If you or anyone else are interested, I have some more on this, I’ve written about related topics before:
Hungerford and Dunblane, outlines how these tragedies were used to disarm the public and tighten state control, and questions whether there were unseen actors at play.
Keir Starmer: Image of a Charmless Man is breakdown of Starmer’s hollow leadership and his reckless posturing on Ukraine, as well as his ties to the Trilateral and the Fabian Society.
Maybe sending our patriotic indigenous army off to Ukraine, while he replaces them with an illegal immigrant army at home, is a good ploy for commie Starmer.
I remember the furore of the mid-70s, but was too young to appreciate its significance.
Mountbatten was a charlatan show pony. Wilson was Tony Blair#1.
There were others who might have wished Gaitskill dead. He - and the Labour Party - was ardently anti-Brussels.
The Tory Party, and the whole of the Whitehall/Westminster establishment was determined to take U.K. in……
……..Gaitskill, Shore, Benn were entirely against it……the parliamentary vote was incredibly close and very obviously subject to forces of bribery and blackmail.
The Soviets could also have wanted him out of the party leadership because in 1961 he had publicly rejected unilateral nuclear disarmament.
Later, he also campaigned to modify the party’s Clause IV which enshrined party dedication to nationalised industry - which gave trade unions so much power.
Gaitskill had gone to Moscow on 1st January 1963, and was admitted to hospital just after his return on 4th January - succumbing on 18th January.
I vaguely remember Gaitskell but, like MacMillan, he belonged to the years before I had any political awareness.
I can remember the arguments over the Common Market - it was sold, not just as a trading bloc, but also as a protection against socialism which I thought was the reason so many Labour politicians were opposed to our joining. Little did we know. It's very interesting to look at old videos of speeches back then. The intellect and the power of oratory of the likes of Benn and Shore underscores just what a sad, fourth-rate bunch rule us today. I may not have agreed with their politics but there was no doubt they were serious politicians you had to pay attention to.
The removal of Gaitskell by the Soviets? - Very plausible.
Labour were originally against the EEC because of cheap labour out-pricing British wages and jobs, and because of the sovereignty issue - in the 1960s most Labour voters were war veterans and their families had been bombed.
Labour changed their minds because in 1988 Jacques Delors went to the TUC conference and basically told them that the EU's power meant that Thatcher was hamstrung - if she created legislation, the EU would negate it with their regulation, and she had to go along with it.
I 100% agree with you about the quality, and intellectual integrity, of major politicians prior to the 1990s. Peter Shore's address to the Oxford Union on the Common Market referendum in 1975 is the most powerful speech I have heard.
Great article. I couldn’t agree more.
If you or anyone else are interested, I have some more on this, I’ve written about related topics before:
Hungerford and Dunblane, outlines how these tragedies were used to disarm the public and tighten state control, and questions whether there were unseen actors at play.
https://open.substack.com/pub/georgelawrence/p/hungerford-and-dunblane?r=3o7s93&utm_medium=ios
Keir Starmer: Image of a Charmless Man is breakdown of Starmer’s hollow leadership and his reckless posturing on Ukraine, as well as his ties to the Trilateral and the Fabian Society.
https://open.substack.com/pub/georgelawrence/p/keir-starmer-the-image-of-a-charmless?r=3o7s93&utm_medium=ios
A really interesting read. Thank you.
I have a 26 year old son. I do fear for his future in this country of feminised thinking and rampant use of misogyny slurs.
We think the ‘deep state’ only exists in the US, but it exists here too, always has and always will. Truth will never be told on anything, ever.
A huge shame, no wonder we have a mental health crisis.
Maybe sending our patriotic indigenous army off to Ukraine, while he replaces them with an illegal immigrant army at home, is a good ploy for commie Starmer.
Very interesting - TY.
I remember the furore of the mid-70s, but was too young to appreciate its significance.
Mountbatten was a charlatan show pony. Wilson was Tony Blair#1.
There were others who might have wished Gaitskill dead. He - and the Labour Party - was ardently anti-Brussels.
The Tory Party, and the whole of the Whitehall/Westminster establishment was determined to take U.K. in……
……..Gaitskill, Shore, Benn were entirely against it……the parliamentary vote was incredibly close and very obviously subject to forces of bribery and blackmail.
The Soviets could also have wanted him out of the party leadership because in 1961 he had publicly rejected unilateral nuclear disarmament.
Later, he also campaigned to modify the party’s Clause IV which enshrined party dedication to nationalised industry - which gave trade unions so much power.
Gaitskill had gone to Moscow on 1st January 1963, and was admitted to hospital just after his return on 4th January - succumbing on 18th January.
All a big coincidence?!?
I vaguely remember Gaitskell but, like MacMillan, he belonged to the years before I had any political awareness.
I can remember the arguments over the Common Market - it was sold, not just as a trading bloc, but also as a protection against socialism which I thought was the reason so many Labour politicians were opposed to our joining. Little did we know. It's very interesting to look at old videos of speeches back then. The intellect and the power of oratory of the likes of Benn and Shore underscores just what a sad, fourth-rate bunch rule us today. I may not have agreed with their politics but there was no doubt they were serious politicians you had to pay attention to.
The removal of Gaitskell by the Soviets? - Very plausible.
Labour were originally against the EEC because of cheap labour out-pricing British wages and jobs, and because of the sovereignty issue - in the 1960s most Labour voters were war veterans and their families had been bombed.
Labour changed their minds because in 1988 Jacques Delors went to the TUC conference and basically told them that the EU's power meant that Thatcher was hamstrung - if she created legislation, the EU would negate it with their regulation, and she had to go along with it.
I 100% agree with you about the quality, and intellectual integrity, of major politicians prior to the 1990s. Peter Shore's address to the Oxford Union on the Common Market referendum in 1975 is the most powerful speech I have heard.
Methinks the square Neoliberal peg doesn't fit in the round Marxist hole. It rather spoils an otherwise good article.