One World-One People-One Class-One Struggle

Workers of the World Unite

The problems of black and brown people are not caused by whites.  It is the social system that people the world over live under, that make poverty and other miseries a part of a person's life. There is only one race, that is the human race so let us realise that we must all work together or the enemy may never be destroyed. Coloured workers, take notice, when it is a question of exploitation you are in the same position as your white brothers and sisters. Skin colour is no safeguard. Black capitalists are just as brutal as white ones. Humans can only be united by their belief in a set of principles. The colour of a man's skin can never be the basis of unity. The black liberation movement although it take different form in each country is set on the premise of the unity of black  against white and  often express the false assumption, that all white people are united against black. The truth is that any black and white capitalist, have more in common between them than all the white workers with the white capitalist, or the black workers with the black capitalist. Race have now become a very damaging factor towards working class unity. IT IS THE SOCIAL SYSTEM THAT WE LIVE UNDER AND NOT OUR RACE THAT MAKE POSSIBLE THE PROBLEMS WE FACE. Racism only serve to obscure the real enemy, world capitalism, and in fact help to keep it going that much longer. A man's economic interest determine his action. The capitalist as an individual is not our target, it is the system that we hate and want to change. The choice facing us today, is not black, against white. but whether we want to continue with this strife ridden system capitalism, or replace it with a system of common ownership socialism. The racial issue in our present time have been described as the most crucial in the world today. This view have been expressed by leaders in government, to the man in the street. To these people there will be some massive explosion sometime in the future, with the races lined up against each other.

As socialists we do not see the racial issue as the major problem in the world. We see the world divided into those who possess the means of production, the capitalist class, and those who seek work in order to live, the working class. It is because of this class division in society that give rise to racism in the first place. When capitalism goes through one of its frequent bad period, some of the workers of the dominant race usually blame their condition, on some other race. Observe how racial feeling run high in Britain during a period of high unemployment. It serve as an easy excuse for people who look around and can see nothing in their frustrating existance.

Nationalism, which serves as encouragement to racism, is preached from the highest level in society. They tell us that we should love our country. Capitalism is a system of exploitation, humiliation, and degradation for the working class. These features won’t go away because the people who administer the system are "your own kith and kin".

Look around the world and observe, how in some countries, racism is actively supported by governments. Racism only serve to divide and confuse the working class and lead them away from the important question of how they produce the wealth of the world, and share so little of it. It is our position as working class people that we should consider, and throw away the idea of race. In the words of our declaration of principles "the emancipation of the working class will involve the emancipation of all mankind without distinction of race or sex."

We are indeed all Jock Tamson's bairns

With every generation you (nearly) double your number of ancestors because every individual has two parents – going back just 10 generations (200-300 years) you are likely to have around a thousand ancestors.

"When genetics researchers talk about common ancestry between people they usually mean that they are tracing the inheritance of particular sections of DNA or genes.And we know that different sections of our DNA have different patterns of genetic ancestry. This means that researchers can get very different estimates of how recently we share ancestors, depending on what they are looking at...
...look at mtDNA to follow ancestry passed along the female line. For mtDNA, everyone alive today shares a common ancestor who lived between 160,000 and 200,000 years ago.everyone alive today shares a common ancestor who lived between 160,000 and 200,000 years ago....
...look at Y chromosome DNA to follow ancestry through the male line, the most recent estimate is of a common ancestor who lived between 240,000 and 580,000 years ago...
...If, however, you look for the most recent person that everyone alive today is descended from, the best current estimate is that the individual lived only 3,500 years ago"

"Genetic ancestry testing presents a simplified view of the world where everyone belongs to a group with a label, such as ‘Viking’ or ‘Zulu’. But people’s genetics don’t reflect discrete groups. Even strong cultural boundaries, such as between the Germanic and Romance language groups in Europe, do not have very noticeable genetic differences. The more remote and less-populated parts of the UK, such as the Scottish Highlands, do have some genetic differences from the bulk of the population, but they are not big. There is no such thing as a ‘Scottish gene’. Instead groups show a story of gradual genetic change and mixing...
...Researchers use the genetic differences between Y chromosomes or mtDNA among a set of individuals to infer possible trees of relatedness. We can estimate the times of common ancestors on those trees, although these estimates lack precision. But it is not reasonable to make a leap from these DNA trees to mapping your ancestors onto geographical locations or past migrations. For example, a man in Scotland might have a type of Y chromosome that has been found more often in North Africa than elsewhere. However, this is based on populations in North Africa now, not in the past, and people have moved over the centuries. And, the same Y type may be found in other parts of the world – he could equally have inherited it from one of these. And even if some of his ancestors did come from North Africa, it does not show when they came to Scotland or how many of his millions of ancestors came from that region."

Prof Steve Jones, from University College London and author of some of the seminal books on genetics and evolution, said: "On a long trudge through history - two parents, four great-grandparents, and so on - very soon everyone runs out of ancestors and has to share them. "As a result, almost every Briton is a descendant of Viking hordes, Roman legions, African migrants, Indian Brahmins, or anyone else they fancy."

The Pix and Mix Race

The last ice age ended relatively very quickly and by 9,000BC and possibly even earlier, the ice had gone. Between  8,500BC and 4,500BC, it was possible to walk to Scotland across the lost sub-continent of Doggerland, now submerged under the North Sea, and it looks as though that was when family bands of men, women and children reached the farthest north-west of Europe. Lying at the farthest north-western point of the vast Eurasian landmass, a place on the edge of beyond, Scotland had to be the end of many journeys, the narrowing or point of a huge funnel. Until the 16th century, it was not possible to go any further.

Tiny variations in our DNA can tell geneticists a great deal about our ancestry. These markers or lineages can be both dated and located in the part of the world where they arose. There are no fewer than 100 different male and female lineages present in the modern population. Scotland turns out to be a tremendously diverse nation. There is no Scots pedegree, just another mongrel people .

Every Scot is an immigrant. For example, we have tested men whose male lineage originated in the ancient kingdom of Thrace on the Black Sea, the home of the gladiator-hero, Spartacus. We have men from the Roman province of Illyria on the Adriatic. Further afield, there are men and women from Siberia whose ancestors lived on the banks of the Yenesei River that flows into the Arctic. There are Scots with an ancient lineage from Anatolia, and also one man whose marker came from the medieval West African kingdom of Denanke. We have Saracens from the Near East and women from the biblical kingdom of Sheba on either side of the Red Sea. Germanic, Teutonic, Alpine and Saxon Y chromosome DNA make up about a third of all male ancestry in Scotland, and there exists a very colourful fringe of smaller lineages such as Berber, Arabian, Kurgan and Balkan. Significant Irish lineages came to Scotland after c450AD, and by the end of the 8th century, Vikings were sailing the North Sea first to raid and then to settle.

It also looks as though most female lineages arrived earlier and that the ancestors of Scottish women have been here longer than the ancestors of most Scottish men. It strongly suggests that later migrations to Scotland were largely male affairs, what one historian has described as waves of small groups of men in small boats.

http://www.scotsman.com/lifestyle/heritage/scotland-s-dna-tracing-the-nation-s-ancestral-history-1-2465715

Scots - the mongrel "race"

According to recent DNA research, the human species came very close to extinction during the last Ice Age. We know this because there ought to be far greater DNA variations than there actually are and providing evidence to suggest the total population of mankind towards the close of the Ice Age could have been as few as ten thousand people or less. More recently, DNA research from Leicester University and published in 2010, goes further and where eighty per cent of Caucasian males in Europe may have had ancestors who lived in regions known today as Iraq and Syria

Around 1,000 people have been tested in the past four months as part of the Scotland’s DNA project, and the preliminary results reveal the “astonishing” diversity of our genetic origins.

Almost 100 different groups of male ancestry have been found so far from all over Europe, and further afield, and 157 types of female DNA from Europe, Asia and Africa.

One per cent of Scotsmen, around 26,000 individuals, are descended from the Berber and Tuareg tribesmen of the Sahara, with a lineage going back 5,600 years.

 The project has also found a lost tribe, the Maeatae, who fought the Roman legions in 208AD and seemed to disapper from recorded history in the 8th century. The latest DNA techniques re-discovered them – concentrated in their historic homelands around Stirling.

 The Royal Stewart DNA is  found in 15 per cent of men with the "Stewart" surname, which means there are thousands of Scots wandering the streets with a “smidgen of royal blood in their veins”, the genetic marker also suggests that the Stewarts were originally Cornishmen.

  A team from Oxford University has discovered that the Celts are descended from a tribe of Iberian fishermen who crossed the Bay of Biscay 6,000 years ago. DNA analysis reveals they have an almost identical genetic "fingerprint" to the inhabitants of coastal regions of Spain, whose own ancestors migrated north between 4,000 and 5,000BC. "Although Celtic countries have previously thought of themselves as being genetically different from the English, this is emphatically not the case," Professor Sykes said. "...from a genetic point of view, Britain is emphatically not a divided nation."  The Celtic cultural myth “is very entrenched and has a lot to do with the Scottish, Welsh and Irish identity; their main identifying feature is that they are not English,” said Dr. Sykes

Dr. Oppenheimer, author of , “The Origins of the British: A Genetic Detective Story”,  said genes “have no bearing on cultural history.” There is no significant genetic difference between the people of Northern Ireland, yet they have been fighting with each other for 400 years, he said.

 "...We all came here after the last ice age and perhaps because it is impossible to go further north-west, Scotland has been the final destination for many journeys over 11,000 years. The basic lineage is the same for Scotland and England, the ice moved north and everybody came from the south. We have a lot more Vikings, and we have more early Irish, but the basic recipe is similar.”explained Alistair Moffat

Many minorities 'live in poverty'

The BBC is carrying a report from the Joseph Rowntree Foundation that found Some 40% of people from ethnic minority backgrounds are living in poverty. Almost half of all children from minority ethnic groups are in poverty.

For all ages, family types and family work statuses, people from minority ethnic groups are, on average, much more likely to be in income poverty than white British people.

The rate varies substantially between ethnic groups: Bangladeshis (65%), Pakistanis (55%) and black Africans (45%) have the highest rates; black Caribbeans (30%), Indians (25%), white Other (25%) and white British (20%) have the lowest rates.

The differences are particularly great for families where at least one adult is in paid work: in these families, around 60% of Bangladeshis, 40% of Pakistanis and 30% of black Africans are in income poverty. This is much higher than the 10-15% for white British, white Other, Indians and black Caribbeans.

Up to half of Bangladeshi workers, a third of Pakistanis and a quarter of black Africans were paid less than £6.50 per hour in 2006 compared with a fifth of the other ethnic groups.

15% of non-retired white British men aged 25 and over are not in paid work , by contrast, the equivalent proportions for Bangladeshis, Pakistanis, black Africans and black Caribbeans are 30-40%.Around 30% of non-retired white British women aged 25 and over are not in paid work but the vast majority – 80% – of Bangladeshi and Pakistani women are not in paid work.

Poverty was not confined to first generation immigrants, it concluded, with British born individuals from minority backgrounds less likely to be in work than their white equivalents.

A household is defined as in 'income poverty' if its income is less than 60% of the contemporary Great Britain median household income. In 2004/05, this was worth:
£100 per week for a single adult with no dependent children;
£183 per week for a couple with no dependent children;
£186 for a lone parent with two dependent children; and
£268 per week for a couple with two dependent children.
These sums are measured after deducting income tax, council tax and housing costs (including rents, mortgage interest, buildings insurance and water charges). The money left over is therefore what the household has available to spend on everything else it needs, from food and heating to travel and entertainment.