Why Britain Needs A New Non-Eurocentric Anti-War Movement

John Rees: Unmasking the Anti-Americanism of a British “Revolutionary Socialist”

One would be entirely forgiven for not being familiar with British left-wing fringe politics and understandably never have heard of a certain Mr. John Rees, a self-anointed “Revolutionary Socialist”, academic and importantly a co-founder of the British anti-war movement, “Stop-the-War Coalition” (StWC). There is every noble reason to be blissfully ignorant of him but unfortunately circumstance compels us to mildly scratch the surface of his posturing as a professed anti-imperialist. The Coalition he co-founded original purpose was to oppose United States and British wars on the Arab and the Muslim world during the War on Terror. This Coalition took the lead in organising anti-war demonstrations over the last two decades and recently is central to organising the anti-genocide demonstrations in support of Palestinians in Gaza. Unfortunately, the latter demonstrations have proven to be completely ineffective in terms of influencing government policy but admittedly they have allowed hundreds of the thousands of people in Britain to vent their disapproval of the Gaza genocide. In the following I highlight three pillars of posturing by Rees and his “Revolutionary Socialist” ilk which exemplifies the utter poverty of British anti-imperialism in the hope a consequential anti-war organisation eventually emerges to effectively challenge American-British warmongering. 

Firstly, central to British alleged anti-imperialism, as exemplified by Rees, is a simple anti-Americanism rooted in historical illiteracy and eurocentrism. Whereas most of the world would rightly denounce the Americans for their imperialism, for a good proportion of Britons, whether left-wing or right-wing, it is denounced for not supporting the British establishment and its military. For example, Rees is right to argue that the so-called “special relationship” between Britain and the United States is “little understood” but totally wrong to say that “the US had been a reluctant – and late-arriving – ally in the two world wars of the 20th century.” This comment is not only ahistoricism, but also plain British propaganda. The fact is Britain and the United States were not close allies before World War One or before World War Two. Indeed, before the latter war, the relationship had been strained because Britain had defaulted on its World War One debts after the United States had financially and militarily bailed out them out in that war.

Continue reading

Decolonising Dunkirk – Genocidal White Supremacists at War with Each Other.

“[Hitler] is only the ghost of our own past rising against us. He stands for the extenuation and perpetuation of our own methods…”[1] George Orwell

Hollywood’s “Dunkirk” movie, released to rave reviews in the midst of the Trump presidential era and a year after the UK Brexit vote, clocked in more than $500 million at the box office worldwide. The so-called ‘World War Two’ blockbuster depicted retreating British troops in the French coastal city of Dunkirk evading the German air force as they attempted to safely board boats back to England. But how exactly did this desperate state of affairs arise? This essay provides a general overview of the military developments which led to the retreat at Dunkirk and identifies the similarities in the world view of the main belligerent parties.     

No one kissed their loved one’s goodbye and then embarked on the journey to fight in the Hundred Years’ War or the Thirty Years’ War for that matter. Likewise, when war was declared many centuries later in Europe in September 1939 no one absurdly tempted fate to announce World War Two had began. Actually, in 1939 there was then no such conflict known as World War One. The war that is now known as World War One, was then known as the ‘Great War’. Yet as the cold European autumn and winter of 1939 naturally seasoned into the following year’s spring, the latest round of European warfare pitched two white supremacist camps against each other.

On one side were the imperialist nations of Britain, France, Belgium, Holland and their allies. Western historians possess an empirically-lacking fascination to refer to the imperialist nations in their literature as “democracies” or “allies” rather than for what they actually were, white supremacist nations who denied democracy to hundreds of millions of non-white inhabitants in their colonial territories while plundering them.[2] These four imperial powers had prided themselves on conquering and plundering colonial territories for the last 300 years. On the other side, was Nazi Germany and its allies. Nazi Germany was led by Mr. Adolf Hitler, a dictator with strong racial prejudices similar to those held by the leaders of the imperialist camp. Continue reading