There are two key classes in society: the working
class and big business. People and organisations on
the side of the working class want a world socialist
revolution to take place, whereas those on the side of
big business (the ruling class) want to stop us.

Because there are a huge number of working class
people across the globe and a tiny number of big
businesspeople, the ruling class has to resort to
divide-and-rule as a major method of staying in
control (i.e. maintaining capitalism). Thus the
parties of big business (including New Labour) attack
asylum seekers and other immigrants (to divide black
and Asian from white), and started wars on Afghanistan
and Iraq (partly to divide Muslims from Christians and
Jews, but oil had was a big influence) - backed up
with attacks on civil liberties (which have to date
been mainly used against Muslims but can later be used
against the working class as a whole). For similar
reasons, they discriminate against women in the
workplace (also to save money).

The ruling class does not leave staying in power to
chance, nor do socialists seeking to end that power -
conspiratorial organisations on both sides build
models of the past and the present state of the world
in order to predict the future and determine what they
need to do to achieve their desired outcomes. This is
now primarily done on computers, but in the past had
to be done using brains, and people still use their
brains for this task in order to help conspiratorial
organisations on their side as well as deal with
every-day tasks. This modelling was dubbed
"psychohistory" in Isaac Asimov's Foundation series,
applied to a galactic revolution. It is now possible
to model the world using computers to a very high
degree of accuracy, and I believe that my modelling
language SDML (see
http://www.socialiststeve.me.uk/sdml.htm) is being
used by the most powerful conspiratorial organisations
on both sides.

AIDS was supposedly started by an experiment using
monkeys in Africa. Due to the ability of the ruling
class to model the world, letting AIDS loose was
clearly a deliberate ploy to divide gay (and bisexual
etc.) from straight people by portraying it as a "gay
plague", as well as increase the degree of racism in
Western society.

Divide-and-rule is also used between disabled and
non-disabled people. Adapting buildings or public
transport to cope with wheelchairs, or building them
to be accessible in the first place, is often rejected
due to cost. Disabled activists (in the Disabled
People's Direct Action Network) in Manchester chained
themselves in front of buses to protest at the fact
that none were wheelchair accessible at the time, and
this action resulted in some buses in Manchester now
being "low floor". However, most buses (even new ones)
are not wheelchair accessible at all, and low floor
buses usually require somebody to push a wheelchair
user on. Most disabled people want independence, some
of the time at least, especially bearing in mind that
benefits are insufficient to employ a carer all the
time.

When I went to San Francisco in the early 1990s (for
work conferences, although I also met up with
socialists and attended a big demo against the
original war on Iraq) I noticed a wheelchair user
driving onto a lift on a bus, the lift rising, and the
user driving onto the bus itself. The bus driver
complained about the cost caused by disabled activists
forcing every bus in the city to be adapted to be
wheelchair accessible. Obviously, after getting
organised in their own towns and cities, disabled
activists across the USA had decided to unite together
and make San Francisco a great place for them to live.
I haven't seen any disabled activists in Manchester
for many years, or many young wheelchair users
recently for that matter, so it is obvious they have
moved somewhere else. I've had a couple of hints that
many disabled people in Britain have gone to Bristol,
but I've yet to check out that theory...

Mental health problems are a form of disability, but
ones that are perfectly legal to discriminate against
- and most good jobs require applicants to specify
health problems on application forms. I recently saw a
TV advert which pointed out that one in four people
suffer from mental health problems and pleaded for
employers not to discriminate. The media is currently
whipping up people's fears by highlighting some
isolated incidents of violent attacks by people who
have been diagnosed with a psychiatric disorder -
whereas statistically, people who have had such
diagnoses are less likely to carry out violent
attacks. If passed, New Labour's Mental Health Bill
would allow people to be locked up in psychiatric
wards on the basis that they may commit a crime at
some point in the future, and it would allow former
psychiatric patients to be forcibly injected against
their will in the community. I am proposing civil
disobedience by mobilising people outside someone’s
home when someone is threatened with injection against
their will, like with the "bailiff busters" in the 18
million-strong mass non-payment campaign that defeated
the poll tax and brought down Margaret Thatcher. [I
joined the revolutionary socialist organisation that
led that campaign during it, then known as the
Militant Tendency and later Militant Labour and the
Socialist Party.]

If everybody was as honest as they said they were,
then socialist revolutions would be much more
straightforward than they have proved. Another major
technique of the ruling class (and the working class
to counter them) is infiltration of socialist
organisations and in fact all organisations in
society, including those on the same side in order to
act against opposing infiltrators. My page on
infiltration (at
http://www.socialiststeve.me.uk/infiltration.htm)
provides some examples.

Derren Brown reveals on Channel 4 (his "Trick of the
mind" series is now being shown on Fridays at 9.30pm)
that some people have the ability to read and control
minds, or perhaps everybody does to some degree or
other mostly without realising it. It was also
revealed on the Channel 5 programme "The World's
Greatest Conspiracy Theories" that mind control is the
number one such theory with over 500,000 websites
devoted to it - and they provided a lot of evidence
for mind control using machines, stating that it is a
fact. For more information, see
http://www.socialiststeve.me.uk/mind-control.htm.

One of the suggested ways of influencing people
through mind control is using mobile phone masts.
There are now plans for a massive increase in the
number of masts, for "third generation" mobile phones.
So massive, that with big public outcries in many
places already faced with new masts being built, New
Labour has passed legislation allowing these masts to
be built without requiring planning permission!
Existing mobile phones have most features that
ordinary people want. Who wants to watch a film on a
tiny screen? I can't imagine that it will make
economic sense to broadcast films in this way
(especially considering the huge sums paid out for the
satellites already) - either they will be cheap to
watch and the mobile firms won't make much money, or
they will be expensive to watch and most people won't
bother watching them. There must be an ulterior
motive!

To move to a less conspiratorial issue that I have
been campaigning on - ID cards. A central computer
containing a large amount of data about many or most
of us would add to the ability of the ruling class to
model us, and influence us using infiltration and mind
control. Unfortunately, most opponents of ID cards
have simply talked generally about "civil liberties"
without explaining the purpose of the government
restricting them (although mention of "Big Brother"
gives a strong hint to those who have read George
Orwell's "1984" or seen the film of the book) or
answering the question of how else to oppose
terrorism. It is no secret that the official "security
services" (specifically MI5) infiltrated the IRA to
limit that organisation's effect and eventually force
them to adopt new methods. Since computer modelling
power has been rapidly increasing over the years,
infiltration and mind control can clearly stop
terrorist attacks if the ruling class really wants
them to be prevented.

So how come the terrorist attacks of 9/11 in the USA
happened then? Well, the US ruling class deliberately
let them happen! The brilliant website
http://www.oilempire.us, which reveals much more about
US politics generally (including Bush's fraudulent
election "victory" against Kerry), contains a lot of
information about 9/11 including pointers to many
websites that I have not had time to check out yet.

Restrictions on civil liberties that were first
adopted by the British government in Northern Ireland
- internment (detention without trial) and Diplock
courts (without a jury) - were recruiting tools for
the IRA rather than successful in defeating them! The
powers just passed by New Labour, with the
acquiescence of the Tories and "Liberal Democrats",
for house arrest and "control orders" repeat the same
situation - and are a further divide-and-rule measure,
to increase the hostility of non-Muslims in Britain
towards that religion and aid the Islamic terrorists
seeking to recruit more moderate Muslims to their
ranks. Allowing a judge to make the decision to
deprive an individual of freedom is not much better
than allowing the Home Secretary to make the same
decision.

A mass movement for freedom and independence in
Ireland was curtailed by keeping hold of six counties
- commonly regarded as Ulster but only part of that
county to try to ensure a Protestant majority (that
may disappear before too long due to the greater
growth rate amongst Catholics due to their Church's
appalling positions on abortion and contraception, but
the appointment of a former member of Hitler Youth as
Pope may increase the tendency of ordinary Catholics
to disregard such advice). Similarly, the brutal
attack by US forces in Iraq on Fallujah (with help
from British troops) killing civilians and insurgents
alike was designed to polarise Iraqi society even
further, dividing Shia from Sunni Muslims ahead of the
elections in January 2005. No elections under
occupation can be free and fair, and the fact that
many candidates didn't even have their names on the
ballot papers was an indication of this, as was the
fact that foreign "observers" who were supposed to
ascertain whether they were free and fair weren't even
allowed in the country!

To be a genuine socialist, you always have to be in
favour of unity of genuine ordinary people and
democracy. That includes opposing the idea of
governments composed of hierarchies of committees like
the "Soviet" government established after the Russian
Revolution of October 1917 - even those that are not
rigged to give a minority (workers) more say than a
majority (peasants) - and counterposing proportional
representation by Single Transferable Vote (and with a
large number of people elected per constituency unlike
what the Liberal "Democrats" propose to benefit
themselves but restrict the ability of socialists to
break through). The capitalist Provisional Government
established after the February revolution in Russia in
1917 did not grant any form of elections; hence the
Bolsheviks (who became the Communist Party) demanded a
Constituent Assembly between the revolutions, but the
influence of two big business infiltrators - Vladimir
Lenin and Leon Trotsky - persuaded them to abolish the
Assembly when right-wing peasants' representatives
(large landowners because they were better organised)
gained a majority. Their argument that the Bolsheviks
would have been crushed if they had acted otherwise is
rubbish - the working class, which had carried out two
revolutions in one year, would have obviously been
able to defend them and carry out a new revolution
(with the help from genuine peasants) when the new
rulers had exposed themselves in the eyes of the
masses. Instead, people calling themselves
"socialists", and particularly "Marxists" or
"communists", have been regarded by many as
undemocratic ever since.

The largest "revolutionary socialist" organisation in
Britain - though fortunately not Scotland where they
are a "platform" of the Scottish Socialist Party (SSP)
- is the Socialist Workers Party (SWP). There are many
ways in which they have aided the forces of big
business over the years - obviously because the
majority of their leadership are infiltrators on the
side of big business.

The approach of the big business infiltrators is to
have a perpetual "revolving door syndrome", whereby
many good workers, young people and particularly
students get drawn into their party - because it is
the first revolutionary socialist organisation they
come across or the biggest or because its newspaper
"Socialist Worker" is open about the fact that the SWP
is revolutionary when some newspapers seem tame in
contrast - and get disillusioned when they discover
what it is really like, becoming lost to revolutionary
socialist politics for a long period of time (perhaps
forever).

For example, he SWP used to give "critical but
unconditional support" to the IRA, and they have
repeated that "mistake" with their support for Islamic
fundamentalists in Iraq and Lebanon. In the latter
country, mass united demonstrations for democracy and
independence between people of different religions
have finally forced the Syrian regime to withdraw,
despite Bush's hypocritical speech for the withdrawal
after the government collapsed - obviously to try to
prevent it, but the SWP lauded the huge Hizbullah-led
demo in support of the occupation provoked by that
speech.

At the SSP conference in Perth in February, Socialist
Worker platform members put forward a resolution
supporting "all the resistance" in Iraq and opposed an
amendment opposing suicide bombings, beheadings, and
murders of trade unionists and foreign journalists
(all of which are counterproductive to ending the
occupation because they alienate genuine working class
people in Iraq and across the world).

The regular "What the Socialist Workers Party stands
for" column of "Socialist Worker" shows that the SWP
still stands for a government like the "soviet" one in
Russia, by calling for "a workers' state based upon
councils of workers' delegates". Such structures are
ideal for other big business infiltrators, like
Stalin, to move up the ranks because a very small
number of people know what they are like until it is
too late. [Additionally, calling for "a workers'
militia" in the same column with the hatred of guns in
Britain (especially after Dunblane) is also designed
to limit the SWP's effectiveness.] I don't completely
reject the idea of hierarchies - they are necessary to
some extent in a socialist organisation under
capitalism or an industry in a socialist society - but
there should be as few levels as possible to still be
effective. Hierarchies of any sort whatsoever tend to
be opposed by people calling themselves "anarchists",
who are virtually all non-violent in Britain and I see
as "revolutionary socialists" too (although few use
that term due to bad experiences with organisations
that do).

All organisations and individuals that claim to
advocate socialism should put the interests of the
working class above their own interests. It is
obviously necessary to recruit to your own
organisation as well as helping the working class
generally (or recruiting to an alliance or party that
the organisation is part of), because without
sufficient members your organisation will be too weak
to influence events when big movements develop in the
future. However, if recruitment is prioritised to too
great a degree, an organisation fails to win the
respect of the working class and the revolving door
syndrome referred to above develops where many of the
best activists drop out after a short period in the
organisation to be replaced by new activists who later
drop out.

The usual way the SWP operates is to portray itself as
*the* party that is going to lead the revolution and
see campaigns as merely ways of aiding recruitment to
the party. This is putting the interests of the SWP
above those of the class. However, because it is a
large party, many of its members are genuine and do
seriously intervene in movements in order to further
the aims of the working class.

When I joined the Militant Tendency in 1990, that
organisation had a completely different attitude -
concentrating on leading campaigns to try to win,
exemplified by the anti-poll tax campaign, but as time
went by it adopted the same attitude of intervening to
recruit that our members had criticised the SWP
previously.

When the SWP finally led a mass movement, i.e. the
anti-war movement through the Stop the War Coalition,
the forces of big business made sure that it did so as
badly as possible.

For example, placards, posters and the front page
headline of their paper failed to mention oil. The
"revolutionary" slogan on their placards was "Stop
this bloody war", as if people didn't know already
that wars kill! My intervention in producing leaflets
with the headline "No war for oil" in the run-up to a
three-pronged demo in Manchester (undoubtedly the
biggest in England outside London) resulted in one
banner and a second batch of leaflets being produced
with the slogan "No blood for oil" on.

Despite the fact that the SWP was (mis-)leading the
Socialist Alliance (SA), SA speakers were not invited
to anti-war demonstrations, rallies or public meetings
(with the possible exception of some small local
ones), whereas Labour MPs and Tony Benn (who is still
in New Labour and admitted at the SWP's "Marxism" in
the summer that he no longer thinks socialism will
ever happen and that we will just have to be content
with a few reforms under capitalism) were given top
billing. After sabotaging the SA (by running it very
bureaucratically), they set up "Respect: the Unity
Coalition" as their new electoral front, alongside
George Galloway who shook hands with Saddam Hussein
and said what a great guy he was and Muslims (some of
whom have right-wing views). Because Respect is a
cross-class formation, and therefore against the
interests of the working class, they are perfectly
happy to promote it at anti-war events.

When a revolutionary socialist organisation becomes a
big threat, conspiratorial organisations on the side
of big business go into overdrive to frustrate that
organisation. In the case of Militant, it led
Liverpool City Council in the mid-1980s and had won a
lot of extra money for the city in the first year, but
made the "mistake" of sending out redundancy notices
to the entire workforce when isolated by the
abandoment of "trendy lefty" councils in the second;
later, infiltrator Steve Nally said the Anti-Poll Tax
Federation would hold an investigation and "name
names", when quizzed on national TV after the riot in
Trafalgar Square (which a subsequent documentary
showed was started by the police), putting Militant on
the defensive when it could have been recruiting
thousands. Despite the mess the SWP made of the
anti-war movement, the failure of Respect to get a
good vote in the north of England (where all-postal
ballots were used) was probably largely due to an
aspect of electoral fraud gone unnoticed (or
deliberately disregarded) by the media. My postal
ballot envelope urged me to return it immediately
before Respect's TV broadcast was even shown! I set up
a UK electoral fraud discussion group (at
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/uk-electoral-fraud) to
highlight this at the time; I've similarly set up a US
electoral fraud group (at
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/us-electoral-fraud) to
highlight numerous ways in which the Republicans
defeated Kerry in 2004, plus the fact that Kerry is a
revolutionary socialist in disguise!

The failure of the Socialist Party (and its
international organisation, the CWI) to support the
formation of the SSP marked the point when its
sectarianism towards other socialist organisations had
become just (or nearly) as bad as that of the SWP, and
I left shortly afterwards - to highlight the problem
of infiltration to the wider world. I had been the
only speaker from England or Wales at a debate during
the 1998 European School of the CWI to support the
formation of the SSP.

Scottish Militant Labour (as Militant had become after
leaving the Labour Party in Scotland) became the
International Socialist Movement (ISM) platform of the
SSP; the ISM later left the CWI. My proposal for a
Revolutionary Platform of the SSP has already created
some debate within the ISM, as reflected by an article
proposing an open forum for Marxists within the SSP by
an ISM member plus contributions from other Marxist
platforms in the current issue of the ISM's
"Frontline" magazine. I will send a further message
about it when I have had a chance to read it, but my
initial comment is that I want to encourage other
kinds of revolutionary socialists who are not Marxists
to unite together within the SSP, including
anarchists.

I had planned to stand in the general election in
Manchester, initially as one of a number of Democratic
Socialist Alliance (DSA) candidates, then (when my
launch meeting to establish a Greater Manchester DSA
failed, due mainly to mind control and infiltration,
as explained in my document at
http://socialiststeve.me.uk/mind-control-gmdsa.htm) as
a sole DSA or independent socialist candidate, but
subconsciously I realised that it was better to
concentrate on Glasgow to ensure that the SSP gets a
good vote and hopefully wins at least one MP.

Since I am unemployed, but have quite a large amount
of savings (which I regard as an investment for the
revolution; despite giving the highest or equal
highest level of subs in the Manchester/Lancashire
region of the Socialist Party for a few years, it was
obviously sensible for me to keep money back to
support my own political initiatives and better
organisations in the future), I have been able to
produce and am handing out a large number of full
colour double-sided A4 leaflets, and produce 25,000
eight-page manifestos four of which are in
colour(which you can read at
http://www.socialiststeve.me.uk/manifesto) most of
which I will hand out after the election. I got some
stickers printed, to put on some of the manifestos to
indicate that I am not standing after all.

By highlighting my proposal for

I have updated my socialist home page and have
included the text from the page below. There are many
links on the page, so go to
http://www.socialiststeve.me.uk if you want to know
more (or visit one of the many other pages accessible
via buttons at the top of the page. [Note that my old
website URL www.stevewallis.org no longer works, so
update any bookmarks to my pages you may have.]

------------------------------------------------

For help on translating my web pages from English into
other languages, click here.

You can now read my manifesto for the general election
on-line or download it. For details, click here.

I am a revolutionary socialist (a Marxist heavily
influenced by anarchism), fighting for a democratic
socialist world free from poverty, unemployment,
homelessness, discrimination, famines, deaths from
preventable diseases, war and environmental
destruction. I favour a non-violent revolution, and
think that the use of guns in the UK, where working
class people hate them so much after atrocities such
as at Dunblane, would be counterproductive, unless the
British state tried to use the army or armed police
against the working class first.

I favour non-violent methods of change such as mass
demonstrations, direct action and standing in
elections (and see the mass demos against the Syrian
occupation in the previously war-torn country of
Lebanon, which I analyse in my page on international
issues, as the way forward for Iraq, although there
has been an upsurge in violence since the demos which
hopefully will not lead to a return to civil war) but
recognise that many movements that do involve violence
are positive and should be supported. Recent examples
of these include the Zapatista uprising in Mexico and
the struggle against the Contra terrorists supported
by the CIA in Nicaragua; I also support the right of
the Iraqi people to fight back against the occupation
by US and British imperialism, whilst promoting real
democracy and opposing counter-productive methods of
struggle promoted by Islamic fundamentalists such as
beheadings, suicide bombings and murders of trade
unionists and foreign journalists.

Some revolutions which have involved violence have led
to very few deaths. This includes the storming of the
Winter Palace in Russia in October 1917, which marked
the point at which the working class took power; it
was the attempted counter-revolution that led to a
massive loss of life. According to the Independent,
only four people died in the revolution in Kyrgyzstan
on the 24th of March 2005, and the violence that led
to those deaths was started by some pro-government
demonstrators; it differs from the previous
revolutions in countries formerly in the USSR (Georgia
and Ukraine) in being largely spontaneous, much more
working class (due to the extreme poverty and shortage
of a middle class in Kyrgyzstan) and in the opposition
(to the previous regime that had clearly rigged the
elections) being very divided. With the presence of
both US and Russian bases in that country, it could be
a big setback for both US and Russian imperialism, but
whether Kyrgyzstan develops in the direction of
socialism remains to be seen...

I am the Convenor of Manchester International
Socialist Movement, which is an informal discussion
group on the internet (mailing list with an archive
that you can browse or search). It has mainly served
as a forum that I have used to post all my important
messages since the run-up to the war on Iraq. You can
join the group from its home page, by clicking here or
by emailing machesterism-subscribe@yahoogroups.com.

I have more recently set up a discussion group for the
North West International Socialist Movement, planning
to launch it as a revolutionary socialist organisation
with an actual membership at some point, rather than
just one based in hyperspace. I decided to widen the
area to the North West of England when campaigning on
the issue of Palestine, because one of my close
collaborators (who attends pickets of Marks & Spencer
in Manchester) lives in Preston. I plan to travel to
Preston to campaign on that and other issues at some
point in the fairly near future.

I have been living in Manchester since September 1984,
and since the Spring of 1989 I have been a political
activist. I had planned to move up to Glasgow, since
that is where I expected the world socialist
revolution to start, because it is the area of the
world in which the organised forces of genuine
socialism are strongest – reflected by the Scottish
Socialist Party (SSP) receiving over 15% of the vote
in Glasgow in the Scottish parliamentary elections on
May Day 2003, getting two members (Tommy Sheridan and
Rosie Kane) elected.

However, Manchester is in my opinion the other city in
the world apart from Glasgow where the left is very
strong, partly due to my activities and the activities
of many other good socialists that I have known, and
partly due to historical reasons – Karl Marx lived in
this city, the trade union movement started here, and
the first real computer (i.e. running a program) was
built at the University of Manchester. There have
often been big demonstrations and meetings in
Manchester, but up to now that has not been reflected
by the development of an organisation like the SSP,
largely due to the relative strength of the Socialist
Workers Party (SWP, which is better than elsewhere in
Britain but still sectarian and fairly heavily
infiltrated by conspiratorial organisations on the
side of big business) and actions by the forces of big
business to wreck genuine socialist organisations like
the Socialist Party (formerly the Militant Tendency
and then Militant Labour) which I was a member of for
about eight and a half years, such as by infiltration
(for example, see my page on Racism and Fascism about
the damage caused by a black regional secretary called
Phil Frampton who eventually revealed himself as an
agent of big business by causing a massive faction
fight in the Manchester/Lancashire region).

My solution to the splintering of the left in England
is for the formation of a Democratic Socialist
Alliance (DSA) – to clarify that we don’t want a
dictatorial regime like the ones that collapsed in the
USSR and Eastern Europe, and to distance ourselves
from the bureaucratic way in which the SWP led the
socialist alliances – and for revolutionaries within
the DSA to unite in the Revolutionary Platform of the
DSA. This Revolutionary Platform, whose only
requirement for membership will be that members regard
themselves as revolutionaries, will enable
revolutionary socialists to organise in a united way
against reformists and infiltrators on the side of big
business. I have already informed some SWP and
Socialist Party members of this initiative, to
encourage those fed up with the sectarianism of their
leaders to consider launching faction fights within
their parties in order to join the Revolutionary
Platform of the DSA (as sub-platforms or just as
individual members) at some point in the future.

Unfortunately, a proposal to set up a DSA on a
national basis was defeated at a “Socialist Unity”
conference on the 12th of March, organised by the
Socialist Alliance Democracy Platform (SADP), despite
the fact that the Socialist Alliance had been
dissolved by the SWP and a small number of allies a
month earlier. At a later meeting of the SADP, it was
decided by a narrow majority to dissolve that
organisation in favour of a “provisional Socialist
Alliance” (SA(P)) after the general election, which
intends to launch a new SA in the Autumn. The SADP did
not select any candidates for the election, but
endorsed two candidates (in Liverpool and Crawley in
London) to stand under its party name “Democratic
Socialist Alliance – People Before Profit”, who had
previously been selected by the United Socialist Party
and wanted to stand anyway when that organisation
decided not to participate.

SADP and (former) SA members in the Greater Manchester
area are considering organising a national
meeting/conference in Manchester, probably in June,
which will hopefully establish the DSA. We started
discussing it at a meeting on the 26th of April, but
due to shortage of time and one person wishing to
consult his organisation postponed the decision until
the next meeting (probably on the 9th of May).

In my opinion, those who wish to set up a DSA are (on
the whole) more serious than those promoting the
SA(P). A statement issued by the SA(P) officers says
that “We are not on the brink of launching a new party
and calling for groups to dissolve” repeats the lie of
leaders of the Socialist Party and the CWI (the
international organisation to which it is affiliated)
that forming the SSP would mean the dissolution of
Scottish Militant Labour; that organisation still
exists and leads the SSP but it is known as the
International Socialist Movement platform. The
statement is very pessimistic, saying “we are back to
square one, rebuilding an alliance almost from
scratch”. Furthermore, trying to impose a programme
(People Before Profit) plus a “principle issue” of
republicanism (which I agree with but does not seem
particularly important to me) on the alliance before
the founding conference has even taken place is bound
to limit its appeal. I intend to join the SA(P) and
attend its conference, but I think the DSA will be a
much more serious organisation.

I have laid the groundwork for the development of an
organisation like the SSP (as I hope the DSA will be)
by discussing with a lot of people and handing out a
lot of leaflets, mainly in Manchester, in the six and
a half years since I left the Socialist Party. I
failed in my attempts to launch a Greater Manchester
Democratic Socialist Alliance (GMDSA) before the
election, but I am proposing that the Manchester area
SADP is renamed as the GMDSA. I intended to stand as
an Independent Socialist candidate in the Manchester
Withington constituency in the general election (that
will take place on Thursday the 5th of May), but
failed to get nominated in time. Nevertheless, I have
handed out and will continue to hand out copies of my
manifesto (which you can download or read on-line by
clicking here), promoting the GMDSA. I am additionally
handing out an A4 leaflet with the first page of my
manifesto on one side and details of the Revolutionary
Platform of the SSP plus information on torture and
protests against the G8 in Scotland in July on the
other (which you can read by clicking here), mainly in
Glasgow. I think I delayed getting ten people to
nominate me until too late due to subconsciously
realising that it was better not to become an MP, due
to believing primarily in revolution from below and
having a lot of other projects (particularly my future
revolutionary socialist band Galaxia), and realising
that it was far more important for me to help the SSP
get good votes (and possibly at least one MP) in
Glasgow – putting the interests of the working class
as a whole before my own interests.

I have now decided to live in and conduct sustained
political activities from at least three places in the
coming period – Fallowfield in Manchester, the
Shettleston branch area of Glasgow SSP, and Penarth
(the town near Cardiff in which I spent my last five
years at school).

I joined Glasgow Shettleston branch of the SSP at its
2005 Perth conference, which I have described in my
document on Scottish Socialist Party history, 2005
conference report and Revolutionary Platform plans. I
have set up a Revolutionary Platform of the SSP
discussion group and discussion group, in preparation
for its launch as an organisation in the near future.
I also regard myself as a supporter of the
International Socialist Movement platform of the SSP,
and will hopefully join that platform soon as well.

The other major initiative that I have launched
recently is the Campaign for Democracy in the UK.
There is a page on this website containing more
details of this campaign.

The other major initiative that I am going to be
participating in is a revolutionary socialist band,
which I have decided to call “Galaxia” – named after
the very left-wing future of the galaxy at the end of
Isaac Asimov’s Foundation series. I will be one of the
singers in the band, but I am inviting some
established musicians/singers to join the band as well
as some people I know – either as permanent band
members or to join us for the odd gig/CD. I will soon
set up a website, www.galaxiamusic.org, and have set
up a ‘galaxiamusic’ discussion group dedicated to the
band, even though the band has not yet been formed. I
have set up a music page on this website here.

As well as being a political activist, I am a computer
programmer, and have developed a modelling language
called SDML (which has a discussion group at
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/strictly-declarative-modelling-language)
which may be of use to other socialist programmers
(especially those who know Prolog). As I explain in my
“Socialism and Conspiracies” document, and on my page
on SDML on this website, I believe that this language
is being used by conspiratorial organisations (on both
sides: the working class and big business) to model
the past and present state of the world in order to
predict the future and determine what they need to do
to achieve their desired outcome. Asimov (or rather
his character Hari Seldon) calls it “psychohistory” in
his Foundation series, when used by a computer to
model a revolution throughout the galaxy, but our
brains utilise the same technique to tackle sub-goals
in our day-to-day tasks. My page on Isaac Asimov on
this website discusses the significance of Asimov’s
literature, concentrating on the Foundation series. If
you want to try SDML out, I recommend that you
allocate about five consecutive days to work through
the tutorial.

Two arcade-style computer games that I and my brother
designed and implemented are available for free
downloading on Windows platforms (via an Amstrad
CPC464 emulator). For more information, click here.

Many of my most important documents and leaflets are
accessible from the Documents & Leaflets page.

For statistics on this website, including number of
hits, click here.

[Note: the statistics are not being gathered any more,
due to the huge number of people who are now accessing
my website after sending out this message to many
other places yesterday, but you may find the old stats
interesting!]

Note that my old webspace provider, hostway, refused
to hand over my domain name www.stevewallis.org, hence
my need to switch to www.socialiststeve.me.uk when I
transferred to ukfast.net, which I know is reliable
(as well as the fastest in the UK according to at
least one independent survey) because I know the
person who runs it: my second cousin Lawrence Jones.


--
Steve Wallis (http://www.socialiststeve.me.uk).
My socialist election manifesto: http://www.socialiststeve.me.uk/manifesto.
Proposer of Revolutionary Platform of the Democratic Socialist Alliance
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/revolutionary-platform-of-democratic-socialist-al\
liance).
Member of Glasgow Shettleston branch of the Scottish Socialist Party
(http://www.scottishsocialistparty.org), supporter of the International
Socialist Movement platform of the SSP (http://www.redflag.org.uk) and initiator
of the Revolutionary Platform of the SSP
(http://www.revolutionaryplatformofthessp.org,
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/revolutionary-platform-of-the-ssp).
Initiator of the Campaign for Democracy in the UK
(http://www.democracycampaign.org.uk;
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/campaign-for-democracy-in-the-uk) and Campaign for
Sanity in the NHS (http://www.health-service-sanity.org).