Social Items

TPQ
Christopher Owens ðŸ”– A dystopian future where a guitar is more powerful than an Armalite?


That’s the world of Jonathan Traynor’s new novel. Less than a year since releasing Race the Undead, he’s brought us another book that playfully examines our fears of an uncertain future with a simple plot:

Joe Murphy has magic in his fingertips. His guitar playing evokes emotions he cannot control. His family and friends revel in his genius. It offers a way out of poverty and a destroyed climate. But in the 22nd Century, playing live music is a crime. The corporate companies want control over all that people watch or listen to. Joe's ability threatens that control.

Very Rush, very Steve Earle (both of whom are listed as inspirations), also very ‘At War With Satan’ era Venom (which lasts 21 minutes and 12 seconds). But there is a genuine love and affiliation that permeates the text in a way that a non-metalhead would struggle to recreate.

Writing in 2010, Traynor discussed this mentality that has long kept metal from going truly mainstream:

This thing we all love, hard and heavy music, is a difficult beast to grapple with for outsiders. There are the hardcore metalheads, there are the thrashers, there are the hard/classic rock fans, there are the devotees who never miss a Distortion Project gig (all hail James and crew!), there are those who avidly attend the rock tribute acts, there are the many thousands who will flock to Metallica, there are the couple of dozen in the Rosetta [RIP] or Auntie Annies [RIP] headbanging away, there are rural outposts like the Diamond in Ahoghill where the flame is kept alight outside Belfast - in other words there are many faces to this beast. Psychologists and social anthropologists would have a field day: but too often the cliched comments focus on the stereotypes. They'll happily rant about Norwegian church burning and murders…or will glaze over as we rant about 'last night's gig'. Then there are the rabid opponents who cast biblical quotations like confetti.


Like Race the Undead, societal issues (the rise of AI, the fear of rigid conformity and the growth of the multi-national corporations) are examined and dealt with in a fashion that engages the reader without once feeling preached at:

The usual paranoia from his Ma. But perhaps she was right. Even he had heard the hysterical rants of politicians, the corporates warning of the danger the black market posed to the stock prices, and the priests and ministers warning of hell. Joe thought hell couldn’t be any fucking worse than this.

Another gust of dust choked wind pushed his bike skittering to the side and broke his ruminations. He stopped. He had a little bit of one his ma’s specials in his bib pocket. Might as well eat it in case he was stopped by some police drone or worse some of the corporate patrol cars with an officious lump warning he could go to the mines if he didn’t get some gainful employment.

Fucking corporates ruling over everything, telling everybody they were working to make a better world. Not for Joe nor any of the folks round here.

He finished the last piece of cake and gazed up at the hazy sky. The hulking stations grinding through the heavens. Server farms and where the super-rich lived away from the dying planet. He wished some of those could live for a day in this hillbilly waste.


As a reaffirmation to the power of live music and the human spirit to rebel when the chips are down, Chords of Chaos tells the truth with just a few chords in its possession.

Jonathan Traynor, 2025, Chords of Chaos. Excalibur Press. ISBN-13: 978-1910728673

⏩ Christopher Owens was a reviewer for Metal Ireland and finds time to study the history and inherent contradictions of Ireland. He is currently the TPQ Friday columnist and is the author of A Vortex of Securocrats and “dethrone god”.

Chords Of Chaos

Lynx By Ten To The Power Of One Thousand Eight Hundred And Ninety Five

 

A Morning Thought @ 2976

Cam Ogie ✍ When Norman Finkelstein appeared in conversation with Candace Owens — the American conservative commentator known for her far-right politics, conspiratorial claims, and repeated minimization of racism — the reaction was swift and intense.

To many observers, the pairing seemed bizarre: a lifelong left-wing dissident and fierce critic of Israeli policy sitting down with a media figure who has defended white nationalist talking points, questioned the historical reality of the Holocaust, and promoted claims such as the idea that France’s first lady was “born a man.” Critics on social media called it a disgrace.

But moral outrage is not the same as moral clarity. Finkelstein’s decision to meet Owens may have shocked his admirers, but it was entirely consistent with the principles that have guided his career for nearly half a century: an unflinching commitment to open argument, a refusal to obey ideological taboos, and a belief that truth is strengthened — not endangered — by confrontation.

A Life Spent Challenging Power

Norman Finkelstein, the son of Holocaust survivors from Warsaw, rose to prominence in the late 1990s with The Holocaust Industry, a controversial book that accused governments and institutions of exploiting Holocaust memory for political and financial ends. The book divided scholars and activists. Historian Peter Novick of the University of Chicago dismissed it as “trash,” while historian David Cesarani wrote that its serious points were “distorted by a venomous dislike” of Jewish elites.

Finkelstein’s criticism of Israel’s occupation policies, and of U.S. support for them, made him a target of organized opposition. In 2007 DePaul University denied him tenure after a public campaign led by Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz, who accused him of academic dishonesty — an accusation Finkelstein and many of his supporters vigorously rejected.

Through all this, Finkelstein remained consistent: he has always gone wherever the argument takes him, regardless of the reputational cost.

The Paradox of Candace Owens

Candace Owens built her career by marketing outrage. Her commentary — frequently broadcast through The Daily Wire and social-media platforms — has included suggestions that nationalism is unfairly demonized, that systemic racism is exaggerated, and that Adolf Hitler’s only mistake was “going global.” These statements have drawn condemnation from historians and civil-rights groups.

The irony, of course, is that Owens herself is Black — a fact that sits awkwardly alongside her repeated defences of structures and figures associated with white supremacy. Her success depends on that contradiction: she is both the critic and the symbol of the world she defends.

That paradox made her an especially revealing interlocutor for Finkelstein, whose own career has been defined by contradictions — a Jewish scholar denounced by Zionist institutions; a left-wing critic who refuses to flatter progressive orthodoxy.

Engagement, Not Endorsement

In an age when political life is built on silos, Finkelstein’s decision to enter Owens’s space was not a lapse in judgment; it was a deliberate act of engagement. He has long argued that refusing to speak to ideological opponents only entrenches division.

Appearing on Owens’s show does not imply agreement. It demonstrates confidence that arguments grounded in fact and history can hold their own, even in hostile territory. As the child of Holocaust survivors and an academic who has spent his career studying genocide, Finkelstein represents a living rebuke to denialism and distortion. His very presence in that conversation challenges the myths Owens’s followers often absorb untested.

The Cost of Intellectual Independence

Organizations like the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting and Analysis (CAMERA) have criticized Finkelstein for decades, portraying his work as biased against Israel. CAMERA describes itself as a pro-Israel media-monitoring group dedicated to correcting “inaccurate and skewed coverage.” Supporters call it a watchdog; critics see it as an advocacy organization that pressures journalists to soften coverage of Israeli state policy.

Such criticism underscores the pattern that has followed Finkelstein throughout his career: his willingness to defy the boundaries of “respectable” discourse routinely provokes institutional pushback. Yet he continues to engage — not to seek approval, but to keep the space for dissent open.

The Courage to Risk Misunderstanding

It is easy to denounce someone like Owens from afar. It is harder — and riskier — to face her in person, in front of her own audience, and insist on truth. Finkelstein’s appearance did not validate her ideas; it tested them.

Whether or not it changed any minds, it demonstrated a principle in short supply: the courage to confront falsehood directly. For Finkelstein, debate has never been a performance of virtue; it is a moral duty grounded in faith that reason and evidence still matter.

Truth Can Withstand Exposure

Norman Finkelstein’s conversation with Candace Owens will not erase his history of controversy, nor will it silence those who find his tactics abrasive. But it remains consistent with the intellectual independence that has defined his life’s work.

To mistake dialogue for surrender is to confuse moral purity with moral courage. Finkelstein’s choice to meet a conspiracist was not a collapse of integrity — it was a statement of faith that truth, if it is real, can survive even the roughest company.

In an era that rewards silence and punishes risk, that conviction deserves not condemnation, but respect.

⏩ Cam Ogie is a Gaelic games enthusiast. 

Norman Finkelstein’s Meeting with Candace Owens Was Not a Fall 🪶 It Was a Reaffirmation Of His Principles

Europe Solidaire Sans Frontières ★ Written by Siyavash Shahabi.

The Greek left is unique in European progressive politics. Shaped by its own experiences, it has developed a powerful critique of Western imperialism. Unfortunately, a significant ’campist’ tendency has reduced global struggles to a simplified binary whilst erasing the voices and movements it claims to support.

The “For a Palestine That Liberates Us” conference in Athens crystallised this contradiction. Organised by Greek left intellectuals with extensive academic networks, NGO connections, and media platforms, the event showcased activists - influencers who have become hegemonic not through mass support but through institutional amplification. They speak loudly about solidarity with Palestine, but their politics offers a caricatured “Middle East” from which real social movements—independent trade unions, women’s organisations, secular leftists—vanish as soon as they complicate the narrative of monolithic “resistance.”

The dominant left discourse correctly identifies Western imperial violence but deploys Orientalist analytical tools, offering “culture” and “identity” as explanations for authoritarian regimes elsewhere whilst demanding democracy and human rights at home.

This selective internationalism has broader consequences. The same campist logic that simplifies Palestine has led portions of the Greek left into silence or worse regarding Ukraine, viewing Russian imperialism through the lens of “anti-NATO resistance” rather than recognising it as aggression against a sovereign people. 

Jacobin Greece And The Politics Of Silencing 🪶 Orientalism In The Hellenic Left

Muiris Ó Súilleabháin ✍ The discourse in recent weeks has been dominated by the continuously vexing subject of remembrance and the legitimacy of remembering those who died in war including our own.

I pen this opinion piece cognisant of the fact that that I speak only for myself. I write as someone who has attended too many funerals of lives that were cut short by violence: family, friends and comrades. I have also watched an inordinate number of funerals of those who were killed by the army that I supported and witnessed the heartbreak, the tears and a grief on a par with any at the funerals that I attended.

As the years have passed, the ghosts rarely visit me unexpectedly now. When they do knock at my door it is frequently as a reaction to media interest in a family’s search for the truth. With the fullness of time my guests no longer induce an angry or anxious response, rather of period a reflection and a private personal act of remembrance.

Never Again Shall a Single Story Be Told As Though It Were The Only One - Berger

Lance Corporal David Jones of the British Army was killed in an encounter with volunteers from the Irish Republican Army on St Patricks day 1978. Recognised as a courageous soldier, he was survived by his mother and father, and sorely missed by his family, friends and comrades. Lance Corporal Jones was buried with full military honours, and he is remembered at Upperlands Remembrance Garden in England.

Volunteer Séamus McIlwaine of the Irish Republican Army was killed in an encounter with soldiers from the British Army on the 26th April 1986. Described by his Chief of Staff as “a brave and intelligent soldier” he was survived by his family and sorely missed by his family, friends and comrades. McIlwaine was buried with full military honours, and he is remembered in a monument erected in Corlat County Monaghan.

The armies for whom these two men fought remember them yearly. November for the British Army and Easter for the Irish Republican Army. Their families may also choose to remember them at these times too or they may not, they may choose to wear the poppy or the lily or they may choose not to. That is their prerogative and there is no one and no organisation who should attempt to dictate how or when these families should remember their loved ones. How they choose to remember is a personal matter for themselves alone, be that privately or be that publicly, and we should all respect that unambiguously.

The British State has chosen to remember its fallen soldiers on or around Armistice Day in November since 1919. The leaders of the devolved UK nations of Scotland Wales and Northern Ireland (sic) have respected this tradition since their establishment. Lance Corporal Jones like all British Soldiers is solemnly remembered across the UK and beyond on Remembrance Sunday.

The Irish State has chosen not to remember those volunteers of the Irish Republican Army who have fallen in the most recent phase of the struggle for freedom, and it should be noted that the President of Sinn Fein has confirmed that she will sustain this policy in the unlikely event that she becomes Taoiseach. Volunteer Séamus McIlwaine of the Irish Republican Army will not have his name read out on the steps of the GPO until the republic for which he fought and died has been established.

None of this is new, and the statement of facts as laid out above, should not suggest that there was an equivalence or that there ever could be an equivalence in what these two young men fought and died for. If we are to heal, however, we must accept that grief, hurt and mourning are universal as a starting point.

What passes for mature and reflective discourse on remembrance focussed this year on the decision by Sinn Fein First Minister to lay a wreath at Belfast City Hall on Remembrance Sunday. Sinn Fein were “behind the eight ball” on this one, damned if they did and damned if they did not. My own view is that the “leadership” chose the path of least resistance. The political furore and the probable collapse of the northern institutions that would have followed an abstentionist position would have been far more damaging to the Sinn Fein “project” than the angry words of a few disgruntled former members. Despite my cynicism about the motivation for Sinn Fein to participate in the British States remembrance of their fallen soldiers, the decision they made, and the public rationale given for taking that decision was, in my view, correct.

The north, Northern Ireland, remains an integral part of the United Kingdom of Great Britian and Northern Ireland. Under the peace accord signed in 1998, it will remain so, until the majority of people in the north decide otherwise. That the success of the Sinn Fein “project” is dependent upon the impossible task of persuading a significant number of Unionists to become Nationalists, is not relevant to this discussion. The laying of a wreath will not change a single mind.

The GFA kicked the critical issues of legacy, remembrance and reconciliation down the road because they were too hot to handle at the time. This should not preclude republicans, especially the families of our fallen comrades, from having the mature dialogue that is necessary to map out a principled position on these subjects.

There are communities in the north who believe that Lance Corporal Jones, died fighting a righteous battle against terrorism. This is unlikely to change even in the unlikely event of constitutional change, but the question must be asked, and we must provide an answer as to how these views will be reconciled in our Republic for all. Will our Republic, erase all history of the Irish men and Irish women who served the British State. Are we not obliged to support and provide leadership for those people in Ireland who wish to commemorate and remember their (British) war dead or will we ban the poppy and Remembrance Sunday?

As Republicans are we advocating the obliteration of official remembrance for people who served in the British forces in much the same way that the Free State parties have purged all mention of the volunteers from our era in the States official history.

In the Republic that I aspire to, we will cherish our British children, as wholeheartedly as our children from Ireland, India, Romania, Somali etc. In developing an understanding that there is a different story, and in accepting that other people hold different beliefs, we do not need to diminish our own beliefs or change our own story.

Therein lies the only criticism that I can see of the public Sinn Fein position on remembrance in 2025. It was not the laying of a wreath at City Hall by the First Minister of a British State, but the statement made simultaneously by comrade Kearney at Edentubber.

Unapologetically asserting “the legitimacy of honouring the dead of recent generations” is the antithesis of unapologetically asserting the legitimacy of Volunteer Séamus McIlwaine of the Irish Republican Army and associated actions in pursuit of the Irish Republic. Without honouring and naming the legitimacy of our phase of the struggle, Sinn Fein have by omission, allowed a parity to be drawn between the actions and validity of the Irish Republican Army and the British Army in Ireland. Perhaps it was not the right time to make clear the distinction, maybe the political repercussions of reaffirming the legitimacy of the Irish Republican Army and their actions were too great for a party walking a tightrope in the north and trying to enter Government in the south.

My personal view is that it was a deliberate omission, and one further step in the process of Sinn Fein distancing itself from the Irish Republican Army. Political power is being pursued at all costs, and I predict that at some time in the near future we will all be informed that overt remembrance of the Volunteers of the Irish Republican Army was tactical and no longer conducive to achieving the strategic objectives that Sinn Fein have set themselves.

The dead will not die completely until they are remembered by no-one - Ildan

⏩Muiris Ó Súilleabháin was a member of the Republican Movement until he retired in 2006 after 20 years of service. Fiche bhliain ag fás.

Remembering

Lynx By Ten To The Power Of One Thousand Eight Hundred And Ninety Four

 

A Morning Thought @ 2975

 

A Morning Thought @ 2974

People And Nature ☭ In this speech to a Russian military court, Anton Khozhaev, a trainee officer accused of desertion to Ukraine’s side, urged Ukrainians to fight on and scorned the “bio-trash” that the Russian army had become.


Khozhaev is one of dozens of protesters who used their final speeches in court to denounce the war, and are now serving long prison sentences.

An event marking the publication of Voices Against Putin’s War, a book comprising English translations of some of the speeches, will be held next Thursday 20 November in London, and streamed on line (see details below).

Khozhaev was studying unmanned aviation at the Zhukovsky-Gagarin academy, where he started after graduating from the Military Aviation Technology University in 2020.

Anton Khozhaev in court. Photo from Sotavision

In 2022, in the days after the Russian invasion of Ukraine, he denounced the war and tried unsuccessfully to sever his employment contract. Prosecutors said he was arrested trying to cross the border to Ukraine.

Khozhaev’s speech, on 16 July in the Second Western District Military Court in Moscow, was reported by Sota Vision, an independent news outlet, and republished on the Poslednee Slovo (Last Word) web site. In this translation I have omitted some lines of poetry that he read out.

Khozhaev was sentenced to 23 years, the first five to be served in prison and the remainder in maximum security prison camps, for treason, terrorism, desertion and money laundering, all of which he denied. He is recognised by Memorial as a political prisoner. SP.

✹✹✹✹✹

Esteemed participants in the trial,

I believe that during this whole hearing, the prosecution have failed to prove my guilt, and, on the contrary, justified my actions.

Let’s take Article 205.5 [of the Russian criminal code, on participation in a terrorist organisation]. I really was the initiator of a shahid [Arabic, meaning “witness” or “martyr”], an intellectual organisation. I made contact with personnel of the Security Service of Ukraine, who took me on for training.

I just wanted to help the people of our brotherly nation to return peace to their land. I was neither an occupier nor a state terrorist of my country. My intentions were the most peaceful possible.

What’s more, it’s no secret to anyone that, at present in Russia, everyone who speaks out against aggression and against the country is called a terrorist.

As for Article 275 [on treason]: my action was in no way treacherous to my homeland. On the contrary, it was aimed at stopping a criminal government, at preventing the deaths of peaceful civilians, including citizens of Russia. The sooner this criminal war ends, the fewer financial and human resources will be needed for the difficult task of reconstruction.

Now you can charge anyone, for anything, under Article 275 if you feel like it. But what I have admitted to, including cooperation with the Security Service of Ukraine, should be treated not as a betrayal of the motherland, but as helping it.

What about Article 174.1 [on the legalisation of property acquired by criminal means]: it’s just funny to accuse me of receiving money – all 12,500 rubles of it [about $80] – especially given the scale of corruption at all levels of state power, including among military officers. This charge has just been added to pile on the accusations.

And this proves, once again, that we are not talking about a justice system, but about a system for vengeance against ordinary people.

Now Article 338.3 [on desertion]. I didn’t desert. Desertion is when a person willingly abandons his battle position at a time when support and defence is needed. But no-one has attacked Russia, no defence is required.

Moreover, the Russian authorities themselves declare that the Russian army is on the attack, that aggression is underway in all directions, and there are only victories. And I just did not want to take part in murdering Ukrainian people who have done me no ill.

Murder is a serious crime. And I am not to blame for the fact that it was impossible to resign [from the army] of my own accord, or by ending my contract. I had no other choice, except simply to quit, in order not to participate in murder.

As for Article 275.1 [on confidential cooperation with a foreign state]: to consider the Ukrainian people as some sort of enemy for defending themselves is criminal. I want to help our brothers, the Ukrainian people. That is not treachery, that is following my conscience, my upbringing, my parents’ teaching. That is love for my fellow human beings.

And when it becomes clear to everybody that my actions were not criminal, but, on the contrary, were deliberately conceived and honest – then, truth will prevail.

I was given beatings, and tortured, by the Federal Security Services. All the investigators’ actions that followed were fabrications. According to the Criminal Code of the Russian federation, and the constitution, all these breaches [of the law] mean that the entire process after my arrest is invalid. Including the sentence passed by the court. I ask the court to bear this in mind.

[For a brief time, Khozhaev’s words were inaudible on the courtroom recording. Then he continued.]

It’s funny to see how they hate me: “He lied, he got carried away, he took the vows.” Don’t forget, I wanted to become an officer. And sometimes, if you want to teach someone, you need to deal with emotions.

To all those who talk about spiritual values and patriotism, I say: I first tried to reach out to Russians, and only then passed on information to Ukraine and went to fight for Ukraine. And in this I am more patriotic than most Russians. Excuse me for saying so, but that’s the truth.

You are all so fond of talking about your love for the motherland: well, this shows that I really do love her.

And please stop calling me a soldier. I do not want to associate with bio-trash. Because trash is what the Russian army has become, a long time ago. That was proven on the 24th of February 2022.

I also want to explain that I did not lie, when I told the Federal Security Service officers that I don’t personally know anyone from Ukrainian law enforcement. It wasn’t necessary to arrest me.

At the end of my final statement I want to address the Ukrainian people. My friends, don’t be afraid. Be brave. Keep fighting.

I am not guilty. Glory to Ukraine.

🔴 Anton Khozhaev’s case is just one link in the chain of repression that continues to grow as the assault on Ukraine grinds through its fourth year. Those such as Khozhaev who try to help Ukraine are singled out for the harshest treatment, but a system has been built to return tens of thousands of other deserters, who simply want to survive, back to the front lines.

Media attention has focused this week on Stoptime, three street musicians from St Petersburg, who were arrested and jailed for 12 days after referring to Ukraine in their songs – and then dragged back to court twice more.

Such repeat prosecutions are being used, far more savagely, against Ukrainian soldiers, especially in the illegally annexed “republics” in eastern Ukraine. The reign of terror against civilians in those republics was detailed in a recent UN report.

=
Event announcement

Try Me For Treason

Readings from anti-war protesters’ speeches in Russian courts and book launch for Voices Against Putin’s War.

Thursday 20 November, 7.0pm, Pelican House, 144 Cambridge Heath Road, London E1, and on line.

Please register on eventbrite. If you register to watch on line, we will send you a link by email, before the event starts.


Thousands of people – Ukrainians, Russians and others – are serving lengthy jail sentences for protesting against Russia’s war on Ukraine. Some were jailed for actions, such as firebombing military recruitment centres (when they were closed, injuring nobody). Some were jailed for writing a few words on social media. We will tell the story of some who used their final statement in court not to appeal for mercy, but to call on their fellow citizens to take action against the war.

We will hear a semi-staged reading of translations of the speeches and hold a discussion about the book, followed by a social, with refreshments. We will also invite attendees to write letters or messages to political prisoners in Russia: our Russian friends will give guidance and help with translation.

Admission free. Donations welcome: any proceeds will go to prisoner support organisations. Organised by the Ukraine Information Group.

🔴Order copies of Voices Against Putin’s War from Resistance Books here.

🔴More about anti-war protesters in Russia here, here and here.

☭ People & Nature is now on mastodon, as well as twitter, whatsapp and telegram. Please follow! Or email peoplenature@protonmail.com, and we’ll add you to our circulation list (2-4 messages per month)

Russian Anti-War Prisoner 🪶 ‘I Just Did Not Want To Murder Ukrainian People Who Have Done Me No Ill’

Róisín McAleer of Social Rights Ireland ðŸŽ¤ interviews Colm Lynagh, Barry Murray and Tommy McKearney about their contributions to the Jim Lynagh Winter School organised recently by the Peadar O'Donnell Socialist Republican Forum.



Reflections On Jim Lynagh Winter School

Lynx By Ten To The Power Of One Thousand Eight Hundred And Ninety Three

 

A Morning Thought @ 2973

Subscribe to: Comments (Atom)