Notes of the Month: Labour Party Problems (1935)

The Notes of the Month column from the October 1935 issue of the Socialist Standard

Labour Party Problems

 

Whilst the Labour Party has officially declared for sanctions against Italy should the latter carry out its threat of attacking Abyssinia, this attitude has met with disapproval from many of its own members, including several prominent officials. Mr. Lansbury has threatened to resign his position as Leader because the application of sanctions may involve the use of armed force. He is now opposed to all wars, because "they are against the teachings of Christianity.” He has now evolved a plan which will, in his opinion, put an end to all possibilities of wars in the future. This is nothing less than the “sharing of all the raw materials, markets and unoccupied territory of the world.” He wants the League of Nations to appoint a commission of economic and scientific experts to draw up a scheme for carrying out these proposals.” They could quite easily tell us how to meet the insistent demands of Italy, Germany and other nations for expansion, and how to pool natural resources, develop the markets, and satisfy the demands of the millions of people starving and sick in Asia, Africa and Europe.” (Daily Herald, September 16th, 1935. Italics ours.)

That Mr. Lansbury can hope that the present owners of territory, mineral resources, etc., will relinquish or share their property unless forced to do so is sheer madness. That he expects such a scheme, even if carried out to “satisfy the demands of the sick and starving millions,” is equally illusory. The “sick and starving millions” are the propertyless workers and peasants, and they are as much a feature of the countries already in possession of raw materials, territory and markets such as Britain, France and the U.S.A. as they are of Germany, Italy Abyssinia, or any other country. The world now belongs to the capitalists and not to the workers, and if it is parcelled out in different proportions or pooled among the present owners, how can that benefit the proletariat?

* * *

 

“Pious ” Enemy No. 2.

The Archbishop of Canterbury is also a Christian. Nevertheless, he can foresee circumstances in which a war may become “Christian." In his broadcast on September 1st he made it clear that, in his opinion, a war fought with the blessing of the League of Nations had also the blessing of the Church. We would add that history does not tell us of many wars in which the Church has withheld its “blessing.”

* * *

Where Does he Stand?

Sir Stafford Cripps is the Chairman of the Socialist League, an organisation affiliated to the Labour Party. He is opposed to Labour’s policy of sanctions, and does not agree with its support of the League of Nations. In an article in the Sunday Referee (September 15th, 1935), entitled ”Where I Stand,” he says: “While capitalism controls our national, and imperialism our international life, the actions of our Government will be determined by capitalist and imperialist interests.” Correct, Sir Stafford, but how do you square that statement with your membership of the Labour Party, which plainly holds the opposite point of view?

* * *

United Front at Last

The Communists seem to have achieved their hearts' desire, that much-sought-after "United Front." And it is of a magnitude that must exceed their most sanguine hopes. For on the Italian-Abyssinian dispute they are solidly behind the National Government (or should we say in front of them?). "The League's Covenant must be upheld by all means at our disposal," declared Sir Samuel Hoare, British Foreign Minister, in a speech at Geneva. And he has the solid support of the bulk of the Labour Party, the whole of the Liberal Party, and most certainly the Communist Party, who have issued impressive-looking proclamations, urging the public to support the League. As their sponsors at Moscow are now members of the League this is not surprising. But their attempts to explain their "policy" are ludicrous. Lenin's condemnation of the League as a “Thieves' Kitchen" still holds good with us, though the disciples of Lenin grace its functions. And what has become of their erstwhile boast, to "turn every imperialist war into a civil war " ?

* * *

Where we Stand

"The people who do not own a country and its resources have nothing to fight for excepting Socialism "! That is our policy. The workers of Abyssinia, many of whom are still chattel-slaves, should not be inveigled into fighting for the property of Abyssinian princes. The workers of Italy have nothing to gain by fighting to secure more territory and raw materials for their masters. And the business of the workers the world over is not to take sides with either of the two Governments, or any other Government or League of Governments. Their business is to take the world out of the hands of the present owners and make it the possession of all. That is not the attitude of any other political party in this country.

* * *

Another Mining Disaster

Seventeen miners died as a result of an explosion in a coal mine near Barnsley (Yorks.) on September 12th. There have now been three big mining disasters this year, all claiming a heavy toll of life. These tragedies emphasise the conditions of workers who, for a pittance of less than £2 per week, have to risk their lives. And we often have to answer questions like: "Do not the capitalists have to risk their money in order to make a profit?" The miners are now preparing to struggle for an increase in their wages. Whilst we commend such struggles, we must at the same time point out that such a struggle, even if successful, will only mean a few more shillings a week. And we ask you miners: "How can you be satisfied with that when, by organising into the S.P.G.B., you can help obtain the Means of Life, including the mines, for society as a whole." Then the risk to human life would be lessened and, in return for less arduous and unpleasant work, all the comforts of life would be yours.

* * *

A “ Corrective ” for Capitalism

"Capitalism is your servant and must never be your master—but it must be treated fairly. When it goes wrong, as it has gone wrong, it must be corrected." (Mr. Bennett, Canadian Premier, Daily Herald, September 13th, 1935.) We propose that the working class makes itself "master" of the political machine, and then administer one stroke—the appropriation of the land, factories, means of transport, etc., in the name of society.

* * *

“Men of Action ” at Work

The German "Men of Action," Hitler and Co., assembled at Nuremberg, where the German Reichstag was called to deal with problems alleged to be of vital importance to the German workers. General Goering presented the first Bill, which provides that the Swastika flag shall become the State flag of Germany. Thus a tremendous victory was won for the German working population! Further evidence of the Nazi Government's concern for the conditions of the German workers was shown by the following new laws (Daily Herald, September 16th): —

For the protection of the German blood and honour, this law forbids the marriage between Jews and Germans or related lines.

Jews cannot hire German maid's in their household under the age of 45.

The joy of German working people should be boundless. How different from Socialists, who are merely concerned with the solution of the problem of poverty!

* * *

Without Trimmings

The agenda of the Labour Party Conference, held at Brighton this month, contains several interesting items. A resolution submitted by the Southport Trades Council and Labour Party reads as follows: "That the next General Election be fought without trimmings, on the policy outlined at the Southport Conference, under the title of ‘For Socialism and Peace,' special stress being laid upon:—

1. The immediate nationalisation of the land and all minerals.
2. The immediate establishment of a 40-hour week, with no reduction in economic circumstances.
3. The immediate raising of the school-leaving age to 15 years, with full maintenance during the last year at school.
4. General retirement from industry at the age of 60, with pension, such pension to be raised to £1 per week for a single person and £2 per week for married couples.

“ It is urged that this general and specific policy be a ‘Stand or Fall' programme, and declares that it is the lowest minimum of policy as Socialists this Conference is prepared to tolerate.”

So now you can “stand or fall” for “Socialism and Peace” with or without “trimmings”—and get “trimmed". 

A further resolution submitted by the Warrington T.C. and L.P. reads as follows: —

“That this Conference, believing that there is a limit to the possibility of Social Reform legislation within the capitalist system, and realising definitely that the Labour Movement of this country has declared for a Socialist policy, agrees that the Movement should centre the whole of its propaganda and educational activities on making Socialism and Socialist Policy its only objective” 

”The Conference further declares that the concentration of the Party on the support of the policy of doles and palliatives has become inimical to its Socialist objective, and that the next Labour Government should set out immediately to adopt such Socialist measures as will render such doles and palliatives unnecessary.”

Everything depends upon what the people at Warrington mean by “Socialism” and "Socialist measures.” But if they mean to change the Labour Party from a reformist organisation to a Socialist one their task is hopeless. The bulk of the Labour Party membership is not Socialist, and the job of converting them cannot be done from within. And why trouble to change the Labour Party if there is already a party in existence whose only objective is Socialism, namely, the S.P.G.B.

Labour Party headquarters have shown what they think of the above resolutions by putting it at the tail-end of the agenda, under the heading of “Miscellaneous.”

* * *

S.P.G.B. and the B.B.C.

Last year we approached the B.B.C. with a view to obtaining permission to put our case over the radio. We received a polite letter, informing us that arrangements had already been made for a representative of “Left-Wing Socialism” to broadcast. As we are not “Left-Wing,” but Socialists, as, in fact, we belong to “no wing” of the Reformist Movement we repudiated the right of anyone to speak on our behalf, unless appointed by ourselves. Now we have again approached the B.B.C. and hope that these gentlemen will grant us the privilege that has not been denied to the other political organisations. If and when we get our turn we hope to be able to make it quite clear to the listeners that as the S.P.G.B. is the only party in this country that does not recruit support on questions of day-to-day legislation under capitalism but gets its backing solely on the issue of Socialism versus Capitalism, we have nothing in common with those who, calling themselves “Socialists,” are, in fact, nothing of the kind. Scientific, revolutionary Socialism in Great Britain is represented by the S.P.G.B.

Sid Rubin

Capitalism v. Socialism (1935)

From the October 1935 issue of the Socialist Standard

 

Trade Union official cites Russia!

There has lately come before us a copy of The General and Municipal "Workers' Journal (June, 1935). Reminiscent of a parish magazine, its pages contain so many incorrect statements and samples of loose thinking that it would take several issues of the Socialist Standard to deal with them individually. It may, however, be of interest to deal with the “Notes” of the General Secretary, Mr. Charles Dukes, especially those under the heading of “Capitalism v. Socialism.” The United States is quoted as an example of capitalism, whilst Russia is referred to as “Socialist Russia.” The General Secretary states that the disaster of capitalism in the United States is due to the fact that they have no policy for refunding their National debt, which has increased by nearly 12,000 million dollars as a result of the “New Deal” policy. The General Secretary should know, however, that national debts are not necessarily disliked by the capitalist class—who are the only people concerned; in fact, some of them like them so well, that there is at the moment a widespread newspaper campaign for expanding armaments by means of a £250,000,000 loan, instead of by means of taxation.

A national debt is nothing more than a sum of money owed by the capitalist class as a whole to that section of the capitalist class which invests its money in war loans and other government securities. The incomes of the whole class are taxed in order to pay the interest to that section. National debts, therefore, are no indication of disaster to the capitalist class.

His remarks on Socialism show that Mr. Dukes knows not what this is. Our own definition of Socialism will be found by reference to our object on the centre page of every issue of the Socialist Standard. As it is now fairly well known that the conditions in Russia do not correspond to this definition—in particular, the means of production are controlled, not democratically, but by the controllers of the Communist Party—it will be obvious that Socialism has not been established in Russia.

Again, as under Socialism goods would be produced solely for use, the necessity of the exchange medium—money—would disappear, yet the General Secretary refers to “money,” “income,” and “expense,” as part of the Russian “Socialist” economy. Another reason given for the “success” of “Socialist” Russia is, that she “does not seek the assistance of foreign loans.” Here, again, he is wrong. Instances of foreign loans negotiated by the Bolsheviks have been recorded previously, but the following is a case in point: —

BIG LOAN TO SOVIET.

Prague, Monday.

Soviet representatives to-day signed an agreement with Czecho-Slovakian banks for a loan of £2,083,000 for five years at six per cent, to finance purchases of Czech manufactures by Russia. —British United Press.

(News Chronicle, June 4th, 1935.)

As to the nature of the “success” itself, this would appear to consist of the fact that there are insufficient workers for the available jobs, and that output in the heavy industries has increased as compared with a year ago. And this is the “success” of “Socialism”! It is, of course, simply the conditions which are regarded as successful under capitalism.

The case for Socialism as against capitalism can be put both correctly and much more simply. Briefly it is that capitalism—a system of society based upon the private ownership of the means of production—produces certain unpleasant effects upon an enslaved class called workers, viz.: poverty and insecurity most of the time, and, by way of a change, unemployment and war. It is, therefore, in the interest of the workers to completely change the basis of a society which produces such effects. As the opposite of private ownership is common ownership. Socialists advocate the replacement of the existing form of society by one based upon this common ownership of the means of production and distribution, namely, Socialism. This result can, however, only be achieved by a class-conscious working class organised for that purpose. It is for that purpose that the Socialist Party of Great Britain was formed, and it is up to all workers who agree with our position to join with us and help on with the work. Now, fellow workers, what about it?

R. Milborne

Educational Classes (1935)

Party News from the October 1935 issue of the Socialist Standard

Blogger's Notes:

• 'Stewart' was Stella Stewart, who is better known today as Stella Jackson, and who was the daughter of SPGB founding members, T. A. Jackson and Kitty Hawkins. By 1935, T. A. Jackson was a longstanding leading member of the Communist Party of Great Britain.
• 'Hayden' was Harry Hayden. He joined the Battersea Branch of the SPGB in April 1932, and was a member of the Party until he resigned his membership in December 1959. He rejoined the Party in July 1975 and remained in the Party until his death in 1992. His obituary appeared in the September 1992 issue of the Socialist Standard.
• 'L. Otway' was the husband of May Otway. Both joined Walthamstow Branch of the SPGB in October 1924. Whilst May Otway resigned her membership of the Party in April 1940, L. Otway was lapsed from Party membership in May 1942.
• 'Reginald' was Augustus Snellgrove's pen-name/ party name.
• 'E. W. Brightmore' , a former member of the Labour Party and the CPGB, was a member of Leyton Branch from 1933 until his membership was lapsed in 1936.
• 'Goldberg' was David Goldberg. He joined the Hackney Branch of the SPGB in March 1925. He's mentioned in Barltrop's book, The Monument, as dying during World War Two. He was killed in action in Italy in 1945.

Notes by the Way: What Mussolini did for Italy (1935)

The Notes by the Way Column from the October 1935 issue of the Socialist Standard

What Mussolini did for Italy

 

Here is a brief description of the lofty principles on which the Fascist Government has trained its boys and young men, under the guise of “education."

There minds have been saturated with bellicose sentiments. The word Fatherland has lost for them its meaning, apparently obsolete, of love for the native land and its inhabitants, and has come to signify a proud and pugnacious attitude to the foreigner. While they were still boys the rifle and the machine-gun were put into their hands. All their Sundays were spent in military exercises. In their elementary school they were taught from a State text-book in which the martial virtues were exalted as the best virtues of a citizen. Indeed, later on they were taught that the citizen in Italy is from 6 to 60 a soldier, and that Italy, in the words of the chief of Fascism, must be a “military, militaristic, and warlike nation." (Times, September 5th.)

* * *

 

Capitalist Crisis and Capitalist War

 

Sir George Paish, in a letter to the Press, recently drew attention to an aspect of the Abyssinian conflict which has received little notice, that is the similarity between the condition of Italy now and in 1896, when also war was waged on Abyssinia.

"At that time the world was suffering from a severe economic and financial crisis, and the distress of Italy caused her statesmen to seek relief in a policy of conquest. The world to-day is suffering from a crisis more severe than 40 years ago, and Italy is in even greater distress than she was then. In consequence, Italy desires a colony to give her a market for her products, to which her people can emigrate, and from which she can obtain food, raw material, and gold .... economic and financial distress is the real cause of the difficulty.” (Times, August 31st.)

Here we have from a world-famed economist, who hopes and believes that capitalism can and should be saved, a fairly frank admission that capitalism is at the root of modern wars.

* * *

 

The Rate of Increase of Output in Industry

 

The rash speculations of Douglasites and others about a supposed vast and rapid increase of output in industry, due to the introduction of improved machinery and processes, have received additional refutation in a survey of output in the Economic Journal (September, 1935), by Ely Devons, of the Economic Research Section, Victoria University of Manchester. Basing his survey on the census of production and other material, he finds that the increase of output per head of the workers in all manufacturing industry in this country increased by at least 14 per cent. in the six years from 1924 to 1930. He thinks the actual figure will be somewhat larger than 14 per cent. for reasons given in the article. Making a reasonable allowance for this, it will be seen that the increase per annum is rather less than 3 per cent.

Taking the smaller range of industries which are covered by the Board of Trade’s index of production he finds that the increase of output per head of the workers actually in work was 20 per cent., or a little more, in the nine years 1924—1933. This gain is well below 3 per cent. a year.

These estimates agree with others given in the Socialist Standard from time to time.

* * *

 

The Output in Mining and Iron and Steel

 

A writer in Forward (August 24th), who shares the misconception that productivity increases at a “tremendous” rate, gives figures relating to coal-mining, an industry in which a great deal of machinery has been introduced. He claims that after allowing for the big reduction in the total output of coal, for the decrease in the number of miners, and for the greater amount of short time, output per head has increased by 30.4 per cent. in the ten years 1923—1933. Even if this were the whole story the increase each year would still be less than 3 per cent. of the previous year's output. Actually, however, it leaves out of account any additional labour used up in the manufacture and maintenance, etc., of the machines, also the fact that, the output per head in 1923 represented a big decrease, as compared with 1913 (from 260 tons a year to 229 tons).

 

On the other hand, miners’ hours of work are shorter than before the War.

 

If these modifications are allowed for it will be seen that miners’ output per head now as compared with that in 1913 has increased at the outside by not much more than 2 per cent. a year. The rate of increase in recent years may have been somewhat larger, but much of this has merely made up for the previous decline in output due, among other causes, to the fact that coal becomes more difficult to get at as the mines become more worked out.

 

An estimate of the increase of productivity in engineering, shipbuilding and iron and steel, based on the index of output published by the Royal Economic Society, and on the number of workers actually at work in these trades, shows that output per head between 1924 and 1930 increased by about 3 per cent. a year.

 

* * *

 

Major Douglas puts his Cards on the Table

There is certainly one thing for which Major Douglas deserves praise, that is for his very definite statement of his attitude towards the Alberta Social Credit Government. He might, had he wished, have expressed vague and qualified approval without committing himself to anything definite. Instead, in an article in the Sunday Express, he stated in plain language exactly what he believes the Alberta experiment will produce. As we know that the application of the Douglas theories will fail to achieve the results Major Douglas anticipates, it is a suitable occasion to place on record what he wrote in the Sunday Express on September 1st, 1935. The following passages are extracted from the article in question:

Mr. Aberhart, the new Prime Minister, is a man of magnetic personality and a magnificent orator. In the heat of the election he went rather beyond any proposals that I have made, but it is entirely false to say that I am in disagreement with him, I admire him greatly (Italics ours.)

He promised during the election to pay every Albertan five pounds a month. I hope and believe that once his plans are in full operation that figure will be substantially increased.

If the credit of a rich province is made fully available to its people without artificial restrictions of any kind, there will be no poverty. Everyone will have enough to eat, a decent home, opportunities for recreation and adequate leisure.

That, I believe, will happen in Alberta if the new Government sticks to its policy. It will probably take fifteen months before the plan is in full operation, and that fifteen months will be a period of great difficulty and bitter strife. The vested interests of the bankers and financiers will not relinquish their monopoly without a hard struggle.

In 15 months from now, I believe that Alberta will be a blessed land. Unemployment will no longer be a menace to its citizens. No wheat will rot in its elevators. Fine new roads will enable tourists to appreciate its magnificent scenery and bring further wealth to its people.

It will become one of the show places of the world.

 

* * *

 

Capitalism and Superior Brains

 

Ousted from one position after another, defenders of capitalism finally fell back on the “superior brains." The capitalist, we are told, provides all the brain-power, the ideas, the organising skill and directive ability. His was the creative genius, without which the wage and salary earners would be floundering about in muddle and chaos.

The creative geniuses of capitalism finally produced the world war and the world crisis and, in passing, they turned whole counties of Great Britain into distressed areas, where idle men and idle mills rotted together. And what about the "superior brains" meanwhile? Having produced the chaotic conditions, are they setting to work to produce a remedy? By no means. Instead, the Chairman of the Whitehead Iron & Steel Co., Ltd., of Newport, Monmouth, is offering a prize of £1,000, with additional prizes of £200 for practical suggestions for “permanently and substantially reducing existing distress in South Wales and Monmouthshire (Daily Telegraph, August 31st).

You send your answers to the Industrial Development Council of South Wales. We know the answer, but we fear nobody will receive a prize for sending it in.

 

* * *

 

"200 Companies Own Half U.S."

 

Under the above heading the Star (August 3rd) publishes a report from Reuter's Agency, stating that, according to the American Bar Association, about 200 Corporations, managed by approximately 1,000 directors, own one-half of the wealth of the United States. These 200 corporations do not include banks.

“A small number of corporations exercise a dominant influence over price control and trade practices, and virtually control the production and distribution of the country,"  a report by the Association states.

Edgar Hardcastle

Answers to correspondents. (1935)

Letters to the Editors from the October 1935 issue of the Socialist Standard

“Use of New Logic” (Yarmouth.) We do not publish anonymous letters.

 

J. Cohen (E.3); F. S. Waterfield (N.); W. T. Raynor (Pinner). Replies held over.

Ed. Comm

Letter: Socialists and Russia (1935)

Letter to the Editors from the October 1935 issue of the Socialist Standard

Socialists and Russia

August 6th, 1936.

 

Dear Sir,—I was listening to your speaker at Finsbury Park on Sunday evening, August 4th, when he remarked that the Soviet Government had issued loans from 7 to 12½ per cent. profit to subscribers, and hinted that by inviting foreigners to invest they are acting just as State capitalists and that the workers are nothing more or less than wage slaves. May I point out that these loans are used for construction of Socialistic industries and that the bulk of Russian workers, numbering several millions, are subscribers towards the loans, knowing full well the .purpose to which the money is being put. The interest given is certainly an incentive, but it should be pointed out by your speaker that as these loans are spread over an enormous number of subscribers the profit accruing to an individual investor is very small and cannot exercise any influence. Also, the number of foreign investors is estimated at less than one per centum (1%) of the total.

The Bolshevists are practical realists and know full well the impossibility of abolishing wages at the present time. As a matter of fact, this is not so very important, but what is much more essentially valuable is that the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution is held firmly in the hands of the workers themselves. If this is not practical Socialism, what is? Can it be denied that the Bolsheviks took over a graveyard and have now progressed at an amazing rate? Can it be denied that the material well-being of the Russian workers is improving from year to year, and that, to my mind, is the acid test, whether they are wage-slaves or overcoming the conditions of wage-slavery that is inherent in private capitalism.

Your speaker boasted that he is upholding the truth. Therefore he should amplify statements that are likely to be misrepresented by mischievous and unscrupulous individuals.

I remain.

Yours faithfully,

H. Jackson.

Reply.

The principal issues raised by our correspondent are: (1) Whether the social system in Russia is Socialist or Capitalist; (2) Whether the bondholders are all small investors; (3) Whether industry is progressing, and (4) Whether the material conditions of the workers are improving.

For replies to the various points, our correspondent is referred to the pamphlet "The S.P.G.B. and Questions of the Day," and to the Socialist Standard, October, 1934.

Brief replies are also given below: —

(1) Socialists from Marx onwards are agreed that characteristic features of Socialism are the common ownership and democratic control of the means of production and distribution; the production of goods only for use, not for sale; the abolition of all forms of income from the ownership of property; the abolition of the system of wage-labour; and the consequent disappearance of privilege.

Are these things found in Russia to-day? Certainly not. The Communist clique which controls the State machine maintains control of Russian industry as rigid as the control of the British Government over the Post Office. Goods are produced for sale, and at a profit. Rent, interest and profit from the ownership of property, bonds, etc., is a normal and growing feature of economic life. As our correspondent admits, the Bolsheviks, so far from having abolished the system of wage-labour, “know full well the impossibility of abolishing wages at the present time.” Lastly, by various means, including the great and growing inequality of pay between the masses of workers and the high-salaried officials, privilege is enjoyed by a fortunate minority.

(2) It is true that the great majority of bondholders own only small amounts of bonds, but exactly the same plea is made in England and America by the defenders of capitalism. In Russia, although precise figures are not available, it is known that some of the bondholders own large or comparatively large amounts. But in any event, this is beside the point. Under Socialism there will be no investors.

(3) The S.P.G.B. has not questioned the claim that Russian industry (like industry in Japan, Turkey, and other countries) has expanded rapidly since the war.

(4) The S.P.G.B. has not denied that the standard of living has risen since the Bolshevists obtained power. That does not mean, however, that we accept all of the extravagant claims made by some Communists. Russia is a country in which rigid censorship and suppression of independent working-class organisation is the normal order of things. As, therefore, it is impossible to hear the unfettered expression of the opinion of the workers themselves, we must accept with caution the claims made by the Russian Government since that Government has the usual interest in presenting the facts in a favourable light.

In conclusion, we would ask our correspondent a question. Seeing that the Russian economic system is not Socialism because it lacks the essential features of Socialism, will he tell us by what name he would describe it other than the one used by our speaker, “ State capitalism.”

Ed. Comm.

How to get to Head Office (1935)

Party News from the October 1935 issue of the Socialist Standard

Great Dover Street is a turning out of Borough High Street, near Borough (Underground) Station. The station it on the line from Morden to Hampstead and Highgate, and lies between the Bank Station and Elephant and Castle.

Blogger's Note:

I include this wee snippet as a wee SPGB in-joke as Barltrop mentions in The Monument that some Party members were up in arms in at the time when the Party decided to move to Great Dover Street in South East London. It was considered by some as the backwoods of London.

Educational Visits (1935)

Party News from the October 1935 issue of the Socialist Standard

A capital start was made on September 7th with our series of Educational Visits. Comrade Kersley threw illuminating sidelights on art in relation to the Materialist Conception of History at the Tate Gallery. It is hoped to extend to more than the twenty auditors who listened to our comrade the benefit of his knowledge by means of a lantern lecture later on. Offers of loan of lantern to organiser. If successful, other Educational Visits will be also supplemented in the same way.

Blogger's Note:

More information and background on Ted Kersley is available via his obituary which appeared in the May 1976 issue of the Socialist Standard.

Socialist Party of Canada (1935)

From the October 1935 issue of the Socialist Standard 

 

Head Office and Headquarters of the Socialist Party in Canada, 194, Market Avenue, Winnipeg, Man.

Will all those interested in the development of a revolutionary Socialist Party, and desirous of obtaining further information, write to the official Secretary, F. Neale, 179, Bannatyne Avenue, Winnipeg, Man. 

Those requiring books or pamphlets on Socialism, or wish to subscribe to the Socialist Standard, official organ of the S.P. of G.B. (subscription rates, 75 cents a year), write to Literature Agent, c/o F. Neale, 179, Bannatyne Avenue, Winnipeg.

SPGB Meetings (1935)

Party News from the October 1935 issue of the Socialist Standard

Blogger's Note:

'Robertus' was the pen-name of Robert Reynolds.

Outdoor Propaganda Meetings (1935)

Party News from the October 1935 issue of the Socialist Standard

Socialist Sonnet No. 248: Social Truth (2026)

From the Socialism or Your Money Back blog

Social Truth

 

What is truth?’ Is an immemorial

Question posed by Pilate, and still a sage

Query this secular social media age

That’s dominated by the spectacle.

Don’t let bare-faced fact tarnish an image

Fostered by some present day potentate,

Determined to determine others’ fates

As he pompously struts his national stage.

Meanwhile, red hobgoblins haunt the courts

Of public debate, their schemes and schisms

Practically confusing socialism

With nostrums, redundant and out of sorts.

While potentates will secure their capitals

For as long as the spectacle holds.

 

D. A.

Updated: Ralph Critichfield ('Ivan') (1949-2018)

I didn't realise it was so long since I last updated Ralph Critchfield's ('Ivan') page on the blog. I just added about 30 articles - with links - to this page. In time I will properly add a link at the top of the homepage which will allow the reader to not only have easy access to this page but other individual pages dedicated to Socialist Standard writers from down the years.

Articles

1940s

Dec 1949: Too Much of a Good Thing

1950s

Dec 1953: The Truth About Bogey Men

May 1954: Pensions and Poverty

Aug 1954: Perspective on Guatemala

Nov 1954: The Age of Sedatives

Jul 1955: Ealing Branch May Sales Drive

Dec 1955: Mental Illness in a Changing World

May 1956: Rough Winds and Rattling Knockers

Aug 1956: Australia takes guard

Feb 1957: Rowton Houses

Mar 1957: Britain in Deep Water

Sep 1957: How did you sleep last night?

Sep 1957: Drum

Dec 1957: The Soldier and Accountant

Jan 1958: Upset in Accra

Jun 1958: Cyprus—A Mediterranean Hotspot

May 1959: When Will It Be?

Aug 1959: Party Politics

Oct 1959: A Straight Talk on the Election

Dec 1959: Mr. Macmillan settles in

1960s

Feb 1960: Macmillan on Safari

Apr 1960: A Message for Aldermaston Marchers

May 1960: Mr. Macmillan's Worries

May 1960: The Magazine War

Jul 1960: Are Politicians Honest?

Jul 1960: Big Ships v Big Jets

Aug 1960: Aneurin Bevan

Sep 1960: A New Foreign Secretary

Nov 1960: Put Not Your Trust

Feb 1961: Excuses and Admissions

Jun 1961: Rocking the Boat

Jul 1961: To strike or not to strike?

Aug 1961: Who'd be a politician?

Sep 1961: Who are the Mugs? 

Oct 1961: H-Bomb diplomacy

Dec 1961: Is this progress?

Mar 1962: All mad together

Apr 1962: Algeria: Who has won?

May 1962: What Makes a Thug?

Jun 1962: Who is in Charge?

Jul 1962: By-Elections: The Government’s reverses

Sep 1962: Macmillan changes nothing

Nov 1962: Past and Present: Remembrance Day poppycock

Dec 1962: On the brink

Jan 1963: Past, Present, Future: Happy New Year!

Feb 1963: Attlee at eighty

Mar 1963: Labour's new leader 

Apr 1963: Promised Land: Arrival Postponed — Indefinitely 

Apr 1963: Why has CND failed?

May 1963: Snakes and ladders

May 1963: It's The Same In The Sprawl

Jun 1963: The South African snake pit

Jun 1963: This Superiority Notion

Jul 1963: A long, cool look at a hot potato

Jul 1963: The Importance of Mr. Profumo

Aug 1963: Struggle for power in the Tory Party

Sep 1963: Behind the Test Ban Treaty

Nov 1963: Memories of a Lovely War

Dec 1963: I’m alright, Alec

Jan 1964: Kennedy and after

Feb 1964: A Guide for ambitious candidates

Mar 1964: The Piper and the Tune

Apr 1964: Unbalanced exports and experts

May 1964: Behind the Dry Statistics

May 1964: Why the date is important

Jun 1964: Aden: The Cost of Oil

Jul 1964: On the pin

Aug 1964: Fifty years too late

Sep 1964: What have we achieved

Sep 1964: Labour theory of value

Sep 1964: Negative and positive

Nov 1964: After the Election

Dec 1964: 100 days that will not shake the world

Jan 1965: Churchill's birthday

Feb 1965: Away with hanging

Mar 1965: After Leyton, What?

Apr 1965: “My country is the world”

May 1965: Tories : No holds barred

Jun 1965: Smoulderings in Southall

Jun 1965: The Roots of Race Prejudice

Jul 1965: Labour’s righteous leaders

Aug 1965: Remember Hiroshima?

Nov 1965: Confusion on the left

Dec 1965: Christmas —the great delusion

Mar 1966: Is anyone exploiting you?

Apr 1966: Another stretch of Labour rule

May 1966: How do you like your leaders?

Jun 1966: The Budget

Jul 1966: Democracy and dictatorship today

Aug 1966: Armaments: The economy of waste

Sep 1966: Are we armchair socialists?

Oct 1966: The Government’s confidence trick

Nov 1966: Wasting time at the seaside

Dec 1966: A Cold Look at Charity

Jan 1967: What causes Crime? 

Feb 1967: A Plea for the Human Race

Mar 1967: Leaders : Are they really necessary?

Apr 1967: Vietnam: A Tragedy? 

Jun 1967: Britain's "Red Guards"

Jun 1967: The Newspaper Industry

Jul 1967: Pomp and its Circumstance

Aug 1967: Toying with Soldiers

Sep 1967: "Capital" in its place

Oct 1967: British Motor Car Industry

Oct 1967: Poor Kids

Nov 1967: 1917 Question and Answer

Dec 1967: Gunter gives his Orders

Feb 1968: The British Shipbuilding Industry

Mar 1968: Draft Resistance and Conscience

Apr 1968: Prejudice and Pride

Jun 1968: Enoch Powell: aftermath or prelude

Aug 1968: Is the Labour Government Crumbling Away?

Sep 1968: Myths about Munich

Nov 1968: The Greatest Show on Earth

Nov 1968: The Suffragettes

Jan 1969: The Computer, Karl Marx and the Battery Hens

Feb 1969: Political Prisoners

Mar 1969: A Matter of License

Apr 1969: The Other Militants

May 1969: Part 1: The Road to Smethwick Pier

Jun 1969: Part 2: Labour in Panic

Jun 1969: 1929: Labour's Cruel Memory

Jul 1969: Kings and Cabbages

Aug 1969: How about some real progress?

Oct 1969: The Great Crash of 1929

Nov 1969: Looking at Hippies

1970s

Jan 1970: Colour prejudice is just an idea

Feb 1970: The Myth of fair wages

Feb 1970: The Vicious Circle

Mar 1970: Labour’s run up or run down

May 1970: Another look at law and order

Jun 1970: More Labour dishonesty

Jul 1970: Everything has its price

Aug 1970: Capitalism – Waste – Want

Sep 1970: Stone walls and iron bars

Nov 1970: Cathy — no home to go to

Nov 1970: Putting on the style

Dec 1970: Concern for causes

Jan 1971: Motives of militarism

Mar 1971: A Bang or a whimper

Apr 1971: Up in arms

Sep 1971: Common Market: The great debate — where we stand 

Oct 1971: Ted’s all at sea but does it matter ?

Nov 1971: Malicious Damage

Dec 1971: Doing the Splits

Dec 1971: Warning — this system is dangerous

Jan 1972: Education and Sex

Apr 1972: Excuses, Excuses

May 1972: The Stretcher Bearers

Aug 1972: The Aristocrats

Nov 1972: The Presidential Election: "As Long As It's Black"

Jan 1973: Revolting business

Feb 1973: He gave us Hell!

Apr 1973: The President and the People: Looking Back on Lyndon Johnson

May 1973: Out of Step . . . What Is 'Normality' In Capitalism? 

Jul 1973: Socialism Means: We are Opposed to War

Aug 1973: Low Life in High Places: The Political Scandals

Nov 1973: Day of Remembrance For What?

Nov 1973: Not Sociology — SOCIALISM!

Dec 1973: Why War?

Jun 1974: The Political Background 1904-74

Oct 1974: Socialist Candidate's Address

July 1975: Crossman: Diary of a Flop

Feb 1978: Seeing Through Jim

Mar 1978: A Steel Prop for Labour

Apr 1978: United they stand

May 1978: Little Children Suffer

Jul 1978: Crime — who loses?

Aug 1978: Time and chance

Sep 1978: Right honourable gentlemen

Nov 1978: In 1918 they called it peace

Dec 1978: Striking a balance

Jan 1979: Fallen Idols

Feb 1979: Margaret Thatcher is a woman

Apr 1979: Like with like

May 1979: The stonewaller's end

Jun 1979: On the beach

Jul 1979: Pay now, live later

Aug 1979: Rod of iron

Sep 1979: 'This man would make a splendid soldier'.

Oct 1979: Labour's mock battle

Nov 1979: It’s a lock-out

1980s

Jan 1980: Socialists confront Mr Tony Benn 

Jan 1980: Anthony Blunt: no sort of traitor 

Feb 1980: Russia's Afghan hound

Mar 1980: Social workers need help

Apr 1980: Lock up your youngsters

Jun 1980: Thatcher's monetarism

Jul 1980: Death of Blair Peach and the Special Patrol Group

Aug 1980: Roy Jenkins and his “new” Centre Party

Sep 1980: Running Commentary column -  Take cover

Oct 1980: Running Commentary - Through the looking glass

Nov 1980: Leonardo for sale

Dec 1980: How to survive Christmas

Jan 1981: The life story of a labour careerist

Mar 1981: What is Benn up to?

Jun 1981: Brixton explodes

Jul 1981: Hunger marching in the 1930s

Oct 1981: Labour's bad memory

Nov 1981: Getting the clap

Feb 1982: H. M. Dustbins: Prisoners' Riots

Mar 1982: Rape Prejudice

Apr 1982: Loss of the Titanic

May 1982: The Falklands: Doing the Bulldog Thing

Jun 1982: The State of Medicine

Jul 1982: Desperate exit

Aug 1982: Off the rails

Oct 1982: Death on principle

Nov 1982: Tories back to nature

Dec 1982: The real Michael Foot

Feb 1983: Which way euphoria?

Apr 1983: Disarming critics

May 1983: A badly crumpled man

Jul 1983: Election nasties

Jul 1983: Prisoners on the roof

Aug 1983: Lot of bottle

Sep 1983: Labour's past

Oct 1983: Hairtrigger society

Jan 1984: No change

Apr 1984: Right minded lot

Jul 1984: Is there life after Thatcher?

Sep 1984: Saints and sinners

Oct 1984: Art—for whose sake?

Oct 1984: Political pantomimes

Jan 1985: In the 
minefield

Feb 1985: Trouble in store

Mar 1985: Blue bloods for progress?

Jun 1985: That was the year . . .

Jul 1985: The Man From Peabody

Nov 1985: What's the Russian for "blackleg"?

Jan 1986: Some facts of life at the top

Feb 1986: Capitalism and aircraft

Apr 1986: How to arrest the police

Jun 1986: The good, the bad, the ugly

Jul: 1986: Panic in the Fields

Aug 1986: Poverty — fiddling the books

Sep 1986: Danger: opportunists at work

Oct 1986: Jarrow: the truth that was murdered

Dec 1986: Paradise what?

Feb 1987: Not what he seemed

Apr 1987: A matter of timing

May 1987: Hardly child's play

Jun 1987: Snap, crackle, pop . . .

Jul 1987: A tender trap

Aug 1987: All in order

Sep 1987: Exit a formidable opponent

Dec 1987: Facing facts

Jan 1988: One nation — an emaciated myth

Feb 1988: Power to the people

May 1988: CND at 30

May 1988: Will Jesse run?

Jun 1988: Racist myths

Oct 1988: Useless election

Dec 1988: Arrival and departure

Jan 1989: Whose hand turns the key

Mar 1989: More gruel, anyone?

May 1989: Thatcherism: a PR gimmick

Jun 1989: Passing Show

Sep 1989: The Economic Roots

1990s

Jan 1990: Left Foot, Right Foot

Sep 1990: Death of a politician

Dec 1990: Debt is a four-letter word

Jan 1991: Death in Downing Street

Mar 1991: Myth and Reality

May 1991: Rise and Fall of a Pitboy

Jun 1991: Was Kinnock always a Tory wet?

Jan 1992: When Labour Ruled (3)

Apr 1992: Another pointless bloodbath

Jul 1992: Opportunity Knocks

Sep 1992: Press, privacy and profit

Oct 1992: New act in the courts

Jan 1993: That was the annus that was

Apr 1993: Youth crime- what’s to blame?

Jun 1993: What community

Jul 1993: The Old Bill and the new Tony

Nov 1993: Who needs leaders?

Jul 1994: Whose fault is it anyway?

May 1995: Unhappy Anniversary

Apr 1997: Anyone for more of the same?

Nov 1997: In the chair

Dec 1997: Labour's Traumatic Victory

Oct 1998: Paying the Piper

2000s

Apr 2001: Make A Difference

Mar 2002: Act in the Court: Dipti in the dock

Apr 2002: Who Are The Wreckers? 

Jun 2004: A brush with the fascists

May 2005: 2005 General Election: Vote Effective – Vote Alternative

Jun 2005: Let them Eat School Dinners

Nov 2005: If This Be Treason

Feb 2006: At the Bottom of the Heap

Jun 2006: Exporting Crime

Jul 2006: Asylum: From Pillar To Post And Back

Nov 2006: Patriotism – a politician’s refuge

May 2007 - Goodbye To Bambi ( Regarding the resignation of Tony Blair. Appeared on the SOYMB blog. A version of this article appeared as the editorial in the June 2007 issue of the Socialist Standard.)

Oct 2007: Gun and knife crime

Jun 2009 Not so honourable members (Expenses scandal)

Jun 2009: The price of “freedom”

Nov 2009 Afghanistan – lying about dying

2010s

May 2010: The “tesco-isation” of charity

Sep 2010: What future for the Beautiful Island?

Sep 2011: The riots: not the way to help ourselves

Jun 2012: Something to Remember You By

Jun 2013: Mount Everest: Top of Whose World?

Aug 2014: 1918 – Winners And Losers

Nov 2014: Beside the seaside

Nov 2016: Aberfan: Disaster In The Hillsides

Dec 2016: A Very Costly Illness

Book and Film Reviews

1950s

Jun 1959: Call The Doctor. By E. S. Turner

1960s

Apr 1961: Congo Disaster by Colin Legum

May 1961: Television and the Political Image by Joseph Trenaman and Denis McQuail

Nov 1961: The Twilight of European Colonialism By Stewart C. Easton

Jun 1962: An Atlas of African Affairs by Andrew Boyd and Patrick van Rensburg

Nov 1962 : Catch-22 by Joseph Heller

Mar 1964: The First World War: An Illustrated History by A. J. P. Taylor

Feb 1966: Insight into Government by Lord Craigton

Feb 1966: An Atlas of Soviet Affairs by Robert N. Taafe and Robert C. Kingsbury

Oct 1966: An Atlas of Latin American Affairs by Ronald M. Schneider and Robert C. 'Kingsbury

Jan 1967: An Atlas of Middle Eastern Affairs by Norman J. G. Pounds and Robert C. Kingsbury

Aug 1967: The Study of Africa Editors: Peter J. M. McEwan & Robert B. Sutcliffe

Dec 1968: Science and the Concept of Race, Editors: Margaret Mead, Theodosius Dobzhansky, Ethel Tohach, Robert E. Light. 

Jan 1969: The Politics of Harold Wilson by Paul Foot

Feb 1969: The Great Terror by Robert Conquest

Apr 1969: Soul on Ice by Eldridge Cleaver

Dec 1969: Post-Prison Writings and Speeches, by Eldridge Cleaver

1970s

Jan 1970: The People's War by Angus Calder

Jun 1971: Conversation with Eldridge Cleaver (Algiers) by Lee Lockwood

Jun 1971: Trial by Tom Hayden

Sep 1971: The English and Immigration by John A. Garrard

Jan 1972: The Conspiracy Trial. Ed. Judy Clavir and John Spitzer

Jun 1972: Family Poverty. Programme for the Seventies. Ed. David Bull

1980s

Nov 1985: Strike by The Sunday Times Insight Team

Dec 1985: For the Sake of Example by Anthony Babington 

Jan 1986: The Labour Governments, 1945-51 by Henry Pelling 

May 1986: Loyalists and Loners by Michael Foot

Sep 1986: The Worst Accident in the World - Observer staff

Aug 1989: Mississippi Burning directed by Alan Parker

1990s

Jan 1999 : Things Can Only Get Better by John O'Farrell

Short Stories

Dec 1964: In Youth is Pleasure

Jan 1966: Dropped bricks

Mar 1973: . . . A Much More Private Letter

Dec 1981: Ghost of Christmas past

Dec 1983: Having a rotten Christmas

Oct 1985: Decisions

Feb 1992: When Labour Ruled? (4)

World Socialist Spring 1985: Previous convictions

Caught in the Act columns

July 1989: The Greasy Pole

Aug 1989: No, No, Nigel

Sep 1989: High Hopes

Oct 1989: Back to Work

Nov 1989: Cutting Up

Dec 1989: Breakdown

Jan 1990: The Loyalty Game

Feb 1990: Also rans

Mar 1990: Punishers and Moonlighters

Apr 1990: Missing a stroke

May 1990: Out of touch

Jun 1990: Who's afraid of Labour?

Jul 1990: Mad Politicians Disease

Aug 1990: Check out

Sep 1990: One of us

Oct 1990: Oil and carrots

Dec 1990: Brylcreem Boys

Jan 1991: Two Of A Kind

Feb 1991: Time for a change

Mar 1991: Goodbye To All That

Apr 1991: Chequered career

May 1991: A Matter of Timing

Jul 1991: Eric Heffer

Aug 1991: Relief for the Rich

Sep 1991: On the agenda

Dec 1991: In the raw

Jan 1992: Whimper, Whimper, You're Dead

Feb 1992: At Issue

Mar 1992: Politics and Sex

Apr 1992: Future Uncertain

Press Exposure columns

Mar 1995: Sun Stroke

Apr 1995: Who's in Charge?

May 1995: Private parts

Jun 1995: Make Your Excuses and Leave

Jul 1995: Winners and Losers

Aug 1995: Oo dun it?

Sep 1995: Bloody Awful

Oct 1995: It's War

Dec 1995: Taking care of English

Greasy Pole columns

1990s

Jan 1996: No More Mister Nice Guy

Feb 1996: Naming the Day

Mar 1996: The Rate for the Job

Apr 1996: The truth can keep you in shackles

May 1996: On the Scaffold

Jun 1996: Something in common

Jul 1996: Straw man at Howard's end?

Aug 1996: New word, old trick

Oct 1996: New wives’ tales

Dec 1996: The Moral Factor?

Jan 1997: The Year of the Idea?

Feb 1997: Beggars are not choosers

Mar 1997: Getting Tougher

Apr 1997: A Gruesome Business

May 1997: So that's it then

Jun 1997: These You have Loved

Aug 1997: Video Nasty

Sep 1997: Paying For It

Oct 1997: Now where were we?

Jan 1998: Trust Me, I'm A Labour Politician 

Feb 1998: Learning a Lesson

Mar 1998: Death of a Dangerous Man

Apr 1998: Who Said It First?

Aug 1998: False identities

Sep 1998: Twisting the Arm

Oct 1998: Sex, lies and leadership

Nov 1998: Mad Tories and Englishmen

Dec 1998: Gays and capitalism

Feb 1999: Variable standards

Mar 1999: Byers Market

Apr 1999: Howard’s End?

Jun 1999: Waiting for Poverty

Jul 1999: Keeping Their Hair On

Aug 1999: Who needs a willie?

Sep 1999: Prescott on class

Oct 1999: Alan Clark – gladly missed

Nov 1999: Tories In Trouble

Dec 1999: Red benches and Red Ken

2000s

Feb 2000: Nothing New Millennium

Apr 2000: Caning the teachers

May 2000: The Death and Life of Selsdon Man

Jun 2000: Some Thoughts of Chairman Clive 

Jul 2000: Two brains?

Aug 2000: Darling turns the screw

Sep 2000: Leaks and changes

Oct 2000: Making the President

Dec 2000: Naming the day

Jan 2001: Court in the Act

Feb 2001: Crack down on the fraudsters! 

Mar 2001: Kumar's Story

May 2001: Ted Heath—A disappointed man

Jun 2001: It's Hattersley's Party - Right? Or Wrong?

Jul 2001: High Noon In Southall

Aug 2001: Politicians on probation

Oct 2001: The Chingford Factor

Nov 2001: Death of a Buffoon

Dec 2001: Blair backs down

Jan 2002: Pornography and Politics

Feb 2002: In the Club – or Out?

May 2002: Thatcher: the voice is stilled

Jul 2002: Mandelson – Coming Up For The Third Time?

Aug 2002: Money for stale words

Oct 2002: The way they tell ’em

Nov 2002: Good News For The Tories

Jan 2003: Plain Words

Jun 2003: Short Cuts And Runs

Jul 2003: The Importance of Being Irvine

Sep 2003: All at Sea

Oct 2003: Sexing it up

Nov 2003: The Disappearing Leader

Dec 2003: Howard’s Beginning

Apr 2004: The Great - Are They Any Good?

May 2004: Alcoholics Non-Anonymous

Jul 2004: Tough on Sound Bites, Tough on the Causes of . . .

Aug 2004: Countdown To The Election

Sep 2004: Looking forward to 2004 – in 1904

Oct 2004: Farmyard Politics

Nov 2004: Promises or Threats?

Dec 2004: Who are you calling a cheat?

Jan 2005: All good clean fun?

Feb 2005: Toadies And Rebels

Apr 2005: On tactical voting

May 2005: The Dark Side of Sunny Jim

Jun 2005: Hard work, decency and politicians 

Jul 2005: Labour wins in 1945

Aug 2005: The Outsider

Oct 2005: Thug in Suede Shoes

Nov 2005: The Respect That Makes Calamity

Dec 2005: Private (?) Lives

Jan 2006: Nightmare for Tory Leaders

Mar 2006: The Whip Who Cracked

Apr 2006: Hoey Hoo-Hah 

May 2006: Honour rooted in dishonour

Jun 2006: Panic Aboard ‘SS New Labour’

Jul 2006: No grace without favour

Aug 2006: Be kind to a hoodie

Sep 2006: Peter Hain - a case of mistaken identity 

Oct 2006: Is There Life After Tony Blair?

Nov 2006: Postman’s knock?

Dec 2006 : The Queen Speaks - Sort Of  

Jan 2007 : Sorry Seems To Be The Hardest Word  

Feb 2007: The Trouble With Kelly

May 2007 : Hazel Blears – nuts in May? 

Jun 2007: Baldwin versus Blair

Jul 2007 : Blair bites the hand that fed him 

Aug 2007: Goldsmith gives up

Sep 2007: Like father like son

Nov 2007: It’s A Date, Then? Or Not?

Dec 2007: It’s Nice to Have Friends

Jan 2008: Money, Money, Money . . .

Mar 2008 : Flint’s Hard Line 

Apr 2008: Blair’s a Catholic – it’s official. But who cares?

May 2008 : Winners and losers

Jun 2008: Timer for a change?

Jul 2008 : Weasels at Westminster

Aug 2008 : David Davis Freedom’s Champion? 

Oct 2008 : When You’re Smiling  . . .

Nov 2008 : Lamont - When Cameron Got It Wrong

Dec 2008: Lucky Gordon?

Jan 2009: Post Offices – Open or Shut?

Feb 2009: Standing out in the crowd

Mar 2009 : Brand Obama

Apr 2009: The Rise and rise of “Harperson”

May 2009 : Bloggers at loggerheads

Jul 2009: Hogg’s ditch

Aug 2009 : Jack Straw – getting to know you

Sep 2009 : Alan Milburn – Days of Despair

Oct 2009: The Hard Life and Times of Alan Duncan 

Nov 2009 : TV Debates - much ado about nothing

Dec 2009 : BNP – Question Time Without Answers

Jan 2010: The Thick of It

Feb 2010: Hoon or Buffoon?

Mar 2010: “. . . Less Equal Than Others . . .”

Apr 2010: Michael Foot – An example of principles?

Jul 2010: Friends (?) in need

Aug 2010: You're Nicked

Sep 2010: Home Sweet (?) Home 

Oct 2010: Marshmallows are not the only sweet 

Nov 2010: Blunt instrument of justice?

Dec 2010: Woolas – another fine mess

Jan 2011: Cable unconnected?

Feb 2011: Nothing New In Old And Sad

Mar 2011: Grow up and understand

Apr 2011: Life, death or suicide?

May 2011: Re-Inventing the Losers

Jun 2011: Wind At Daybreak For The New Politics 

Jul 2011: Calm down and listen

Aug 2011: Hacking? Who’s hacking?

Oct 2011: Order… Order…

Nov 2011: Djanogly – One Of The Family

Dec 2011: Oliver Letwin – Eccentric or Fake?

Jan 2012: Theresa May . . . or May Not?

Feb 2012: Getting on at Westminster

Mar 2012: Baby David Speaks

Apr 2012: All in what together?

May 2012: Maude Gone Mad?

Jun 2012: A Kick in the Worst Nightmares

Jul 2012: 1922 And All That

Aug 2012: Jeremy Spanks the Baby

Sep 2012: Reshuffle – Who? When? Why?

Oct 2012: Who Wants To Pick This Bone?

Nov 2012: Contrickery in Conference

Dec 2012: Cracking the Whip

Jan 2013: How Not to Spoil Your Vote. And Why

Feb 2013: Is UKIP worth a vote?

Mar 2013: Disturbance? In Westminster?

Apr 2013: Calamity . . . Calamity

May 2013: Thatcher and Thatcherism – A Long Time Dying

Jun 2013: Not Another Maggie Thatcher?

Jul 2013: Wayward in Westminster

Aug 2013: A Dissatisfied Novice

Sep 2013: All That Stuff – And Nonsense

Oct 2013: Obsessed With Disorder

Nov 2013: Kinnock in the News Again

Dec 2013: Doing the Hokey Cokey

Jan 2014: Catching The Eye

Feb 2014: Ouch! What A Lovely War

Mar 2014: A Tale Of Two Constituencies

Apr 2014: Mission Implausible

May 2014: Tony Benn – Getting it Wrong

Jun 2014: Attack Dog? Or Barking Mad?

Jul 2014: Elections... or Earthquakes

Aug 2014: Pray Silence for the Veterans

Sep 2014: Dobson Drops Out?

Oct 2014: Clashing In Clacton

Nov 2014: Reckless In Rochester

Dec 2014: Slags and Swamps

Jan 2015: Who You Calling A Pleb?

Mar 2015: Fables And Fabians

Apr 2015: Goodbye (?) to All These

May 2015:  Public Accounts Hodge Podge

Jun 2015: Wandering in Wolverhampton

Jul 2015: Labour Pains 

Aug 2015: Liam Byrne Out Of The Shadows

Sep 2015: Catching a Crabb?

Oct 2015: What It Was All About 

Nov 2015: Tessa Fails To Make It

Dec 2015: Liz and Her Life and Loves

Jan 2016: Healey and Howe

Feb 2016: Throwaway Minister

Mar 2016: National Wealth Service?

Apr 2016: Questions...? Answers...?

May 2016: In Europe or Out? Do You Care?

Jun 2016: Goldsmith versus Khan

Jul 2016: European Union? Civil War?

Aug 2016: MayDay . . . MayDay . . .

Sep 2016: How Do You Like Your Leaders?

Oct 2016: Andrea’s Friend

Nov 2016: When it’s Amber it Means Caution

Dec 2016: Rough Ride On Runway Three

Jan 2017: Cameron’s Selections

Feb 2017: Laughter At A Price

Mar 2017: Farewell To Tristram

Apr 2017: New (?) Hope (?) For Labour

May 2017: Taking The Rise With Tony

Jul 2017: Theresa - Strong And Stable

Aug 2017: Working For Jeremy

Sep 2017: How Do You Like Your Leaders?

Nov 2017: Adonis As It Is?

Dec 2017: Beware of Leaders

Mar 2018: What’s ‘Appropriate’ Then?

Apr 2018: Rising Star? Do We Need Another One?