The Journey to 1945

 

How industrial militarism got underway – the pioneers.

Becoming a militarized world did not happen by accident. As industrialization took place, it was planned by those who wanted to make and sell manufactured weapons. The early figures like Krupp and Armstrong were pioneer entrepreneurs and engineers out to forge a business. Profits came with economies of scale and they set out to increase scale. The first book looked at the growth of arms manufacturing companies in the 19th century selling arms initially at home and then throughout the world. From Japan to Paraguay, states were persuaded by political vanity, bribery and scares to purchase arms. Then their neighbours could be persuaded to buy some as well. Politicians were taught that force was the name of the game, force against national force. Autocratic leaders had long surrounded themselves with soldiers, but these did not melt away with democracy, but democracy was managed to continue militarism. Usually this involved pushing people towards nationalism and patriotism. States built up their armed forces, went looking for countries to control as colonies like Alexander the Great or Caesar, and then probably went to war. The British elite learned Latin and looked at Rome in their public schools and went out and ran a similar empire with British made weapons. The arms companies ran the show and then provided the wherewithal with industrial scale arms production and profits.

The Great War was about weapons, not territory.

Companies like Krupp, Armstrong, Vickers, Schneider, Mauser, Skoda, BSA,  Nobel, Du Pont and Remington became among the biggest industrial companies on the planet. They conversed with Prime Ministers and Emperors, and promoting arms to big and small nations. Arms “races” and wars became normal, and by 1914 there were four great arms races pushing Europe to the edge. Each state was watching the others, and their military build-up, for a decade. Arms companies and warship manufacturers stoked fear. They developed propaganda machines and pushed their agenda in newspapers and through pressure groups. Then, military competition pushed over the edge, into the greatest war of all. Austro-Hungary‘s Skoda had tried to sell arms to Serbia, but failed. It was miffed. Serbia would not buy Skoda arms because Austro-Hungary was her most likely enemy. Then the so-called Pig War ensued between 1906-08, and with the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand the Austrian Empire was ready to issue an ultimatum and then invade. This was the starting gun for all those other arms races to start – France-Germany, Germany-Russia, England-Germany and Russia/Serbia-Austro Hungary. The Great War saw the production of arms explode in the greatest output of weapons the world had ever seen, many times over. After the Great War with four years of maximum production and growth, these companies controlled the biggest industry in the world.

The Buried History of Disarmament.

There were many before the Great War who understood the danger of the arms industry and militarism. They included Gladstone, Leo Tolstoy, Bernard Shaw, Keir Hardie, President Wilson, Pope Benedict XV, Bertha von Suttner, Frédéric Passy, Jeanette Rankin, Ramsey McDonald, Charles Trevelyan, Arthur Ponsonby, Bertrand Russell, Maude Roydon, Mahatma Gandhi, Alfred Fried, Jane Addams and many more. They had waged a widespread and articulate war against war, militarism and the arms trade. At this time Britain was seen as an unprincipled imperial aggressor, side-stepping the Hague Peace Conference in 1899 to fight the Boer War. Arms companies had sold weapons to Japan, Russia, the Ottoman Empire, Serbia and many other countries priming them for conflict.  During the early years of the century the pacifists named the escalation of arms, pointing out the stupidity of teaching mass murder, the destructiveness of war and the arrogance of rulers and the armaments industrialists. They were right; if murder was wrong, mass murder did not suddenly become patriotic. There was no way round that argument, but the argument did no win. Jingoism, a stirring up of popular warlike patriotism won the day. Jean Jaures was shot to get rid of his opposition. Keir Hardie, the Labour Leader, became a hate figure because he opposed the war, and everybody went off to fight in a euphoria of presumed success. When the War came its horrors mounted month on month. They promised it would be over by Christmas, and the Pope suggested a Christmas Truce which looked like holding with the troops, but it was broken and the carnage went on and on with millions of shells, and then gas, crossing the front to kill and maim.

The Reality of the Great War.

Superficially, the War was about who won, and the patriotic stuff was there on all sides. But soon no-one had won. Everyone was bogged down in the trenches with young soldiers dying at about six thousand a day. The War Poets said it, but everybody knew it. Oh what a lovely War! “Up to your waist in water, Up to your eyes in slush, Using the kind of language, That makes the sergeant blush.” And it was worse than that. Russia collapsed with about three million deaths. Germany eventually ran out of equipment and the people and its fighting collapsed in 1918. The United States had moved from supplying weapons and explosives to engagement. It had it relatively easy, because it only had 117,497 deaths and 204,002 injured, a light burden compared to other countries. Overall, some twenty million died and a further twenty million were injured. The United States partly entered the War because the Britain and France (and Russia, who defaulted) owed so much that the US had to make sure they would repay their debts. They in turn needed Germany to pay reparations in order to pay the Americans. The debts of the War crippled the economy of the world through to Hitler.

Yet it was the personal reality of it which bit. People had seen themselves killing and being killed. The reality of War was horrific with bodies in mud and craters across the horizon. Murder destroys you.  The German High Command invented the myth that the Jews had stabbed them in the back to disguise the fact that they had pursued the War and they had lost. The biblical idea of the scapegoat, the one who would carry the sins, was vested in the Jewish race to get the military off the hook. Really, everyone knew that this was the travesty of civilization. It was the War to End All Wars. It must never happen again. Yet, it was worse than that. The returning soldiers carried flu around the world and at least fifty million more people, weakened by the war, died all across the globe. Two great tidal waves of grief traversed the globe touching all those mourning a hundred million dead and injured. Then, there were those suffering PTSD – full of rage, silent, sleepless, raw at the inhumanity they had seen. Often, they took it out on their women – another brutal undercurrent to the War. Then, frozen winters without food, resources, young people, fuel, shelter in Russia and Eastern Europe. The suffering cannot be imagined. So, millions just tried to cope, but underneath they knew War must be addressed and ended. The statesman of the era were chastened. They had often bought into chauvinism and the arms trade, and knew that the sale of weapons was the underlying problem. As Lord Grey, British Foreign Secretary in the decade before the War said, “The moral is obvious; it is that great armaments lead inevitably to war.” There was widespread repentance at this false trust in militarism. The Tragedy is that is clear understanding was defeated in a mere twenty five years; and few  understand how it was defeated and the militarists have hidden it…

Postponing the Great Geneva Disarmament Conference.  

Alongside the great pre-war pacifists, another generation emerged who knew war was wrong because they were in it. Vera Brittain, Lord Robert Cecil, Clem Attlee, Arthur Henderson, George Lansbury, R.H.Tawney, Charles Raven, Philip Noel-Baker, the explorer Nansen, Field-Marshall Sir William Robertson  and even the main architect of Britain’s War effort,  Lloyd George, saw the problem of militarism and were determined to do something about it. Pacifists including Gandhi, Bertrand Russell, The Anglican Pacifist Fellowship, In France the ex-servicemen, the anciens combattants, shared pacifism with a primary school movement in which children understood how militarism was wrong.  There was a massive world-wide popular movement which involved tens of millions of people, still perhaps the biggest in human history. The movement grew. Key was the Catholic Church which under Benedict XV had opposed WW1 throughout. He described it as a “useless massacre” which did not endear him to the fighting statesmen. The Catholic Church mobilized millions for peace. There were rallies of thousands of women well before Hitler thought of mass rallies.  The Anglican Church also woke up. People saw the problem was arms and wanted to end the power of the Merchants of Death, as they came to be known. They had pushed arms, naval confrontation and military rivalry; millions lay dead while the arms manufacturers made their profits. Their weapons were undeniably evil. Statesmen and millions of ordinary people sought and worked for world disarmament to make the Great War the War to end all Wars.

But the British Conservative Government, the key one at this stage, did not co-operate. The Coalition Conservatives learned to prevaricate on disarmament until 1924. In the 1924 second election, a minority Labour Government was overthrown in unusual circumstances. A fake telegram, purporting to come from the USSR Minister, Zinoviev, was acquired by the Conservative Party and published in the Daily Mail four days before the election purportedly telling Socialists to rise up and have a revolution. Labour was actually resolutely democratic, and distrusted the Soviets, but the mud stuck and Labour lost enough seats to face a new Conservative Government. This Government, with Churchill as Chancellor buckled down against disarmament. It did as little as it could between 1924-9 and successfully held off the Disarmament Conference. This delay was crucial. It allowed the arms companies to organize themselves. In 1927 an arms company paid William Shearer $20,000 for six weeks work on disrupting the 1927 Coolidge Naval Conference on reducing warships. He and others were successful. Lord Cecil resigned from the Government over its failure to agree naval reductions. Britain wanted to hang on to its navy and was in rivalry with the States. The arms companies were now in control behind the scenes. But the public was for the League of Nations and against the Conservatives and in June 1929 Labour was returned with twenty seven more seats than the Conservatives in a minority Government. So again the momentum for the Disarmament Conference speeded up.

They continued through a decade, an amazing programme of persistence. This now-ignored disarmament movement came to a head in the great Geneva Disarmament Conference of 1932, backed by organisations representing nearly half of the world’s population, especially Christian and women’s organisations, along with  most of the world’s statesmen. It had been planned since 1925 and was a long time coming, but come it did, backed in Britain by the King, Archbishops, Prime Ministers, military leaders. Sadly, before it started Nansen, the explorer and humanitarian and Stresemann, the key German politician, was also dead of a stroke.

No, Appeasement is Different.

You are now entering a historical black hole. The history of disarmament has been covered up and papered over by those who want it to disappear. Mainly, one word has done it – “appeasement”. Churchill was against Appeasement and Disarmament is appeasement – End of Discussion. This is a travesty of history. “Appeasement” was British leaders running the Conservative Government in 1938-9 who were pro-Nazi even when war was likely, because they were against socialism. Britain was rearming fast at the time, so it was not about not arming.

Churchill saw Hitler coming, but so, too, did everyone at the Disarmament Conference, even Sir John Simon, and knew disarmament would sideline him and the Nazis for ever. Churchill, of course, was against disarmament and for the Navy, and was one of the British politicians undermining the Conference. Later, he was fighting members of his own party who were appeasers and in the Conservative Government. They were the “Big Four”, Chamberlain, Simon, Hoare and Halifax, the same Simon who had scuppered the Great Geneva Disarmament Conference.. So, Appeasement was not disarmament. They were different in time and focus. Churchill had great respect for the disarmers like Lord Cecil and Clem Attlee, and the attempt at World Disarmament occurred in 1932 before Hitler came to power. Appeasement came five years later from Fascist Sympathizing Conservatives, a group who for obvious reasons later tried to disappear..

Airbrushing Disarmament out of History.

World Disarmament has been covered up because it makes sense, it nearly happened before Hitler came to power and the arms companies do not want us to even think about it as a possibility. It is also covered up because British Conservative  politicians prevented it. We did so because we were jealous of the United States as the new world superpower and wanted a big Navy so that we could control the Empire. It was that pathetic. The whole world was waiting on the acceptance of President Hoover’s plan, and we Brits were jealous, and put it into treacle. They discussed treacling in Cabinet. Sir John Simon funked it. Lloyd George said that “Sir John Simon sat on the fence so long that the iron entered his soul” Eden expressed his contempt for him, and Harold Nicholson, an ally of Churchill, just called him “a toad and a worm”. It was an appalling event in British history which opened the way to the Second World War before Hitler came to power. So we try to blot it out.

The Conference was also undermined by the Japanese invading Manchuria, the arms companies using agents to prevent it working, and the various military people at the Conference, but mainly it was the British. If we had worked with Hoover and the United States disarmament would have happened. All aggressive weapons – bombers, howitzers, tanks and submarines – would have been closed down, and the rest cut by a third immediately. Hitler storming about the unfairness of the Versailles outcome, would have had nothing to rant about and could show his armpits to the doctor. When in January 1933 the Oxford Union voted overwhelmingly that “This House would not fight for King and Country” it was voting its contempt at the handling of the Geneva Disarmament Conference. Ordinary people the world over did not understand what had happened, because the Conference just stalled. They continued to believe disarmament must take place, because all of this was done in secret, in committees by politicians committed to doing nothing. The Conservative Party said it was a peace party when we were rearming and then went for appeasement. The arms companies had won and soon they would be quietly back in business.

American Corporatist Capitalism.

By 1918 the American economy was several times bigger than Britain’s and the dominant economy in the world as immigrants poured in, resources were opened up, oil became abundant and the Midwest prairies produced their crops. But American capitalism had been turned by the Great War in two respects. First, the arms companies had grown faster than the others and were quite dominant among the New York Capitalist elite. They were used to running the show and running Washington. In the twenties they controlled both political parties, dominated the world economy and knew only expansion, even while Europe still struggled.

Then in 1929 American capitalism faced the crisis of the Wall Street Crash. Often the big capitalists like Du Pont had got out in time and had vast amounts of capital. They bought up other businesses, like General Motors in the case of the Du Ponts. Much of their capital could not easily be used in the domestic US economy in recession. They were already deeply engaged in financing the German economy and had Fascist sympathies, so money flowed to Germany and its rearmament, and also similarly to the USSR. They were still running the show internationally. But in December 1932 they faced Franklin D. Roosevelt, one of their own class who had turned to attack, “the money-makers in the Temple” in his inaugural address and was deeply critical of their capitalism and prepared to act for the public good. They actually tried a US Fascist coup attempt in 1934 against the “Socialist” Roosevelt, but it failed thanks to the whistle blowing of General Smedley Butler. That is another suppressed bit of history. Then they tried to turn elections, but were again defeated by Roosevelt.

The Pro-Nazi Americans

But the US capitalist elite had no constraints on their international business and they moved  to support Hitler. The Harriman Bank had long been lending funds to Thyssen, Hitler’s patron, and as Hitler moved to power, they became the conduit for heavy US loans funding Nazi economic development and rearmament. We ask how Germany moved from an economy on its knees in 1932/3 to one able to defeat and subdue Europe in 1939, the answer is mainly that the Nazis were enabled by finance and munitions from the United States, channeled especially by the Harriman Bank and its key representative Harriman Bush.. The help of banks and munition companies, often with Fascist sympathies, made the Nazis able to fight the Second World War. The munitions companies also encouraged and funded Fascism in many other countries, helping create the chaos that supposedly required arms to sort them out. The War between Japan and China and the Spanish Civil War got the arms gravy train going again. Thus, the process of funding and promoting arms sales defeated the great peace and disarmament movement of the early 1930s. Both World Wars had the same main cause – those who pushed munitions and made money out of them and profited from war. The Second World War was thus formed against large populations in most major countries avid for peace and disarmament. Few people understood how capital and the arms companies had undermined disarmament and opened the door to World War Two. American funding of the Nazis carried on right up to Pearl Harbour.

The World’s Biggest Ever Industrial Complex.

            The Allies eventually won the Second World War in the greatest military drama in human history. The actual victory over Hitler and Fascism was such a dominant story that winning the War dominated the munitions transformation of the years 1935-45; it was vast. In fact, of course, military manufacture and finance mushroomed in Germany, France for a while, Italy, Japan and especially in the USSR and the United States. The military machine amounted to perhaps more than a quarter of the entire world economy, the biggest industrial complex the world had ever seen. The Second World War created a militarized world with mega arms companies, enormous armies, bases throughout the world and a generation whose business was fighting. It is the elephant in the room and we ignore it.  A massive organizational change took place in the five to ten years of the War and its preparation. During this period arms companies, defence departments, scientific research, technological direction, the military establishments, transport, information gathering and many other areas of life were all integrated into the military machine. Such a vast establishment was not going to disappear, especially in the victorious nations, without serious planning. It was to drive for its place in the continuing post-war world, and it won.

          World War Two and the Construction of Peace.

But it faced a mighty, uphill task. The Great War had been a horror beyond imagining, and tens of millions were determined to fashion disarmament, and now another twenty one years later one even worse had taken place. Militarism had a dirty name, personified in the frog-marching Fascists. Many people remembered the Geneva Disarmament Conference of 1932 had been defeated. A War of unimaginable proportions had been loosed on the world with atrocities and genocide in the Holocaust, the far East, the vast spaces of Eastern Europe and around the globe. Some seventy million had died. Millions were walking around with PTSD, or still living with charred flesh and bombed houses. Millions more were mourning husbands, sons, daughters and colleagues. They faced the poverty of rationing small bits of food, queuing for necessities and shivering through cold winters with no fuel because War Lays Waste. There were some 1.9 billion soldiers serving in World War Two, and for most their deepest conviction was not about who won or lost. They knew War was wrong, wrong, wrong. The United Nations was formed largely by Roosevelt and Vice President Wallace, before Roosevelt died. It was set up with some commitment to peace and disarmament. Although this was quickly dissipated, millions hoped for something better. More than this, Fascism had fought the war and Socialism had been attacked. Now socialists would have to rebuild the world. So, when the British Election took place there was no question that Clement Attlee should be in charge in July 1945 even before the war ended, because Churchill the War Leader and the old militarist, was not the man for the job. The nation was grateful to Churchill as war leader, though millions still hated him, but they were not going to have a militarist in charge. So, Churchill looked for allies across the pond.

 Thus, after the War, while hundreds of millions of people were trying to get back to ordinary living, a titanic battle was going on for the shape of the post-war world around the military. At one level the Government in Britain were clearing streets, repairing buildings and roads, getting soldiers back to work, putting together a national health service, nationalized industries, rationing, the Welfare state, prefab housing, milk and orange juice for kids, addressing shortages of food, clothes, furniture, caring for distressed families and getting coal distributed for the winter, and at another level the post-world war world had to be addressed. Immediately, it was easy. The Government was bankrupt and, provided the armed forces were treated well, economies in the military had to be made. But, in this theatre Britain did not count. It was intent on its domestic recovery with a clapped-out Empire.

The United States and the Truman Era.

The United States dominated the world. In 1945, as a result of the devastation in Europe, Russia, China, Japan and elsewhere the US accounted for an amazing half of the world monetized economy. It was owed money by the other Allies and had a buoyant economy through war production. What the United States did would sway history. Its internal politics would be played out across the globe. Here, too, millions were trying to put together their lives again after serving in the military or undertaking arduous war work, but something else was going on in Washington, the Pentagon and among what was soon to be known as the military-industrial complex. It was working at its own survival, and the continuation of the war machine it had constructed. The people who were in a position to do this were hard, knew what they wanted and knew how to run the American system. Often, as with John Foster Dulles, Alan Dulles, James Forrestal, Averell Harriman, Prescott Bush, Douglas McArthur and others they had been part of the American financial elite dealing with the Nazis and their sympathies were there and against Socialism.. During the War events they were often in charge inside Government and strategically placed. Of course, some quick footwork was needed. The Fascist sympathizers melted into top posts and sought to turn the West against the Socialist USSR, the real heroes of the fight against Hitler. The US Right Wing was forming things their way long before Roosevelt died, fighting him for control of the United States Government. They got rid of Roosevelt’s Vice-President, Wallace, who had a strategic international perspective and replaced him with a little man, Truman, who would largely do their bidding. That did not fully work out, but in the big scheme of events their agenda won and the world eventually rearmed. We look at this process.

Demonizing the USSR.

Military systems need enemies and the only one available was the USSR. It was the West’s greatest ally against Hitler. Indeed, on most impartial reckonings, the USSR took the brunt of fighting the Nazis and defeated the German War machine; they turned the War. It was an awesome, courageous victory in which the costs were enormous; the USSR lost 25 million people in the Second World War, while the United States and Britain lost half a million each. We in Britain crow about defeating Hitler, but the Russians can crow ten times louder. Many USSR villages, towns and cities were destroyed by the fighting and bombing which the USSR suffered while the West delayed opening a second front. The scale of that devastation we cannot imagine, or the long-term cost of putting it right. Yet soon the Brits and the Americans “Won The War” and within months the USSR had been marginalized, denied aid, and was the new enemy, while the Nazi sympathizing groups became the new establishment within the Truman Presidency. Aid was even given to Germany and denied to the USSR. The speed of this transition was amazing. In August 1945 Stalin was supporting the US attack on Japan, as he promised Roosevelt he would, with forces in Manchuria and in October was strongly supporting the formation of the United Nations.  Then suddenly in the four months or so before Churchill’s Fulton Missouri speech on 5th March, 1946 the Soviet Union had become the enemy to be armed against. This transition needs a massive re-evaluation. Churchill, the War leader, was part of setting up another war against his hated USSR and receiving adulation for it, but he was exactly fitting the needs of the old pro-nazi brigade. Suddenly, Fascism and the Far Right’s militarism which had caused both World Wars was no longer the problem but Communism, even as Socialists and Communists were being elected to governments throughout eastern and western European.

From 1945 a big propaganda machine kicked in. Churchill and the Truman Americans were discussing nuking the Soviets. It was not practicable, mainly because the US was very short of atomic bombs, but the temptation was there. Stalin found out what was going on and international relations were soured. We make a fuss about the “traitor spies”, but Stalin needed spies; we were nasty allies. Soon, before the second Red Scare and the McCarthyite Movement, it was Socialists, not Fascists who were the traitors who needed hunting down. Within months the Nazi and Fascist sympathizers were rehabilitated and Socialism was the scapegoat. The “Iron Curtain” was put in place by Churchill’s Fulton Missouri speech of 5th March, 1946 and there were “reds under the bed”. Forrestal’s two Atomic tests in July 1946, supposedly to test how battleships stood up to nuclear bombing, showed the USSR that the US was backing arms and the Cold War was on.

Of course, Stalin is supposed to be the bete noir of these events, trying to dominate Eastern Europe. He had carried out evil mass purges in the 30s, the horrific Gulag, and he was a paranoid dictator. But this too had a background, though not a justification. The Tsarist regimes were autocratic and often violent. The Great War led to Germany’s brutal defeat of Russia and chaos with the Revolution. When the Great War ended Churchill as Minister for War led a personal attack on Red Russia which together with a war with Poland until 1921 led to a devastating war in which Bolsheviks were inured to fighting. Lenin was indeed violent. The challenge of holding the USSR together was vast. Stalin came to power without trust and knew as soon as Hitler came to power that Russia would be attacked. He armed for the inevitable fight against the Nazis and the USSR’s defence against the Nazis was magnificent and the most costly in history. At the end of the War he had a massive war machine, which he, too, set about downsizing. He was scavenging for anything that could improve the lot of his hungry, war-weary, devasted people. The USSR armed forces fell from 13-2.8 million while the US forces fell from 12.2-1.6 million.   

 A Recap -The Journey to 1945.

How industrial militarism got underway – the pioneers.

Becoming a militarized world did not happen by accident. As industrialization took place, it was planned by those who wanted to make and sell manufactured weapons. The early figures like Krupp and Armstrong were pioneer entrepreneurs and engineers out to forge a business. Profits came with economies of scale and they set out to increase scale. The first book looked at the growth of arms manufacturing companies in the 19th century selling arms initially at home and then throughout the world. From Japan to Paraguay, states were persuaded by political vanity, bribery and scares to purchase arms. Then their neighbours could be persuaded to buy some as well. Politicians were taught that force was the name of the game, force against national force. Autocratic leaders had long surrounded themselves with soldiers, but these did not melt away with democracy, but democracy was managed to continue militarism. Usually this involved pushing people towards nationalism and patriotism. States built up their armed forces, went looking for countries to control as colonies like Alexander the Great or Caesar, and then probably went to war. The British elite learned Latin and looked at Rome in their public schools and went out and ran a similar empire with British made weapons. The arms companies ran the show and then provided the wherewithal with industrial scale arms production and profits.

The Great War was about weapons, not territory.

Companies like Krupp, Armstrong, Vickers, Schneider, Mauser, Skoda, BSA,  Nobel, Du Pont and Remington became among the biggest industrial companies on the planet. They conversed with Prime Ministers and Emperors, and promoting arms to big and small nations. Arms “races” and wars became normal, and by 1914 there were four great arms races pushing Europe to the edge. Each state was watching the others, and their military build-up, for a decade. Arms companies and warship manufacturers stoked fear. They developed propaganda machines and pushed their agenda in newspapers and through pressure groups. Then, military competition pushed over the edge, into the greatest war of all. Austro-Hungary‘s Skoda had tried to sell arms to Serbia, but failed. It was miffed. Serbia would not buy Skoda arms because Austro-Hungary was her most likely enemy. Then the so-called Pig War ensued between 1906-08, and with the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand the Austrian Empire was ready to issue an ultimatum and then invade. This was the starting gun for all those other arms races to start – France-Germany, Germany-Russia, England-Germany and Russia/Serbia-Austro Hungary. The Great War saw the production of arms explode in the greatest output of weapons the world had ever seen, many times over. After the Great War with four years of maximum production and growth, these companies controlled the biggest industry in the world.

The Buried History of Disarmament.

There were many before the Great War who understood the danger of the arms industry and militarism. They included Gladstone, Leo Tolstoy, Bernard Shaw, Keir Hardie, President Wilson, Pope Benedict XV, Bertha von Suttner, Frédéric Passy, Jeanette Rankin, Ramsey McDonald, Charles Trevelyan, Arthur Ponsonby, Bertrand Russell, Maude Roydon, Mahatma Gandhi, Alfred Fried, Jane Addams and many more. They had waged a widespread and articulate war against war, militarism and the arms trade. At this time Britain was seen as an unprincipled imperial aggressor, side-stepping the Hague Peace Conference in 1899 to fight the Boer War. Arms companies had sold weapons to Japan, Russia, the Ottoman Empire, Serbia and many other countries priming them for conflict.  During the early years of the century the pacifists named the escalation of arms, pointing out the stupidity of teaching mass murder, the destructiveness of war and the arrogance of rulers and the armaments industrialists. They were right; if murder was wrong, mass murder did not suddenly become patriotic. There was no way round that argument, but the argument did no win. Jingoism, a stirring up of popular warlike patriotism won the day. Jean Jaures was shot to get rid of his opposition. Keir Hardie, the Labour Leader, became a hate figure because he opposed the war, and everybody went off to fight in a euphoria of presumed success. When the War came its horrors mounted month on month. They promised it would be over by Christmas, and the Pope suggested a Christmas Truce which looked like holding with the troops, but it was broken and the carnage went on and on with millions of shells, and then gas, crossing the front to kill and maim.

The Reality of the Great War.

Superficially, the War was about who won, and the patriotic stuff was there on all sides. But soon no-one had won. Everyone was bogged down in the trenches with young soldiers dying at about six thousand a day. The War Poets said it, but everybody knew it. Oh what a lovely War! “Up to your waist in water, Up to your eyes in slush, Using the kind of language, That makes the sergeant blush.” And it was worse than that. Russia collapsed with about three million deaths. Germany eventually ran out of equipment and the people and its fighting collapsed in 1918. The United States had moved from supplying weapons and explosives to engagement. It had it relatively easy, because it only had 117,497 deaths and 204,002 injured, a light burden compared to other countries. Overall, some twenty million died and a further twenty million were injured. The United States partly entered the War because the Britain and France (and Russia, who defaulted) owed so much that the US had to make sure they would repay their debts. They in turn needed Germany to pay reparations in order to pay the Americans. The debts of the War crippled the economy of the world through to Hitler.

Yet it was the personal reality of it which bit. People had seen themselves killing and being killed. The reality of War was horrific with bodies in mud and craters across the horizon. Murder destroys you.  The German High Command invented the myth that the Jews had stabbed them in the back to disguise the fact that they had pursued the War and they had lost. The biblical idea of the scapegoat, the one who would carry the sins, was vested in the Jewish race to get the military off the hook. Really, everyone knew that this was the travesty of civilization. It was the War to End All Wars. It must never happen again. Yet, it was worse than that. The returning soldiers carried flu around the world and at least fifty million more people, weakened by the war, died all across the globe. Two great tidal waves of grief traversed the globe touching all those mourning a hundred million dead and injured. Then, there were those suffering PTSD – full of rage, silent, sleepless, raw at the inhumanity they had seen. Often, they took it out on their women – another brutal undercurrent to the War. Then, frozen winters without food, resources, young people, fuel, shelter in Russia and Eastern Europe. The suffering cannot be imagined. So, millions just tried to cope, but underneath they knew War must be addressed and ended. The statesman of the era were chastened. They had often bought into chauvinism and the arms trade, and knew that the sale of weapons was the underlying problem. As Lord Grey, British Foreign Secretary in the decade before the War said, “The moral is obvious; it is that great armaments lead inevitably to war.” There was widespread repentance at this false trust in militarism. The Tragedy is that is clear understanding was defeated in a mere twenty five years; and few  understand how it was defeated and the militarists have hidden it…

Postponing the Great Geneva Disarmament Conference.  

Alongside the great pre-war pacifists, another generation emerged who knew war was wrong because they were in it. Vera Brittain, Lord Robert Cecil, Clem Attlee, Arthur Henderson, George Lansbury, R.H.Tawney, Charles Raven, Philip Noel-Baker, the explorer Nansen, Field-Marshall Sir William Robertson  and even the main architect of Britain’s War effort,  Lloyd George, saw the problem of militarism and were determined to do something about it. Pacifists including Gandhi, Bertrand Russell, The Anglican Pacifist Fellowship, In France the ex-servicemen, the anciens combattants, shared pacifism with a primary school movement in which children understood how militarism was wrong.  There was a massive world-wide popular movement which involved tens of millions of people, still perhaps the biggest in human history. The movement grew. Key was the Catholic Church which under Benedict XV had opposed WW1 throughout. He described it as a “useless massacre” which did not endear him to the fighting statesmen. The Catholic Church mobilized millions for peace. There were rallies of thousands of women well before Hitler thought of mass rallies.  The Anglican Church also woke up. People saw the problem was arms and wanted to end the power of the Merchants of Death, as they came to be known. They had pushed arms, naval confrontation and military rivalry; millions lay dead while the arms manufacturers made their profits. Their weapons were undeniably evil. Statesmen and millions of ordinary people sought and worked for world disarmament to make the Great War the War to end all Wars.

But the British Conservative Government, the key one at this stage, did not co-operate. The Coalition Conservatives learned to prevaricate on disarmament until 1924. In the 1924 second election, a minority Labour Government was overthrown in unusual circumstances. A fake telegram, purporting to come from the USSR Minister, Zinoviev, was acquired by the Conservative Party and published in the Daily Mail four days before the election purportedly telling Socialists to rise up and have a revolution. Labour was actually resolutely democratic, and distrusted the Soviets, but the mud stuck and Labour lost enough seats to face a new Conservative Government. This Government, with Churchill as Chancellor buckled down against disarmament. It did as little as it could between 1924-9 and successfully held off the Disarmament Conference. This delay was crucial. It allowed the arms companies to organize themselves. In 1927 an arms company paid William Shearer $20,000 for six weeks work on disrupting the 1927 Coolidge Naval Conference on reducing warships. He and others were successful. Lord Cecil resigned from the Government over its failure to agree naval reductions. Britain wanted to hang on to its navy and was in rivalry with the States. The arms companies were now in control behind the scenes. But the public was for the League of Nations and against the Conservatives and in June 1929 Labour was returned with twenty seven more seats than the Conservatives in a minority Government. So again the momentum for the Disarmament Conference speeded up.

They continued through a decade, an amazing programme of persistence. This now-ignored disarmament movement came to a head in the great Geneva Disarmament Conference of 1932, backed by organisations representing nearly half of the world’s population, especially Christian and women’s organisations, along with  most of the world’s statesmen. It had been planned since 1925 and was a long time coming, but come it did, backed in Britain by the King, Archbishops, Prime Ministers, military leaders. Sadly, before it started Nansen, the explorer and humanitarian and Stresemann, the key German politician, was also dead of a stroke.

No, Appeasement is Different.

You are now entering a historical black hole. The history of disarmament has been covered up and papered over by those who want it to disappear. Mainly, one word has done it – “appeasement”. Churchill was against Appeasement and Disarmament is appeasement – End of Discussion. This is a travesty of history. “Appeasement” was British leaders running the Conservative Government in 1938-9 who were pro-Nazi even when war was likely, because they were against socialism. Britain was rearming fast at the time, so it was not about not arming.

Churchill saw Hitler coming, but so, too, did everyone at the Disarmament Conference, even Sir John Simon, and knew disarmament would sideline him and the Nazis for ever. Churchill, of course, was against disarmament and for the Navy, and was one of the British politicians undermining the Conference. Later, he was fighting members of his own party who were appeasers and in the Conservative Government. They were the “Big Four”, Chamberlain, Simon, Hoare and Halifax, the same Simon who had scuppered the Great Geneva Disarmament Conference.. So, Appeasement was not disarmament. They were different in time and focus. Churchill had great respect for the disarmers like Lord Cecil and Clem Attlee, and the attempt at World Disarmament occurred in 1932 before Hitler came to power. Appeasement came five years later from Fascist Sympathizing Conservatives, a group who for obvious reasons later tried to disappear..

Airbrushing Disarmament out of History.

World Disarmament has been covered up because it makes sense, it nearly happened before Hitler came to power and the arms companies do not want us to even think about it as a possibility. It is also covered up because British Conservative  politicians prevented it. We did so because we were jealous of the United States as the new world superpower and wanted a big Navy so that we could control the Empire. It was that pathetic. The whole world was waiting on the acceptance of President Hoover’s plan, and we Brits were jealous, and put it into treacle. They discussed treacling in Cabinet. Sir John Simon funked it. Lloyd George said that “Sir John Simon sat on the fence so long that the iron entered his soul” Eden expressed his contempt for him, and Harold Nicholson, an ally of Churchill, just called him “a toad and a worm”. It was an appalling event in British history which opened the way to the Second World War before Hitler came to power. So we try to blot it out.

The Conference was also undermined by the Japanese invading Manchuria, the arms companies using agents to prevent it working, and the various military people at the Conference, but mainly it was the British. If we had worked with Hoover and the United States disarmament would have happened. All aggressive weapons – bombers, howitzers, tanks and submarines – would have been closed down, and the rest cut by a third immediately. Hitler storming about the unfairness of the Versailles outcome, would have had nothing to rant about and could show his armpits to the doctor. When in January 1933 the Oxford Union voted overwhelmingly that “This House would not fight for King and Country” it was voting its contempt at the handling of the Geneva Disarmament Conference. Ordinary people the world over did not understand what had happened, because the Conference just stalled. They continued to believe disarmament must take place, because all of this was done in secret, in committees by politicians committed to doing nothing. The Conservative Party said it was a peace party when we were rearming and then went for appeasement. The arms companies had won and soon they would be quietly back in business.

American Corporatist Capitalism.

By 1918 the American economy was several times bigger than Britain’s and the dominant economy in the world as immigrants poured in, resources were opened up, oil became abundant and the Midwest prairies produced their crops. But American capitalism had been turned by the Great War in two respects. First, the arms companies had grown faster than the others and were quite dominant among the New York Capitalist elite. They were used to running the show and running Washington. In the twenties they controlled both political parties, dominated the world economy and knew only expansion, even while Europe still struggled.

Then in 1929 American capitalism faced the crisis of the Wall Street Crash. Often the big capitalists like Du Pont had got out in time and had vast amounts of capital. They bought up other businesses, like General Motors in the case of the Du Ponts. Much of their capital could not easily be used in the domestic US economy in recession. They were already deeply engaged in financing the German economy and had Fascist sympathies, so money flowed to Germany and its rearmament, and also similarly to the USSR. They were still running the show internationally. But in December 1932 they faced Franklin D. Roosevelt, one of their own class who had turned to attack, “the money-makers in the Temple” in his inaugural address and was deeply critical of their capitalism and prepared to act for the public good. They actually tried a US Fascist coup attempt in 1934 against the “Socialist” Roosevelt, but it failed thanks to the whistle blowing of General Smedley Butler. That is another suppressed bit of history. Then they tried to turn elections, but were again defeated by Roosevelt.

The Pro-Nazi Americans

But the US capitalist elite had no constraints on their international business and they moved  to support Hitler. The Harriman Bank had long been lending funds to Thyssen, Hitler’s patron, and as Hitler moved to power, they became the conduit for heavy US loans funding Nazi economic development and rearmament. We ask how Germany moved from an economy on its knees in 1932/3 to one able to defeat and subdue Europe in 1939, the answer is mainly that the Nazis were enabled by finance and munitions from the United States, channeled especially by the Harriman Bank and its key representative Harriman Bush.. The help of banks and munition companies, often with Fascist sympathies, made the Nazis able to fight the Second World War. The munitions companies also encouraged and funded Fascism in many other countries, helping create the chaos that supposedly required arms to sort them out. The War between Japan and China and the Spanish Civil War got the arms gravy train going again. Thus, the process of funding and promoting arms sales defeated the great peace and disarmament movement of the early 1930s. Both World Wars had the same main cause – those who pushed munitions and made money out of them and profited from war. The Second World War was thus formed against large populations in most major countries avid for peace and disarmament. Few people understood how capital and the arms companies had undermined disarmament and opened the door to World War Two. American funding of the Nazis carried on right up to Pearl Harbour.

The World’s Biggest Ever Industrial Complex.

            The Allies eventually won the Second World War in the greatest military drama in human history. The actual victory over Hitler and Fascism was such a dominant story that winning the War dominated the munitions transformation of the years 1935-45; it was vast. In fact, of course, military manufacture and finance mushroomed in Germany, France for a while, Italy, Japan and especially in the USSR and the United States. The military machine amounted to perhaps more than a quarter of the entire world economy, the biggest industrial complex the world had ever seen. The Second World War created a militarized world with mega arms companies, enormous armies, bases throughout the world and a generation whose business was fighting. It is the elephant in the room and we ignore it.  A massive organizational change took place in the five to ten years of the War and its preparation. During this period arms companies, defence departments, scientific research, technological direction, the military establishments, transport, information gathering and many other areas of life were all integrated into the military machine. Such a vast establishment was not going to disappear, especially in the victorious nations, without serious planning. It was to drive for its place in the continuing post-war world, and it won.

          World War Two and the Construction of Peace.

But it faced a mighty, uphill task. The Great War had been a horror beyond imagining, and tens of millions were determined to fashion disarmament, and now another twenty one years later one even worse had taken place. Militarism had a dirty name, personified in the frog-marching Fascists. Many people remembered the Geneva Disarmament Conference of 1932 had been defeated. A War of unimaginable proportions had been loosed on the world with atrocities and genocide in the Holocaust, the far East, the vast spaces of Eastern Europe and around the globe. Some seventy million had died. Millions were walking around with PTSD, or still living with charred flesh and bombed houses. Millions more were mourning husbands, sons, daughters and colleagues. They faced the poverty of rationing small bits of food, queuing for necessities and shivering through cold winters with no fuel because War Lays Waste. There were some 1.9 billion soldiers serving in World War Two, and for most their deepest conviction was not about who won or lost. They knew War was wrong, wrong, wrong. The United Nations was formed largely by Roosevelt and Vice President Wallace, before Roosevelt died. It was set up with some commitment to peace and disarmament. Although this was quickly dissipated, millions hoped for something better. More than this, Fascism had fought the war and Socialism had been attacked. Now socialists would have to rebuild the world. So, when the British Election took place there was no question that Clement Attlee should be in charge in July 1945 even before the war ended, because Churchill the War Leader and the old militarist, was not the man for the job. The nation was grateful to Churchill as war leader, though millions still hated him, but they were not going to have a militarist in charge. So, Churchill looked for allies across the pond.

 Thus, after the War, while hundreds of millions of people were trying to get back to ordinary living, a titanic battle was going on for the shape of the post-war world around the military. At one level the Government in Britain were clearing streets, repairing buildings and roads, getting soldiers back to work, putting together a national health service, nationalized industries, rationing, the Welfare state, prefab housing, milk and orange juice for kids, addressing shortages of food, clothes, furniture, caring for distressed families and getting coal distributed for the winter, and at another level the post-world war world had to be addressed. Immediately, it was easy. The Government was bankrupt and, provided the armed forces were treated well, economies in the military had to be made. But, in this theatre Britain did not count. It was intent on its domestic recovery with a clapped-out Empire.

The United States and the Truman Era.

The United States dominated the world. In 1945, as a result of the devastation in Europe, Russia, China, Japan and elsewhere the US accounted for an amazing half of the world monetized economy. It was owed money by the other Allies and had a buoyant economy through war production. What the United States did would sway history. Its internal politics would be played out across the globe. Here, too, millions were trying to put together their lives again after serving in the military or undertaking arduous war work, but something else was going on in Washington, the Pentagon and among what was soon to be known as the military-industrial complex. It was working at its own survival, and the continuation of the war machine it had constructed. The people who were in a position to do this were hard, knew what they wanted and knew how to run the American system. Often, as with John Foster Dulles, Alan Dulles, James Forrestal, Averell Harriman, Prescott Bush, Douglas McArthur and others they had been part of the American financial elite dealing with the Nazis and their sympathies were there and against Socialism.. During the War events they were often in charge inside Government and strategically placed. Of course, some quick footwork was needed. The Fascist sympathizers melted into top posts and sought to turn the West against the Socialist USSR, the real heroes of the fight against Hitler. The US Right Wing was forming things their way long before Roosevelt died, fighting him for control of the United States Government. They got rid of Roosevelt’s Vice-President, Wallace, who had a strategic international perspective and replaced him with a little man, Truman, who would largely do their bidding. That did not fully work out, but in the big scheme of events their agenda won and the world eventually rearmed. We look at this process.

Demonizing the USSR.

Military systems need enemies and the only one available was the USSR. It was the West’s greatest ally against Hitler. Indeed, on most impartial reckonings, the USSR took the brunt of fighting the Nazis and defeated the German War machine; they turned the War. It was an awesome, courageous victory in which the costs were enormous; the USSR lost 25 million people in the Second World War, while the United States and Britain lost half a million each. We in Britain crow about defeating Hitler, but the Russians can crow ten times louder. Many USSR villages, towns and cities were destroyed by the fighting and bombing which the USSR suffered while the West delayed opening a second front. The scale of that devastation we cannot imagine, or the long-term cost of putting it right. Yet soon the Brits and the Americans “Won The War” and within months the USSR had been marginalized, denied aid, and was the new enemy, while the Nazi sympathizing groups became the new establishment within the Truman Presidency. Aid was even given to Germany and denied to the USSR. The speed of this transition was amazing. In August 1945 Stalin was supporting the US attack on Japan, as he promised Roosevelt he would, with forces in Manchuria and in October was strongly supporting the formation of the United Nations.  Then suddenly in the four months or so before Churchill’s Fulton Missouri speech on 5th March, 1946 the Soviet Union had become the enemy to be armed against. This transition needs a massive re-evaluation. Churchill, the War leader, was part of setting up another war against his hated USSR and receiving adulation for it, but he was exactly fitting the needs of the old pro-nazi brigade. Suddenly, Fascism and the Far Right’s militarism which had caused both World Wars was no longer the problem but Communism, even as Socialists and Communists were being elected to governments throughout eastern and western European.

From 1945 a big propaganda machine kicked in. Churchill and the Truman Americans were discussing nuking the Soviets. It was not practicable, mainly because the US was very short of atomic bombs, but the temptation was there. Stalin found out what was going on and international relations were soured. We make a fuss about the “traitor spies”, but Stalin needed spies; we were nasty allies. Soon, before the second Red Scare and the McCarthyite Movement, it was Socialists, not Fascists who were the traitors who needed hunting down. Within months the Nazi and Fascist sympathizers were rehabilitated and Socialism was the scapegoat. The “Iron Curtain” was put in place by Churchill’s Fulton Missouri speech of 5th March, 1946 and there were “reds under the bed”. Forrestal’s two Atomic tests in July 1946, supposedly to test how battleships stood up to nuclear bombing, showed the USSR that the US was backing arms and the Cold War was on.

Of course, Stalin is supposed to be the bete noir of these events, trying to dominate Eastern Europe. He had carried out evil mass purges in the 30s, the horrific Gulag, and he was a paranoid dictator. But this too had a background, though not a justification. The Tsarist regimes were autocratic and often violent. The Great War led to Germany’s brutal defeat of Russia and chaos with the Revolution. When the Great War ended Churchill as Minister for War led a personal attack on Red Russia which together with a war with Poland until 1921 led to a devastating war in which Bolsheviks were inured to fighting. Lenin was indeed violent. The challenge of holding the USSR together was vast. Stalin came to power without trust and knew as soon as Hitler came to power that Russia would be attacked. He armed for the inevitable fight against the Nazis and the USSR’s defence against the Nazis was magnificent and the most costly in history. At the end of the War he had a massive war machine, which he, too, set about downsizing. He was scavenging for anything that could improve the lot of his hungry, war-weary, devasted people. The USSR armed forces fell from 13-2.8 million while the US forces fell from 12.2-1.6 million.   

The militarists had to destroy the possibility of peace. They also had to develop a collective amnesia where the fifteen years struggle against the merchants of death to prevent the preconditions of the Second World War was forgotten under the mantra – “Of course we had to fight Hitler”.  Meanwhile, those in Britain, France and the United States, who had backed Fascism and the Nazis – the militarists, arms companies, financiers and members of the aristocracies – washed themselves down and redressed themselves as Fighting for Democracy. The military-industrial complex was able to perpetuate their position and succeeded in making a continual arming world in which the munitions business would flourish and grow. The western propaganda machine fostered by the military-industrial complex was the main architect of the Cold War for the next half century. Its dishonesty has never been owned. Here we look at the construction of that fully armed world system, against the good will of many. Those who wanted an end to war and create a world of peace were sidelined and defeated again.

The militarists had to destroy the possibility of peace. They also had to develop a collective amnesia where the fifteen years struggle against the merchants of death to prevent the preconditions of the Second World War was forgotten under the mantra – “Of course we had to fight Hitler”.  Meanwhile, those in Britain, France and the United States, who had backed Fascism and the Nazis – the militarists, arms companies, financiers and members of the aristocracies – washed themselves down and redressed themselves as Fighting for Democracy. The military-industrial complex was able to perpetuate their position and succeeded in making a continual arming world in which the munitions business would flourish and grow. The western propaganda machine fostered by the military-industrial complex was the main architect of the Cold War for the next half century. Its dishonesty has never been owned. Here we look at the construction of that fully armed world system, against the good will of many. Those who wanted an end to war and create a world of peace were sidelined and defeated again.

WE SHALL DISARM THE WORLD

NOT SWALLOWING CAMELS.

War, militarism and the arms trade probably account for more than half the world’s injustice and evil. Jesus warned us about straining out gnats and swallowing camels. This is perhaps the world’s biggest camel and we swallow it like morning cereal. So, let’s face the camel of militarism which we have been made to assume is necessary and normal. The full evidence is devastating, but this is the fast version.

MILITARISM IS IN CONTROL.

World disarmament is off the menu, and has been except for a brief flurry around the end of the Cold War when it was quickly shut down. We cannot think disarmament because the military and arms people have run the show most of the time since 1900 and always tell us we need arms. A string of wars, big and small, have been accompanied by arming. Arms produce wars and arms, we are told, save wars. Blessed be the arms trade. They profit from conflict and are inside governments in Washington, Moscow, London and most of the capitals of the world, though they have learned to keep a low profile. Scares occur nearly every day to keep us in fear. Enemies are talked up. You need to be armed is conveyed as a moral imperative. Arms purchases increase, military dictators and militarised democracies abound, and disarmament is unthinkable as some kind of treason. You have been taught to rule out disarmament, to unthink it.

JESUS MAY HAVE A POINT.

But is this correct? Jesus is obviously the world’s greatest teacher. He backs peace and asks us to make it. He turns down the temptation of power over all the kingdoms of the world, unlike Caesar, Ghengis Khan, Napoleon and ‘itler. He requires us to love and understand our enemies and make peace. He spreads peace and asks us to pass it on. He deconstructs rows and turns away from any aggression. This is God’s way for us and it means the reconciliation of peoples; nation will speak peace unto nation. He fulfils what is spoken in the prophets. Isaiah says God will hammer swords into ploughshares and nations will never again go to war or prepare for battle. Psalm 46 talks of stopping wars all over the world. Jesus in one devastating sentence dismisses the military enterprise. “Those who take the sword will perish by the sword”, a prediction fulfilled in every decade of modern history. He is the Lamb on the world throne, bringing the rule of gentleness and not might. Paul replaced the Roman armour which ruled the world in the first century after Christ with peace, justice, truth, faith and the word of God as the “weapons” to fight with. Christianity is for peace and Christians say so in church every Sunday, and actually the Church manages quite well without an army. American Christians who say Christianity and guns go together are brainwashed out of Christianity. My peace, says Jesus, I leave with you.

But, say the militarists, this is just unrealistic. Christianity is out of touch with our age. It is a vague ideal, divorced from realpolitik. In reality we have to have armed forces, secret services, deterrents, military bases and keep ahead in the arms race and the technology of weapons. Terrorism is real, and the threats from Russia, China, North Korea and Iran cannot be avoided. Peace is for Christmas cards. Mostly, the churches have come round to accepting this.  Now services bless our continuous at sea nuclear deterrent and we are safe. Every time peace comes up now, it is nice but not part of real politics. But is this the last word?

THE MILITARY SUCCESS OF THE UNITED STATES?

The United States is the world’s leading military power and its military success. Except, the US lost another war last week – in Afghanistan. Trump blustered but the US lost, after eighteen years and spending a trillion dollars. It has lost in Iraq in seventeen years of fighting after “Mission Accomplished”. That cost two and a half trillion dollars, and the mission was not accomplished since there were no weapons of mass destruction and it has spawned another generation of terrorism as Camp Bucca birthed ISIS. The US and the UK are losing in Syria, which is not surprising since it was unclear which side we were fighting. The War in Libya left a failed state in a mess with democracy not in sight. US and UK weapons in Yemen have produced horror upon horror. So, the US has spent six plus trillion dollars on failed wars which have killed a million, displaced some 10 million refugees, and produced five big failed states in the middle east. Really, Iran and Saudi Arabia are also unstable. US military policy is a shambles. Its wars do not work. Soon the world will wake up to this. Something has got to replace US militarism.

MILITARISM DOES NOT WORK.

Really, however, militarism has not worked for a century. Its costs dog world history. Since 1914 two hundred million have died through war. Even more have been injured. The trauma among soldiers and civilians in all wars is probably over a billion, but covered up. Arms produce war. Four arms races sparked into WW1. The sabotage of the Geneva Disarmament Conference in 1932 allowed the arms companies and Hitler back in to start WW2. The Cold War was a useless forty year waste. Militarism has cost the world between five and ten per cent of total world income, often destroyed democracy, absorbed much of the most advanced science and technology and all for the purpose of destruction. It is the biggest failed experiment on the planet. Anyone allowed to think can see that, but usually we are just fatalistic. History is one damned war after another. We no longer ask Why? After all very few people profit from war. People die and are injured. Cities are destroyed. Economies collapse. Debts mount up. The young next generation is wiped out. Wars are difficult to sell when no-one profits from them. So why do we have them?

WHO NEEDS WAR?

The one group who need war are the arms manufacturers. They profit from wars and the rumour of wars. Their gear is used in war. Millions understood this between the wars in the biggest peace movement ever. Krupp worked on the Kaiser. Armstrong and Vickers had groomed the British Government for the Boer War and the Great War. Schneider-Le Creusot had the gun which would this time beat the Germans and were arming Russia. Skoda worked up Austro-Hungary against Serbia. Britain and Germany armed the Turks. There was the hyped “Dreadnought Crisis” and four arms races fanned by newspaper propaganda. Nobel was making a killing. . Belgian arms kept the Congo in subjugation and came in handy at Sarajevo. British battleship manufacturers sold battleships to Japan, with a bit of bribery, to help them beat the Russians in 1904-5. That upped sales around the world. As arms sales grew, often financed by debt, it needed only a spark to set off World War One. Who needs wars? The arms companies need wars, and by and large they get them.

THE PROBLEM SEEN, BUT TOO LATE.

After World War One most people saw the arms problem. There were cartoons of fat arms traders. Lord Grey, Foreign Secretary in the decade up to 1914 summed it up. “The moral is obvious; it is that great armaments lead inevitably to war…” They wanted to make it the War To End All Wars. Disarmament was written into the Versailles treaty and the League of Nations, not just for Germany, but for everybody. For a time, the arms companies were on the back foot. All the Churches got behind disarmament in a big way. But the Conservative Government of 1924-9 was able to stall the big disarmament Conference. Lord Cecil, leading its planning, fell out with them and nothing decisive happened except public support for disarmament around the world grew. Then in 1929 with a Labour Government and Arthur Henderson as Foreign Secretary the pace picked up again. In 1932, at last, the Great Disarmament Conference arrived, supported by petitions with tens of millions of signatures. President Hoover’s Plan to cut out all aggressive weapons like bombers, subs and howitzers and the rest of arms by a third received a warm welcome from almost all the countries of the world, including the USSR, France, China, Germany, Italy, Canada, Belgium, Brazil, Spain, Turkey, Cuba, Austria, Norway, Finland, Hungary, Denmark, Mexico, Sweden, Estonia, Switzerland, New Zealand, Roumania, Persia, Venezuela, Argentina, the Netherlands Luthuania, Afghanistan, Colombia, Latvia, Portugal, Bolivia, Bulgaria, Yugoslavia and others. They enthusiastically welcomed the possibility of a disarmed world.  Japan was missing because it was invading Manchuria (armed by Britain and other states). Key was the British response. It was lukewarm, noncommittal. It welcomed the proposal but said that it would submit its own proposal, but there was a problem. Most Conservatives in the House of Commons were against disarmament. There were links to the Navy. Eyres-Monsall, First Lord of the Admiralty wanted to keep all his battleships and aircraft carriers. Douglas Hogg, secretary of state for War wanted to keep his tanks and heavy mobile guns. Lord Londonderry, Secretary of State for Air wanted to save the bomber, and the arms companies were applying pressure in the background. The British put forward a counter-plan which allowed her to control her Empire, keep her Navy on the 8th July, 1932 and really it killed the Hoover Plan without saying so. It spoke words of further negotiation, but the proposal for Full World Disarmament was dead. Cabinet minutes of those weeks show that one of the main motives of the Cabinet was jealousy of the United States as the new dominant economic world power. It was that pathetic.

People knew that no world disarmament would mean German rearmament. It had waited thirteen years for other states to do something. The failure of Geneva gave more power to Hitler and six months later he came to power. Most people did not know the Conference had failed. Britain talked about more negotiations and it struggled on into 1933. Roosevelt could not revive it. British politicians clamped down on what Britain had done, and the public still hoped that disarmament could happen. In 1934 the book, “The Merchants of Death” opened up the role of the arms companies, and the US Nye Commission did it further, but by now they were too late and US companies were queuing up to arm Hitler funded by US banks. World War Two was on its way. After World War Two the militarists made sure disarmament was buried without trace and so it has largely remained since. The arms companies are in the business of war and the major reason why they continue happening.

KEEPING THINKING AT BAY

Although the evidence for the failure of war and competitive arming is everywhere, people are kept from thinking about it by fear. Jesus attacked fear, because militarism’s real power comes through fear. Do this or I will kill you. Militarism sells fear most days. Ironically the most powerful are the most fearful. The militarists have re-created the enemies they need for their business. Russia, anxious for co-operation after the Cold War has been pushed into antagonism, especially by NATO action in Ukraine. China actually quite restrained in its international relations is being portrayed as a threat, like North Korea, also threatened by the US. Iran the useful adversary for the Iraqi arms gravy train. On top of this, trashing much of the middle east obviously generates the terrorism we are also scared of. A world-wide threat system is designed to keep the military system in business and to stop us from thinking.

THE FRAGILE WORLD CONTROL SYSTEM FOR MILITARISM.

So, the militarist hegemony keeps the show on the road. New contracts. New weapons. Replace the unusable nuclear weapons. US military budgets boom. 2% minimum military expenditure for any civilised country. All the members of the UN Security Council are the heaviest armed and the biggest arms exporters. New wars are being stoked. We must keep the show on the road. But it is unreal. It is the Judy and Punch show for the masses, the soap opera which will keep us servile.

                But it is not real. Saddam had no weapons of mass destruction in 2003 and we had multiple sources of information that that was so, even though the world media were fed the opposite. The Arab Spring for Democracy was killed by western and Russian arms, and we are busy again supplying the military dictators in Egypt. The outrage about the Crimea was fake. Of course, the Crimea was going to join Russia. The US/UK seize an Iranian tanker in international waters at Gibraltar and then bluster when the Iranians do a tit for tat in the Straits of Hormuz. The US fulminates about the Chinese Navy in the China Sea, when it has bases all around the world. North Korea, scared stiff of the US and with an economy half the size of Lancashire, becomes a major world threat. The secret services do James Bond to keep us watching. But it is a show. The armour has no body, no meaning, no purpose. It is a washed up, self-promoting industry. Like the god, Dagon, it is a statue ready to fall. Militarism is really dead; we have to bury it successfully. More than this, it is mainly a western show. The arms production of the West, and its arms, dominate the world. We say, Peace, peace, but there is no peace, and now we do not even bother to say it.

THE TIME HAS COME.

This is no vague issue, but urgent. The Middle East is in chaos. There are 66 million refugees fleeing military activity world-wide. Fascism – always the link between big money and arms – is stalking the world again. In the US, Russia, China, UK and many other states, strong arm governments are in power. The position of the United Nations has been deeply challenged by the United States, and the military/arms/security systems are developing new technology systems every day which make us more vulnerable. More than this we cannot afford militarism. Armed forces mean people poverty. Wars destroy twenty years of economic development. Military spending brought down the USSR. It has and will bankrupt us. Militarism also moves to its own crescendo. Talk war and weapons and sooner or later you walk the talk. There is a slow train coming round the bend. So, we must act now. Jesus insistently says, “Be ready. Read and understand the times you live in.”  We must be ready.

THE WORLD IS HEATING UP.

One more point is also decisive. Making weapons is one of the most energy intensive forms of manufacturing. Running the military is similar – planes, ships, bases, subs eat it up day after day. Wars are energy rampant  – vast movements of troops and equipment, explosions of bombs, shells and the rebuilding and replacing of all that is destroyed. The military system and wars waste something like 5-10% of total human CO2. The planet is heating up. This must be stopped fast. It is imperative. Closing down this energy use gives us a chance of saving the planet from runaway global warming, perhaps our last chance.

WORLD MULTILATERAL DISARMAMENT IS FAR EASIER.

 So, it turns out that world militarism, far from being realistic, is stupid beyond measure and we have been swallowing camels and ignoring Jesus for far too long. The 1932 Geneva Disarmament Conference was nearly ninety years ago.  World Disarmament needs to be done. It must be done. There are two red herrings which need to be pickled. First, we nail the “unilateral” word. Unilateral disarmament is dangerous; what if you do it and nobody else does? So, normally, disarmament (unilateral) is ruled out. But why disarm unilaterally? Everyone should do it, as occurs with mot states other than the US which still insists on citizen’s rights to shoot one another. Why form the Basingstoke Disarmament Society when you can do it in the whole UK? We need Multilateral Disarmament and can have it.

Second, there is the disarmament has failed and will always fail mantra. A little bit of study shows that disarmament fails, partly because it is partial and not full, allowing all kinds of arguments, but mainly because the military insist on being in charge of it. Turkeys don’t vote for Christmas and the military screw up disarmament. Well, they would wouldn’t they? What is needed is a clear, decisive plan that helps the military and arms companies through the process, and then it can be done. World Multilateral Disarmament is far EASIER than any ongoing military development and wars would be.  It is time to quit war and act as grownups. We need no threats, no weapons, but just law-abiding living and productive and useful business.

THE WORLD DISARMAMENT PLAN.

It requires a clear plan that everybody can understand, abide by and enforce. Yes enforce. This is not cosy wish fulfilment. If Fred has a machine gun in the garage, the police move in. It is a plan backed by the UN, international law and the UN member states. The power base for this transition is popular world-wide support. The world Christian community, which has not yet acted together, is over two billion. If they can be mobilised, conscripted, then we are nearly half way there. We will discuss that strategy shortly. The key issue is for us all to see where we are going. There are six points.

  1. CLOSE DOWN ALL MILITARY SYTSTEMS TOGETHER. Every state cuts military expenditure and all weapon types by 20% a year until it is all gone in five years. Weapons are destroyed or recycled to peaceful use. Disarmament is policed by a combined UN force which shrinks as the military system does.
  2. ARMS PRODUCTION STOPS. Arms manufacturers stop production immediately and are given 80%, 60%, 40% and 20% subsidies on previous arms revenue while they convert to civilian production.
  3. DEMOBILIZATION OF ARMED FORCES. Members of the armed forces are given similar payments in addition to their pensions while the military systems are closed down.
  4. TOTAL SURVEILLANCE AND ENFORCEMENT. There is open inspection of all possible arms sites by anybody at any time to ensure full compliance. Those most fearing states can require compliance.
  5. CLOSE DOWN TERRORISM. Terrorist (non-state) weapons are offered buy-back terms for a limited period of time, and then military teams move in to confiscate.
  6. LAW, JUSTICE AND ORDER. A UN Council and Courts System of International Law handles disputes as we do within nations. International law.

Everybody understands arms are eliminated in five years and all states do it. Penalties for failure are decisive. Military dependent rulers are given exit routes and democratic elections take over, and international relations become non-oppositional. Many states will have to forgive past aggressions but all international relations become and remain peaceful to the blessing of us all. It can be done, as long as the military are not put in charge. We could in six years’ time have a disarmed and warless world, end refugees and much world poverty and save 10% of the world CO2 generation. It is sensible, practical, Christian and good for all of us. So, what do we have to do to get it on the world stage.

THE NEXT MOVES.

TEN THOUSAND SEEING THE MILITARIST  LIE AND UNDERSTANDING WORLD DISARMAMENT IS POSSIBLE AND EVEN EASY.

There are three keys to turn. The first one you may already have done. It is seeing that WMD makes sense when everybody else is not thinking about it and that it can be implemented. There is nothing special about the arguments here, but if you are reading this you probably have some idea of the problem and how disarmament makes sense. If you do not, just think about gun ownership in the United States… The conclusion can be obvious for people of all faiths and none.  This is not a sectarian policy. We need to be a hundred, a thousand and then ten thousand reasonably articulate people who see the point and spread it, an active community of faith and conviction, each one a self-starter prepared to open things up. Groups like CAAT are already working in the field, some people are pacifists, but the big agenda needs to be on the table and understood by each of us. Getting to a thousand quickly is not difficult. Some people get there in ten minutes. The ten thousand figure is probably the critical one. Once the issue is fully on the public agenda, it will explode, just as it has been suppressed. So are things roughly as laid out here. You’ve read it. What do you think? The old have too much thinking shaped by the military orthodoxy and lived under Cold War rhetoric for much of their lives and maybe cannot change quickly, so the young may be decisive. It is not just having a view but making a movement for full-disarmament-pacifism and taking on intellects like Trump. It’s that difficult.

THE WORLD-WIDE CHRISTIAN COMMUNITY WAKES UP.

Second, the challenge is to get Christians worldwide to see the integrity and point of Christian teaching about arms and Christian peace. Frankly, a lot of Christians have sentimentalized peace, or made it an individual person issue. In some areas it is not difficult. Pope Francis is already saying most of these things. Often Christians are too nice to confront and have fitted in with the militarism of their governments and side-lined obvious Christian teaching. Peace with God, peace in our hearts, but we forget that nation shall speak peace unto nation stuff. We do not believe peace can work. That is the tragedy of the present Christian Church. Peace is real – the way we all actually live our lives, work, trade, play and learn. Peace is ordinary and good. The military pie in the sky – “home by Christmas”,  “Mission Accomplished”, “Only weapons keep us safe” is the false religion; it needs calling out. So, there is some kind of spiritual change needed here. Opening up Christian groups has hitherto not been a fast operation. Here something drastically different needs to occur. How it might happen is anyone’s guess. God continues to wait.

Another Christian change is moving to the worldwide Church. Churches are strongly national, aside the Catholic Church, and the whole Church has never acted together, although perhaps nearly in 1932. This time round, we must all agree and push in the same direction. For US gun owning Christians that seems unthinkable, but the underlying Christian argument cannot be assailed. You Shall Not Kill obviously entails not producing millions of killing instruments. If abortion is wrong, militarism and arms is too. So the sanctity of life before God is seamless and all Christians should support it in international affairs. There are 2.3 billion Christians world-wide and if they act, each with a tiny bit of faith, in concert, World Multilateral Disarmament will be unstoppable/

PETITIONS WORLDWIDE

The main weapon of disarmament, as it was in the early 30s is Petitions. Petitions are without aggression. They state what people believe and ask governments to act. They are faster than elections, which have a long drift of policy change. They are specific, addressing one issue. Governments have promised responses and by and large the response depends on the number of votes behind the petition. They are a lever. In recent times there have not been international petitions. This one aims to be replicated and grow in all countries. Of course, multilateral disarmament is a threat to no-one, because no-one disarms until we all do. The military lobby will scream that it is impractical, unthinkable, dangerous, unpatriotic, like the gun lobby in the States, but we have seen through weapons and war. So, we move petitions. That is largely work. Emails, tweets, facebook, media, talks, discussions. Some will be good at it. We all can work at it. We do not want media primadonnas, just ordinary people who will move the mountain. The numbers are needed to make it democratically irresistible. Ten million here, twenty million in the US, China, Russia, India and the momentum is worldwide and the UN takes over. It will be a fight, but not against anybody, but only for them.

So, we are on the road. I’ve just opened a Parliamentary Petition on 13/3/2020 and it must be up to 10,000, but preferably tens of millions in six months time. It needs to move fast and that is mobile/phone/computer and contacts for an hour or two a day from us all The principle is interesting. Jesus said, “Faith can move mountains” but he probably meant in buckets, thousands and then millions of individual commitments adding up. In 1932 some petitions had tens of millions of signatures. We should do better than that now with the technological ease. So, what do you think? Does it chime with your faith? Do you agree? Can you be a growth point so that we can disarm the world. We have martyrs and people of peace down through history whom it has cost dearly. Surely our generation can do better than this. A million peace petition signatures fast and the UN in 2022.. Get out your bucket. Somebody needs to set up websites, get links going, and do the business. I try incompetently. Over to you.

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/300818

alan@storkey.com

Turning the Big Switch

We experience fighting and violence day by day. There is the trooping of the colour and the services of remembrance, but that is not it. Activities of state around the world are done with soldiers, so that we absorb the message that without soldiers the state cannot survive. We have war heroes on large columns, victory arches, no lost war memorials, and each day it is drummed into us that only the military can keep us safe. But that it not it. We have pictures each week, perhaps each day, of areas of the world being bombed. Even if it is our forces doing the bombing, the subconscious message is, if you do not have armed forces, you are in danger. But that is not it. Behind it all is the great modern lie.

We do not know what the great lie is, but it is there close to the centre of your head and my head. You will see violence, every day in the news and in fiction. You are ten million times more likely to see a murder on television than you are in real life. It is the normal part of life, normal millions of times, indisputably there. You live with violence. It is around like the dog and needs feeding each day. Not real violence, or though it may be that too, but normal violence each day in your head. Choose your channel. Billy the Kid, Rambo. James Bond, the Iraq news, the Syrian News, the Nazis, WW1, WW2, Star Wars, Tom and Gerry, Cowboys and Indians, Star Wars, Dan Dare, War Games, Poirot, East-Enders, Dennis the Menace, Murder She Wrote, chess, Churchill, the Orient Express and thousand of others. Millions of kids steer through war games. Murders proliferate in Oxford and violence becomes normal, normal, normal. You are inured; six bloody letters say it all, injured without the j. It is preconscious, unconscious, subconscious. It closes down the mind’s shop before opening time. And those who do peace are weird, fixated, use arguments and go on marches. They are obviously abnormal. That rules the world. 

We do not see peace. Sometimes there will be a symbol of a dove or an idyllically smiling family, but there will be no news reports on peace – ceasefires yes, but not peace. There will be no peaceful couple relating with understanding on TV, because it is not dramatic. The media do not do peace, because there is no hook, no suspense, no thrills. TV does not do a peaceful day in Solihull. You do not watch people driving on the left, even though it solves a lot of conflict. You do not see understanding, empathy, shopping, education, walking, hospitals, DIY, waiting, caring and all the normal things we do as peace, because peace is so super normal it is invisible. It is the only way to live in families, estates, cities and flying on aeroplanes. It is the pre-requisite, the sine qua non, of markets, holidays, systems, networks, humour and hobbies. Actually, neither the Queen or the Duke of Edinburgh has knocked anyone off the board for sixty years.  Peace means that we can like other people.

So, the great lie is out. Rather than violence being normal and peace a distant ideal, actually peace is as normal as Hallo and violence does not work. Bush’s “Mission Accomplished” was a total complete failure. Ask the dead. Hitler was wrong. Wars, knife attacks, nuclear weapons, murders do not work; they are the aberrations of human living. Violence, the stuff we have in our heads as normal, fucks everything up. Of course, sorting it out is a bigger question, though not as big as it seems. But the difficult bit, which is actually the easy bit, is turning this switch in our heads, turning off the normal violence switch. It is merely a simple re-orientation. No murders in Oxford. No War Games. Oh, Germany, Malaysia and dozens of other countries were largely peaceful today. Soldiers were bored again. The tomato harvest worked. A bad temper is bad. How can I help him? Revenge is out. James Bond does not exist. Then, when millions of us turn the switch, this crisis ridden world can be addressed, and we can, in Jesus’ words, make peace. Peace is free, gives instant benefits, is normal, it works, it produces civilisation, not to mention, love, joy and hope and good buildings. So, let us each turn the switch on violence as normal, whatever it takes, and then see what happens.

CAN THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND DO ANYTHING?

I was thinking this morning about a friend, John Houghton, a lovely man whom it is a privilege to know. Then I became utterly pissed off with the Church of England. That needs a bit more explanation.

John, Sir John, to be more precise, might conceivably be a way out hippy dressed in weird clothes whom the Church of England might ignore. Actually, he is a past Oxford Professor of Atmospheric Physics, head of the Met Office, lead editor of the first three reports on Global Warming produced by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the author of the standard text on “Global Warming” published by Cambridge University Press, usually dressed in a suit and tie. The first edition came out in 1994. In other words, it was probably true that John knew what he was talking about more than anybody on the subject and has for three decades, nearly half a lifetime. In fact, he has argued the case meticulously and carefully on the evidence, and convinced people from Margaret Thatcher onwards, backed by thousands of scientific papers.

Move closer to the present, and the last Synod the Church of England produced a slightly radical motion on addressing climate change. Of course, everybody else has been doing the same thing, and now the Church of England is plonking along behind and has clambered on board the bus with a resolution. Meanwhile it has spent decades discussing whether women can wear robes and pointy hats in its own hierarchy. It has taken thirty years to wake up to climate change.

We can bring Jesus into the discussion by pointing out that Jesus warned about straining at gnats and swallowing camels. Preachers explain, in case you did not get it, that that means that you concentrate on trivia while accepting important things as of no importance. You may already be there direct from Jesus. The Church of England has largely ignored Sir John Houghton, a Christian speaking from a long rigorous understanding of the stewardship of God’s creation, while it decides what sex is and discusses intincturing. John was down the line prophetic and never made it to a Synod agenda. Of course, others deliberately turned the other way because global warming could be bad for business, but the Church of England was probably looking for and discussing gnats on the menu.

Of course, you will detect a slight edge in this rhetoric, and will realise, as I did, that there is personal investment in these tart words. John was right. George Monbiot was right on global warming. It was not difficult to understand even back then. You stood on the bridge over the motorway in the rush hour and could see it happening, or you believed Nigel Lawson. So, the question was what should we do about it?

With a little bit of thought, one answer was clear at least twenty years ago. We need to disarm the world. Making weapons, running the military, planes, aircraft carriers, missiles, wars, bombs, clearing the mess up afterwards, rebuilding, is one of the biggest generators of CO2 on the planet – somewhere between 5-10% of total world CO2 output. And it is unnecessary, merely there for the arms companies. So, you listen to John, do a bit of homework, and realise that world disarmament is practical if Christians will back it.

But then there is the Church of England. Now the Church of England is supposed to listen to Jesus. That is in the writing on the tin. And Jesus said, “Those who take the sword will perish by the sword.” As preachers explain, this is not a statement about sword swallowing, but about the way the military system is self-destructive, or, at least, I hope they do. Jesus also said a lot about making peace, and the Old Testament, which Church of England people are also supposed to read, says a lot about de-weaponizing. Jesus also seems more committed to loving enemies than nuking them. So, you would think the Church of England would be interested in disarming the world when it listens to Jesus. Actually, it ignores it, and concentrates on blessing the UK continuous at sea nuclear deterrent in Westminster Abbey. There is no evidence that the Anglican blessing of nuclear submarines does anything, or indeed, that the very costly deterrent has deterred anything, but the Church of England remains the servile pawn of the military establishment like the Vicar of Bray and nothing happens, less than nothing.

Of course, my investment in this issue is of no consequence, as is John’s far greater one in addressing global warming. It was not even remotely about him. My being pissed off with the Church of England does not matter a jot, but the possibility that the Anglican Church is a beached whale incapable of movement by faith on any big issue, does. The Church of England can wake up to global warming, to disarming the world and a range of other real life issues, if it wakes up. But it is inert. It does not see camels, or elephants in rooms, or big picture Christianity. The issue may be what is right in God’s great scheme of things not what we might give up this year for lent.

It is amazing that Jesus is so ignored. He covered it all. You see, but don’t understand. He insisted we would not get it, so that we will. Well, if Christian education, discipleship, is just reciting liturgy in the Church of England perhaps we will be slow to get it. Further, Jesus insisted just prior to his death and resurrection that his disciples should be ready, prepared, read events like we read the weather, and not miss the boat or be late for the wedding. Strangely the Church of England manages to be behind the times, often spectacularly so. It has just allowed women bishops nearly five hundred years after Elizabeth I was head of the Church of England. It is 30 years late on global warming despite John Houghton.

But it can be on time for world disarmament, or rather, it can learn from its mistakes. It tried quite hard in the 1932 Geneva Disarmament Conference. Disarmament then, which nearly happened, would have stopped Hitler coming to power. But the Church of England, and others, were not on top of another of Jesus’ bits of advice. Be as innocent as doves and as wise as serpents. Serpents choose when to strike. The question is whether the Church of England can DO anything decisive. Disarming the world would be doing global warming big. It must be done. Snore on or wake up.

WE WILL LINE YOU UP AGAINST A WALL

So, we call you out,

you who hide behind Whitehall,

the Pentagon and the talk of defence,

but sell the killing stuff wherever you can.

Come out, all of you.

You have designed the kit,

to blast homes, tanks and planes

with people inside, limbs spread,

and children not understanding.

Come out. You have sold suave contracts,

bribes, dictators, wherever there is money.

The arms fair is not, because there

will be death and destruction.

Since you were named “merchants of death”,

you have hidden, languaged your business

into good patriotic stuff,

planning to kill, but for our good,

although the deterrents do not work,

because we use them.

Come out. You killers of the planet,

you planners of death, even millions,

in nuclear fireworks. Come out.

Walk out of your factories, sales facilities,

your meetings with politicians, the military,

for the game is up, the war game, stupid at last,

and we will line you up against a wall

and shake hands with you,

and subsidize you while you make something useful

and end your job description for ever,

and make peace, cheap and God-blessed

for all people.

The Emergence of the Trivial Life.

Often the biggest changes emerge almost unnoticed, and in the 1920s a world-shaping change emerged in the new affluent United States in both the East and West. What do you do when you are rich and self-obsessed, when, In Jesus words, life has become pulling down barns and building bigger ones? Of course the elites of Europe built palaces and stately homes and dressed in finery and pranced about. And the eastern elites did the same. Their venue was the Waldorf-Astoria and their new sumptuous homes. But this was different. They were not nouveau riche, but just rich and the culture was that of the flappers partly divorced from the old culture of Europe. Indeed, many US writers and poets like Hemingway and T S Eliot fled back to Europe to do their work.. It was added to something else in the West, Hollwood, which would change the world. There is much more to Hollywood than this, but this – is big. ENTERTAINMENT – is so big, it dominates all.

What is it? It is something which engages, titillates, rewards the egos of those entertained, but there is nothing beyond it. You come out of entertainment with nothing but a warm feeling. You are rewarded for spending money. You feel good without doing good. You get rich and then you are rewarded by a plethora of forms of entertainment. That is the point of life, though those words would never be spoken, because the hollowness would be out.

Then, it spread. It consumed five, ten, twenty, thirty perhaps hours of everybody’s life. Instead of worshipping God, they were entertained, and the entertained person was often no more than the slightly flattered or exited ego lost in the shallowness of the moment. That was one of the biggest changes in modernism, the emerging on unending shallowness, superficiality and manipulation. Of course, the films, music, soaps, whodunits, cartoons, suspense, musicals, dancing and the rest were often far richer than this characterisation, but the flood tide of the entertained life which began in the 1920s in earnest, was the long slow drift to the trivial. This was the vast flotsam in the estuary of world history. It would dominate American culture and after 1945 much of the rest of the world, often with disastrous effects. The only real question of entertainment was, “Did you like it?”  

The World Church

world christians

It is astonishing that in the 21st century the World Church should be so fragmented and never realize its biblical identity or think of acting together. There is no conceivable doubt that the Church is a World Church. Christians were told to go into all the world and preach the Gospel. John 3:16 says, “God so loved the world that he gave his only Son that whoever believes on him, should not perish and have eternal life.” The chorus, “Red and yellow, black and white – all are precious in his sight” has been round for a century or more. We hear Coptic, Russian, African, American worship and know the witness of Christians in every continent, but still most of the time churchgoers revert to being Anglicans in the Ely Diocese, or Welsh Methodists, and we practise our tribal rituals.

Of course, Christians know that there is a worldwide church out there, and they have been very adept at having events on television and throughout the media conveying it. There is no way Christians cannot be aware of their brothers and sisters across the globe through missionary movements, news of persecution, music, and so on. And, of course, the Catholic Church has been global for several centuries. Yet, still we are not the World Church.

There are three obvious impediments. The first is ecclesiasticism and institutional church loyalty. Still demoninations, sorry denominations, claim the organisational loyalty of Christians, and their money, and the institutional churches focus down on their within-building worship and ritualised behaviour. Churches have been through ecumenism and come out the other side knowing that somehow pulling together organisational churchianity misses the point.

The second is doctrinal exclusivism, the self-rightness of different groups and their need to possess their truth. For centuries the Catholic Church owned its truth, largely because it allowed membership criteria and created religious power. The Reformation and the opening up the Bible created a rich set of discussions about all kinds of aspects of truth, but sadly both Catholics and Protestants settled down on their own versions of infallibilism, infected by the need for pulpit power or the need to “defend” God. Poor education, doses of rationalism, and a range of sub-cultural attitudes kept us small minded, but God will give us big picture Christianity than which nothing is bigger.

Then the Church was frightened by Fascism, Atheistic Communism and Western secularism away from thinking big, or standing on public issues and it has become the amorphous introverted body it is at present, with some intimations of what God’s wider purposes might be, but actually unable to organise into the body of I Corinthians 12 knit together from the Head or able to run a race like an athlete, to do something efficiently. It is not fit for purpose. What might that purpose be?

This issue has grown from studying the 1932 Geneva Disarmament Conference when the World Church nearly emerged. Tens of millions of Christians and others, possibly amounting to nearly half the world’s population got behind world disarmament. It was backed by the Pope, Archbishops, Kings, most of the world political leaders, and usually on Christian grounds. President Hoover supported by almost all the world’s political leaders proposed a radical 1/3 plus immediate cut in arms, but the arms companies, and the British Government, because it was jealous of the United States, stalled it. Hitler came to power. He was funded and armed, and World War Two killed off the World Church, and it has stayed fragmented since.

It nearly happened, and it could happen again on the issue of disarmament. 2.3 billion World Church Christians could disarm the world, if we worked to one purpose. This time we can have the wit to see it through and save the world from disasters, waste, threats, wars, military global warming, just when the whole system of militarism is ramping up. But Christians need first to wake up to the possibility. The Lamb on the world throne, rather than the Bomb, is the God-given Way. Loving enemies works. Wars are stupid. Arms only destroy and are worse than useless. Weapons and War can be systematically rolled back. The logistics are not difficult. The costs are vastly negative. But for this to happen we need to undo a century of brainwashing by the militarists. Then we can disarm the world.

How can a Church preoccupied by chasubles, frightened by secular powers, locked in denominationalism, focussed on minutiae wake up to this – to being the World Church, to lifting its heads, to disarming the world? Really, it is easy in a social media world where hundreds of thousands of church members could sign petitions in a day, and all Christians can make peace all across the world. We need to know where the shoes of peace are going. The stages are relatively clear. The opposition is obvious. It will be a fight, but with the armour of God – truth, justice, peace, salvation and the Word of God – it can be done. But the first question is: Can the World Church wake up? You, too, are the World Church. Your power is not control or aggression, but shared public conviction and action with Christians everywhere. You are the World Church; you can bring about world multilateral disarmament and much more in God’s purposes.

Brexit, the Church of England and Welby’s political position

welby

The Archbishop of Canterbury seems set to accept an invitation to chair a post-Brexit Reconciliation Panel. Justin Welby’s political position on Brexit is: the people decided to leave in the Referendum and in honour bound we must see it through. He is now looking to chair a reconciliation forum reflecting, as he sees it, Christian principles of national mutual respect, a bit like shaking hands at the end of a rugby match. It is, of course, meant for the best, but there are a number of problems with this position.

  1. Members of the Church of England tended to vote Brexit (66%) and contributed strongly to the Referendum outcome, and so Welby’s Church is not neutral. The call to accept the Brexit position and work with it is already one-sided and, as events will probably show, premature.
  2. The Referendum has a questionable role in UK politics. For example, when it occurs might easily change the result. The poll could have happened six months later and with longer reflection the result might have been different. Arguably, it was called to solve a problem in the Conservative Party, and the result might have reflected anti-Government sentiment at the time.
  3. Christianity does not believe the people, or rulers, are right. The prophets, and Jesus, emphasized the failings of both, and so it is possible to make wrong decisions. Indeed, we frequently do. Our political responses should reflect this underlying truth.
  4. The Referendum was unfair (on both sides). The Remainers main effort was to scare people into remaining, as it has stayed since the event. The Brexiteers told lies, like the obvious side of a bus one, and refused to acknowledge that what they were saying was not true. They ran a social media campaign, based on dubious money, which was propaganda based rather than debate based. This was not new; there have long been dodgy election practices – slit-eyed Blair etc. – that pervert proper votes, but the fact remains, it was a dishonest campaign. Many issues, like Northern Ireland, were not on the Table.
  5. The result reflected two media biases. The first is that major media outlets, especially the BBC, has failed for decades to report EU politics, except occasionally, giving few people any idea of what the EU does. Secondly, there have been a series of press reports about the EU of the “outlawing bent banana” variety, which have been untrue and really libellous, aiming to discredit it. Boris Johnson, now Prime Minister, contributed to this genre. Rich media outlets have born false witness to the EU.
  6. Age is important. Given the remain votes of the young and the Brexit votes of the old, it is already likely that the voting pattern now will have moved to remain. There were no votes for 16-18, when arguably, because they may have to live with the vote for life, they should have been included in the franchise. Each and both points question the idea of mandate to leave.
  7. The Church of England is an ecclesiastical organisation, and has not understood, let alone, shared the views of Christian Democratic parties throughout the EU. They have been and are crucial to peace, community, economic justice, workers’ rights, subsidiarity and just markets. The Church of England, and Welby, should not be turning their back on these deep and important Christian insights, but recognizing them over here. This they have failed to do.
  8. Perhaps the deepest failure of the Referendum Campaign is that it was entirely a selfish event. All sides were preoccupied with our “national interest”. There was no discussion of what was good for Europe. We were similarly selfish on the refugee issue. Germany welcomed a million displaced people. We struggled to reach 10,000, grumbling in the process. That we could be concerned with European reforms which might make things better has not been on the UK Agenda since Thatcher. A Christian leader should hold to account our national selfishness, not merely give the pot a stir.
  9. All European nations have deep and important Christian faith communities and sharing with them has been part of our Christian heritage for more than a thousand years. Often the Church of England has not been good at being part of European Christianity, though it tries a bit. The Brexit move would be a major retreat into Christian nationalism, a constant danger for the Church of England.

So, for these first six reasons Welby’s response to the Referendum is open to serious question. It is not a done event. The Bible reminds us, it is no good saying “Peace, Peace” when there is no peace. This is not a finished rugby match. And for these three others reasons, leaving the EU is a Christian defeat which we should not accept.

Viasat’s Money and Priti Patel.

ppatel

Priti Patel is Minister of State at the Home Office. It is suggested she should withdraw from any Cabinet discussions on an advanced military satellite system contract that the MOD is considering next year to avoid a conflict of interest. It is amazing this is not already seen as an unacceptable conflict of interest for her as an MP. We read in the Parliamentary Register of Members Interests:- “From 1 May 2019 to 30 June 2019, Strategic Adviser, Viasat Inc, of 6155 El Camino Real, Carlsbad, California 92009, a global communications company. Expected remuneration of £5,000 a month for a commitment of approx. 5 hrs per month. (Registered 3 June 2019; updated 31 July 2019)”  Viasat will be bidding for that contract.

Priti Patel is paid £79,000 for her work as MP and another £71,000 as Secretary of State. As an MP and Minister of State she should be working sixty or more hours a week in those two jobs, above the European directive of 48 hours a week maximum for what is good for you. She also receives £161,000 from Accloud, a web communications company. She gives approximately 20 hours a month to them as a non-executive director, one of four. The Viasat Contract  brings in another £60,000 a year bringing her annual income from these four jobs to £380,000 or so, aside any other income. On the assumption that she actually works 60 hours a week with four weeks holiday, she is receiving £130 an hour for every hour she works, which is insulting to all the people caring, delivering, cleaning, doing agricultural work, selling and packing for far less than a tenth of that amount. Work should be honoured and properly and fairly paid. In the Viasat contract she receives £1000 an hour. It cannot be earned.

The issue is the Viasat Contract and its purpose. What is the work for? Viasat work in military and government communication systems, especially those developing “secure” satellite links across warzones and military systems. It is a very high tech company operating mainly with the US military satellite systems and it has few potential customers because it is so advanced. The UK Government and defence system is one of them. The planned bid for the MOD contract next year fits this pattern. Viasat  has some 6500 workers, many of them highly technical and full time. It is unthinkable that Priti Patel might have technical, military or other expertise to bring to this company at the end of a sixty hour plus week doing three jobs which should require high commitment. This money is not for work done in the normal sense.

So, what work has Priti Patel done in the past?  She has worked for a Public Relations Firm, Weber Shandwick, partly in relation to British American Tobacco’s interests. She also worked for Diageo defending alcohol interests. In 2017 she was sacked as a Minister for secretly having a series of meetings in Israel while on a private holiday discussing we know not what. She was dismissed by Theresa May for operating outside ministerial guidelines. She said she had cleared it with Boris Johnson, her secretary of State. He denied it and she was asked to resign. The meetings suggest opening up some kind of Israeli influence on Conservative Government policy, perhaps in relation to the Palestinian aid. Her work seems to have been in transmitting influence from interested parties into Government operations, both in Westminster and the EU.

So, the question is, What is Viasat paying Priti Patel a thousand pounds an hour to do? The declared work is as a “Strategic Advisor”, and the obvious strategic advice is on gaining contracts in the MOD, where Patel has no expertise. The contract occurred before she became a Minister, but influence seems the purpose of the contract. It is merely a question of the level of influence, not the character of it. What else can it be? Of course, both parties have the right to answer the question, but the question is, does the money go to Patel so that a lucrative contract might go to Viasat? The question needs answering by both parties. Why were Viasat paying Patel a thousand an hour? What “advice” did they hope she would give that they did not already understand in what we hope is an open contract procedure? To Patel the question is: What was she accepting a thousand an hour to do? We should have honest answers to these questions. Otherwise we know with high certainly that another munitions or government contract is being illicitly sought through political influence and another politician has been bought to provide the influence. That should never be part of UK politics.

Why is Militarism on the Inside of Government and Protest on the Outside?

The Queen, a gracious Head of State, is surrounded by soldiers, changing guard, being inspected, sloping arms and marching round her. She emphatically does not need them, but they are history, we love them and they can stand very still. Yet, the symbol remains real. Still the military are inside UK Governments, and the peace protesters, as we might call them, are on the outside at Greenham Common, marching against the Iraq War, or waving placards outside arms fairs. It is the military who defends the State and peace and disarmament are outside, and in some sense disloyal to the State.

Why is peace on the outside and the military on the inside? Governments have been very protective of their right to declare war. We need it to protect you, they declare. And people, or even Parliament, are not to be trusted over complex decisions. In the past, citizens who were likely to be called up and die, would not easily vote for War. The atmosphere has changed, as we discuss in a moment, but the UK is still one of the least democratic on this issue, as George Eaton set out last year.

A 2010 survey of 25 European democracies found that 11 had “very strong” parliamentary war-making powers: “Prior parliamentary approval required for each government decision relating to the use of military force; parliament can investigate and debate use of military force.” Four countries had “strong” powers (prior approval of military action in all but exceptional circumstances), two had “medium” powers (the ability for parliament to demand troop withdrawal and to investigate and debate military force) and four had “weak” powers (parliamentary notification required). Only four countries (the UK, France, Cyprus and Greece) had “very weak” powers: no parliamentary approval or debate required. ( New Statesman, 11/4/2018)

Both George Brown and William Hague committed themselves to enshrining in law the Parliamentary right to vote on going to war, but it has not happened. Democracy isn’t quite trusted. There is now an “expectation” that Parliament will be consulted about War, but that, too, is problematic. Parliament did vote over the Iraq War, but with some strong arm twisting and using the apparatus of Government. Most would agree that if it had been admitted there were no weapons of mass destruction and if the state apparatus of propaganda had not been so strong in relation to the media, the War would have had little support, and most now recognize it as a wrong war.

But now, again, the military is on the inside, as it is with most Conservative Governments, and Jeremy Corbyn, who has been critical of UK military activity is presented as a dangerous outsider, another example of peace campaigners who are labelled dangerous. It is never clear quite why peace is dangerous, but the rhetoric settles over Conservative governed Britain.

Perhaps the lesson is that the peace people, though democratic means and honest persuasion, need to re-present the military, the idea of “defence” and disarmament, not as protest, but as a necessary reform of the inner working of politics. It is not good enough for peace to be on the outside. War obviously does not work anywhere, and it is time politics, inside and out, came up with an alternative. Maybe it needs turning inside out.

main webpage