lauren

"Let’s let non-White people identify as ethnically English in the census." There are multiple reasons the diminishing, distortion and denial of English and other British ethnicities being pushed by the ruling class. First is obviously to poke and open wound, to provoke tensions and distract from their dominion over us all. Second is capitalism knows two historical epochs of the nation, first the awakening of national life and national movements, the struggle against all national oppression, creation of nation states and nationhood. Then, imperialism enforces relations between nations, destroys national borders, creates the international unity of finance capital, of economics, of politics, science, etc. It is the strangulation of all sovereignty, it is the death of nations. Third is that the census data and consequent Boriswave of mass migration shows one in four adults in England and Wales is not ethnically British. Fourth, the British population has consistently voted against mass migration. This means the question of migration is also firmly a democratic question. Fifth, the migration question has instilled in it an ongoing contradiction arising from the perhaps deliberately ambiguous language distinction between ethnicity/nationality and citizenship. Sixth arising from this bill, if passed, would be the distortion of crime data. Seventh, with continued mass migration, both legal and illegal, the data on trends of settlement would be distorted, and essentially hidden. With these issues in mind, and that these are not new issues but longstanding problems, that the ruling class is now openly calling for the outright legal erasure of the English ethnicity is unsurprising.

To understand Israel you must understand why it is not a nation. A nation is a historically constituted, stable community of people, formed on the basis of a common language, territory, economic life, and psychological make-up manifested in a common culture. A nation is formed only as a result of lengthy and systematic intercourse, as a result of people living together generation after generation. But we should look more closely at the economic. The settler colonies of Britain were founded and became nations in their own right during an earlier era of capitalism, mercantile and then industrial capitalism. Israel, however, is quite unique in being conceived during the last era, imperialism, i.e. finance capitalism. Capitalism knows two historical epochs of the nation, first the awakening of national life and national movements, the struggle against all national oppression, creation of nation states and nationhood. Then, imperialism enforces relations between nations, destroys national borders, creates the international unity of finance capital, of economics, of politics, science, etc. It is the strangulation of all sovereignty, it is the death of nations. Understood this way, Israel is the antithesis of a nation. The imperialist nations such as Britain have organically developed from feudalism, to capitalism and advanced to imperialism, yet are bound by the limitations of history and context. Israel by contrast is the pure conception of imperialism, entirely rootless, utterly cosmopolitan, and therefore it is entirely appropriate it is born from the rootless and cosmopolitan plantation of Jewish peoples from Europe, Africa, Asia and the Americas in Palestine. Being the pedigree child of imperialism is to not be restrained to the boundaries of national territories, or national economic life. Israel is international, Zionism is internationalism. As such, Zionism is best understood as the most organised section of imperialism. It is the concrete manifestation of the international unity of finance capital, and Israel is merely it's nexus.

Reparations seems to rear it's ugly head every few months. It is born of the same poverty of spirit as social democracy, i.e. to beg for more scraps from the master's table and indenture yourself ever deeper. No true nation can be built on the foundations of beggary. Sovereignty and stability can only be built upon self reliance. As Ibrahim Traore, President of Burkina Faso, says: "Africa does not need the World Bank, the IMF, Europe or America. We Africans have what it takes to grow our economy without any loans. We cannot continue to be financial slaves using loans." Moreover, who owes the debt? Is it the British worker who works 48 hours a week to barely pay their rent, bills, debts and necessities? Is it the British worker who has reaped nowt but the ever growing burden of wage slavery? Because that is who would pay. But who should pay? The debt is in fact owed by the perpetrators of that system of wage slavery over the British, the inheritors and benefactors of a system that once held the world in chains, and still does. It is the capitalist and capitalism that owes. But debt under capitalism is nationalised, and profit privatised. And as such any arbitrary debts decided will be levelled in another Budget, and rendered from the blood and sweat of British workers by burglary. And if it is the capitalist who owes, and the workers who pay, to whom is the debt to be paid? Is it the African who in their multitude rip rare earth minerals with their bare hands? Is it the black Venezuelan whose nation is taken from him? Is it the Nigerian in his hovel dreaming of care work in Nottingham, thus perpetuating his servitude? No. The debt would be paid to the comprador, the charlatan and the corrupted official, it would be paid to the goon, the general and the guilty judge. In essence the sum of debt would merely shift hands between the capitalist and the servile captain in his constituency, only to be repaid by corruption, concession or to the IMF. Reparations are therefore merely foreign aid writ large, and a case of do not look at what the system says, but what it does. The British worker therefore does not owe a monetary debt to the oppressed people's of the world, but a debt to himself to overturn the capitalist system that holds him in the bondage of wage slavery, capitalist contempt and corporate complicity.