Credible nuclear deterrence effects, debunking dogmatic "disarm or be annihilated" enemy propaganda. Realistic effects and credible nuclear weapon capabilities for deterring or stopping aggressive invasions and attacks which could escalate into major conventional or nuclear wars.

Tuesday, January 02, 2018

Racist socialist and hatred inciting propaganda from mass murder regimes: the foundations of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament exposed (updated)

(For evidence of CND infiltration into racist, mass murdering regimes, see references linked here.)

"An hour's listening disclosed the fanatical intolerance of minds sealed against new ideas, new facts, new feelings, new attitudes, new hints at ways to live.  They denounced books they had never read ... Communism ... had frozen them at an even lower level of ignorance than had been theirs before they met Communism." - black American novelist Richard Wright in American Hunger, 1944, on reasons for leaving the Communist Party.  (Don't forget 100 million worldwide Communist murders, civil wars and insurrection massacres in the 20th century.)

Bob Darke, Hackney Council Communist Party Councillor, The Communist Technique in Britain, Penguin Books Special S160, 1952, pages 146-7:

"The Communist Peace Campaign was under way ... Out of the great confusion, the fear and the bewilderment of the post-war world, the Party picked the blackest and most terrifying spectacle of all - the Atomic Bomb.  At all peace activities, all meetings, all demonstrations, we were instructed to display large posters declaring 'Ban the Atom Bomb!' ... The pamphlet's subject-material consisted of ... the effects of atomic warfare: the blinding, the maiming, and killing. [Not mentioning the deterrence of world war and the deterrence of effective, concentrated invasion forces that set off wars such as the invasion of Belgium 1914, Poland 1939, Afghanistan 1979, or Kuwait 1990.] ... The non-Party press helped us unwittingly by publishing large maps showing the extent of damage which would occur if an atom bomb fell in the centre of London.  There was great jubilation in the Party when we discussed the propaganda value of these maps to our Peace Campaign. ... the Peace Campaign sprang less from a people's spontaneous and natural desire than from the direct decision of the Soviet-controlled Coninform.   Every Communist fellow-traveller ... clergymen, artists, actors - all were now canvassed. ... We were instructed to infiltrate innocent peace movements and swing them into line behind us [for evidence of this communist fascism running CND, see link here]."


Bob Darke was a Communist Party of Great Britain/CPGB member from 1933-51, and Communist Party Councillor in Hackney Borough.  He was on personal terms with the General Secretary of the CPGB, Harry Pollitt, who he states on page 137 instructed him in 1951: "to oppose and hamper Civil Defence [lifesaving] plans within the borough, to move reference back to such motions, and to hinder the Council's proposals for Civil Defence as far as possible." This is exactly a repeat of what happened in 1935-40 when the Nazi appeasing supporters of fascist "peace pact collaboration" falsely denounced civil defence as a "fraud" to create "war psychology" as President Kennedy shows in his published 1940 college thesis, Why England Slept.  Millions died as a result of such fascist tricks.

"The West won't contain Communism, it will transcend Communism. It won't bother to ... denounce it, it will dismiss it as some bizarre chapter in human history whose last pages are even now being written." - President Reagan, 1981. (Reagan was attacked as a warmonger for backing civil defense, by journalist Robert Scheer's book With Enough Shovels: Reagan, Bush and Nuclear War, in which Scheer interviewed Reagan and found that his criticism of Joseph McCarthy was that he used a scatter gun rather than a rifle to weed out communist propaganda spreaders.)

UK Prime Minister, 22 November 1990, in House of Commons (source Hansard, House of Commons 181/445-53): 
"Ten years ago, the eastern part of Europe lay under totalitarian rule, its people knowing neither rights nor liberties. Today, we have a Europe in which democracy, the rule of law and basic human rights are spreading ever more widely, where the threat to our security from the overwhelming conventional forces of the Warsaw pact has been removed: where the Berlin wall has been torn down and the cold war is at an end. 
"These immense changes did not come about by chance. They have been achieved by strength and resolution in defence, and by a refusal ever to be intimidated. No one in eastern Europe believes that their countries would be free had it not been for those western Governments who were prepared to defend liberty, and who kept alive their hope that one day east Europe too would enjoy freedom. 
"But it was no thanks to the Labour party, or to the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament of which the right hon. Gentleman is still a member. It is this Government who kept the nuclear weapons which ensured that we could never be blackmailed or threatened. When Brezhnev deployed the SS20s, Britain deployed the cruise missiles and was the first to do so. And all these things were done in the teeth of the opposition of the hon. Gentlemen opposite—and their ladies. [Laughter] The SS20s could never have been negotiated away without the bargaining strength which cruise and Pershing gave to the west. 
"Should we be censured for our strength? Or should the Labour party be censured for its weakness? ... socialists who put expediency before principle."


Jeremy Corbyn's Marxist and Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (a front for communism, exposed in Paul Mercer's Peace of the dead) revolutionary tactics of picketing and inciting hatred, division, strikes, and other "divide and rule" Marxist tactics to agitate against free liberty and true democracy. The continuing threat of communist anti-democracy rioting pickets in 2018: agitators who were on the far left Marxist front of the 1985 Labour Party are now on the front benches in the Shadow Cabinet, despite making anti-democracy statements, contradicting themselves, and promoting bigoted, unsubstantiated racial hatred, which is illegal.  Their only response, when they can't get away with ignoring justified criticisms entirely, is to make lying attacks on the critics while ignoring the substance of the criticisms.

Racist Stalinist USSR funded criminal warmongering hatred spewing head of British communism Harry Pollitt:

"Thus we can see the two great differences between races: Aryanism means ethical perception of work and that which we today so often hear – socialism, community spirit, common good before own good. Jewry means egoistic attitude to work and thereby mammonism and materialism, the opposite of socialism. ... Socialism as the final concept of duty, the ethical duty of work, not just for oneself but also for one’s fellow man’s sake, and above all the principle: Common good before own good, a struggle against all parasitism and especially against easy and unearned income. And we were aware that in this fight we can rely on no one but our own people. We are convinced that socialism in the right sense will only be possible in nations and races that are Aryan, and there in the first place we hope for our own people and are convinced that socialism is inseparable from nationalism." - Hitler's racist socialism speech to his National Socialist Workers Party, "Why We Are Antisemites", 1920. (All of Hitler's "successes" for "socialism" were based on bankrupting Germany with debt to "fund" full employment, and then war to divert attention from internal problems when the borrowed money ran out, exactly the same failure mechanism for all "socialists".)
Pollitt himself spread this propaganda and hatred of Jews, capitalists, and anyone opposite his own evil criminality:

"Pollitt's bowing and scraping before Stalin ... does not induce confidence that he would have resisted an injunction from Moscow to root out 'enemies of the people'.  Secret plenipotentiaries of Comintern were attached to every party outside the USSR.  They lived under aliases, transmitting central directives ... Ernest Darling ... became a research assistant of the New Fabian Research Bureau as well as a Labour Party member.  He joined the Communist Party of Great Britain in 1932 ... Pollitt and Darling had a lengthy exchange of letters.  Darling never objected to current general strategy in a direct way ... But by September 1946 Pollitt had had enough and advised Darling to 'consider [his] position in the party'. This brought Darling back into line: he found the thought of life outside the ranks unbearable. ... [British Foreign Office top level] spies such as Kim Philby, who became a communist as a Cambridge undergraduate ... had to keep their party membership a secret so as to be able to enter the British establishment. ... They became accustomed to laughing at non-communists ... This necessitated continuous self-deception, and some managed it better than others.  Pollitt was the master of the technique. ... Pollitt coped with the grotesque brutalities of Stalin's Soviet Union by declining to think about them.  Not once did he criticise the show trials, collectivisation, the blood purges ... Selective silence was a cardinal qualification for remaining a communist. ... Only Pollitt and a small coterie knew about the party's dependence on a regular subsidy from the USSR.  The rest of the party was taught to regard talk of 'Moscow gold' as the vilest slander."

- Robert Service, Comrades, Pan Books, 2008, pages 194-201.

Service adds on page 311-2 that when Premier Khrushchev exposed Stalin's evil in his Cult of the personality speech, fanatic "Harry Pollitt was furious about the denunciation of Stalin. 'He's staying there as long as I'm alive,' he said of the portrait of Stalin that hung in his living room - and stay there it did."

For the current racism of communist liars in senior positions in Parliament, please see the updates on previous post linked here for details, and links to evidence that the left wing racist anti nuclear bigots suppress!  There is one fundamental problem with communism and fascist based socialism: pseudo-scientific dictatorship which claims falsely that diversity is weakness rather than strength.  The fanatical obsession with destroying the liberal diversity of ideas, of people, and of innovation is the the weakness of such fascism, both "left" and "right" (which are both forms of bigotry).  Celebrity news anchors on TV and film stars, plus "moderate" politicians then adopt fascist left wing terrorist supporters as mascots to divert attention from their tax-dodging, their elitism, their wealth, and their corrupt cronyism.  It is just a cynical camouflage tactic to help maintain their "popular" hubris.

Regarding factually defensible means to end wars, we need to deter concentrated force tank invasions by the nuclear tactical weapon W54 as Kennedydid in West Germany or the W79 Reagan used, and deter dispersed tank invasions with big tough walls patrolled by people with anti-tank rockets, and proof tested civil defense (click here for details) to avoid collateral damage to civilians in an enemy attack.

Now to celebrate the New Year, let's do what the lovers of Richard Rhodes' books like, and delve into the literature for exciting quotations that show how the current anti nuclear propaganda effort began:

From Robert Service's Comrades: Communism a World History, chapter 10: Probing America (Macmillan, 2007; Pan books 2008 at page 125; note that Comintern =  "struggle by all available means, including armed force, for the overthrow of the international bourgeoisie and the creation of an international Soviet republic as a transition stage to the complete abolition of the state"):

"The Wall Street Crash in April 1929, according to Comintern's global prognosis, should have led to a massive increase in the party's popularity.  [Hence the efforts of people like anti-nuclear bigot Jeremy Corbyn now to try to bankrupt Britain, in a effort to bring about communism.]  Yet membership grew from 7,500 in 1929 to only 90,000 in 1939.  By the mid-1930s, Stalin had concluded that Comintern should moderate its struggle against F. D. Roosevelt ... the Communist Party of the USA, as it was known from 1930 ... dressed itself up as the only organisation in American politics with an unconditional devotion to social justice, economic fairness, racial equality, and the struggle against fascism and imperialism. ... Although the communists were a spectacular failure at every election, they undoubtedly increased their influence, especially among intellectuals."

This was the "communist" background for their infiltration of the Democratic party by pseudo socialists (con artists who were not real communists but obsessed with Robin Hood style propaganda to justify theft and the sabotage of progressive true liberalism, freedom, and real democracy).  They failed when they tried to stand under their true flags, so they adopted false ones.  The nuclear bomb was a godsend for their propaganda: by exploiting unreasoned fear of the unknown they could try to help the USSR by getting the West to disarm.  The anti-nuclear bigots were helped, ironically, by official secrecy - a secrecy which always fails in the end due to spies, independent enemy research, and an arrogant self-delusion that Sputnik or Pearl Harbor events can be stopped by denying public access to fundamental data.  The hard core fanatics were joined by innocent dupes who compared the official technical information vacuum (caused by secrecy) to the endless anti nuclear rants and took the latter as the only source of information.

Service continues with the delusion of American Democrats, who fought with propaganda on nuclear war "effects" (ignoring civil defense against collateral damage) against the "right wing" Republicans, like Eisenhower, Nixon and Reagan (Robert Service, Comrades, Pan Books, 2008, Chapter 35: Roads from Communism, at pages 415-416):

"American Presidents from Harry Truman to Jimmy Carter had acted as though the USSR was a durable fixture in world politics.  It was as late as 1988 that Richard Nixon published his book, 1999: Victory without War, making the case that only a policy of renewed detente could safely wear down communism into defeat.  The USSR was a global power.  It financed and directed dozens of communist parties and their 'front' organizations [like the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, see Paul Mercer's book Peace of the Dead: the Truth Behind the Nuclear Disarmers].  It projected its military might and prestige ... communist states covered a third of the terrestrial surface of the planet. ...

"Reagan in 1981 was as militant as Churchill in 1918 without being a warmonger.  Wherever in thye world a Soviet threat existed, he armed its local enemies. ... The mujehaddin resistance to the USSR's puppet regime in Afghanistan was given Stinger ground-to-air missiles.  Reagan funnelled cash and arms to the contra rebels against Nicaragua's radical reformers - the Sandinistas - under Daniel Ortega, who had come to power in July 1979.  Washington also supported ... forces in El Salvador trying to suppress the Marxist guerrilla movement ... In October 1983 he ordered the US Marines to suppress the Marxist-led New Jewel government on ... Grenada."

In conclusion, Service remarks in the final Chapter 40: Accounting for Communism on page 474 of the 2008 Pan edition that Western pacifist propaganda after WWI stopped the USSR from being defeated in 1919, while financial crises in the West plus natural resources in Russia, and the USSR's draconian censorship of alternative ideas, allowed the USSR to last so long:

"The Great Depression in the world economy could hardly have happened at a better time for the USSR.  Another stroke of luck was the fact that Russia and its borderlands were rich on natural resources. ... Soviet communism's survival also resulted from the country's political and cultural insulation from the capitalist world even when trading with it.  Stalin eliminated the space where alternative organisations, individuals and ideas might operate.  private entrepreneurship, national assertiveness, spiritual exploration and religious celebration were more or less eradicated  There was an internal state of siege. ... Gorbachev ... lifted the siege and inadvertently brought the order tumbling down."

Service also summarises the problems with left wing communist ideology, lying propaganda, in his Introduction to the book (quotation following is from page 6 of the 2008 Pan edition):

"Communism in power has problems everywhere.  It never overcame social resentment or apathy about its purposes.  Nowhere did it fully eradicate the pre-revolutionary culture.  It persecuted religion without successfully eliminating it.  Its labour discipline was usually woeful.  The communist order beneath the apex of supreme leadership had to accommodate itself to a degree of disobedience and obfuscation unmatched in liberal democracies. ... these phenomena were not the grit in the machinery, but the oil.  Without them, the entire order would have ground its way to a standstill.  A 'perfect' totalitarianism cannot give an attractive enough incentive for people - from middle-ranking officials down to state-employed factory workers - to co-operate. ...

"A chasm existed between officialdom and the people under communism.  Marx and Engels has predicted a 'withering away of the state'.  Communist history moved in the opposite direction.  State power increased exponentially.  Labour camps proliferated.  Repression of individuals and groups hostile to communism continued to be necessary for the maintenance of the status quo.  Civil society was crushed. ... Dictatorship had to remain dictatorship."

In reading this, I recall some of the Marxist hatred towards individuality which I have received, and which undoubtedly turned me into a rebel against the authoritarianism of pseudo socialism, dictatorship.  This will undoubtedly be considered "off topic" or "boring", to Marxist left wingers.  For me, the British NHS (national health service), a socialist enterprise started by the first Labour government, produced nightmares and health problems from the age of about 6.

Groupthink medical dogma was to remove tonsils and adenoids as a precaution against colds and flu.  Until that time, I could speak perfectly.  The operation was a nightmare because I was given gas anaesthesia at a high concentration which I could not inhale a single breathe of, they refused to let me take the mask off to speak about it, so I was suffocated until I fought to remove the mask.  They didn't want to know what I had to say, claiming it was "panic", and the only problem was the release of gas into the theatre from the removed mask.  So much for expertise and liberalism.  As soon as you have a real problem, you are suppressed freedom of speech.  Eventually they gave up trying 100% N2O and injected anaesthetic.  There was no apology for giving no oxygen or air mixed with the nitrous oxide.  It seemed to me that they normally used injections, decided to experiment with pure N2O, and blamed me for their failure.  Soon after the operation, medical dogma reversed and the NHS decided that removing the tonsils and adenoids, which are part of the immune system, is normally not good practice.

Afterwards, the needless removal of the barriers to infection resulted in endless flu and colds, and this rapidly led to the blockage of the Eustachian tubes which drain the inner ears, preventing the hearing of high frequencies. Although, normally, fluids block low frequencies and allow high frequencies such as ultrasound to pass, the mechanism operating in the inner ear is that fluids have the opposite effect and suppress high frequencies, allowing only low frequencies to pass: fluid in the inner ear is a disaster since dampens the oscillation of the eardrum and the small bones (the hammer, anvil, and saddle) which convey the oscillations to a nerve which acts as the electrical part of a microphone). Higher frequency oscillations of the eardrum, when submerged in liquid on one side, are damped out very efficiently.  Lower frequency oscillations of the eardrum are less seriously attenuated by the liquid, so despite the fact that fluids are good by themselves at allowing the propagation of high frequencies (as in ultrasound), they have the same effect on the eardrum as sticking a microphone in a glass of water.  To explain this to people proved difficult.

From the age of 6 to 10, I had no correction for the fluid blockage of the Eustachian tubes and the inner ears.  So I had about four years frequency-distorted hearing, only hearing low frequency sounds.  Medical groupthink apparently had no idea about this problem on the ground level, and endless pseudo corrections such as amplifiers of distortion and speech correction lessons (over a period of years, speech is affected, turning into low frequency without any high frequency components, to follow what is heard) were given, accompanied by social abuse mostly instigated by impatient teachers and even the headteacher of the second primary school I attended, aged 9.  They seemed to think that mimicking me would somehow drain my ears of fluid and remove the problem.

They tried and failed to give me speech correction lessons, without bothering about the fact that all I heard from them was distorted speech.  Some words can't be understood or distinguished from others when the high frequencies are removed.  I couldn't even speak my own name, Nigel, without hears thinking it was "Michael".  (Without the correct high frequency notes "N" sounds like "M", and you cannot invent and insert high frequencies that you can't even hear, so speech lessons are useless - you hear the same distorted words from the "expert" as from anybody else.)  Efforts to gently persuade him that I had problem with hearing distorted sound was ignored, and efforts make the point more forcefully were abusively sneered at and discounted.

It was only at age 10 that I had a professional audiologist test the frequency range I could actually hear and thus permit an operation to drain fluid from my inner ears (a simple process of making small holes in the eardrums).  Did my speech immediately go back to normal?  No.  My self confidence has completely reversed because I had been made painfully aware that there was a problem with my speech.  I had developed an aversion to speaking unless absolutely necessary, causing a diffident manner.  A year after that I changed schools again and received complaints regarding my lack of self confidence and my lack of confident speech from the new teachers, who immediately again made the mistake of jumping to conclusions and inventing lies: instead of researching the facts, or asking for reasons, they did assessments based on present behaviour and thus ignored the mechanisms for it.

The point is this: at each stage dogmatic medical groupthink and educational groupthink fails to give a damn about the individual, it hates any really justifiable opposition.  The socialist system creates disasters, blames the victims, and them abuses them further in a hate campaign which is camouflaged behind arrogant "pride" and abuse, believing it can get away with this by censoring any opponent.  In doing this, the system exposes itself for what it is: a greedy, malicious, uncaring evil dictatorship.

This boring tale could be dismissed as "one person's bitter and limited experience", but it is not unique.  Freedom, peace, and progress all depend on individualism, not state "socialism".  I put "socialism" in inverted commas because it doesn't do what it claims, but the very opposite of that.  What socialism should concern itself with is not financial equality (its key selling point to criminals) but humanist equality: the effort to wipe out elitist dogmatism and pseudo expertise of professionals, and to encourage equal rights of everybody to assert not lies, but factual evidence.  But the "socialist" systems in place are completely corrupted by money.  What an irony.

If there are any genuine socialists, they will take seriously if not actually campaign for the credible nuclear deterrence of war, the only workable solution that has been proof tested in history: disarmament encourages enemy aggression.

Update 3 January 2018:

MEDIA INFILTRATION BY FASCIST PSEUDO SOCIALISTS

"We cannot afford to give ourselves moral airs when our most enterprising neighbour humanely and judiciously liquidates a handful of exploiters and speculators to make the world safe for honest men."

- socialist propaganda playwright George Bernard Shaw "excusing" socialist genocide eugenics (he loved racist eugenics by both Hitler and Stalin; see link here). (Quotation source: Service, Comrades, Pan Books, 2008, page 206.)

Note that the nasty, English-literature polluting murder supporting fascist and commie Shaw also professed stupid and nasty bigotry against people with speech defects, in the BBC quack recording of him linked here.

"Any report of a famine in Russia is today an exaggeration or malignant propaganda."

- New York Times, 23 August 1933 fake claim by pseudo socialist Walter Duranty. (Quotation source: Service, Comrades, Pan Books, 2008, page 206.)

"... Malcolm Muggeridge, the Moscow correspondent of the Manchester Guardian  ... journeyed by train through the famine-stricken Ukraine, witnessing the consequences of official measures.  Desperate peasants crowded railway-station platforms as he travelled south.  The bloated bodies of starving children orphaned by the deaths of executed or malnourished parents ... The dismissiveness of local party and government functionaries ... Unfortunately, his editor in Manchester preferred a lighter treatment of the Soviet Union.  Muggeridge resigned ..." - R. Service, Comrades, Service, Comrades, Pan Books, 2008, page 204.

Communist of Great Britain MPs Willie Gallacher and Phil Pirati lost their seats in the 1950 elections, and the party never won a parliamentary constituency again under the Communist Party banner.  They did however infiltrate the left wings of major British political parties with some success using false flags and superficial camouflage, recent examples being Jeremy Corbyn and friends.  Senator Joe McCarthy, despite short cut failings, succeeded in starting a witch hunt against pseudo socialist fascism:

"McCarthy concentrated his fire on film-making and other sectors of the media.  Often his accusations were ill-founded but he succeeded in creating an atmosphere of suspicion ... his impact was enormous and permanent.  No longer did the left-wing American press give gentle treatment to Marxism ... Words like communism and socialism - and eventually even liberalism - became widely pejorative. ... A spectacular case in the United Kingdom was the removal of Andrew Rothstein, lecturer in Russian history at London University's School of Slavonic and East European Studies.  Rothstein, a founding member of the Communist Party of Great Britain who had begun work in the Soviet embassy's information department and spent years in the Comintern apparatus in Moscow, had never disguised his political allegiance. ... he had published nothing of scholarly merit ..."

- Robert Service, Comrades, Pan Books, 2008, page 274.

Service on page 127 states that McCarthy's successful witchhunt reduced American communist party membership to just 3,000 in 1957 as the media finally began to disclose the nasty fascist of so called communism:

"[American Communist Party] General Secretary Gus Hall, the dullard devotee of the USSR, welcomed the suppression of the Hungarian Uprising in 1956 and the Prague Spring in 1968.  If the USSR had invaded Alaska, he would probably have interpreted it as a happy incursion of garlanded peace-lovers. This was no more and no less than Moscow expected of a CPUSA leader. ... Hall and his comrades as Soviet stooges through all the years of detente between the USA and the USSR urged the maintenance of diplomatic, commercial and cultural exchanges.  They eulogised Leonid Brezhnev as the world's greatest promoter of peace and progress.  The Soviet Union was represented as a beacon of democracy [it even had fake "democratic" elections, complete with Hobson's choice for voters, between either a communist party comrade, or another communist party comrade...] Gorbachev's reforms in the late 1980s came as un unwelcome surprise to Hall ... Hall signed a receipt for $2,000,000 from the Soviet party in 1988.  But his scarcely veiled criticisms annoyed Gorbachev, who withdrew Moscow's subsidy in the following year ... Hall ... had been party leader since 1959 and the party's vanquished candidate in four presidential elections."

Malcolm Muggeridge, as quoted above, was unique in resigning from the pro-communist Manchester Guardian (now called the Guardian and the Sunday Observer) newspaper.  Pro-communists flocked to the Guardian, including Arthur Ransome (now better known as a children's fiction author):

"The Manchester Guardian correspondent Arthur Ransome was one of them.  Ransome publicly endorsed the Bolsheviks so warmly that leading Soviet propagandist Karl Radek wrote an introduction to Ransome's Letter to America which was translated for distribution in New York.  Ransome in the course of his work had fallen in love with Trotski's attractive secretary Yevgenia Shelepina ... the new Mrs Ransome was not the innocent secretary she seemed.  In October 1922 she was the recipient of a gift from the People's Commissariat of External Affairs ... diamonds to the value of 1,039,000 rubles. ... In all probability she was smuggling financial assistance to the British communists. ... Ransome had been an enthusiast for the Bolsheviks ..."

- Robert Service, Comrades, Pan Books, 2008, pages 131-132.  (Service there goes on to show that the Western media contained USSR propaganda journalists from the earliest times, for example Albert Rhys Williams who worked in Russia for the New York Evening Post, and John Reed who wrote a pro-USSR book called "Ten Days that Shook the World" which led Lenin to hand him over a million rubles in assets to found the Communist Labor Party.)

"... cunningly the communists sanitised the political scene before visitors came to Soviet cities.  The troublesome leaders of non-communist groups were invariable removed.  Everything was done to create the illusion of a regime beloved of its people.  The lie was put about that those who struggled against the Bolsheviks ... were the willing tools of foreign capitalist powers."

- Robert Service, Comrades, Pan Books, 2008, page 133.

"[As a result of the 24 August 1939 USSR-Nazi secret pact to invade Poland and thus start WWII] On 1 September [1939] Hitler began a blitzkrieg against Poland ... Stalin held back the Red Army on the Soviet-Polish border for a fortnight until he could secure a peace agreement with Japan ... Then the Soviet tanks rumbled into ... Poland [15 September 1939].  The USSR became Hitler's active collaborator."

Robert Service, Comrades, Pan Books, 2008, page 214.

Note that without the Soviet collaboration agreement (the secret annex to the misnamed "non aggression pact" of 24 August 1939), Hitler would probably not have invaded Poland.  Thus, Stalin helped to start WWII.  This episode, of Nazis jointly invading Poland in September 1939, causing WWII, is still completely taboo in most Western and all Russian socialist history textbooks.  It was covered up at the time too, with American Time magazine giving Stalin its "Man of the Year" award in 1940 for the falsely named USSR-Nazi peace pact!  It was only after the Nazi invasion of Russia in June 1941, nearly two years into the war for Britain, that Stalin reversed his policy and ceased collaborating with Nazi fascist genocide.

And that genocidal collaboration included the Katyn Forest Massacre of April-May 1940 by the USSR, in which Stalin's NKVD murdered 22,000 Poles.  Naturally, politically-correct Time magazine found excuses to ignore the evidence and in January 1943 made Stalin "Man of the Year" yet again.

Soviet Union funding for communist propaganda in America was massive by the Reagan era:

"... Boris Ponomarev, head of the International Department of the Central Committee Secretariat, went on dishing out dollars through the Assistance Fund for Communist Parties and Movements of the Left, supplemented by contributions from eastern Europe.  The distribution list conformed to current objectives of Soviet foreign policy.  In 1980, by far the largest grant was $2,500,000.  This went into the account of the Communist Party of the USA ... to perform a useful service in propaganda.  Next in line were the French communists with $2,000,000; their position as a spokesman for the 'peace-loving' intentions of the USSR in western Europe was pre-eminent.  The Finnish communists received $1,350,000 [due to the common border with the USSR and thus the need to fund "divide and rule" commie mob disruption to try to stoke up communism there ahead of an invasion; Portugal, Greece and Chile received respectively $800,000, $700,000 and $500,000 for commie propaganda and disruption]."

- Robert Service, Comrades, Pan Books, 2008, page 326.



Above: the 1952 book The Communist Technique in Britain by Bob Darke, who had been a Communist Party of Great Britain member for 18 years and was a London Hackney Borough Councillor until resigning from the party in May 1951, and exposing the hate abuse the criminal communist thugs used against any rational arguments or objections, as he explains on pages 139-142:
"During the serious housing shortage of the mid-forties [11,000 people in Hackney alone had been made homeless by Nazi bombing] the Party worked the most sensational confidence trick in its history - the Squatters' Movement.  So pathetic were the hardship cases exploited in this deception that for a while even Fleet Street [national London newspapers] was convinced that it was normal, a spontaneous demonstration on the part of the homeless.  But when the almost military-like precision of the campaign became obvious, there should have been no doubt in anybody's mind that the [Communist] Party was at the back of it.  The Party never openly admitted that it ran the squatting in West End blocks of flats, or the rash of small-house squatting that spread across London. 
"The [Communist Party newspaper] Daily Worker covered the campaign with the same poker-face inscrutability it wears when Party members paint anti-American slogans ... or demonstrate against American bomber stations. ... The London Squatter Movement was conducted by [Communist] Ted Bramley, from the offices of the [CPGB] London District Committee.  Bramley actually appeared in person to run the taking-over of blocks of flats ... members of his staff occupied rooms in one of the blocks to conduct the campaign ... In Hackney, the Party was instructed to ear-mark vacant houses, to collect homeless families ... and move them in on the word go. ... for a time I believe the Party had found the right solution ... the arbitrary seizing of property.  But I soon realised that ... the various 'Squatters' Committees' we had formed [were] no more than propaganda vehicles.  The Party's leaders knew ... that the squatters' campaign would be defeated.  But ... the Party was going to benefit ... It could use the opposition to the Squatters' Movement as proof that the Government was refusing to live up to its Socialism. ... pram-pushing families were moved into flats ... only to be moved out again by the police.  The Siege of the West End flats, the blockade running of food and water by Communist flying squads, got full play in the Party press ... 
"For weeks after the defeat of the Squatters' Movement, the [Communist] Party in Hackney was capitalising on the misery ... For a while the Party believed that it had raised its prestige as a result of its organisation of the squatters.  The use of similar hit and run tactics in other fields, the arbitrary defiance of the law, were being discussed seriously.  Then came the London County Council Elections and the Party realised that the public's intelligence was not as myopic as was believed. ... the Party suffered its biggest defeat on record.  The campaign nearly killed me. ... Maybe I was drunk with my own Party's arrogance. ... the Party Executive was really bitter.  Jewish voters in the East End had turned their backs on the Party at last.  Even the whispered exhortations at polling-booth doors, the 'Vote for the only anti-fascist party', had not brought in the one vote the Party always thought it could rely on: the vote of the Jew."
Darke also discloses on page 127 that the Communist Party of Great Britain broke election expenses rules in the 1945 election when when William (Bill) Rust, who had been in 1930 the first editor of the Communist Party's Daily Worker newspaper, spend £1,000 on his Hackney constituency election campaign, when the legal limit was £480.  Darke was helped to cover up this illegality by two Communist Party lawyers.  Despite this fraud, Rust still failed to get elected MP for Hackney. (Out of 100 Communist Party candidates in the 1945 UK general election, only 2 were elected MPs.)  Nevertheless, as Darke pointed out on pages 20-21, the 880 card-carrying Communist Party members in Hackney in 1952, amounting to just 0.5% of Hackney's citizens is able to "make Hackney speak with the authority of Lenin and Stalin.  When it wants to, it can control the greater part of the democratic machinery of the borough, although not necessarily in a democratic manner."

The response of communists like the evil thug Pollitt to books like this, just like their response to communist gulags and genocide, was simply to pretend it is all fake news by Jewish capitalists.  This is still the racist approach of communists today, who refuse to engage with reasoned facts and resort instead to childish and pathetic hate rants against all the evidence for the evil and failure of their gibberish.  By 1950 most people could see that Marxism was just an excuse for a fascist dictatorship which grabbed more land in Europe in the 1940s than Hitler had done in the 1930s.  (Another useful book is Richard Crossman's compilation of bitter diatribes by former communists, The God that Failed, which includes Arthur Koestler's account of the fascist methods used by the German communist party before Hitler destroyed it: communists humiliated any opponents into recanting reasonable objections.  There was little difference between the evils of Nazi and commie ideology.)

Robert Service explains the basis for this irrational religion of hatred and oppression on page 39 of the 2008 Pan edition of Comrades: "Marxism, far from being based on scientific observation, was just as utopian as the nineteenth-century rival variants of socialism which had drawn the ridicule of Marx and Engels.  Practically every sector of intellectual thought involved discomfort for Marxists.  Historians questioned whether societies had followed the simple sequence of stages [Hegel's philosophy, not hard science] described in most works by Marx and Engels: primitive communism, slave-owning society, feudalism and capitalism."

Other pseudo science abounded in the foundations of Marxism: the Marxist concept of the apocalypse as a precursor of communism is debunked by chapter 1 of Cohn's The Pursuit of the Millennium, although it continued to abound in Communist ideology.  Chairman Mao is quoted by J. Chang and J. Halliday on page 428 of Mao: The Unknown Story, stating that a nuclear war would be a bonus if it killed half the world's population, since: "imperialism would be razed to the ground and the whole world would become socialist."  So much for communist peace pipe dreams!  Then you have the internal conflicts within communism: Chinese communist versus Russian communism, the Vietnamese Vietcong commies versus the Cambodian Khmer Rouge commies led by the terrible Pol Pot who was supported by China because of the fear of Vietnam becoming a USSR satellite after the American surrender in 1975.

This story of internal communist conflict really begins with the struggle between Trotsky and Stalin after Lenin's death.  Trotsky rightly denounced Stalin's purges in his book Revolution Betrayed, and was rewarded by having himself airbrushed out of history and then having an ice pick buried into his brain by a communist agent while in exile in Mexico. This attitude problem of communists is traceable right back to Marx and Engels, the founders of the religion of Marxism:

"They acted as if their followers had no right to gainsay or criticise them.  They actively encouraged devotion.  The consequence was that they were treated as prophets whose every word had to be treasured.  Marxists turned to the works of Marx and Engels in the manner of Christians examining the Bible.  Where contradictions existed ... they has to be denied or somehow brought to appear as insignificant or resoluble. ... Marxism from the start offered a shelter to the kind of [pseudoscience cult] intellectuals who in the Middle Ages had argued about how many angels could stand on the point of a needle. ... At various times both Marx and Engels had subscribed to the [French] revolutionary dictatorship and terror.  They scoffed at moral arguments.  They ridiculed ... other brands of socialism (or communism). They asserted the scientific basis of their doctrines ... They were harsh polemicists.  It came easily to both of them to mock and denigrate their socialist adversaries.  They were interested in ends and untroubled about means ... They despised liberal theory ... For them, parliamentary democracies were really bourgeois dictatorships ... They themselves benefited from political tolerance in the United Kingdom ... Engel's industrial profits and Marx's free access to the British Museum Library were theirs by legal right - and without them their revolutionary propaganda and activity would have been hobbled.  Yet they ... blithely stood forth as the destroyers of democracy, legality and institutional checks and balances.  Everything had to be pulled down before rebuilding could commence [this is also common place in the pseudo scientific revolutionary ideology of people like IC].  The ideas of Marx and Engels indeed contained seeds of oppression and exploitation under a Marxist revolutionary regime."

- Service, Comrades, Pan, 2008, page 32.

The key problem is that Marxist utopia is superfluous if not counter socialist as Herman Kahn explains, as capitalism generates wealth, the average and the lowest income level increases so that poverty is eliminated.  It is not borrowing or theft which generates wealth, but capitalism.  Marxism, by seeking to destroy capitalism, ironically seeks to destroy the golden goose which funds genuine socialism.







"The bourgeoisie, by the rapid improvement of all instruments of production, by the immensely facilitated means of communication, draws all, even the most backward, nations into civilization.  The cheap prices of its commodities are the heavy artillery with which it batters down all Chinese walls, with which it forces the underdeveloped nations' intensely obstinate hatred of foreigners to capitulate. ... The bourgeoisie, during its rule of scarcely one hundred years, has created more massive and more colossal production forces than have all preceding generations together.  Subjection of nature's forces to man, machinery, railways, electric telegraphs, clearing of whole continents for cultivation, canalization of rivers, whole populations conjured out of the ground - what earlier century has even a presentiment that such production forces slumbered in the lap of social labour?"

Or, as Service puts it on page 129 of Comrades, Pan, 2008: "... the American 'failure' to go communist exemplifies the inherent flaw in the vision of Marx and Engels ... Tens of millions of Americans indeed lived in and live in poverty.  But most people [i.e. the larger percentage] experienced material betterment. ... Lenin and Trotski recognised that capitalist America was going to be a difficult political nut for communists to crack [hence the mass media infiltration, political Democratic Party infiltration, and pseudo socialist efforts to bankrupt it with massive multi-trillion dollar debts owed, in part, to communist countries like China].  They rightly indicated that American workers shared in the benefits brought to their country by its leading position in the global economy and politics. ... But they stuck to the tenet that capitalism in the USA was on the brink of irretrievable collapse. ... In the end, in 1991, it was to be the USSR and not the USA which tumbled into oblivion."  A fact still ignored by communists like Jeremy Corbyn of the ultra left of the British Labour Party and the leadership of countries like bankrupt Venezuela.

Kahn and his Hudson Institute co-authors justified Marx and Engel's praise of capitalism by pointing out, on pages 130-131 of The Next 200 years that since in 1976 three grain crops annually each yielded 12 metric tons per hectare, it followed that in 2176 crops over 2 million square miles would be needed, but: "Six relatively unused areas - the Sahara desert, the Amazon basin, the Gobi desert, Saudi Arabia, Australia and the sea coasts of Chile and Peru - offer some 7.5 million square miles of excellent opportunities ... where large-scale sunshine is available.  These lands alone [using hydroponic techniques of growing plants in simple plastic water irrigation tubes supplied by desalination plants, see diagram below] could produce more than three times the food requirements estimated ... for the world in 2176. ... hydroponic techniques have been shown capable of growing crops with less water, fertilizer and other inputs than needed in conventional agriculture, and of growing them unblemished and free of disease or insect attacks."

Lenin had insisted on communist dictatorship in his 1917 work, The State and Revolution.  Rosa Luxenburg, observing that the October 1917 revolution in Russia had begun with mass strikes instigating a state of emergency, tried this in Germany.  The result was fights between equally evil Nazxi fascists and communist fascists (although by the year 1945, the USSR had actually murdered more than the Nazis; something like 20-40 million compared to 6 million), which allowed Hitler to gain power on the promise of quelling disorder.  The "divide and rule" hate crimes of pseudo socialists include efforts to divide nations using mass immigration and civil wars (cultural wars) due to multiculturalism (the opposite of peaceful integration), race war, class war, religious war, and so on.  All of these, together with support for terrorist groups, trade union strikers, picketing of factory and hospital gates to ruin the economy and thus (supposedly) sow the seeds for a communist revolution as in Russia, October 1917, are still being used by failed political movements today.  Utopia remains as popular a pipe dream today as when Thomas More wrote about it in 1516.  

Update (9 January 2018) with some quotations from Bob Darke's, The Communist Technique in Britain, Penguin Books Special S160, 1952 (published in America as Cockney Communist, 1953)

RACISM DELIBERATELY USED BY THE COMMUNIST PARTY OF GREAT BRITAIN, WHILE CLAIMING TO ANTI-RACIST

Bob Darke, Hackney Council Communist Party Councillor, The Communist Technique in Britain, Penguin Books Special S160, 1952, page 138:
"We could always rely on support from the public gallery of the [Hackney Council, London] chamber if the debate below promised to be a hot one.  When the Council debated the rise of Fascism in the East End, one of the non-Communist councillors, a Jew, came under fire from the gallery.  A Jewess in the gallery, a member of the [Communist] Party, screamed at him as a provocateur, and another Party member, also a Jew, shouted that he was a 'renegade and a traitor' to his people.  Neither of these demonstrations was spontaneous or unplanned.  We knew they were to happen before the meeting. 
"On another occasion when I was speaking in the chamber against the rents increase I could have told you the exact second just when a comrade in the public gallery was to leap to his feet and shout: 'Spend less on war expenditure and more on housing!'"
HOW THOUSANDS OF COMMUNISTS MANIPULATE MILLIONS OF DUPES

Darke explains its aim on page 11 of The Communist Technique in Britain, Penguin Books Special S160, 1952:
"I shall attempt to explain how it is possible for a few thousand Communists to speak and act on behalf of millions who hate Communism."
Justifying this, Darke explains the divisive, hatred inciting fanaticism and "peace" propaganda hypocrisy involved in accomplishing this on pages 13-16:
"The Communist Party is at war with the rest of society.  Marxism declares there is no compromise in this war, no peace between one side and the other.  The Communist is taught that his enemy (that is anybody but a Communist) is ruthless, merciless, and unprincipled.  To defeat him the Communist is justified in being more ruthless, more merciless, and more unprincipled. ... a war cannot be won if you permit yourself the indulgence of seeing your enemy's point of view.  He has an end in view, the establishment of a Communist society.  That, to him, is a good end and anything that hastens it, however bad in itself, is a good thing.  Tax a Communist with the lack of democracy in a trade union controlled by a [Communist] party minority and he will ... say that the minority is working for the general good, therefore its actions are justifiable.  ... 
"Why is the Communist so intolerant?  Once again the war analogy.  If you wish to defeat the enemy you do not tolerate him, you hate him.  The Communist is taught ... that there is no middle line.  Marxism preaches the inevitability of revolutionary change within society.  Anyone who denies this is acting against it and thus hindering the coming to power of the Communists.  His extermination as a political force is a number one priority. ... 
"Why is it impossible to argue with a Communist?  He will only argue on his own terms.  He is right.  You are wrong.  You are wrong because you have not accepted his belief that the Marxist interpretation of life is the only one.  If you have not accepted it, you are on the other side.  You cannot be speaking the truth.  I have had a vivid experience of this lately.  A woman in Coventry asked me to talk to her son whose Communist Party membership troubled her.  I talked to the lad and to his friend, a Party official. ... They blandly refused to believe me.  Why?  I had deserted the Party.  I had gone over to the other side.  I was not on the side of 'Capitalism' and they suspected my motives. ... 
"Why will a Communist break the law ... yet violently attack an opponent for doing the same thing?  The Communists regard the laws of this country as a product of a capitalist society designed to protect a capitalist class. ... If it is possible to use those laws to weaken his enemy he will do so, but not because he has any respect ... The essence of Party work is intolerance. ... A comrade whose wife or parents oppose his way of life is a potential danger to the Party.  He is instructed either to recruit his family into the Party or leave them.  There is no compromise.  He is taught to believe that those of his family who do not share his beliefs are dupes of the capitalist system. ... Many top line Communists hold good jobs in the unions ... They hold these jobs by virtue of the Party's backing.  And in return for these jobs they will be dishonest, treacherous, amoral. ... Doubts, disputes, disagreements are never made public ... The enemy must see no weakness."
The manipulative trade union control mechanism whereby a small number of hard Communists control millions of dupes is explained by Darke in chapter 3, pages 50-52 (Darke was on the Executive of the UK Fire Brigades Union in World War II):
"Marxist theory maintains that the beginning of class consciousness is the worker occurs at the moment when he begins to struggle against his employer. ... The Party views the trade union branch as a political weapon ... A few days before I left the [Communist] Party [16 May 1951] I had been told to consider the point that it would be a good thing if union branches in Hackney were to organise token strikes against the war in Korea. ... Would the factories we had ear-marked have come out?  They would.  Were all the workers Communist, then?  They were not.  Then how? ... The British worker is in the main a good trade unionist and he is loyal to his union and trusts it.  Nobody knows this loyalty better than the Communists, and nobody is more cynical about abusing it. 
" 'We must capture the unions!' shout the Communist Parties everywhere in the world.  And they do it so damned easily.  It is not necessary for the Party to have a majority membership of the unions. ... It it necessary to have at least three of the key positions on union executives held by open or under-cover Communists.  Whenever Communists go all out to swing a union or a union branch into their power they aim at placing Party members into the posts of Secretary, Chairman and Treasurer. ... Communist unionists always attend meetings, and because they are always in attendance the donkey-work of union business is willingly handed over to them. ... In my own time on the Hackney Trades Council I have eased through Communist-inspired resolutions on peace, on Korea, on Russia, long after the fixed time for union business to end.  I have eased through those resolutions knowing that the men who might have opposed them and defeated them have looked at the clock and gone home."
Darke explains on pages 55-58 how this was done while he was a Communist Party executive in the UK Fire Brigades Union during WWII:
"I can remember a time when, in the Fire Brigades Union during the war, we [Communist Party] had secured the offices of President, General Secretary, and National Officer and Treasurer. ... But when Party headquarters decided to exploit this situation and swing the Fire Brigades Union behind the campaign for a Second Front [to ease the Nazi pressure off Stalin and allow a complete Communist takeover of Europe] it met with intense opposition from the rank and file in the stations.  Thus, you had a situation where the ordinary trade unionist was so much out of sympathy with the officers he had ostensibly elected [often the Communists pretended to be moderate socialists; in any case the USSR never abolished money and was stuck at the socialist dictatorship stage of Marxism, not true Communism] that he violently repudiated their decisions. ... 
"It was never necessary for the Party to have overwhelming numbers in a factory to swing it into line.  I know a factory where some 2,000 workers were employed.  Of its twelve shop stewards 6 were Communists and there was a fraction of 30 Party members among the workers.  Not many Party members, would you say? ... The Party controlled only one in every 60 of the workers, but it controlled half of the shop stewards. ... 
"In the Fire Brigades Union during the war I was part of a conspiracy that removed eight national officers who stood in the way of the Communist march to full control.  Most of them were wiped out of the way by breaking down their health ... Where the rest fought back we turned on a whispering campaign ... If his personal life was so blameless that not even the most credulous would believe lies about it, then we rumoured that he was in truck with the bosses, that he was a Tory sympathiser.  And if that were not successful, we whispered that he was a secret Communist.  That always worked ...  it is probably a most vivid indication of Communist cynicism that whole secretly deriding decency and honesty such as the ordinary man cherishes, the Party makes a point of arrogating such virtues to itself in its propaganda. ...
"... the Hackney Communist Party at one time or another controlled 28 out of 35 union branches in the borough.  Yet at no time has its trade union strength been higher than 150.  Those 150 men and women swung Hackney's unionists behind the banner of Lenin and Stalin ... What they did and what they are still doing is miraculous, if the devil can work miracles.  Hackney's Communists have forged a pattern for the [Communist] Party's seizure of power.  Again and again I have ... heard the Party's leaders say smugly: 'We could take over the country in 24 hours...'." 
Darke also makes the point that he was only given his Communist Party backed position on the Executive of the Fire Brigades Union in WWII after he had abstained from Communist Party meetings due to the Communist Party's backing of the aggressive joint USSR-Nazi invasion of Poland (the USSR also invaded Finland) under the misnamed "Non-Aggression Pact" of August 1939.  They corruptly have him power to compensate for their backing of Stalin's evil.  Darke finally flipped and resigned from the Communist Party after Stalin stoked up the Korean War tensions by sending hundreds of Russian MIG-15 jet fighters to shoot down American B-29 bombers, thereby helping the Communist North Koreans impose the tyranny that persists to this day.  Darke explains on page 155:
"The editor of the local paper challenged me in an editorial to declare which side I would be on in the event of a war between Britain and Russia."
When Darke refused to evade the question but came down against Russia, his Communist Party comrades came after him.  Dark writes in his Conclusion, pages 157-9:
"It [the Communist Party] is able and ready to take advantage of the slightest weakness on the part of any non-Communist, be he Socialist or Tory.  It is a party constantly at war.  Its members are the victims of a war-neurosis, a war-fever and a war-hysteria. ... Whenever the Communist Party of Great Britain has obtained domination within a trade union it has done so by exploiting the apathy of the ordinary rank and file.  Whenever it has lost that power ... it has been because the rank and file has at last stood up and fought back, has attended meetings, has recognised and rejected the stacked votes ... We are in danger of seeing a Communist menace in terms of the Alan Nunn Mays, the Klaus Fuchs and Pontecorvos only. ... Bans and witch-hunts are of small value.  The Communist Party, long experienced in turning victimisation into political propaganda, is hit hardest when the workers vote against it. ... We have built up a movement which is based on a man's right to be heard and represented in whatever way he chooses, a movement which is based on man's fundamental belief in the decency of his neighbour.  Communist will replace this with a society based on man's fundamental fear of his neighbour. ... 
"There are people, apart from the most cynical Communists, who believe that a Durham miner, a Lancashire cotton worker or a London busman can get along without freedom of speech ... I have not lived among working folk all my life to believe that ..."
DARKE ON THE CRIMINAL WAR MENTALITY RATIONALE OF LEFT WING DUPES
"We knew that Communism would only come to Britain after a great defeat.  We knew that the defeat of Britain in a war against Russia would bring the Red Army and Communism.  Then why were we appealing for peace?  You answer the question. ... What I had done for the [Communist] Party, what I was doing, began to leave a sour taste in my mouth. ... 
"Apart from one final peace meeting which I organised in Stoke Newington Hall, my efforts were all half-hearted now. ... British soldiers went East to fight for the United Nations [against Communist dictatorship in Korea].  'Hands off Korea!' came the slogan, evoking bitter memories in those who remembered the Hands-off-this-and-that campaigns of the pre-war days. ... When I read of shiploads of ammunition exploding, of factory disasters and strikes, my thoughts went back to the French Comrade's theatrical exhortations: 'The arms must never get there!  This is the period of Communist heroism!'  I never felt less like a Communist hero ... My doubts, my defection and hesitation soon aroused the local Party suspicion."
- Bob Darke, The Communist Technique in Britain, Penguin Books Special S160, 1952, pages 148-154.

Darke was 25 when he joined the Communist Party of Great Britain (CPGB) in 1933, when it has 3,000 members.  As a result of Prime Minister Winston Churchill's collaboration with Stalin in WWII, and union control by Dark, who a member of the CPGB's National Industrial Committee for 10 years, CPGB membership soared to over 100,000 in 1945 (source: Darke, page 86).

By 1952, after the USSR imposed dictatorships across Eastern Europe, CPGB membership had fallen back to 30,000.  But because of the controlling nature of CPGB fanaticism with infiltrating positions of power, as Darke explains, each member was had the real equivalence to a hundred or so members of other parties, so that 30,000 in 1952 were loud-mouthed fanatics with a similar media voice to other parties with 3 million members.  Darke on pages 94-5 shows how this fanatic control was enforced by CPGB General Secretary Pollitt when a resolution proposing a "mild criticism" of CPGB activity was made in the Communist Party Congress:
"For some minutes other delegates on the floor watched to see which was the cat was going to jump.  Then Pollitt, as General Secretary, launched into a violent speech, mercilessly attacking the resolution and its proposers as deviationist, provocationist, opportunist, Trotskyist, any term found in the Party abuse book.  You would have thought that the little borough resoluton was going to wreck the Party. 
"Having been given their lead from the Executive, other delegates leaped to their feet and excelled each other in attacking the harmless resolution.  They were well disciplined.  Nobody attempted to answer the criticism raised in the resolution, but all abused the comrades who had moved it.  They were only too happy to crawl out of the conference hall with their resolution unanswered. ... 
"After 18 years' experience of this discipline I think I can understand how it is that Party leaders on trial in Poland, Hungary, Czechoslovakia behave like puppets in the dock.  They have become creatures of Communist discipline, accepting the Party's absolute authority, so that even when the Party places them on trial for their lives, they still obey the commands of that discipline."