Adity Chakrabortty

I have a huge amount of respect for your work, your understanding of the political consensus that has harmed so many in the last 30 years is exceptional. Your posts about people having the vapors over John McDonnel inciting abuse and violence indicate a blindspot which has been evident for a while. You can clearly see that women, jewish people are being targeted and physically and verbally intimidated day in and day out. You can see people like April Preston who was terrorised at home, you know women like me having folders full of death threats, and rape threats. When you tell people that there is academic justification for this you are being disingenuous. You are pretending you dont see this, you are pretending there has not been(and remains) political consensus on the welfare cuts and local authority changes that I work on, you are pretending that when John McDonnell is inciting abuse of his political opponents and critics it is not felt in women being abused, threatened, having their kids put at risk. You tell people thatyou support the organised abuse that this ‘movement’ requires. If someone did that to you you would say something. But I wouldn’t do that to you and nor would most people you know. You would do that to use.

When you offer spurious academic justification for this it enables our abuse. It is no different to the far right, except apparently it somehow is…something to do with us being acceptable price for your political identiy and us being unabusable if its your comrades. No political party wishing to address inequality would be helped by you doing that. It is harmful to Labour when their followers do this, it is more harmful when their journalists show who is expendable and who can be hurt and who their political movement can target with impunity. Equality legislation has always mapped out who is abusable and who isnt. This is not unexpected.

The response of @callmemrfister to being called abusive

Is to encourage his followers to abuse other women, getting users like @lordycynico to take part, calling them ‘loonbags’. He’s a bit of a Darwin award contender, as is @lordycynico. People who spend their days abusing women on the net o n behalf of the Labour Party generally are. It’s why John McDonnell is so dangerous. As demonstrations of how Corbynism uses abuse of women, you could do worse than follow @callmemrfister. He’ll show you day in and day out, how the Labour Party uses abuse of welfare claimants to uphold political power. And if you describe it as abuse, he will show you that he can’t help it. Someone is going to get killed by the end of the summer because Corbynism relies on men like this. Would that be ‘social murder’, would Labour take any responsibility? No. I think not.

Apparnetly I need sexual imagery to be included in my abuse, so this kind of thing is coming my way now. But this is all normal. These people are normal…no.



I am off twitter for 6 days.

THis is how Labour left work. @callmemrfister wishes not only that his right to abuse women on behalf of the Shadow Chancellor be protected, but that women do not injure his identity by describing it as abuse.

THis is a very dangerous reflex. Essentially @callmemrfister has been encouraged to place an individual at the core of his political identity, so that whatever a political party do, he will abuse anyone who objects. When John McDonnell uses words like ‘social murder’ it means that @callmemrfister will have justification for this. Many men don’t draw the line at internet abuse, and many men do this offline. Which is why when John Mcdonnell incites violence it’s a problem.

What we learned in the twentieth century, was that creating an identity for yourself as inherently good justifies appalling actions. Only through reflection on the power you exercise can you address inequality.

I have to be driven from the public sphere because the identity that @callmemrfister has adopted is false. When your identity is attached to nothing, you lash out to protect it. Its at the core of much domestic abuse and the violence women face from men. He lashed out at me because he is supporting a political leader upholding welfare cuts that even made Iain Duncan Smith sick and a woman on benefits discussing it is aproblem. So he will abuse women on benefits and drive them out of the public sphere to protect a powerful man. He can’t admit this to himself so he has to try and get my twitter account shut down., Because if he makes me go away it means its not true that this is what he does. This is why Corbynism is so dangerous. Men like @callmemrfister. Me being booted off twitter for 6 days does not change what this is.

A blog post I would like to be given to @callmemrfister

Hello @callmemrfister. Yesterday I spoke about the Shadow Chancellor’s words being used to incite violence and you challenged me and said that a Shadow Chancellor has no power, which is the view of a child. You said this because you were abusing women on his behalf to suppress political discussion, on behalf of a political party upholding welfare cuts which will kill people. You said this because you are one of the people who is willing to abuse women on behalf of a politcial party for discussing welfare cuts that will kill people. You abuse women to uphold a neo liberal consensus that this has been acceptable for over 30 years.

You abused me by inciting a pile on of your followers and misrepresenting what I said and then when I described it as abusive, you got twitter to lock my account. Twitter locking my account does not make you abusing women, for discussing the Shadow Chancellor inciting violence and upholding welfare cuts that will kill people, anything buta buse. You using twitter to try and prevent me describing your behaviour accurately is an admission and today you have done it again. You did this because you abuse women for discussing welfare cuts that will kill people, and for discussing the Shadow CHancellor inciting abuse. He incites abuse and you abuse women. You abuse women on behalf of a political party for discussing this and no amount of using twitter to get my account locked changes this.

You can get my account locked, it is just you evidencing youa re a man who abuses women on behalf of a political party and tries to do everything you can to silence them. I hope the way yoou use the internet for abuse isnt carried on offline and you are not as much of a risk to women offline as you are on. I suspect you probably are because these tendencies tend to be demonstrated in all areas of life.

If you do not wish to be described as someone who abuses women on behalf of a political party, for challenging the welfare cuts at the core of the neo liberal consensus, dont do it. When hearing your behaviour described accurately injures your identity, the problem is your identity. The reason you do not wish me to describe you abusing women discussing welfare cuts on behalf of a political party, is because you are ashamed and you should be. It is disgusting to abuse women on behalf of a political leader for discussing welfare cuts that will kill people and this is what you do. I can’t use twitter for six days because you need women driven out of the public sphere, to protect the ability of welfare cuts to kill people and you abuse women on behalf of a political party and dont like it when they call you out. That will still be true in 6 days.

For Attention of:Alt-McCats @maybethisisawar

I am writing this to you because of your hobby abusing and harming women. You wrote an eloquent explanation about why you desperately need to abuse and harm women and why it is justfified because middle class politeness is not appropriate when dealing with the poverty and despair you say drives you.

This was you exploiting women, exploiting women’s hardship to justify abusing them, threatening them, and disenfranchising them. It was YOUR behaviour and the behaviour of YOUR culture that meant women suffering the actual impatc of austerity could not challenge it. You make it dangerous for them and their children to go near challenging austerity. The Labour manifesto upheld the welfare cuts that this year will kill women, that have already led to them losing their kids, being harmed by abusive partners they can’t leave, and it used them to pay for a tuition fee bribe. In effect the movement you are part of is responsible for this. People who actually work with inequality know one thing, they know that when you are working with someone, or speaking for someone with less power than you have, you have to take care. They know without reflection on the impact of what they do they will cause harm. THis is not unusual for the people who actually deal with inequality, who live wit hit. But those people not just abusive men looking for a moral justification to threaten, intimidate and harm women.

Your response to me, when you called me an ‘IT’ and incited your followers to abuse me, your behaviour to other women, it makes you a risk to all women. If you want a hobby absusing and intimidating women, which you do, find another justification. Your so called eloquence in justifying your absolute need and right to hurt, harm, disenfranchise and intimidate women is not new to 21st century women. We know how to identify it. Your reasoning is that of a rapist, peadophile or domestic abuser. You do not have the right to abuse, intimidated, or harm any woman and you certainly do not get to walk over the corpses of the women paying ofr austerity to justify it. You are a risk to women. Own it. You don’t get to claim moral authority for being a risk to women and you certainly can’t address inequality by doing so.

You are correct., There are times when politeness will not do. Your hobby abusing, harming, intimidating women, is about you. There is no moral justification for it and it harms all women.

Going to Pride to make people ashamed

Today, the left have decided that they will decide who is allowed to be gay, and if someone is gay they will decide if those people are acceptable and allowed to walk the streets without fear. @SnowflakeAJ_87 and @dylanhm attended Pride to tell people that Pride is not about being able to walk the streets, with your head high and without hiding your sexuality. They used Pride to abuse and scare people, and to tell them being gay was sufficient that you are required to obey them and vote the way they say they are allowed to, or they will abuse and you and frighten you off the streets.

The only thing you do when you decide that the political label you choose makes you inherently good, is you make sure that you cannot reflect on your actions and you will hurt people. THese men are  vicious nasty homophobic bullies who chose to use a Pride march to tell gay people to get off the streets or be afraid. THey think this makes them good. It makes them dangerous bullies.

THis is a message. NOONE is required to ask your permission to be gay. Noone is required to ask your permission before they vote. Noone is required to be afraid to be on the streets because you are so small minded and you do not have the right to make anyone afraid to walk the streets and believing you do have that right makes you a very nasty piece of work.


Appparently Corbyn taking money from regimes who hang gay people, being close friends with men who think homosexuality is akin to peadophilia and should be dealt with violently, means that they had the right to do this. And being gay means you should be abused for not voting for this man.

Women upholding the abuse of other women,

To the women out in force, upholding abuse of other women, because your comrades will like you more. The women who watch Corbynites terrorise other women, and only act to gaslight them and shame them for objecting, we see you.

I will never know why women chuck other women under a bus for male approval, you will always get solidarity from other women, but understand we see you. We know what you are and it’s revolting. It’s revolting to sell out your sisters for a bit of approval from misogynists. It’s your choice but don’t expect anyone to pretend we didn’t see you make it.

Dear Aaron Bastani,

Aaron, am sorry for interrupting you practicing your pout, but we need a chat. I met you in 2010 when you were blacblocking up so you could have a ruck at protests against austerity, when your mates were abusing welfare claimants because obviously a tiny social network rooted in elite institutions needed austerity to build media careers. I met you through James Butler, who also liked wearing black to beat up working class people at protests, and you were all excited about the opportunities that austerity would create for you while it killed people.

I met him at Oxford University, he told me the offspring of pop stars were comrades. You and your friends are now at heart of Corbynism, and have managed to get the ‘careers’ you wanted, while those welfare cuts are still in that Labour manifesto. This summer and winter they will kill people. People have already lost kids. People already died. Thousands of people.

Anyway, you weren’t really open about your experience on David Miliband’s campaign when you were pretending to be the revolutionary poster boy, you definitely weren’t open about your views on the need for ‘the poor’ to be given a can do attitude by excellent workfare policies.

The opposition to welfare and local authority cuts had to be stopped, so you and your friends could wank off about fully automated luxury whatever and your plans for the glorious revolution.

You had your anti-cuts movement and social care, child protection, and our welfare system went unnoticed. They went unnoticed as social care collapsed, as our child protection system became punitive, as poverty was created and people died, and children were removed from women who couldn’t leave domestic abuse, and adopted.

You don’t really know the difference between astroturf, the synthetic creation of the appearance of a grassroots movement, and a genuine grassroots movement. Grassroots activism in this country shaped the institutions targeted by austerity, we learned about inequality a long time ago, but that knowledge never made it to policy making. You and your friends managed to demonstrate how inequality generates political risk, that elite social closure has taken the actual power of labour, and trade unions that should have been able to say these things could not be done without system failure, were needed so you lot could have another route to media from elite institutions.

Political science, plus twitter, plus market orthodoxy and middle class bribes. Yeah, that’ll succeed as long as noone finds out how pro-Brexit Corbyn is.Your bullshit political science Phd is not worth the cost of having it bound(lol- I got a copy…how the fuck that passed I do not know). It apparently entitled you to solicit the abuse of welfare claimants, social care users, to get a fake anti-cuts movement.

Then we saw that intimidation and abuse extended to elected representatives and journalists, and now you think you are within a sniff of power. No sweety. The system failure caused by austerity is driving your vote, I know youa re thick but you don’t really understand what this means. It time limits Corbynism for a start, and even if you nasty bullying thugs got to Downing St, you still need solutions. And you don’t have them.

You call people sad, call people melts, and you encourage abuse of women, and anyone else who notices what a thick twat you are, and how you and your mates prevented anyone from discussing the reality of austerity so you could do what you are doing now.

Am going to leave this here because it’s funny. It’s funny that you thought the a complex educated working class were ‘the poor’. Its funny that you thought ‘the poor’ could get a ‘can do’ attitude through forced labour and abuse by benefits systems. Its funny that within a year of writing that, you and your mates were actively preventing the poor from challenging austerity, that you went on to disable a political party and are now abusing anyone you like, and calling welfare cuts, tuition fee bribes, and abuse and intimidation of single mothers, socialism. It’s funny that you and your mates were stupid enough to use twitter and provide future scholars with a written, chronological record of how you did this. It’s funny that you never once considered that twitter is not ephemeral and you might be leaving a lasting trail. It’s almost as funny as you standing in front of the mirror practcing your pout and curling your biceps while you try to impress old has been’s like Paul Mason. It would all be funny if you and your mates weren’t now suggesting that the ability to apply entryism techniques to CLPs entitled you to assert sovereignty over parliament(no sweety, it’s not possible…sorry).

You would be a lot funnier if you didnt require women and jewish people be terrorised for your movement, and if so many people hadn’t died as a result of the austerity you prevented discussion of. I’m going to leave a snippet of your article here Aaron. I want to thank you, because of what you lot have done, by the time this mess has done, I have three books on the disintegration of the mediating class. It’s going to take us years to gather the name of the people who died while you took their only chance to fight austerity,

I have a record of you demonstrating the purpose of the elite left was upholding the neo liberal consensus at all costs. That’s those welfare cuts that are left in the manifesto, that’s the neo liberal consensus right there. You are a bit of a melt really. A pouting ambitious but very thick boy, who saw the bodies of welfare claimants as steps to a career tweeting shit and making podcasts for no money. You selling out would be funny if you’d made any money, but you literally did all that for a twitter profile. Stepped on the bodies of the dead to be King of a Chatroom. Bloody hell Aaron, at least most people who do stuff like that have a price. The Labour Party are letting you out up front so you can expose yourself and be dealt with. I don’t know why they bother, you are so fucking dumb you do the work for them.aaron

Democratic centralism

MPs work for their constituents, a wide variety of competing interests, within the boundaries covered by their office. They are required to use their judgement and balance those competing interests. Their constituents vote on the MP by name, not the party, the party gives a manifesto as a guide to what will shape the actions of that MP. Listen to Matt Zarb and other Corbynites, as they claim that MPs should be delegates of party and as they assert sovereignty over elected representatives, and assert that established entryism techniques are valid. Their assertion of sovereignty over elected representatives is a direct challenge to democracy itself, it is a direct attempt to remove representation from constituents and parliament, and therefor people, to take it and give it to a tiny, self-appointed, and unaccountable clique. It is upheld by abuse and intimidation. Today Centre left journalists at mainstream publications will be pretending they do not know the difference between democratic centralism and democracy. Like the differences between North and South Korea are not self evident. They will be doing this because they have no qualms about democracy being eroded, if it is in their interests.

Jeremy Corbyn and his followers are clearly stating, that austerity has been an opportunity to impose democratic centralism as a means of completely disenfranchising millions of people. Corbyn is evidence of inequality demonstrating political risk, of elite social closure of power of labour and his attempts to centralise power around his elite clique render Labour an invalid political force.

This is heartbreaking but it has happened. Note today which journalists are pretending they do not know the difference between democratic centralism and democracy. Take note of those discussing party unity in full knowledge that is unity behind attacking democracy, abuse and intimidation of women, jews, and journalists.

Labour are a fascist party

Before Labour can be treated as a legitimate political force they must:

  1. Confirm their commitment to democracy. Not just democratic means of obtaining power.
  2. Renounce violence, intimidation and abuse of women.
  3. Renounce violence, intimidation and abuse of Jewish People.
  4. Commit to a free press where journalists can practice without fear of intimidation

Until such a point there is evidence of commitment to all these things, we cannot treat the British Labour Party as a valid political force.