Socialism and Conspiracies (version 5)

Guest

There has been a continuous conflict between classes in society for
as long as they have existed (ever since the classless hunter-
gatherer societies known by Marxists as `primitive communism'). The
ruling class has conspired to remain in power and the masses have
conspired to neutralise the conspiratorial organisations of the
ruling class enabling them to overthrow the ruling class and
establish a fairer society.

As time has gone on, the form and sophistication of the
conspiratorial organisations have advanced, but I now believe that
establishing conspiratorial organisations is a rational response to
the class struggle so the conspiratorial organisations have existed
in one form or another for as long as the classes themselves have.
In their simplest form, the conspiracies are merely alliances
between friends or relatives pursuing a common cause, but the most
powerful conspiratorial organisations today use computer modelling
to predict the future and determine what needs to be done to advance
the interests of the classes the organisations represent.

The continuous struggle between opposing class interests does not
just go on between people; it actually goes on within an
individual's mind to try to get that individual to act in the
interests of a particular class. I used to think that people could
be neatly divided into those acting in the interests of big business
or the working class, but I now realise that society is far more
complex – people acting in the interests of big business at one
moment in time can act in the interests of the working class at
another moment in time. Furthermore, mind control techniques can be
used to make somebody act against the interests of the class that
they want to act in the interests of.

So, why do I think that mind control is at work? Well, basically, I
know that it is possible so it is naïve to think that serious
conspiratorial organisations would fail to utilise it. My evidence
for mind control is sixfold:

• Some cults use brainwashing to get their followers to
believe incredible things (like humans evolving from clams in the
case of the Church of Scientology);
• Magicians like David Blaine and Derren Brown demonstrate
mind reading and mind control to quite a large degree for
entertainment purposes;
• I was hypnotised as a student, by a stage hypnotist, so I
know that hypnosis is not a hoax;
• I feel that my mind was controlled in a meeting that I went
to with two other people (who together could exert more control than
one of them on their own), during which I came to a decision I was
determined not to come to beforehand when presented with very
superficial evidence;
• A former best friend who I have now cut off all links with
(Julian Beard) was very successful on the telephone at persuading me
to do something I was inclined not to do. He was out of contact with
me for a while, during which I assume he was trained to speak
hypnotically, and when he got back in contact with me his voice had
completely changed.
• I actually tried out a bit of mind reading and mind control
on a train from Manchester to London two or three years ago. Two
children were playing the game "Guess Who?" in which you ask a
serious of questions to eliminate various characters and identify
the card the opponent has chosen. I tried a variant of that game
where you guess a character simply by touching the opponent on the
arm – and got the character correct both times. I then got my
opponent (the older child who I think was a girl) to guess the
character I had chosen by touching me on the arm – asking her to say
the first name that came into her head without really thinking about
why she had chosen that name. She got the character correct both
times as well. There are about 50 cards in that game, so the odds
against that being a coincidence were about six million to one. When
I tried the same thing with the younger child, it didn't work –
either because his brain had not developed enough or because he was
a boy.

The idea of mind control being at work in society is pretty scary,
but it is important to recognise that there are limits to how it can
be used. I don't think that it can be used to persuade somebody to
do something that they are very determined not to do, and it
probably takes more than one person with mind control abilities in
close proximity to bend somebody's will to a large degree.
Furthermore, it can only be used on individuals – mass hypnosis of
the population (e.g. via the TV) is not possible; if that was not
the case then the mass demonstrations against the war on Iraq could
have been prevented.

I strongly believe that another factor in society is robots. I have
worked in the field of Artificial Intelligence and know that all the
fundamental problems of building a robot that emulates a human being
have been solved. However, the sorts of robot that the powers that
be acknowledge can be built are so primitive that it is clear that
cover-ups in science are at work. There are such large vested
interests at stake that I suspect that the field of biotechnology
has also evolved to the extent whereby robots that look and act
human can be built, and that they can mingle in society.

Three beings who I have met in recent years have exhibited such
repetitive behaviour that I have strongly suspected that they are
robots. I first went public with this assertion on the most
important web page you will ever read at
http://www.stevewallis.org/important.htm

After the Russian Revolution in October 1917, 18 countries sent
their armies to Russia to try to crush that revolution and failed.
So the ruling class (big business) were naturally very frightened
about the possibility of the revolution spreading. If you can't
crush them from the outside then you have to resort to crushing them
from the inside.

Infiltration is occasionally recorded in the history books. It is
fairly well known that the leader of the Bolsheviks (who later
became the `Communist Party') in the Duma (Russian parliament) was a
police spy.

So what would the rational response of the ruling class in Britain
be to the Russian Revolution? Well, they obviously wouldn't want the
fledgling Communist Party of Great Britain (CPGB) to get off the
ground. And when it did, they'd want it to hold workers back rather
than letting it lead workers to a successful revolution. And it is
well known that it did hold workers back, most spectacularly and
disastrously in the General Strike. The usual Marxist explanation
for the failures of the Communist parties in the West is to blame
inexperience and the influence of Stalin (who was afraid of losing
his own power if a genuine revolution were to take place elsewhere).
However, why would the international ruling class (i.e. big
business) be so naïve as to rely on such factors when they can
utilise the strategy of long-term infiltration to try to ensure that
the Communist Parties betray the workers they purport to represent?
They would have had the opportunity to ensure that most of the trade
union leaders in the CPGB at the time of the General Strike were
state agents or heavily influenced by them.

It is only to be expected that the state would particularly target
the largest socialist/communist party in the country. The largest
such party was the CPGB for many years but it is now the Socialist
Workers Party (SWP). Most genuine socialists who want to fight for a
better society join the party that seems most serious and this is
usually the biggest. The party for which commentators have
recognised the greatest extent of state infiltration is the US SWP
(no relation to the SWP in Britain) – the infiltration by the US
state was revealed in a court case, which the SWP won, and I believe
that that infiltration was a major reason why that party collapsed
to the pathetic party it is today (of maybe a few hundred in the
whole of the USA). There have also been allegations (including in a
book by the journalist Stephen Dorril) of state infiltration playing
a significant role in the collapse of the Workers' Revolutionary
Party (WRP) in Britain.

By far the most influential socialist organisation in Britain in
recent years has been the Militant Tendency. It had three Labour
MPs, led the Liverpool council struggle (which inflicted the first
defeat on Thatcher in winning extra money for the city, but was
ultimately defeated due to the betrayals of councillors elsewhere)
and led the poll tax non-payment campaign which defeated the tax and
led to the fall of Thatcher. If the state was not already
significantly targeting Militant beforehand then it certainly would
have started to in the mid-1980s. Militant made some bad mistakes,
which were sometimes (at least) largely caused by state
infiltration, and were very costly in terms of recruitment. However,
the biggest factor in the decline in membership (from about 8000 at
its height to about 400 at the time I left) was the collapse of
Stalinism and the capitalist triumphalism which resulted.

There remains the question of what the state did as Militant
declined in size. Did it withdraw most of its agents and allow the
organisation to regain its strength? That would be extremely
foolish! No, I suspect that most stayed in and are now a strong
force in what is now the Socialist Party. This, I think, explains
the fairly recent sectarian behaviour of the Socialist Party (such
as pulling out of the socialist alliances and generally preferring
to conduct its own campaigns rather than uniting with other left-
wing activists).

In an earlier version of this document, I expressed the view that
moves away from sectarianism by the SWP (such as getting involved in
the Scottish Socialist Party, socialist alliances in England and
Wales, and taking campaigns involving other left-wing activists more
seriously) were a result of the balance of class forces changing
within the SWP. I now think that this move away from sectarianism
was a cynical move by the SWP leadership who are composed entirely
of big business infiltrators – the main evidence for this viewpoint
is the fact that the SWP have transformed the socialist alliances in
most areas into reformist electoral fronts for their own party. I
have also had the opportunity to study the Socialist Worker platform
of the Scottish Socialist Party firsthand at the party's 2003
conference, and the ridiculous positions of that platform indicate
that they have not changed for the better due to uniting with the
rest of the left in the same party.

So how do the conspiracies work? Well, everybody builds models, to
varying levels of detail, of other people's minds inside their own
minds. This is necessary in order to conduct a meaningful
conversation, never mind doing something to change the world for the
better! We also build models of organisations and parts of
organisations to enable us to deal with them in our everyday lives.

The brain is partly motivated by the desire to promote a certain
kind of world – and there are two clear choices in the world today,
a capitalist world of wars, poverty, famines, unemployment,
environmental destruction (etc.) or a socialist world which will
solve these problems – and partly motivated by concern for
individuals who the person cares about. Some people are more clearly
on one side (the working class or big business) than others, but
they are all acting to promote the interests of socialism or
capitalism even if they are not aware of it with their conscious
minds. We cooperate with those who we think are on the same side,
compete with those who we think are on a different side, and are
cautious while awaiting further input with those who we're not sure
about. Some of us (including myself) act alone on this basis, others
form together in small groups, and still others join larger groups
with some sort of organisational structure. The larger groups are
generally most powerful but they are also most prone to infiltration
by people with different agendas.

Some groups rely entirely on the combined effect of the models in
their own minds to model other people and organisations and to
develop strategies and tactics based on these models. However
anything a brain can do, a computer can do, so it is only rational
for the most powerful groups to utilise fast powerful computers to
help in their modelling. Computer languages like SDML, which I
developed over a period of about eight years (see
http://sdml.cfpm.org), can be used for this task. In fact, I
strongly suspect that SDML is the primary computer modelling
language used by conspiratorial organisations today.

There is probably one dominant group on every side at any particular
moment in time, which has a strategy about how that side can achieve
its aims. Other groups on the same side will generally go along with
this strategy although sometimes in-fighting takes place that may
result in some other group becoming dominant. The dominant group on
each side is almost certainly not the obvious one – such as MI5 in
the case of the ruling class – a much more secret multinational
organisation is more likely.

Marxists recognise that there are two key sides in society – the
working class and the ruling class (big business) but there are also
vested interests which may have conspiratorial organisations of
their own such as Liberal Democrats, fascists, Scientologists,
Jehovah's Witnesses, the Catholic Church and Islamic fundamentalism.
Since the ruling class is the dominant class, the other vested
interests are largely being manipulated by that class, but they can
be manipulated by the working class or smashed as the balance of
class forces changes.

Some of those vested interests indulge in infiltration themselves.
For example, the fascist organisation the National Revolutionary
Faction have on their website
(http://www.nationalbolshevik.com/nrf/nrfadviceforcadres.html)
advice for their cadres who are infiltrating socialist organisations
and other organisations in society such as the National Health
Service and the police.

I think I first became aware that big conspiracies were going on
involving state infiltration when I read the Morning Star (the daily
paper that was then the organ of the CPGB) regularly as a child. Why
was the paper of a `revolutionary' party so bad? I remember at one
point wondering what I could do to make the world a better place and
writing some suggestions down. I don't know what happened to that
book of paper – I probably threw it away realising that keeping it
could be dangerous. However, from that point on (if not before), I
believe my subconscious has been working on the problem.

I didn't significantly get involved in politics until 1989, when the
anti-poll tax movement was getting started in Manchester. I could
tell that this campaign had great potential to make a difference.
However, I didn't join Militant until the 6th of June, 1990. I went
on the People's March Against the Poll Tax from Liverpool to London
later that year but was fairly low profile in most of my time in
Militant/Militant Labour/the Socialist Party. I did however do quite
a lot of work on the internet, putting forward socialist views on
various newsgroups and setting up a mailing list for the CWI (the
international organisation that Militant/the Socialist Party is
affiliated to). I also had the CWI website on my work computer for a
couple of years or so. However, it wasn't until 1998 that I attained
any significant positions outside cyberspace, getting on the
Steering Committee of the Greater Manchester Socialist Alliance and
the Regional Committee of the Socialist Party. I think not becoming
too prominent too soon helped me avoid too much state interference
too soon in my political `career'.

It was at the 1998 European School of the CWI in Leuven, Belgium,
that I first became a significant threat to the ruling class. There
was a big debate between the leadership of the Scottish comrades
(then called Scottish Militant Labour) and the British/International
leaderships. The Scottish comrades were proposing the setting up of
the Scottish Socialist Party which they would become a faction of
(called a `platform'). This was opposed by the British and
International leaderships, and they had convinced the other sections
of the CWI except for France to go along with their opposition. I
was the only comrade from England or Wales to speak in the debate in
favour of the Scots. As a result I came under quite a lot of
pressure not to speak in the debate and I was moved later in the
schedule until finally being slotted in first thing in the morning
before most of the comrades had arrived. I reordered my speech to
move what I thought were the most important bits to the end, but the
Chair cut me off and took the microphone off me just before I could
make those points. I ended up storming off the platform! Others had
been allowed to massively overrun their allocated time but not me!

I spent much of that week discussing with comrades from around the
world trying to convince them of the Scottish case and I was fairly
successful. I went round them again after my speech in a damage
limitation exercise reassuring them that I hadn't gone mad, but that
I hadn't slept the night before my speech and that as a fairly
inexperienced comrade the pressure got to me. It seemed to work!

The conclusions I finally came to with my conscious mind, about
state infiltration of socialist organisations, arose as a result of
that week in Belgium. This was supposed to be a gathering of 200 of
the best revolutionaries on the planet and at times most of them
behaved like sheep. There were clearly some processes going on below
the surface that could only be explained by infiltration.

After coming to these conclusions, I thought of setting up a counter-
network to act against the state infiltrators. This is the only
rational course of action apart from giving up. Therefore it is not
surprising that such networks already exist! The ruling class
infiltrates our organisations so we have to infiltrate their
organisations – and our own to defeat the enemy within.

Of course infiltration is not limited to socialist organisations and
the `security services'. Campaigning organisations, the NHS, the
police, the internet, companies, trade unions, etc., are also
infiltrated. I hope that the US military is sufficiently infiltrated
so that if George W Bush gets trigger-happy and presses the nuclear
button nothing will happen. This is not a game – socialism or
nuclear annihilation is the future of the human race.

But there are reasons to be cheerful. The Scottish Socialist Party
had six members elected to the Scottish Parliament in the elections
on May Day 2003 (partly due to my intervention in Glasgow). The SSP
is strongest in Glasgow, where it received over 15% of the vote and
had two members elected (Tommy Sheridan and Rosie Kane). I now
realise that it is essential for me to move up to Glasgow in order
to influence events much more than I can from down here in
Manchester (but I will continue spending some time in Manchester
since it is another important city – socialism has to spread
throughout Britain and the world). I am confident that the SSP can
come to power in Scotland in 2007 at the next Scottish parliamentary
elections if not before. A socialist independent Scotland will be a
tremendous beacon for the working class and promote revolutionary
upheavals across the world.

Newsfeeds

Latest Posts

	Dimsum Forum Index -> Notice Board and Events	All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Page 1 of 1