I support the smash EDO campaign and have organised people from Portsmouth to go to one of the smash EDO marches through Brighton but it disgusted me to see someone having a go at a bloke who worked there. Sure, have a go at the management and company, but that bloke was only there to pay the rent and feed his family.

It's bang out of order to victimise and intimidate someone just because they work there. If he could get a job that was ethical and paid the bills then I'm sure he would. But as it stands people have to take what job they can.

The guy shouting the rhetorical questions is a tit. Standing there shouting shite with a rollover inbetween his fingers in a look-at-me-im-a-hardman way.

The worker guy did the exactly the right thing, just ignore the cock.
Its not like the idiot was going to do anything - too chicken shit and got no muscle.

Tell the parent of a dead child in Palestine that this guy should be absolved of all criticism because 'he was just doing his job'!

I really can't believe that in this day and age that people can still, comfortably and unquestioningly, subscribe to these pathetic non-excuses in some vague hope that it will assuage their moral guilt and provide some sort of quasi-rational excuse for apathy in an attempt to distance themselves from the unsavoury (and sometimes illegal) practices which they are involved in (and therefore contribute to) during the course of their work.

Eddie says that he "support[s] the smash EDO campaign and [has] organised people from Portsmouth to go to one of the smash EDO marches through Brighton but [that] it disgusted [him] to see someone having a go at a bloke who worked there." What is this bloke Eddie trying to say here? He seems to be contradicting himself. Is he even aware of the purpose of the Smash EDO campaign that he claims to support? I was under the impression that the main purpose was to close the factory (and eventually the company) in order to prevent them from manufacturing and selling parts for weapons systems that are used indiscriminately against civilian members of the Palestinian population.

Furthermore Eddie goes on to say, "Sure, have a go at the management and company, but that bloke was only there to pay the rent and feed his family". This rather seems to be a misguided attempt to place the Smash EDO campaign in a class context, an attempt to put the plight and interests of the EDO 'workers' ahead of those of the true victims- those who are killed and maimed by the parts manufactured by these 'workers' in Brighton.

Of course the 'worker' was "there to pay the rent and feed his family", but to the same degree so was the management and other members of the company. Now, this observation is in no way intended as a device for absolving members of the capitalist heirarchy (like Paul Hills) from THEIR involvement in the whole rotten, murderous system, but to implicate members of the working class and highlight that that they are also culpable and can not simply constantly blame the boss class or the political and economic system as though they were totally impotent and neutral within the social and economic sphere

It's as if Eddie believes that the role that the EDO 'workers' play within the permanent appropriation, readjustment and remorseless recuperation of capital is imposed in some kind of fascistic or totalitarian way and involved no personal choice or personal political belief, understanding or viewpoint.

Surely a more realistic position would be to understand that both worker and management both play fundamental, even symbiotic, roles within the modern corporate system. Although, of course, the degree of power and influence that each group holds or wields is, of course, heavily skewed and biased in favour of the management position.

The modern economic factory system which, in the context of EDO, can be seen both in (a) the specific sales of arms components as exports to the Israeli state and (b) the wider application of an exploitative wage-slavery system as a form of economic and social control through the regulation of employment and wages. This contemporary economic model is, historically speaking, the logical conclusion of the vertical heirarchical social system known as feudalism, and retains many of its fundamental power relations in a format which has evolved little except to largely drop its social aspect and to remain mostly in the economic sphere (link-  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feudalism).

Feudalism was an extremely controlling social order where power was disproportionately distributed around the top tier, the level composed of aristocrats (modern equivalent- CEO's, CFI's, managing directors), next tier down was the dominion of the vassals (modern equivalent- upper middle class, management and professional positions) followed by their serfs (modern equivalent- working class, agency workers, illegal immigrants): [serfs being defined as the peasantry who are typically held as slaves by the vassals. In return for the 'privilege' of being allowed to live on the land, serfs would be expected to 'pay a high rent' to a local lord (modern equivalent- Landlord). This rent was either in the form of taxes and fees payable in foodstuffs or coin, but also usually required the peasant to 'spend time working the lord's land', known as the 'demesne' (modern equivalent- the factory or call centre).]

With all of this in mind we can place Eddie's other quotes into a more realistic context which actually takes into account more of the relevant determining factors and does not just place all 'workers' on some sort of stereotypical pedestal which absolves them from influencing the environment in which they work.

For example Eddie says that "It's bang out of order to victimise and intimidate someone just because they work there". Really Eddie? 'Victimise' and 'intimidate' are interesting words to choose, especially when placed in the relative context of the victimisation and intimidation suffered by the Palestinian people as a direct result of the fruits of the labour of these angelic 'workers' who just want to feed their little kiddiwinks.

Supplementary to this Eddie says that "If he could get a job that was ethical and paid the bills then I'm sure he would." Would he really? For a start this is obviously speculative. There is no way that Eddie knows the intentions, good or otherwise, of this man. It sounds much more like Eddie is attempting to project his own values on to this man in an attempt to protect his ridiculous quasi-mythical hypotheses of the family orientated, hard working, tough as old boots salt of the earth type who bears no ill will to his working class brothers in Palestine.

Does he really believe that this 'worker', struggling along on a factory production line, earning enough take home pay to buy just enough food from Lidl for his family, (after managing to scrape together just about enough to cover the mortgage and other bills, after also paying off the interest on his heavily indebted credit cards), does he really believe that this worker is all that bothered about the relative subjective definition of what constitutes an 'ethical' job?

This sounds like the kind of waffle that would emanate from the mouth of a self important Grauniad reader with no direct contact or real understanding of the 'workers' that he is championing, probably a graduate in the social sciences now employed in some form of social work.

[Apologies for the obviously peurile dig and recourse to stereotype here, but it is intended as a way of making my point- hopefully a more relevant attempt than that of Eddie.(Eddie is probably a full time employment agency enviromental waste control agent- sorry, bin man!)]

Finally Eddie makes the point that "But as it stands people have to take what job they can". Again is this really so true? Or is it yet again merely a reflection of Eddies personal viewpoint? It sounds like a very cynical and negative way of looking at the very people that he is trying to stand up for.

Let's look at that clause again. People HAVE to take what job they CAN. Again no personal choice is allowed to be exercised. You are allowed minimum wage shit McJob A or minimum wage shit McJob B. At a stroke the entire working class are turned into victims who are powerless, who have no choice, who have no voice. In fact the more I read this and think about it the more it seems to me that underneath Eddie's superficial solidarity with the 'workers' at EDO-MBM lies some dark secret. Could our Eddie actually be one of our disgruntled workers?

The fact remains, although our Eddie seems loathe to admit it- either through guilty compliance (as a worker there) or through ignorance through a lack of political understanding or judgement, that the workers at EDO MBM also have blood on their hands. They cannot be absolved of the guilt that accrues to Paul Hills and colleagues. Unfortunately Eddie I'm afraid that having a blue collar instead of a white one does not in this case equate to mitigating circumstances.

All of the workers at that factory are more than aware of the job that they do and the potential results. This is not something that the company would disclose to them at the start of their contract, but if they were not tempted to do some research and find out for themselves as a result of the continuing pressure of the Smash EDO campaign at least, then they must be selfish, cold hearted inhuman individuals who are not worthy of our concern because somebody simply shouts obscenities at them.

As for the concern that the poor chaps are simply trying to feed their kids and pay their mortgage- three responses spring to mind. Firstly, what about those selling crack on the estates, projects and banlieues who are forced by the same capitalist free market economy to illegality in order to feed their kids? Secondly does the pretext of trying to feed your kids- when there are other options available- entitle you to cold heartedly contribute to the maiming and massacre of innocent kids in a place far removed from your ipod and flat screen TV? Thirdly, the excuse that you are simply paying the rent and feeding your kids sounds very similar to another one trotted out by people responsible for the murder of innocent people, yet removed from the actual bloody and violent act themselves by a desk in an office or a conveyor belt in a factory. The excuse that they were unaware of the scale of the horrors or that they were just following orders. That place was, of course, Nuremburg.

Finally the inescapable truth is that as far as a class analysis goes these people are nothing more than class traitors. There behaviour appears selfish and self serving and does not take into account the pain and suffering inflicted on others of their class on the other side of the world. If we want to talk of creating a better world, of campaigns against arms companies and war criminals, of fighting together against a common enemy, then we must talk of solidarity, of helping and working with those with which we have things in common, with those with whom we have an affinity

In this case our affinity must lie with the many innocents who are slaughtered (of course not all of them are totally 'innocent' some may even be involved in activity that the Israeli state defines as terrorist- but guilt or innocence on the terms of a rogue, terrorist state means absolutely nothing to me- that,however, is for another discussion). Our affinity must also lie with all those involved in the Smash EDO campaign, with the Decomissioners and with all of those who individually or in decentralised autonomous groups attack the corporate war machine or any other aspect of this sick and twisted leviathan with the aim of causing as much economic and political damage as possible whilst at the same time taking back, even if only temporarily, autonomy and true choice of action where we decide together that course of action which benefits us and our peers without resorting to gaining 'permission' from our self-imposed masters- the political state and the global market.

These people deserve our contempt, a few choice words will hurt nothing more than their stone cold hearts or perverted, distorted, deformed egos. A violent discourse that is nothing compared to the true horrific violence of the broken, twisted corpses and writhing cadavers lying smouldering in the phosphoric stench of the baking, blistering Middle Eastern sun. The dying moans and piercing screams emanating from the violated and shattered remains of what was, only moments before, a happy and loving family are drowned out in the incongruous howls of a rabid dog that screech deafeningly from the F-16 afterburner as it lopes home, glittering in the harsh, stark sun; perversely glimmering in the warm, satisfied ardor of post-coital glow- its ammunition spent, its pilot relaxing- happy in the knowledge that his 'enemy' is impotent, incapable of retaliation. His mission complete, he hangs loose, waiting for home, content in his state of the art Western fuck machine. A machine that brings indiscriminate pain and death, not life. A machine that reflects and represents the competitive, aggressive, ubiquitous death culture subscribed to by the 'enlightened' states and countries of industrial democracies and capitalist civilisation. A machine with parts made and supplied by the workers at EDO-MBM, Brighton, England.

fine words - well put

encore!

There's not a single chance I'm going to reply to all of that but I'll try to cover some of the points raised.

Right...

Yes, I am aware of the purpose of the Smash EDO campaign is to shut down the factory and it's one I support. But whilst I don't think that those jobs should exist, in taking a job from EDO, I don't think it's all black and white.

Maybe I am pushing my personal views on the bloke as you say, but that's mainly because I've been in similar moral dilemmas before.

I've never personally done jobs for the arms industry and on a few occasions have walked out of interviews with companies that I have found out do this sort of work but I can't say I haven't been tempted. Let's look at the issues behind my personal reasons for the temptation as I'm being accused of adopting working class stereotypes.

1) I have only one skill and that is as a CNC machinist. Unfortunately, where I'm from there isn't alot of work in precision engineering that isn't somehow involved in the arms trade as there's a big naval dockyard here so that rules out pretty much every sub contractor in the area.

2) If I don't take the job then there's quite a few people that will and my refusing a job has had no impact on anyone except me.

As a result of this, despite coming out of school with 3 A grades and getting a Mechanical Engineering Btec, I have been consigned to the scrap heap and have spent the last 4 years pushing trolleys in the local supermarket 5 days a week whilst working one or two days making parts for wind turbines and the marine industry (at one point I had 4 days off in a period of 6 months). That job has gone down the pan as the company I worked for has gone under. Which leaves me in the position of not looking good enough to potential employers because I do a dipshits job at a supermarket.

As I'm currently struggling to pay the bills at the moment I can completely sypmathise with the bloke at EDO and resent that his involvement is being seen in completely black and white terms. And to call him cold hearted or whatever you said is completely unrepresentative of the people that work in these places as I know a few people that have and they all say it is an issue they struggle with.

There may have been other points raised but I simply don't have the time to answer them all but I hope this has put across my viewpoint a bit better. Though seeing the amount of writing you did from de-constructing two paragraphs from me, I'm sure I'm gonna have to read your novel in response to this post.