A Wake-up call

In June’s General Election, a majority of young people voted for the Labour Party. It is hard to prove this statistically as votes are not analysed by age group, but we only have to look at our university towns, which are increasingly Labour strongholds, for evidence. This June, Canterbury, which boasts both the University of Kent and Christ Church University, turned Labour for the first time since the constituency was created in 1918.

From the Brexit point of view, Corbyn’s strong showing – and thus likely survival as Labour leader for the time being – is good news inasmuch as he is at best lukewarm about the EU. On the other hand, those young people who turned out in large numbers to support him are far more Europhile than their new hero, and what is more, the many areas where they do agree with him are a cause of great concern. They revolve around an ideology which, if it was ever implemented by a future Labour government, would take us out of the frying pan into the fire. The uncomfortable reality of how close Mr Corbyn came to No. 10 should act as a wake-up call to those of us who voted for Brexit because we value our freedom.

When I was the same age as Corbyn’s young admirers, the Labour Party contained a solid bloc both of MPs and members whose roots lay more in Methodism than Marxism. A pro-soviet socialist element could be found, but it was widely mistrusted both inside and outside the Parliamentary party. The collapse of the USSR may have been a blessing for the inhabitants of Eastern Europe, but it allowed something equally odious to creep in almost unnoticed – the so-called “Cultural Marxism” of the Frankfurt School. This influential group of Marxist academics came together in the 1920s to analyse why the 1917 Russian revolution failed to spread round the world. They decided that the principal obstacle was Western society, with its Christian foundation. By the 1960s, they had drawn up their battle plan to conquer it, described by one of their young acolytes, Rudi Dutschke as “the long march through the institutions” – subverting society by a gradual take-over of the professions, including educational establishments. The Blair government may have taken Labour away from the planned economy beloved of classic socialists but instead brought political correctness, a typical weapon from the Frankfurt School’s armoury, out from the fringes of so-called “loony left” councils to the mainstream.

Corbyn and his associates, while seeking to bring back the classic tax-and-spend and planned economy of Socialism, are also very much in tune with Cultural Marxism. The thought of such a man seizing power is truly worrying for anyone who values our historic liberties – regardless of his lukewarmness towards the EU. But 40% of the electorate and a still higher proportion of young people voted for him on June 8th. This is the hard fact, even though many of them would not have realised what a Labour victory would mean. After all, many university graduates voted Labour over one issue – the party’s promise to abolish university tuition fees. Many of them would have had no idea of the link between socialism and tyranny because of the way history is taught these days and even fewer realise that it would have been their generation which would ultimately have to spend the rest of their lives footing the bill if Corbyn’s la-la-land spending policy had ever been implemented.

Some, we hope, will become wiser on getting a job. After all, Winston Churchill once said, “If a man is not a socialist by the time he is 20, he has no heart. If he is not a conservative by the time he is 40, he has no brain.” However, such has been the infiltration of these toxic ideas into our schools that something drastic will be required to rescue our young people from the consequences of the indoctrination they have suffered. Furthermore, Corbyn’s supporters are not just confined to the young or inhabitants of our “vibrant” cities. Evidence even from the pleasant rural neighbourhood where I live points to all too many people with “no brain”, even though they themselves would be badly affected. One study forwarded to me recently suggests that Labour’s proposed land value tax would have resulted in everyone around here being asked to cough up at least £5,000 per year in Council Tax, including my Labour-supporting neighbours.

Can anything be done to save us from this situation? It is very worrying that we are turning out young people unfit to run a cockle stall, let alone the country. What happens when government will fall into the hands of “Generation Snowflake” with their “safe spaces”, no-platforming and propensity to go into meltdown whenever their iPad malfunctions? It would be a gross generalisation to portray all young people – or even all young Corbyn supporters – in these broad terms, but the pathetic pro-EU student demonstrations we saw after the referendum vote a year ago points to there being all too many of them.

What is more, things are getting even worse in our schools. We are now seeing primary schools introducing gender-neutral uniforms or even allowing five-year-olds to decide whether they want to be boys or girls. What will happen when these confused young children turn into adults?

One thing is clear:- these developments have only reached such alarming levels because of either cowardice or complacency  – or perhaps both – within the Conservative Party. Even UKIP has been contaminated, with Suzanne Evans describing herself on her personal website as “Deputy Chair”. Sorry, Suzanne, but in my books, a chair, whether deputy or not, is something you sit on.

The only way to take on this poisonous ideology is to tackle it head on, find its weak spot and assault it on every front. This general election offers yet further proof that no other tactic works. You can’t win battles by offering a diluted version of your opponent’s ideology. The 1950s-style interventionism of the Conservative Party’s latest manifesto not only failed to compete with Corbyn’s 1970’s-style socialist revivalism but did little to enthuse the party’s natural supporters. Mrs May’s team made a mistake in trying to tack left that nearly proved fatal.

So what is the weak spot? It boils down to one word which permeates everything in the Corbynite Left’s thinking – loathing. Given the Frankfurt School’s mission was to subvert Western society, they must have realised that a contended, culturally cohesive prosperous nation was never going to show much enthusiasm for their project. In a country like ours in particular, this therefore called for extreme measures. We must be taught to loathe ourselves and our historic values. Chris McGovern, the Chairman of the Campaign for Real Education, has written extensively on how the school history syllabus has been radically amended with this end in view. Children are taught all about our role in the slave trade but not about our subsequent efforts to stamp it out. Our country’s great heroes like Winston Churchill are airbrushed out of history. In 1995, to mark the 50th anniversary of V-E Day, the Department for Education sent a teaching video about World War 2 to every school in the country. The primary school version lasted 34 minutes   but allocated only 14 seconds to Churchill, stating only that, “People thought he helped the war end in Britain.” The video did emphasise, though, “It was quite sexist in the war.”

And this leads onto another form of loathing – towards all those traits not in conformity with political correctness. The loathing is displayed in a particularly venomous form towards anyone who manifests them today. Try engaging with the PC zealots on the internet and you will know what I mean. The left has hijacked the high moral ground and regards it as its own exclusive property. Anyone who challenges its nostrums must be attacked and if open abuse fails to change their minds, they must be visited by the boys in blue and sent on an equality and diversity course.

Naturally, a generation brought up to believe they are citizens of a country with a loathsome past are not going to believe it has the resilience and resourcefulness to survive as a self-confident self-governing nation, hence the Europhilia of so many young people. Patriotism is anathema. Let us not think that Corbyn’s lack of enthusiasm for the EU somehow makes him a patriot. His refusal to sing the National Anthem and his long-standing close links with the IRA are sufficient evidence to refute any such notion.

Christianity, in particular, is to be loathed although for some strange reason, not Islam – even in its most extreme forms. When the left-wing polemical atheist Christopher Hitchens began to attack Islam, he faced strong criticism from others on the political left. Hichens’ great sin was being consistent with his atheism, but in so doing, he broke a foundational principle of the Frankfurt School – the need for toleration of minorities, even if some of these minorities treat women badly or commit terrorist acts. This redefinition of tolerance pressurises any majority, especially if it holds strong principles, to loathe itself for its alleged blinkered, prejudiced attitudes.

And of course, self-loathing is encouraged in other ways. What is the desire for a sex change but self-loathing? It is unsurprising that, according to the World Health Organisation, suicides have increased by 60% in the last 45 years. In the UK, far more men than women commit suicide. In a world of strident feminism (another Frankfurt School creation), men should loathe themselves, well, just for being men.

Is there anyone who can step into the breach? Thankfully there is. The discussions between the Tories and the Democratic Unionist Party has put the spotlight on a party about which many may have previously known very little, due to a tendency to shy away from the complexities of Northern Ireland’s politics. While the political left is spitting blood at the prospect of any deal which will bring them into the government, here are a group of politicians who have refused to play their silly games. Self-confident and patriotic, opponents of abortion and gay marriage, the DUP is like a breath of fresh air in the confusing political atmosphere of Westminster at the moment. It stands up for our armed forces, supports grammar schools and proclaims patriotism, individual freedom, law and order. When assaulted by the PC brigade, it stands firm. Although not above controversy and the occasional scandal, it has conveyed a far greater impression of responsibility and integrity than any UK mainland-based party in recent years.

In recent conversation, I have heard more than one wistful comment to the effect that, “If the DUP were to put up a candidate here, they would get my vote.” There is a lesson here for all of us. A totalitarian ideology based on loathing can be conquered by people of integrity and conviction who offer an optimistic future.

After one of her resounding election victories, Mrs Thatcher expressed a hope that Labour may never again win power in this country. Some were hoping for a similar result when Mrs May called this snap election. It didn’t come anywhere near happening, but could yet come to pass if enough people wake up and recognise that the big gap in UK politics is not in the mythical “centre ground”, but for a party of freedom and enterprise; a party proud of our country and its great history; a party prepared to expose the lunacy of the left, take its assaults on the chin and battle on until our young people are reclaimed from the Corbynite abyss. Will the Tories finally pick up the long-discarded mantle of Margaret Thatcher? Could UKIP arise from the ashes? Should the DUP step in and field candidates in mainland UK constituencies? Time only will tell, but the full benefits of Brexit will be lost unless there emerges a party unequivocally committed to replacing the politics of loathing with sanity, hope and pride in our country, its historical values and institutions.

This article first appeared in the Euro Realist bulletin.
Print Friendly, PDF & Email


  1. Phil JonesReply

    Excellent points, John.

    What I find rather unfortunate at present with the Conservative Party is the talk of it needing ‘a young leader’ to capture the youth vote that went with Corbyn. For instance, a Priti Patel rather than a David Davis replacing Mrs. May. That is exactly what the Conservative Party does not need. Firstly, Mrs. May doesn’t need replacing; she is doing a fine job. Secondly, the Party doesn’t need a ‘young leader’ if she did need replacing. Following Labour’s lead was the thinking that put in David Cameron as head of the Party rather than David Davis in 2005. The big brass in the Party called for a ‘Blair II’. Of course, now that Blair is looked at as a war criminal, it’s a different story. Mrs. May is doing just fine and it’s about time that all in her Party gathered around and showed full support. It is a very difficult time coming and Mrs. May will need all the emotional support possible.

    As far as young people, of course they vote for candy such as free university. Most haven’t been out in the world and have no experience with the tough realities of life. Not their fault. They just haven’t been around long enough. The SNP and Labour disgracefully play on this in wanting the voting age to be reduced as far as possible. And you have Corbyn playing his Pied Piper role — a total irresponsible who would go to any lengths for power. I find him very frightening.

    I have a strong sense that if Mrs. May can find the mental strength to carry on for a few years and see Brexit substantially through, the younger voters will come to appreciate her. Also it will give time for Corbyn to again display his true colours and for the Labour Party to build up its infamous internal discord. At present Labour is still riding a wave based on the last election but that will only have a limited duration. The Blairites cannot see Corbyn as a Prime Minister but for the present are laying low — but it won’t last. You just have to look back at the incredible dislike for Corbyn existing within the Labour Party just prior to the last election to see that at some point soon all is going to return to unstability.

  2. Jack TaylorReply

    Thank you John for this excellent article, you’ve hit the nail on the head. Cultural Marxism and the ‘long march through the institutions’ are processes few are aware of, yet they have had a profound impact on our society over the past few decades, with the left adopting them to implement their social agenda via the back door without public consent or awareness.

    In recent years I have been particularly heartened by grassroots movements such as Gamergate and the alt-right that have helped bring awareness of, and resistance to Cultural Marxism into the mainstream.

    The Marxist’s vile agenda needs to be exposed, and it’s good to see there are so many decent patriotic people willing to take them on.

  3. Gordon WebsterReply

    I agree, an excellent article John. The Frankfurt School is but one spoke in the Cultural Marxist, Global Marxism Wheel. We all know about Mr George Soros and his Open Society Foundation, which funds Open Britain, Open Borders, Hope Not Hate, Black Lives Matter, The media Diversity Institute and True Vision, not only here but in America. We all know about Common Purpose, which mimics the Frankfurt School, and is said to be funded by Soros and Rothschild. What we may not be aware of, and what I am reading now it about the Tavistock Institute, and Mass Control of whole Populations, by media manipulation, the destruction of the family and cultural values, and even by sex, drugs and rock and roll.
    The first book I started researching is “The Tavistock Institute of Human Relations,” by Dr John Coleman (downloaded for free), which gives the full history of the TI, and appears very well researched. It was initially funded and controlled by the Rothschilds, Rockefellers, JP Morgan, and even The Monarch of Britain. Its first psychological manipulators were Lippmann and Bernays, who were followers of Gustave Le Bon (The Psychology of The Crowd) and one Arnold Toynbee (yes that one). They Tavistock has gown since those meddling days, to become a complete control mechanism.
    The second book, puts the cherry on the cake, and complements the Tavistock Book, and shows how easy it is to break people and implant thoughts and beliefs into their heads, which weren’t there before and are contrary to their whole previous life belief. Using fear, drugs, and a continuous bombardment of lies, it is very easy to commit what the auther named “Menticide,” – the killing of the mind. The Book is “The Rape Of The Mind,” by Dutchman Dr Joost AM Meerloo, and is subtitled “The Psychology of Thought Control, Menticide and Brainwashing.” It was written in 1956 and is very well researched, Meerloo having lived through the Nazi Era, and almost a victim himself. It is very cheap on Kindle and I recommend, if you want to understand what the global communists are doing to us, using Tavistock, Common Purpose, the Frankfurt School AND the British Media, which the Tavistock Funders own, that you download both books.
    Oh, two other funders of the Tavistock? Were the Harmsworth brothers Lord Rothermere (The Daily Mail) and Lord Northcliffe (The Daily Mirror). They have been bending our minds since 1913, are pretty damned good at it after all these years. Please read both, because the more we understand the manipulators, the more we can counteract their poison.

Leave a comment