Why I am supporting Solutions Barbados’ national rebuilding project

Update: September 8, 2019

Solutions Barbados failed to win a single seat in the 2018 general election in Barbados.

And since then there has been an exodus of party members and/or supporters, according to my sources.

Due to a failure of communication, the dialogue and possible partnership I had hoped to develop with party leader Grenville Phillips has not materialized.

Phillips was always facing an uphill task but a gradient steepened by what may be a self-imposed isolation from the concerns of average Barbadians probably has not helped his cause.

I continue to wish him and any who have not abandoned him the best in their endeavors.


From my vantage point, the best chance Barbados has of being saved from its present, long-standing, deeply dangerous economic, moral and political state of affairs rests with Solutions Barbados, led by structural engineer Grenville Phillips.

I believe that Solutions Barbados, founded and led by Mr Phillips, who is possibly “the first ever chartered structural engineer to run for elective politics anywhere on our planet”, is the most holistically credible and trustworthy of the newer political parties that will be contesting the May 24 Barbados general election.

Employing the metaphor of a “bunker” and the “parking problem” I introduced in my previous article, I make bold to say that Mr Phillips and the other 27 candidates standing with him currently provide the safest most secure options Barbadians have for rebuilding, re-orienting and rejuvenating our long abused, scandalously misused economy and society.

Indeed, as a creative Caribbean change catalyst and holistic, domino effect development driver of more than 30 years standing myself, it is my studied view that Barbadians’ individual and collective brands will yield the richest possible dividends only if they are prophetically (and profitably) parked or invested in the Solutions Barbados bank of human capital that Phillips, the son of one of Barbados’ most distinguished business leaders, and his party colleagues are building.

In fact, were it not for the young ages of my children and other matters which make it necessary for me to live in England at the moment (despite the fact that their mother and I have been separated since 2010), I would probably have been standing in that general election as a candidate for Solutions Barbados, as I was invited to do, by Phillips.

Mr Phillips invited me to be a Solutions Barbados candidate when I visited Barbados last October.

I was keen to take up the offer because, as those who follow this blog and my other online communication channels are aware, I have been questioning the fitness of the ruling Democratic Labour Party (DLP) and the opposition Barbados Labour Party (BLP) to lead Barbados for many years.

My reservations about the DLP and BLP, the two parties that have dominated Barbadian politics since the island’s independence in 1966, are based first and foremost on my interactions with and observations of the conduct of members and supporters of both the DLP and BLP, over several years.

I was born into and raised in a DLP household.


My late father as a young man
My late father as a young man


My father, the late Jeffrey Campbell (of Jeffrey Campbell Hi Fi “fame”) was an active trade unionist and was virtually “bonded” to the late DLP power broker Sir Richard Haynes, for whom he canvassed in Carrington Village and other Nazareth approximating Barbadian parking spaces.

Also, and as I indicated in the previous article published here, I had a brief but significant conversation with Prime Minister Stuart last October and my interactions, directly and indirectly, with Ms Mottley go back to the 1990s, at least, when I was working on a cricket based board game called Quicket.

I have engaged even more extensively with current BLP supporter and prominent Pan Africanist activist David Comissiong, currently doing the rounds on BLP platforms in a bid to see his cousin Mottley and other BLP candidates elected.

All BLP and DLP members and activists are implicated in the Barbados-sown, globally grown campaign of character assassination and intellectual property rape and sabotage that I have been the target of for more than 30 years.

Indeed, at varying times, in varying ways, BLP, DLP, NDP (founded by Haynes), PEP (founded by Comissiong) and other labour politics preaching, political capital grasping individuals and their local, regional and international allies have acted consciously or unconsciously to undermine my and others’ efforts to live by the labour of our hands and minds, for the benefit of our immediate and wider Barbadian families.

I would even go so far as saying that consciously or unconsciously all Barbadians (myself included), not just our politicians, have contributed in some way to the decline of our economy, society and individual well being that we are currently experiencing.

My own primary shortcoming, perhaps, has been my “big picture” preoccupation and ambition, which no doubt made some observers question the pragmatism of my program.

Certainly, since founding my business Intelek International (formerly The Roots Academy) in the 1980s, I have not only been working for the benefit of all Barbadians and Caribbean people, but in spirit and truth, for all humanity.

My song “Small Beginnings” serves as a reminder to me of the importance of pursuing a grounded, organic growth vision, thereby reconciling my nationalist and internationalist ideals and agendas.

Yet despite knowing this, Comissiong particularly, with the conscious or unconscious complicity of my current local MP Clive Lewis, of the British Labour Party, current University of the West Indies Vice Chancellor Sir Hilary Beckles, fundamentalist feminist activist lecturer Margaret Gill, politician “porn prince” Donville Inniss and other conscious and unconscious Barbadian, British, American, Canadian, Indian, Nigerian and other gender, race and religious flag flying racketeers have conspired to block and frustrate the conciliatory legal and other efforts I have made to free myself of the psycho-social choke-holds that they have persistently sought to hold me in.



L-R Rev Sonia Hinds, Margaret Gill, Sandra Richards, Joy Workman and Diane Cummins. Beautiful maidens all in a row? Or thought terrorists, tragically confused and forlorn?
L-R Rev Sonia Hinds, Margaret Gill, Sandra Richards, Joy Workman and Diane Cummins. Beautiful maidens all in a row? Or thought terrorists, tragically confused and forlorn?



As recently as May 1, “Sista Docta” Sandra Richards, Beckles’, Comissiong’s and Gill’s UWI Cave Hill colleague and Pan Africanist ally, sent me a thinly veiled death threat because I made it clear to her, in unambiguous terms, that I was aware that she had been undermining me and my gender, race and religious labels transcending work for years.

“Rest in peace” the DLP-BLP divide and rule demagoguery channeling, racial rhetoric reliant Richards wrote during an exchange of text messages, after I questioned her level of literacy.

I had suggested her “fundamental problem” is “some kind of illiteracy” because despite clear written evidence of my efforts to be understanding, empathetic and conciliatory toward her, while declaring my deep hurt and disappointment over her treacherous treatment of me, Richards who was at the time in London for her mother’s funeral (sadly), accused me of “misdirected fury” toward her and threatened to report me to the Metropolitan Police.

This kind of subtle, indirect aggression is just part of the campaigns of psychological warfare that I have been subjected to by Barbadian and other conscious or unconscious fundamentalist feminists and race racketeers like Richards since at least the 1990s.

It is part of the pattern of negative labeling and misrepresentation that simplistic secular-religious news separation channeling Caribbean journalists Harold Hoyte, Al Gilkes, Julius Gittens, David Ellis, Dennis Johnson, Kaymar Jordan, Francine Alexander-Charles and their American and British associates (including Sandra Moore, Mike Liggins, Rita Johnson, Jill Lawless, Herbert Dyer and others) have perpetrated against me, consciously or unconsciously.

Even approaches I have made to the Inter American Commission on Human Rights, the Washington based International Center for Journalism, the Inter American Press Association, Britain’s National Union of Journalists and the Church of England to have my dilemma highlighted and addressed appear to have been thwarted, consciously or unconsciously, directly or indirectly by BLP, DLP and affiliated academic, political, religious and commercial interests.

It is only by the grace of God and the prayers of those who call on a “Name Above All Names” (Philippians 2:9), in my defense, that I have survived the conscious and unconscious conspiring of DLP, BLP and other politicians and activists who have been raping and robbing Barbados, consciously and unconsciously, since at least the 1960s.

It is first and foremost my faith in God, which powers my Emperor Haile Selassie simulating “confidence in the victory of good over evil” that has kept me sane despite BLP, DLP, Tory, Labour, Liberal Democrat, UKIP (yes, I remember your moral bipolar bungling, Lorraine Winslade) and other efforts to create a “hostile environment” in Barbados, the UK, the US and elsewhere for me and others in my Intelek International “family”.

This forgiveness focused, empathy engendering faith, modeled on the self sacrifice of Joshua of Nazareth, has saved me from the kind of “misdirected fury” that Richards accused me of – just before she practiced it herself, ironically.

This Christocentric, more so than “Christian” faith, informs my acknowledgement of the “divine spark” in all of us, irrespective of our gender, race, religious or other labels and the limitation of vision and fallibility of faith that these labels or “bunker categories” (as philosopher-film maker Zarina Khan calls them) may entail.

And this faith in God is the primary basis of my support for Solutions Barbados: a party founded on a personal faith in God that guarantees that however errant or fallible we or our interpretations of the Bible, the Koran, the Torah, the Upanishads or any other religious text may be, we may enjoy divine favor and mercy.

Since initiating communication with Phillips in July 2015, I have come to respect and admire him increasingly.

But I am not supporting his political initiative because I think he or it is perfect.

I am supporting him and Solutions Barbados because whatever this immensely gifted civil engineer may lack in political experience, he seems to make up for more than adequately in a fear of God based honesty and integrity.

Like the simultaneously humble and proudly emerging astrological therapy evangelist and practitioner Maria Mavropoulos-Stoliarenko, I see a challenging but overall bright future for Solutions Barbados, regardless of the outcome of tomorrow’s general election.

The planets are aligned in the first structural engineer to stand in elective politics on this planet’s favor!

My own seismology and semantics intersection tracking “software” is discerning positive vibrations emanating toward Soulutions Barbados  from the earth’s core.

I predict that Barbadians will thrive under Phillips’ and other key party members and supporters guidance in ways that the economic historian Tristram Hunt, who included Barbados’ capital city Bridgetown in his chronicle of Ten Cities That Made An Empire, could ever have anticipated.

This is partly because I am anticipating support for Solutions Barbados from Stuart, Mottley, Comissiong, Owen Arthur and others, provided they have the good sense to abandon the antiquated gender, race and religious racketeering artifices of the BLP and DLP, and make a quantum leap out of the divisive party politics that George Lamming and other seers have dubbed destroyers of Barbados’ human capital.

Guided by the faith of our African and European Christocentric ancestors, Barbadians are poised to lead the world in the ministry of reconciliation (2 Corinthians 5:11-21).

The opportunity to be a channel of God’s peace that was squandered when a glory grabbing, historical racial grievance exploiting spirit got the better of then Deputy Prime Minister Mottley (or was she the Attorney General?), Sir Hilary, Comissiong, the scandalous opportunist Aaron “Buddy” Larrier, the gay marriage “gofer” Peter Wickham and others who hijacked brand Barbados at the United Nations’ World Conference Against Racism in 2001 is now once again before Barbadians.

The divinely inspired Soulutions Barbados nation rebuilding project can surpass anything that the secular historian Hunt, who possibly identifies as an atheist or agnostic, could imagine, given the limitations of economic theory, which, incidentally appears to be being radically rethought.

The magnitude 4.6 earthquake that shook Barbados on April 28, 2018 (UTC Time), two days after PM Stuart finally announced the long awaited date for the now imminent general election, is a sign to those who recognize the interdependence of natural and spiritual phenomena.

Mottley herself spoke recently of the significance of the number 8, symbolizing “new beginnings”, during a religious service to mark the 80th anniversary of the founding of the BLP.

But while she apparently took the symbolism of the day she was speaking as a sign of God’s seal of approval on her determination to be Barbados’ first woman prime minister, she apparently had no regard for the fact that the symbolism could arguably apply more radically to God’s seal of approval on a new party: Solutions Barbados.

Mottley therefore demonstrated the kind of self-serving symbol rendering “illiteracy” that Richards displayed on May 1.

But then Mottley’s very name, sadly, denotes disparity, incongruity and confusion.

Holding her in as high a regard as I do, indeed as I do Gill, Richards, Comissiong, Beckles, my local MP Lewis, the Allvoices-Pulse Point affiliated journalist and former soldier Dyer and others, despite their betrayals, I cannot help but feel sorry for Mottley.

That is why I hope she has the good sense to try to work with Phillips, rather than perpetuate the gender rivalry and racketeering that has been shaking the foundations of Barbadian family life and wider social cohesion to its core – like the November 2009, magnitude 7.4 (note that 7 x 4 = 28) earthquake that marked a new seismological era for Barbados.

I hope Mottley, her spiritual backer Reverend Sonia Hinds and other women with whom the simultaneously homicidal and suicidal Richards is close, has the good sense to abandon the zero sum gender games that Barbara Rambousek of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development  and other highly, strategically placed women seem adept at playing, even as they, like Richards, deplore such micro aggression.

A year or so ago, I tried to draw Rambousek’s and others’ attention to the tragic, counterproductive potential of the London based EBRD’s female inclusion programs, evident, I dare say, in the fact that 84 men a week are apparently committing suicide in England, as business woman and empathy advocate Belinda Parmar recently disclosed on an edition of BBC Radio 4’s Woman’s Hour.

I hope that notwithstanding the phenomena of nominative determinism of Mottley’s name, readers will see the seismic rumblings and shaking that have become worryingly frequent in Barbados as omens pointing to the highly volatile, extremely dangerous character of the deeply submerged, conspiratorial “silence of Omerta” character of the fundamentalist feminism that Mottley courts, consciously or unconsciously.

The Solutions Barbados leader’s name can be rendered as “big city, horse power lover”. And he and his colleagues will certainly need all the horse power and stamina at their disposal to turn the divisive gender, race and religious politics and racketeering that is undermining Barbados’ vital values consensus around.

I am calling on all Barbadians at home and abroad to do their part to support him.

Vote Solutions Barbados and join and contribute to its peace and prosperity building program.

My parking charge problem and a Barbados 2018 general election reflection

Parking ticket issued by Norwich City Council
Parking ticket issued by Norwich City Council


I recently submitted the following appeal for a parking fine I was slapped with by Norwich City Council a few weeks ago.

The appeal is a small part of a program of human rights advocacy I have been pursuing on my own and others’ behalf, in response to a Barbados-sown, globally grown campaign of psychological warfare that has been directed against me for more than half a century now.

Liversage (4th from right) and other members of Kotu Drummers in the Gambia
Liversage (4th from right) and other members of Kotu Drummers in the Gambia

I share the words of that appeal here as a template for the kind of human ecology focused activist litigation that I have been developing with the direct and indirect assistance of visual artist Deborah Liversage (currently “parked out” in The Gambia), the environmental justice litigators Client Earth, the mental health advocacy network Emerging Proud and various other individuals and organizations which, while not inerrant and infallible agents, have much to offer as channels of healing in the world.

My hope, at the very least, is to underscore the links between the choices that Barbadians will make in the upcoming May 24 general elections on that island (where I was “parked” for a brief period last October) and political and other developments unfolding in England, which has been my “bunker” since July 4th, 2006, when I arrived here as an immigrant.

My choice of the term “bunker”, instead of garage or parking space is explained in the next two paragraphs.

An heir to the wins and woes of the so-called Windrush Generation of Caribbean immigrants, I share with the Pakistani-Indian spawned, Tunisia-based Russian Orthodox Church nurtured filmmaker Zarina Khan a sense of the wisdom in us all seeing ourselves as world citizens.

Khan, who apparently first “made a name” for herself with a dramatic project undertaken in war torn Sarajevo has said “One of the main obstacles facing us all is the way society hides behind ‘bunkers of categories’. We cannot say, who we are if we cannot say, where we come from or which community we belong to. That is a major obstacle, which must be undone, urgently. My work is about undoing frontiers and categories. An urgent process, because those bunkers are where war begins.”

However, my work, as a Linguistics trained, Pentecostal tongues speaking, studying and theorizing holistic communications and education specialist, involves ridding the clearly well meaning Khan, Barbadian politicians Freundel Stuart, Mia Mottley, David Comissiong, Grenville Phillips and others of the delusion that a world entirely without “bunkers of categories” is either desirable or possible.

It is to help them appreciate and navigate the complex Yin-Yang complementarity that is at the core of human identity and existence.

My focus, as indicated in various ways, at various points in my artwork, books, music and other creative output, is what I called the “nucleus of reality” in my November 1982 penned poem Communion.

And at the time I wrote them, I probably had only a very infant inkling or understanding of how my inking of those three words could be related to or be a corollary of the relatively recent emergence of “String theory” in the study of the atom.


An appeal for dialogue - my poem "Communion"superimposed on the parking ticket I received.
An appeal for dialogue – my poem “Communion”superimposed on the parking ticket I received.







From my point of view, therefore, Khan’s own excessive preoccupation with the abuse of religion to rationalize war is perhaps the most formidable obstacle to the realization of her good intentions.

From my lexical labels transcending point of view “religion” is no more responsible for wars than the secular calculations that drove Adolf Hitler’s, Joseph Stalin’s, Slobodan Milosovic’s, Marshal Mobutu’s and other seemingly blood thirsty, megalomaniac political leaders’ agendas.

And I blame the mainstream media’s divisive, simplistic and ultimately unhelpful labeling  of complex phenomena as “religious” or “secular”, thereby parking those phenomena in facile classification bunkers (or parking spaces), for the cognitive confusion and psychological distress that so many British citizens and residents suffer.

Aided and abetted by their shortsighted allies in politics, commerce and academia, the mainstream media is consciously or unconsciously creating a haze of morality that is as psycho-socially suffocating as the industrial activity generated smog that covers large parts of China and India.

My appeal to Norwich City Council is intended as a breath of fresh air, to alert the relevant officers of that and related organizations to the need for them to do their part to ensure that we all live in a wholesome, high air quality environment.

We have enough of the low minded fogging of facts and suppression of truth by fake news peddling traditional and new (social) media opportunists to last us an eternity.

The lethally literalistic word play of University of the West Indies “quality assurance” executive Dr Sandra Richards, who recently ended a very serious, contentious conversation that she and I were having with the words, “Rest in peace”, is clearly calculated to work like carbon monoxide on the mind, not clear the air, so that she and I can both breathe easy; breathe freely.

And it is not only the antithesis of the healing rhetoric that Richards’, UWI Vice Chancellor Sir Hillary Beckles and other UWI officials preach.

Richards’ threat is also the latest attack she and Mottley admirers, like her UWI colleague Margaret Gill, have perpetrated against me, in the long-running Barbados sown, globally grown campaign of character assassination and economic sabotage that conscious or unconscious succubus socialists have led enthusiastically.

I publish my appeal of the Norwich City Council parking ticket or Penalty Charge Notice (PCN), partly as a rebuke to those who like my “bad minded” Barbadian academic compatriots pursue a simultaneously homicidal and suicidal Pan Africanist and White Supremacist pedagogy.

My appeal is published here to remind them and their allies at Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital, Norfolk Constabulary, Norfolk County Council, Hellesdon Hospital, BBC Norfolk, the University of East Anglia and everywhere else in the Commonwealth of nations of our global, oxygen oriented interdependence.

In Stigmata, an as yet unpublished collection of writings, I quote the late Martin Luther King Jr who, speaking to the issue of human interdependence wrote,

“In a real sense all life is inter-related. All men are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny. Whatever affects one directly affects all indirectly. I can never be what I ought to be until you are what you ought to be, and you can never be what you ought to be until I am what I ought to be. This is the inter-related structure of reality.”

The “greater goal” of the forthcoming Stigmata collection is to demonstrate solidarity with those across the length and breadth of Barbados who struggle with the social oxygen denying, micro aggression perpetrating and other character assassinating effects of stigmatization every day.

As I note in Stigmata “Barbadian society, partly because of its demographic ‘smallness’ and ‘closeness’ and partly because of its conservative historical evolution, probably tends to stigmatize rather more aggressively and permanently than other societies.”

I have also linked this self-destructive, judgmental attitude to Barbadians’ excessive dependence on written things, a dependence to which our pride in our 98% literacy rating attests.

I extensively explain the dangers of excessive dependence on written things or “scripture” in religious and other matters in my book The Bible: Beauty and Terror Reconciled.

Former Labour Party MP Tristram Hunte, the economic historian who now heads the London-based Victoria and Albert Museum, failed to engage with this aspect of Barbados’ “knowledge industry” as holistically as he could have in his 2014 publication Ten Cities That Made An Empire,  where the role of Barbados’ capital Bridgetown in the building of the British empire is detailed.

Mia Mottley, courtesy Twitter
Mia Mottley, courtesy Twitter

Barbadian Zarina Khan, who specializes in real estate and intellectual property trading could probably educate Hunte about the interdependence of Britain and Barbados in these core economic spheres.

Not to be confused with the Pakistani-Indian-Tunisian-French film maker Khan, the Barbadian Khan probably knows what it means to experience significant breathing difficulty through the British Home Office recalling creation of a “hostile environment” because of her proximity to Barbadian politics.

It was through Khan that I first met the Barbadian Mottley, in the 1990s, when I was seeking legal advice about a cricket-based board game I was creating called “Quicket”.

More on Khan, Quicket, related issues of nominative determinism and a brief conversation I had with Barbados PM Stuart, in my next article here.

In the meantime, I would be grateful if readers would let me know what they think of my appeal and if they have any similar legal appeal stories to share.

I can be reached by email at this address: poeticjazztice04@yahoo.co.uk; or on Twitter: @Poeticjazztice.



The text of my PCN

As I told the officer who issued the PCN, I had only been parked for a few minutes to check if I was at the right location, the address of the Elim Church I was visiting.
I was there to seek the help of that church’s leadership with a number of personal and community challenges that I am addressing in my capacity as a holistic communication and education specialist.

Unfortunately, I became “distracted”, as I occasionally do, because of the mental and emotional (cognitive and affective) weight of the burdens that I am being made to carry by the collective hostility and/or indifference of my GP, my local MP, Clive Lewis, Twitter CEO Bruce Daisley, some Norfolk Constabulary, Hellesdon Hospital, Lloyds Bank, Utility Warehouse, University of East Anglia, European Bank for Reconstruction and Development and British Broadcasting Corporation personnel and other individuals and organizations that in various ways have been consciously and unconsciously undermining my and my family’s well being and life prospects directly and indirectly.

This collective, conscious and unconscious hostility and/or indifference, has created a “hostile environment” that is linked not only to the current Conservative government’s immigration policy but also to the current and past gender, race and religion racketeering tactics and immigration intrigues of the Labour Party, the Liberal Democrats, the United Kingdom Independence Party and other political entities.

My visit to that Elim Church and other formal and informal (including legal) initiatives that I have embarked on are part of my efforts to engage constructively with the Labour Party, Norfolk County Council, the Church of England, the Roman Catholic Church, Ishaan Mosque and other religious and secular groups and individuals, so that we can adress the “ambient terror” that we are all experiencing.

I believe that psycho-social terror and/or anxiety is evident in the phobias, suicides, murders, marital breakdowns and other symptoms of Britain’s ongoing national identity crisis, especially in issues around Brexit.

And the state of distraction that contributed to my failure to return to my car in a timely manner on April 22, 2018 (and before that, my failure to properly read the instructions about parking outside the time limits allowed for that particular space) is in fact one of the less harmful consequences of the state of psychological siege that I am living under as a result of my MP Mr Lewis’ and other politically motivated individuals’ and/or groups’ hostility and/or indifference.

Thanks to the conscious and unconscious gender, race and religious racketeering of current and former Norfolk Police personnel and their “partners” in Norfolk’s majority and minority ethnic communities, I have been living with an irregular heart rhythm (atrial fibrilation) since at least 2008.

This psyhcosomatic affliction puts me at risk of a stroke or heart attack, a situation described by one doctor as habitually drinking from a river in which crocodiles are submerged and ready to strike at any minute.


Sandra Richards with her UWI colleague Margaret Gill, who had demonstrated that she "looooathes" me long before she declared it.
Sandra Richards with her UWI colleague Margaret Gill, who had demonstrated that she “looooathes” me long before she declared it.











And then there are the two-legged crocodiles who wish me dead because of my outspokenness against their gender (including gay rights), race and religious political racketeering.
One of them, an influential Barbadian academic, Dr Sandra Richards, sent me a threatening message (“rest in peace”) on Monday, May 1, when she and I had an argument.

Like the “unapologetic trade unionist” Mr Lewis, his former BBC colleague Rita Johnson and other politically well-connected Norfolk residents, Dr Richards, an employee of the University of the West Indies responsible for “quality assurance”, seems to think that my challenging of her evangelical fundamentalist Pan Africanist beliefs is an offence that is punishable by death, literally or at least metaphorically.
Please note that Mr Lewis MP recently sentenced me to a kind of metaphorical death by refusing to enter a dialogue with me to resolve past disagreements amicably.

These and other matters weigh heavily on my mind daily – like the “psych ops” that Conservative MP Ian Duncan Smith once boasted that he and other Brexiters deployed as part of their EU referendum strategy.

So, I am using the opportunity this PCN appeal has provided me to ask Norwich City Council to spare me the financial and psycho-social stress and hardship that this parking fine is likely to cause me.

Moreover, I would urge Norwich City Council to consider that given the extraordinarily hostile “psych ops” assault conditions I am currently living under, by setting aside this appeal against your parking fine, you would be endorsing the “hostile environment” that my MP Mr Lewis, Dr Richards and others have been consciously or unconsciously conspiring to create for me.
I believe this is a contravention of Norwich City Council’s, Mr Lewis’ and other public official’s and bodies’ duty to provide a safe environment for the citizens and lawful residents of this country.
In this regard, I draw your attention to at least three decisions that have gone against the UK government for failing to ensure that all who reside within its borders have the clean air required for them to “breathe easy” (https://www.clientearth.org/government-loses-third-air-pollution-case-judge-rules-air-pollution-plans-unlawful/).





“Careful” conversations with Selma James’ ( Cosmic Cricket- part 1)



How women’s reproductive words become flesh

I had my third conversation with the disarmingly self-deprecating yet profoundly assertive and politically potent Crossroads Women’s Center founder Selma James on Wednesday, February 21.
Essentially in the form of an interview, this conversation, our first, “fleshy”, face-to-face engagement, focused mainly on communication challenges and the careful listening and speaking that is required to avoid the pitfalls that bedevil all human communication: pitfalls that stem at least partly from the arbitrary, patently conventional yet unpredictable character of spoken language and its written representations.


James and I agree on the obscurity of language.


In fact, when I suggested that even at our best, human beings cannot communicate beyond certain parameters, James went further, saying “We can’t communicate at all”.
But James obviously did not intended for those words to be taken literally.


Why would she do the interview if she did not think there was some chance of getting her message across?

However, her intensification, one might even say excessive affirmation of the point that I had made, may prove true of the apparent Utopian Marxist James’ most careful and cared for communication in the long term, ironically.

Tragically, the considerable good that James and other Marxist feminists have accomplished in underscoring the value of women’s so-called “invisible work” risks being overshadowed by Utopian, group think expectations of what the visible valuing of women’s or anyone else’s work should entail.
As I argue below James and other Marxist secularists seem prone to the very excesses of religious “heaven on earth” or “pie in the sky” thinking that they rightly associate with the “opiate of the masses”.


Selma James in May 2016 Courtesy The Big Issue.
Selma James in May 2016 Courtesy The Big Issue.

Yet if millennia of religious and secular ideology based pursuit of a perfect world has taught us nothing else, has it not taught us the impossibility of perpetual, pervasive peace on earth?

Much as I applaud James’ apparent unfailing optimism, which in many ways reflects the pragmatic hope and sense of purpose that powers my own often thankless “invisible” work, I cannot help but be uneasy about the prospect of her and others’ work ending in frustration, or worse, for them and others.

Fundamentalist evangelical feminists may be happy to blame men for all the communication failures that have culminated in wars and other forms of conflict, but most people will agree that in the “battle of the sexes” both sides are at fault and at risk.

What I hope this analysis of James and my careful conversations makes clear are the challenges that we all face if women’s and men’s words are to be fleshed out or incarnated fruitfully and have their intended inter-generational, “carnal knowledge” curating and harmonizing, creative outcomes.


It was toward this end I that referenced the idea of the “banality of evil”, popularized by political theorist Hannah Arendt, during my interview with James, as a counter to her selectively pessimistic, self-fulfilling prophecy risking, mainstream media modeled view of communication challenges.


The danger of this morbidly mechanistic, deadly digital view, the price that women, men and children are all paying for superficial, corporate deadlines driven news coverage and analysis, with its simplistic secular-religious dichotomies and antagonisms, can hardly be calculated.


But persons familiar with the views propagated by Canadian nationalist Harold Innis (November 5, 1894 – November 8, 1952) about threats posed by the American advertising industry and wider media machine to Canada’s culture and economy will appreciate the point I am making.


So too will those familiar with the warning of Karl Jung, often quoted by me, regarding what is lost by “modern man’s” simplistic rejection of the existence of a spiritual realm. Here is Jung’s warning again:

“Modern man does not understand how much his “rationalism . . . has put him at the mercy of the psychic “underworld . He has freed himself from ‘superstition’ (or so he believes), but in the process he has lost his spiritual values to a positively dangerous degree. His moral and spiritual tradition has been disintegrated, and he is now paying the price for this break-up in world-wide disorientation and dissociation.”


The inclusion here of the above “Beast from the East” video, references to the Jewish festival Purim, with which the Jewish James may be familiar and my employment of cricket language and themes is part of my attempt to not only demonstrate the validity of engaging with the spirit world “metaphorically” but to explore its metaphysical, Caribbean creole communication continuum resembling reality.




James batting on a ‘sticky wicket’

In the brief essay “A Word About Words”, one of the introductory segments of my book The Bible: Beauty and Terror Reconciled (subsequently TBBTR), I briefly address the kind of conversational pitfalls that make communication perilous for persons like James and I, who speak the same language – in our case, English.

As I note in TBBTR, citing Jamaican linguist Merlene Cuthbert, same language speakers are at times in danger of misunderstanding each other because they make assumptions about what each other means to say when they use shared words.

This perverse potential of spoken words was no doubt a key factor behind the Marxist feminist James’ decision to have her own recording of our conversation created.

Another key factor, probably, was the way the conversation was going at that moment, approximately 1 minute 20 seconds after I had started recording it, using the camera on my mobile phone.


I was forced to use my phone after another camera I had borrowed specifically for our interview turned out to be inoperable because it needed charging.


And when my phone camera’s capacity was exhausted I used its audio recorder to capture another 29:12 minutes of conversation with James.

And the ‘siesmological’ or, in technical creole linguistic terms, the substratal, yet richly symbolic significance of these recording gadget gymnastics will become apparent as this written record of James’ and my careful conversation progresses.

The manner in which James and I marshalled and utilized our respective Marxist and “Christian” (I prefer the term Christocentric) experiences to converse both collaboratively and competitively, like cricket captains exploiting climatic and other atmospheric conditions on the field of play, certainly makes for an engaging cosmic cricket commentary.
For now though, it will suffice to say that like that borrowed, “dead” camera, something of James and my own cryptic, potent-yet-impotent cerebral capacities are demonstrated.

The clearly confrontational, possibly irreconcilable Marxist and Christocentric experiences and ideas that underlie her and my respective linguistic competences rise to the surface in rather intriguing, continuum of character revealing language performances.


Cyclone Emma and anticyclone Hartmut (the "Beast from the East") colliding over the UK and Europe
Cyclone Emma and anticyclone Hartmut (the “Beast from the East”) colliding over the UK and Europe

A “Beast From The East” like Siberian silence and chill can be detected in all of the three recordings (two video, one audio) I did on my phone in James’ Kentish Town, London office that day.

Links to those recordings, in their unedited entirety can be found here, here and here. And a transcript of all three recordings is also being prepared for publication.
So why post another video recording, created a week later at the start of this article?


As I state in that video, shot in the predawn hours of March 1, I was struck by and wanted to capture something of the deadly, silent assassin character of the heavy snowfall we were experiencing in Norfolk and other parts of England: a silence that I felt was not only refracted in or paralleled by James reluctance to discuss details of her marriage to the late Caribbean Marxist and cricket historian CLR James, but also linked to a wider, cosmological yet particular, peculiarly enigmatic “carnal knowledge” marital reality.


I had actually begun to explore this simultaneously attractive yet destructive and therefore repelling, lily-white-yet-deep-night, shadowy capacity of snow in the winter of 2012-13 with a series of articles referencing Norfolk’s deep frieze.


But back then I only had a very limited, hazy sense of how a frosty silence could share features with a God Father and Earth Mother mystique and related Yin-Yang possibilities.


I had only an elementary understanding of how an Anglo-American meteorology mediated, Mediterranean modeled matrimonial “silence of Omerta” could be reconciled to Purim bacchanalia to produce the “substratal” narrative about creole Caribbean cricket and speech that I am attempting here.


And then there are these “waking night” shifts I have been doing, in my Holistic Homecare and Hospitality brief.


Sleep walking as I have been some days, I could be forgiven for not fully appreciating how the emergence of the phrase “Beast from the East” in mainstream Western news reports might be linked to my long running “Mouth of the Beast” series of articles.


Asleep and awake simultaneously, how could I have known that I was metaphysically reconstructing a scene from the movie Zero Dark Thirty?
But notwithstanding my own occasional Ben Carson-like brain fart or brain freeze, I usually know a deathly chill when I have encountered it in another’s speech.


And James’ welcoming warmth and hospitality clearly gives way to beastly chilling, at times abrupt speech and dismissive sentiment – especially when I offer what for her seems to be an intolerable, capitalism excusing take on the causes of the deadly dissolution and failure of the 1979 Grenada Revolution in 1983 (7:21 to 9:23 of the audio recording).


Grenadian descended Barbadian Marxist David Comissiong and his ideological twin Sir Hilary Beckles, a Marxist economic historian, could not have responded more icily!

James’ strident, and from my viewpoint, disappointingly one-sided, ideologically puritanical response can be heard from 7:29 of the audio recording.
In the first video recorded segment of our conversation though, James was playing a more defensive Calypso cricket.

Her thought tango with me was more tentative.

The clearly visible rolling of James’ eyes and a brief, cryptic smile on her face suggest that she is batting “on the back foot” or on a “sticky wicket”, as her late Trinidadian husband CLR, a passionate cricket enthusiast and writer, might have said, if he was in attendance.

James’ ideas are articulated or become flesh rather haltingly and less compellingly at that moment.

Her verbal batting is more reminiscent of the hyper-defensive West Indies batsman Jimmy ‘Pad em’ Adams’ game than the lightning quick master blasters Vivian Richards’ and Brian Lara’s, in that instance.


James’ ideological Kadooment and Purim

James seemed unprepared for my first question about the paradoxical situation that currently exists, where the International Wages For Housework Campaign that she is best known for overshadows the actual housework that she has done and, I imagine, is still doing.

I remain somewhat surprised that the Jewish James, born Deitch, formerly Weinstein (according to Wikipedia) had difficulty responding to that question, not least because I had raised it in the first article I had published about her and my evolving acquaintance.

As I recall, I had also sent James a copy of that article and suggested that she read it ahead of our meeting.
To be fair to her though, I also have a vague recollection of James saying that she may not have been able to access that article for some reason.

Anyway, it was as she was haltingly framing her response to the Purim mask mimicking paradox of her public persona and private praxis, which I had now raised a second or third time, that James’ colleague Sarah Calloway entered her office with refreshments and, simultaneously, proposed that they do their own recording, presumably as a kind of security against James being misquoted by me.


As seen at the end of the first video, James agreed with Calloway, saying “I always like to know what I’m doing, you know.”

This comment is telling, highlighting the fact that despite our previous two telephone conversations, and the publication of the article referencing them, James felt that she did not know enough about me to trust my reporting.

I might as well have been an unknown, masked reveler ‘latching on ‘pon she bumper’ on a Bajan Kadooment morning, as far as she was concerned (those familiar with my Barbados Crop Over festival based Lewd Logic project will have some appreciation of the light-hearted language and imagery I am using here).


James was clearly having second thoughts about my intent.


The person who took this photo of Barbadian-international pop singer Rihanna during Barbados' 2016 Crop Over festival "latched on pon she bumper" (or focused on her buttocks) photographically
The person who took this photo of Barbadian-international pop singer Rihanna during Barbados’ 2016 Crop Over festival “latched on pon she bumper” (or focused on her buttocks) photographically – photo courtesy www.largeup.com

And this arguably legitimate concern about my identity and possible motivation for seeking her out had been indicated earlier, before I had started recording, when James asked me “Who are you really?” or words to that effect.

But my answer, briefly summarizing my evangelical Pentecostal Christian background, subsequent religious disillusionment and current critical yet empathy emphasizing and evoking, Christocentric (more so than “Christian”) metaphysical outlook on life seemed to fall on deaf, or at least, hearing impaired ears.

The lifelong writer James’ considerable powers of mental record making, information recall and application seemed to be inoperable just then, like that camera that I had borrowed to record our long sought, keenly anticipated, carefully negotiated conversation.

That camera was not the only thing that was not performing at optimum capacity, apparently.

And in addition to a recharge of battery, there seems to me to be an even more urgent need for an adjustment of James’ Marxist feminist lens.

Whether it is a question of her age or a consequence of the widely attested obscurity of the current social media transforming, fake news foggy playing conditions that political activists like James, and indeed all of us who would change society for the better are now obliged to perform in, the faltering of James’ vision is unmistakable, sadly.

In particular, the “bad light” or poor visibility that James labours under, through her idealistic interpretation and application of Marx’s teachings, is apparent in her inflexibility on the causes of the failure of the Grenada revolution, as previously noted.


Maurice Bishop with Fidel Castro and Daniel Ortega.
Maurice Bishop with Fidel Castro and Daniel Ortega.

Her dogged denial of my suggestion that Maurice Bishop’s New Jewel Movement “splintered from within”, suggests an idealistic, Utopian Communist inflexibility that is worryingly reminiscent of the ideological rigidity that I have observed among some puritanical Pentecostal and other evangelical fundamentalist Christians, militant Muslims, juridically jaundiced Jews, bigoted Buddhists, hate peddling Hindus and other religious persons.


Areas of incoherence and inconsistency that challenge the authenticity of the very important and valuable work that the autonomist James has done and, remarkably despite her age, is still doing also come to the fore in the equation of money and power in her matriarchal materialist dialectical analysis of women’s “reproductive work”.


I believe that one of the most dire consequences of this clearly unintended, antisocial socialist anomaly, not just for James, but for many women she has influenced directly and indirectly, is evident in the ideological hijacking and political prostitution of womanhood that James herself has lamented persistently.


Moreover, I believe that in assessing the Marxist matriarch James’ legacy, careful consideration needs to be given to her and other clearly well meaning, but excessively ideological feminist activists’ contribution to the opportunistic homogenization or ‘bulk packaging’, politicization and commodification of mothering.


Even as I noted my own paid and unpaid, especially parental caring work, and thanked James for her role in facilitating the financial measurement of unwaged care, thereby allowing for it to be remunerated, I was nonetheless constrained to ask James if she thinks there will ever be a point when there will be “universal agreement” on what a parent’s patting of a son’s or daughter’s head is worth (video recording number 2, from 1:32 to 4:40)?


That is because from my fatherhood and more widely informed point of view, the possibly catastrophic current commodification and politicization of mothering, and fathering latterly, is behind much of the anxiety that British children and parents are suffering, as successive World Happiness Reports published by the United Nations suggest.


Moreover, I believe this conscious or unconscious ideological-political hijacking, excessive monetizing and related undermining of family values, and motherhood in particular, reached a nadir in the public attack of “matriarch” Sir Elton John on the designers Domenico Dolci and Stefano Gabana, when they publicly voiced their reservations about legalistic efforts to make homosexual parenting normative.

Again: “The letter killeth.”


Now, those who know of my ongoing efforts to get legal redress for human rights abuses I have suffered at the hands of the Church of England, the Roman Catholic Church, the British Labour and Conservative parties and other institutions and individuals implicated in a Barbados-sown, globally grown conspiracy to undermine my knowledge trading work and impoverish me can attest to the fact that I value the law highly.


However, if I have managed to communicate nothing else through TBBTR, I should at least have made clear my profound agreement with the ancient dictum that “the law is an ass”, a denunciation of legalism usually traced to Charles Dickens, though rather inaccurately.


Dickens’ deployment of this denunciation by his character Mr Bumble, in his classic novel Oliver Twist is nonetheless very fitting in this article, because Dickens used it to underscore the potential mothering, marital power of women that James and other feminists ignore or undervalue, consciously or unconsciously.



Hence, as one source explains, when Mr. Bumble, the unhappy spouse of a domineering wife, is told in court that “…the law supposes that your wife acts under your direction”, he replies: “If the law supposes that…the law is a ass – a idiot”.


Does Mr Bumble’s denunciation of “the law” differ fundamentally from the biblical denunciation of the lethal capacity of the Jewish scriptures (in the original Greek “te gramma”) in 2 Corinthians 3:6, which I repeatedly stress: “the letter kills”?


Are we not confronted here with the very problem of clouded consciences and hazy vision that Joshua of Nazareth addressed when he is said to have declared “Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me. And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life.” (John 5:39-40 KJV)


Yet the anti-Zionist, supposedly secularism grounded, grass roots reality stressing, philosophical speculation denouncing writer-activist James and other feminists often treat the writings of Mary Wollstoneraft, Virginia Woolf and others as inerrant and infallible holy writ.
They thus fail to engage authentically with the phenomenon of matriarchal marital monopolizing, especially the passive-aggressive guises in which it can masquerade.


“Panty government”, as some Caribbean people crudely call it, is not always openly domineering.


Criminologist Rachel Stuart, an advocate of women’s autonomous agency and culpability in illegal activity has been convicted and imprisoned four times herself, and therefore speaks to these matters with personal authority.


Stuart, Dr Susan Batchelor, I and other members of the British Society of Criminology recently spent an entire day discussing the involvement of women in crime as “victim-offenders” and only managed to scratch the surface of this paradoxical situation.


In the meantime, while James and other women ignore or undervalue women’s soft power, it seems to be finding bold, biological orthodoxy challenging assertion in the pop icon John’s and other gregarious gay men’s conscious or unconscious matriarchal ambitions.


Note that Sir Elton caused a stir in the US in 2010 by describing Jesus as a “compassionate, super-intelligent gay man who understood human problems”.


Also note the coincidental timing of United States president Barack Obama’s 2012 re-election motivated gay marriage endorsement, and Sir Elton’s advocacy of it.


John had previously been content with the notion of “gay partnership”.


And Obama’s links to my native Barbados, through his gay marriage endorsing attorney general Eric Holder are also noteworthy, given Barbados’ historical role in propagating British cultural mores in the Americas, as British economic historian Tristram Hunt has documented in his book Ten Cities That Built An Empire.


But I hardly have time to explore the role of prominent Barbadians like political scientist Peter Wickham and Barbados Labour Party leader Mia Mottley in propagating an emergent homosexual “reproductive work” orthodoxy here.
Sufficeth to say, it seems that what legalistic inflexibility and intolerance in feminism catalyzes, like legalistic inflexibility and intolerance in fundamentalist religious and other spheres, is the “poverty of imagination” (as South African Nobel Prize winner Nadine Gordimer has called it) that the gay parenting rights crusader Sir Elton exhibited even as he accused Dolce and Gabana of a lack of grace.


And those who assume that women’s “sovereignty” over their bodies justifies the capitalist codification and commodification of abortion, making it an absolute, virtually sacrosanct woman’s right, suffer similar literalistic, fundamentalist feminism clouded lenses.


It also seems clear to me that the “rights” of prostitutes advocated by the probable James satellite Motley and other Barbadian and Caribbean feminist socialists, with scant regard for the demoralizing, dehumanizing potential of the sex trade for women and men, can be just as counterproductive and antisocial as the crass clumping and capitalist commodification of marriage by excessive, intrusive Christian, Jewish, Muslim and other binary “block chain” labeling, homosexuality homogenizing, holiness monetizing religious interests.


Readers following my “Mouth of the Beast” series of articles may recall my use of the term “Clump”, a combination of Hilary Clinton’s and Donald Trump’s last names, to draw attention to their stormy marriage mimicking ideological morphology or political co-dependence.


The “Beast from the East” like, turbulent environmental conditions that their traditional and new media intensive political campaigning generated, with the help of their respective Randolph Hearst recalling, huffing and puffing media allies, inevitably undermined the radical rooting in reality that makes any marital “carnal knowledge” communication or exchange authentic.
It is a numbers thing, essentially.



Promises, promises

Think of Chinese Whispers, the communication distortion game.


Like the diffusion and distortion of the Jewish reformer Joshua (Jesus) of Nazareth’s message across temporal and spatial boundaries, the sheer number of “personal” commitments that Clinton and Trump made, or that were made for them, implicitly or explicitly, by authorized or unauthorized members of the Democratic and Republican parties, ensured the obscenity and unreality of their Messianic persona incarnating, political capital amassing activity.


And the inauthentic and deceitful character of the ostensibly woman empowering, but actual sexual slave-making sex cult of which the apparently self-deluded American actress Allison Mack was allegedly the matriarch comes to mind here forcefully.


Allison Mack, courtesy Wikipedia
Allison Mack, courtesy Wikipedia

I have noted the probable roots of Clinton’s and Trump’s messianic complexes in their relationships with their father and mother respectively.
Similarly, I would not be surprised if the Superman star Mack’s relationship with her father has contributed to her alleged co-dependence with the cult leader Keith Raniere, a virtual “Mack daddy”.


But however we view Mack’s and Raniere’s victim-offending, in terms of criminology, it seems clear that an inflexible, intolerant, fundamentalist Marxist lens, like an inflexible, intolerant fundamentalist Christian, Buddhist, Hindu, Islamic, Jewish, Capitalist or any other excessively ideological religious or secular lens, generates bigotry, prejudice and potentially catastrophic stereotyping.
It produces and perpetuates the “gang mentality” or “group think” that I expect James, Galloway and other socialists find abhorrent – at least in theory.
Could anyone who knows James imagine her becoming a Mack-like “groupie”?


Yet it could be argued that James devotion to Marx does not differ from Mack’s devotion to Raniere, substantially.


James salvation, from this perspective, would be the capacity of her brand of Marxism to problematize its own atheistic, materialist cosmology – much like James’ capacity to engage, as fellow Marxist Bettina Aptheker has done, with the sexual abuse she suffered at the hands of her father critically.


Aptheker revealed that abuse in Intimate Politics, her autobiography.
And Aptheker’s openness on this crucial matter contrasts with James’ unwillingness to talk about her relationship with CLR poignantly.


There is certainly ample theoretical, specifically written evidence that James is aware of the dangers of the gang mentality generalizing that has come to the fore during the Brexit referendum in England and around the battle between the matriarch Clinton and patriarch Trump for the United States presidency.


Her colleague Nina Lopez emphasizes James’ insistence on precision, which I applaud and share, in Lopez’s foreword to Sex, Race and Class – The Perspective of Winning, a 2012 publication of a collection of James writings dating back to 1952.
Unfortunately, this insistence on precision was not as much in evidence during the “oracle” James and my conversation.


In fact, James’ chilly response to what she apparently sees as capitalist stereotypes make her insightful writing on class crossing grass roots activism and similar incisive analyses that reflect her insistence on precision seem like Purim masquerading.




Was James mirroring my Columbo-esque performance?
Again, keen to allow James the benefit of the doubt, I am willing to consider the possibility that I am to some degree responsible for that.


Having initiated the tango with James, there is a degree to which my moves dictated her missteps.


She did say after our interview, and unfortunately, off the record, that the question I raised about social media was beyond her competence.


Could my rather relaxed, casual interviewing style, punctuated with long pauses and some half-finished and disjointed sentences, reflecting the fact that I was somewhat sleep deprived after one of my weekly carer night shifts, have induced James into some sleepy or sloppy thinking?


I readily admit to a rather sleepy or sloppy, detective-Columbo-like speech performance that morning.


However, all things considered, I believe that I managed to maintain my “line and length” with something like Australian cricketers Glen McGrath or Shane Warne recalling bowling consistency.


I believe I was able to demonstrate the Barbadian fast bowler Kemar Roach approximating speed and penetration of thought, word and deed that our compatriot, historian Trevor Marshall has labeled a “pursuit of the quintessence of spirituality”, in his foreword to TBBTR.


Ridley Jacobs, courtesy ESPNcricinfo
Ridley Jacobs of the West Indies during the West Indies net practice at the Kensington Cricket Ground, on March 9 2004, in Kingston, Jamaica. (Photo by Ben Radford/Getty Images)

As volatile as Kurtly Ambrose, potentially, when my ire has been ignited, my salvation, so to speak, has been a “pastor” Ridley Jacobs recalling, Christian humility: a humility that I believe was manifested in Jacobs’ consistent stewardship as the West Indies’ wicket-keeper batsman, as I recently told him.



While probably differing with Jacob’s conventional Christian world view in significant ways (I am more likely to pray prostrate rather than kneeling, for one thing), the curiously competitive, yet compassionate and collaborative motivation that informs my relatively open-minded interaction with James shares fundamental Christological, empathy and reconciliation focused features with the Wesleyan wicket keeper Jacob’s theology.


My eclectic, interdisciplinary academic exploits and ideological labels transcending activism resemble Jacobs’ improvisational, unorthodox batting style in some ways.
Basically, despite at times patchy, inconsistent speech production, I was able to maintain conversational coherence and consistency as I interacted with James because of my underlying, time and space tested commitment to something approximating cricketing fair play.


Put alternately, I am able to maintain my interlocutory line and length in complex, at times inhospitable, windy conditions because my in many ways favorless, politically abused and exploited life experience has equipped me with reservoirs of empathy and resilience.



Playing through the line


I first got a firm sense of how much the fossilized or frozen, inflexible thinking patterns of Marxists like James and other secular ideologues can have in common with rotish religious thought patterns and systems when I read Understanding Secular Religions, by American Christian apologists Josh McDowell and Don Stewart in the 1980s.


But it was while pursuing a Bachelor of Arts degree in Linguistics, under the tutelage of Caribbean linguists Korah Belgrave, Peter Roberts, Martha Isaacs and others at the Barbados-based University of the West Indies’ Cave Hill Campus that I was introduced to fundamentals of scientific language analysis, like the distinction between judgmental prescriptive and more objective, open-minded descriptive approaches to language analysis, and could therefore apply these fundamentals to my then already advanced study of religious and secular belief systems.


The main ideas of TBBTR had already been established by then, as copies shared with American International Publishers, SCM Press and other interests can attest.


My studies of Linguistics reinforced and enriched those ideas.


The sociolinguistic and sociopolitical parallels between the evolution of Standard English and other “ruling class” language varieties and canonical or conventional Christian, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, Capitalist, Communist and other dominant, literary canon established and enforced religious and secular knowledge systems thus became apparent to me.


Similarly, my use of the term “fossilization” above, to describe the hardening of opinion that James demonstrated on the Grenada revolution question derives from and is dependent on my familiarization with the technical, language learning concept of “interlanguage fossilization” sometime between 1995 and 2005, when I was pursuing my Linguistics degree.


Charles Cornelius' interlanguage acquisition diagram


This combining or coalescing of language acquisition and development theories and religious conviction shaping experiences and ideas can also be detected in my criticisms of the Marxist Corbyn and other “sleep-walking socialists”, on one hand, and carnivorous capitalists like Theresa May on the other.


It has also contributed to my label transcending coupling of the superficially, albeit significantly opposing ideologies of “capitalist” icon Margaret Thatcher and her “socialist” rival Tony Benn.


And the same concern with the semantic substance or core structures of outwardly differing beliefs and thought systems dictates my “clumping” of humanist views held by James, Corbyn, my local MP Clive Lewis and other apparent evangelical atheists with the religious prejudices and presumptions that these and other humanists characteristically, and rightly, challenge and protest.


And this ethical efficacy and truth focused, religious and secular language penetrating mode of analysis is in fact mirrored by James’ own preoccupation with precision, mentioned above, and as documented by her colleague Lopez.
Lopez notes James’ determination to avoid generalizations, quoting her where she declares “I hate imprecision. It’s the enemy.”


And Lopez underscores how the kind of conversations that James and I have been engaging in contribute to the degree of lucidity and precision that James has achieved in her activism.


Noting that training has been “a two-way learning process”, Lopez shares this account by James of her process:

“I trained myself by training others, trying to be useful to them, to understand what they were having trouble with. I still do. It’s a big discipline.”


And in words that recall the typical faith-knowledge deficit that the late Barbadian evangelical fundamentalist Christian preacher Holmes Williams sought to address through his booklet Know What You Believe, James continues, “To explain myself I had to find out what I thought. I can never just sit down and think things through, but as I speak and try to find the right words my thoughts become clearer.”


So, thankfully, if her colleague Lopez can be believed, James is “always updating herself”.



Will we meet again?

And that is why as I reflect on the whole process of getting to know James so far, I am strengthened in my previously expressed view that she is a kind of oracle and that our interaction, like that I share with artists-businesswomen Janice Lear-Gurney and Deborah Liversage was divinely destined.


The question, raised in the previously cited article, is destined for what?


Noting the coincidence of James and my second telephone conversation occuring on the anniversary of the first, and her and my involvement in the “care industry”, I wrote “I feel both a sense of indebtedness to James and a sense of unease. Where might these signs of serendipity and synchronicity lead?”


Certainly, considering the differences in our genders, ages, races and ideological orientations, some clashing of opinions between James and I once we had actually met seemed inevitable.


Despite the mutual interests and acquaintances in Barbados and other Caribbean countries that we discussed during our second telephone conversation, she and I seemed destined to collide, like the arctic anticyclone Hartmut (as the Beast from the East has been dubbed in Germany) and the cyclone Emma that collided with it on and around February 24.


Despite our best intentions and mutually respectful aspirations, we seemed destined for a collision that would compound her, my and others’ confusion and deepen our respective ideological assumptions and prejudices, thereby deepening each other’s relative detachment from reality.


And James and I might be in for a major falling out yet.


I will have a better idea of whether or not she will agree to meet with me again after this article is published.


For the time being though, I am not only enjoying the calm before any possible storm but I am in some ways looking forward to the “Beast from the East” heavy snowfall that may be coming.


And that is because I deeply believe that James and I have more in common than our differences suggest.


I believe a dialectical synthesis of our views or thaw of our thoughts, if you will, is inevitable.


And this is despite James’ demonstrated “take no prisoners”, winner take all, tragically Trump-like conversational tendecies, which she defiantly displayed in a conversation with former Conservative Party politician Edwina Currie.
I have a deep sense that whether or not I one day have the honour of changing her “adult nappy”, literally, I will be able to claim the honour of perhaps gently waking James from the kind of elderly Marxist socialist sleep that I may have awoken Labour Party leader Corbyn and my local MP Lewis from rather more abruptly.


I certainly sense that James and I can collaborate to bridge the, Brexit-attested, Trump-election-win-reinforcing generation gap without too much of the clashing and clanging communication of ideas that risks disturbing her and my own necessary nocturnal carers’ napping.


I am keen to work with James and others at the Cossroads Womens’ Center to address the very serious challenges facing both our generations.



The group think tornadoes behind London violence


From my semantics and seismology intersection monitoring point of view, the stabbing deaths of two young black men in the vicinity of James’ office less than 10 hours before she and I met is a peculiarly ominous oracle.

And the fact that neither James, her colleague Calloway, a black woman, nor I (a black man) mentioned those deaths during our meeting at her office concerns me deeply.
I am awed by the fact that during our careful conversation, we were all silent about the tiny, yet terrifying, life threatening group think tornadoes that have been touching down around James Kentish Town base and in other parts of London with flesh ripping ferocity.


That is part of why I chose to open this article with the foregoing “Beast from the East” night time video recording.


It locates my conversations with James in the wider dialogue or dialectic of carnivorous conversation through which character can be molded or mortally wounded, as the case may be.


Sir Wilson Harris when he was knighted in 2010. Pool photo by John Stillwell, courtesy the New York Ties
Sir Wilson Harris when he was knighted in 2010. Pool photo by John Stillwell, courtesy the New York Ties


It connects the gun and knife crime courting conflicts currently flaring up in Camden and other London boroughs to the time and space transcending cosmological conflict that touches down or is incarnated in every human psyche, as the recently deceased Guyanese writer-mystic Wilson Harris may have put it.


Of course, in a profoundly personal sense, my emphasis in that video on the potent, deadly silent assassin character of heavy snowfall, the fact that its gradual, frosty build up can end life, effectively, attests to my own experience of relative isolation and silencing by the conscious and unconscious designs of Margaret Gill, Charmaine “Lie-e-lah” Gill, James Carmichael, Harold Hoyte, Al Gilkes and other Barbadian political conversation shapers who, like James, arguably, contradict themselves dialectically.


It attests to my experience of being “frozen out” of conversations by the Marxist myopia and other imagination insulating, vision limiting lenses of my local MP Lewis, a journalist-turned-politician, and his supporters, including BBC Norfolk’s Rita Johnson, who, from my perspective, seems guilty of an extraordinary failure of empathic vision.


Rather like James and the “musical” matrix John, the National Union of Journalists (NUJ) Mother of Chapel Johnson and other Norfolk-based journalists seem oblivious to how much their secular, possibly atheistic ideological fixations and fossilizations may have in common with the precision and specificity trampling stereotyping and generalizing of Buddhist, Christian, Islamic, Jewish and other “block chain” generators or “bump stock” triggerers of religious bigotry.


(And time and other constraints will not permit me to elaborate here on the link I have previously made between apparent Google-like information gluttony generated self-delusion and the murderous myopia of the millionaire real estate magnate and gambling addict Stephen Paddock, whose fear and loathing was incarnated in Las Vegas last October.)


They and Lewis, who recently rejected an effort I made to find common ground with him and work collaboratively despite past tense relations, seem intent on relegating my ideological labels transcending, linguistics and theology combining work to the margins and shadows of British, Caribbean, American and other societies’ academies.


Indeed, Lewis, a “bookish theoric” if ever I have met one, seems so intent on erasing any trace of my cutting edge contribution to contemporary British society that he is willing to undermine Labour leader Corbyn’s claims to be leading a movement for a new, more deeply democratic, authentically socialist political ecology and economy.


How else might one explain Lewis’ ongoing rejection of my now six months old peace offering even as Corbyn denounces Theresa May, Amber Rudd and other Conservative Party members for their “hostile environment” immigration policy toward Caribbean and other minorities?


Having been the target for more than a quarter of a century of the deadly Beast from the East snowfall recalling, tribal political silencing and character assassination that is a feature of both secular and religious, socialist and capitalist political capital accumulating strategies (like the gender, race and religious racketeering that I have been denouncing persistently in my “Mouth of the Beast” article series), I see the Windrush West Indian immigration scandal currently making headlines in England as just a symptom of how British politicians and their monetarily overpaid, ethically underachieving media allies tear at and undermine the bonds of British society.


To be continued….

Fundamentalist Feminism (2018 version “introduced” by the oracle Selma James)

I created this composite image in December 2016 to depict "gender gyrations" in UK and US politics.
I created this composite image in December 2016 to depict “gender gyrations” in UK and US politics.


In a couple of weeks I will be marking the 12th anniversary of the first publication of my article Fundamentalist Feminism.

I re-publish that article here today, February 15th 2018, for a number of reasons, including as a prelude to an upcoming third conversation with the feminist Marxist thinker Selma James, best known, according to Wikipedia, as the founder of the International Wages For Housework Campaign.

As a feminist myself, I am obliged to problematize what Wikipedia apparently accepts uncritically.

Is there not a paradox here, possibly?

How is it that the woman who has perhaps done more than anyone else to have a spotlight shone on the economic value of women’s unwaged, private or invisible work, can be considered “best known” for work done in the glare of public scrutiny?

What of her private, unwaged, invisible work legacy?

Shouldn’t that work be “rescued” from obscurity?

During a brief conversation with James today, only our second so far and occurring exactly on the first anniversary of our first conversation, which took place on February 15, 2017, intriguingly, I got a glimpse into how she resolves this paradox by asserting her right to privacy.

I also got a sense, of the depth of her and my shared belief in serendipity as she agreed that the mirroring dates of our twin conversations was noteworthy.

James, the third wife and long-time collaborator of Trinidadian Trotskyist CLR James also flashed me a hint of her extraordinary humility, saying of her relationship with the Caribbean bard “I was just his secretary, really.”

And the crisis that is a consequence as much of James’ working class roots, perhaps, as it is a tributary of the tangled relations at the heart of male-female interdependence generally, is thus brought into stark relief.

The obscurity at the interface of human procreation and productivity, the conception and birthing of every “brain child” remains intact for James, despite her being a mother of millions, conceptually.

I address this morphological marital dilemma, a crisis of identity, essentially, in Fundamentalist Feminism where I explore what I call “gender complementarity”.

And I am anticipating a lengthy and fruitful correspondence with James around these and related issues as we pursue what from my point of view seems like a dialogue that was divinely destined to be.

Working as a paid “carer” myself, in both knowledge trading (intellectual property) and the less glamorous “adult nappy changing” and wider “carnal knowledge” curating (bodily health maintaining) capacities, I feel both a sense of indebtedness to James and a sense of unease.

Where might these signs of serendipity and synchronicity lead?

Might she one day be a nurse-needing participant in my Holistic Home Care and Hospitality project, like the oracle Janice Gurney?

What should I make of my connections to James through a Europe-based Barbadian colleague who apparently shares what from my point of view is a flawed, Fentonesque confidence in the potential of literacy?

And then there is James’ picturesque and “picturate” presaging of the artist Deborah Liversage, so near and dear to me…

Selma James' and Deborah Liversage's winning ways.
Selma James’ and Deborah Liversage’s winning ways – a composite image.

What omen, good or ill, might one cipher from the proximity of my second conversation with James, born Weinstein, to the emergence of the “Me too” movement and my own irregular, oracular literary and other efforts to ensure that this extraordinarily movie and wider media manufactured tempest does not wipe the long, low frequency record of female-on-female sexual harassment, rape and murder clean?

Might my “channelling” of both Selma’s and her late husband’s theorizing around the issue of homosexuality prompt the “seen it all” actress Sharon Stone, of Mosaic fame currently, to  finally answer the question I put to her, via Twitter, about female-female sexual violence in the movie and wider media industry?

A constructive engagement with the less prominent National Union of Journalists members Arjum Wahid and Nick McGowan-Lowe about the relevance of my “Help Google Be Good” petition to the journalism profession may be more likely.

In that petition I liken excessive elements of Google’s information ecology footprint to Harvey Weinstein’s catalytic and as is now clear, catastrophic libidinous lechery, incidentally.

And somewhere along that rope there is a knot called Gaia Pope, that ties James’ views on epilepsy to a testimony of hope: a lump in this writer’s throat that is free of the mild malignancy of Geoffrey Boycott’s cricket commentary.

A grammar school educated Rachael Heyhoe-Flint approximating cricket shero  James might not be.

But the 87 year old has not only demonstrated comparable moral mettle but also outlived the younger Baroness Heyhoe-Flint who died aged 77 last January.

Like her late cricketer-historian husband who died age 88 in 1989, James therefore demonstrates a penchant for pragmatically penetrating all kinds of boundaries.

Junior (Jay) Campbell


Intelek International

February 15th, 2018

Fundamentalist Feminism

a major threat to women, men and the family: a threat to humanity

Introduction: an appeal to the United Nations and other international agencies

My purpose here is to expose fundamentalist feminism, an ideological and political movement that I believe is one of the greatest threats facing women, men, the family and society generally today.

I have chosen to deal with this issue on the eve of International Women’s Day precisely because I hope to attract the attention of bodies such as the United Nations to this issue.

There is a view, in some quarters, that the work of the United Nations and other international agencies is excessively and unjustly influenced by feminist politicos whose zeal to advance women’s issues is not being balanced by a reasonable concern for challenges facing men.

This certainly is one way of interpreting the comments of Barbadian Parliamentarian Trevor Prescod who, while addressing a men’s meeting some years ago expressed the concern that attempts by males to bring balance to gender issues in international meetings were being more or less “shouted down” by women. Prescod suggested that women attending such meetings were “winning” the arguments by virtue of the sheer number of them present.

Of course, it stands to reason that in the absence of meaningful dialogue – where all sides to an issue are given a reasonable hearing, there can be no real winners. The reduction of discussion on gender issues to a “war of words” between the sexes benefits no one, for as Calypsonian Singing Sandra of Trinidad and Tobago has said, “Nobody; nobody wins a war”.

When dialogue on gender issues deteriorates into a verbal war between males and females, as in physical war, perhaps more so – because without meaningful dialogue there can be no hope for genuine solutions – it is our essential humanity, which transcends gender, ethnic, religious and similar boundaries, that suffers.

I pray that this appeal will have some weight and consequences among the male and female personnel of international agencies and all others who have the interest of humanity at heart. If one woman, man or child is helped by this initiative my purpose will have been achieved.


My purpose here is to expose fundamentalist feminism, an ideological and political movement that I believe is one of the greatest threats facing women, men, the family and society generally today.

Fundamentalist feminism defined

Basically, fundamentalist feminism is an aggregate or body of ideas that promote an unrealistic, and unhealthy concept of women by exaggerating their strengths and virtues and concealing their vices and weaknesses. At the heart of fundamentalist feminism, is the suggestion that women are capable only of good, and not of evil.

Essentially, fundamentalist feminism blames men and men’s dominance (also called “patriarchy”) of politics, religion, business, the family etc, for most or all of the problems facing society.

Fundamentalist feminism overlooks or conceals the complicity of women (mothers, wives, sisters, consorts and other women) in the “evil that men do”.

Fundamentalist feminists label instances of such “complicity” as evidence of women’s victimization and abuse, freeing them of both blame and responsibility.

It is to that extent – at least – essentially anti-feminist, dis-empowering women.

Like fundamentalist religious, racial, political and other ideological systems, fundamentalist feminism is based on predominantly simplistic, one-sided analysis that favors its “messiah-types”.

So, just as Christians, Rastafarians, black people or white people are viewed as “infallible” heroes in their respective fundamentalist systems, women are viewed as humanity’s only hope in fundamentalist feminism.

The interdependence of males and females – an essential feature of the human condition and an inescapable prerequisite of our material and spiritual well-being, that is normally apparent to all – is thus ignored or understated by fundamentalist feminists.

The joint responsibility of men and women for humanity’s successes and failures is denied.

The basic belief of fundamentalist feminism is that women are good and men are bad: women are non-violent and peacemakers, men are violent and war mongers; women are honest, men are dishonest. In short, fundamentalist feminism teaches that women are morally superior to men.

Fundamentalist feminism is therefore a kind of “reverse chauvinism”.

It has roots in the challenge of the women’s movement to “male chauvinism”, but unlike the more salutary segments of the women’s movement, it is not concerned with gender “equality”. Fundamentalist feminism audaciously declares the superiority of women! The goal of empowerment for women is not advanced in the context of equality, but rather in the context of supremacy and domination.

Writing on feminist legal theory, Erin Pizzey, founder of the women’s refuge movement, notes in a December 2000 article that “the ideology of legal feminism today goes far beyond the original and widely supported goal of equal treatment for both sexes.” She says “The new agenda is to redistribute power from the ‘dominant class’ (men) to the ‘subordinate class’ (women), and such key concepts of Western jurisprudence as judicial neutrality and individual rights are declared to be patriarchal fictions designed to protect male privilege.”

On November 18th 2005, I sought to share Pizzey’s views with an audience gathered at the eleventh annual Caribbean Women Catalysts for Change Lecture, hosted by the University of the West Indies Cave Hill Campus’ Centre for Gender and Development Studies. The lecture was delivered by Madame Justice Desiree Bernard, the first female judge of the recently instituted Caribbean Court of Justice.

I was disappointed, though not surprised, to find that no one else attending the lecture, male or female, seemed to have heard of Pizzey. This “anonymity” accords with Pizzey’s own testimony of the ostracism to which she has been subjected by many influential feminists and their male supporters, because of her views. It supports her assessment that:

“There was, and still is, a strict censorship against anyone trying to break the code of silence. No one wants to acknowledge the extent of the damage that the feminist movement has done to the family and to men in the last thirty years.”

Pizzey does not claim to be a feminist or any other “ist”. She describes herself simply as ‘a lover of God in all his aspects.’ She did join the women’s movement in her native England in 1971.

However, she says she did so with reservations because of the movement’s leftist and totalitarian leanings. She speaks of standing up in many “violent and threatening collectives” of the movement, to tell its leaders that “hating all men” was not something she wanted to be a part of. She says she was “hated with a passion” because of her views and ultimately excluded from this “liberation” movement.

Pizzey also tells of boycotts by members of the press, withdrawn invitations to speak publicly and other obstacles that have been set in her path since she has left the movement and has been seeking to challenge what she sees as its ill-founded and socially destructive strains – what I call fundamentalist feminism.

Concerns I share with Pizzey include:

  1. fundamentalist feminist propagation of such erroneous ideas as a) women are not as capable of violence as men b) women are not as likely to abuse children as men and therefore make better parents than men and c) women are less likely than men to be afflicted by “political power-hunger”
  2. fundamentalist feminist corruption of the legal system, leading to a) fathers of children being denied their rights b) the introduction of laws that are founded on presumptions of women’s innocence or are otherwise biased toward women
  3. fundamentalist feminist influence on education leading to discrimination against boys by both male and female teachers
  4. fundamentalist feminist domination of the discipline of “women studies” (I benefited from a few courses in this discipline and think it has redeeming qualities but I am not sure Pizzey would agree)
  5. fundamentalist feminists’ hijacking of the legitimate causes of women – for political and monetary gain, and
  6. media cover-up or suppression of the very real short-comings and dangers of fundamentalist feminism.

I also identify in a profoundly personal way with Pizzey’s story. I share the following details of my own experience because I think it provides significant insights into the essential pathos of the fundamentalist feminist psyche (power-hungriness and glory grabbing – what I call the Lie-e-lah syndrome) and its opportunistic operation in the political realm.

By exposing the evil that fundamentalist feminism generates I hope to encourage a more wholesome, authentic feminism. I do not believe fundamentalist feminism’s primary threats are its threats to men’s well-being: I believe its primary threats are to the well-being of women.

Just as fundamentalist Christianity is anti-Christian at its core, so too fundamentalist feminism is profoundly anti-feminist. Rooted in a denial of truth, it tends toward self-alienation and therefore exposes women to delusions (of insignificance or grandeur).

The stories of the sociopathic behaviour of two individuals recounted here, makes this clear. Their stories, intertwined with my own, are set out below. I have given them fictitious but appropriate names – “The Liar” and “Market Guilt” – to conceal their identities. I have also “confused” their genders, deliberately using masculine or feminine nouns and pronouns inaccurately to refer to either or both of them, and in some cases, to their male and female allies and/or consorts.

In addition to further concealing their identities, this strategy of “gender confusion” reinforces two recurring points made here: 1. that fundamentalist feminism is profoundly anti-feminist and 2) that not only females embrace and/or exploit fundamentalist feminist ideas to serve their misguided, selfish political or other agendas. At a deeper, symbolic level, it also hints at the complex “homo-ideological” (on the verge of homosexual) properties of the fundamentalist feminist psyche.

At a basic level, of course, the concealment of these individuals’ identities also protects me from legal liability. I can vouch for the truth of what I say here, but it has so far been impossible to find anyone else that can do that who is willing to. A wall of intimidating silence has been constructed to shield The Liar and Market Guilt from the just consequences of the distressingly deceitful behaviour they and their allies have perpetrated.

Even the office of the Ombudsman in Barbados, to which I turned for relief around 2000-2001 has failed to breach that wall. I hope the publication of this document will inspire at least one of the persons who can corroborate my story with the courage he/she needs to do so.

My experience of fundamentalist feminism

I have never joined a feminist organization, but like Pizzey, I have been a supporter of legitimate, genuine feminist causes for many years. Among other things, as a free-lance journalist I have written and produced material on Violence Against Women for UNIFEM and the Caribbean Media Corporation (formerly the Caribbean News Agency or CANA). I was also the privileged, sole male participant at a “round-table” on women in politics, hosted by the Caribbean Association for Feminist Research (CAFRA), some years ago.

Like Pizzey, I too have suffered exclusion, victimization and isolation by feminists because of my refusal to ignore the shortcomings of feminism. And, just as there seems to be an attempt to erase Pizzey’s contribution to women’s causes and her very existence from history, there seems to be an attempt to erase my own work and existence, in the Barbadian and wider Caribbean context.

The media in Barbados is playing a critical role in this. On the March 14th, 2002 edition of the popular local radio call-in program “Brass Tacks”, senior Starcom Network staff member and host David Ellis launched a broadside against my organization Intelek International and myself. I had by then been engaged in a little publicized “feud” with other staff members or associates of Starcom Network, or its parent organization, the Nation Publishing Company for some time.

One catalyst for this “feud’, was a dispute I had with The Liar, a former media personality, over an extravagantly unethical breach of intellectual property he committed against me. This man/woman has for some time challenged my contribution to an artistic production in which he/she participated in the late 1990s. I contested, and still contest, her failure to mention my contribution to that production when he announced the credits the night of the production.

My dispute with this individual escalated as members of Barbados’ feminist movement, led by Market Guilt rallied to cover-up or otherwise excuse The Liar’s “oversight”. Among other things, Mr. Guilt, an acknowledged psychiatric sufferer (possibly a schizophrenic) has argued that The Liar was entitled to use an idea to which I introduced her because no one can claim “ownership” of an idea. I am familiar with this view, held by many communist-leaning persons, but have never seriously engaged Ms. Guilt on it because the fundamental point for me was The Liar’s failure to acknowledge my contribution on the night of the production. I thought, and still think this was the least she could do, since she had asked my permission to use the idea.

The dispute has escalated even further though, taking on political dimensions, as one of the organizations hosting the production became a catalyst for the cultural renaissance that is currently sweeping Barbados. Bolstered by the innocent and perhaps naive attention of then Minister of Education, Culture, Youth Affairs and Sport (subsequently Barbados’ Attorney General, now Minister of Economic Development) Mia Mottley, The Liar went on to claim that she was “the Founder” of that organization.

I view this exaggeration as a spectacular manifestation of the “Lie-e-lah” syndrome, to which fundamentalist feminism is prone, because of its power hungry, glory grabbing and truth-twisting propensities. It is more accurate to view Market Guilt, myself and other persons as co-founders of the organization in question.

The founding of this organization is in fact a fine example of the operation of the male-female interdependence to which I referred above.

However, The Liar’s coveting of the “founder” role is consistent with the unethical breach of and flagrant disregard for principles of intellectual property that remains the genesis of our dispute – and my dispute with Market Guilt.

Indeed, Ms. Mottley, The Liar, Market Guilt and other local fundamentalist feminists seem to prefer a radical feminist interpretation of the history of the organization that erases the seminal male influences behind it, represented by its male founding members. They seem to favour a fundamentalist feminist interpretation of Barbados’ cultural legacy that exaggerates women’s contributions – implying that the organization in question was the product of a virtual “virgin birth”. They seem committed to projecting the idea that it is mainly women who were (and are) prepared to bear the sacrifices and take the risks that have transformed the particular area of Barbados’ cultural landscape with which I am concerned, from a virtual barren wasteland (as far as the current generation of practitioners is concerned (no disrespect is intended toward outstanding Barbadian forerunners of this artistic discipline), to the fruitful plain that it now is.

Actually, one highly placed female academic has even gone so far as to declare that women may be more disposed to be this kind of artist because they are more spiritual than men! The “virgin birth” view of the organization merits more scrutiny than may at first be apparent.

Now, I am not suggesting that this academic is a fundamentalist feminist. On the contrary, my interactions with her suggest that she is a quite reasonable human being whose thinking is characterized by balance, not extreme opinion. A successful academic, she certainly does not seem disposed to the power-hunger or glory grabbing of the Lie-e- lah syndrome.

I therefore believe this academic’s views were arrived at by a simple observation of the current gender profile of Barbados’ cultural landscape. The fact is, thanks largely to the manipulations of fundamentalist feminists, and the complicit, slanted and superficial reporting of the males and females of local media houses who support them, it may well appear that Barbados’ current cultural renaissance originated with and is being led by females. The ill-founded projection of The Liar as the initiator and embodiment of this renaissance has been critical in the creation and perpetuation of this false impression.

That exaggerated, Lie-e-lan impression of Barbados’ current cultural flowering is based fundamentally on a denial or devaluation of the role of male artists – including my own role. And, at least in my case, this denial or devaluation has not come about “accidentally”: it has been achieved by a sustained, systematic campaign of character assassination, beginning with the charge that my disagreement with The Liar over the project mentioned above, stemmed from my being jealous over her success with that project.

I have been represented as an envious, dishonest and unprincipled person, seeking to reap success where I have not sown the requisite seeds of creative or administrative effort. I have been hated, shunned and ridiculed by fellow artists in Barbados’ relatively close-knit creative community. I have been made the object of (and still am plagued by) an unofficial boycott or “embargo” of some kind, which limits my capacity to trade as fully as I desire in intellectual property in this country. I believe the following incidents and situations are evidence of this boycott or embargo:

  • The non-playing of music and other audio material I have produced by local radio stations.
  • The silence of media personnel and other social commentators on my contribution to Barbados’ current cultural renaissance.
  • The omission of any reference to my work among that of Barbadian artists who were featured on an edition of the Art Club, a television program produced by ARTV in London, and aired on CNN several times a week.
  • The omission of any reference to my work in the UNESCO/NCF sponsored “Country Cultural System, Profile: Barbados”, authored by Dr. Glenford D. Howe”.
  • The rescinding of an invitation to present copies of a poster I published (the “Bowler’s Psalm”) to the West Indies cricket team (I had previously presented the team with copies of my “Batsman’s Psalm”).
  • A “side-lining” and silencing I suffered after I was invited to participate in a popular local cricket discussion radio program, “Best and Mason”.
  • The rescinding of an invitation I received to perform some of my work at a local farewell function for a foreign diplomat.

These incidents and situations are just a sample of the “violence” to which I have been subjected as my conflict with The Liar and Barbados’ fundamentalist feminists has escalated and widened. I refer to it as violence because this is precisely what it is.

In her 1997 book When She Was Bad: Violent Women and the Myth of Innocence (New York: Viking, ISBN: 0-607-85925-7) Patricia Pearson highlights this kind of violence, known as “indirect aggression”. Indirect aggression, as noted by Stuart Birks of Massey University, New Zealand, in his review of Pearon’s book, has been defined by Finnish psychologist Kaj Bjorkqvist as “‘a kind of social manipulation: the aggressor manipulates others to attack the victim, or, by other means, makes use of the social structure in order to harm the target person, without being personally involved in the attack.'”

Pearson says girls develop the capacity for indirect aggression from very early. Distinguishing indirect aggression from the physical, direct violence commonly ascribed to men, she says,

“… as soon as girls hone their verbal and social skills, at around ten or eleven, they become aggressors of a different kind. They abandon physical aggression, even though their pre-pubescent hormones are still no different than boys’, and adopt a new set of tactics: they bully, they name call, they set up and frame fellow kids. They become masters of indirection.”

I believe an extraordinary example of such violence against myself and my organization (Intelek International) occurred in 1998 or so, when a function I had organized with a local government department was “hijacked” by The Liar, probably with the help of Market Guilt.

I had been in dialogue with members of a local NGO that was the immediate organizer of the event, and had arranged to have members of an organization with which The Liar and I were affiliated perform as part of their programme. On the evening for which the reading was scheduled, The Liar had commandeered the proceedings by the time I arrived. When I inquired with an official of the government department as to what had transpired, I was informed that The Liar had been identified as the leader of our organization, and therefore the person with whom the organizers of the event should do business. I had presumably been represented as an impostor, glory-grabber or other fraud.

Needless to say these and other indirect assaults by The Liar, Market Guilt and their fundamentalist feminist backers have taken and continue to take a tremendous toll on me physically, emotionally and financially. They impact negatively on my capacity to nurture and provide for my wife and daughter and participate to the optimum of my ability as a productive member of Barbados’ creative community.

Other prey and predators in Barbados’ fundamentalist feminist politics

Yet, I am not the only victim. I stated earlier that fundamentalist feminism is antifeminist at its core. I know of a number of female artists who have also suffered indirect aggression and have been similarly disadvantaged by local fundamentalist feminists. Theirs and other examples illustrate the opportunistic, unprincipled character of fundamentalist feminism. Like Christian and other forms of fundamentalism, it is a malleable ideological construct, lacking sound historical, factual grounding. This lack of authenticity makes it a widely adaptable tool that can be manipulated by males and females alike, to serve their selfish ends.

Many males have benefited from the entrenchment of fundamentalist feminism in Barbadian politics, the media and broader commerce including: publishers/publicists, cultural and political activists, poets and politicians.

Their examples are a chronicle of falsehood oriented, “unholy alliances” that demonstrate the extraordinarily adaptable character of fundamentalist feminism, for some who benefit now, it would appear, were at one time objects of considerable indirect and direct (at least verbally) aggression by local feminists. Of course, as an instance of political conflict, their examples would have to be weighed with due regard to their own exploitation of Barbados’ feminist and wider female lobby and vote.

The vagaries of fundamentalist feminism therefore do not manifest themselves with any kind of consistency or coherence. Its fruit are varied, and even contradictory because, again, of its lack of rootedness in reality – its lack of authenticity. This feature also accounts for the ease with which it can fuse with or fuel the agendas of other ideological systems, such as Christianity, Communism, Capitalism, Rastafarianism and Pan Africanism.

Fundamentalist feminism’s adaptation by males to purely personal ends, whims and fancies is probably best demonstrated by the examples of individuals in the publicity/publishing field, who are some of The Liar’s most committed supporters. Each has reaped personal benefits, though of different kinds, by either perpetuating The Liar’s exaggerated opinion of his contribution to Barbados’ current cultural renaissance or by shielding him from accountability for that exaggeration and related dubious deeds. One, a married man with whom she has been sharing an adulterous relationship for many years, is now the mother of The Liar’s child.

In the case of two others, the dividends have been particularly significant: they include support for the suggestion that a publication with which they and The Liar are associated was the critical catalyst behind Barbados’ current literary and broader cultural renaissance. Actually, responsibility for Barbados’ current cultural renaissance is so highly prized, that it has even attracted “claims” from Prime Minister Owen Arthur, who assumed his Government’s ministerial portfolio for culture in 2001.

The exploitation of the vagaries of fundamentalist feminism in the cultural and political arena by government and opposition actors in Barbados is particularly instructive. There is no question in this writer’s mind that the popularity that some government and opposition figures have enjoyed has in large measure been achieved by accommodations reached with some of this country’s most unprincipled fundamentalist feminists – women and men who are determined to assume positions of power in this country at any cost!

Personally, I shudder at what the implications of that alliance – which crosses political party lines – could mean for Barbadians.

At the very least, it could lead to the concealment (and/or corruption) of the Christocentric focus of the current cultural renaissance in this country. Communist, Pan Africanist and Rastafarian or Rastafari-sympathizing fundamentalist feminists in this country seem intent on erasing or obscuring any evidence of the Christocentric roots of this renaissance, especially as represented in my own work. The intention, it appears, is to claim the contemporary “revolution” in cultural consciousness for the more militant activists who have been labouring long for Barbados’ cultural liberation.

I do not object to the honouring of the years of cultural activism by persons like Elombe Mottley, the Mighty Gabby, Cynthia Wilson, Kamau Brathwaite or the younger Aja, Arturro Tappin and Market Guilt. I however object to the suggestion that these and other Communist, Socialist, Pan Africanist or Rastafarian oriented cultural and political activists were the principle or only catalysts of Barbados’ current cultural renaissance. Such a view marginalizes and minimizes the crucial reconciliation and syncretization of Christian and nationalist currents that myself and others (like the Reverends Harcourt Blackett, Dean Harold Crichlow, Canons Andrew Hatch and Noel Titus and Father Clement Paul) represent. It misrepresents the historical evolution that has led to the emergence of such fundamentalist and broader Christian cultural initiatives as the use of steel pan in churches, the Experience Christian Calypso Tent and the participation of fundamentalist church oriented groups like “Living Springs Dance Academy” in the National Independence Festival of Creative Arts (NIFCA).

I explore these issues more fully in another document I am currently preparing. There I look, among other things, at some of the schizophrenic analysis and outcomes of the cultural awakening currently sweeping Barbados. My main concern here though is the schizophrenic analysis and society fragmenting fruit of fundamentalist feminism.

A solution

The “battle of the sexes” is with us to stay. This is probably the oldest conflict known to man, and I see no logical reason to expect it to go away. Actually, I believe gender conflict is a quite basic, natural and potentially wholesome part of the process of human development. I believe it is a primary forum for the transmission of values such as honesty, patience, humility respect and tolerance; I believe that from childhood onward, gender differences play a key role in our development of conflict resolution skills.

The emergence of fundamentalist feminism, a perversion of the legitimate concerns of the feminism of the 19th and 20th centuries, stems from our perennial, repeated failure to manage this age-old conflict. At the deepest psychic and most distant historical level, it stems from humanity’s unhealthy, idealistic longing for and preoccupation with perfection.

In another discourse (“The Bible: Beauty and Terror Reconciled”) I identify this longing as a key factor behind the intimidating and exploitation breeding perception of scripture that I call the “terror of the Bible”. I speak in that text of the “propensity of the human mind to seek to establish some infallible, unquestionable, unchanging authority around which we may order our perception of reality and regulate our conduct.”

In the context of fundamentalist feminism, this “authority” becomes feminity, as defined by fundamentalist feminists. For fundamentalist feminists, womanhood is the “inerrant and infallible” guide to truth – in more or less the same manner as “the Bible” is the “inerrant and infallible” guide to truth for fundamentalist Christians. In either case, what is needed is a more realistic, dynamic and, to that extent, authentic understanding of both authority and truth. (Let me say here that while useful and entertaining the treatment of “the sacred feminine” as a locus of power in Dan Brown’s “The Da Vinci Code”, probably does not facilitate this end as well as some might think).

In layman’s terms, no man or woman, is always right. No human being is perfect. No human system of government is perfect. A dynamic, difference and change respecting understanding of authority and truth takes into account the fallibility of all humanity and all human systems of control and government. Such an understanding leads us to value each other more, irrespective of gender, racial, religious or any other ideological differences: it emphasizes our interdependence.

In the domestic context, a dynamic, difference and change respecting understanding of authority and truth will help male and female partners share the leadership role, recognizing that this is a function more so, than an office. The “head of the household” model of home management, promoted by many churches and the Men’s Educational and Support Association of Barbados (MESA, of which I was the first Secretary) and other men’s organization is as defective as its fundamentalist feminist counterparts. Husbands and wives (or male and female partners) need to be tutored in a dynamic paradigm of leadership that emphasizes sharing of responsibilities in the context of agreed values and goals. These goal and values need to be viewed as the foundation upon which the home is built and the “head” that the homebuilders serve. The Principle-centred, value based teachings of leadership trainer Steven R. Covey point in the right direction.

Furthermore, the indispensable value of truth needs to be emphasized. Wholesome relationships between men and women cannot be attained in the absence of honesty – especially honesty with oneself. We need to be able to admit when we are wrong; we need to be able to face our failings if there is to be balance and harmony in our relationships with others.

Patricia Pearson’s book emphasizes the need to acknowledge unpleasant truths where they exist. In her chapter on women in prisons, she suggests we will not solve a problem if we deny its existence or its true nature. The fundamentalist feminist Lie-e-lah syndrome thrives on denial and self-deception.

While Pearson’s book concentrates on extreme violence, much of what she says can be adapted to refer to more common interaction. Much insight can be gained from shifting one’s perspective away from the prevailing paradigm which focuses on men’s shortcomings and looking at the role of both males and females in instigating and perpetuating violence – physical and psychological.

In an advertisement televised as part of the recent UNIFEM project, International Day for the Elimination of Violence Against Women and the Sixteen Days of Activism Global Campaign, Barbadian calypsonian Allison Hinds expressed the desire – and right – of Caribbean women to express themselves without fear. The prevailing paradigm, with its roots and fruit in fundamentalist feminism, is itself intimidating. As Starcom network’s David Ellis suggested some time ago during an edition of Brass Tacks, any challenge of the prevailing paradigm is met with swift, sweeping claims of male insensitivity, bias, pettiness or worst (also recall parliamentarian Prescod’s views, shared in the introduction above). Pizzey’s and my own marginalization are also evidence of the treatment those who challenge this paradigm can expect – regardless of their gender.

I hope that the publication of this essay and the account here of my own, ongoing struggle against this paradigm serves as a source of encouragement to those who may feel that they are alone in their own struggles. I hope my own continued quest for “poetic justice” will serve as a source of inspiration and courage for men and women to speak out against the scourge of fundamentalist feminism. I will be happy to assist with the publication or dissemination of such stories in any way that I can. I can be reached at the following email address:


In the service of beauty and truth,

Junior Campbell


Intelek International


March 5th, 2006

Guardian newspaper’s “creed greed” (Love Arctually – part 1)

A brief foreword

The article below was originally published on the England-based Wikinut citizen journalism website on October 25, 2015. I reproduce it here, now in compliance with the law of love (Galatians 5:14) and in the service of the most sublime “carnal knowledge” scripting.

J. Campbell

February 10, 2018



My dad as he appears in one 'Love Arctually' image.
My dad as he appears in one ‘Love Arctually’ image.


Today I’ll be doing my first public reading in several years.

The occasion is the inaugural Love Arctually production.

As explained below, Love Arctually is “rooted in my experience of the potential and limits of language – especially written representations of language.”

This article, the first in what I expect will be a long-running series, explains the rationale behind the project.

The article is substantially derived from an open letter I wrote to inform friends, family, business associates and other possibly interested parties about the project and to invite those who could do so to attend.

There is also additional text and a number of photos and other images created for the project.

The initial feedback I have had and other developments around the project, like a petition calling on the Guardian newspaper to “rein in” its reporting on the highly contentious reparations for trans-Atlantic slavery issue, also provide useful written and other material that I look forward to sharing here in due course.


First, an extract from the email I sent to my brother Wayne, my local MP Clive Lewis, retired Canadian diplomat Isaac Goodine and others, informing them of and inviting those of them who could to attend it.

Dear All

Thanks for the interest you have shown in the Intelek International Love Arctually project.

Your encouragement and engagement is critical to its success and means more than I can say. (And as you all know, I am not put at a loss for words easily!)

Below is a brief background to the project and a summary of what those of you who attend its first public “installment” on Sunday, October 25th, at 7:00 pm at the Costessey Center in Norwich can expect.



Love Arctually is rooted in my experience of the potential and limits of language – especially written representations of language. I come from a literacy-focused culture, much like England. In fact, Barbados has been called “Little England”.

Essentially, Love Arctually provides a platform for sharing and showcasing the power of literacy to liberate and limit our perceptions of reality.

The focus is on what I call “thought tints”: scales and shades of meaning in which our words are rooted and from which they derive authenticity, as they are incarnated or “fleshed out” in time and space.

It’s about conversations with ourselves (in our consciences) and the love and care we can express through a coherence and consistency of thought, word and deed.

It’s a forum for discussing language as “current” (electrical charge) and “currency” (credibility).

When was the last time you heard an electrifying speech?
To be continued…

Sir Hilary Beckles channeling Forbes Burnham’s blight and inciting Farrakhanesque violence – part 1

Beware my “brother” Hilary

Below is a copy of an email I sent to University of the West Indies (UWI) Chairman Sir Paul Altman on December 8th 2017.

A “small beginning” of what I hope evolves into a mutually respectful, relationship rehabilitating conversation between UWI and me, the email expresses my concerns about self destructive, social cohesion depreciating elements of Vice Chancellor Sir Hilary Beckles’ Pan Africanist pedagogy, especially his reparations for trans-Atlantic slavery rhetoric.

My email explains how since at least 2001, when Barbados controversially put slavery reparations on the United Nations agenda, at the World Conference Against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Forms of Intolerance (WCAR), Sir Hilary has been consciously or unconsciously pushing a parasitic, simplistic and socially poisonous “good blacks vs evil whites” reparations narrative.

I turned to Sir Paul, a prominent Jewish Barbadian real estate entrepreneur because previous, more informal efforts to get my concerns addressed by approaching Sir Hilary himself, including through calls to his office at UWI’s Mona Campus in Jamaica, and through his colleagues Dr Alan Cobley, Dr Eudene Barriteau and others at UWI’s Barbados and Trinidad (St Augustine) campuses have so far proven ineffective.

Having not received a response from Sir Paul to-date, I am publishing my letter to him here in the spirit that the Guyanese politician Jesse Burnham published her 1964 pamphlet “Beware My Brother Forbes”, prophetically warning her compatriots of the grave threat she believed he posed to Guyana’s democratic prospects.

It seems clear to me that whatever their intentions, good or ill, professor Beckles, politician-lawyer David Comissiong, ethicist Anna Kasafi Perkins, education analysts Verene Sheperd and “Sista Docta” Sandra Richards, feminist activist Margaret Gill and others working for or close to UWI are channeling the worst of the now long deceased democracy degrading, even disemboweling, Guyanese dictator Forbes Burnham’s legacy.

(I will address the good that the sagacious Burnham did, in spite of his own and others’ limitations, in due course.)

And I am clear that by opposing Beckles’ ivory tower broadcasting of Burnham’s divisive spirit, I am risking a fate like Walter Rodney’s.

Rodney was the manipulative Marxist Burnham’s most prominent critic until he was assassinated, on Burnham’s instruction, allegedly, with British and American governmental complicity.

Like Maurice Bishop of Grenada, he was a Caribbean casualty of the Cold War conflict.

Moreover, having suffered a degree of character assassination and commercial sabotage at the hands of Aaron “Buddy” Larrier and other Beckles spiritual allies or thought twins in 2001, in the lead-up to and following the WCAR, I am also mindful of Beckle’s links to the volatile, violence rationalizing Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrkhan.

Indeed, Farrakhan’s divisive denunciation in 2014 of Kofi Anan, Thabo Mbeki, Jacob Zuma and others as “Uncle Toms”, “sell outs”, and “collaborators” on the basis of the bellicose Beckles’ interpretation of their conduct during WCAR 2001, is chillingly reminiscent of how Larrier, Comissiong, Rastafarian academic Ikael Tafari and others attacked me in 2001 ahead of the WCAR because of my insistence that the role of Africans as traders in the slave trade, not just tradees needed to be adequately addressed in our pre-conference deliberations.

Moreover, readers should note that in a 1993 speech the characteristically tantrum tongued, hot headed, Farrakhan defiantly asserted the NOI’s right to “deal with traitors and cutthroats and turncoats” as they saw fit.

Note too that at that time the fiery tongued, black people homogenizing Farrakhan was defiantly responding to decades old allegations that the NOI was responsible for the assassination of Malcolm Little, better known as Malcolm X, but most respectfully, arguably, as Malcolm Shabazz.

And I note “Shabazz’s name changes here because they document a spiritual journey that the secular, mainstream, popular media seems to have done much to devalue and distort, consciously or unconsciously.

There certainly seems to be a tendency for some human ecology misreading, word-to-flesh mismanaging editorial entities, like BBC Norfolk’s Mike Liggins, to treat Rodneyesque and Shabazz-like rebels the way Elijah Muhammed apparently treated his once highly prized, most prominent disciple: that is, like privately owned property to be disposed of as the NOI supremo saw fit.

It certainly seems that Muhammed, with Farrakhan’s acquiescence, and some say a CIA wink, treated Malcolm like a slave, really, when you think of it.

Like Liggins, who called me a “crank”, Charmaine “Nailah Imojah” Gill who called me a liar and failure, and others who project their Burnhamesque, binary and bi-polar labels onto my and others social capital and wider intellectual property proprietorially, Muhammed apparently presumed to dictate Shabazz’s narrative: to self-servingly stereotype and define his former disciple’s story.

Unsurprising then that two days before he was murdered, Malcolm, having freed himself of Muhammad’s 12 years of ideological domination, described his former devotion to the NOI as inducing a kind of brain death.

Shabazz said he had been hypnotized by the NOI and made a zombie.

Of course, while valid to some degree, this assessment should be taken with a pinch of salt as it ignores Shabazz’s personal responsibility for what he believed.

This blame-shifting capacity is part of the attraction of the race demonizing, “wicked white people” and “bestial blacks” gospels that race racketeers like Beckles, Burnham, Farrakhan, Nigel Farrage, VS Naipaul, Surinder Kandola, Robert Mugabe, Steve Bannon, Kelly-Ann Conway, Reverends Sally Muggereidge and Joanne Farman propagate consciously and unconsciously.

I fear a similar personal responsibility side-stepping, bow-to-Beckles-compelling zombification is happening at UWI.

University of Warwick lecturer Michael Nibblett and Jamaican religious history authority Doreen Morrison can attest to this on the basis of comments made by Dr Aaron Kamuguisha, a high profile UWI academic, when I challenged his ideological bowing to Becklesque, Burnham-recalling racial bigotry during a talk he delivered at UoW in 2016.

And a note of caution to those apparently infatuated by British Labor Party leader Jeremy Corbyn may be beneficial here, given the openly threatening and otherwise intimidating tactics that Corbyn’s Thomas-Mair-like, Militant friends and supporters are alleged to have repeatedly been engaging in.

Certainly, like Burnham and his socialist ideology preaching, then state-capture-and-state-capitalism practicing adherents, some of Corbyn’s and his comrade and militant founder John Lansman’s Caribbean Black nationalist counterparts tend to treat rebellious “Rodneys” like me that challenge their authority like wild animals that need to be destroyed or at least discredited.

As I noted in an article addressing the counter-productively politicized, bi-polar, “binary notation” of the fundamentalist feminist activist Gill, our compatriot writer George Lamming alluded to this proprietorial state-based, human potential wasting politically motivated destruction in 2015, treating it as the defining trait of Caribbean political party traditions.

He said “It is my view that the political party, as it operates, is the source of public corruption. It is the source of a waste of human capital. It is the major obstacle to any rational and serious debate about politics.”

Intriguingly, the prominent Barbadian thinker Lamming, best known for his novel “In The Castle Of My Skin”, offered this assessment during the 5th annual Assembly Of Caribbean People, held at UWI Cave Hill.

From my vantage point, under Sir Hilary’s Vice Chancellorship, all of UWI but especially Cave Hill, where he served as principal for a number of years, is at risk of becoming a Burnham blight transmitting, Farrakhanesque flame-thrower rhetoric replicating factory.

More on that in part 2 of this discourse, by which time I hope to have heard from Sir Paul and can report that my concerns about UWI’s future are being taken seriously.

In the meantime, readers may want to consider signing a petition I published on January 25 to support this and related Caribbean reparations rhetoric rehabilitating goals.

My letter to Sir Paul Altman

Dear Sir Paul Altman

My name is Junior (Jay) Campbell and I am an England-based Barbadian holistic communications and education specialist, trading as Intelek International.

Under the Intelek label I pursue a variety of personal development and social cohesion building activities.

And where possible I work with various public and private sector and similarly ostensibly opposing interests (for example, Christians and Muslims) to build the kind of value consensus that Barbadian sociologist Richard Carter has identified as one of our country’s most urgent needs.

Typically, following Rev Dr Martin Luther King Jr’s, Mahatma Ghandi’s and other peaceful protester’s example, I do this by emphasizing principles of interdependence and the consequent need for programs of action rooted in systems that facilitate mutual respect and accountability.

It is in this regard that I have been prompted to contact you, in your capacity as Chairman of the Council of the University of the West Indies’ Cave Hill Campus.

I am deeply concerned about the “divide and rule” course of Cave Hill’s and the wider UWI body’s pedagogy.

This mind poisoning pedagogy is being propagated by Vice Chancellor professor Sir Hillary Beckles, Dr Sandra Richards, lecturers Margaret Gill and other UWI personnel, consciously or unconsciously.

I am particularly concerned about Sir Hilary’s, Gill’s and Richards’ deeply divisive, shallowly scholastic and fundamentally undemocratic, capricious and dictatorial reparations advocacy.

In 2001, as a consultant to the Barbados Government Commission for Pan African Affairs, I worked with politician David Comissiong, Rastafarian community leader Iral Jabari Talma, trade unionist Ricky Parris and other Afrocentric human rights advocates who with professor Beckles led Barbados’ “successful” (I use the term advisedly) 2001 bid to have reparations for trans-Atlantic slavery put on the United Nations agenda.

Then and since, I have been astounded at the capacity of professor Beckles and other leaders of Barbados’ reparations lobby to dismiss or trivialize the issue of Africans’ and African-descended Barbadians complicity in the trans-Atlantic trade as slave traders and owners.

From my perspective, this reduces Barbadian reparations advocacy to a kind of opportunistic, race racketeering demagoguery and undermines Barbadians’ capacity to engage with the very emotive, volatile issues around past, present and future race relations in our country constructively.

From my perspective, Beckles, Comissiong, Vincentian prime minister Keith Mitchell, Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan and other Caribbean, American, British, Canadian and other reparations advocates are not so much knowledge workers as political propagandists.

Their reparations advocacy is characterized by a dangerous deficiency of self criticism, rooted in a consciously or unconsciously cowardly commitment to discreditable self interest.

From my perspective, Beckles’ “success” at garnering Mitchell’s, other Caribbean, American, British and Canadian political and academic leaders’ support for his short-sighted, radically retrogressive, scholastically anemic and intellectually malnourished, “obese English” reparations bid is more indebted to systemic weaknesses in Barbados’ and these country’s governance systems than any thing else.

I can attest first hand to the failure of Barbados’ politically compromised and morally adrift media establishment to hold Sir Hilary, Comissiong, Dr Sandra Richards and other fundamentalist feminist and Marxist opportunist reparations advocates accountable for defects in their one-sided, reverse racist values consensus undermining reparations reasoning.

The complicity of Rev Gerald Seale, Rev Harcourt Blackett and other Barbadian, American and other clerics through arguably well-intended but characteristically “ecclesiastical”, indulgent and excessive interventions must also to be noted and lamented.

Like the media these and other cleric’s and lay people’s contributions to the debate have often consisted of ethically flawed, generalization and stereo-type based ideas.

What is needed, at least, is a more mathematical, radical scrutinizing and weighing of African descended Caribbean slave traders and owners motives.

For example, the questionable personal and political concessions made by Toussaint Louverture, Nanny of the Maroons, Marcus Garvey, Bob Marley and other well meaning but nonetheless fallible Caribbean freedom fighters need to be examined with equal amounts of objectivity and empathy.

I note that each of these leaders at least attempted to use authority earned through revolutionary rhetoric and/or struggle to negotiate accommodations that ultimately replaced one set of dictators with another.

CLR James identified the essential dynamic behind this race glossed phenomenon in the context of the Russian revolution, denouncing it as “state capitalism”.

Such penetrative analysis seems sadly missing in the reparations discourse that Sir Hilary propagates.

What is happening instead, essentially, is that scientific analysis and argumentation are being sacrificed on the altar of political, racial and religious sentimentality: cults of personality and opportunism have been pushing principled, historically grounded argumentation to the periphery of the reparations debate.

And I cannot over-stress the extremely harmful part being played by unprincipled, short-sighted elements in Barbados’ mainstream news media and their co-conspirators in international news and publishing interests, especially some academic publishers.

The West-Indian-politician-Westminster-choir-boy ploys and trickery that Barbadian calypsonian Anthony “Mighty Gabby” Carter deplores in one of his well-known songs are being taken up by Beckles and others whose scholastic authority and power to persuade derive not so much from the content of their arguments as from their proximity to Oxford, Cambridge, Harvard, Yale UCLA and other British, American and similar “first world” educational institutions.

(And I have copied Harvard University’s Laird Bell professor of History Sven Beckert into this email and would welcome his thoughts on that point.)

But like the widely discredited but defiant British academic, Professor Dame Glynis Breakwell, professor Beckles and other reparations crusaders seem to be exploiting weaknesses in international education systems of accountability and transparency.

Yet even as the foundations of predominantly secular segments of the international academic fraternity are being shaken by seismic shifts in thinking in medicine (especially in the field of mental health), Beckles’ beloved economics and other social sciences, Beckles, Gill, Comissiong, Richards and others seem to be mechanically regurgitating fundamentals of discredited, divisive, shallowly socialist, essentially “state capitalist” Marxist ideas.

And I believe that like the Donald Trump presidency, a patent product and propagator of “fake news” reaction to the gay marriage “faith ruse” excesses and other anomalies of Barack Obama’s presidency, the consequences of binary, divisive thinking about reparations for the Barbados economy and society are apparent already.

Professor Beckles’ and his fundamentalist feminist and other allies’ combative, one-sided reparations propagandizing is sowing seeds of distrust and paranoia, undermining what little values consensus the sociologist Carter and others may have documented.

Buttressed by the malicious, mischievous machinations of Aaron Larrier, Richards and others who have consciously or unconsciously cultivated a deep antipathy for white people through misfortunes they have suffered as minorities during their sojourns in England and other predominantly white countries, Beckles like the “new negroe” Bussa before him and whom he immoderately champions, is pouring contempt on centuries of quiet, diplomatic, peaceful conflict resolution methodologies and traditions that Errol Barrow, Tom Adams and other more circumspect Barbadians have developed.

I have even heard the ideologically imbecilic suggestion by one UWI Cave Hill acolyte, that Bussa should replace Barrow as Barbados’ putative “Father of Independence”.

Arrogantly discarding biblical and other anciently attested peace building, social cohesion advancing methodologies (like Egyptian Ma’at and South African Ubuntu traditions, to which they nonetheless occasionally pay lip service) the robotic reasoning, shallowly “radical” reparations revolutionaries dispense with the unique, geo-politically crafted, temporally and spatially measured and mediated “truth-to-power-speaking” techniques that have been dictated by Barbados 166 square mile topography, as much as by anything else.

Disdaining of the “cool headed”, morally measured, conflict management and resolution skills that are Barbadians’ distinctive heritage, as Mariano Brown and other Caribbean politicians and business people have noted, the gender, race and religious racketeers that shield Beckles, Gill, Richards and others from rigorous academic and moral scrutiny are selling Barbados down the river as surely as some of our African ancestors did, and some of our African, African American and Black British contemporaries routinely do today.

Our youth are being tutored in coarse and volatile political agitation that seems more characteristic of Jamaican, Trinidadian, Guyanese and other lesser developed, more temporally and spatially challenged realms of democratic discourse, doctrine and practice.

I am asking your help to address this deeply regrettable democracy destroying trend.

It is an abuse of the Barbadian and wider Caribbean tax paying public’s contribution to the development of UWI and our other formal and informal educational institutions over successive generations.

I have tried to recruit professor Allan Cobley and other UWI personnel without success.

Similar approaches to the Inter American Commission On Human Rights, the Commonwealth Secretariat, mainstream and other news entities, like the supposedly progressive Barbados Underground blog have been sabotaged by the machinations of Comissiong, Larrier, Gill, Richards and the Commonwealth Secretariat’s Karen Mckenzie, originally of Jamaica.

I have had some success though in getting Donville Inniss and other Barbadian politicians and business people who have been undermining my work to rethink their unethical, human rights violating objectives and strategies.

And an initial conversation with Prime Minister Freundel Stuart during a visit to Barbados in October 2018 has led me to think that ill-conceived efforts to have me declared persona non grata, mainly because of my questioning of fundamentalist Christian and other excesses (documented in my book “The Bible: Beauty and Terror Reconciled”) have been abandoned.

I have a sense that the most formidable obstacles to the good that I can do for Barbados as a peace maker have been overcome and I am keen to build on this foundation.

Moreover, I have been speaking to many Barbadians at home and abroad who share my perspective.

However, as conversations with prominent Cave Hill academics (including one who spoke in the presence of two English colleagues during a visit to England) have made clear, many of professor Beckles’ colleagues are intimidated by him and his international academic and political connections.

The aforementioned visiting academic spoke of the need to ensure that he could continue to pay his mortgage.

And I am told that the suppression of criticism of Sir Hilary at the Mona Campus in Jamaica is at a particularly perilous stage.

I suspect that the impunity implied by the outcome of the trial of his son Rodney Beckles on that island for the alleged murder of Jamaican Khalil Campbell has had a chilling, demoralizing effect on many potential whistle blowers.

For my own part, having been labelled “a spy” and otherwise attacked by rabid reparationist Aaron “Buddy” Larrier, the late Dr Ikael Tafari and others, I am not without sympathy for those who have been silenced.

Having seen the kind of blame and flame throwing rage and other hot head, bullet blunt irrational behavior Sir Hilary’s mouth has triggered in the likes of Louis Farrakhan and others, far be it from me to call those who find silence in the face of his divide and rule offensives cowards.

But notwithstanding the hardships I have suffered at the hands of other people, especially as a result of what former prime minister Sir Lloyd Erskine Sandiford has called “academic politics” I fear only God, Sir Paul and commit my and my family’s welfare to his care.

Still, any advice you can offer on how I can get professor Beckles and other UWI personnel who have previously viewed me as a threat to their interests to work with me on a less demagogic, more democratic, measured and conciliatory reparations discourse (giving due attention to proactive, self reparation strategies particularly) would be deeply appreciated.

If it helps to view this letter as a formal complaint to the UWI Council you chair, please accept it in that context and capacity and advise me what additional steps I can take to ensure that the menace Beckles poses to himself and others is addressed appropriately.

In closing, I want to assure you that I have made no secret of my concerns about Sir Hilary’s, Comissiong’s and others’ questionable arguments and methods.

From 2001 until now, I have denounced them openly, as the article extract copied below and the full article at the link accompanying it makes clear.

I have also sought to demonstrate empathy, the very thing that I believe can facilitate consensus around reparations and similarly fraught gender, race and religion charged debates.

Despite Comissiong’s, Beckles’, Gill’s and others’ apparent complicity in the aforementioned or alluded to campaign of character assassination and economic sabotage that I have survived, I have forgiven and bear no ill will toward them.

But I cannot stand quietly by while Sir Hilary undermines the very liberty he would champion.

“Slavery was not just a system of holding people in bondage, it was holding people in bondage for a purpose, and that was to make money, to make money off of their bodies, and that’s the important realization that Americans have to come to,” said Professor Annette Gordon-Reed, speaking after a talk by Sir Hilary at Harvard.

But thanks to the selective silence and/or incompetence of journalists Kaymar Jordan, Olutolye Waldron, Julius Gittens, Harold Hoyte, Al Gilkes, David Ellis, Anthony Blackman and others, Beckles is basically allowed to treat UWI like his own slave plantation.

This and similar interventions are motivated as much by my sense of duty to the thus “enslaved” people of Barbados and the Caribbean as by concerns for my own and my family’s welfare.

I see little difference between the mind control manipulations of the trans-Atlantic slave trade and the intellectual property plundering, knowledge trading machinations employed by Sir Hilary, Rupert Murdoch and some other knowledge industry owners and workers today.

Sadly, I see much of the same “body of information” snatching behavior being perpetrated by social media Goliaths Google, Facebook and Twitter, with the conscious or unconscious connivance and complicity of some members of Britain’s National Union of Journalists (of which I am a member).

And I actually feel sorry for professor Beckles and company much of the time.

As a member of Barbados’ Jewish community you may be familiar with the phrase “banality of evil”, coined by Hannah Arendt in her book covering the trial of Adolf Eichmann.

Basically, I believe professor Beckles and company have a lot in common with Eichmann and the Nazi regime that both braced and butchered (metaphorically) his heart and mind.

Their reparations advocacy, falls ominously within Arendt’s description of Eichmann, especially her belief that his inability to think for himself was exemplified by his consistent use of “stock phrases and self-invented clichés”.

According to Wikipedia, Arendt claims “The man demonstrated his unrealistic worldview and crippling lack of communication skills through reliance on ‘officialese’ (Amtssprache) and the euphemistic Sprachregelung that made implementation of Hitler’s policies ‘somehow palatable.'”

In at least one of the articles on my blog I may have compared Eichmann’s incarnation of “the banality of evil” with Beckles’ (and Trump’s, possibly) peculiar Caribbean incarnation of the “bananity of evil”.

I am also inclined to compare their demagoguery with the “bigly” gambling of Trump, Google founder Sergey Brin and the “fear and loathing in Las Vegas” channeling mass murderer Stephen Paddock.

Arendt’s references to Eichmann’s “stock phrases” actually recalls the “bump stock”, mechanical modification that the reputedly imperious, controlling Paddock used to maximize the killing potential of his weapons.

It also recalls the “roller coaster of emotion” manipulating pressure tactics used by the now discredited Trump University, according to court materials, among them sales playbooks, describing a technique that was used to persuade students to pay for courses costing as much as $35,000 for that real estate business training institution’s “Gold Elite” program.

As both my book “The Bible: Beauty and Terror Reconciled” and my Linguistics thesis on glossolalia (glock-solalia?) indicates, I have been engaged in a study of such “fear and loathing” cognitively and affectively fossilized and fossilizing communication phenomena for some time.

Conversation analysis specialist Dr Elizabeth Stokoe of Loughborough University, copied in here with other secular and religious education stakeholders, can also attest to this.

She knows as well as anyone of my concern that “intelligence” derived from interrogation or any other conversational encounter should be historically rounded and grounded. That it should be authentic.

Please help me save UWI and Barbadian and Caribbean educational achievement from association with counterfeit, immoral, unethical Trump University approximating machinations.

Yours sincerely
Junior (Jay) Campbell
Intelek International
Link to article cited

Blessing and blight of Sir Hilary Beckles’ scholarship – Mouth of The Beast #11

Extract from article cited
Indeed, I think it is safe to say that based on what has gone before in this series of articles, it should be clear that while I remain a committed Pan Africanist like Beckles and Comissiong, I am a radical Pan Humanist first.

It should be clear that while I see some validity in the notion of ‘whiteness’ being normative, in many Western formal and informal educational and socializing contexts, as recently argued by another Williams-like apologist, black American academic Reggie Williams, I do not subscribe to the view that “whiteness” is normative in every scenario.

In article six I recounted a Twitter exchange I had with Williams, where I challenged that racist assumption at the heart of an article entitled “Seeing whiteness”, that the Assistant Professor of Christian Ethics at McCormick Theological Seminary had published in the Christian Post.

As Mottley, leader of the Barbados Labour Party and others have noted, while it is self-evident that “whiteness” is normative in some scenarios, especially in the UK, US, Canada, Australia and Europe where white people’s numerical majority as reflected in their domination of mainstream media and academia is still significant, it is not unchallenged.

The veil of whiteness over Western society’s vision and values is rather more porous than Williams imagines.

His vision, apparently shared by Beckles and others whose scholarship seems fundamentally compromised by a neurotic negativity or ‘inadequacy syndrome’ is in fact marred by the kind of generalization or ‘bigly’ thinking that Trump and other gender, race and religious racketeers and demagogues trade on.

A persistent advocate of the wisdom of small beginnings, I subject all ‘big ideas’ to rigorous scrutiny: not least my own ‘macro economic’ notions.

So, my persistent WCAR-related questioning in 2001 of Barbadian Pan Africanists’ decision not to discuss the involvement of black people in the trans-Atlantic slave trade as traders, rather than just as slaves or slave descendants was a matter of conviction and principle.

Back then, as we prepared for that UN conference, which was hosted by South Africa, I felt that this fraught question of black-on-black abuse and violence is critical to any discussion of reparations.

My insistence that this vexing issue should be frankly discussed by Beckles, Mottley, the former Barbados Government Commission For Pan Affairs Director Comissiong and other government and NGO affiliated persons involved with me in conferences, dialogues and other preparatory activities linked to the WCAR was therefore not personal – certainly not in the petty, base sense of that word.

It was in fact an assertion of my own and other moderate black Barbadian thinkers’ personhood: the personhood of the majority of Barbadians, who choose middle-of-the-road positions not just on trans-Atlantic slavery reparations, but on a range of issues as a matter of course.

Moreover, I was asserting the personhood that every race racketeering extremist,
paedophile priest, political con artist, plagiarizing academic and selectively silent journalist attacks not just in their victims, but in themselves, ultimately.
It was an expression of my and their freedom of conscience: our right to see things differently; to disagree.
It was, in fact, an expression of my human rights, including the right to imagine or believe what I choose to imagine or believe.
My right to be me.
Again, these are precisely the kinds of human rights that Beckles and other Pan Africanists were asserting even as they harassed, undermined, intimidated and threatened me, directly and indirectly.

Web-spinning ‘Spiderman’ Cameron’s progressive policing – Englands unknown police #5

This article is one in a series published when I was an anchor with Allvoices-Pulse Point.

This series documents difficulties I have been experiencing working with England’s official and unofficial (“citizen”) police to address short and long-term threats to my and others’ business interests, health and security.

I address militant Islamic terrorism and other forms of unlawful violence, especially psychological violence and other kinds of indirect aggression perpetrated by Western and other secretive state organs like the CIA, Mossad and the KGB.

I decided to reproduce this 5th installment of that series here (as I did on the Wikinut platform on September 19, 2014) as part of a group of “conversations” and programs of constructive engagement I am pursuing with the social media giants Google and Twitter, my local MP Clive Lewis and a number of artists, academics, medical practitioners, bankers, trade unionists, journalists and other contributors to Britain’s and Barbados’ “knowledge economy”.

Still, despite the wide sweep of issues these conversations embrace, references in this particular article to Rastafarian and reggae music legend Bob Marley are extraordinarily serendipitous and surprising to me.

That’s because these references coincide with online, extended conversations I have been having over the last 12 days with Jason Toynbee, Karl Watson and Ray Gurney in which the “informative” Marley features prominently.

With Toynbee, a former Open University lecturer and the author of Bob Marley: Herald of a Postcolonial World?,  I have been discussing progressive and regressive (or degenerative and regenerative) aspects of Marley’s “natural mysticism”.

I contacted Toynbee seeking  insight into the truth of a claim by Marley’s one-time manager Don Taylor that the peace preaching reggae icon had executed “ghetto justice” on the man who led the 1976 gun attack on his home.

Sadly, this kind of fear and force focused “policing” is well-known to Jamaicans and other Caribbean people.

Barbadian historian Karl Watson has been sharing details of an encounter he had with Marley in Barbados in the 1950s, when they were both teenagers.

Ray Gurney, an architect and business associate (with wife Janice “life of the party” Gurney) was recently inspired by Marley’s song “One Love” to create a family film he had first thought of some years ago.

Marley’s well-known love of football, probably one of the genetic legacies of his white English father Norval that Marley himself, his mother Cedella, wife Rita and other Afrocentric guardians of Marley mythology have policed repressively speaks to me voluminously.

As does the socially seismic disqualification of Italy for the select group of nations that will compete in the 2018 World Cup battle for soccer supremacy.

Archbishop Vincent Nichols, President of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of England and Wales, a key “police state” like, Judeo-Christian heritage preserving entity that I have been seeking to engage with constructively about its role in the aforementioned “short and long-term threats to my and others’ business interests, health and security” may have some idea of what that Italian tragedy means to me and other “unknown police”.

 Readers familiar with my geological and geopsychic phenomena tracking core beliefs will appreciate why I view the August 24, 2016 and January 18, 2017 earthquakes similarly.
I also note, with a sense of urgency, the devastation wrought by the December 28, 1908 Messina earthquake, as we approach the 59th anniversary of that tsunami-linked stumping of the “toe” of the beautiful game proud boot that is Italy.
The 900 year interval between the 2017 earthquake and its January 3 predecessor of 1117 that disquieted Verona is also suggestive of a cyclical, degenerative and regenerative dimension to the divine justice I serve and seek.
War wounds and winning tactics


“If we can succeed in inventing means of changing their attitudes and beliefs, we shall find ourselves in possession of measures which, if wisely used, may be employed in freeing ourselves from their attitudes and beliefs in other fields which have greatly contributed to the instability of our period by their propensity for holding up progress.”

D Cameron

It would be easy to attribute the statement above to British Prime Minister David Cameron, given his recent call for “muscular” promotion of British values to fight efforts by militant Islamists to subvert England’s progressive, liberal education system, through the so-called “Trojan Horse” strategy.

It would also be incorrect.

The title of this article and the “D Cameron” attribution that follows the opening quote are parts of a deliberate, Cristiano Ronaldo recalling journalistic body shift, employed by this writer to get readers to question and rethink what they think they know – much like I questioned the identity of Detective Inspector Rob Sterling of City of London Police, in the first article in this (England’s unknown police) series.

In a manner marginally comparable with the aggressive, excessive electroshock ‘therapy’ employed by pioneering psychiatrist Donald Ewen Cameron, the actual author of the quoted statement, I am attempting to ‘depattern’ the reader, gently erasing presumed attitudes and beliefs and ‘inputting’ preferred thoughts.

Strategically imitating (more like metamimicking) much of the modern media’s manipulative ‘information management’, which serves select interests – like Dr Cameron and the other scientists, military personnel and politicians who collaborated with him on the Central Intelligence Agency’s (CIA’s) MKULTRA mind control program – my Lionel Messi-emulating goal is to present an intensive critique of not just former journalist and political web spinner prime minister Cameron’s news management praxis, but a critique of the entire ‘knowledge industry’.

Like Luis Suarez, I’m striking against the inflated defences of both secular and religious education papier mache Mephistopheles.

But in contradistinction to Suarez, I don’t think I’ve bitten off more than I can chew.

As those familiar with my work with the United Nations Development Program (UNDP, Barbados) in the late 1990’s, the Encyclopedia of Caribbean Religions (2013, University of Illinois) and my on-going efforts to reform global fast food powerhouse Domino’s Pizza will know, I’ve been breaching the dogmatic defences of secular and religious knowledge soldiers and systems for several years now.

I’m particularly keen to explore the intersection of predominantly secular Western news media interests and the interests of the predominantly religious, non-Western communities that are typically the subject of academic international development theorizing – the kind of analysis that at least one University of East Anglia development studies course is dedicated to and that Oxfam’s Senior Strategy Advisor Duncan Green offered in a 2012 article.

Actually, a substitution of the word ‘Jihad’ for ‘struggle’ in Green’s article demonstrates the kind of journalistic depatterning that I am going for here. It gives fresh legs to my cause.

One hope is that the psychological shaking or cognitive shifting I achieve by such ‘thought substitution’ may provide a model or stimulus for the kind of critical thinking, open mindedness and even pessimistic questioning that might dislodge the bureaucratic blind faith or official optimism and complacency that was cited as a key factor behind the scandalous Daniel Pelka tragedy.

And the geographical coincidence of the Pelka tragedy and Trojan Horse affair, both based in the English Midlands, is not lost on my metaphysical instincts. My hope is to make the implications of such coincidences explicit.

In this article, as in others I have published here, including some outside this series, I’m capitalizing on a number of geographical, historical and other coincidences around the names “Cameron”, “Campbell” and “Thompson”, for example, as Anansi-like, I spin a web of transient deception, to demonstrate the counter intuitive notion that the more things change, the more they reveal unchanging truths and realities.

Another goal is to challenge linear Western notions of developmental or progressive change, which are notorious for understating or else completely ignoring the circular, mimetic character of change as experienced by time and space bound, socio-biologically sourced humanity.

It is such novelty chasing, typically anti-religious Western concepts of development that Al Queda, Boko Haram, El Shabab, Islamic State In Iraq and the Levant (ISIS) and some of their militant Rastafarian and other Afrocentric Caribbean counterparts oppose, fundamentally.

So here and subsequently, I’ll be comparing and conflating the academic ambitions and experiences of current University of East Anglia development studies staffers and students like John McNagh, Emil Dauncey, Sophie Helle, Le’Roi Adolphus, Rosanne Tromp and others, with the experiences and legacies of Dr Cameron, Emil Durkeim, Robert K Merton, Sylvia Plath, Sir Hilary Beckles, Viola Davis, Esther Philips, Margaret Gill and other father and mother figures and ancestors of academic inquiry.

As before I’ll also be drawing on interactions with journalists, visual artists and other creative industry organizations and personalities, including sketch artist Toni Hayden (England), dance groups Acrojou (England) and Forklift Danceworks (USA), singer-songwriters Anna Mudeka (Zimbabwe-England), Alicia Saldenha (Japan-Trinidad) and Edwin Yearwood and John King (Barbados).

As to be expected of what is essentially a media critique though, the direct and indirect contributions of journalists like Mike Liggins of the British Broadcasting Corporation’s (BBC’s) Norfolk outlet and Eric Smith, David Ellis and Kaymar Jordan of Barbados’ media will feature prominently.

Like the mesmerizingly meandering yet direct and driven Argentinian striker Messi, I’m executing a deceptive, direction changing yet maintaining ‘fakie’, temporarily misdirecting and wrong footing the reader, on occasion, as I pursue the historian’s highest goal: to reconcile the parts that each individual person and event contributes to the whole narrative of human existence and creativity.

From this literary set piece, assisted by the direct and indirect wing-man role-playing contributions of ‘team mates’ like Dauncey and Helle, for example, I am hoping to replicate something of the grace and beauty that Messi achieved when he scored his second World Cup goal of June 25th (fourth of the tournament), as his side battled Nigeria, ancestral cradle of the wily spider Anansi.

I’m conflating ‘beautiful game’ battles being fought today on Brazil’s 2014 World Cup fields of play, with the terrorizing, tragic legacies of the two Western World Wars, fought mainly in European theatres, with contemporary ideological disputes and divisions that all of us have a duty to monitor and police, though not always muscularly.

I am also firmly following-through on an undertaking given in the previous article in this series to give detailed attention to the politics of the deeply conflicted musical and religious icon Bob Marley .

I will be exploring not only the psychosomatic, rough or “rude bwoy” character of Marley’s tragic demise, but also his prima donna, Diego Maradonna approximating low “center of gravity”.

The psychiatric ‘apostle’ Cameron’s statement, taken from his paper The Social Reorganization of Germany, offers insights into the socio-psychological fall-out of the two World Wars’ devastating cultural explosions particularly.

Cameron (1907 – 1967) was an enigmatic, Scottish-born, Presbyterian raised, American acculturated, prominent yet “obscure” pioneer of Western professional and professorial psychiatric theory and practice.

And Islamic Jihad was not the focus of this prominent pioneer of psychiatry, who according to Wikipedia’s main article “served as President of the Canadian, American and World Psychiatric Associations, the American Psychopathological Association and the Society of Biological Psychiatry during the 1950s”.

His paper is not referring to the attitudes and beliefs of United Kingdom-based Muslims.
A profoundly “shell-shocked”, psychological semi-survivor of World Wars I and II, apparently, Professor Cameron was referring to the German people, whom he had come to view as archetypal representatives of ultraconservative, overly aggressive humanity.

Germans were to him what the “blue-eyed devil” white man is to Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan, presumably.

They were the “Pope Paul” and “Babylon” of the fundamentalist Rastafarian worldview of my deceased Rastafarian compatriot Dr Ikael Tafari and the Reggae icon Marley – in his most militant, arguably self-alienated moments, at least.

Wikipedia’s principle article on Dr Cameron – which readers should note may be accused of glossing over human rights abuses he perpetrated in the service of the CIA, incidentally – tells us that in 1945, he, Nolan D.C. Lewis and Paul L. Schroeder, colonel and psychiatrist, University College of Illinois, were invited to the Nuremberg Trials for a psychiatric evaluation of Adolf Hitler’s second in command Rudolf Hess.

But before his arrival in Nuremberg, Cameron seems to have already arrived at some astoundingly bigoted, settled, imagination-starved and ungracious views of Germans, which he recorded in his paper.

“Cameron argued that German culture and its individual citizens would have to be transformed and reorganized. In his analysis, German culture was made up of people who had the need for status, worshiped strict order and regimentation, desired authoritarian leadership and had a deeply ingrained fear of other countries,” says Wikipedia, citing his paper.

It continues “The paper stated that German culture and its people would have offspring bound to become a threat to world peace in 30 years. To prevent this, the West would have to take measures to reorganize German society”

But what “people” (nation, tribe or tongue) has not at some time, in some circumstance, in some measure, been “made up of people who had the need for status, worshiped strict order and regimentation, desired authoritarian leadership and had a deeply ingrained fear of other countries”?

Is that not a description of the classic, morally and politically conservative, Talibank Thinking temperament that can be found within all national borders?

Is it not, moreover, the kind of psychosocial profile that one might expect of large segments of all Western nations’ citizens around the turn of the twentieth century, as they struggled frantically to stabilize their “attitudes and beliefs” following the seismic shakings of the Christian Reformation, the French Revolution, industrialization, and the consolidation of scientific (so-called) secularism?

What people – African, Indian, Chinese, European or any other classification – is above the Nazi, fascist nationalism that England, France, Spain, Italy, the Netherlands and other European nations flirted with but which found its most simultaneously triumphant and tragic expression as it overtook Germany?

What objective justification did Dr Cameron have for thus stereotyping an entire country?

I’m inclined to think very little, if any, ultimately.

But beyond the self-asserted, arguably arrogant empiricist Cameron’s breath-taking bigotry, what stands out most shockingly is the Presbyterian professor’s extraordinary imitation of the very reactionary, retrogressive brutality that he denounced the German people for.

I believe this “own goal” like crisis of identity is the critical lesson that the no doubt well-meaning attitudes and beliefs policing yet perverse, probably criminal cruelty perpetuating professor Cameron can teach all of us – and not least, his prime ministerial “twin” David Cameron, strapped as he is with first-among-equals, father-like governmental responsibility.

The example of the scientist Cameron’s contradictory “war on terror” strategy should arouse the would-be hero PM Cameron’s “spider sense”, reminding him, Home Secretary Theresa “aunt” May and other UK attitudes-and-beliefs-policing authorities that if not properly managed, muscular moves to protect national security may violate not only principles of international solidarity but also the dictates of domestic human rights principles and policies.

Defending their goal of a progressive, culturally integrated, peaceful and prosperous Britain, the English prime minister and his parliamentary colleagues, would want like United States defender Geoff Cameron to avoid anything resembling the own-goal with which Brazilian defender Marcelo Vieira opened the goal-scoring of World Cup 2014.

They would not want to repeat the error of Ghanaian defender John Boye, a Spiderman whose muscular legging aided his side’s defeat and Portugal’s victory.

Graduate student Dauncey “a qualitative researcher undertaking a PhD in the School of International Development Studies” at the UEA could offer a useful metamimetic or semiotic analysis of Boye’s error, conceivably, as his research “focuses on the lives of young men living in an urban, Muslim enclave in Accra, Ghana”.

According to his LinkedIn profile, Dauncey’s broad research interest “is in how these young men make sense of themselves and the worlds that they inhabit.”

He writes “I examine how young men experience and (re)produce a world in which the local and global, consumer and producer are not easily disentangled. Drawing on my own field research I explore the understandings of identity and self that are at stake for young men through diverse forms of consumption and (re)production and the social relationships that frame them.”

“Courtship and marriage, work and leisure, shopping, dress and keep-fit are just a few of the practices and experiences examined. I argue that such practices are not merely economic necessities, but embodied self-making practices grounded in gendered relations of power,” he says.

Dauncey is also interested in the critical analysis of qualitative research methods, in particular focus groups and is currently investigating focus group methodologies and how the data they produce might be better situated and interpreted, by academics like himself, presumably.

Pursuing my own metamimetic analysis of the UEA’s, McGill University’s, the University of the West Indies and other academic institutions‘ ‘shadow worlds’, I am interested in how Dr Cameron, Dr McNagh, Dauncey, Helle, Trompe, I and other academics experience and (re)produce a world in which the local and global knowledge consumer and producer are not easily disentangled.

Drawing on my own “field research” (which, relative to my UEA “focus group”, is so far comprised mainly of introductory conversations and correspondence with McNagh, Dauncey and others) I too am exploring the understandings of identity and self that are at stake for young and old, male and female academics and other thinkers “through diverse forms of consumption and (re)production and the social relationships that frame them.”

Moreover, like the American Merton, “a tall, pipe-smoking scholar”, who “often used the trajectory of his life story, from slum to academic achievement, as material illustrating the workings of serendipity, chance and coincidence, which so long fascinated him,” I, an average height, non-smoking Barbadian thinker am using the trajectory of my own story of Derek Walcott-like dramatization of the creative use of schizophrenia in Caribbean writing, music and other fields as material illustrating the workings of serendipity, chance and coincidence which continue to fascinate me (the book by that title was first to published by my organization, Intelek International).

And lets not discount what I share with PM Cameron, which sadly includes the tainting that he and other British Parliamentarians share through their association with the press pedophilia of recently convicted former News of the World editor Andy Coulson and the late Liberal politician Sir Cyril Smith, whose liberal, progressive British values apparently led him to justify his homosexual and other serial sexual abuses of minors.

In the next article in this series, I will be exploring evidence of links between Cyril Smith, an alleged powerful pedophile ring operating in the British Parliament and similar ‘informal’ pedophile media and political collectives linked to MKULTRA operating in the United States, India, Pakistan, Guyana, Jamaica and my native Barbados.

I can only hope that not only DI Stirling of City of London Police but also his Norfolk Constabulary colleague, DC Trevor Tutt, with whom I shared the name of a possible pedophile embedded in one of Barbados’ top educational institutions, will give due consideration to this information.

As far as I am concerned, you don’t have to be psychic or spiritual to see the connections.

Relatively little investigative journalistic or policing curiosity – the kind that saved Tory MP Andrew Mitchell from an extraordinary media-police miscarriage of justice, apparently – is all that is required.


Dr Ewen Cameron – scientific patron saint or predatory secularist?

The psychiatric ‘apostle’ Cameron’s statement, taken from his paper The Social Reorganization of Germany, offers insights into the socio-psychological fall-out of the two World Wars’ devastating cultural explosions, particularly.

Cameron (1907 – 1967) was an enigmatic, Scottish-born, Presbyterian raised, American acculturated, prominent yet “obscure” pioneer of Western professional and professorial psychiatric theory and practice.

And Islamic Jihad was not the focus of this prominent pioneer of psychiatry, who according to Wikipedia’s main article “served as President of the Canadian, American and World Psychiatric Associations, the American Psychopathological Association and the Society of Biological Psychiatry during the 1950s”. His paper is not referring to the attitudes and beliefs of United Kingdom-based Muslims.

A profoundly “shell-shocked”, psychological semi-survivor of World Wars I and II, apparently, Professor Cameron was referring to the German people, whom he had come to view as archetypal representatives of ultraconservative, overly aggressive humanity.

Germans were to him what the “blue-eyed devil” white man is to Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan.

They were the “Pope Paul” and “Babylon” of the fundamentalist Rastafarian worldview of my deceased Rastafarian compatriot Dr Ikael Tafari and the Reggae icon Marley – in his most militant moments, at least.

Wikipedia’s principle article on Dr Cameron – which readers should note may be accused of glossing over human rights abuses he perpetrated in the service of the CIA, incidentally – tells us that in 1945, he, Nolan D.C. Lewis and Paul L. Schroeder, colonel and psychiatrist, University College of Illinois, were invited to the Nuremberg Trials for a psychiatric evaluation of Adolf Hitler ’s second in command Rudolph Hess.

But before his arrival in Nuremberg, Cameron seems to have already arrived at some astoundingly bigoted, settled, imagination-starved views of Germans, which he recorded in his paper.

“Cameron argued that German culture and its individual citizens would have to be transformed and reorganized. In his analysis, German culture was made up of people who had the need for status, worshiped strict order and regimentation, desired authoritarian leadership and had a deeply ingrained fear of other countries,” says Wikipedia, citing that paper.

It continues “The paper stated that German culture and its people would have offspring bound to become a threat to world peace in 30 years. To prevent this, the West would have to take measures to reorganize German society”

But what “people” (nation, tribe or tongue) has not at some time, in some circumstance, in some measure, been “made up of people who had the need for status, worshiped strict order and regimentation, desired authoritarian leadership and had a deeply ingrained fear of other countries”?

Is that not a description of the classic, morally and politically conservative, Talibank Thinking temperament that can be found within all national borders?

Is it not, moreover, the kind of psychosocial profile that one might expect of large segments of all Western nations’ citizens around the turn of the twentieth century, as they struggled frantically to stabilize their “attitudes and beliefs” following the seismic shakings of the Christian Reformation, the French Revolution, industrialization, and the consolidation of scientific (so-called) secularism?

What people – African, Indian, Chinese, European or any other classification – is above the Nazi, fascist nationalism that England, France and Italy flirted with but which found its most simultaneously triumphant and tragic expression as it overtook Germany?

What objective justification did Dr Cameron have for thus stereotyping an entire country?

I’m inclined to think very little, if any, ultimately.

But beyond the self-asserted, arguably arrogant empiricist Cameron’s breath-taking bigotry, what stands out most shockingly is the Presbyterian professor’s extraordinary imitation of the very reactionary, retrogressive brutality that he denounced the German people for.

I believe this “own goal” like crisis of identity is the critical lesson that the no doubt well-meaning attitudes and beliefs policing yet perverse, probably criminal cruelty perpetuating professor Cameron can teach all of us – and not least, his prime ministerial “twin” David Cameron, strapped as he is with first-among-equals, father-like governmental responsibility.

The example of the scientist Cameron’s contradictory “war on terror” strategy should arouse the would-be hero PM Cameron’s “spider sense”, reminding him, Home Secretary Theresa “aunt” May and other UK attitudes-and-beliefs-policing authorities that if not properly managed, muscular moves to protect national security may violate not only principles of international solidarity but also the dictates of domestic human rights principles and policies.

Defending their goal of a progressive, culturally integrated, peaceful and prosperous Britain, the English prime minister and his parliamentary colleagues, would want like United States defender Geoff Cameron to avoid anything resembling the own-goal with which Brazilian defender Marcelo Vieira opened the goal-scoring of World Cup 2014.

They would not want to repeat the error of Ghanaian defender John Boye, a Spiderman whose muscular legging aided his side’s defeat and Portugal’s victory.

Dancing with Dauncey, dramatist Derek Walcott and other detectives

Graduate student Dauncey “a qualitative researcher undertaking a PhD in the School of International Development Studies” at the UEA could offer a useful metamimetic or semiotic analysis of Boye’s error, conceivably, as his research “focuses on the lives of young men living in an urban, Muslim enclave in Accra, Ghana”.

According to his LinkedIn profile, Dauncey’s broad research interest “is in how these young men make sense of themselves and the worlds that they inhabit.”

He writes “I examine how young men experience and (re)produce a world in which the local and global, consumer and producer are not easily disentangled. Drawing on my own field research I explore the understandings of identity and self that are at stake for young men through diverse forms of consumption and (re)production and the social relationships that frame them.”

“Courtship and marriage, work and leisure, shopping, dress and keep-fit are just a few of the practices and experiences examined. I argue that such practices are not merely economic necessities, but embodied self-making practices grounded in gendered relations of power,” he says.

Dauncey is also interested in the critical analysis of qualitative research methods, in particular focus groups and is currently investigating focus group methodologies and how the data they produce might be better situated and interpreted, by academics like himself, presumably.

Pursuing my own metamimetic analysis of the UEA’s, McGill University’s, the University of the West Indies and other academic institutions‘ ‘shadow worlds’, I am interested in how Dr Cameron, Dr McNagh, Dauncey, Helle, Trompe, I and other academics experience and (re)produce a world in which the local and global knowledge consumer and producer are not easily disentangled.

Drawing on my own “field research” (which, relative to my UEA “focus group”, is so far comprised mainly of introductory conversations and correspondence with McNagh, Dauncey and others) I am exploring the understandings of identity and self that are at stake for young and old, male and female academics and other thinkers “through diverse forms of consumption and (re)production and the social relationships that frame them.

Moreover, like the American Merton, “a tall, pipe-smoking scholar”, who “often used the trajectory of his life story, from slum to academic achievement, as material illustrating the workings of serendipity, chance and coincidence, which so long fascinated him,” I, an average height, non-smoking Barbadian thinker am using the trajectory of my own story of Derek Walcott-like dramatization of the creative use of schizophrenia in Caribbean writing, music and other fields as material illustrating the workings of serendipity, chance and coincidence which continue to fascinate me.

And lets not discount what I share with PM Cameron, which sadly includes the tainting that he and other British Parliamentarians share through their association with the press paedophilia of recently convicted former News of the World editor Andy Coulson and the late Liberal politician Sir Cyril Smith, whose liberal, progressive British values apparently led him to justify his homosexual and other serial sexual abuses of minors.

In the next article in this series, I will be exploring evidence of links between Cyril Smith, an alleged powerful paedophile ring operating in the British Parliament and similar ‘informal’ paedophile media and political collectives linked to MKULTRA operating in the United States, India, Pakistan, Guyana, Jamaica and my native Barbados.

I can only hope that not only DI Stirling of City of London Police but also his Norfolk Constabulary colleague, DC Trevor Tutt, with whom I shared the name of a possible paedophile embedded in one of Barbados’ top educational institutions, will give due consideration to this information.

As far as I am concerned, you don’t have to be psychic or spiritual to see the connections.

Relatively little investigative journalistic or policing curiosity – the kind that saved Tory MP Andrew Mitchell from an extraordinary media-police miscarriage of justice – is all that is required.






















“In the Name of Science” by Andrew Goliszek





Trump’s bipolar Bajan ‘head teachers’ (Heady black and white nationalist alliances – part 1)


The F-AcT of Publishing ‘bigly’

It will help to begin this title shifting, cloistered, oracular 14th installment of my Mouth Of the Beast series of articles with a word of thanks to Ann Fenton, Managing Editor of the American news blog The Latest.

The submersion of the MOTB brand under the black and white nationalist title in this instance is both an assertion of my relatively absolute power over my writing and a subtle rebuke to Ms Fenton.

An apparent stickler for compliance with the Associated Press’ Style Guide, the mainstream news journalist’s Bible, Ms Fenton can be thought of as a hyper vigilant, arguably anal retentive head teacher or press pope.

She might be considered a compulsively ordered editor, afflicted with an edited, literary version of the racial anxieties behind Donald Trump’s, Steve Bannon’s, VS Naipaul’s, professor Sir Hilary Beckles’, Louis Farrakhan’s and other black and white nationalists’ and similar social separatists’ insistence on ethnic and color coded clarity.

And I do not suggest this as a slur against Fenton because like her and other writers, including The Latest publisher Jeffrey Hall, almost certainly, I too have ‘black and white’ publishing anxieties.

We're all drowning in floods of information...?
We’re all drowning in floods of information…?

Indeed, I empathize with Fenton precisely on the basis of my own neurotic and phlegmatic publishing struggles, especially my own seemingly interminable challenges of learning and unlearning the subjectivity of words.

I identify with the AP’s Jill Lawless and the BBC’s Mike Liggins and other BBC journalists similarly.

And as a corrupt corporate culture challenging petition I have started suggests, I am keen to help the BBC reform itself internally.

I want to help Liggins, Wendy Witham, Garry Standly and others free themselves from the duplicity and double-mindedness that excessive corporate conformity can make normative or normalize.

On a similar basis, I empathize with and, if I could, would “radicalize” Barbadian poet and formidable feminist and trade union activist Margaret Gill who is featured in the above video.
A virtual embodiment of the literary fault lines along Barbados’ gender, racial and religious divides, Gill was diagnosed with bipolar disorder in 1987.

But that is an official record or “publication” that Gill, a founder member with me of Voices: Barbados Writers’ Collective, is rightly refusing to be defined by.

And consistent with my work with others promoting reform in mental health diagnosis and treatment, I support Gill in that public assertion.

But Gill, with whom I was once involved intimately, risks being defined by a psychosis of another kind: a sociopath-like, public image obsessed twisting of the heart and mind.
Weighed in the balance by the omniscient umpire who presides over the cosmos’ collective wickets, the longstanding Democratic Labour Party member Gill risks being branded a player of a deeply malformed, malicious and corrupt cricket.

Like former England cricket team captain Nassar Hussain’s now clearly premature analysis of the West Indies team’s performance in their second test match against England at Headingly, Gill, a poet of considerable pedigree risks being exposed as a Pharisee: a performer whose words are empty.
That is because like Trump, Hilary Clinton, Dr Ben Carson, Kellyanne Conway, her UWI colleagues professor Beckles and ‘sista’ Dr Sandra Richards and other conscious or unconscious gender, race and religion racketeering manipulators and bullies, Gill is at risk of being defined by her contribution to the long-running, Barbados-sown, globally grown campaign of character assassination and related human rights violations that has been undermining my work, my health and my family life for more than a quarter of a century.
And let me assert again here, as I have done previously, that campaign is not harming me only.

As I have indicated in an open letter to the Queen of England, to whom Barbadian parliamentarians owe a particular moral and constitutional duty, that cowardly campaign is undermining freedom of the press and other critical cornerstones of Barbados’, England’s, America’s, Canada’s and related democracies.

But the good news, the gospel truth, if you will, is that it is in Gill’s power to redress the risks to her reputation as a person of integrity proactively.

And what a tragedy it would be if the following decree of CS Lewis, describing essentially self-alienated, self-righteous leaders is ultimately, definitively said of this truly gifted Barbadian woman.
“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.”

It is this tyrannical delusion of righteousness that makes Gill, Beckles, Carson, Farrakhan and other black leaders conscious or unwitting allies of beast-like Trump’s truth trampling, tyrannical work.

The convergence of white and black nationalists’ bipolar political, hollowly heady, excessively high minded impulses is both rooted in and leads to miscalculation of their own and misappropriation of others’ social capital.

This creates power vacuums among their respective constituents, resulting in social equivalents of the destruction that hurricane Harvey represents.

Or as I indicated in a number of recent tweets it causes #TrumpicalDepressions.

The delusions of manic depressives like Gill always tend to create deluges of one kind or another.

The embarrassingly public mental health crisis that the radically race conscious rap artiste Kanye West suffered following his endorsement of Trump may be a case in point.

Thesis I tweeted linking Trump's heated racial rhetoric to hurricanes Harvey, Irma and Jose.
Thesis I tweeted linking Trump’s heated racial rhetoric to hurricanes Harvey, Irma and Jose.


I will get to the particulars of Gill’s ongoing betrayal of the beautiful bond that she and I initiated in Barbados in due curse.

For now it will suffice to say that hers seem to mostly be sins of silence.

Her crimes, and I do mean crimes, seem mostly to be a matter of secretive, conspiratorial subversion.

And in the same way that the cosmic reason why the literary umpire Fenton rejected an earlier, 700 word version of this article is something of a mystery to me, so too Gill’s perverse persistence with a cynical Naipaul and Surinder Kandola recalling secrecy about abuses she, I and numerous others have suffered at the hands of Barbados’ gender, race, religion, class and otherwise deeply divisive, tribal political culture remains something of a puzzle.

But for now, back to Fenton.

I empathize with the difficulties of her editorial role, which essentially obliges her to police not just the words but also the motives of others.

Indeed I grapple with the limited control I have over what even the words I create, write or speak, can mean, let alone the words of others!

The heart can be such a shady, obscure, erogenous zone (Jeremiah 17:9).

“Schnart Art”, an Intelek Domino Effect Associates (IDEAs) project that I have embarked on with a number of emerging citizen journalists and ‘seers’, including visual artists Deborah Liversage, entrepreneur ‘oracle’ Janice Lear-Gurney and her architect husband Ray, demonstrates the cyclic or perennial challenges around human language-knowledge consumption and production patterns that I struggle with daily.

Consistent with the fundamental, geopsychic phenomena measuring, early warning aims of this KoreBelief blog, of which it is a ‘by-product’, SchnartArt proceeds not only from the obscurity of the oracle Gurney, but also engages with seismic significations of the August 21, 2017 solar eclipse, profoundly.

I certainly view the hurricane Harvey triggered tragic deaths and destruction in Texas as a kind of semantic saturation, catalyzed perhaps by Trump’s hot wind rhetoric engaging with an extremely cold, frigid, fundamentalist Christian front.

I also hold Trump’s, Bannon’s, Farrakhan’s, Carson’s and others’ heat generating, at times blood chilling rhetoric responsible, at least indirectly, for the ongoing destruction of hurricane Irma and the emerging threat of Jose.
And to be clear, this is not just a meteorological metaphor.



It is also an empirical assessment that derives fundamentally from a time and space generated, linguistic labels transcending rehabilitation of the medieval notion of “humors”.

Accordingly, as I recently indicated to Barbadian cleric Reverend Sonia Hinds, I am inclined to see some causal or at least contingent connections between the Texas flooding and real property rich Trump’s moral famine risking political correctness destroying obsession.
I believe these destructive weather systems may be reasonably viewed as God’s or the cosmos’ way of cleansing America and its Caribbean neighbors (especially proud Jamaica, where Beckles is currently based) of their excessive, racial pride rooted delusions.

From that point of view, these violent weather phenomena may be viewed as cleansing winds, sent to prompt a review of well-meaning but misguided or short-sighted, maliciously and materially motivated decisions.

Trump’s immediate White House predecessor Barack Obama’s simplistic, short-sighted support for gay marriage, apparently ignoring 2000 years of Christian marriage manipulation and perversion by various shadowy micro and macro economic interests, would fall into the former category of Mike the headless chicken misreads.

I suppose I can sympathize with Obama, a constitutional lawyer by training.

I can see why he and other legal minds might think the letter of the law could fix the fundamentally social, complex challenges that marriage, whether gay or straight, monogamous or polygamous presents.
But I see the destructive hurricanes as a cosmological indictment on the real property rich magnate Trump’s condition as an ethical and intellectual property thin, moral dunce more readily than I see it as an Obama or Clinton conceit remedy.

My primary concern though is that these and other natural disasters might be read more prospectively and respectfully by the people of the Caribbean.

I suggest we think of them as colonic cleansers removing post-colonial psychic impurities from the Caribbean body politic’s system.

And from my creole linguistics informed perspective, the balance of probability clearly favors such an analysis, however tentatively offered.

I certainly stand by the validity of this theistic proposition, irrespective of British historian Niall Ferguson’s and other atheist or atheistic, secular historians’ indifference to the intersection of ethics and ecology in spoken, written or otherwise published words.
I single out Ferguson here because in the September 4, 2017 broadcast of BBC Radio 4’s The World This Weekend he defended Trump’s supposed PC redressing verbal aggression.

As I noted in a post in the National Union of Journalist’s Facebook group, Ferguson seems to have a peculiarly unscientific understanding of the power of the 45th US president’s brazen Twitter and other public pronouncements.

I wrote: “His criticism of the media for focusing on Donald Trump’s tweeting is not without merit but deeply concerning nonetheless… surely a historian of Niall Ferguson’s standing should have some inkling of the potency of the public comments of a US president.”

Even if he isn’t familiar with the idea of a ‘speech act’ as formulated in the discipline of Linguistics, a scientific study of language, I opined, Ferguson, a seasoned broadcaster and the Laurence A. Tisch Professor of History at Harvard University should know something about the power of words.
He should be aware of the power of words to escalate or deescalate tense, potentially violent situations.

A student of distinguished American diplomat Henry Kissinger apparently, Ferguson should be aware of the concept of “constructive ambiguity”.

But he seems to have little grasp of the workings of language beyond some rudely agglutinated or hurried together, self-contradicting understanding of the coherence that may exist in and across pragmatics and related linguistic fields, such as semantics, syntax, phonetics, phonology and morphology.

Which brings me again to the seemingly PC hyper sensitive editor Fenton.

She seems to have little awareness of the relative obesity of the English language and how this makes a nonsense of Style Guide and other notions of clarity, at least potentially.

Like Ferguson’s ethically shallow assessment of Trump’s tactless diplomacy, Fenton’s editorial stewardship toward me might be described as a Hussainesque misreading of a cricket test match by reliance on the the temporal and spatial constraints of T20 memories.

Reviewing and ultimately rejecting the earlier version of this article that I had submitted to The Latest, Fenton ignored my stated intention to present my ideas in a series of articles rather than a single 700 word, one-off instalment.

She also took particular issue with my use of the word “mistress”, despite my effort to explain the unique, gender transcending “entailment, implicature, semantic and pragmatic” properties that distinguish my use of that word in this instance.

Fenton apparently reasoned that even my use of quotation marks to signal my peculiar, idiosyncratic use of the word made no difference.

But by binning my article, basically, Fenton triggered a sense of longing for the short-lived literary liberties that I enjoyed while working as an anchor with the then more relaxed, Style Guide-challenging, citizen journalist publisher Allvoices-Pulse Point.

She therefore triggered a happy memory even as she helped me appreciate the extent to which both traditional print and cutting edge digital media entities can be virtually imprisoned by and perpetuate the binary or bipolar gender, racial, religious and other stereotypes that ‘divide and rule’ demagogues like Trump, Beckles and Farrakhan trade on.


Donald Trump, 45th United States President (Wikipedia)
Donald Trump, 45th United States President (Wikipedia)

Her insistence on my conformity to the Style Guide’s dictates on journalistic ‘clarity’, a perfectly reasonable, legitimate insistence in many ways, therefore shifted my attention from Gill’s, Beckles’ Carson’s, Richards’, Farrakhan’s and other Black and Minority Ethnic community leaders’ conscious or unconscious support of Trump’s agenda to the systemic nature of the media industry’s tendency to package and ‘compartmentalize’ information and, intentionally or unintentionally, perpetuate bipolar, black-versus-white and other bigotry enabling ‘branding’ and stereotyping.

Fenton demonstrated what we might call the petrifying or heart and head hardening propensity of the money and otherwise materially motivated publishing industry.
She dramatized, pragmatically, the printed word’s tendency to facilitate mental frigidity, fossilization and compartmentalization.
Particularly through a tendency to force writers to make binary or bipolar word choices, the publishing industry tends to limit those writers’ and their readers’ capacity to think holistically.

Fenton, Hall, Ferguson, Katharine Viner, Ted Turner, Rupert Murdoch, David Thomson, Paul Dacre, professor Beckles, Richard Dawkins and other publishing industry and wider knowledge trading ‘priests’, ‘priestesses’ and similarly ‘ordained’ worshipers of ‘Style Guide gods’ force us to choose between words like “secular or religious” and “black or white”, for example.
Yet it is apparent that at its worst, demonstrated both by PC trampling Trump and some of his hyper sensitive detractors, this tendency of the written word can be a catalyst for or ally in the binary, bipolar thinking that was behind the tragic killing of human rights advocate Heather Heyer, during an eruption of racial tensions over a white nationalist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia.
As readers may recall, the 32 year-old Heyer was killed by James Fields Jr, a white nationalist (or should that be whites rights activist?) who in a now routinely used terror strategy drove a car into a group of protesters that included Heyer.
She was killed an 19 other protesters were injured.

That arguably sensory rather than sense less vehicular slaying of Heyer by the 20 year-old Fields was a dramatic demonstration of the 2 Corinthians 3:6 New Testament warning about written things that I have cited repeatedly in this MOTB series: “the letter killeth”.
This spirituality restricting, cognitively corrosive capacity of the written word, which finds a peculiar contemporary expression in Trump’s and others’ politically polarized tweeting, tends to be overlooked by written news publishers and knowledge traders everywhere.
Secular and religious publishers seem equally indifferent to the capacity of written word based black and white clarity to kill.
And although the lethalness of the letter is a central theme in my book The Bible: Beauty and Terror Reconciled, I tend not to dwell on it myself.
How could I and maintain any sense of self respect as a post modernist scribe in the mold of Cheikh Anta Diop and Jacques Derrida?
So I am grateful to Fenton for prompting me to reflect at length on how what I in one poem call “the illiteracy of Christ” is relevant to Trump’s and other divide and rule demagogues’ programs of publishing ‘bigly’.

I am indebted to her for reminding me that despite the efforts of those like Ferguson who might deny a causal or contingent link between Trump’s aggressive rhetoric and the racial tensions now undermining black and white Americans’ efforts to coexist peacefully, his word, and that of other supposed “white slight redressing”, PC pulverizing pragmatists became flesh in the Heyer tragedy.

Fenton’s challenge has ultimately deepened my conviction that while the pen may be mightier than the sword, it is also, potentially, as impotent.

She has strengthened my belief that like the car driven by the hot head Fields, the 26 characters of the alphabet are mere machines, ultimately.

Their meaning and utility derive from the consciousness of the writer-driver.

And some writers, like Scotland’s ‘Bin Lorry Bin Ladin’ career driver Harry Clarke are clearly less conscious and conscientious than others.

Now, should Fenton be considered not only a ‘bookish theoric’ but in fact a binary thinking, bipolar person herself?

Probably not in the strict, medical sense of the word.

I know very little of Fenton beyond what is indicated by the few emails we have exchanged.

And I hope that she has never suffered the misfortune of a deeply stigmatizing bipolar disorder or similar mental illness diagnosis, as these tend to be self-fulfilling prophecies.


Gill a ‘bookish theoric’?
Which brings me back to the woman featured in the joint Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) and World Health Organization produced video accompanying this article: Ms Gill.

As she admits in the PAHO/WHO video, Gill was diagnosed with bipolar disorder by Barbados’ secular science based medical establishment in 1987.

That clearly was not an easy admission for the proud poet Gill, as her facial expression, especially a seemingly anxious, Fentonesque shifting of her eyes to someone positioned to the left (her right) of the recording camera suggests.

Gill, the winner of the inaugural Frank Collymore Literary Endowment Award, the most prestigious on the island is clearly aware of her reputational, publishing vulnerability.

She knew full well the risk she was taking as she chose to stand up and be counted among people “breaking the silence and the stigma around depression”, as the video states, with black and white clarity, literally.

And again, for this conscious risk-taking I will salute the emotionally fragile yet self-affirming poet Gill’s courage endlessly.

However, I can only offer her a restrained, largely optimistic, emotionally edited salute at this stage, because Gill does not seem as aware as she could be of the fallibility or selectivity of her Kandolaesque memory.

I say this because in February, 2017 Gill said that she loathes me because I ‘outed’ her as a mental health sufferer, rather than letting her publish that information herself.

Emphasizing that it is not her way to hate anybody, Gill, the mother to an adult son, told me that she was making an exception to that rule just for me.

So it appears that Gill believes that she has arrived at her loathing of me rationally.

There certainly was a vehemence and determination in her voice as Trump-like, she executed this venomous, violent speech act: “Ya see you Junior Campbell, I loooooathe you!” she said, stressing the vowel of that verb for impact.

I believe the ‘outing’ that Gill is accusing me of occurred in an Allvoices article I published in 2012, ventilating my concerns about her conscious or unconscious role in the long-running campaign of character assassination and other ‘brand bashing’ human rights violations.
Yet if I recall correctly, I published that since binned but soon to be re-published article some time after Gill had already “published” the bands of her bipolarity, if I may use that ecclesiastical marriage announcing analogy.
Put with Fentonesque simplicity, in 2012 I believed I was free to mention Gill’s mental health struggles publicly because she had already done so by then.

As I recall, she had told me that her courageous, mental health stigma challenging public declaration had come about during a conference of some kind, possibly held at the former Sherbourne Conference Centre (now called the Lloyd Erskine Sandiford Centre).

So, it may well be that the long-time Democratic Labour Party member Gill’s decision to loathe me is based on a failure of memory.

And I say ‘may well be’ because I am mindful of a rather darker, more depressing possibility.


Given our capacity as human beings for self-deception, it may be the case that Gill remembers that she had outed herself as a mental health sufferer but is seeking to conceal that fact in a bid to discredit me, as her DLP colleague Donville Inniss and others dancing along Barbados’ political divides have been doing since the 1990s.

That is to say, Gill may be casting herself as a victim, basically, in order to justify her, her UWI colleagues Beckles’, Richards’ and other fundamentalist feminists’ and black separatists’ efforts to portray me as a villainous, or (and perhaps more professionally damaging) a well meaning but incompetent person.

Much as it saddens me, I am obliged to consider the possibility that Gill has given herself wholly to the political machinations and related public relations deceit that blight all levels of Barbadian communication and social relations.

And it seems to me that Barbadians’ pride in our longstanding but rather optimistic 98% literacy assessment only exacerbates this dilemma.

Gill’s bipolarity, a personal challenge, is in fact correlated by the similarly separatist, socially divisive party politics that Barbadian writer George Lamming has identified as a pernicious destroyer of Barbadian dreams and talent.

The prominent Barbadian thinker, best known for his novel In The Castle Of My Skin, offered this assessment during the 5th annual Assembly Of Caribbean People, held at UWI’s Barbados-based Cave Hill Campus in 2015.

Here are Lamming’s words as reported by a local newspaper:

“It is my view that the political party, as it operates, is the source of public corruption. It is the source of a waste of human capital. It is the major obstacle to any rational and serious debate about politics.”

The basic argument of this essay is that by behaving like the anxious editor Fenton, who again, I empathize with, Gill, Beckles, Richards and other Barbadian black nationalist thinkers are advancing the deeply divided and divisive president Trump’s and other white nationalists’ short-sighted agendas, consciously or unconsciously.

I am contending that this unintended consequence of their actions is a perpetual risk not just in spite of their literary and other academic accomplishments, but to some extent because of them.

Again, as the biblical writer put it “the letter kills”.

And I readily concede that my own written words can have a lethal impact.

So contrary to Fenton’s apparent assumption, it is not my intention to denigrate or humiliate Gill or anyone else.

I am simply suggesting that Barbadians are particularly susceptible to the unintended forgetfulness or deliberate dishonesty that Gill demonstrates because of the mental and moral fog that our country’s literacy linked, color coded political party opportunism and tribalism generates.
This is why Voices, the writer’s group that Gill, Nailah Imojah, Umbali Imojah, Mark McWatt, Joy Workman and I founded became such an attractive object of conquest or, as former Barbadian prime minister Owen Arthur once suggested, in a reference to Barbados’ cultural industries overall, a source of political capital.
I believe Lamming, a Marxist analyst who has impressed this writer by his willingness to acknowledge the limitations of Marxist analysis would caution against or even denounce that kind of proprietorial or territorial political speculation.

The Trinidadian thinker and cricket officianado CLR James did the same, incidentally, penetratingly labeling the USSR a ‘state capitalist’ venture.
Due partly, perhaps, to the victimization that he suffered under the mercurial Trinidadian leader Eric Williams’ regime, James too was aware of how the schizophrenic disconnect between Caribbean politicians’ and political activists’ socialist preaching and their capitalist practice could make them ‘mistresses’ of Trump-like racketeers and tricksters.

The crux of the problem, as articulated on one occasion by the late Barbadian trade union activist Ricky ‘Babu’ Parris, under whom I served as the Treasurer of the Pan Africanist Movement of Barbados, is a failure of polarized black and white nationalists to appreciate the value of being at least as self-critical as one is inclined to indulge in self-praise.
Ottis Gibson, the former Barbadian coach of the England cricket team spoke of a related challenge in a press conference held on September 5, 2017 at Lord’s Cricket Ground, ahead of the 3rd and decisive Investec test match between England and the West Indies.

More on that in my next article, to be published modestly here.


Black and white signs and wonders

Like Fenton’s questionable, simplistic, possibly corporate interests driven insistence on clarity, Gill’s loathing of me appears to be the consequence of a defective conscience: a deficiency of self-awareness, as our fellow poet Parris might say from the grave.

More pointedly, given that she had already gone public with her mental illness history, I am inclined to believe that Gill loathes me for some perceived offence or group of offences that she is either unwilling or unable to concede.

The perceived injury that Gill refuses to forgive me could be the fact that it was I, not her, who ended our relationship.

Or, and I think this is more likely, the fact that I married a white woman.

It seems to me that this racist territoriality is something that Gill shares with Trump, Farrakhan, Beckles, Richards and other nationalists and separatists.
A similarly compelling possibility is that Gill is angry with me for publishing details of her betrayal of the DLP.

As I have published previously, she did that when she asked me to do some ‘indirect’ canvassing for Reginald Farley, the rival Barbados Labour Party candidate, in the 1994 general election campaign.

I suppose it is easier to blame me than it is to blame herself, Robert Morris or another of her die hard DLP comrades for the militant tendencies or excessively strict, potentially violent or otherwise human-rights-infringing ‘labour discipline’ that made her feel obliged to conceal her support for a BLP candidate.

And I have no doubt some Barbadians would say that I should blame myself at least partly for accepting that BLP ‘mess of pottage’ despite having been raised in a DLP household from my childhood days.

But I reasoned, as I believe Gill did, that never having joined the DLP I was better placed than her or another person officially tied to that party to canvass for Farley.

And I believe she stressed the indirect character of that Farley promoting tactic which was conducted by means of an ostensibly independent house-to-house survey of voter opinion.

In other words, I felt that despite my loyalty to the DLP (which I incarnated with a vote for then party leader and my local representative Sir Lloyd Erskine Sandiford in the same general election) I could indirectly support Farley with a clear conscience.

I certainly did not think I was selling my democratic birth right or otherwise surrendering my rights as a Barbadian citizen to freedom of association.

I did not and do not believe that my interactions with Gill or any other Barbadian activist, politician, party or any other political entity anulls my entitlement to the freedom of conscience and other human rights that my slave and free Barbadian ancestors fought and laboured for.

Does the fact that my father canvassed for the late Sir Richard Haynes give the DLP proprietorial or territorial interests in Jeffrey Campbell’s children?
Does the labour expended by my father for Barbados’ trade union movement, in the hotel industry, as a hifi player or as a sign painter with the Ministry of Transport and Works entitle any of his shop steward or other union colleagues to a proprietorial or territorial interest in me?

If so, they should tell me how.



In an as yet unpublished poetic precursor to this narrative, I consider the possibility that somehow, through the neural networks of her tortured, bipolar soul, Gill’s professed loathing of me may be fuelled by a fragmentary love.

I write:
“And love and hate can be confused so easily in the market place: buyer’s remorse with the marketer’s guilt.
Ask Prime Minister Theresa May, media magnate Karen Blackett or that game Grand Master Reverend Sally Muggeridge.
You play your own word games with a considerable mastery.
You certainly gave that venomous verb dramatic, extended emphasis during our brief, long-distance conversation, this past February.
Oh! If words spoken in 0:03 seconds could kill!
If words travelling from Christ Church, Barbados, to Norfolk, England via fibre optic cable could decapitate,
Your Kalibank Queen killing skills would have finished me that day.”

The poem continues with a prayer:

“If only you and I could concoct a kindred science to reconcile our complementarily traveled and troubled, occasionally harried and muddled hearts and minds.

Oh that you and I could construct a man-woman, person-to-person faith based on our uniquely shared experiences and scribed in a marriage of our poetic Bajan idiolects.”

But as I have made clear to Gill and others, I am not seeking reconciliation or accommodation with her for her or my sake only.
A socialist she should know how the rift between her and I has been rippling and ripping socially.

A radical feminist in some ways, as indicated, for example, by her refusal to shave her legs, Gill knows that the personal is political, especially in Barbados, because of the depth and breadth of the tiny, 166 square mile island’s political penetration and saturation.

But as a priest after the order of Mechizidek, I would appeal primarily to Gill’s piety, rather than her Marxist or other ideologies.

Not least, because in February Gill told me that I am not the only person God speaks to.



Black and white alleys and allies

The economic historian and former British Labour Party MP Tristram Hunt offers a somewhat rudimentary mapping of the international dimensions of Barbadians’ published and unpublished, private and public sociopolitical ripples in his book Ten Cities That Built An Empire.

Like Ferguson’s ideas about ‘contaminated Christianity’, Hunt’s analysis is useful, but not above critical scrutiny.

There certainly is no evidence that he is interested in engaging with Barbadians’ religious faith penetratingly.

Like the late 19th century, money-minded madame Rachel Pringle, might Hunt, like his academic colleague Beckles, be assuming that every confession of religious faith or spirituality is shallow and of little consequence?

Might the labour rights preaching Gill be similarly convinced?
Might she be merely marketing and bartering the beliefs of Providence Methodist Church, her official place of worship, the last I knew, rather than fully embracing them?

Could it be that like disgraced ex-Methodist minister Paul Flower, Gill has given herself over to publishing ‘bigly’ what she pours contempt on through private unpublished actions?
I hope this is not the case.

More than hoping, through this article, I am acting decisively to alert the prodigiously talented Gill to what she and other members of the DLP, BLP and other stewards of Barbados democratic legacy are at risk of wasting, like the prodigal Englishman Tom Rakewell.

I have also been in touch with our mutual friend Reverend Hinds to this end (efforts to reach Richards through UWI and other initiatives have however so far sadly fallen on deaf ears).

Both women know that I have been tracking the earthquakes, sudden deaths and other socially seismic events that have shaken the faith of Barbadians in recent years with more than a passing interest.

And while I am not so conceited as to assume some messianic mantle that puts Barbadians’ fate in my hands, I also am mindful of my duty as a fully committed follower of the Cosmic Christ’s leading.

I do what I can to be a salting, life saving representative of the Barbadian incarnation of Christ’s brand.
Whether she loves or loathes me, I remain as committed to doing whatever I can to be a blessing to the uniquely beautiful Ms Gill, as I am to be a blessing to all Barbadians and Caribbean people.


References and further reading




A mad world: capitalism and the rise of mental illness


Trust Your Institutions, They Said. It Will Be Fun, They Said. (or “Rupert Murdoch’s monopoly and Morocco’s monarchy”?)



The article below is published with the permission of its author Olaug Holmøy, of Amnesty International, Norway. It was written for an academic assignment as part of her studies in International Development at the University of East Anglia.

The link to Rupert Murdoch’s media empire, suggested by the alternate title is mine. More on the rationale for linking Murdoch and Morocco’s monarch managed media will follow.

I have edited the syntax (not the semantics) of Holmøy’s article very slightly, because of linguistic challenges affecting her writing.



According to Reporters Without Borders (RWB) overview the Kingdom of Morocco is ranked at the 131st place for press freedom, just above Palestine.

The authorities in the country are threatening journalists, citizen-journalists and also foreign media with surveillance, heavy fines and imprisonment.
Sensitive subjects such as Islam, the monarchy or Western Sahara are areas the authorities don’t want the media to be snooping in, and will therefore do everything within their power to prevent it from happening.
A group of journalists’ wanted to give training to citizen journalist via an App in Morocco.
Free Press Unlimited (FPU), Small World News and The Guardian Project developed the secure storytelling app called StoryMaker.
This app would provide the citizen journalist of Morocco with the opportunity to publish content and they could have been anonymous while doing so.
The StoryMaker app could be a great chance for the Moroccan people to share things about their country, reveal situations about their society and the government. It is regarding this last point that things gets tricky.
According to an article by Amnesty International from 2016 the authorities believe that grassroots journalism, like StoryMaker, can destabilize the peoples trust in their institutions.
Who’s to say the Moroccan people should trust their institutions?
After shutting down an opportunity to spread information about their situation, it does not seem reasonable to trust ‘them’.
Because of this initiative seven journalists faced trial, and some of them could get up to five years in prison.
Another example as to how the authorities work is the amendments to the criminal code.
RWB means it clearly was designed to restrict journalists’ right to information.
Journalists’ without information is no journalist at all.
According to Rethinking Media Development countries needs rules to make sure that all citizens have access to information in order to foster a media that serves the interests of society.

The World Bank have studies showing that a country with high level of press freedom is also a country with higher control of corruption (Wolfensohn, 1999).
This assertion can naturally be reversed, meaning that a country where journalists are imprisoned for taking advantage of their human right, that is freedom of expression, there is most likely corruption within the country.
It is extremely suspicious when journalists get imprisoned when wanting to write about the monarchy.
By doing so it just makes it clearer that they are closing in on a touchy subject.
Personally I am very grateful to organizations like Amnesty for pushing where it hurts and actually demanding change in countries like Morocco.
Thus having huge international organizations coming in to a country and demanding change can be tricky as well.
It can be seen as quite invasive when Amnesty and also The Guardian Project point fingers on how countries in the global south run their society.
Then again, freedom of expression is a human right, and that is in fact universal for all humans.
When foreign media wanted to cover the situation on Western Sahara, the Moroccan authorities stole the material.
They say this decision was made because the foreign media had not asked for permission before starting the story.
Still, I truly doubt the situation would have been any different if they had asked in advance.
So the Moroccan institutions should be trusted, but the people should not ask questions, and do not have access to information about their institutions such as the monarchy or the government.
Using new methods in media, such as StoryMaker is just down instantly.
Then again a platform for anonymous publishing could be misused, and people could in fact write articles to mobilize groups that are not beneficial for the country.

But as this blog states earlier; higher level of press freedom = higher control on corruption. And that can only be good, can it not?
Amnesty International (2016). Morocco: Journalists risk imprisonment for running smartphone app training. [online] Available at: https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2016/06/morocco-journalists-risk-imprisonment-for-running-smartphone-app-training/ [Accessed 19.10.16]
Amnesty International (2016). Morocco ramps up crackdown on press freedom with trial over citizen journalism. [online] Available at: https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2016/01/morocco-ramps-up-crackdown-on-press-freedom-with-trial-over-citizen-journalism/ [Accessed 19.10.16]
Equality and Human Rights Commission (2016). Article 10: Freedom of expression. [online] Available: https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/human-rights-act/article-10-freedom-expression [Accessed 19.10.16]
Reporters Without Borders (2016). Morocco. [online] Available at: https://rsf.org/en/morocco [Accessed 19.10.16]
Wolfensohn, James D., (1999). Voices of The Poor. [online] Available at: http://chora.virtualave.net/voicesofthepoor.htm [Accessed 19.10.16]
Author, name, (year). Rethinking Media Development. [online] Available at:
https://learn.uea.ac.uk/bbcswebdav/pid-1716876-dt-content-rid-2401915_1/courses/DEV-5015A-16-SEM1-A/Rethinking%20media%20development.pdf [Accessed 23.10.16]

https://az734552.vo.msecnd.net/cache/5/c/a/2/b/a/5ca2ba268e380b283938e612d33395b926865f5b.jpg (Photo: ©AP/Press Association Images) [Accessed 19.10.16]

How I’ll Vote Tomorrow (A 2017 UK general election reflection)



I published the following poem hours before I voted in the June 8, 2017 general election in Britain: a snap election, called by Prime Minister Theresa May, supposedly to “strengthen her hand” as she leads the country into  Brexit negotiations with the European Union.

Part battle cry, part prayer the poem addresses issues I and other UK citizens and residents have been grappling with since before the shocking murder of South Yorkshire MP Jo Cox and other extraordinary manifestations of  our apparent failure to cope in what by reasonable estimation may be considered Britain’s “captive state”.

The video recording of former United States warrior-president Dwight D Eisenhower’s poignant warning about the threat to his country’s democracy posed by its own “military industrial complex” is included here in that context.

I explore these and related ideas in an as yet unpublished article, entitled “An Eisenhower eye on Elor Azaria’s, Alexander Blackman’s and Sir Hilary Beckles’ plays, prisms and prison terms”, the fourteenth article in my long-running ‘Mouth of the Beast’ series.

And my preoccupation in this poem with the ongoing ‘Free Marine A’ saga is in fact a manifestation of the chilling effect that that case has had on my mental state: the fact, essentially, that the Court Martial Appeals Court decision that basically earned Blackman his freedom was like the “Cry havoc!” invoked by Shakespeare in his play Julius Caesar.

I do not think it would be an exaggeration to say that that deeply depressing and divisive legal decision, secured with the assistance of a highly questionable campaign run by the controllers of Britain’s own “MIC” (media industrial complex), has sickened me physically.

Indeed, as I recently hinted to Dr Rachel Clawson of the University of Nottingham, leader of a study on forced marriage among disabled people, turning on the question of their mental capacity, the difficulty I have been experiencing writing the “Eisenhower eye” article stems from a very real fear that it might be the death of me.

I told Clawson of the sense of “ambient terror” that I live with daily, but did not disclose my very real fear that the manslaying “Blackman brigade” might come after me.

This sense of peril to my family’s and my own personal well being and life prospects, stems not only from my situation as a member of Britain’s Black and Minority Ethnic (BME) community. It is rooted in a vulnerability that I have been groomed in by the majority black Barbados government’s peculiar capacity to inflict harm on non-conforming black citizens, directly or indirectly, where ever they may be.

It is rooted in my experience of “state capture”, Barbadian style, through that country’s strong ties with the US, Britain, Canada, Singapore, India, Zimbabwe and other Commonwealth countries.

I have long-running experience of the soul suppressing pressures of the island’s political, religious, media, academic and other orthodoxy enforcing elites that make a sham of its notions of freedom and democracy.



How I’ll vote tomorrow
For those who may be interested to know,
I will be voting strategically tomorrow.
I will be voting for the candidate I consider the ‘lesser evil’.
For a person who, on balance,
Will do what is best not just for their party, media, trade union,
or business backing beaus:
they will act first and foremost for the ‘ordinary’ people who extraordinarily amid this country’s mass media induced existential haze, voted them through.
I will be voting for a person of profound and practical conviction.
Whose good works, not their rhetoric, demonstrate their belief in a just yet merciful God.
I’m not particularly interested in church, mosque, synagogue or temple attendance.
As far as I can tell, much of the world’s problems
Stem from a disemboweling of truth by religious congregations.
The greatest threats we face stem from “religiously” secular, fundamentalist, evangelical atheists who have more than they will ever know (or admit) in common with fundamentally impious, self-deluding religious fanatics.
I can speak on this subject with some authority
Because I used to be firmly entrenched in such secular and religious communities.
And even now,
I am not entirely out of the woods.
But how could I be,
While still living in and engaging sympathetically with fellow travelers in the world?
How could I be untouched by others suffering?
How could I not be influenced by the needs and desires of fellow spiritual immigrants?
How could I not understand Thomas Mair’s anger and confusion,
Even as I denounce and deplore that misogynist maniac’s murder of Jo Cox?
How could I not empathize with Alexander Blackman’s desire for a freedom that I feel certain he, his lawyer Jonathan Goldberg, the Daily Mail campaigner Paul Dacre and that paper’s owner Lord Rothermere know he has not earned.
I have no end of respect for the ‘Big Al’ who dared to put on a British services uniform some years ago.
But having so egregiously disgraced Lord Nelson and every other British hero and “shero” who went before him,
Named and unnamed;
Known and unknown,
Shouldn’t “Marine A” relinquish any claim to the high honor of a marine’s uniform?
Hasn’t his obscenely callous conduct in Helmand Province brought enough shame on British citizens and residents.
Hasn’t his juvenile provocation of religious fanatics, like the Charlie Hebdo journalist’s, put enough of the people he was supposed to be protecting in the line of fire?
Must he like the predatory pedophile Jeffrey Epstein, who compared his dark deeds to stealing a bagel, insist on the honorable discharge he does not honorably deserve?
I empathize with Blackman’s wife, his sister Melody and other family members who campaigned for his freedom.
I too am a ‘family first’ man.
But it cannot be right that they and other people cast aspersions on the character of ordinary, hardworking people, by calling other blokes critical of their campaign ‘lesser men’, as Melody has done.
Some citizens and residents of this country may never see a designated battle field beyond Britain’s shores.
But aren’t many parts of this country unofficial war zones?

I shudder to think what life was like for murdered mother of two Kerri McAuley before ‘GI Joe’ Storey effectively ‘orphaned’ her children.

Like Blackman and Israeli medic Elor Azaria, Storey has ‘stoically’ pleaded manslaughter, by reason of diminished responsibility, the EDP reports.
And yet I know of other Norfolk men and women for whom daily life is filled with various Manchester, London, Paris-like terrorist attack terrors.
The battle of the sexes is not always a cold war.


Screenshot of Rachel Clawson led forced marriage study website
Screenshot of Rachel Clawson led forced marriage study website

And one child I know was sexually and violently abused by a grandparent from the age of five until adolescence.
And that person is apparently still blaming him/herself because their body may have responded ‘naturally’ to the abuse, one that routine rape had become the norm.
Talk about cynical sexual grooming!
Talk about the human feeling distorting fog of war!
Talk about terrorism making us headless chickens primed for political manipulation by the likes of Epstein, Steve Bannon and Donald Trump!
Talk about the tragic ‘success’ of the spirituality dismissing, life experience devaluing biomedical model of psychiatry that is propagated by the military industrial complex about which president Dwight D Eisenhower warned!
Former soldier Ian Duncan Smith can tell us more than a little about that – as he can about the use of psych ops tactics by Brexiters during Britain’s EU referendum brouhaha.
So too, probably, can Welsh MP Tommy Mercer and other ex-soldiers who have apparently never learned the discipline of Jesuit pioneer Ignatius Loyola.
They seem more motivated by Trump’s tragic ‘glory grabbing’ and the perverse privacy protection of Peter Thiel, Sir Hilary Beckles, Ben Carson and others who would make Britain as grey and ‘great again’ as gun powder pretty America.
Like Jeremy Corbyn, before his reported, much-hyped awakening to the ‘real world’, they seem to be driving like ‘Bin Lorry Bin Ladin’ Harry Clarke under the influence of their unconscious.
They seem to be laboring like Len McCluskey under some Lloyds Bank-like belief that ‘bigger means stronger’.
I’m a mathematician.
I deal in proportions.
And I am done talking, for now.
From here on, this glossolalist will be practicing a Trappist monk-like silence, as I prepare to vote.
Through my pain, through my shame, through my anger like the EDP’s James Marston’s, I will vote for the one I consider the least potentially catastrophic option among those standing in Norwich South.
And while part of me really wants to tell you who will be the lucky or unlucky sod (Clive Lewis and Simon Wright who he succeeded can tell you that representing me in Parliament is no easy job) I think its best that I keep that between me and God.
As we say in my birthplace, Barbados: “Na name, na blame, na lock-up!”