Showing posts with label socialism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label socialism. Show all posts

Thursday, March 12, 2026

Book of the Month: A History of Wales

I have two personal connections with this book. Firstly, this copy belonged to my Dad. According to the note inside the cover he bought this in 1994, which was the year it was first published in English in paperback by Penguin. 


This is one of the few books I took from the vast collection of books that Dad left behind when he passed away unexpectedly seven years ago. There was a bookmark in it at page 505, which for a while I thought was the point where he had stopped reading. But actually it was a marker for a short bit about the Christian revival of 1904 - an event my Dad was very interested in. 

So, I'm not sure if my Dad ever finished reading the whole book. But I have. I was prompted to read it by my second personal connection with the book - recently I've got to know Anna, one of the daughters of the late author, John Davies. 

Anna is standing for election to the Senedd and is top of the electoral list for Plaid Cymru in our area. We were out canvassing one morning and she mentioned seeing a copy of her father's book in a second hand shop. I asked what the book was, thought that it sounded familiar, and later went and dug it out of the stack of inherited books in my office.

Anna gets an anonymous passing mention in the author bio. 


Anna has also told me that it was the first book that Penguin published in Cymraeg. (And it was also a lot longer than originally planned!)

The opening few chapters are easy to read at pace because, truthfully, there isn't much that is easily verifiable in Wales's history up until the Norman invasion. The paucity of Celtic relics from Wales compared to Anglo-Saxon relics from England is down to the Christian faith of the Welsh who unlike the pagan Saxons didn't fill the graves of their dead with stuff that could be dug up years later by archaeologists. So the story rattles along quite quickly.

The few written records of Welsh history from before and during the Norman occupation of Wales are frequently fanciful. John describes the unreliability of one chronicler, Nennius, in a slightly waspish fashion saying: "where it is possible to prove the correctness of Nennius's material, it is clear that his ignorance was monumental."

There are several similar sardonic comments. Regarding the legend that St David raised up a small hill to stand on so he could more clearly address his followers, John points out that in the very hilly area of Ceredigion, "it would be difficult to conceive of any miracle more superfluous". When discussing the 19th century growth of holiday resorts on the North Wales coast, he unambiguously says Rhyl "attracted a less middle-class type of tourist" than Llandudno.

While this is a history of Wales, it's not really a beginner's history. I was glad to have a rough sense of Welsh history already, as several people and events are referred to in throwaway fashion - the reader is expected to know what happened to David, brother of Prince Llewelyn the Last, with two oblique references to his execution in Shrewsbury, without any more detail given. This trait gets more frequent as the book progresses. 

I think the favourite factoid I learned from this book was that to encourage Welsh people to emigrate to America in the 18th century, a story was invented of a Welshman called Madog who sailed west centuries before Columbus and landed in the New World. Madog's descendents were a Welsh-speaking tribe living in the American hinterland, known as the Madogwys. This led to a Welsh explorer setting out to find the Madogwys and along the way he became the first European to map the Missouri River. 

That story is amusing but it shows how powerful stories can be. Earlier in the history, John writes about the growth in Welsh poetry and how the poets reframed the subjugating defeats of Welsh leaders in "a cry against the extinction of identity and against the tyranny of fact." It's an evocative turn of phrase and captures how people have always wanted to describe the world as it should be, rather than how it is.

In later chapters, where there are more reliable sources to draw from, the overall narrative gets a bit bogged down in numbers. It's instructive to compare the numbers of people employed in the coal industry between one generation and the next but there are several such comparisons - numbers of Welsh-born inhabitants, number of Welsh speakers, number of people employed on the land, number of tons of coal extracted and exported, and so on. It all gets a bit statty and less easy to read.

Overall the theme of the book is about identifying the historical processes that resulted in Wales being Wales, an entity different yet thoroughly influenced by England. This uniqueness has survived numerous obvious and non-obvious pressures, from outright conquest through to the conforming pressure of militant socialism in the miner's unions. 

The history of the Welsh language is similarly a history of pressure, again not always from obvious sources. I was unaware of how anti-Cymraeg the unions were in the 19th and 20th centuries. I was struck by the irony that top-down repression of Cymraeg was less effective than the movement that preached solidarity among the workers, effectively the people of Wales robbing themselves of their language.

This (first) edition of the book was published in 1994 and the last chapter covers the discussions about a Welsh parliament in the 1960s and the failed devolution referendum of 1979. There was a second edition published in 2007, by which time Wales had an Assembly and its own devolved government. Proof perhaps that history hasn't stopped. I would like to see what got added to the second edition. 

The final few paragraphs of the version I read - before devolution happened - outline the hope that the Welsh nation will continue to endure, as it had despite everything. The last page or so are very Yma O Hyd in theme and I found it uplifting. It made me happy to think that only a handful of years after the author concluded writing his history, steps had been taken to further safeguard and establish the nation of Wales.

Monday, July 10, 2023

Niche socialist marketing

I recently saw this fly poster on some street furniture and it struck me as so bizarre it must be a genuine attempt at political marketing.


Socialist Appeal is a group that was part of the Militant group in Labour but now operates separately as the Labour Party tries to distance itself from anything called socialist. It would appear Socialist Appeal are trying to appeal to a certain type of socialist. People who are happy to describe themselves as communists. 

There aren't many actual communists around these days. Among my friends I know one avowed communist - a guy I've known since my schooldays who is a card-carrying member of one of the communist parties. (He even cheerfully describes himself as a Stalinist.) 

Trying to appeal to communists specifically seems like a very narrow focus for targeted advertising. I can't imagine many people look at that and think 'Yes, I do happen to be a communist, actually. This must be an important message for me."

And then what is the message for the minute fraction of the population who would say yes when asked if they were a communist? Well it's simple - Get organised!

I can think of lots of revolutionary slogans: "Rise up!" "Cast off your shackles!" "Choose your side!" "Fight the power!" "Codiwch Cymru!"

"Get organised!" is, um, well, laughably condescending. "You need to get organised!" sounds like the sort of thing an exasperated mum would say to a sloppy teenager who proudly packs his own case for the school activity week and forgets to include any underwear. 

It wouldn't inspire me to join the movement even if I was a communist reflecting on my level of organisation and admitting it was lacking. 

So, overall, as a recruitment message, I don't think this is effective. It's guerrilla mass advertising aimed at a very narrow target audience. And the message is uninspiring even if it manages to reach those people. 

I don't think the capitalists have much to fear from this. Which might not be a surprise. After all, capitalists tend to be better at marketing.

Tuesday, February 02, 2016

Quotes from Raymond Williams, playwright and political thinker

Occasionally I read a quote that just leaps out and sticks with me. Often these are from quite unexpected sources - like when I read an article written by the Welsh health minister, Mark Drakeford, which included this quote:

“To be truly radical is to make hope possible rather than despair convincing.”

I liked that. In the political narratives around us, it all seems to be about despair - extremists, the pressures of migrants, the NHS at breaking point, the economy. Every party, or factions in parties, seems to be trying to convince us that the other side will bring ruin upon us. And we seem to be buying into this. The despair has become convincing. Hope seems impossible.

I've been called a radical a few times for my politics and theological world view. It's not a label I would use to myself. But then if I am going to be regarded as a radical, I want my lived out beliefs to be a radicalism that makes hope possible.

The person who said “To be truly radical is to make hope possible rather than despair convincing.” was a playwright and political thinker, Raymond Williams. This particular quote was from a book called Resources of Hope, which was published posthumously in 1989.

The internet - that great reservoir of quotes - has some more interesting thoughts from him, many of which I agree with, and some that have made me think about things, if nothing else. Raymond Williams was very interested in class and society, and also the moral bankruptcy of unalloyed capitalism, all of which I am interested in. So, here are some more thoughts, in his own words:

“Culture is one of the two or three most complicated words in the English language.” (Keywords, 1983)

“Real independence is a time of new and active creation: people sure enough of themselves to discard their baggage; knowing the past is past, as shaping history, but with a new confident sense of the present and the future, where the decisive meanings and values will be made.”

“We all like to think of ourselves as a standard, and I can see that it is genuinely difficult for the English middle class to suppose that the working class is not desperately anxious to become just like itself. I am afraid this must be unlearned.” (Culture and Society, 1958)

“What breaks capitalism, all that will ever break capitalism, is capitalists. The faster they run the more strain on their heart."

“It wasn't idealism that made me, from the beginning, want a more secure and rational society. It was an intellectual judgment, to which I still hold. When I was young its name was socialism. We can be deflected by names. But the need was absolute, and is still absolute.”


Saturday, November 10, 2012

It's a by-election this week

After many years my local MP Alun Michael is waving bye bye to his constituency as he bids to become the new Police and Crime Commissioner for South Wales. So, it's a rare event - a by-election in Cardiff this week. And that means the Pantperthog to Knockando tradition of rating the candidates based on the stuff they've stuck through my letter box.

This time I'm going to rate them according to the number of pieces of post through the door and the number of definite promises they make, and the candidates contactability (all the ways they offer you to get in touch, not including generic websites) minus the number of other people they blame for the mess we're in, and the number of negative comments about other parties. I'm also going to award some arbitrary bonus points for things I think are noteworthy. I'm going to list them alphabetically by surname

Hey, ho, let's go...

Candidate: Stephen Doughty
Party: Labour
Info: 1
Promises: 5 vague promises, but only 1 definite one - a new watchdog on energy prices, so 1 point
Contactability: Phone, email, Twitter = 3 points
Blames: "Tory/Lib Dem cuts" = -2 points
Negative comments: 5 references to "Tory/Lib Dem cuts", although two of these are in 'quotes' from concerned members of the public. Still, -5 points.
Grand total: 5 positive and 7 negative = overall score of -2

Candidate: Rob Griffiths
Party: Welsh Communist Party
Info: 2
Promises: 9 (including cutting VAT, closing tax havens, nationalising utilities, withdrawing from Afghanistan)
Contactability: Post, email, phone, FB and Twitter = 5 points
Blames: Bankers, career politicians ("Please don't vote for me if you want a Blues, Yellow, or Pink Tory who's looking for a cushy career"), and "an arrogant, rich and corrupt elite" = -3
Comments: 4 jibes at politicians of any kind = -4
Total: 16-7 = 9

Candidate: Andrew Jordan
Party: Socialist Labour
Info: 2
Promises: Lots of vague references to opposing things and wanting more jobs, but only two definite ones - to get the same funding for Welsh schools as in England, and also to bring vacant council housing stock up to Welsh Quality Standards. Mentions closing tax loopholes, so a generous 3 points.
Contactability: Public meeting, phone, YouTube, email, Twitter = 5 (it also included a general UK address for the party, but I'm not giving them a point for that)
Blames: Nobody
Comments: Describes all candidates from the other four parties as "another nodding head in Westminster" if you vote for them, so -4
Bonus Point: Endorsement by Ricky Tomlinson = 1 point
Total: 7


Candidate: Bablin Molik
Party: Liberal Democrat
Info: 2 (although one of them was a 'survey')
Promises: No congestion charge in Cardiff, raising the income tax threshold to £10,000 = 2
Contactability: Post, phone, personal candidate's website = 3
Blames: Labour for all that is wrong locally = -1
Comments: - 6 digs at Labour, including calling their candidate a "career politician" and a "spin doctor", plus dismissing the Conservative and Plaid candidates as non-local careerists as well = -8
Total: -2


Candidate: Luke Nicholas
Party: Plaid
Info: 7 (the most of any party)
Promises: Semi-nationalisation of Welsh railways, a Welsh Procurement Bill, green energy = 3 definite promises among vague stuff about apprenticeships and jobs. 3 points.
Contactability: twitter, facebook, email = 3 points
Blames: "the establishment parties" for ignoring Wales and "the Government in Westminster", so -4
Comments: Digs at Westminster, but no direct comments on other parties, so 0 points.
Bonus point: Luke mentions that he follows the Welsh football team home and away, so 1 point for that! (I told you the bonus points were arbitrary!)
Total: 13


Candidate: Craig Williams
Party: Conservative Party
Info: 1
Promises: Electrification of the railways, £546 in tax cuts in 2014 = 2 points, also mentions the Police Commissioners as a Government way of reducing bureaucracy. (But that's not a promise)
Contactability: Phone, email, freepost address = 3 points.
Blames: Labour for local problems = -1
Comments: Attacks Labour for 'cutting' the NHS in Wales, and says they "have failed the next generation" on education. Claims Labour caused the rise in police bureaucracy. "Cardiff has been let down badly by a complacent Labour party" and Gordon Brown. 4 negative comments = -4.
Total: 1


Candidate: Simon Zeigler
Party: UKIP
Info: 2
Promises: "Investing in UK public services instead of wasting money in the EU" is the kind of vague statement that earns you nil points. No definite promises = 0.
Contactability: Phone, web-page = 2
Blames: "The tired old parties" / "The career politicians in Westminster" = -2
Comments: Has unflattering photos of the three main party leaders, and blames career politicians, so -3.
Bonus point: The phrase 'Kick them in the ballot box' was quite amusing. +1.
Total: 0

So, in conclusion after this unscientific review, how did they do?

Plaid Cymru - 13 points
Welsh Communist Party - 9 points
Socialist Labour Party - 7 points
Conservative Party - 1 point
UKIP - 0 points
Labour - -2 points
Liberal Democrats - -2 points

I'm not sure any of this will make a difference to who I vote for, but it's interesting to compare it to last time around. The Liberal Democrats are a lot less negative, possibly because they have a new candidate for the first time in ages. The Communists and other redder then red parties do well because they make lots of specific promises. Overall, though, the vagueness of what people promise, or even just raise the issue without making any comment on how to solve it, is frustrating. There's still time this week for more leaflets to influence my decision. I'll update as we go.

I've done this before, if you'd like to look back.
The 2010 election
2009 Euro Elections
Welsh Assembly 2007 elections plus update 1 and update 2


Monday, December 17, 2007

Ends and means (-philosophy post)

At work today a friend and I were discussing a situation where someone we both knew had been treated quite badly by a religious organisation, which perhaps should have acted better. In fact, if they'd followed their own 'values statement', they wouldn't have done the things they did to end this guy's employment. But then, I always say, if you need to put your values in a statement, then they aren't obvious enough to people in the way you conduct yourself.

Anyway this drifted into a discussion of 'ends and means' and raised the ethical chestnut of 'do the ends ever justify the means?' After the discussion ended I remembered a quote from Michael Foot, onetime leader of the Labour party, on the subject. A couple of google searches later and I found what I was looking for, although Foot was actually quoting a writer called Ignazio Silone. Here's what he (Foot) wrote:

"Every means tends to become an end," Silone had one of his characters write, and the physical and mental torture of both Italian Fascism and Soviet Communism were known to him as he wrote: "To understand the tragedy of human history it is necessary to grasp that fact."

"Machines which ought to be men's instrument, enslave him, the state enslaves society, the bureaucracy enslaves the state, the church enslaves religion, parliament enslaves democracy, institutions enslave justice, academies enslave art, the army enslaves the nation, the party enslaves the cause, the dictatorship of the proletariat enslaves Socialism."

"The choice and the control of the instruments of political action are thus at least as important as the choice of the ends themselves, and as time goes on the instruments must be expected to become an end for those who use them. Hence the saying that the end justifies the means is not only immoral; it is stupid."

"An inhuman means remains inhuman even if it is employed for the purpose of assuring human felicity. A lie is always a lie, murder is always murder. A lie always ends by enslaving those who use it, just as violence always enslaves those who use it as well as their victims."
In some ways, this reminds me of Nigel Wright's description of 'institutional evil' - when the institution which was set up for the benefit of human beings takes control of those human beings. In terms of religion, it's not a long step to get to inquisitions, crusades and jihads, morality police or Pullman's Magisterium when that starts to happen.