Well at last one Labour Friend of Israel’ (Keir Starmer) who failed to condemn the 21st century Genocide perpetrated by his ‘friends’, in the Israeli governmental elite, Netenhayu et al, has gone from the leadership of the British Labour Party. However, the Zionists war criminals in the occupied territories of Palestine, and the remains of the once Epstein-led oligarchal cult won’t be too worried. The Labour Party ranks, particularly the front bench, are full of Friends of Israel, who have been groomed, compromised and cultivated by campaign donations and complimentary trips. Trips to experience the wonders of the territories confiscated by Israel from the previous Palestinians in 1947 and later.

This political cultivation includes the probable next leader of the Labour Party and the almost certain next Prime Minister of the UK (Andy Burnham) whose allegiance to the Apartheid and genocidal Jewish state of Israel has never wavered, since he climbed onto the ladder of Labour Party advancement. Mr Burnham was not even deterred from involvement and support whilst ‘Israel’ was killing children, (queuing for food and water); murdering first responders attending emergencies; targetting hospital staff whilst they were saving lives and shooting journalists for daring to expose the atrocities carried out by the IDF and settler para militaries. This tells us all we needs to know about moral quality of the ‘loyal’ opposition to the so-called democratic ‘peaceful’ nation-state of the UK.

If the reader needs confirmation of this probability just take note of how many Friends of Israel cult members he appoints to his own elite peer group of chosen ones. So what the citizens of the UK can expect from any new leader of the Labour Party, is very much the same as what has gone before during the history of this third party of ‘revolving-door’ elite UK governance. Think of a distilled essence of Tony Blair, Neil Kinnock, Gordon Brown and pipe smoking Harold Wilson and you won’t be far off the mark. After all, the Labour Party was founded in 1900 by reformist minded dissidents from the Liberal Party, the Tory Party and the salary tenured officials within British Trade Union Movement.

This opportunistic liberal alliance was never hostile to the capitalist mode of production or to the hierarchical structure of its political governance. Its elites just wanted to find a regular place at the elite feeding trough of Parliamentary privilege. True, there was an early impatience with the previous conservative approach to governing the capitalist mode of production. The Conservative elite had kept highly intelligent representatives from the middle class, newly educated members of the working classes and ambitious bureaucrats trained within the official Trade Union movement, away from official positions of influence and power, but that ended. The initial route chosen by the rising liberal elite, was to create a political party and movement which would stand reliable candidates in parliamentary elections in constituencies dominated by badly treated working class citizens. It succeeded.

Ideologically and practically, Mr Burnham is a product of the Blarite New Labour perspective of accomodation to and supporter of, close ties with the ruling capitalist elites in industry, commerce and finance. For those of us who came across him in the Lancashire town of Leigh, it was obvious that he adopted none of the Harold Wilson rhetoric of squeezing the rich until their ‘pips squeeked’. Not that Harold ever did much squeezing, he drew the line at initiating sticks and stones that might hurt their bones, but Harold knew that name calling would be like water off a duck’s back. So a careerist who would not even speak out against the most heinous of human crimes – genocide of men women and children – will not even speak ill of the dead, let alone anyone living and who are able to loosen the purse strings of grant’s, campaign contributions and lucrative deals.

Diplomatic silence and avoidance of anything which may puncture the polished surface of elite sensibilities and cut off any gravy train of advancement is avoided by the knights of the working class tilters at windmills. The best that we can expect to come from Mr Burnham in office, (or any alternative from Labour, is a slight reform of something which is obviously problematic and yet also inconsequential. The management of nation-state societies in the period of 21st century decay, decadence and discontinuity hs become an even greater delicate balancing act between competing class interests. It is a balancing act that largely ignores the biological and ecological implications of the capitalist mode of industrial mass production and of the limitations of the current socio-economic model in addressing these climate and ecological altering symptoms.

The British Labour Party has long been just part of the anthropocentric political spectrum of hierarchical mass society ideological praxis which is based upon the hope (or ambition) that hierarchical mass societies can be persuaded to adopt some minimal ecological policies and principles which run counter to its fundamental structure. The clue to its inevitable practices is in the description of its social type. A hierarchical mass society, whatever word is used to mask that fact, (democratic, fascist, communist, socialist or theistic) is by function a hierarchical institution in which the desires and wishes of the dominant elite prevail, within a hierarchical mass society political and economic system.

I have demonstrated at length elsewhere that even the most radical intellectual thinkers of the most destructive capitalist phase of the hierarchical mass society form, such as Karl Marx, remained firmly trapped within the anthropocentric paradigm of thinking and acting productively. Although Marx castigated the negative side of Industrial mass production by ‘capital’s, he extolled its productive capacities potential for unlimited production to lift the oppressed out of capitalist induced poverty and repetitive drudgery.

Modes of production are essential to mass societies as they are the sociological structures which form an interface between human aggregates and the necessary biological and and bio-chemical inputs that all life forms on planet earth require to survive. However any mode of production which has been designed to function primarily within sociologically determined parameters rather than within biologically determined parameters, sooner or later will become biologically unsustainable. Marx and the Marxists lacked the evidence to reach that conclusion and so continued with assumption that nature can be manipulated without any limits.

If such radical 19th century thinkers and observers as the revolutionary-humanists around Marx, and the 20th century revolutionary minded inteligencia that produced the Bolsheviks and Maoists, could not cast off the anthropocentric limitation of their thought processes and considered that unlimited production of nutrition and useful materials from nature could be sustained at high levels indefinitely then the 21st century opportunistic climbers within the system are even less likely to reach such conclusions let alone perceive any viable solutions.

The anthropocentric fixation of campaigns (political or otherwise) constructed for the sole purpose of just remedying the negative effects of the current system upon various marginalised or exploited human beings, as destructive and despicable as they actually are, is only a level of understanding (or misunderstanding) the sociological part of the problem of life on earth. The large number of facts that are currently unknown or being ignored by the anthropocentric fixated intellectuals, embrace the following. The human devised sociological part of the vast matrix of human life on earth, rests entirely on the existence of an entirely separate and naturally functioning, biologically based ecological life support system which exists in the form the planetary biosphere.

The Labour Party leaders and intellectuals are not the only activists who have failed to advance their understanding, beyond the anthropocentric limitations of the past, but their social irresponsibility includes the fact that they have consistently assumed they don’t need to. That limitation is an almost universally self-induced handicap. It may require many more unnecessary and preventable disasters to shock enough of our populations out of their socialised complacency and break free of the intoxicating complexity of the busy, busy, too busy to do anything but relax and enjoy moments out of the daily grind. The idea that the future existence of life on earth is somebody else’s problem not our own, seems to have permiated all but a thoughtful few and those few are not currently among the ranks of those with influence and power. For those who are prepared to question the prevailing anthropocentric orthodoxy, the next section briefly explains the 21st century view of nature

NATURE AS WE CAN NOW SEE IT.
The nature that has been seen by humanity with the naked eye is biology – in it’s full visual splendour and enormity. To the naked eye nature is demonstrably an integrated, interdependent system which is colourful, multifaceted and splendid. Yet it’s full complexity and intricate sophistication has been hidden from the vision of the human eye and from the intellectual consciousness of humanity – for almost the entire history of the human species. Consequently, there is as much (or even more) to the biological essence of life on earth that we don’t see than what we normally do see.

Indeed, despite this complexity and sophistication within all species of life, it still remains hidden from all other biological forms of species on earth and from all of us humans who do not have access to the modern technology which can now reveal it. It was only during the late 20th century that humanity manufactured the means to magnify the the microscopic bio-chemical and biological elements that make up that intricacy, complexity and sophistication. It was only then possible to make it visible to the sight of a minority of fortunate, specially trained human beings. Only after s further period was it then was it possible to make it accessible to human intellectual understanding via the diagramatic, photographic and written representations these specialists have published.

From these specialist sources, the microscopic life forms hitherto hidden from sight until the mid to late 20th century comprise of two basic microscopic bio-chemical lipid membrane bound units designated as Prokaryotic and Eukaryotic cells. (Imagine a long lasting soap buble, within which are a number of other functioning things. Now shrink it down until its invisible. That’s the closest crude analogy I can come up with at the moment. RR) Each of these cells comprise of a lipid bio- chemical membrane, containing within it is a liquid called cytoplasm, and within that either a nucleus bounded by a second lipid membrane (the Eukaryotic cell) and other bio-chemical sub units, or a nucleus without a lipid membrane (the Prokaryotic cell) and other bio-chemical sub units. The membranes, nucleus and sub units within the outer membrane of these cells are all active bio-chemical units which have evolved the ability to absorb minerals and liquids from outside their external membrane and process them within the internal liquid of the cell in different chemical combinations that serve the self-renewal and self-replicating of the cell itself. Additionally in the case of the Eukaryotic cell, the internal sub units can metabolise and create mineral and energy material to be passed across by tubules to other specialist cells within any multi-cellular organism.

The cells, although microscopic in size have within their membranes many other smaller sub-units such as ribosomes, nucleotide, flagelum and membrane in Prokaryotic cells (as in Bacterial life forms), whilst Eukaryotic cells (animal life forms) contain mitochondria, golgi apparatus, microtubules, and DNA within the nucleus RNA strands, which we now know are part of the self reproduction (sexual or asexual) of all species of life. This description is only a condensed, crude and schematic representation that I am offering here since the main objective here and now is to create enough information for the reader to begin to grasp the sophistication and complexity of the biology of life on earth which has sustained itself over billions of years utilising only minute portions of the natural liquids (water), gaseous (oxygen, nitrogen), mineral (sugars, proteins and carbohydrates) and direct energy sources of the the solar and planetary system. No need to believe in magic, nature exceeds it in every dimension. There is no equivalence in the anthropocentric world of humanity.

The nearest comparison to the complexity and sophistication of a biological Eukaryotic cell from within the sociological domain of the human scientific and technological expertise, would be the following. ‘If humanity devised a tiny almost invisible, self-repairing, self-reproducing, self-improving and self-energising general computer that could mass produce itself, integrate itself, with feedback loops, into myriads of other electro-mechanical – self-repairing, self-reproducing, self-improving and self-energising, computers and began to endlessly accomplish appropriate tasks, within an electro-technical domain for the next million or so years.

That of course is technically, electrically and mechanically impossible! Everything humanity devises has a sell by date and a type-determined limited duration of active existence. Yet even if it were possible, those imaginary tiny electro-mechanical devices would still not have constructed the equivalent of the earths biosphere which contains, food, water and air to sustain millions of species and billions of individual units, many of them with consciousness and some with self-consciousness. And furthermore, unlike machines, biological systems, if left unmolested will carry on for many more millions or billions of earth orbits.

It needs to be constantly born in mind, that the bio-chemical, biological basis of life on earth was sufficiently ecologically balanced and self-reproducing for generation after generation of species numbering in the millions, (i.e. plants, insects, animals (fish, birds, mammals and humans) over millions of years. The hierarchical mass society sociological structural of human aggregation has only lasted for two or three thousand years and in several key essential survival areas is already undermining the basis of all current and future species of life on earth.

The human species evolved from within this biological system and after a long period of it’s own evolution eventually, without even knowing of this unseen biological microscopic intricacy, decided it could hijack this system and bend or break it in pursuit of its elites own whims and fancies. Thus commencing with the hiearchical mass society phase of human aggregation which in turn began the so-called ‘progress’ of creating climate change, mass sea, air and soil pollution and commencing a long period of wars and genocides against it’s own species and all other species that couldn’t be profitsbly utilised and or which simply got in their way.

Roy Ratcliffe (June 2026)