21 July 2006

GEORGE GALLOWAY, STALINIST SCUMBAG – 2,453

My thanks to Ken Weller for alerting me to this, a nasty little piece by Galloway in Alexander Cockburn’s cretino-leftist Counterpunch to mark the 70th anniversary of the start of the Spanish civil war. It purports to be an appreciation of John Cornford, the communist poet who died while fighting for the International Brigade in Spain at the age of 21 – but it is laced with venom.

“But for a bullet in the brain on the Ebro,” he declares, “Rupert John Cornford might have loomed as large as George Orwell in the British left-wing lexicon.” Fair enough. I’m not a great fan of Cornford as a poet, but he’s undoubtedly worth reading (and Orwell thought so too). But then Galloway goes on:
Orwell would probably have informed on him to his bosses in British Intelligence. For Cornford was a Communist.
And he continues, a propos the volunteers for the International Brigades:
their memory has been sullied by Orwell's slanders, unfortunately reinforced by Ken Loach's film Land and Freedom.
This is disgusting Stalinist drivel. Orwell did not have “bosses in British Intelligence”, and he did not inform on anyone: the famous list he handed over in the late 1940s to his friend Celia Kirwan, then working for a Foreign Office propaganda operation set up by a democratic socialist Labour government, was of people he considered should not be approached to write for it because of their pro-Soviet sympathies. Big deal.

And Orwell did nothing to sully the memory of the International Brigade volunteers. He did expose the vile role of the Stalinists in suppressing the Spanish revolution in 1937 – and his disgust at the failure of the British left to recognise what they did remained with him throughout his life. But that is not the same thing. There is not a word against the International Brigades volunteers anywhere in his work. Indeed, he became friendly with at least two veterans of the brigades, Hugh Slater and Tom Wintringham – both of whom parted company with the Communist Party soon after their experience in Spain and played key roles in the Home Guard in 1940-41 when the CP was defending the Hitler-Stalin pact. In the leftist jargon of the time, which of course Orwell hated and would never have used, his attitude to the International Brigades was that they were lions led by jackals. Which is a bit like the ordinary members of the Respect coalition.

5 comments:

Neil Williams said...

"lions led by jackals. Which is a bit like the ordinary members of the Respect coalition".

In any "Coalition" there will be some differences of oppinion. I actually agree with you about the role of the CP in the Spanish Civil War which Orwell wrote about so well in Homage to Catolonia (it was to all be proved correct in Hungary later).
This however does not mean Respect is lead by jackals. Which Political party in the Uk or anywhere in the world does not have some differences of opinion between its members (they are all soe form of alliance!).

Respect is lead by brave and honourable men and women who are prepared to stand out against the crowd for Peace, Against War and for Demoratic Socialist change in the UK. Or would you rather have "New Labour" and their pro privatisation policies and warmoggeing for another 10 years??

Neil Williams
Respect Blog at:
http://respectuk.blogspot.com/

Paul Anderson said...

Well, actually Neil, I prefer Labour even at its worst to Stalinist loons with nutcase Islamist support. It would be bad enough to see the old International Socialist tradition go down the pan with a dedicated Stalinist fuckwit as figurehead. But to do so in a Popular Front with reactionary Islamists as the make-weight for the proletariat makes me want to chuck.

barneymagrew said...

And also Neil ,Respect is not lead by brave and honourable men and women but by demagogues and lunatics ( sorry but I can find no other word for Yvonne Ridley. Other than cretin) Nor is it for peace or against war but rather it actively supports the Ba'athist and islamo-fascist terror campaign against the Iraqi working class. It supports the assasination of Iraqi trade unionists and, although it may purport to support democracy in the UK, it doesn't in Iraq.And I too would rather 10 more years of New Labour than 10 seconds of the inane bollocks that we get from the jihadist left. For example, yesterday I went to my first civil ceremony .These so-called gay weddings represent real progress towards gay equality in Britain. Thanks to New Labour.Equality for gays ,and women for that matter ,is no longer an issue in Respect in deference to their reactionary allies who would rather see them executed.

ps Tell us Neil, is it true that you had gender segregated prayer rooms at this years 'marxism' jamboree

Anonymous said...

Paul Anderson continues to use epithets derived from abuse of the mentally ill and disabled. I've raised the issue with him yet he has decided to continue - he is clearly beyond argument and beneath contempt. The worst aspect of this is that he is a teacher of journalism.

Anderson doesn't use the words 'b*tch' or 'n*gg*r' but 'cr*t*n' is fine as far as he is concerned. At best he is to be pitied for his limited command of the English language and its many alternative terms of abuse.

This birdbrain, blockhead, bonehead, boob, bore, buffoon, butt, chump, clod, clown, dimwit, dolt, donkey, dope, dork, dumb ox, dunce, dunderhead, dupe, fathead, gomeral, gomeril, halfwit, idiot, ignoramus, jackass, jerk, lamebrain, laughing stock, lightweight, lunkhead, meathead, nincompoop, ninny, nitwit, numbskull, oaf, omadawn, sap, schlemiel, silly, simpleton, twerp, twit is clearly too stupid to use a thesaurus.

barneymagrew said...

But not too stupid to read a signature. Your bowdlerised thesaurus misses the most accurate. Fuckwit