full of grammatical errors, is indicative that this is the real Diana, who flunked all her exams and was no great expert at grammar. Interestingly, although they look odd when written down and are difficult to read due to lack of commas and full-stops in the right places, when read out by Diana on her website – – as with her posthumous autobiography transcribed by Andrew, then they sound very much like the Diana we remember, with pauses and emphasis in all the right places.

But the exciting development in communication with alternative realities/the spiritual dimensions is in the field of Instrumental TransCommunication (ITC), formerly known as Electrical Voice Phenomena (EVP). This started off with mysterious voices being captured on audiotape from white noise on unused radio frequencies, but has now developed into much more sophisticated communications, including TV pictures from the spiritual dimensions achieved under laboratory conditions, and moreover repeatable. In actual fact ITC has been going on since the late 19th century, when people like Thomas Edison tried to communicate with the dead via scientific instruments and inventions, rather than via human mediums. Indeed two-way communication devices such as the Spiricom have been invented and were successful for a time, till the spirits communicating moved to a higher level away from the Earth plane. But messages, pictures, etc. continue to be received via ITC and the technology is developing so fast that in decades to come it should be possible to prove to the world that two-way communication with the dead and with alternative dimensions, in the form of sound, voices, TV pictures and computer images/texts are real, are repeatable, and can be obtained under strictly controlled laboratory conditions which screen out other interferences and terrestial radio/TV transmissions, etc.. I predict in the coming decades that the after-life will be proved scientifically by such methods, backed up by new mathematical theories on the quantum universe by post-Einsteinian scientists such as Ronald Pearson.

Indeed, for those who care to investigate, scientists and notable people have endorsed the reality of life-after-death and communication with the spirit world for well over a century. Just some of the names of these people are listed below. Are we seriously saying all these scientists, doctors, professors, inventors, authors, statesmen, etc. were all deluded? Is it not far more likely they were on to something which present day orthodox scientists fear the most – that materialistic science is caught in a cul-de-sac, based on incorrect or incomplete theories, and that we have to go back 100 years or so and re-examine the theories that even Albert Einstein himself began to doubt were completely right before he died?

Prof. Albert Einstein, John Logie Baird (one of the inventors of television), Thomas Alva Edison (inventor of the phonograph, electric light bulb, etc.), President Benjamin Franklin (scientist, inventor and statesman), Sir William Crookes OM, FRS (chemist and physicist), Sir Oliver Lodge (who developed the wireless telegraph), Sir Arthur Conan-Doyle, President Abraham Lincoln, Prime Minister Gladstone, Queen Victoria, Prime Minister Sir Winston Churchill, Lord Arthur Balfour, Air Chief Marshal Lord Dowding, Dr Carl Yung, Mark Twain, President Woodrow Wilson, Emmanuel Swedenborg (scientist/theologian), Ronald Pearson (quantum physicist/engineer), Dr Raymond A. Moody, MD, Dr Richard Hodgson, Dr James H. Hyslop, Dr William James, Prof. Camille Flammarion, Dr Charles Richet, Dr Cesare Lombroso, Dr Robert Hare, Prof. James J. Mapes, Dr Alfred Russell-Wallace, Sir William Barrett, Dr Hamlin Garland, Prof. William R. Newbold, Dr Carl A. Wickland, Dr Isaac K. Funk, Dr William McDougall, Dr T. Glen Hamilton, Dr Robert Crookall, Dr C. J. Ducasse, Dr Raynor C. Johnson, Dr Gardner Murphy, Dr Hereward Carrington, Dr Harry Price, Dr Elizabeth Kuebler-Ross MD, Dr Barbara R. Rommer MD, Gary Schwartz Ph. D., Jon Klimo Ph. D., David Fontana Ph. D., Dr Jan W. Vandersande Ph. D, Alexander Imich Ph. D..