Jeremy Corbyn has become notorious for demanding that India’s prime minister be banned from Britain, for his role the violence that engulfed Modi’s home state of Gujarat in 2002 when he was its chief minister.
The violence began on the morning of 27 February 2002, in which 59 people died in a fire inside the Sabarmati Express, after returning from paying homage at Lord Rama’ birthplace at Ayodhya, to take part in a ceremony called the Purnahuti Maha Yagna. 27 women and 10 children were burnt to death, and 48 others were injured.
These Hindu victims are hardly ever reported or if they are they are then called extremist and right-wing. One of the alleged organisers of the attack was a commander of the Muslim radical group Harkat-ul Jehad-e-Islami.
On 17 March 2002, chief suspect Haji Bilal, a local town councillor and a Congress worker was captured by an anti-terrorist squad in Godhra.
The president of Godhra municipality, Mohammed Hussain Kalota, was arrested in March. Others arrested included corporators Abdul Razak and Shiraj Abdul Jamesha. Bilal was also alleged to have a connection with gang leader Latif. These are inconvenient facts not only ignored by Corbyn and his party but the wider mechanics of power and information.
The British media constantly lambast India’s prime minister Narendra Modi as right-wing, or even extreme right and Far Right. Indeed even fascist and with Nazi links. This is because he is head of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and rose through the ranks of its volunteer wing the RSS. The latter is said be especially violent and linked to right-wing extremism. But what do these terms actually mean? Do they have any relevance?
The Brexit campaign and process has been saturated with in fighting, anarchy and a complete revamp of British politics.
No longer can one simply speak of Left and Right wing. We have a Labour Party whose working-class support base voted overwhelmingly to leave the EU. Much of this as due to discontent about feeling left out of the political mainstream, especially in some of Britain’s most deprived areas which ironically before Thatcher crushed the miner’s strike of 1984 and 1985 were the engine for the country’s industrial growth.
The gig economy, zero hours contracts, draconian benefit laws, rising house prices, unaffordable rents and the demonisation of entire communities as degenerate racist ‘chavs’ have led to an increase in homelessness, reliance on food banks, suicide, malnutrition, and even recourse to sex work for those who see no other option in the vortex of despair.
In sink estates throughout the country the knife crime and revenge killings that were so much part of the lyrics in menacing drill music, have now spilled out into the middle-class leafy areas with country lines drug mules, home invasions and brazen robberies as a nation suffocated by over a decade of Conservative government austerity lacks the means to fight scenes reminiscent of nightmare dystopia as found in 28 Days Later or The Purge.
These nice areas are often where Labour now draws much of its intellectual support.
Britain’s Weimar Politics
There is a massive disconnect in the political system. Labour mainly supports remaining in the EU, but the details get murky. Its traditional support are hardcore Brexit. Having been taken over by Momentum the party is dominated by an antisemitic and Hinduphobic mindset fixated with outdated Marxist theories, ideas which have scant relevance to the lives of ordinary working-class folk, who are overwhelmingly white.
The contradiction is further heightened when we witness how Corbyn simultaneously supports LGBT rights and yet associates with hardcore Islamic preachers who would annihilate the former group without hesitation. The Conservative Party is now dominated by a hardcore wanting to leave the EU, but who have launched a purge against their own dissident members as well as unnerved their traditional support base in the business community who fear the No Deal Brexit.
After the death of its leader John Smith the Labour Party was remoulded by Tony Blair into a carbon copy of the Thatcherism then dominating the Conservatives under John Major. This helped broaden appeal beyond its traditional proletarian roots and win confidence of business leaders who remembered how the last Labour administration was dominated by unions that constantly brought Britain to its knees. Before the election of Thatcher in 1979 the UK was truly the sick man of Europe ready for an IMF bailout.
Under Blair this New Labour swept to victory in 1997 helped by the fact that it was the Conservative government wracked by internal dissension over Europe, and having its votes eaten by the Referendum Party of Imran Khan’s then father-in-law Sir Jimmy Goldsmith. Symbolising a Cool Britannia as epitomised by Britpop music, New Labour seemed unstoppable.
But Blair’s policies only increased the wealth gap. Politics became murky dominated as it was by spin doctors. Foreign policy, notably the disastrous decision to invade Iraq, was influenced by the American neoconservative dogma brought to it by former Trotskyists.
Matters came to a head in the general election of 2010. The use of focus groups meant that all three main parties gave almost exactly the same answer to questions. This resulted in a hung parliament and a coalition between the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats.
When this broke up in 2015 David Cameron turned on former ally Nick Clegg with savagery, aided by the fact that by being part of a Conservative government, the Liberal Democrats lost much of their traditional support and backtracked on some of their major policies. Clegg’s party was brutally routed in the 2015 election. Buoyed with confidence and a disconnect from the mainstream, Cameron called for a referendum on staying in the EU.
He lost and resigned his post. Since then prime minister, once the dream of those who dream of power, became an office with about as much appeal as being in the inner circle of Roman emperor Caligula.
After defeat in the First World War, Germany lost its monarchy and had a democratic system thrust upon it while having to deal with the nasty Allied revenge of the Versailles Treaty. It was this anarchic politics which led to brawls between various forces on both Left and Right opposed to democracy. The Leftist violence was dominated by communists full of confidence after Lenin seized power in Russia from the liberal democratic government of Alexander Kerensky. The various right-wing groups became dominated by the Nazis.
Any stabilisation was derailed by a previous form of austerity, the much harsher one caused by the Great Depression of the 1930s. In the face of dull, respectable politicians who could not work out to govern Hitler appeared as messianic, dynamic and above all full of charisma. It was this that cut though his menacing ideas and incoherent programme to allow him to take charge. In Britain today we have a situation where Jeremy Corbyn is seen as a man of principle, and indeed has stuck by his long cherished ideas, however out of synch they may have been. It is this which makes him stand apart from all the spin and ambiguous answers.
He has also not become a slave to the financial allure of big business lobbying which offers lucrative careers to politicians even while they sit in Parliament itself. Being an MP has just become another business venture, not means to serve the wider public. Nobody can accuse Corbyn of that. He is also far from alone in being a fringe figure now taken seriously as potential leader. UKIP, once regarded almost beyond the pale and having its own issues with racism and antisemitism, may not do well in Britain’s first past the post electoral system.
But the very fact that Brexit is happening demonstrates the influence of UKIP and its now splinter rival the Brexit Party. These outfits are serious contenders for votes in what have been solid Labour seats. UKIP and Brexit Party are more Eurosceptic and at worst xenophobic than outright racist.
That would be found in the British National Party and more extreme National Action. Unlike the BNP the latter does not even attempt to hide its Nazi roots. But are these Nazi roots wholly on the Right?
Britain’s equality watchdog is the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC). It has said it believes Labour may have “unlawfully discriminated against people because of their ethnicity and religious beliefs” as it announced the first step of a statutory inquiry into the party’s handling of antisemitism complaints.
The EHRC has only rarely taken action against political parties before. In 2010, the regulator ordered the BNP to rewrite its constitution to comply with race relations laws. Gideon Falter, the chairman of Campaign Against Antisemitism, said:
“It is a sad indictment that the once great anti-racist Labour party is now being investigated by the equality and human rights regulator it established just a decade ago.”
In response, Huda Elmi of the party’s NEC called for the EHRC to be replaced, describing it as “a failed experiment”. She added: “We need to abolish it and bring back separate, well-resourced governmental bodies for each equality strand!” The similarity with how democratic institutions in the Weimar Republic were similarly Nazified is chilling.
From Blackshirts to Brexit
The white working-class which has historically been the support base of Labour before Tony Blair has also been fertile ground for something more sinister.
It was from the proletariat of London’s East End that the British Union of Fascists drew its support in the 1930s, resulting in the Battle of Cable Street by communists dominating the anti-fascist opposition of Moseley’s Blackshirts to march through largely Jewish areas has become part of Leftist legend in the defense of democracy. So it continued.
With mass immigration after the war the same white proletariat were courted by the Union Movement (which wanted to join the EEC), White Defence League, National Front, British Movement, British National Party, Combat 18 and more recently National Action. At the same time Labour and the Socialist Workers Party made attempts in the opposite direction; the latter forming the Anti-Nazi League to oppose racism and fascism at street level where violent attacks took place. Youth culture was caught up in this divide. Teddy Boys, skinheads and casuals became the face of racist violence on the streets.
Corbyn has always taken an active part in opposing racism and other forms of intolerance. As early as 1983 he supported LGBT rights. He was a campaigner against apartheid in South Africa, serving on the National Executive of the Anti-Apartheid Movement and was arrested in 1984 while demonstrating outside South Africa House.
In 1985, he was appointed national secretary of the newly launched Anti-Fascist Action and he supported the miners strike. He has supported CND and being active in the trade union movement. In 1988, Jeremy Corbyn was one of the first MPs to raise the issue of Saddam Hussein’s Halabja chemical attack against the Kurdish people, at a time when Hussein was still an ally of the west
But when opposing oppression it gets ambiguous as to what is ‘oppression’? Who are the ‘victims’? Are some victims more important than others? Corbyn warranted MI5 attention for his invitation to the IRA and Sinn Fein to meet him in Parliament. Between 2009 and 2012 Corbyn appeared on Iran’s state mouthpiece Press TV which has been banned in the UK.
Corbyn was criticised for being paid and also appearing on a television programme that is the propaganda tool of a nation that suppresses LGBT rights. At a meeting hosted by Stop the War Coalition in 2009, Corbyn said he invited “friends” from Hamas and Hezbollah to an event in parliament, referred to Hamas as “an organisation dedicated towards the good of the Palestinian people,” and said that the British government’s labelling of Hamas as a terrorist organisation is “a big, big historical mistake.”
Having been elected leader of Labour in 2015 things took a more ominous turn. Allegations of antisemitism have constantly plagued the party. But what is less well-known is the Hinduphobia that has saturated it.
Red Flag of Blood versus Saffron Flag of Peace
Corbyn has been active in supporting laws to stop caste discrimination and has been chair of Dalit Solidarity Network. Yet as is well known this type of behaviour can notoriously overlap into more general anti-Hindu hate.
While Hindus have been constantly accused of caste discrimination (and this often overlaps into being accused of racism), at no point has Labour or its anti-caste axis partners actually engaged with Hindus. One would have thought that Corbyn would have welcomed the election of Narendra Modi as prime minister of India.
After all Modi hails from the Ganchi community in Gujarat, part of the very Scheduled and Backward Castes which Corbyn should be pleased to see achieving success against all the odds stacked against anyone from an impoverished background succeeding.
Instead Modi has been labelled variously right-wing, extreme-right, neoliberal and all manner of labels by hardcore Leftists such as Corbyn. These labels cease to have meaning and relevance used as they were to describe conservative and liberal views back in nineteenth century Europe.
Applied to India they are even more clumsy. Applied to Hindus they are insulting and condemnatory. To the Left, anything remotely Hindu is automatically right-wing, backward and extremist. This is despite the fact that not only is the prime minister of India from an impoverished backward caste background, but so is the president.
Ram Nath Kovind is the president of India. He was born on 1 October 1945, in Paraunkh village in the Kanpur Dehat district of Uttar Pradesh, as the youngest of five brothers and two sisters. Kovind was born in a mud hut, which eventually collapsed. He was only five when his mother died of burns when their thatched dwelling caught fire.
Kovind was born into the Kori caste, considered underprivileged even among the Dalits. After his elementary school education, he had to walk each day to Kanpur village, 8kilometres away, to attend junior school, as nobody in the village had a bicycle. Again instead of applauding these efforts at social mobility and advance of Dalit rights, Corbyn completely ignores them.
Behind all this anti-racism lies a very nasty sinister element in Corbyn’s politics. Hindus are savages and need civilising in a reincarnation of Rudyard Kipling’s White Man’s Burden.
Also, by blaming Modi for the violence in Godhra in 2002, Corbyn ignores the Hindu victims who were burned alive simply for following their own beliefs, and the three hundred or so Hindus shot by policein the rioting which followed.
Just as with lynchings against blacks in America’s Deep South before civil rights, the victims themselves are blamed while the perpetrators of violence get off helped by the spin and propaganda of those who hold the levers of power and information.
At a more general level Labour will not even look into allegations of Hinduphobia even while it gives lip service to fighting the very antisemitism which has become entrenched in its fabric. If we look back at Huda Elmi’s comments about each “equality strand” it effectively means that each ‘strand’ has its own special treatment.
Or as Orwell said famously in Animal Farm, “some animals are more equal than others”. Baroness Chakrabarti has refused to reply to any concerns raised about Hinduphobia by the Labour Party. It is simply not a concern. Hindus do not qualify for victim status in the eyes of Corbyn, Chakarabarti, Naz Shah and Byrne. The fact that they are overwhelmingly people of colour makes no difference.
When India revoked Article 370 in Kashmir, condemnation came from the very top, from Corbyn himself. As a party Labour has scant sympathy for Hindu victims of genocide, rape, massacre and terrorism. Labour always had this strand of thinking, most notably with figures like Lord Ahmed.
Now most vociferous include Naz Shah who showed even less sympathy for Hindu victims of genocide by terrorism in Kashmir than she did for teenage girl rape victims of Muslim grooming gangs. The Labour Party was one of the first to react when the Narendra Modi government made its shock announcement on 5 August to scrap Article 370 and split Jammu and Kashmir into two union territories. Labour MP Liz McInnes, who is also the party’s ‘Shadow Foreign Minister’, issued a statement the same evening when no other country had reacted to the development.
In a detailed statement, the party said, India’s decision to scrap the special status of Jammu and Kashmir, and its bifurcation “threatens stability in the region and the chances of a peaceful resolution which is so desperately needed”. McInnes even urged UK’s foreign secretary Dominic Raab to “do everything within his power to deescalate this tense and threatening situation and end the cycle of violence and fear within which generation after generation of Kashmiri children have grown up for the last seven decades”. This was followed by Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn’:
“The situation in Kashmir is deeply disturbing. Human rights abuses taking place are unacceptable. The rights of the Kashmiri people must be respected and UN resolutions implemented.” What about the Kashmir Hindus then Jeremy? Do they not have rights? As many as eight Labour MPs have even urged Prime Minister Boris Johnson to call the Modi government’s move on Kashmir illegal and unjustified. MP Yasmin Qureshi, who represents Bolton South East, wrote a letter to Johnson, urging him to “strongly condemn the actions of the Indian government” and its “illegal and unconstitutional revocation of Article 370 to annex Kashmir”.
Qureshi was born in Pakistan’s Gujrat city and moved to Britain when she was nine years old. Labour Party MP from Birmingham, Liam Byrne, launched an online petition over the Kashmir issue and was among the politicians backing Tuesday’s protests:
“Today thousands of people marched from Downing Street to the Indian High Commission to send a clear message to Modi – you cannot silence the people of Kashmir.”
But Byrne has no qualms about ensuring that the voice of Hindu refugees and victims from Kashmir are muzzled. He spoke at a rally where five thousand descended upon the Indian High Commission to pelt it with missiles in front of a largely passive and helpless police.
The ugly face of Labour’s Hinduphobia was revealed in graphic detail. Are comparisons with Kristallnacht exaggerated? The protesters, while carrying flags of Pakistan and Kashmir chanted slogans for the liberation of Kashmiris. This ‘liberation’ is similar to the ‘liberation’ of Germans in Czechoslovakia’s Sudetenland in 1938, which so inspired Muhammad Ali Jinnah, the founder of Pakistan. It was the next step into German expansion east after Anschluss with Austria. In same manner these protestors want Kashmir’s Anschluss with Pakistan.
Labour’s Gestapo Plague
It took a brave soul to stand against the Nazis as they came to power in Germany. Hans Achim Litten (19 June 1903 – 5 February 1938) was a lawyer who represented opponents of the Nazis at important political trials between 1929 and 1932, defending the rights of workers during the Weimar Republic.
In May 1931, Litten summoned Hitler to testify in the Tanzpalast Eden Trial, a court case involving two workers stabbed by four SA men. Litten cross examined Hitler for three hours, finding many points of contradiction and proving that Hitler had exhorted the SA to embark on a systematic campaign of violence against the Nazis’ enemies.
This was crucial because Hitler was meanwhile trying to pose as a conventional politician to middle class voters and maintained that the Nazi Party was “strictly legal”. Though a judge halted Litten’s questioning, thus saving Hitler from further damning exposure, newspapers at the time reported on the trial in detail and Hitler was investigated for perjury that summer. He survived the investigation intact, but was rattled by the experience and took his revenge. On 28 February 1933, the night of the Reichstag fire, he was arrested. He was later to die in Dachau.
On the other hand, Josef Michael Hartinger (14 September 1893 – 1984) was more fortunate in that he survived. He was a state prosecutor in Bavaria who, along with medical examiner Moritz Flamm, exposed the murder of prisoners in Dachau in the early days of Nazi oppression.
Over a number of months, they uncovered clear evidence of murder and compiled a dossier of charges against Hilmar Wäckerle, the SS commandant of Dachau and Robert Erspenmüller, a supervising guard. In May 1933, Hartinger presented the case to his superior, Bavarian State Prosecutor, Karl Wintersberger.
Initially supportive of the investigation, Wintersberger became reluctant to submit the resulting indictment to the Justice Ministry, which was increasingly under the influence of the SS. The Nazification of the justice system meant that Hartinger’s attempts to expose the truth were thwarted. Instead the SS became even more secretive about the concentration camps while the Gestapo was set up to cow the masses into obedience.
This is what Hindus in UK face if they try and complain. The Hinduphobia so rampant in the Labour Party is done without any pretence at democracy or accountability. All attempts at enquiry are met with a wall of silence.
The intellectual hatred this comes from also saturates the main organs of media. If Hindus complain to the media outlets so beloved of the left-wing types that support Labour and oppose Brexit, notably the Guardian, Independent and BBC, then they are given the run around or again no response. Hinduphobia is the hatred nobody talks about.
If any attempt is made to raise it in person again wall of silence or get shouted down at meetings by these Stormtroopers. In Corbyn’s Labour Party, Hindus are simply not welcome. Hindu victims of terrorism in Kashmir do not exist. In July 2019, BBC Panorama entitled “Is Labour Anti-Semitic?”, included a claim by former staff that, in the first half of 2018, senior Labour figures had interfered in the complaints process while new senior officials in their department downgraded outcomes for antisemitic behaviour.
In August 2018, Labour MP Frank Field resigned the Labour whip over a “culture…of nastiness”. He retained his party membership, announcing that he would sit as an “independent Labour MP”. Another Labour MP, Luciana Berger, said that Labour had become “sickeningly institutionally racist”.
In tackling this supposed Hindu threat what of Corbyn’s own left-wing politics. His support for diehard communist Cuba and the bankrupt socialism of Venezuela is well-known. It is but the tip of the iceberg. In the 1980s, two young members of a group which tried to thwart Kinnock’s campaign against Trotskyists in Labour were Corbyn and Jon Lansman, later the founder of Momentum.
It is but a far memory as is Blair’s New Labour. Now working on Corbyn’s inner team are Andrew Murray and Seumas Milne. Both Murray and Milne, together with another old comrade, Steve Howell, whom Milne brought in as Deputy Communications Director in February 2017, were originally members of Straight Left, a pro-Soviet faction within the Communist Party, disparagingly referred ever since to as “tankies” because of their support for the Soviet invasions of Czechoslovakia and Afghanistan.
On the May Day march on 2 May 2019 in London, Labour’s Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell gave a speech flanked by pictures of Stalin and Mao. Corbyn condemned the establishment of NATO as a mechanism to start a Cold War with the USSR. Hence he ignores the very crimes of communism and socialism.
Under communism 100 million have died in gulags, logai, genocide, famine and other forms of violence. Yet Corbyn had no problem with China’s Xi Jinping visiting Britain in 2015 when he praised the Chinese leader for his country’s ‘remarkable’ achievement lifting millions of people out of poverty.
Why no boycott over the Chinese leader when that country has if anything a worse human rights record than India, and not even the pretence at democracy?
Venezuela has become the usual socialist paradise of hyperinflation and poverty. It takes a special kind of stupid to bankrupt a country with more oil than Saudi Arabia. The famines by Stalin and Mao were deliberate. Millions had to die in order to reach the socialist utopia that never happened. This was not all just class war. In Stalin’s suppression of Poles and Ukrainians this was ethnic. Same with Mao and the Tibetans, and now the Uighers in China. Racial and class enemies overlapped. For all of Corbyn’s support for minorities and people of colour, Hindus are not on the list.
They are just like kulaks, Poles, Ukrainians and Jews under Stalin. They are the enemy. Hence genocide of Hindus does not appear in his world view. It is necessary damage. Perhaps more striking is that it bares striking similarity with the very fascism and racism which he has always opposed. But then that is the dirty secret. Far Left and Far Right are like Romulus and Remus, the founders of Rome. They are fratricidal but brothers nevertheless.
Labour: From Socialism to National Socialism
Morgan Phillips, when he was General Secretary of the Labour Party, once said that the Labour Party owed more to Methodism than Marxism. Then in 1944 the darling of what became the Thatcherist Right, Austrian economist FA Hayek, wrote in Road to Serfdom that Nazism had its foundations in socialism; hence it was National Socialism. It remains a disturbing fact that Nazism has roots on the Left.
In the original German it is the National Socialist Workers Party. Indeed in 1957 John Bean founded the National Labour Party, a far right outfit.
The party campaigned on a platform of white nationalism, antisemitism, and opposition to non-white immigration. Electoral failure led to the party merging with the White Defence League on 24 February 1960. Out of this eventually came both the British National Party and the National Front.
However it was more than just a name. While Corbyn has long embraced classic left wing causes, history tells us that this can morph into something nasty. It is possible to speak for the victims of war in Yemen, the conditions of Palestine refugee camps, and British army atrocities in Northern Ireland without recourse to hating entire communities and demonising entire groups. This Labour under Corbyn has been unable to do. Hence the accusations of racism and antisemitism. But a look back at the history of the Left should bring this as no surprise.
As the nineteenth and twentieth centuries overlapped, British socialism was saturated with eugenic thinkers: Sidney and Beatrice Webb, George Bernard Shaw, Harold Laski, HG Wells. Many eugenicists regarded themselves as on the political Left. Social reform would improve the breeding quality of the proletariat. These thinkers were usually ardent socialists, including Alfred Ploetz and Karl Pearson. They followed a socialism which rejected the Marxist class struggle in favour of the need to biologically engineer the nation.
In 1880, Karl Pearson had favoured the need to strengthen the state against liberal individualism and to improve Britain’s population by additions of superior racial stock. Most revealing of all is the title of Pearson’s book. It was called The Moral Basis of Socialism. WJ Sanderson and his Order of the Red Rose combined working-class militancy with support for eugenics, including purging Britain of alien exploitative parasites and the elimination of inferior races.
When Australia received independence in 1901, the Labor Party fully backed a policy of White Australia, stating that coloured labour would depress white working-class standards of living. William Morris Hughes was Labor prime minister during the First World War.
A veteran trade unionist, he was adamant in upholding the White Australia policy. After 1945, Arthur Chilfley, Labor deputy leader and Minister for Immigration said that no “half-castes” would be allowed. A “mongrel Australia” was to be prevented. White Australians who married Asiatics were to be deported. The Labor government was ecstatic that natural blondes could be found from among the refugees fleeing the Baltic states. A quota was applied on Jewish immigration but former Nazis were welcomed as ideal racial stock.
Indeed when one examines fascism, Nazism, apartheid as well general racism and xenophobia, as we are struck by the brazenly Leftist origins of its leaders, proponents as well as rank and file. Oswald Mosley showed the ideological shift from Labour to fascism in his pursuit of socialist technocratic planning.
On 27 March 1924 he had left the Conservatives to join the Labour Party which was dominated by the guild socialism of GDH Cole, SG Hobson and AK Orage. Guild socialism fused the cooperative movement and English medievalist reaction against the unbridled capitalism of the nineteenth century as demonstrated in the 1906 book The Restoration of the Guild System by Arthur J Penty. It was therefore no accident that British fascism was born out of the well founded reformist impatience among bona fide socialists.
Many fascists such as William Joyce joined the BUF due to the same idealism which led others to socialism. Mosley himself formerly of that aforementioned Labour administration, had like Mussolini been a one time socialist. BUF leaders included significant numbers and influential people from the Left: Alexander Raven Thompson was a former socialist, John Beckett and Robert Forgan were once Labour MPs, while WJ Leaper and John Scanlon had come from the Independent Labour Party.
Propaganda in Blackshirt and Action positioned the BUF as a rival and alternative to Labour for working class votes and the impoverished victims of the unhealthy economy, painting the Labour Party as having empty commitment to socialism. Indeed John Beckett claimed the BUF had more sincere socialist convictions than his former political home, Labour. With Corbyn in charge of Labour it seems that the wheel has come full circle almost a century later.
Now with the Soviet demise, Corbyn glosses over the fact that modern Russia is more criminal, more malignant, and more inclined towards murder than any evil corporation of western capitalism.
On July 6, 2011, Corbyn told the House of Commons: “There is a huge memorial movement within Russia today on behalf of those [Soviet soldiers] who are still not recognised for the sacrifices they made.” Yes but it was the USSR which helped start Nazi aggression. For all his anti-fascist posturing, he ignores this basic fact. The Non-Agression Pact of 23 August 1939 was followed by the notorious treaty of friendship which resulted in the rape and division of Poland by both Germany and the USSR.
On 11 February 1940 a trade treaty exchange Soviet raw material and food for German machinery and military equipment. By a treaty dated 10 January 1941 the agreement was confirmded for another year. Stalin sent personal congratulations to Hitler for his quick victory over France while Soviet propaganda beamed extravagant displays of pro-Nazi sympathy. Millions of tonnes of grain, timber and metals poured into Germany from the USSR.
The Soviets even shipped materials to Germany from fellow Axis power Japan across its own Trans-Siberian railway. Soviet oil fuelled Panzers and the Luftwaffe with German machinery and arms replenishing the supplies of the USSR.
Hence while working in Berlin in 1940 as part of the Soviet commission monitoring deliveries of German technology to the USSR under the terms of the Nazi-Soviet pact, interpreter Valentin Berezhkov was surprised at the striking resemblance of his surroundings. Hitler had unqualified respect only for Stalin, while the latter only ever trusted his German counterpart. Hitler was ready to join with the USSR in order to destroy the liberal democracies in the West.
Although the Nazis looked down upon the racially inferior Slavs, they admired the ideological commitment of the Bolsheviks while looking down upon their fascist allies such as Italy and Romania. In 1942, Dr. Goebbels said that while Fascism was only superficial, National Socialism came from the roots. In 1943 Himmler went even further:
“Fascism and National Socialism are two fundamentally different things . . . . There is absolutely no comparison between Fascism and National Socialism as spiritual ideological movements.”
Back in the 1920s Hitler himself said:
“In our movement the two extremes come together: the Communists from the Left and the officers and the students from the Right. The two have always been the most active elements. . . . The Communists were the idealists of Socialism.”
Goebbels wanted a geopolitical tryst with the USSR. No surprise then that both Stalin and Hitler were enduring allies from 1939 to 1941, joining hands in raping Poland. Poles suffered terribly, thousands being marked for deportation, enslavement or extermination, the last element being a factor which befell the elite.
Stalin would have found Hitler’s cleansing of Poland’s leadership very familiar to his own annihilation program. Stalin had already been impressed of how Hitler had murdered his own Nazi rivals in the Night of the Long Knives. Hitler’s SS and Gestapo functioned like the Soviet NKVD, and his Five-Year Plan was modeled on Stalin’s Five-Year Plans. Enslaving the Poles was just one of many meeting points between Nazi and Soviet regimes.
With Hitler now apprentice to Stalin, was there really any difference between his National Socialism and the latter’s “socialism in one country”? Even after the Nazi-Soviet Axis fell, Stalin is said to have said that the combined forces of the USSR and Third Reich would have been invincible.
As late as February 1945 Hitler said that both he and Stalin could have created a durable entente.
The USSR rehabilitated many former Nazis into the security and administrative machinery of East Germany, especially the police and Stasi. Remer’s new party, the SRP, was well received in East Germany and like other postwar radical German nationalists, received Soviet backing. Fritz Grobba, Hitler’s former spymaster in the Middle East, became ambassador to Saudi Arabia and Iraq.
He also became the Soviet Foreign Ministry director of Arab affairs in Moscow, facilitating the arms deal between Czechoslovakia and Nasser’s Egypt. Former Nazis such as Grobba were essential to the Communist penetration of Arab countries.
In The Footsteps of Himmler
It is common among the hard Left to call India’s BJP and linked RSS as right-wing and even fascist movements. Yet there was never any history of collaboration with the Third Reich or European fascist movements. That is complete contrast to certain individuals, ideologies and outfits which are regarded as friends and allies by the new Labour Party. In 2014, Corbyn spoke at the Islamic Centre of England at an event celebrating the 35th anniversary of the Iranian Revolution.
He praised Iran’s “tolerance and acceptance of other faiths, traditions and ethnic groupings in Iran” and said “I respect Iran’s history. I respect what brought about the revolution in 1979”.
He has also been supportive of al-Quds Day rallies. Corbyn has taken thousands of pounds in gifts from organisations closely linked to the terror group Hamas, whose operatives he once described as “friends”. Iran’s former leader Mahmoud Ahmadinejad formally ‘questioning’ the reliability of the historical evidence of the Holocaust.
Yet Corbyn has travelled to Tehran at the expense of a secretive British-Iranian multi-millionaire who has employed a number of other British parliamentarians as consultants to build business links with the country. Iran it must remembered sponsors literature denying the Holocaust and in 2006 hosted a conference in Tehran where the very crime itself was put under question. Attendees included former KKK leader David Duke, French revisionist professor Robert Faurisson and Bendikt Frings of Germany’s neo-Nazi party the NPD.
In February 2013, Corbyn and his wife travelled to Gaza thanks to a £2,800 gift from Interpal, a British charity banned by the US government as “part of the funding network of Hamas” and as a terrorist organisation in its own right. His own Shadow Foreign Secretary Emily Thornberry cut her work in the Commons short to address the controversial Cordoba Foundation which has links to the Muslim Brotherhood.
On 6 November 2018, Imam Shakeel was invited to appear at the Lewisham Labour Against Racism public meeting tonight alongside Labour MPs Janet Daby and Vicky Foxcroft. Begg is head of the Lewisham Islamic Centre attended by Lee Rigby’s killers, and lost a libel action in 2016 against the BBC after it called him an “extremist”. He has previously called for Muslims to wage “jihad against the Jews”.
The Labour Party under Corbyn has had disturbing links with radical Islamic movements. Corbyn is a patron of the Palestinian Solidarity Campaign and had campaigned extensively for Palestinian rights. In 2002, Jeremy Corbyn travelled to the West Bank to meet Yasser Arafat at the height of the Intifada. The then-backbencher said Arafat gave a “very strong message of defiance” in his Ramallah compound.
In 2014, Corbyn visited Tunisia where he took up an invitation to join a delegation paying respects to those killed in a 1985 Israeli bombing of the Palestinian Liberation Organisation (PLO) headquarters in Tunis. Among those present were high-level Palestinian figures including Fatah Central Committee member Azzam al-Ahmad, Maher Taher of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine and Palestinian ambassador to Tunisia, Salman el-Herfi. If Corbyn ever condemns groups like ISIS it is only by blaming western imperialism for starting the situation. In this he is taking a path well-trodden by Nazism.
Corbyn’s hero Yasser Arafat was among those who benefited, and enjoyed a close relationship with Otto Skorzeny, a notorious Nazi who escaped justice and found refuge in Egypt, recruiting former SS and Wehrmacht officers to train the Egyptian army. Indeed neo-Nazi Germans fought with Arafat’s Fatah organisation. Otto Ernest Remer had crushed the July 1944 plot against Hitler. In 1953 he fled to Egypt where he preached that international Jewry was oppressing Germans and Arabs. He also helped train FLN guerrillas fighting the French occupation of Algeria.
Other help came from Johan von Leers and also former SS officer Ritter Franz von Scholl trained FLN rebels at a castle in Tétouan in Morocco. Indeed some neo-Nazis and former top Nazis such as Skorzeny envisioned a German-Islamic belt from Europe to Indonesia.
Himmler’s antipathy towards Christianity was not reflected in his attitude towards Islam, which he viewed as an excellent entry qualification to the Waffen SS. One school each, at Dresden and Göttingen, were established to train imams for Bosnian Muslim volunteers. Himmler made his pro-Islam views clear to Goebbels:
“I have nothing against Islam because it educates the men in this Division for me, and promises them heaven if they fight and are killed in action. That’s a highly practical and attractive religion for soldiers!”
Neat racial theories by the Nazi command were compromised by pragmatism on the Eastern Front. This was most notable in the employment of Hilfswillige or Hiwis, “Willing Helpers” who did menial jobs. These were later formed in November 1941 into armed groups, the Osttruppen or Eastern Troops.
A large number of these Hiwis were from Soviet Muslim and usually Turkic peoples: Kazakhs, Uzbeks, Tatars, Tajiks, Chechens, Ingush and Azeris. Specific battalions were set up such as the Turkestanisch-Kaukasisch-Mohammedanische Legion (Turkistan-Caucasian-Mohammedan Legion) which was mostly Azeri, the Turkmen dominated Turkestanische Legion and the Volga Tatar dominated Wolgatatarische Legion. Azeri soldiers took an active part in the Nazi suppression of the Polish uprising in Warsaw under Bor-Komorowski.
The Mufti of Jerusalem, Mohammed Haj Amin al-Husseini, was provided with an elegant villa in Berlin and an SS stipend. He toured Bosnia in 1943 meeting Muslim leaders and speaking in mosques in order to drum up volunteers for the Muslim legion known as SS-Handschar.
The Nazi-Islamic Axis came in useful when former Nazi war criminals found sanctuary in Arab countries. Egyptian security apparatus was transformed by the arrival of Alois Moser, SS-Gruppenführer who was involved in the extermination of Ukraine’s Jews, and Egen Eichberger a fomer battalion commander in the Sonderkommando.
Egypt also welcomed Joachim Däumling, formerly of the Gestapo and who had served with the Ustashe in Croatia. Many German war criminals found refuge in Egypt where the fascist Green Shirts had praised Hitler as “Abu Ali.
The military socialist revolutionary government employed many former Nazis. Otto Skorzeny was respected by Egypt’s revolutionary leaders including Nasser. The Mufti himself arrived in 1946, as did Remer in 1953 who claimed that international Jewry was oppressing Germans and Arabs.
The Egyptian Information Ministry was led by Omar Almin, churning out anti-Semitic propaganda. He was close to the Mufti and was in fact Nazi émigré Johann von Leers who converted to Islam. Another Nazi German expat, Louis Heiden, became Louis Al-Hadj and translated Mein Kampf into Arabic.
Egypt’s Nazi expat community applauded Nasser’s expulsion of all Jews and helped train his army on military techniques such as in the Suez War. Yasser Arafat was among those who benefited, and enjoyed a close relationship with Skorzeny. He was also in contact with Remer in Damascus.
Indeed neo-Nazi Germans fought with Arafat’s Fatah organisation. Von Leers had worked in Goebbel’s Propaganda Ministry, writing books calling for the extermination of the Jews. When he escaped American internment arrived in Cairo in the 1950s, he was welcomed by the Mufti. He showed exuberance in his newly found faith of Islam by praying that Allah would strike Adenauer dead and making this revealing comment:
If there is any hope to free the world from Jewish tyranny, it is with the Moslems, who stand steadfastly against Zionism, colonialism, and imperialism.
It could almost have come from Corbyn himself!
Belgium’s former Nazi collaborator Jean-François Thiriart visited Iraq in 1968 in order to elicit Arab help in forming a neofascist European brigade to fight American “occupation” of the continent. Thiriart was welcomed by the Ba’ath party leadership and would enjoy a close friendship with Saddam Hussein as he advocated European support for the Arabs against Israel. He also forged links with George Habash, while his disciple Claudio Mutti founded the Italian-Libyan Friendship Society with Gaddafi in 1969.
Mutti published an Italian translation of both the Protocols of the Elders of Zion and Gaddafi’s Green Book, as well as founding the PLO or Lotto di Popole (Struggle of the People).
Mutti converted to Islam, publishing a book on the quotations of Ayatollah Khomeini, to complement his existing works praising the “conservative” revolution, Russian nationalism and Romania’s Iron Guard.
In the late 1960s Nouvelle Droite’s leader Alain de Benoist and follower of Italian national socialist Julius Evola spoke of an alliance between the European and Islamic world as both were threatened by the faceless, soulless and degenerate mass consumer society of American capitalism.
The Gulf War of 1990 allowed neo-Nazis to show loyalty to their Islamic allies. Michael Kuhnen said that Kuwait was the Silesia of Iraq and contacted that country’s embassy in Bonn in order to offer the service of European mercenaries as the Freedom Corps to fight their common American and Zionist enemies.
Not only does Corbyn ignore the plight of Hindus forced out of Kashmir, he sides with their very oppressor quite openly. On 8 September 2017, in an interview to BBC Urdu, Corbyn said it was not the responsibility of Pakistan alone to fight terrorism because the world as a whole needed to beat off the ‘collective challenge’. Commenting on US President Donald Trump’s recent allegations that Pakistan offered safe havens to ‘agents of chaos’, the top leader of the Labour Party said:
“Pakistan is a country which should be treated respectfully. It should not be criticised from the outside”. In the same interview he expressed support for Rohingya Muslims and ‘advised’ Myanmar leader Aung San Suu Kyi to respect their human rights the same way the world did hers when she was under house arrest. Yet again no mention of Hindus massacred, raped and forced out of Pakistan and Kashmir. Again only certain people of colour make the litmus test set by Corbyn and his cult.
Despite the Nazi vilification of blacks, Germany used America’s very real and often deadly racial oppression of slave descendants to its advantage.
Following the international outcry against the pogroms perpetrated by the Nazis against the Reich’s Jews during Kristallnacht (in November 1938, Goebbels’ propaganda ministry denouncing the USA as hypocrites.
The SS newspaper, Das Schwarze Korps, in its front-page cartoon, “The Last Scream,” showed a Jewish Uncle Sam spouting the words,
“We are protesting in the name of humanity against the barbaric methods in Germany.”
Juxtaposed with this image were portrayals of screaming African-Americans being lynched and executed in the electric chair.
During the war Nazi leaflets aimed at African-Americans said that in Germany there had never been lynchings of blacks.
The lack of coherent Nazi policy towards blacks meant that despite persecution, often in the form of forced sterilisation, some Germans of African descent even served in the Wehrmacht.
In addition, there was an influx of foreign volunteers during the African campaign, which led to the existence of a number of black people in the Wehrmacht in such units as the Free Arabian Legion.
Almost two decades later, Lincoln Rockwell, leader of the American Nazi Party attended the Nation of Islam conference in Chicago where he praised the Black Muslims and in turn was honoured by Malcolm X.
The notorious photograph of him at the meeting with two henchmen, the only white men present, has become emblematic of this bizarre and twisted alliance.
In March 1933 the Nazis banned what they called “Judeo-Negroid” music from the radio. But in this they only reflected the views of many for whom rampant racism against blacks was normal. This included intellectuals in the USSR. In 1922 Meierhold, adapting a novel by Ilya Ehrenburg to the stage, complete with jazz band, depicted a sinister plot by Jewish American capitalists to conquer Europe by colonising it with Africans.
But this plot was overturned by revolutionary heroes tunneling from Petrograd to Wall Street, thus saving Europe from the horrors of cannibalism. This play was staged at the height of the Rhine crisis, during which the middle class throughout Europe fantasised about being swamped by blacks. Maxim Gorky, depicted jazz as a capitalist conspiring to brainwash and control black Americans, and this dangerous music was no acting as a subversive force within Soviet society. This was a thinly disguised cover for the crudest racial stereotyping.
Corbyn is the heir to a long tradition of racism and antisemitism among the Left. Henri de Saint-Simon, Charles Fourier, Alphonse Toussenel, Proudhon, George Duchere were socialist pioneers in France who were deeply antisemitic.
The Left’s hatred of blacks was perhaps most poignantly and nauseatingly expressed during the French occupation of the Rhineland from 1919 to 1923 which led to hysterical fears of racial pollution of the white race by France’s African troops raping German females.
ED Morel, founder of the Congo Reform Society that had campaigned against Belgian atrocities and first Secretary of the left-wing Union of Democratic Control, interpreted (as did many Socialists and Communists) the deployment of black troops as an instrument of capitalist oppression.
The Sixties campaigners in Britain fought racism, sexism and homophobia. But this also fostered an aggressive individualism and aggressive identity politics which threatened basic freedoms. Multiculturalism sees life as a contest between racial and sexual tribes, a romanticisation of tribalism which is dangerous and extremely destructive.
Hence the very fact that Corbyn touts his anti-racist credentials should not let us digress from the reality. His refusal to tackle antisemitism must be seen in this light. But while this is publicised, less well-known are his anti-Hindu views. His support for Dalits and Kashmir is a thinly disguised attack on Hindus.
His refusal to engage with Hindus in this matter is indicative of this as also indicated by Chakrabarti’ continual wall of silence when contacted. While it would be easy to resort to the multi-culturalist tribalism that Corbyn’s Labour Party seems to be obsessed with foisting upon the country, let us also remember that this type of divisiveness benefits no community in Britain.
On 29 July 2019, Fiyaz Mughal wrote “Pro-Palestinian Jeremy Corbyn Has Never Really Cared About Muslim Suffering” in Israel’s Haaretz in which he exposed Corbyn’s opposition to NATO airstrikes which saved Kosovars from Serbia’s genocidal intent. Indeed Corbyn has never answered for his stance on Kosovo, nor has he acknowledged the massacre of Kosovar Muslims that took place.
Progressive, feminist and gay Muslims and those questioning the Iranian state’s crushing interference in daily life face repression would take issue with his appearance on Press TV and laudation of Iran as a tolerant country. Corbyn became aggravated when questioned by Channel 4 about his appearance on Press TV.
On 21 April 2019, Haras Rafiq, chief executive of the Quilliam counter-extremism think tank said that a Labour government would be “dangerous for Britain” according to a leading counter-extremism expert, who warned
“if he becomes the Prime Minister we’ve got a problem”.
Speaking to Express.co.uk Mr Rafiq said:
“I think it’s dangerous for Britain, for the UK, if somebody like Jeremy Corbyn who has been a supporter of Hamas and other terrorist entities becomes Prime Minister: “He has an affinity, he has sympathy and empathy, and certainly supports some of their values and ideas.” Rafiq was highly critical of what he termed the “regressive left”, a phrase used to describe those on the hard-left who express solidarity with reactionary groups and regimes as long as they are anti-Western. He argued: “The left and the far-left, the regressive left, is suffering from a phenomenon that we call the bigotry of low expectations:
“They will stand up for LGBT rights, they will stand up against discrimination, but not when it’s Muslims….It’s almost neo-orientalism where they believe, in inverted commas, ‘the savages don’t know better’, and it’s worrying.”
As Hindus are the ultimate savages in Corbyn’s eyes, it is very worrying indeed. Hinduphobia is now espoused at the very top of the Labour Party. Complaints made are either ignored or met with threats. In terms of anti-racism there is certainly one community of colour and visibly non-white appearance who do not benefit from Corbyn’s anti-racist credentials.
Indeed they find themselves the convenient scapegoat for a virulent form of prejudice that rears its ugly head and employs all the old colonialist racism in its arsenal. Behind all those liberal ideas and pontifications about progress and diversity lies a seething animosity towards Hindus. Corbyn’s refusal to recognise Hindu victims of sickening violence in Godhra, Kashmir and elsewhere is but the most obvious example. To the Hindus, it is Corbyn who is the nefarious face of a new resurgent Far Right.