fabianism, the enemy within - the fabian basis | politics uk news at abelard.org
abelard's home latest changes & additions at abelard.org link to document abstracts link to short briefings documents quotations at abelard.org, with source document where relevant click for abelard's child education zone economics and money zone at abelard.org - government swindles and how to transfer money on the net latest news headlines at abelard's news and comment zone
socialism, sociology, supporting documents described Loud music and hearing damage Architectural wonders and joys at abelard.org about abelard and abelard.org visit abelard's gallery Energy - beyond fossil fuels France zone at abelard.org - another France

news and comment
politics uk

article archives at abelard's news and comment zone topic archives: politics uk

for previously archived news article pages, visit the news archive page (click on the button above)

New translation, the Magna Carta

site map

This page helpful?
Share it ! Like it !

fabianism, the enemy within - the fabian basis

"Membership of the Society was only allowed to those who signed the "Fabian Basis" (which was similar to the old "Clause 4" of blessed memory!).

"By February 1891 there were 361 full members and 300-400 members of provincial societies who belonged to 12 local societies.

"By 1893 there were 500 full members and 70 local societies with a total of about 2000 members.

"In 1887, the Fabian Society published its programme, known as “The Basis,” which proposed “the use of the existing institutions, party and parliamentary machinery for the realization of social reforms.” These reforms, which can be described as Fabian socialism, aimed at “ the elimination of privately owned land and the establishment of community ownership of the means of production.”

"The instruments to achieve these goals were democratic government control, municipalisation and nationalisation. The Fabian Society rejected the Marxian theory of the class struggle and postulated that the transition from capitalism to socialism would never be carried by force." [Quoted from Just good friends by Richard Bomford, 2006]

They were wrong, of course, socialism has several times been established by force and mass murder.

The only difference between Fabian socialism and Marxism is the means, not the ends. All Marxists believe that the ends justifies the means. Believing that they could not gain power by open/revolutionary means, the Fabians chose covert means.

Most of the Labour 'leadership' are Fabian members.

related material
For Socialism and Peace: the Labour Party's Programme of Action, 1934
Socialism and appeasement - so few stood firm against the socialist dictatorships of Stalin and Hitler
papal encyclicals and Marx - some extracts: on socialism and liberalism

the web address for the article above is




Mandela, the long walk to a myth - is there any such thing as a socialist who tells the truth?

There are many over-positive glosses of Nelson Mandela's actions, while Socialist have a visceral negativity to the late Conservative Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher.

Thus Mrs Thatcher is described as a supporter of apartheid and so, negative to all the changes wrought in South Africa to bring about the large political and social changes that ocurred since the 1960s.

Is there anywhere a socialist who does not lie?

“She is an enemy of apartheid… We have much to thank her for.”
Nelson Mandela, 1990.
Mandela was in prison from 1962 to 1990.

Marker at abelard.org

"Into this context came Margaret Thatcher. She shared all these fears. She strongly believed that sanctions would damage all races and help start a conflagration. But she also believed that unless the white government changed, disaster would follow. By establishing a working relationship with it, she sought to aid that change."

"From 1984, when she first met Botha, Mrs Thatcher put pressure on him to release Mandela. She wanted an orderly transition to majority rule. She knew that this was impossible without the man who, though not technically the leader of the ANC, was its giant." [Quoted from telegraph.co.uk]

Marker at abelard.org

Quote from a State secret letter, written by Margaret Thatcher to P.W. Botha, 1985 [.pdf]
"Finally - and this is the most difficult since it involves an outsider presumirng to trespass on your affairs - I do very strongly believe that you should be aiming to take further specific measures in the next month or so. I have noted the decision to lift the state of emergency in six districts: but have been sad to see that violence in the Western Cape has forced a further extension on you. Please do not under-estimate the impact on international opinion of the imposition of states of emergency and the gain from lifting them as soon as you are able. I continue to believe, as I have said to you before, that the release of Nelson Mandela would have more impact than almost any single action you could undertake..."

Margaret Thatcher personally donated £20,000 to Nelson Mandela's foundation.

the web address for the article above is

socialist cake and tory cakes

Socialists believe there is only one cake, and that it must be divided up according to the socialist cult beliefs. That is why they are so concerned to take cake from 'the rich',whom they suspect of hiding the cake so's they can eat vast amounts of cake during 27 meals a day.

Conservatives have a different approach - bake more cake, so's there's plenty for all as Conservatives don't, in fact, keep cake under their beds. The socialists tend to demand money instead, so capitalists sell their cake-making machinery to pay the taxes. At which point, there is inevitably less cake.

All socialists are barmy.

fascist 'new' labour and the uk economy

The Socialist Labour Party has a long history of undermining the UK economy. It promises what is bad for the long run in order to gain what is good for the party in the short run.

This leaves other parties in the invidious position of either matching those 'promises', or losing as a mass of uneducated people vote for cake today, instead of for building for a stronger future.

Once in power, Socialism inevitably concentrates on their cult dogma over pragmatism, thus further damaging society.

Invariably, Conservatives, or even Liberals, are left sorting out an endless stream of problems while trying to right the economy in a difficult situation.

Until the 1950s, Socialists actually believed their own cant, well into that time a good proportion of the Labour Party was riddled with true Marxist believers, but this was somewhat mitigated by a loyal nationalism.

Now most of them are time-servers with no beliefs whatsoever beyond power and a centralised state. Maybe in Red Ed they now have another true believer, like his Marxist dad, but one who seems to have lost all and any taint, or tinge, or glimmer of nationalism - or should that be patriotism?

Here is Aneurin Bevan, a rather narrow intelligent autodidact who early on flirted with Oswald Mosley's extremists, and was temporarily expelled from the party for his rabid Communist sympathies - Bevan wanted the Communists openly in the Labour Party (a long problem for the Labour Party). He was too popular so the Party soon had to reinstate him!

"I know the right kind of political Leader for the Labour Party is a kind of desiccated calculating machine."
Bevan referring to his rival, Hugh Gaitskell.

"I would describe the central problem falling upon representative government in the Western world as how to persuade the people to forgo immediate satisfactions in order to build up the economic resources of the country. Let me put it another way. How can we persuade the ordinary men and women that it is worth while making sacrifices in their immediate standards or forgoing substantial rising standards to extend fixed capital equipment throughout the country? This is the problem and it has not been solved yet." Bevan, 1959

Marker at abelard.org

"Osborne, rightly, is stressing spending control. “We need an affordable state,” he said yesterday"
[Quoted from conservativehome.com]

The whole article is worth a scan.

Yet again, Socialists have left the next generation with the debts built up during their attempts to bribe the public, instead of building the nation's future.

related material
britain’s welfare state was whose idea did you say?
For Socialism and Peace: the Labour Party's Programme of Action, 1934
Socialism and appeasement - so few stood firm against the socialist dictatorships of Stalin and Hitler

the web address for the article above is

mini-quiz: minimum wages - when, who, what

when did the uk start with minimum wages?

"The Trade Boards Act of 1909 created four Trades Boards that set minimum wages which varied between industries for a number of sectors where "sweating" was

"The Trade Boards Act of 1909 created four Trades Boards that set minimum wages which varied between industries for a number of sectors where "sweating" was generally regarded as a problem and where collective bargaining was not well established."

who introduced it?

"The passage through Parliament of the Trade Boards Act 1909. It fell to Winston Churchill, as President of the Board of Trade in the reforming Liberal government of the time, to introduce the bill on 24 March 1909, and pilot it through opposition and amendments until 20 October when it became law."

who did it apply to?

"Initially, the act applied to domestic chain-making, ready-made and wholesale bespoke tailoring, paper-box making, and the machine-made lace and finishing trade."

"Initially, it encompassed less than a quarter of a million workers. The rates set were not based on the cost of living but on what the individual trade could bear."

[Quoted from The Servile State by Hilaire Belloc]

related material
britain’s welfare state was whose idea did you say?
For Socialism and Peace: the Labour Party's Programme of Action, 1934
Socialism and appeasement - so few stood firm against the socialist dictatorships of Stalin and Hitler

the web address for the article above is

'qualifications' do not distinguish good teachers from bad, but then i'm not teaching them!

“Yet after decades of research we have little understanding of what makes educators effective. Observable characteristics, including teacher qualifications, generally have no or very small effects. This is a remarkably consistent finding in most rigorous studies worldwide. If there’s anything research in the economics of education has disproved, it’s the theory that teachers with specific qualifications perform better than those without. Most people might also find this intuitive since practically everybody has probably experienced good unqualified teachers and bad qualified ones (and vice versa).”

There are grave errors at the heart of teacher training:

  • that you can teach a class, when you must teach the individuals,
  • that subject knowledge trumps psychological knowledge,
  • that theory trumps reality,
  • that teaching is only a trade.

The government should no more be in the classroom than in the hospital operating room or the medic's surgery.

Until teacher training is radically improved, teaching will continue to rely on chance and natural ability, not 'qualifications'.

related material
reality, laying the foundations for sound education
franchise by examination, education and intelligence
child education zone zone - fundamental education articles

the web address for the article above is

You are here: politics uk news from October 2013 < News < Home

latest abstracts briefings information   hearing damage memory France zone

email abelard email email_abelard [at] abelard.org

© abelard, 2013, 31 october
all rights reserved

variable words
prints as increasing A4 pages (on my printer and set-up)