As I Please

A gloomy preamble to a gloomy blog

“Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity …

Surely some revelation is at hand;
Surely the second coming is at hand…
And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,
Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?
From “The Second Coming” by WB Yeats

Background notes to this blog

There has been no letup in the intensity of the political struggles within the UK political parties in recent weeks. The pundits ponder interminably in print and on the airwaves about which event is more likely to come first – the next general election or World War 3.

Other issues competing for our attention include racialism, anti-

Semitism, Muslim activities, the increasing gap between rich and poor, democracy – the list is endless – and there is confusion everywhere.     

In this blog Holdenforth will comment on these and other issues. We make no pretence to be impartial or independent but we will do our utmost to adhere to the central Orwellian principle of sticking to the truth. 

To get our show on the road Holdenforth asserts that the UK is a national Augean stable.

What, I hear you ask, is the meaning of Augean?

Augeus was the king of Elis in ancient Greece, and he had a problem. His problem was that he owned 3,000 oxen whose stalls had not been cleansed for 30 years. If you do the calculation, you will see that Augeus had on his hands a lot of bullshit.

Let us continue. 

Holdenforth accepts that we need to state to our readers what we would actually do were we to find ourselves in a position to do it.

We also plead guilty to the charge that we disagree with almost everyone about almost everything, that Holdenforth is a grizzling griping grousing grumpy old timer. And we assert that on most contentious issues we have been in the right.

Don’t say that you have not been warned.

Israel, Gaza and Anti- Semitism

There is strong competition for the title of the most worrying conflict in the world as I write 6. For Holdenforth, the most worrying conflict is that between Israel and Hamas that has been raging for the past five months.

Holdenforth notes that around 200 hundred innocent civilians – mostly women and children – are being murdered in Gaza on a daily basis as the various academic debates continue about the rights and wrongs of these murders.

We pose the question to Israel in general and Netanyahu in particular – how many more innocent people are to be murdered before you call off the dogs of war. Possibly the most harrowing event now taking place anywhere in the world is the treatment by Israel of the two million inhabitants of Gaza, a tiny narrow strip of land – approximately 45 square kms -to the south and west of Israel.

It is in this tiny area that Hamas operates and in which the October 7 attack was planned.

In the 5 months or so that have elapsed since October 7 Israeli forces have inflicted huge casualties on the civilian population.

In our time there is no shortage of extremely effective propaganda machines.

To illustrate the point the Israelis rightly and raucously highlight that Hamas is a terrorist organisation but they are quite reticent on the terrorist organisation that brought Israel to power, namely Irgun.

Other critics of Israel point out that the Balfour /Lloyd George declaration in 1917 was conceding land to the Zionist Organisation that was not theirs to dispose of. That consideration would not have weighed heavily with Lloyd George and Arthur Balfour.

“In Palestine there was irreconcilable conflict between Arabs and  Jews.”
English History 1914 to 1945, AJP Taylor

“The Balfour Declaration was abandoned after 20 years of attempting to reconcile the irreconcilable. It was no doubt unreasonable that the Arabs of Palestine should pay the whole price of what was a world problem, anti Semitism.”
Extract from English History – AJP Taylor

Where does Holdenforth stand on the most worrying issue of today – the conflict between Israel and Palestine – or, or many refer to it- the conflict between Israel and Hamas?

As I write the media – official and social – are replete with details of the atrocities committed by Hamas terrorists in Gaza. 

For its part Israel has vowed to inflict retribution on those responsible.

Back to Lloyd George and Arthur Balfour  

In Year 2 of the first world war – 1915 – Lloyd George, in his capacity as Minister of Munitions, was concerned about the acute shortage of explosives.

He contacted Professor Weizmann, an accomplished chemist, to explain the problem to him and to seek his help. Professor Weizmann quickly solved the problem and his achievement was a most important contribution to the British war effort.

Lloyd George asked him how he, Lloyd George, might reward Weizmann for his work.

To quote Lloyd George, “Weizmann explained his aspirations as to the repatriation of the Jews to the sacred land they had made famous. When I became Prime Minister in December, 1916, I talked the matter over with Mr Balfour – the outcome was the famous Balfour declaration in 1917.”

This declaration read:

“His Majesty’s Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.”

During the next 28 years the collective mind of the Jewish Diaspora was understandably pre-occupied with the murderous activities of Hitler in pursuit of his final solution of the Jewish problem.

In post war Palestine the British Government attempted to maintain peace between Jewish immigrants and existing Palestinian communities. This was not an easy task and the UK sought to relinquish the mandate.

One feature of this phase was the emergence of Irgun, a Zionist group roughly equivalent to Hamas in Gaza today.

In the years from the end of WW2 to 1948 Irgun proved to be masters in using terror to secure their aims. Given the scale and severity of the terror the British Government of Mr Atlee wished to be relieved of the mandate.

The Irgun Group wrote the textbook for terrorism that has been imitated around the world to this day.

It is ironic that the “terror” tactics employed by Hamas are taken out of the Irgun textbook.

The State of Israel was established in the summer of 1948.

Events in Palestine since 1948 have seen years of the steady expansion of Israel at the expense of Palestine and others.

Israel continues to occupy and even extend illegal settlements, a point noted in the last week by Mr Gutierrez, the Secretary General of the UN despite the opposition of the United Nations.

“All the devouring and insatiate Monsters imagined since imagination could record itself are fused in the one realisation, Guillotine. And yet there is not in France, with its rich variety of soil and climate, a blade, a leaf, a root, a sprig, a pepper corn which will grow to maturity under conditions more certain than those that have produced this horror. Crush humanity out of shape once more and it will twist itself into the same tortured forms. Sow the same seed of rapacious license and oppression over again and it will surely the same fruit according to its kind.”
From “A Tale of Two Cities” by Charles Dickens

In the above extract Dickens was making the simple point that the horrors of the French Revolution arose from the suppression of the people by the ruling class in previous years.

• Thus – The French Revolution
• Thus the emergence of Hamas

The terms and conditions of the Balfour declaration have drifted down the years away from Palestinian claims and in favour of Jewish claims.

It is not easy to predict a civilised lasting settlement to this frightening conflict, the origins of which go back into the mists of time.

For our part we hope for the best but we fear the worst as the daily toll of deaths mounts.

We would go further – Netanyahu, the most powerful figure in the Middle East, sadly combines the mendacity of Goebbels, the viciousness of Himmler, the arrogance of Goering and the humbug of Mr Pecksniff – an unedifying combination.

A few words on the conflict between the free world and Mr Putin being waged in the Ukraine

This conflict is now well into its third year and there are few signs that the war will end any time soon.

Holdenforth would like to rewind the tape of history back to the Crimean War waged between France and Britain on the one side and Russia on the other side in 1854.

“If there was a moral to be drawn from the Crimean War (1854 to 1856) it would be this: in a war between Russia and The West, it will be the Powers which keep out who will be the real gainers”
From “Crimea: the War that would not boil”, an essay by AJP Taylor.

Does the verdict of AJP Taylor on events which took place almost 200 years ago have any relevance today?

Holdenforth thinks that it does.

The outcome of this conflict today – Putin versus The West – is difficult to predict despite the daily detailed accounts about what is happening.

Holdenforth is mindful of the advice of Orwell that “all propaganda is lies”

Holdenforth follows this advice and tries to be wary about swallowing the information fed out by both sides.

Thus:

We accept that the NATO net is tightening to the north of Russia.

Russia is tightening its grip in Eastern Ukraine.

Ukraine is experiencing a shortage of munitions as its suppliers become increasingly anxious about throwing good money after bad. 

It is reported in some quarters that some supporters of the Ukraine cause are dubious about the performance of Zelensky as a latter day Kitchener.

Others have been comforted by the suggestion of Mr Macron that now might be the time to put western boots on to the ground and into the fray, a suggestion that did not meet with universal western approval.

The careless work of the German Intelligence Department in allowing The Kremlin to listen to sensitive conversations about what NATO was planning to do next did little to bolster the confidence of the beleaguered Ukrainians in the day to day conduct of the war.

Just a thought – Mr Zelensky has been strident that Putin and his henchmen be brought to justice once Ukraine has emerged victorious.

Where does Zelensky stand on the conflict in Gaza? At what level of fatalities might he say that enough is enough?

The death of Mr Navalny.

The available evidence suggests that Putin is as contemptuous as Netanyahu about the murders that he is prepared to authorise in order to secure his objectives and strengthen his position.

Just as Netanyahu follows the Irgun rule book so Putin is prepared to follow the example of Stalin in his pursuit of Trotsky.

Gosh – Trotsky again in an Holdenforth blog. We are merely reporting and have no links with Momentum.

Notes on democracy

Many Western commentators on the prospects of WW3 breaking out rightly stress the importance of democratic safeguards in their various institutional arrangements.

What then is democracy?

“Democracy is that system of government under which a great free people having 35 million people to choose, pick out a Coolidge to be head of state. It is as if a hungry man set before a banquet prepared by master cooks … should stay his stomach by eating and catching flies.”
Thus HL Mencken on Coolidge in 1927.

What are we to make of the selections of Biden and Trump respectively in 2024?

“The democratic method is that institutional arrangement for arriving at political decisions in which individuals acquire the power to decide by means of a competitive struggle for the people’s vote”
From “Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy” by Joseph Schumpeter.

Holdenforth is happy to second this definition.

It is quite easy to spot the difference between regimes which abide by this definition and those which don’t.

All those living in Europe and North America will testify to the ferocity of the competitive struggle for the people’s vote.

Mr Putin pays lip service to the principle but those contemplating participating in the struggle in Russia are understandably uneasy about the hazards posed by joining in the competitive struggle.

Holdenforth is ready to acknowledge the strong democratic credentials of Israel – the opponents of Mr Netanyahu in Israel are only too ready to expatiate on his weaknesses.

In defence of Nigel Farage

For Holdenforth aka John Holden – what follows will not be easy to write but our claim to be honest and fair must be demonstrated.

Holdenforth has disagreed with Farage’s tireless efforts in the past decade to urge the cause of Brexit and we have said so in numerous blogs. He could accurately be described as the Founding Father of Brexit.

On the credit side in Farage’s favour we gladly acknowledge his successful campaign to expose the shabby tactics employed in the financial sector to refuse banking facilities to those deemed on flimsy grounds or on no grounds to be unsuitable.

Farage has to be congratulated for his successful campaign to expose the pitiful attempts by HMG to control the steady flow of illegal immigrants from Europe into the UK. His key point has been that all these immigrants are breaking the law because they are already in a safe country and therefore at no risk.

And Farage has led the fight to highlight the sheer absurdity of seeking to transfer those whose applications have failed to Ruanda – a costly embarrassing failure.  All small boat arrivals are criminals because they are NOT at risk in France.

Farage has been and continues to be right. 

There – we said it.

Defence of the realm

Holdenforth has been shaken by the catalogue of serious failures in recent months about the reliability of some of the key sections of our defence arrangements. Erratic missiles and poor maintenance performance of key ships come to mind.

I recall that many years ago there was a rumpus when a half-eaten pork pie was found in the sharp end of a British missile.

We had assumed that such sloppiness had been rooted out but evidently that has not been the case.

When the time comes – to go over the top –  do we seek a postponement until our repairs are completed?

The Post Office scandal

We have had our say in previous blogs about this interminably protracted scandal

Right now, we will limit ourselves to insisting that the criminal proceedings to be taken against senior post office managers be speeded up.

This action and the proceedings carried out by Win Williams are not mutually exclusive.

Gorgeous George

George Galloway and his tirades against Keir Starmer – a damp squib or a real threat to the electoral prospects of the Labour Party in 2024?

Holdenforth would like to contribute to the Galloway debate but his most recent visit to Rochdale was to watch a Rugby League match between Rochdale Hornets and Warrington in 1954. This gap of 70 years may make our awareness of what is happening in the town a little dated.

Getting On

We referred earlier to the probable contest between President Biden v  Mr Trump in the November Presidential election.

Holdenforth is confused about this prospect.

On the one hand we are delighted at the confidence shown in octogenarians by the political machines of the Democrats and Republicans.

On the other hand, Holdenforth will be 84 in a few months’ time and he is only too aware of the validity of the jibe by Shakespeare on this theme:

“And then from to hour we ripe and ripe
And then from hour we rot and rot
And thereby hangs a tale”

Speaking as an octogenarian – but NOT claiming to represent old timers – I am relaxed about aged fingers on nuclear weapon triggers – but I would not be relaxed if I were still on the ripe and ripe section of life. 

Two observations

*Holdenforth noted the comedy aspects of the group photo which included Queen Camilla and Vanessa Redgrave . The former has been a tireless worker to secure promotion from the slightly unseemly role as the mistress of the Prince of Wales to the rather more exalted title of the Queen of England.

Dame Vanessa Redgrave was at one time a ferocious member of the Trotsky movement dedicated to the overthrow of the existing social order.

If you can’t beat ‘em then join ‘em!

* “Junior City lawyers in line for £2m pay packet”
Headline in the Daily Mail, February 27^th

One sector of the national economy that is running counter to the national trend is the professional legal sector where affluence can be found in abundance. They flourish not only in advising on issues within the UK but also internationally as obscure disputes are brought to the UK to be resolved usually in painfully protracted proceedings.

“ It appears that there’s gold in them there courts.”

Notes by the editor

The editor would like to respond to a couple of the points made in Holdenforth’s latest epistle. The first concerns Mr Zelenksy’s public utterances (or lack of) on the conflict in Gaza. I would diffidently suggest that there are at least two possible reasons for this, which are not mutually exclusive: both are equally plausible. The first is that Mr Zelensky has not provided his hot take on Gaza, or the Anglophone conflict in Cameroon, or the Boko Haram crisis, or the Schleswig-Holstein question, or United’s chances in the cup, because he has other priorities, such as dealing with a Russian invasion. The second is that, what with said Russian invasion taking its toll on national resources, he is anxious to maximise the number of potential allies who might be willing to contribute in whatever way to the war effort: history is littered with national leaders who have been obliged to hold their nose in this way.

The second concerns the blanket assertion that “all small boat arrivals are criminals because they are NOT at risk in France”. My response here will take a little more of your time, and will take in (amongst other things) a Fellowship in Leeds, the mendacity of the populist right, the Chichester Park Hotel and the assiduous research of Dr Matthew Sweet.

In the latter half of the 1990s, I was engaged by the Institute of Communications Studies, University of Leeds to read the newspapers for a living. There was a little more to it than that: if I came across an article pertaining to immigration, asylum seekers, racism, xenophobia or right-wing extremism I was then obliged to log it in an Access database under an extensive coding scheme. Perhaps unsurprisingly, there was a little more to be logged in the Mail or the Sun than in the Guardian, but as a proportion of the whole, across all newspapers, not many articles needed to be logged. I would venture to suggest that were the exercise to be repeated in the current climate, those proportions would be far higher: for the past decade or so, the Daily Express in particular has devoted many of its pages to particularly unpleasant diatribes about foreigners (indeed, its front pages in that time seem to include pretty much nothing else, apart from perhaps the Royal Family and wholly erroneous long-term weather forecasts).

The Express (and its broadcast media equivalent, GB News) have sought to inflame the debate with dangerous, misleading rhetoric which should not go unchallenged.

Firstly, the notion of ‘first safe country’ is not to be found in international law; The 1951 Refugee Convention does not require a person to claim asylum in the first safe country they reach and explicitly states that asylum seekers should not be penalised for irregular entry into a country in which they intend to submit an application for refugee status”. This point has been reaffirmed on numerous occasions both in international law and, in 1999, by a British court.

So: not criminal, which is Holdenforth’s main objection. However, I think we need to dig a little deeper. There are those (not, I would emphasise, Holdenforth) who might then ask, “Why are they coming here, guv? Why don’t they just stay in France?” Without bothering to look at facts, those asking the questions typically satisfy themselves that the answer is (a) benefits (b) taking our jobs (c) raping our women (d) conducting terrorist activities or (e) all of the above.

Let us try and answer that question.

To begin with, if the asylum seekers have a smattering of a second language, it tends to be English rather than French. Secondly, France receives far more asylum seekers than the UK, and only a very small proportion of those (albeit a significant number) can be found camped out in atrocious conditions in ‘The Jungle’ settlement at Calais. Thirdly, it should be observed that the far right in France is well established; many politicians have built careers on the back of racist, Islamophobic and indeed anti-Semitic public utterances; its police can be trigger happy with the pepper spray and the tear gas: in short, France can be unpleasant if you are Black, Jewish and don’t speak French. Fourthly, those seeking asylum in the UK may have family members living in the UK, or else will be seeking support from the wider diaspora based in the UK.

Next, it is important to emphasise that many of these individuals are not economic migrants, but have been displaced by internal conflicts (often instigated, at least in part, by Western interventions). They are fleeing death, torture or sexual assault. They are desperate. Many are easy prey to the gangs who extort considerable sums of money from them, in return for allowing them – allowing them! – to risk their lives in a perilous Channel crossing.

Many of those that do succeed would be more than happy to take any jobs that are available, particularly in the informal sector: crop picking, car cleaning, working in fast food restaurants. Indeed, in crop picking, they are essential to the sector’s viability. They are not coming for the benefits (which, in France, are slightly higher).

Nor are they here to rape our women. There have recently been demonstrations (primarily consisting of extremists bussed-in from outside the area) outside the Chichester Park Hotel, now used as temporary housing for asylum seekers. The fact that those asylum seekers are overwhelmingly women and children has not deterred the demonstrators from insisting that there are sexual predators on their doorstep. (Furthermore, there is no evidence to suggest that asylum seekers are any more likely to commit sexual offences than the population at large.)

But the Express or GB News will not have this, because whipping up anger is their game. The latter does this by riffing on populist (primarily xenophobic) fears while encouraging a raft of ludicrous but potentially highly dangerous conspiracy theories. The writer and broadcaster Matthew Sweet has devoted considerable time and energy to exposing their mendacity; I would just like to dip my toe into these unpleasant waters by highlighting a few of them:

• The channel regularly features Neil Oliver, who spends most of his time making false claims about the COVID-19 vaccine (e.g. that it causes new kinds of blood clots) and fictional “turbo” cancers or else claiming that the Jews are planning to impose a “one-world” government. In January 2024, he agreed with an interviewee who claimed that “a mysterious group” (whom she named elsewhere as the Jews) had a plan to turn us into cyborgs.

• In 2022, it included several interviews on the Mark Steyn programme with Naomi Wolf, who described the vaccination rollout as “mass murder” and compared it to the actions of doctors “in pre-Nazi Germany”. (Steyn himself delivered misleading monologues about the rollout before leaving the channel after it decided to make him personally liable for any future Ofcom fines. Wolf has since gone even further down the rabbit hole, insisting that “they” are enabling time travel and putting chips in our arms via the vaccine.)

• This week GB News has complained that a gentleman called Sam Melia was imprisoned for two years for distributing stickers that read “It’s OK to be white”. Melia, a former member of a proscribed far right group, was actually imprisoned for plastering anti-Semitic stickers outside Jewish schools.

The channel has also provided a platform for far-right groups such as Voice of Wales (now banned from mainstream online outlets) and former members of proscribed organisations such as For Britain.

And behind all this nonsense, this poison, sits Farage the ringmaster, the peerless populist always staying just the right side of the legal line so that he can avoid charges of outright racism while playing to his audience with a concoction of half truths and plain lies, deftly fomenting discontent. It remains to be seen whether he will return to front line politics with Reform UK; if so, it is unlikely that he would risk standing for Parliament again, because that is a game he might well lose. Rather, he will be Reform’s cheerleader from the sidelines, hoping that after the Conservative Party’s probable demolition at the imminent General Election that Reform, bolstered by the rump of the Tory right, might be in a position to push for power further down the line.

Like Trump, Farage has blossomed in the unfiltered post-Twitter world, where everything, even the obvious truth, can be dismissed as “fake news”. However, it is important to challenge those dismissals, and to ensure that facts – cold, hard, facts – are presented are such, and xenophobia called out for what it is.

The Decline and decline of the BBC

The nationwide search for Mr – Who?

As I write – possibly the most popular topic of conversation across the country remains the activities of the now outed Huw Edwards. Holdenforth suspects that there are more hacks from all parts of the official and unofficial media still on the case than were paid by the BBC to attend the Glastonbury festival – said to be circa 500.

We at Holdenforth have better things to do with our time and so will resist the temptation to join in the hue ( geddit?) and cry pursuit of Mr Edwards.  Instead we will run over the arguments we have advanced in previous blogs to resolve the long standing BBC problem by the simple expedient of privatising it. Here goes.

Back in 2003,  Holdenforth, Aka John Holden,  wrote the first draft of his book A Cushy Number.

I selected three prominent figures from the world of professional football to develop my idea of what constituted a Cushy Number.

One of my selected figures was Gary Lineker.

Let me repeat what I wrote 20 years ago.

What about Mr Lineker, our TV pundit. By any standard his job is one of, at best, medium demand with the job holder under no significant stress.

Performance measurement is perfunctory, but even sceptics like me must accept that his combination of suavity and well informed comments are likely to earn the approval of the viewers.

A few years ago, there was some unseemly comment in the gutter press about his off-side sexual activities, with his more acerbic critics noting that he would have been a more effective player had he shown the same zeal on the football field that he has shown in the bedroom. For our part we note that the scale of his playing away activities is evidence of the relative cushiness of his job…

What about the job of Mr Lineker? All very relaxed, but with a question mark over job security. Performance measurement is partly a matter of ratings, but it is always complicated by the issue of competing channels…  Mr Lineker is clearly well rewarded and his modest working hours leave him plenty of time and opportunity to pick up moonlighting money.

Readers, please note the final phrase – plenty of time and opportunity to pick up moonlighting money!

Holdenforth on Mr Lineker in March, 2023 –  Notes on free speech:

Some spectators of the Lineker v BBC sideshow have argued that the BBC is suppressing free speech.

Holdenforth will point out that where Lineker is involved – nothing is free – or even cheap. 

Where were we?

In the beginning God created the BBC and his first Pope was John Reith.

For a while all went according to plan – and presumably God saw that it was good.

Sadly, the sons and daughters of Satan seized the levers of power within the BBC and the descent into the abyss gathered momentum.

Today the BBC proclaims that it remains a sui generis that adheres to its original divine mission statement.

Holdenforth diffidently notes that there are those outside the BBC who disagree with this delusion and who argue that the BBC is most accurately summed up by its perceived mission statement by those outside the BBC – “ there’s no business like show business.”

Indeed, we will go further – we suggest that the gap between the BBC propaganda about its elevated place in our society and the outside view that its privileged days are numbered is clearly visible.

Notes on which institutions sit where in our society and where they ought to sit  — The Hierarchy of Institutions

Time was when the first three estates were established along the following lines:

• The spiritual as represented by the Clergy:

The boundaries between the component groups were said to be fluid – but we will put the  boundaries issue on the back burner for now.

At some point a fourth estate was defined – sometime in the late 18^th century – as being the press. The function of this estate was to keep a suspicious eye on what those in Estates 1 to 3 were up to.

Much more recently perceptive sociologists have defined a fifth estate – those who operate in the jungle that is inhabited and controlled by social  media.

Where does the BBC sit in this hierarchy of estates?

Holdenforth has never seen this key issue discussed. However we have no doubt that the BBC – thinking of itself as a sui generis –  sees itself as the sixth estate – outside and remote from the squalid struggles for power that pervade Estates 1 to 5 inclusive.

Anything else to add?

Holdenforth has long argued that the BBC has abandoned the hallowed status acquired for it by John Reith and that the BBC should be promptly privatised.

We noted – in a detached way – that the BBC Chairman, Richard Sharp had resigned following accusations that he had been less than prudent in his dealings with Boris Johnson. So – we mused – that is the usual fate of those who have dealings with Boris Johnson.

However – we did not leave it at that. We looked at the organisation structures used to manage and oversee the BBC and we were struck by the sheer vacuity of so many of the top jobs and the immense scope for some ruthless pruning in this area.

Accordingly,  we suggest to those in the private equity sector – here is a fat organisation – correction – an obese organisation – offering substantial opportunities for slimming down.

Get your numbers boys to carry out a swift due diligence exercise – you can’t go wrong.

We must rule out Mr Rupert Murdoch in this instance – far too busy with his complex matrimonial activities.

Holdenforth can claim some relevant experience in this area- some years ago bright young go getter introduced the idea and approach of lean management. Long before this bright young go getter published his views I worked for an organisation that pioneered the idea and approach of emaciated management  – and the lessons learned in that harsh managerial climate have remained with me.

We were about to leave it at that but at the last moment we were gratified to be assisted in our case against the BBC by a most illuminating six column article in – you’ve guessed it – The Daily Mail – detailing who  is currently paid what at the BBC.

What follows is far more gripping to Holdenforth than the frothy reports about Huw Edwards.

Predictably Mr Gary Lineker tops the list at £1.35M for his not especially onerous part time duties.

Further details of the earnings of senior BBC staff are supplied and we note, more in sorrow than anger, that Mark Easton has to get by on £200k.

An additional intriguing group of BBC “employees” are those paid via third parties. Holdenforth would not dream of hinting that there are tax advantages to payments made in this way. Suffice it to say that all the costs incurred – directly or indirectly – are paid out by the BBC, and, ultimately by the licence fee.

Let us get to our main points – at last.

For many years senior employees at the BBC argued that they remained at the BBC out of a sense of public duty and could earn far more elsewhere.

Let us put that dubious claim to the test by privatising the BBC.

It would be instructive to review after a year or so how many had been let go as being surplus to the requirements of the new owners, and of those remaining how many were paid more and how many were paid less.

Holdenforth proposes that HMG should privatise the BBC – just sell it off in its entirety to the highest bidder.

The BBC would could thus be redefined as just another part of the 4^th estate and subject to the same terms and conditions as all the other members of the 4^th estate.

The rest of us – the commoners – can then spend more time considering and learning how to cope with rather graver matters – UK membership of the EU, the War in the Ukraine, / NHS in crisis, widespread disruption of services by public sector unions, – you get the picture.

A stroll down memory lane

“Well, he would say that, wouldn’t he?”
Response from Marylyn Rice -Davies, a close friend of Christine Keeler,  when questioned during the Profumo Affair in 1963 about her contacts with a senior figure involved in the scandal.

An updated version:

“Water firm bosses fight plans to cut their bonus”

Mail on Sunday, July 2

Well, they would say that, wouldn’t they?

Those of us not enjoying the immense pickings by those at the top of the water sector may well not be in favour of allowing this small but affluent group to continue to help themselves.

“Sir:-there is no settling the point of precedency between a louse and flea”
Dr Johnson on which of two obscure poets was the better poet in 1776

“The essential function of marriage is the continuance of the race…

The accidental function of marriage is the gratification of the amoristic sentiment of mankind

The artificial sterilisation of marriage makes it possible for to fulfil its accidental function whilst neglecting its essential one.”
From “The Revolutionist’s Handbook” by George Bernard Shaw – 1903

There was a boisterous  altercation recently between two combative factions at a public gathering to demonstrate their respective views.

The larger group was anxious to ensure that the public was aware of the rights of the LGBT sector to equality with regards to sexual preferences.

The smaller but if anything rather more aggressive group, the Stop Oil sector, was anxious to persuade / cajole/ bully the rest of us into agreeing to its demands.

The ensuing confrontation was a source of entertainment to those with no affiliation  to either sector.

Holdenforth takes the same view as Dr Johnson as to which of the two groups was in the right.

One aspect of the war between THE WEST and Putin.

This conflict, which has never been out the news since the initial invasion launched by Russia is once again a major issue of concern in THE WEST.

Holdenforth would like to flag up just one aspect of the war.

We have noted that there is an element of selective indignation in the moral fervour voiced on a 24/7 platform by President Zelensky. He appears to be quite relaxed about the appalling record of Israel in the flouting of international law and especially about the one sided war between Israel and the various groups in Palestine.

To be consistent, surely he could urge that the many countries committed to freedom might consider equipping  the Palestinians with modern and powerful weapons to reverse the illegal occupation of their land by Israel?

Holding Coutts to Account

Since Brexit first emerged as a major issue some 10 years ago Nigel Farage has been possibly the most influential politician presenting the Brexit case – and Holdenforth has taken the opposite view throughout these years.

We never thought that we thought that we would say this, but we now think that Mr Farage has been hard done by in the treatment of himself and his family by his bank.

We will support and sign any petition campaigning to restore a normal banking service to Mr Farage.

As I Please

We will begin this blog with an apology. For reasons still not wholly clear to us we issued our last blog but one twice. We attribute our mistake to a combination of national confusion and international confusion – and our old age.

We can only hope that our faithful readers either did not detect our mistake or, better still, were delighted to read the repeated blog for the rewards of so doing.

In any event our subsequent blog got us back on track. Our main topic was the decline and fall of Boris Johnson and the front photo was of four tellers reporting the results of the views of his fellow MPs on his honesty.

Glad to get that out of the way.

Now – where are we now? Yet another tricky blog to write – as already noted – we are still confronted by a combination of national and international confusion – and Holdenforth is not getting any younger.

Let us begin by taking a snap shot of the UK as we edge into the third quarter of 2023. Most observers and commentators are agreed that – to use the term favoured by Jeremy Corbyn – the prospects for THE MANY are bleak and the mood of THE MANY is not assuaged by the daily revelations about the corruption of  THE FEW at the top, in short about the tensions between the many in poverty and the few in affluence, between the losers and the winners in our lop sided society.

Thus:

Food prices are rising rapidly – and all of us like to eat. Bad for inflation.

Housing – Mortgage rates are rising steadily triggering pro rata increases in the cost of the repayment of mortgages – and we all like to have a roof over our heads. Time was when the young would have a choice between buying a  house and renting a house. Not so today. The prospect today for those at the bottom is to be homeless.

“What is the classical rate of interest ….I find it difficult to state it precisely …”
From The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money

Maynard Keynes, 1936

If Keynes found it difficult – what chance have you and I got?

In the past few decades, the interest rate has fluctuated between zero and – albeit briefly – 15% on Black Wednesday, 1992. The Chancellor of the Exchequer on Black Wednesday, Norman Lamont, was later to warble Je ne regrette rien – a sentiment not widely shared by UK voters and later regretted by Mr Lamont.

Holdenforth has been a middle of the road man – in 1968 he borrowed £4k from what was at that time an honourable organisation, the Halifax Building Society, to be repaid at 7.5% over 25 years – a steady Eddie of a borrower.

Today the great majority of us are anxious about the increasing cost of having a roof over heads.

Some will have noted that the heir to the throne, Prince William, shares their concerns. All very commendable, but Holdenforth has written elsewhere about the concerns expressed by Edward the 8^th – later to be demoted to the title of the Duke of Windsor. The then King was visiting the distressed areas of South Wales in the mid-1930s and commented that “something must be done”.

Well said, Sir. What exactly did you have in mind?

Holdenforth asks Prince William – exactly what measures do you suggest to achieve your objective?   

Meanwhile, a sector currently causing significant national concerns is that prevailing in the supply of water.

Holdenforth has noted the pitiful attempts of those responsible for this sector to explain how the privatisation of this sector has not quite worked out as planned.

Holdenforth has a simpler explanation – the startling greed of those running the sector.

How did they get away with it?

We have said before and we will say again now:

• Q – Why does a dog lick its balls?

The plight of the water sector has attracted a huge amount of media coverage.

Thus:

“Privatising water and rail has been a disaster”
Peter Hitchens, Mail on Sunday, July 2

“Why was our utilities giant EVER slowed to fall into the clutches of an Australian predator?”
Alex Brummer, Mail on Sunday, July 2

However – Holdenforth readers should note a defiant riposte from a predictable quarter.

“Water firm bosses fight plans to cut their bonus”
Mail on Sunday headline, July 2

This particular crop of managerial boss thieves combine breath-taking greed with outer layers that make the skin of the rhinoceros seem astonishingly thin.

Holdenforth  has been here before – some 20 years ago:

“Can you picture the scene at a board meeting of a privatised monopoly? The first and most important task is to finalise the remuneration of the Directors for the next accounting period. The updated reward packages of Mr Paul Getty, Mr Bill Gates and Her Majesty the Queen will be tabled and reviewed, and the gaps noted and regretted. The meeting will then finalise a plan to close these gaps as quickly as is politically possible. The accountant will be instructed to ensure that he does not lose a nought in his calculations.  With this core task accomplished the second task is to readjust the price of the commodity in order to fund the package increases. The numbers boy will be sent away to do the necessary sums. The third task will be to sort out a plan to cajole, persuade, and bamboozle the regulator into nodding through the price increases required. This can be tricky and may require some thought.

The one issue which is never considered because it never arises is whether the customer will pay. He will pay because he has no choice. Governments have thrown dust in the eyes of the voters by seeming to bring in an element of competition. All nonsense of course. Why bother with a regulator if we have competition?”
Extract from A Cushy Number by John Holden aka Holdenforth

Update: Mr Michael Howard – now Lord Howard – was the minister responsible for the privatisation of the water sector in the late 1980s.

A few days ago, he was pulled out of retirement to justify the privatisation on the Today programme.

It was pitiful to listen to the retrospective case put forward by Lord Howard. Even this most slippery of legal eagles struggled to defend the indefensible.

Where does Holdenforth stand on this one?

“The privatisation of near monopolies is about as irrelevant as (and sometimes worse than) even the Labour Party’s proposals for further nationalisation in the 1970s and early 1980s.”
From  A Life at the Centre by Roy Jenkins 

The Coup that never was.

A week or so ago the world woke up to the news that forces in Russia – led by a Mr Yevgeny Prigozhin – who were dissatisfied with the lack of progress in the war between THE WEST and Russia and were marching to Moscow resolved to do -what?

Holdenforth was mystified at the unexpected turn of events. In our defence we had said in numerous blogs that, whilst we had clear views about the origins of the war, our expertise did not include the conduct of war.

However there was no shortage of expertise elsewhere.

“Massive Columns of Commentators forced into humiliating defeat”
Spoof headline in Private Eye on the need for the media mob to do a sharp about turn.

“I cannot forecast to you the action of Russia. It is a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma; but perhaps there is a key. That key is Russian national interest.”
Extract from a speech by Winston Churchill, October 1, 1939: an earlier, rather more plausible comment about Russia when WW2 had scarcely got under way.

Back to the here and now.

The war between THE WEST and Putin continues. Mr Zelensky is as active as ever in seeking to widen the scope and severity of the conflict. The story about the collapse of the rise and fall of the Prigozhin rebellion had barely vanished from the headlines when news of rioting across France emerged.

The domestic difficulties in the UK and in France may have reduced the zeal of some in THE WEST to intensify the conflict in the Ukraine. 

Lords a leaping 

Today the number in that most desirable retirement home for party hacks – The House of Lords – is at an all-time high – close to 1,000 and rising  steadily. (Editor’s note: while an awful lot of folks are currently entitled to wear the ermine, they (that is, sitting members) currently number 777, considerably below the 1999 peak of around 1,300, after which the Blair government sent all but 90 of the hereditary peers out to pasture. However, Blair himself created an impressive 374 life peers during his ten years in Downing Street, with David Cameron contributing a further 245 in his six years in the top job, making Boris Johnson’s total of 86 seem positively modest.)

To save space in this blog Holdenforth will put onto a separate blog his solution to the problem of how to accommodate the swelling ranks of the unemployed parasites well past their sell by date.

For now, Holdenforth asks our readers to nominate their choice for the most odious of the recent selections.

Our choice is an easy one despite the multitude of those demanding to be considered.

We name Lord Watson.

Why?

 No one would dispute that one of the most odious of crimes is that of sexual abuse.

A crime that comes close to this this is to accuse wholly innocent people on the basis of the absurd allegations of  just one man, an offence made even more serious because it was made under the protection of parliamentary privilege.

Tom Watson was guilty of this most squalid offence – but Sir Keir Starmer saw fit to arrange his membership of the House of Lords where he now sits.

By comparison the elevation of  Charlotte Owen to the Lords was a comical if ill-judged selection by Boris Johnson. Clive Myrie made a shrewd but politically unwise point when, on “Have I Got News For You,” he noted that he quite understood why Mr Johnson would like to give her one.

A few closing snippets

“ The language of priorities is the religion of socialism” said Nye Bevan. True enough but not  a helpful slogan.

The top priority of those in charge of the water sector has been to loot the organisation.

The top priority of substantial numbers of the super-rich has been to arrange their affairs to exploit accommodating regimes around the world so as to minimise their tax payments.

The top priority of eco activists is to stop the oil – the rather more tepid preference of the rest of us is to enforce laws which specify what actions are within the law and which are not.

“We must take radical action to get Rwanda DONE”
Boris Johnson in his exciting new column, Daily Mail, July 1

Johnson went on to say that “It is time … for parliament to determine that Rwanda is safe, bust the evil people traffickers, stop the boats, recapture the spirit of 2019 and get Rwanda done”

A brave new initiative from our recently despatched hero or a yet another outburst from the bloated bladder of bullshit?

Holdenforth favours the latter explanation.

A quite feasible explanation is that people all over the world will always seek to improve their lives and the people smugglers are simply enterprising travel agents prepared – for a fee – to assist them in their endeavours.

“All professions are conspiracies against the laity…. Do not suggest that the medical conspiracy is either better or worse than the military conspiracy, the legal conspiracy, the sacerdotal conspiracy, the pedagogic conspiracy, …. The innumerable industrial, commercial and financial conspiracies …”
Extract from the preface to The Doctor’s Dilemma by George Bernard Shaw

Holdenforth fully endorses Shaw’s views on the exploitation by members of professions of the rest of us. No profession exploits its dubious expertise more than the medical profession. As I write the profession has kicked its solemn commitment to healing as per the Hippocratic oath into the long grass and replaced it by working tirelessly to relieve the rest of us of our meagre and dwindling pecuniary resources.

How does Holdenforth see the future? sadly we are gloomy about our prospects — we are suffering from an attack of the effs.

We are faltering , floundering, foundering, failing – you bet, flailing, frustrated, fulminating, festering, furious , fractious. Other effs suggested themselves but this is a family blog and you get the picture.

The origins of the war in the Ukraine

The conflict in the Ukraine has now been underway for just over a year. Holdenforth has nothing to say about the conduct of the war but we would like to add a few points about the origins of the war, and in particular about its portrayal in the West as a conflict between THE WEST and Putin.

 “Crimea: The war that would not boil”
Title of an essay by AJP Taylor about the war between Russia and the combined forces of France and Britain which started in 1854 .

 “The Crimean War was the cold war in an earlier phase. Two world systems, mutually uncomprehending, lurched against each other, each convinced of its defensive good faith . Both sides shrank from the head-on collision which would have produced a war to remake the world… “
Extract from the above essay.

Sounds familiar?

Let us fast forward to the current war in The Crimea with especial reference to events in The Crimea.

 The origins of the current war

Following the launch of Operation  Barbarossa in June 1941 the  forces of the USSR were pushed back and back by German forces to Stalingrad in late 1942. The tide was then reversed and between January 1943 and May 1945 the German forces were driven out of the USSR and back to Berlin by Red Army.

Germany surrendered unconditionally to the allies (USA and the UK in the west and the USSR in the east in May, 1945).

The main features of Operation Barbarossa were:

• The appalling losses on both sides in the battles between the two opposing armies.
• The even more appalling systematic murder of the “inferior“ people by the SS forces operating behind the advancing Wehrmacht and later alongside the retreating Wehrmacht as they initially advanced into the USSR and – after Stalingrad – as they retreated back to Berlin.

It has been estimated that this mass murder of innocent civilians caused as many deaths as those caused on the battlefield. These murders would have been carried out on all those “inferior” people being defended by USSR forces – and these would have included Ukrainians,  Belarussians, and of course, Russians.

The murdered millions are in no position to comment on what happened to them but it is probable that those that survived can recall what happened and who was responsible.

These memories may be a factor in later Russian leaders being determined that the events occurring between June, 1941 to May 1945 would never be repeated.   

 “By far the most grievous suffering among the warring states in WW2 was borne by the Soviet Union which lost at least 7 million men in battle and a further 7 million civilians, most of the latter died as a result of deprivation , reprisal and forced labour.”
From-”The Second World War“ By John Keegan

 Also carried out during this 4 year period was what was probably the most appalling crime of all during WW2., possibly the most appalling  crime in history, the targeted murder of some 6m Jews murdered because they were Jewish.

Israel and the Jewish Diaspora were understandably resolved to ensure that these crimes would never be repeated.

Just one point to make here – had the Red Army not prevailed inside and outside Stalingrad – would the parents of Mr Zelensky have survived the consequences of the Final Solution policy?

 Notes on the politics of the current war

Mr Zelensky is a most accomplished practitioner of the art of Public Relations. He likes to portray the Ukraine conflict as a conflict between civilisation and barbarism. Is there an element of selective indignation here given the shaky record of Israel in its treatment of its Arab neighbours?

Holdenforth is uneasy about the zeal with which Zelensky urges his supporters in THE WEST to join the conflict partly by bankrolling it and partly by supplying enough weapons and munitions to drive Russia out of every bit of what was the Ukraine Republic prior to break up of the USSR.

Holdenforth has already spelled out its aversion to Boris (Horace) Johnson.

We find it ironic that those two masters of PR -Johnson and Zelensky – should be the most strident in demanding the rush to war be intensified.

Thus – Johnson – the master of mendacity.

Zelensky – former stand up comedian catapulted into the top job in the Ukraine.

A worrying alliance for those seeking solutions – minimum damage solutions – compromise solutions which recognise Russian concerns about the geography and history of the Crimea.

We would go further – we suggest that there has been nothing to compare with this epidemic of jingoism since the outbreak of WW1.

Holdenforth sees the main stakeholder in THE WEST as being the USA.

The two key elements in the Foreign Policy of the USA can be simply stated.

• “Never give a sucker an even break”
• “When you have got them by the balls – their hearts and minds will follow”

Both are admirably direct but both are difficult to reconcile with the 7^th  beatitude –

“Blessed are the peacemakers  for they shall be called the children of God”
Matthew 5,9 

A word about the contribution of Sir Keir Starmer and The Labour Party to the conflict

Holdenforth was -and remains – very unhappy about the enthusiasm with which Starmer visited the Ukraine and threw the full support of his party to the cause of THE WEST

 “Political language – and with variations this is true of all political parties from Conservatives to Anarchists – is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of respectability to pure wind.”
From “Politics and the English Language by  Holdenforth‘s hero, George Orwell

And a comment which seems to Holdenforth to be appropriate to describe the recent attempts by Sir Keir to woo the UK electorate back to the Labour Party:

“It ( a report submitted to him by one of managers) made me feel like I’ve eaten a large helping of  jelly soufflé. I‘m full of an overwhelming feeling of f*** all”
Bob Scholey – at the time of his pugnacious abrasive remark was a regional manager in the recently nationalised British Steel Corp, later to be appointed its Chairman.

For Holdenforth both comments capture the flavour of the Starmer contributions to recent political debates.

Just one final point – we at Holdenforth are mindful that we  are a tiny part of a tiny minority – are we in danger of disagreeing with almost everybody about almost everything and we are somewhat lonely in our disputatious redoubt.

Who do we like?

Let’s hear it for the late great Roy Jenkins.

Notes by the Editor

Firstly, an apology for the lateness in this particular blog’s arrival. This was due, not because we disagree with its sentiments (although we do, and more of that anon), but because we had a second encounter with COVID, and subsequently there were a few rather interesting series on Amazon that we wanted to catch up with.

Secondly, the article itself. We outlined our previous objections to the broad thrust of Holdenforth’s argument in a response to a previous blog, observing that its central tenet (that Ukraine should return to its former existence as a Russian vassal state) does not go down well with the overwhelming majority of Ukrainian citizens, who are, after all, the main interested parties here. (We would also gently point out that the term “the Ukraine” rather than “Ukraine” is the way that the Russians referred to it during the Soviet era: latterly, its use has largely been limited to those who feel it should remain a Russian province.)

With regards to Holdenforth’s comment that “had the Red Army not prevailed inside and outside Stalingrad – would the parents of Mr Zelensky have survived the consequences of the Final Solution policy?”, we could suggest an alternative, say  “If Stalin hadn’t implemented collectivisation would more than three million Ukrainians – perhaps as many as five million – have died of starvation in the 1930s?” (Or indeed, if, in 1940, Hitler hadn’t said, “I’m bored with Operation Sealion, let’s invade Russia”?)

If one were looking to historical parallels to Zelensky’s (entirely reasonable) requests for additional weaponry, Roosevelt’s Lend Lease policy, passed in early 1941 after Churchill had urged the President for help late in 1940, might come close. Then, as now, the US was not fighting a proxy war: indeed, as Roy Jenkins himself says in his biography of Churchill, even after the Placentia Bay meeting in August 1941 (which resulted in the Atlantic Charter), “it would be quite wrong to think of [the Placentia Bay meetings] as days of ineluctable steps in this direction.” It is true that at that time the US was more overtly isolationist, as enshrined in the Neutrality Acts of the 1930s. However, US policy prior to the Russian invasion of Ukraine had certainly been based around withdrawal from theatres of conflict (Afghanistan) or  expressing muted disapproval (when Russia annexed the Crimea). The US is not the puppet-master in Ukraine, no more than it was in Europe in early 1941.

The Origins of the War in Ukraine

How and why did we wake up on February 24^th to learn that Russia had invaded Ukraine?

This war is now in its ninth month. Why would Holdenforth wish to revisit the conflict?

The causes of the war, the crimes of Mr Putin, the virtues of the leaders of the countries that comprise THE WEST – all are pretty clear by this stage. Only clandestine bolshies or the agents of our enemies or those  dedicated to the suppression of freedom and to the overthrow of democracy or any combination of these factors dissent from what we might term the Zelensky stance.

Surely we can simply tick the cause of and the case of THE WEST in this most clear cut conflict between good and evil and move on to other matters?

The course of the war has been exhaustively covered in THE WEST and there has been and continues to be broad agreement that Russia under the leadership of Stalin’s heir, Putin, has fought a dirty war with odious motives and that THE WEST has fought a clean war albeit under a collective leadership for the noblest of motives.

In this blog Holdenforth will look at the origins of the conflict to check if the Russians were indeed from the outset the bad guys.

“My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery.  If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone, I would also do that.”

Abraham Lincoln spelling out his commendably frank reasons for engaging in the American Civil War.

There are those in Russia today who wish that Mr Gorbachev would have adopted this stance at the time of the break-up of the Soviet Union in 1991. Put simply they believe that Mr Gorbachev was extremely naïve in accepting the deliberately vague assurances from Western leaders about NATO having no ambitions to encircle the crumbling USSR. Those in Russia who take this view argue that Mr Gorbachev ought to have ensured that these assurances were embodied in firm commitments in writing in formal treaties.

For this group the key factor was that the insistence that THE WEST accept in a formal treaty that the boundaries of NATO would not be expanded.

Holdenforth noted that  when Mr Gorbachev died a few weeks ago Mr Putin made precisely this point and for this reason his views about his predecessor but one were much less supportive than the views of most Western commentators.

“A Story has no beginning or end: arbitrarily one chooses that moment of experience from which to look back or from which to look ahead”

From  “The End of the Affair” by Graham Greene

Holdenforth would like to examine possible contributory factors to the conflict which started on February 24^th of this year.

“I should not want to include these inferior people in my Reich”
Hitler giving his views about Russians to Professor Toynbee in February 1936

“When Barbarossa begins, the world will hold its breath”
Hitler to his generals on February  3, 1941.

Barbarossa, the codename for the attack on Russia by Germany, was launched on June 22, 1941 and  the world did indeed hold its breath – and it was to hold its breath for the next 4 years.

Let Holdenforth summarise the appalling consequences of the implementation of Barbarossa.

• During the first four months or so of the war the Wehrmacht  advanced rapidly against the forces of the USSR.
• The advance was halted just outside Moscow by a combination of bad weather and dogged resistance by Russian forces.
• In early 1942, Hitler switched the direction of his main attack to the southeast, his aim being to secure control of the oil fields in The Caucasus
• Hitler also stretched his forces unnecessarily by attacking Stalingrad, an error which triggered a turning point in the war when Von Paulus disobeyed the orders of Hitler and accepted the surrender of the German 6^th army in January 1943.
• The Russians led by Chuikov inside Stalingrad and by Zhukov outside Stalingrad inflicted major defeats on the hitherto invincible Wehrmacht. 
• The story of the next 30 months is one of the remorseless advance of the Red Army from Stalingrad in the east to Berlin in the west, an advance which ended in the unconditional surrender of all German forces to the forces of the allies in May, 1945

The main features of the war between Germany and Russia were:

• The appalling losses on both sides in the battles between the two opposing armies.
• The even more appalling systematic murder of the “inferior” people by the SS forces operating behind the advancing Wehrmacht and later alongside the retreating Wehrmacht as they initially advanced into the USSR and – after Stalingrad – as they retreated back to Berlin.
• It has been estimated that this mass murder of innocent civilians caused as many deaths as those caused on the battlefield. These murders would have been carried out on all those “inferior” people being defended by USSR forces – and these would have included Ukrainians,  Belarussians, and of course, Russians.
• The murdered millions are in no position to comment on what happened to them but it is probable that those that survived can recall what happened and who was responsible.

These memories may be a factor in later Russian leaders being determined that the events occurring between June 1941 and May 1945 would never be repeated.   

It should be noted that these mass murders were scarcely ever reported on at the time because Hitler and his henchmen, notably the notorious SS death squads, took care to silence any witnesses.

“By far the most grievous suffering among the warring states in WW2 was borne by the Soviet Union which lost at least seven million men in battle and a further seven million civilians, most of the latter died as a result of deprivation , reprisal and forced labour.”
From “The Second World War” By John Keegan

Also carried out during this four year period was what was probably the most appalling crime of all during WW2, possibly the most appalling  crime in history, the targeted murder of some six million Jews, murdered because they were Jewish.

The Jewish people that survived the Holocaust were understandably and justifiably and rightly determined to ensure that the Holocaust story was told to the fullest possible extent.

Let us now fast forward to February 24^th of this year, the date when Russia invaded The Ukraine to trigger the current war.

The war is now in its 9^th month and today, November 11 – a notable date in history – it shows no sign of ending.

What have been the main features of this current war?

To begin with, this war has been a proxy war.

What is meant by this assertion?

As Holdenforth understands it THE WEST has funded the war and has supplied slogans and propaganda and weapons in abundance.

The key element of boots on the ground has been supplied by the Ukraine on the one hand and by Russia on the other hand.

Mr Zelensky has proved himself a master in the art of PR on the world stage. His skill in this all-important area has left the Russians floundering in his wake. 

Holdenforth suspects that there may be an element of selective indignation about the stance of Mr Zelensky. At the drop of a hat, he will describe the war as a conflict between good and evil, between freedom and tyranny.

Holdenforth has noted that Mr Zelensky is strangely muted when the dreadful record of Israel about its consistent flouting of UN demands that it vacate the occupied territories in Palestine.

Holdenforth also suspects that there are some in THE WEST who suspect that his practice of addressing Ukrainians on a daily basis is wearing a little thin.

The war has been and continues to be extensively and intensively reported on around the world. As has historically been the case the first casualty has been the truth and the reports coming out of THE WEST and the reports coming out of the Kremlin are mutually exclusive.

The integrity of reporters like Lyse Doucette and Orla Guerin has been established over many years and is beyond reproach.

Holdenforth fully accepts the accuracy of the reports on the conflict issued by the BBC.

A word on the war aims of the two opposing parties.

The WEST made it clear at the outset that it was not opposed to the Russian people but it also made it clear that:

• Mr Putin does not speak for the Russian people, and that.
• Mr Putin must be deposed – in other words THE WEST required regime change.

Holdenforth believes that this war aim will not help to achieve a peaceful outcome to the conflict.

Russia and Putin

When the conflict first began to become a global issue the stance of Russia was that it would not accept that Ukraine could become a member of NATO because this outcome would transfer the frontier of THE WEST from the far west of the Ukraine to the Russian border, a significant shift in the global power game and unsurprisingly a change not viewed favourably by Russia /Putin.

Holdenforth thinks that Mr Putin may have a point here.

One other point here: Holdenforth has noted that the USA has made a habit since the end of WW2 of arranging regime changes around the world. 

These  regime changes have typically begun with massive PR campaigns – need to replace tyranny with freedom, need to bring about democracy – you get the picture.

Sadly, most of these attempts to impose changes in the politics of the areas thus helped have resulted in either anarchy or even worse tyranny or both.

Those favourably inclined to the aims of the USA will award full marks for the intentions of the USA but equally many may be rather more reluctant to endorse the various outcomes.

Mr Putin will have noted the treatment meted out to Sadam Hussein, to Colonel Gadafi, and to the incumbent leaders of the Arab Spring – and he will not have been impressed. It is unlikely that he, Putin, will allow himself to be treated in a similar manner- and he is strongly positioned to ensure that that will not be the outcome.

The casualties of the war in the Ukraine.

Holdenforth accepts that the intense media scrutiny of the conflict ensures that the casualties reported by both sides are accurate. We have on occasions been confused by the contributions of the array of retired military experts as they confidently predict the imminent collapse of Russia but we readily accept that we are way out of our depth in this complex area.

We are clear on one feature of the war – the suffering inflicted on the civilian population of the Ukraine has been and continues to be appalling in scale and severity as hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians flee their destroyed homes in search of safe havens.

Just a thought

Holdenforth noted earlier in this blog that “This war has been a proxy war. What is meant by this assertion? As Holdenforth understands it THE WEST has funded the war and has supplied slogans and propaganda and weapons in abundance. The key element of boots on the ground has been supplied by the Ukraine on the one hand and by Russia on the other hand.”

What if this way of conducting a war had been available to the UK in 1914? Reluctant to put its forces in the line of fire by putting boots on the ground but prepared to supply bullets and guns for the French armed forces to wage the war.

A much more agreeable arrangement from the UK point of view.

A very timely point to make on the 11^th of November, 2022, the 104^th anniversary of the signing of the armistice  to signify the end of WW1. I am unable to consult my father on this one – but he did serve his king and country in the Caucasus war zone in WW1. He was lucky – he survived the war and returned to the UK to resume his job as a Plate Layer. I was born in 1940, the youngest of his eight children

“Blessed are the peacemakers for they shall be called the children of God”
Matthew 5,9.

Amid all the talk of the possibility that the conflict in the Ukraine could drag on for many months – even years, together with the crippling problems triggered by the conflict – soaring global energy prices, hunger in areas reliant upon grain from the Ukraine, tensions in powerful countries that do not see themselves as committed to the dominance of THE WEST – what does Holdenforth want to see NOW?

A peace conference between the key stakeholders in the conflict which are of course the USA and Russia to resolve ALL the points for which the war is being fought.

Sadly the UK is not even a key stakeholder in the UK

Well, then.

Holdenforth’s editor has a few thoughts on the above, which to his mind comprise statements which are, firstly, either factually incorrect or represent willful misreadings of the unfolding events; those which are not strictly pertinent or at best only tangentially related to the matter in hand; those which tell only part of the story and where we must dig a little deeper to explore the wider context; and, those which are rather splendidly a combination of one or more of the above.

Justifying my above assertions requires a little more elaboration than that of Samuel Johnson’s refutation of the non-existence of a matter: a little more, but not much. Let the stone-kicking begin.

To begin with, Holdenforth’s analysis of the events post-Barbarossa are accurate, and are certainly “a factor in later Russian leaders being determined that the events occurring between June 1941 and May 1945 would never be repeated”, but really is a case of so far, so good: it partially explains the Soviet mindset, but does not proceed to its consequences, which were to keep over a hundred million individuals across neighbouring countries in Central Europe and Eurasia under quisling regimes for forty years: when they objected, notably in Hungary and the then Czechoslovakia, those objections met with a brutal response. Secondly, when we take the particular example of the Ukraine, this country’s own attempts at independence in 1917 (the establishment of the Ukrainian Central Council, which sought national territorial autonomy) failed when it was forcibly reconstituted by the Bolsheviks into a Soviet republic in hock to Russia; it the suffered grievously under Stalin, most notably during the famine which he engineered during the 1930s and which resulted in the deaths of between three and five million Ukrainians. This historical context is important: while the Soviets wanted to created an array of buffer-zones between themselves and what Holdenforth has described as THE WEST (Capitalise them, it sounds more threatening), it also demonstrates why the Ukrainians were rather keen on moving from being a buffer zone into a the membership of an alliance which could offer protection against a Russia which was becoming ever more militaristic.

Secondly, the portrayal of the conflict as a proxy war is at best only partially correct. Zelensky is certainly a master of propaganda (see also Churchill, Winston in this regard) and has needed to be, given the initial diffidence of NATO: he has been a constant flea in the ear of Joe Biden and whichever UK Prime Minister happens to be in charge that week, at different times cajoling, pleading and demanding more equipment and weaponry, and receiving some, but by no means all, that he has asked for; he has also requested boots on the ground, but NATO has demurred, recognising that such a step might really well lead to a nuclear holocaust. (The digression into “what if we could have gone down this road in 1914” really is a scenario on a par with “If my Auntie had bollocks”, and so can safely be ignored, as can the saunter into whataboutery around Zelensky’s lack of commentary on the Israel-Palestine question)

Thirdly, the assertion that regime change was the desired outcome from the outset is simply inaccurate (it was for a while a line in the sand for Mr Zelenskiy, at a time when the bombing, and Mr Putin’s rhetoric, was particularly violent, but even Zelenskiy appears quietly to have withdrawn this demand). On a related note, Holdenforth’s statement “the USA has made a habit since the end of WW2 of arranging regime changes around the world” invites the conclusion that Uncle Sam is seeking to mastermind yet another one, this time at the Kremlin: well, just because the last three cars to have passed have been red, it does not logically follow that the fourth will be of a scarlet hue, and this rationale is about as watertight as that.

Perhaps oddly, one other misrepresentation is that “the intense media scrutiny of the conflict ensures that the casualties reported by both sides are accurate”: both sides are believed to have downplayed the extent of military casualties in particular. Russia has confirmed that around 6,000 of its soldiers have been killed, while independent estimates put the figure at over 17,400, with at least a further 5,000 fatalities amongst Wagner Group mercenaries and Donetsk forces. Ukraine in turn admits to 9,000 dead, while the US estimates that the country had suffered 100,000 casualties, both killed and wounded.

So ends the refutation.

While we would concur with the wish of Holdenforth for peace talks, these are unlikely while Russia retains a sizeable military presence on the ground in Ukraine, especially so given the scale of atrocities which its forces have visited upon the hapless civilians of that nation. Thousands, very probably tens of thousands have been killed, many by shelling, others shot in cold blood; millions have been displaced. The responsibility for this lies squarely with Putin. He will certainly not entertain this truth: he may – just may – revise his strategy to enable a face-saving withdrawal not just from cities such as Kherson, but from the entire country. However, the fear is that much more blood, military and civilian, will flow before his mind turns to such an approach.

Holdenforth manifesto following the Westminster Regime change

Recently the UK public has been a close if apathetic observer of the Tory party version of regime change, masquerading as democracy at its best. Holdenforth outlined our thoughts on this farce in a previous blog and we have nothing to add to what we said then. We still believe that this unedifying spectacle has provided a suitable overture to the tragi-comedy that is now unfolding under the shaky grip of our new Prime Minister.

In that same blog we listed the formidable problems that awaited Ms Truss in her new role.

 We said that these problems included:

• The challenge of climate change, especially the challenge of exactly how to assuage the understandable fears of the poor as they face the problem of how to keep warm in the coming winter, and;
• The threats posed by a pugnacious Mr. Putin, a decrepit Mr. Biden,  ex-President  Trump avid for vengeance, an impatient President Xi Jinping  anxious to take Formosa back into its historical home, many if not most senior politicians in the EU, a small but raucous band of voters who feel that they have been short changed by nature and bigots in  the allocation of sexual inclinations, the reluctance of would be immigrants to submit to assessment of their status in Rwanda, a queue of hostile trade unions eager to impose their undoubted power on the public.

And so on and so on – a formidable catalogue of problems all bawling to be the top priority of Prime Minister Truss.

Holdenforth has to confess that we had not anticipated having to add another regime change – that from Elizabeth Two to Charles Three –  to an already complicated scenario.

However – like our newly promoted king we can only do our best – and we will do just that. 

Our new PM has outlined to the public her policies for dealing with the  problems listed above. Thus far her responses have been an adroit mixture of clear policy positions on some issues, vague slogans on others and simply ignoring the remainder.

Doubtless some commentators will press her to fill in the gaps, including Holdenforth.

Holdenforth doubts if Liz Truss devoted the whole of the protracted period of mourning to activities associated with the changes triggered by the Royal regime change. We suspect  that she used this phase to put some flesh on the bones of her slogans and of the policy lacunae in other areas.

Holdenforth readers will want to know where Holdenforth stands – not just on the formidable catalogue of problems in the LT in tray – but also on the equally formidable catalogue of problems that either escaped her attention or that she thought too trivial to mention.

As for the changes at the top of the monarchical tree we will allow the transition from Prince Charles to King Charles to take effect whilst we ponder the significance of the change.

 A minor but illuminating digression —  a word on the fatuous attempt by BOJO to distort history in his final address to the sceptical UK public

His aim was to spell out the main achievements of his brief premiership.

Brexit. He got Brexit done. Well, yes, indeed he did. Holdenforth has devoted a great deal of blog space in the past 5 years to exposing the fraudulence of his claims about the many benefits of leaving the EU. We remain Remainers.

The vaccine. A successful programme of vaccine development and – as important – of ensuring that the vaccine was widely deployed. We will give him a tick on this one.

Support for Ukraine in general and for Mr Zelensky in particular. This support, raucously publicised, was confined to the supply of military equipment. Holdenforth has argued that the close friendship that developed between Zelensky and Johnson was one between two undoubted masters in the art of specious public relations. Holdenforth also notes that the Zelensky view of the reliability and integrity of his blond chum was not shared by those who knew BOJO  best – his political colleagues in Parliament – hence the issuing of the black spot, the walking of the plank and the Westminster version of regime change.

Zero emissions. BOJO was a little confused on this key policy issue. Holdenforth has argued that the main point at issue here is how exactly the UK can manage to move to a zero emissions outcome whilst ensuring that the public does not freeze to death whilst making the transfer. This has become THE number one issue as the public – especially the old timers – worry about their ability to fund the purchase of the required supply of kilowatt hours and therms in the coming possibly chilly months.

 Holdenforth’s take on the problems awaiting Ms Truss.

 Firstly, the aforementioned challenge of climate change, and of exactly how to assuage the understandable fears of the poor as they face the problem of how to keep warm in the coming winter.

We understand that Ms Truss has specified what is to be done to protect the public but not everyone is happy about the support being in the form of a long-term loan.

Not a problem for we of the octogenarian persuasion but some of the younger set are not best pleased.

The Opposition Labour party has proposed a substantial windfall tax on energy suppliers currently in receipt of huge and fortuitous profits.

Well done Sir Keir  for your fair and sound suggestion.

The threats posed by a pugnacious Mr. Putin

We have set out our stance on this one at length in previous blogs. We beg the key players – Putin and Biden – to seek jaw jaw and not war war, and to put Churchill’s slogan into a search for an immediate  negotiated formal settlement. 

Two additional points here:

• Gorbachev?  A naive simpleton and good, trusting, well-meaning man who was taken for a ride by cynical American politicians such as James Baker.  Gorbachev should have insisted on having informal American promises never to extend NATO eastwards enshrined in an absolute inalienable international treaty. His failure to do so has been a major factor in the subsequent invasion of the Ukraine by Russia.
• Current state of play – Russia on the back foot – Ukraine on the front foot – Ukraine soldiers doing the fighting using state of the art of weapons supplied by THE WEST.

The threat posed by ex-President  Trump avid to wreak vengeance on his successor following recent FBI activities.

We at Holdenforth have to confess ourselves baffled by this disturbing war of words between the current and previous holder of the most powerful position in the world.

By an impatient President Xi Jinping of China  anxious to take Taiwan aka Formosa back into its historical home

Holdenforth can see some merit in the position adopted by China and our view is influenced more by geography than by ideology.

We also noted that some 200 years ago US President Monroe asserted that the USA would oppose any attempt by Europe to seek to interfere in American affairs and that the USA would avoid getting entangled in non-American issues.

Holdenforth noted with some dismay the less than helpful recent bellicose jaunt by Nancy Pelosi into this tense area.

Are the US Democrats seeking to demonstrate that they can be as bellicose as the US Republicans?

The threat posed by the perceived hostility towards the UK by many if not most senior politicians in the EU following Brexit

Holdenforth fully understands this hostility. We have argued at inordinate length in previous blogs that the UK Brexiteers have behaved disgracefully and that were we in the shoes of the EU top brass – we would adopt the same hostile approach on just about all issues.

The threat posed by a small but raucous band of voters who feel that they have been short changed by nature and bigots in  the allocation of sexual inclinations.

Holdenforth will pass on this delicate issue. As octogenarians we have been given to understand that the arrangements of yesteryear have become rather more diverse.

In our youth we were told that “ if my aunt had balls, she would be my uncle but she doesn’t and she isn’t.”

Holdenforth will move on hastily.

The threat posed by the reluctance of would-be immigrants to submit to assessment of their status in Rwanda.

Holdenforth notes that Priti Patel was adept at slogans, but less than effective in implementing these slogans.

Liz Truss was understandably evasive on this contentious issue -and Holdenforth will be similarly discreet

But – we note that UK continues to be the destination of choice for many asylum seekers.

And – more in sorrow than in anger – we noted that the Mail columnist Richard Littlejohn put forward an absurd solution to stem the flow of illegal immigrants – bus them immediately to areas that welcome them in theory but are not too keen on them being sent to where they live.

Not one of your more plausible ideas, Mr Littlejohn.

The threat posed by the queue of hostile trade unions eager to impose their undoubted power on the public

Holdenforth can understand the wish of those workers in the public sector to seek to minimise the decline in their living standards.

Their readiness to compromise will not have been helped by the decision by HMG to remove caps on the bonus payments beloved by the banking fraternity but not by the wider public.

WE also repeat our plea to Sir Kier Starmer to adopt the policies suggested by the Roy Jenkins

The gist of these policies:

• Return the utilities to the public sector
• Allow market forces to prevail where there is genuine competition.

Holdenforth on the serious problems NOT listed by Liz Truss

At this stage Holdenforth will restrict itself to one line statements of the issues in this category.

In our next blog we will  expand on these issues and, as is our wont, cautiously and diffidently suggest solutions.

These issues are as follows:

• The continuing decline in the performance of the NHS
• The failure of HMG to act against those guilty of the persecution of wholly innocent post office managers

Together with the threat posed by:

• The woke sector – those who seek to rewrite history  
• The readiness of single-issue zealots to impose their policies
• The  ever-growing size of the gambling sector
• Those seeking to prey on the vulnerable and the aged

 No shortage of candidates for scrutiny here.

 A word about King Charles III

Holdenforth hopes for the best but fears the worst with the promotion of the Prince of Wales to King Charles III 

Obviously Charles will not be able to emulate his predecessor in terms of years on the throne but we have reservations about his abilities – more on this in a later blog.

For now we hope that his performance will not trigger the arrival on the scene of a latter day Cromwell anxious to curb the ambitions and clip the wings of the new monarch.

And Finally 

We opened this blog by saying it would serve as our manifesto.

We hope that the policies outlined will secure your support but we fear that Holdenforth  will have departed the scene before sanity will prevail.

For a change we will conclude on an optimistic note.

 “Till the war drum throbbed no longer and the battle flags were furled
In the parliament of man, the Federation of the world.
There the common sense of most shall hold a fretful realm in awe,
And the kindly earth shall slumber, lapt in universal law.”
Tennyson, Locksley Hall

Putin V THE WEST – A confused old timer writes

What exactly is confusing you, old timer?

What has happened since your last blog to trigger your confusion concerning this most worrying conflict?

Let Holdenforth begin with a confession – we find ourselves Faltering, Floundering, Foundering, Failing, Flailing, Frustrated, Fulminating,  Festering, Furious and Fractious.

We will proceed to outline our concerns and fears on this shaky flaky foundation.

In this blog Holdenforth will outline  some of the issues that have arisen since our previous blog was issued a few weeks ago.

None of these issues affect our wish to see the earliest possible end to the conflict and for war war to be replaced by  jaw jaw.

Our concerns surround the gap that is emerging between the raucous PR war that is being won by a wide margin by THE WEST over the woeful PR performance waged by Russia

AND

What Holdenforth perceives to be happening on the ground. 

Allow us to give a few examples.

Sadly – and unlike hotelier Basil Fawlty – we must mention the war

 Notes on the war, on its origins and on its prospects on the 77th anniversary of the most significant date in the Russian calendar, the end of WW2 in Europe.

We will diffidently jot down a few points which seem to us to be relevant.

To begin with, Holdenforth contends that the root cause of the conflict in the Ukraine is the wish of the USA to extend the frontier of NATO way beyond its current borders. If some in THE WEST have their way Russia would be faced with NATO expanding and extending its boundaries very significantly. Thus:-

• NATO to expand to the NORTH of Russia
• NATO to expand to the EASTERN border of Ukraine, so far to THE EAST as to be further EAST than Moscow
• NATO to expand to the SOUTH by retaking the Crimea. 

The war in Ukraine is in essence a proxy war being waged by the USA in its role as paymaster and policy maker.

The situation in the Ukraine has not been helped by Mr Biden initially denying and then confirming that regime change IS the US policy. He has asserted that his  quarrel is with the Russian leader and not with the Russian people. Change the Russian leader and a most welcome peace will return to this troubled area.

For reasons of his own Mr Putin would prefer the existing border to stay as and where it is. His invasion of the Ukraine is his way of expressing his discontent with the policy of the USA

Who exactly are the main players in the very dangerous game now being played in the Ukraine?

The big 2 are clearly Russia  led by Mr Putin and the USA led by Mr Biden

Significant Cheerleaders for THE WEST include:

• BOJO for the UK
• Whoever for the  EU
• Someone from the USA military for NATO
• Mr Zelensky for Mr Zelensky – a most effective cheerleader on behalf of President Zelensky   

Those managing the highly effective PR exercise on behalf of THE WEST argue that The WEST is on the side of freedom, democracy, and the right of independent nations to act as they wish – you get the picture.

The same Western PR machine argues that Putin does not believe in any of these WESTERN liberal values and instead pursues policies that would ensure that they did not flourish.

A word about one of the minor players in the tragic drama unfolding in The Ukraine

Step forward BOJO.

Where does our Prime Minister stand and what has his contribution to the conflict been?

Holdenforth concedes that we are not ardent supporters of BOJO and this may emerge from our assessment of him.

Dealing with BOJO can be compared with trying to grip an eel that is immersed in snot.

• Holdenforth suspects that our distrust of BOJO is widely shared, not least by most of the leaders of the counties in the EU. We would go further and suggest that EU leaders have no more trust in BOJO than they do in Putin.
• As we write, the political air in the UK is still rife with rumours that the time of BOJO as PM is running out. These rumours  gained momentum following the poor performance throughout the UK of the Conservative Party in the recent elections. His position is thought to have become more secure following revelations about Beergate and the perceived precarious position of Sir Keir Starmer. 
• One school of thought opines that BOJO was saved by the bell, the bell being the invasion of the Ukraine by Russia.

BOJO has re-invented himself as the fearless defender of the values and traditions of THE WEST.

Holdenforth is not convinced that he has succeeded in persuading the UK voters that he carries conviction in this role. Also conviction may not be the most appropriate word in this context!

For PR purposes BOJO distrusts Putin. But why should Putin trust BOJO? Do you trust BOJO? You do? Gosh!

As we stumble and flounder in the world of conjecture – what if Putin were to follow the example of THE WEST and initiate a global campaign for regime change in the UK? There are many in the UK already urging this policy just as there are many in the USA who would like to see Joe Biden relocated to an old folks’ home.

 What is the significance of the results of the elections in Northern Ireland?

The emergence of Sinn Fein as the largest party may trigger some very tricky problems given the violent history of the province.

Many in the mainstream media have been full to overflowing with their condemnations of Sinn Fein and of their foot soldiers in the former ranks of the IRA.

A quick stroll down memory lane at this point:

“The English governing class had killed two million Irish people. They abused the Irish for disliking this… Nothing was done for Ireland until an embittered and more resolute generation of Irishmen acted for themselves”
“Genocide” by AJP Taylor

The points made by Taylor may or not be valid – but what has this got to do with BOJO? Well – just this.

• After decades of patient negotiation agreement was reached between the warring factions in Northern Ireland. This agreement  – The Good Friday agreement – replaced the appalling conflict that had scarred the province for several decades with an agreement that provided an effective and stable constitution to govern Ulster.
• BOJO has been irresponsible because in his pursuit of Brexit – he ignored the potential threat to the stability of the Good Friday agreement . He now has the gall to argue that the EU should amend its position so as to resolve the problem in Northern Ireland that he himself created .
• Just one more point – It has been suggested that  Mr Biden – a dedicated supporter of the Good Friday agreement, will be opposed to any move which in any way poses a threat to the integrity of this agreement. BOJO cannot say on this occasion that no one warned him of this threat. 

Holdenforth must press on – we will be here all day if we stray too far into the very delicate area that is Northern Ireland. 

Anything else to say about Brexit?

We have already noted that most EU leaders do not trust BOJO.

In some of our previous blogs we suggested that Brexit was a very bad idea and that the day of reckoning for BOJO’s squalid opportunism was still to come.

As I write voters are being softened up to prepare them for the hard times that lie ahead. Damaging inflation, soaring costs in the shops, soaring energy costs, CV lurking in the shadows – a bleak prospect.

And Boris, in another of his disguises, that of Dr Pangloss, suggests that “all is for the best in this best of all possible worlds”

To which Holdenforth adds – “Up to a point, BOJO“

Let’s get Brexit done – A PR masterpiece from BOJO.

Holdenforth would add – courtesy Oliver Hardy –  “Another fine mess you’ve got us into”  

How does Holdenforth make that out?

A word of explanation. In the beginning there was a stable institution – The EU. Some 5 decades of discussion and give and take had been devoted to this splendid, civilised organisation, an organisation which sought to replace hundreds of years of conflict in Europe culminating in two appalling world wars with cooperative arrangements thrashed out  between the previously warring nation states.

Sadly, a handful of squalid but very effective UK politicians injected a phase of unprecedented disruption and distraction.

Today France for wholly understandable reasons is reluctant to assist the UK on Brexit or indeed on any other matter.

The UK hit team of Truss and Wallace 

 In WW1 Britain had the rousing support of Horatio Bottomley in the life and death struggle with Germany.

Today we have the formidable team of Wallace and Truss (or Liz and Ben, whichever you prefer) to fulfil the same role.

 First up, the bawling, brawling Liz Truss, our Foreign Secretary.

As we write  Ms Truss is leading THE WEST in terms both of tone and content in her assault on Russia. At times she makes even Mr Zelensky, the new International Treasure – and PR maestro –  look like a moderate, a considerable feat. 

If the war should end – sooner or later or whenever – with the retreat of Russia from all the territory now in dispute and with NATO guns on the very eastern frontier of Ukraine – then Ms Truss might claim to be the cheerleader of the claim of The WEST to be the bastion of democracy, a freedom loving collection of like-minded peoples and the standard bearer of liberal values – you get the picture.

Holdenforth can’t quite see the Truss policy prevailing but she has spelled out her war aims in no uncertain terms.

Mr Ben Wallace – this hit man is the quiet one of the pair – but equally resolved to rout the Bolshies with his hard rhetoric .

A truly formidable pair – Putin must be quaking in his boots as wave after wave of threats threaten to overwhelm the Kremlin.

Just one slight concern here – in some of the many conflicts around the globe since Vietnam where the USA has intervened to preserve democracy and freedom one outcome has been a disagreeable end of life experience for the vanquished dictator -the cases of Saddam Hussein, Colonel Gaddafi and President Mubarak spring to mind.

Putin might not relish the prospect of being hauled before some court or other in THE WEST to answer for his actions. Indeed he might go further and take whatever action he deemed necessary to ensure that this does not happen. Unlike all the others rash enough to tangle with the USA he is in a strong position to ensure that it does not happen. 

Just a thought.

The Channel migrants, the Ukraine refugees and the Rwanda factor.

Prior to the eruption of the war in the Ukraine the UK had observed a steady flow of illegal migrants from around the world across the English Channel and into the UK.

The main features of this flow had been:

• Initially transported in lorries, then latterly in small boats.
• Denunciation of the criminals in charge of the transport arrangements by  HMG. These denunciations had no discernable impact on the situation.
• Significant successes by the illegals in terms of managing to land safely on the English side and then digging in to ensure that they were able to remain in the UK
• A perceived lack of support and indeed of sympathy by the French

Latterly the perceived need for the UK to accept significant numbers of Ukrainians forced out of their homes in the conflict coincided with the announcement of an effective solution to the problem of the arrival of non Ukrainian refugees – simply sub contract out the tiresome task of deciding who could be accepted by the UK and who could not. The country selected for this formidable task was Rwanda.

A couple of points to make here:

• Holdenforth does not blame anyone for seeking to improve their prospects – who wouldn’t  seek to do just that.
• Is there a case for a global policy of completely open borders? There is such a case but just try to persuade those in affluent countries to endorse it.

Crucially – if the UK can’t cope with  a bunch of gangsters – those arranging travel for the illegals –  what hope is there of forcing the second most powerful nuclear power on earth to behave or else?

Whatever your view about the values of the Bolshies – they are what they are whether THE WEST likes it or not – and THE WEST doesn’t like it – Putin is a more formidable opponent than Iraq and Libya and Afghanistan.

As I write the situation is said to be fluid.

 A word  about Zelensky

This  international treasure, this maestro of the mysterious world of propaganda, this star of zoom shows in the TV stations of THE WEST as he pleads for more and more weapons to help him to turf the Russians out of the Ukraine has been transformed in a few short weeks into to a  global mega celebrity.

However as his fame has grown – so has the intensity of the spotlight that accompanies his every move.  

Holdenforth suspects that the Zelensky star is on the wane as more and people question if the aim of encircling Russia was sensible and whose idea was it in the first place.

Was this possible transfer of NATO from east Poland to east Ukraine really worth all this aggro. I mean – was it really?

And was his love affair with BOJO a wise move – what do you think?

The media have been full of images of Zelensky and BOJO walking through Kiev to assess the damage.

Holdenforth cannot recall any such photo opportunities taking place in war torn Stalingrad as that ferocious battle neared its end. 

Notes on democracy

“The democratic method is that institutional arrangement for arriving at political decisions in which individuals acquire the power to decide by means of a competitive struggle for the people’s vote”
From “Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy” by Joseph Schumpeter

THE WEST has rightly stressed its commitment to democracy as a key policy difference between Russia and THE WEST.

Holdenforth would like to look at how this principle has been and is being applied in practice in the UK.

Step forward Lord David Frost.

The well-nourished Lord F flourished for a time as a senior Civil Servant in the Foreign office. It was said of him that on occasions he dared to dissent from the prevailing orthodoxy of that organisation.

At some point his ability was recognised and he was speedily elevated to the House of Lords and then put in charge of the UK side of the discussions with the EU about the arrangements between the two bodies post Brexit. For whatever reason or reasons Lord F speedily resigned from the Johnson cabinet,  but Holdenforth gathers that there is a campaign gathering momentum for him to exchange his Cushy Number in the Lords for a selected safe seat in the Commons.

This farce is UK democracy in action and Holdenforth sees a significant gap between PR and real life.

“One telling criticism of the current upper house is that on a busy day it resembles an old folks home and, on a quiet day, a morgue.”
Extract from Holdenforth blog on the weaknesses of the House of Lords

It would be difficult even for the most talented master of PR to sell this farce as democracy in action.

Mr Lavrov, the Russian Foreign Minister might be tempted to put this point to Ms Truss.

 At this point we would like to mention a few issues that illustrate why we are reluctant to buy into the policies of THE WEST as proclaimed by its admittedly effective PR machine.

 Firstly, on May 10 Prince Charles announced the legislative measures planned by his government in the next parliament. Holdenforth found little to disagree with in terms of policy but, cynics that we are, the measures read more like a wish list than a realistic to do list.

We would like to see just a little progress, if you will a little tangible evidence that things are on the move before we can see our way clear to endorse THE WEST in general, and the BOJO-led UK government in particular.

 For our part we regret that many critical issues were simply ignored. Let us cite a few that seem to us to be important.

THE WEST stresses that citizens in THE WEST are free but that those in Russia are not.

That boast would not be appreciated by the post masters wrongly convicted of fraud by The Post Office.

Where is the plan to take swift action  against the Senior Managers in the Post Office responsible for this most appalling miscarriage of justice?

Holdenforth would be more impressed with the BOJO defence of freedom if he were to act much more quickly to remedy the appalling treatment  endured by hundreds of wholly innocent sub post masters.

 “Winning Euro lottery ticket worth £184 million sold to UK purchaser.”

Holdenforth noted the unseemly dispute between Mr Richard Desmond, newspaper proprietor, in the UK corner and a Mr Komarek, described as a Czech Oil and gas tycoon, over the operation of the UK national lottery. We also noted that the Chairman of the body responsible for awarding the contract “has links to Russia”.

Most importantly we have wholly justified suspicions that those managing these mega gambling operations have a licence to print money for themselves.

Who decides which charities will get what from the vast sums available?

And – while we are on the subject – how much attention is paid by HMG to exactly how much of the money paid to charities finds its way to the intended recipients?

Holdenforth understands that Mr David Miliband picked up a significant consolation prize as a Charity administrator.

The Grenfell Tower scandal

Holdenforth noted that the various bodies responsible for ensuring that the correct materials used to clad buildings were used have gone strangely silent and remote.

These groups are evidently relying on the time-honoured practice of hoping that the problem will go away.

That may well be one outcome but try persuading the residents of buildings that cannot get insurance until all cladding complies with the standard.

They might well be unhappy with what is going on or rather with what is not going on.

The British Virgin Islands

The claim that the financial arrangements are in place in  various off shore tax havens took a bit of a knock when the Prime Minister of the BVI was caught in a sting in Florida as he arrived with a jaunty smile and a bag of incriminating papers.

A sad day for British financial probity when the FBI exposes our man in the BVI.

Throughout the Brexit campaign BOJO argued that Brexit would allow the UK to take back control.

How does he now square this assertion with the struggle for control of Chelsea FC  between Mr Abramovich – whose side is he on by the way – and various vultures from around the world?

One scandal that has just emerged is the shaky performance of some companies that do funeral deals – the issue here is that  people pay money up front up front to pay funeral costs when the named person dies.

Sadly some companies in the pre paid funeral business – latter day Burkes and Hares – have spent the up front money leaving those left behind required to pay all over again or abandon the Loved one to a pauper’s funeral.

The trail from Gupta to Cameron

This scandal drags on and on.

Holdenforth was interested in this particular scandal from the time the story broke because Holdenforth  – aka John Holden – spent much of his working life in the UK steel sector.

Mr Gupta was believed to have resorted to some sharp practices as his Liberty Group got into financial difficulties. As if his business short cuts were not complicated enough the investigative trail meandered through Greensill to former Prime Minister Cameron Enquiries are said to be ongoing but this will be no consolation to the many steelworkers with very uncertain futures.

A change of emphasis to close.  Holdenforth has absolutely no sympathy for the activities of the Extinction Rebellion activists. We noted via the Queens Speech that sterner punishments are to be meted out to the sticky activists but we have doubts that even these will deter the zealots.

A more general criticism from Holdenforth about the current political scene in the UK

We believe that UK politics resembles a gigantic Tammany Hall. Some readers may recall that Tammany Hall was the HQ of the Democratic party in New York more than 100 years ago. It was said to be mired in corruption but its supporters argued that Tammany always saw to it that its supporters  were suitably and promptly rewarded.

The UK version offers a great deal but leaves hug gap between promise and delivery

I could go on – and on – and on – but you get the picture – Enough already

Closing points

1. My future  – writing as a soon to be 82 year old – I see a bleak future under threat on a variety of fronts – a bit like the threat to Russia from NATO..

Extinction Rebellion activists argue that unless we accept their policy that sooner rather than later we shall fry to death

Economic forecasters are predicting that we face the prospect of having to choose between freezing to death or maybe starving to death as economic chickens rather than real chickens come home to roost.

Mr Putin has hinted at the possibility of nuking us unless we back off

Holdenforth does not relish the prospect of any of the options

What do you think?

 2. Our core stance is not that Putin is right – far from it – but that THE WEST is in no position to try to occupy the high moral ground in the conflict.

Notes from The Editor

The editor of this blog would like to suggest an alternative to the narrative outlined above, namely that “the root cause of the conflict in the Ukraine is the wish of the USA to extend the frontier of NATO way beyond its current borders”.

To begin with, it suggests that NATO and the US had a coherent policy for the region, which (to judge from its activities over the past decade) seems unlikely. Certainly, the relative indifference with which the Russian occupation of the Crimea in 2014 was met was itself an indicator that the US was not particularly keen to cross swords with Putin on this issue.

Secondly, American policy under Trump was broadly to minimise involvement with NATO and play nicely with Putin, largely (one suspects) to enhance Trump’s own property portfolio in Russia and perhaps because the American President was also being blackmailed by the FSB. Instead, the US bogeyman became China, with the net result that numerous Chinese companies found it difficult not only to do business within America but also in other Western nations.

Thirdly, the American withdrawal from Afghanistan was not only one of the most shambolic and ill-considered military procedures of the past 50 years or so, but also an action that led Vladimir Putin to suppose (not without reason) that the West was weary of conflict and (as per Crimea) would make only token protests should he invade Ukraine and replace the existing regime with a Russian puppet.

In reality, the root cause of the conflict is Putin’s desire to re-establish Soviet-era borders, with the possible additional buffer of satellite sites. While US intelligence had accurately flagged how the war would begin (Russian insurgents in the east of the country claiming that they had been attacked and calling for help), the US’s actions (and those of its NATO allies) have been reactive rather than proactive: Zelensky may be an effective television performer, but he is certainly no NATO stooge: those performances have been crafted to persuade NATO to engage, rather than follow its narrative. His actions have been the driving force here.

Similarly, neither Sweden nor Finland had given much thought to joining NATO before the invasion. Putin’s “exercise”, designed as the next stage in recreating an enlarged Russia, is likely to leave him facing NATO on a far greater stretch of his borders.

Finally, it has always struck me that one of the fundamental tests about whether a society is free is when individuals are permitted to protest that it is not so without fear of receiving a stuffed eelskin to the back of the head. Hence, Piers Corbyn, David Icke, Uncle Peter Hitchens and all can shout the odds from Speaker’s Corner or the Daily Mail and (unless those protests become particularly boisterous) finish the day in the comfort of their own home rather than in a cramped cell replete with a few additional cuts and bruises. This is patently not the case in Russia, where even a mild disagreement with the state line is liable to see you wind up in chokey and more vigorous objections tend to result in a nasty case of fatal Novichok poisoning.

Putin/Russia v THE WEST – Easter Musings

It appears to Holdenforth that this theme is likely to run and run. So be it.

We understand the wish of our readers to receive incisive situation reports. We concede that our report is issued not from the front line of the conflict but rather from the tranquil edge of the fringe of the periphery of the conflict- but we will give it our best shots.

Here goes.

Our two texts for today are both take from the Mail on Sunday on April 3: an Edward Lucas article (for the prosecution against Putin) and a Peter Hitchens piece (for the prosecution against the USA). 

Holdenforth will opt for lofty neutrality  as we look at the respective cases put forward by the two fiery partisans.

But – we cannot resist inserting one quote from the Hitchens article.

 “As I once again find myself on the despised, hated and reviled side of the argument I might as well do this properly… I am sorry to say that there are people in the USA who will not be sad if this war drags on … it is this policy which explains the otherwise mad expansion of NATO against the warnings of every qualified expert in the world…”

In the negotiations to bring the conflict to an end, who speaks for Putin/Russia and who speaks for THE WEST?

In the former case, it seems to Holdenforth that this is the easy one, namely, just the one voice – that of Mr Putin.

“Madmen in authority, who hear voices in the air, are distilling their frenzy from some academic scribbler of a few years back.”
From -“The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money” by Maynard Keynes.

The influential and highly effective PR machinery deployed by THE WEST is working overtime in order to cast doubt on the sanity of Mr Putin – and it may well be the case that in this instance THE WEST’S PR machine is correct.

However, Holdenforth diffidently suggests that the root cause of the conflict – the reluctance of Putin/Russia to accept that the NATO frontier can be transferred from West Poland to the eastern border of The Ukraine without so much as a muted squeak of protest – has some validity.

Furthermore, when we posit the question – Who speaks for THE WEST? – Holdenforth is rather less clear and it seems to us that the raucously proclaimed unity of THE WEST is turning out to be somewhat elusive in practice. Thus:

• Holdenforth continues to believe to believe that the USA is both ringmaster and paymaster and that the USA is and will continue to be calling the shots for THE WEST.
• For the reasons outlined in our previous blog we see President Zelensky as not much more than a glove puppet controlled and encouraged by the USA.  We readily concede the status of Zelensky as an international treasure although we suspect that his mega decibel performance as a maestro of the media is starting to lose its shine. 
• We note the quavering wavering performance of the European Union as it dawns on the 27 nation members that some sanctions are affecting some states more than others.

Holdenforth has also noted that that Boris Johnson has been warmly commended by President Zelensky for his steadfast support of the cause of freedom, democracy and so on. It may be the case that President Zelensky has not done his homework here.  The track record of Prime Minister Johnson in terms of loyalty, consistency and honesty is pretty shaky. 

Suffice it to say that not everyone shares the admiration of Zelensky for Johnson.

How about this for a thrust between the Johnson shoulder blades?

“In Downing Street you will see a shambling figure who wants to be considered a great war leader (easy: shout ‘Send the weaponry’ to the defence secretary, then through back channels brief Zelensky that some praise of our prime minister would be deeply appreciated).”

These peevish words from Matthew Parris appeared in his column in The Times on April 2. Parris evidently feels that these two maestros of PR were indulging in a spot of mutual back scratching.

On to other players – to what extent, if at all, does the Secretary General of NATO,  Mr  Stoltenberg, speak for THE WEST?

Mr Stoltenberg does cut an imposing figure as he plays Little Sir Echo to the policies of the USA as set out by the NATO paymaster, the USA. Those interested in the key question of who is calling the shots on behalf of THE WEST would be advised to listen to the words of the organ grinder rather than those of his subservient monkey.

Next up – the army of media experts, a motley bunch of former generals, faded politicians, tetchy journalists and celebs anxious to secure whatever publicity they can garner, all waiting to be roped in by media managers with slots to fill.

This last mixed bag have just the one feature in common – a readiness to spout the message that is the flavour of the day.

Holdenforth will not be taking seriously their collective desire to shine as they have their moments in the spotlight.

Possible mediators between the warring parties

In our previous blog, we highlighted the relative strengths and weaknesses of Israel and Turkey to fulfil the role of mediator. India has been suggested as an alternative, to which we would say – Why not, given that it is non-aligned and with no commitment to either side.

The joker in the pack of possible mediators is Mr Roman Abramovitch.

Holdenforth has been perplexed not just by the suggestion that Mr Abramovitch might act as a peacemaker but that there is evidence that he has actually already done so.

Given the heavy fire that has been directed at Mr A in recent weeks by THE WEST – what the hell is going on here?

Let Holdenforth try to shed light on the life and times of this most astonishing man:

• Back in Stalin’s day the masses toiled hard to create the capital assets that were to lay the foundations of future prosperity.
• Come the collapse of the USSR in 1991, the quick witted and greedy in Soviet society moved in to claim ownership of these valuable assets having done nothing to create them.
• These oligarchs then moved their wealth elsewhere to have more agreeable lifestyles. I doubt if Comrade Stakhanov  would have toiled quite so  hard had he known that his strenuous work would have this particular outcome.
• All the global assets of Mr Abramovitch have been subjected to severe sanctions by THE WEST, and this casts doubt on his capacity to act as referee in the struggle between THE WEST and Mr Putin. It is also a wholly appropriate termination to a squalid dishonest career.

Holdenforth diffidently notes that:

• There was no shortage of greedy citizens in the UK who were only too anxious to partake of the large crumbs that fell from the Abramovitch table.   
• Greed is not a monopoly of The Russian Oligarchs
• Show Holdenforth an oligarch whatever his / her origins and HF will show you a greedy bastard – but greed is not a matter for The International War Crimes to investigate.
• It has been reported that many supporters of Chelsea FC are more than happy to award Mr A the status of being an international treasure.

Holdenforth suggests that those responsible for selecting suitable neutrals to facilitate a settlement hand Mr A the modern equivalent of the black spot.

To what extent does The WEST speak for those countries not aligned to the WEST or to Russia?

 “Britain’s £1.3 billion of aid for nations that won’t condemn Putin”
Headline in the Daily Mail, April 1.

“Blow, blow, thou winter wind,
Thou art not so unkind
As man’s ingratitude”
As You Like It, Shakespeare

The gist of the Mail article was to highlight the fact that many countries around the world were receiving substantial aid from the UK taxpayer and yet failed to condemn Mr Putin.

Holdenforth had not grasped that adherence to UK policy was expected to follow from being on the receiving end of generous aid packages.

Countries which failed to join the chorus of condemnation by THE WEST of Putin included:

• Syria – (received £53m in aid and actually voted against sanctions)
• Bangladesh – (£132m, abstained)
• India – (£58m, abstained)
• Laos – (£44m, abstained)
• Pakistan – (£142m, abstained)
• South Sudan and Sudan –  (a combined £320m, abstained)

Not surprisingly, Russia got nothing.

Holdenforth suspects that prior to the next round of handouts there will be a careful review of voting records. THE WEST has enough problems without having to contend with the awkward squad.

We started this blog by asserting that “Holdenforth continues to believe to believe that the USA is both ringmaster and paymaster and that the USA is and will continue to be calling the shots for THE WEST”

Time now for us to put some flesh on the bones of this assertion by commenting  on how effectively President Biden is performing as the leader of the free world.

 “I will do such things,
What they are yet I know not, but they shall be
The terrors of the earth”
Thus a moist King Lear fulminating in the storm.

How precise has President Biden been in spelling out what will happen to President Putin if the latter does not back off?

The media pack has not been impressed by what it has seen and heard. Sadly – on the rare occasions that the President has strayed into sense he has stated the exact opposite of the official policy of the USA. His aides have been forced to clarify his statements and then to clarify their clarifications – not very comforting for those of us who are apprehensive about the possibility of an exchange of nuclear weapons between the two main parties.

It will have been noted that in recent decades the USA has been able to bully nations unable to retaliate and Mr Trump exploited this particular freedom to the limit. Unfortunately, on this occasion one feature of the Russian defence arrangements – arrangements which have almost bankrupted Russia – is that Russia has parity with the USA in terms of nuclear weapons.

Prior to the eruption of the conflict between Putin and THE WEST, Holdenforth was assailed by two distinct threats:

• Either opt for zero emissions of carbon or be fried to death
• Either pay the latest charges to stay warm or freeze to death

HF is now faced with possibility of being broken down into his component protons, neutrons and electrons if Mr Putin opts for the nuclear exchange.

How many of us are relaxed about the prospect of the flaky shaky senile finger of Sleepy Joe Biden on the nuclear button?

Happy Easter!

Further Thoughts on Ukraine

In our previous blog, Holdenforth made it clear that we were and continue to be appalled by the losses of Ukrainian lives, by the destruction of Ukrainian property and by the circumstances which have triggered by the flight of huge numbers of Ukrainian people – almost all of them women and children – out of Ukraine and into neighbouring states in search of safety.

We also argued for an end to the fighting NOW and for the holding of  talks to resolve the differences between THE WEST and Putin / Russia.

In this follow up blog we draw the attention of readers to items which cast doubts on the credibility of some of those assuming high lofty moral stances on the conflict from shaky and dubious platforms to pronounce on the undoubted odious behaviour of Putin.

“Brutality and a lesson I’ve never forgotten”

Headline in the Daily Mail on March 11, 2022

Let us begin by referring to a letter below the above headline from a Mr Readman. The writer detailed the brutal suppression by Mr Khruschev of the Hungarian protests  in October 1956 in which some 2,500 people were killed by the Red Army.

It was not helpful to the cause of the Hungarian protesters that their uprising coincided with the Suez crisis, an episode which tarnished the reputation of the UK around the world.

 “After having insulted the United States, after having affronted all our friends in the Commonwealth, after having driven the whole of the Arab world into one solid phalanx behind Nasser, we were then going to deal with all the outstanding problems in the Middle East.”

Nye Bevan to The House of Commons December 5, 1956

Bevan was posing asking the question – who knew what and when about the planned attack by Israel on Egypt?  He also memorably asked – “Did Marianne deceive John Bull or seduce him?”

One man who knew what there was to know about what was going on was Prime Minister Eden. He retired hurt from the scene leaving the hapless Mr Butler to salvage what could be salvaged from the debacle. In the political turmoil which followed, Harold MacMillan emerged as our new prime minister. In the Suez crisis Macmillan had adroitly distinguished himself by being the last man to join the conflict and the first man to vacate it.

 The invasion of Iraq

“Our enemies see us as weak and divided, but this war is the West’s wake up call. Now we must act.”

Headline above Tony Blair article in which he called for increases in defence spending and for the restoration of our democratic values.

He also and possibly rashly wrote that “we did the hard military part in Afghanistan (and to a degree in Iraq) and achieved some form of stability …”

Not everyone would agree with his comments on Iraq.

“ I applaud the Labour Government‘s considerable economic and social advances but a Prime Minister who repeatedly betrays trust is unacceptable”

Extract from a guarded letter to The Times from a former editor of New Scientist, Dr Bernard Dixon, on April 30^th, 2005

In the same edition of The Times Matthew Parris was rather more forthright:

“The British people do know that Tony Blair is a cheat… The British people do not mind being led by a cheat … cheats don’t confess. They sweat and stick to their story.”

Sadly it appears in retrospect that the core reason for the invasion turned out to be incorrect – The Saddam Hussein regime did not possess Weapons of Mass Destruction.

Even more unfortunately the outcome of the invasion was to reduce Iraq into a chaotic shambles, a state of affairs which prevails to this day.

The only point which  Holdenforth  wishes to make is that the responsibility for this squalid episode and outcome rests with Tony Blair. Not a good position from which to argue the case for democratic values and freedom from tyranny.  

The Bombast of BOJO

“ We know what to expect when the Tories return to power – a Party of great vested interests, banded together in a formidable confederation; corruption at home, aggression to cover it abroad; the trickery of tariff juggles; the tyranny of a wealth fed party machine; sentiment by the bucketful; patriotism and imperialism by the imperial pint; an open hand at the public exchequer; an open door at the public house; dear food for the million; cheap labour for the millionaire. That is the policy which the Tory party offers you.”

Winston Churchill – at the time a Liberal –  1908

Well put, Mr Churchill. His point about corruption at home, aggression to cover it abroad has a familiar ring about it with regard to the posturing of Boris Johnson as an upholder of all that is best in the traditions and values of  THE WEST.

“What have we got from today’s Tories and their leader Mr Johnson?

As already noted by Mr Parris “The British people do know that Tony Blair is a cheat….. The British people do not mind being led by a cheat … cheats don’t confess. They sweat and stick to their story.”

Thus Holdenforth about Mr Johnson in 2022 only more so.

Other residents of glasshouses currently and ill-advisedly throwing stones at Putin.

In no special order:

Gordon Brown – a senior member of  HMG at the time of the invasion of Iraq. The same Gordon Brown who promised to eliminate  the Tory record of Boom and Bust – and replaced it with a record of bust and bust. Holdenforth believes that the history of the UK since our invasion of Iraq would have been more honest and honourable had Mr Blair treated Gordon Brown with the same harshness with which he treated Saddam Hussein and if he had treated Saddam Hussein in the same wary and circumspect way that he treated Gordon Brown.

David Cameron – the Prime Minister who agreed to hold a referendum about UK membership of the EU and who therefore bears responsibility for the appalling consequences of that fateful decision. The same David Cameron  who sought to authorise the bombing of Libya, the same David Cameron whose unseemly haste to get rich quickly  resulted in the Greenhill and Gupta/Liberty Steel fraudulent fiascos. Holdenforth understands that Mr Cameron is currently carrying out some sort of community service by way of expiation for his past dubious activities in his various activities and ventures. We trust that the UK electorate will recall the full content of his shaky CV when the day of reckoning arrives. 

The Arab Spring:- Ah yes, the Arab Spring.

How many Arab states said to have flourished in the Arab spring phase, said to have been invigorated by the injection of  freedom, democracy and prosperity into their previous arrangements, sadly missed the summer and autumn and now find themselves in the bleak endless chaotic totalitarian winter?

Back in 1992 I spent a couple of weeks working for an Egyptian company on the western shore of the Sinai peninsula. As I recall – life for the locals under President Mubarak was reasonably tolerable. I gather that the arrival of the Arab Spring brought no improvement in the lives of the people – quite the reverse.   

According to a UN report, the seven year Saudi-Yemeni war will have killed 377,000 people by the end of 2021.

This sparsely reported conflict has resulted in the deaths of many thousands of innocent people. We mention it, not to take sides but to draw attention to the fact that different standards appear to apply when friends of THE WEST are responsible for the maiming, starving, displacing and killing. How do we in THE West reconcile the differences?

Holdenforth has noted that Israel has been suggested as a possible neutral/intermediary to help the main opponents in the conflict to resolve their differences.

Holdenforth welcomes any contribution from any source prepared to bring the two sides to together, but the track record of Israel in honouring UN requests not only to abstain from adding to its catalogue  of illegal settlements but to return the existing illegal settlements to their rightful owners  would NOT, we think, establish Israel as a state with a respectable record of complying with UN decisions. We contend that Israel is not a  plausible peace maker.

Turkey as a possible peace maker between the warring parties.

Turkey is ideally located to supply this contribution, controlling as it does the key sea route out of the Black Sea to the Mediterranean.

One slight hitch here is the delicate issue of the lavish yachts owned by Oligarchs and subject to sanctions imposed by THE WEST.

Holdenforth understands that several of these lavish floating palaces are moored in Turkish harbours and it might be advisable to arrange for them to hoist anchor and sail to less controversial berths. The P&O company, adept in these matters, could help in this regard.

As we write this blog we note that the hunt is still on for affluent friends of Mr Putin to be named and blamed and sanctioned.

The sanctions police are said to know who they are and where they live and to warn them that the Putin gravy train days are over.

One aspect of this search for friends of Putin puzzles Holdenforth.

For much of my working life I was employed in the uphill work of attempting to improve the productivity of the UK sector in order to make the sector more competitive internationally.

One key target of managers in the UK and indeed around the world was to ensure that the headcount of employees was kept to the minimum  level required to make and sell the product, and there was some modest success in this area.

Accordingly Holdenforth was surprised at the surfeit of Oligarchs and friends of Oligarchs to be found on the Boards of Russian Steel Companies- including quite a few from the UK.

Thus – whilst managers at the sharp end of  the UK steel were trying to improve productivity – quite the reverse process was going on at the top (dare we say cushy) end of the sector.

Feather bedding was said to be widespread at the top – boards groaning with the weight of oligarchs thought by some to be surplus to the requirements of steel producers charged with the prosaic job of making and selling steel at a profit.

One name in particular intrigued Holdenforth, that of Sir Michael Peat, said to have earned £1.9M since joining the Evraz board in 2011. Sir Michael has an impressive CV – one time treasurer to the Queen and for 9 years private secretary to HRH Prince Charles.

We wondered – what exactly would have been his contribution to the performance of Evraz during these years?

Could it be that he possessed talents capable of helping Evraz up the global league table of competitive producers? You tell us!

A word about Mr Zelensky

Holdenforth has noted over the years the readiness of some prominent people in the BBC to bask in the soubriquet of being National Treasures – the names of Mr Gary Lineker and Mr Stephen Fry spring to mind.

An even more impressive figure has emerged in recent weeks. It is asserted Mr Zelensky has become a globally adored International Treasure.

Yes? Well – up to a point Lord Copper.

A word from Retired US Army Colonel and ex Pentagon Senior advisor  –  Douglas Macgregor.

“Right now, Zelensky has better press than Mother Teresa so he is reluctant to give that up  and he has become a rock star to THE WEST… Pretending to be a lot of things that he’s not… The cards are in the hands of Washington and President Biden.”

Holdenforth suspects that Zelensky is rather overplaying his hand.

Zelensky: “I’d like to thank Ireland for supporting us… well, almost”

Headline in The Daily Mail – March 26

The key point in the report  underneath the headline was that Ireland was lukewarm in its support for Ukraine and The Mail detailed the neutrality adopted by Eire in WW2.

People in glass houses ought not throw stones. The enthusiasm shown by Zelensky for the support given by Ireland is not universally shared.

And Finally

“I will have such revenge on you both

That all the world shall -I will do such things –

What they are yet I know not- but they shall  be the terror of the earth”

A moist King Lear fulminating in the storm after his disagreement with his two older daughters

We at Holdenforth would like to add our contribution to the Tsunami of conjecture about what the outcome might  be. 

The only meeting that will count will be between Putin and Biden – others, frequently adept in media interviews and masters of the dark art of PR – Zelensky, Boris Johnson, Macron – whoever  – are there to make up the numbers.

There is widespread disagreement as to what Putin might do and might not do – and equally – widespread sympathy for Biden as he struggles – like King Lear – to  flesh out his aged slogans and aspirations.

Closing Bullet Points 

• Holdenforth does not seek to defend the indefensible actions of Putin.
• We do suggest that a period of silence from those of his prominent critics who have over the years tarnished the reputation of THE WEST would be welcome.
• WE urge as a top priority the replacement now of war war by jaw jaw , the jaw jaw phase being conducted in an atmosphere where the main players are prepared to make concessions  in order to secure an enduring peace
• Meanwhile the war drags on and on with all its inevitable appalling daily consequences.