Friday, 9 October 2026

Remembering Ernesto "Che" Guevara on his Death Anniversary


On this day in 1967, Argentine revolutionary socialist, Ernesto Rafael Guevara de la Serna, 
familiarly known by the Argentinian slang word “Che", was executed on the orders of the CIA after he had been captured by the Bolivian Army in Vallegrande, Bolivia. 
The hunt for Che in Bolivia was led by CIA agent Felix Rodriguez. A informant told the Bolivian Special Forces about the location of Guevara's guerrilla unit, and on October 8, 1967, the unit's camp was surrounded, and Guevara himself was captured in the Quebrada del Yuro ravine. 


Che was wounded in the leg, and another bullet pierced the magazine of his rifle so that he was unable to fire back. Rodriguez, upon hearing of Guevara's capture, immediately reported it to CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia.  
Che Guevara spent the night of October 8-9 in captivity on the floor of the village school of La Higuera, with the bodies of his two murdered comrades lying next to him.   
On October 9 at 12:30 a radio order came from the high command in La Paz. The message said: "Proceed with the elimination of Señor Guevara." The order, signed by the president of the military government of Bolivia, Rene Barrientes Ortuño, was transmitted in encrypted form to CIA agent Felix Rodriguez. 
The executioner was Bolivian army sergeant Mario Teran, who drew the short straw in a dispute between soldiers over the right to kill Guevara. When Terán, the soldier who would execute him, entered the room, Guevara reportedly said “I know you’ve come to kill me. Shoot, coward! You are only going to kill a man.”   
Guevara’s body was strapped to the skids of a helicopter and flown to Vallegrande, a small town 65 kilometres away, before being moved to an open-air laundry in the grounds of a hospital. It was here that the international press was summoned and the famous Christ-like photograph of his lifeless bearded corpse  taken by Bolivian photojournalist Freddy Alborta. 


Alborta's post mortem photo of Guevara,  1967

It is probable that Che would have been compared to Christ being taken down from the cross in any case. He was in his 30s when he died, he had long hair and a beard, and he gave his life for the cause of the working class and the peasants in a deeply Catholic country. And probably his image would only grown in its inspiration – that change would arrive in Bolivia and that the poor could eventually live in dignity.  But the photograph  that emerged seems to me to be a powerful visual and artistic reminder of Che’s redemptive powers.
Fearing that it might become a place of pilgrimage, the authorities decided not to bury the revolutionaries in the local cemetery. Instead, they were concealed in a mass grave in the corner of an airfield.


A mural dedicated to Che Guevara in Vallegrande, where his body was taken and displayed to the international press. This is now part of the Che Route, sponsored by the Bolivian government and foreign solidarity groups. 

On October 15, Fidel Castro announced Guevara's death to the public. Guevara's death was considered a severe blow to the socialist revolutionary movement in Latin America and around the world.  
In his last letter to his children, Guevara wrote  “Above all, always be capable of feeling deeply any injustice committed against anyone, anywhere in the world. This is the most beautiful quality in a revolutionary.”
Ernesto Rafael Guevara de la Serna was born to a well-off family in Argentina in 1928. While studying medicine at the University of Buenos Aires, he took time off to travel around South America on a motorcycle; during this time, he witnessed the poverty and oppression of the lower classes. He received a medical degree in 1953 and continued his travels around Latin America, becoming involved with left-wing organizations.
In the mid 1950s, Guevara met up with Fidel Castro and his group of exiled revolutionaries in Mexico. Guevara played a key role in Castro’s seizure of power from Cuban dictator Fulgencio Batista in 1959 and later served as Castro’s right-hand man and minister of industry. Guevara strongly opposed U.S. domination in Latin America and advocated peasant-based revolutions to combat social injustice in Third World countries.
Guevara resigned from his Cuban government post in April 1965, then disappeared from Cuba, traveled to Africa and eventually resurfaced in Bolivia, where he was killed.
The legacy of Che Guevara is constantly evolving in the collective imagination. As a symbol of counterculture worldwide, Guevara is one of the most recognizable and influential revolutionary figures of the twentieth century. An icon of global popular culture, as well as a hero of Third World communist revolutionary movements and a symbol of the Western Leftist Movement. He remains a monumental figure in Latin American history, influencing a half-century of political ideals and movements. 
In Cuba, an economic blockade led the island to act in defiance of U.S. power, creating in its wake an internationalist foreign policy. Guevara played a key role in the ideology and action needed to carry out these policies. 
Today, despite a 66-year-long US blockade of Cuba and the current intensified blockade that has caused a humanitarian disaster, the country allocates about 14% of its national budget to education. According to the World Bank, Cuba had a 98% literacy rate as of 2021, and UNICEF reports a 100% primary school completion rate. 
Education has long been a cornerstone of the Cuban Revolution, and universal education is one of its greatest successes. In 1961, Cuba launched a mass literacy campaign targeting rural areas. Illiteracy declined from 23% to 3.9% that year alone. 
Education is completely free in Cuba, even at the highest level. This means that, in addition to primary and secondary school, Cubans can access university education, postgraduate studies, medical school, and all other fields of study at no charge.
According to the U.S. Department of Education, 79 per cent of adults in the United States had sufficient English literacy skills as of 2019. This means that one in five adults in the United States lacks these skills.In September 2025, the Nation’s Report Card revealed that high school seniors' reading scores dropped to their lowest average since 1992, signalling falling literacy rates. 
Professors at the University of California system are expressing frustration that their students also lack basic middle-school math skills.
While the United States has long targeted Cuba and its socialist system, it seems that the island country's dedication to investing in accessible educational opportunities for every citizen has generated results superior to those of the capitalist United States, even though the latter has a much larger economy and more global power.
The following  photo was taken on March 5, 1960, seven years before Guevara’s death, at a funeral for workers killed in an explosion in a Cuban port that Fidel Castro’s revolutionary government blamed on the Americans. 
Guevara, looked on as Castro delivered a fiery funeral oration. For about thirty seconds, he stepped to the front of a crowd near Castro’s rostrum, into the view of newspaper photographer Alberto Díaz Gutiérrez, also known as Alberto Korda. Korda snapped two shots of Guevara, his face resolute and his long hair flowing from under his trademark beret, before Guevara retreated back into the crowd. Perhaps due to his background as a fashion photographer, Korda took a liking to one of the images and cropped it into a portrait, even though the newspaper La Revolución declined to use it.  
For several years, the now-iconic photo remained nothing more than a personal favorite of the man who took it. Korda named the picture Guerrillero Heroico—“Heroic Guerrilla Warrior”—and hung it on his wall, occasionally handing out copies to guests. It was not until 1967 that the public would first see the image, which appeared in the magazine Paris Match alongside an article about Latin American guerrilla movements.  
During Guevara's, memorial service in Havana, an enormous print of Guerrillero Heroico was hung over the façade of the Ministry of the Interior. The service marked Che’s canonization as a martyr of global revolution, as well as the ascendance of Korda’s image as an icon of rebellion.  
The following year the image of Guevara went viral. It appeared on the cover of a copy of Guevara's memoirs, published in Italy. It was also used as the cover of a literary journal advertised on the New York City subway. 


In the same year, Irish artist Jim Fitzpatrick created a stylized version of the image, setting a black-and-white Guevara against a red background, and distributed it as widely as he could to honor Guevara’s legacy. The poster bearing this image was shown at the Arts Laboratory in London. It quickly became the image used prominently in the student riots that swept across France in May 1968. 


Since then, Che’s face has been commodified, merchandised and objectified, appearing on T-shirts, ice cream wrappers, posters and mural art. His life is told in films, such as The Motorcycle Diaries (2004), in documentaries, plays, and in songs. 
Yet the rights to Che’s face are not owned by the Guevara family, but by the photographer and artist who created the image. The famous photograph of Guevara in a beret was taken by Alberto Korda (Alberto Díaz Gutiérrez) in 1960, titled Guerrillero Heroico (Heroic Guerrilla Warrior). British pop artist Sir Peter Blake regarded it as ‘one of the great icons of the 20th century.’ 
This photograph was the beginning of the commodification of the image of Che. Che’s image is an ever-present political and social emblem that has been morphed in popular culture. It operates as ‘both a fashionable de-politicized logo, as well as a potent anti-establishment symbol used by a wide spectrum of human rights movements and individuals affirming their own liberation.’  
Che’s image has become a counter-cultural symbol that operates independent of who he was as a person, metamorphosed from his life as a revolutionary appropriated into a work of art. Hannah Charlton writes in The Sunday Times (2006) that ‘Possibly more than the Mona Lisa, more than images of Christ, more than comparable icons such as the Beatles or Monroe, Che’s image has continued to hold the imagination of generation after generation.’ 
Che's short life reveals Cuba’s resilience in the struggle to provide the needs of the people through the Cuban Revolution, especially those whose ethnic identity and race are factors in their economic and political oppression.Time magazine selected him as one of the 100 Most Influential People of the 20th Century.
Che  remains a polarizing figure; admired by some as a symbol of idealism and revolutionary dedication, a heroic defender of the oppressed and poor,while others criticize him as a violent adventurer, an executioner and the "Butcher Of la Cabaña" while Jean Paul-Sartre, Susan Sontag, Nelson Mandela and many others have regarded him as a hero and an inspiration, a man who was prepared to die for his beliefs. 
What made Che unique was the unorthodox current of Marxism-Leninism he represented. Unlike those who believed revolution had to wait until all the perfect material conditions emerged, Che argued that revolutionaries had a duty to create those conditions through struggle itself. His theory of guerrilla warfare held that even a small group of committed revolutionaries could spark broader popular movements rather than waiting indefinitely for history to move on its own.
He believed that revolution was not just an external process, but an internal, almost spiritual, struggle to develop new values, ethics, and forms of consciousness: the creation of a “New Man.”  
Che also rejected the idea that socialism could be built in one state and survive indefinitely in isolation, and his life reflected the belief that the struggle for socialism had to be global or risk total defeat.
 Che understood the centrality of ethics in politics, the centrality of subjective factors in revolution, leading to the rapid transformation of Cuban society into a giant school of reclaiming Cuban culture and ethical values.  
Hence, the literacy and “voluntary labour” campaigns, the advances in education and medicine, and the large scale involvement of people in movements for agrarian reform, housing reform, and so on. These movements and campaigns converted idealistic goals into on-the-ground realities that have continued to evolve, making possible what one could have never imagined even in one’s wildest dreams.  
Rejecting the use of capitalist methods to fight capitalism, Che alongside Fidel Castro used the methods of socialist praxis to transform what began as a national liberation struggle into a socialist revolution that would transform institutions and social and human relations through an organised and conscious “praxis” that—despite errors recognised publicly by both of them and their successors—continues till today.  
Che also repeatedly warned about the dangers of not seeing the deficiencies of “existing socialism” and of mechanically copying Soviet manuals and methods. He had spoken about this often, and this is also explicitly stated in his writings preserved in Cuba and available around the world. He observed that the “intransigent dogmatism of the Stalin era has been succeeded by an inconsistent pragmatism . . . returning to capitalism.” 
He saw the actions and programmes of the Cuban Revolution as “clashing with what one reads in the (Soviet) textbooks” and contributed insightful socialist critiques of both capitalist and socialist societies and their theories.  
History has never agreed on what to make of him. His story resists simplicity. What remains certain is that he lived—and died—according to absolute conviction. In the final hours before leaving for a war he would not survive, he was thinking about his children. Not about fame. Not about legacy. But about what values he hoped they would carry forward. “Study and read diligently,” he wrote. “Remember that an individual has no value alone.” Stand for something. Learn everything you can. Never be indifferent to suffering." 
In death, Che Guevara would become the iconic symbol of revolutionary martyrdom; giving up his own life with no fear, for the cause of fighting oppression and liberating others. His ideas and actions inspired many leftist movements across Latin America and beyond, particularly among youth and radical groups in the 1960s.Murals, paintings and pictures of Che Guevara can be found all over the world in the poorest areas.
Che went down in history as a man who devoted himself entirely, without reserve, to the noble and difficult struggle for the liberation of man, for the triumph of communist ideals. Che Guevara's life today is an inspiring symbol of heroism and devotion to the ideals of revolution and socialism and  he  remains a global symbol of hope, resistance, and fighting oppression. Martyrs don't die, they live through us.
In July 1997, his remains were discovered; and sent back to Cuba, where they were reburied in a ceremony attended by President Fidel Castro and thousands of Cubans.In October, the Council of State of Cuba issued a notice designating the period from the 11th to the 17th of that month as a national period of mourning, and his remains were interred at the Che Guevara Square in Santa Clara. 
Comrade Che dedicated his life to the struggle against the imperialist bandits who oppress and exploit the world's peoples, chief among them the greatest enemy of the human race, the USA. 

“At the risk of seeming ridiculous, let me say that the true revolutionary is guided by a great feeling of love. It is impossible to think of a genuine revolutionary lacking this quality. If you tremble with indignation at every injustice, then you are a comrade of mine.  ”  -Ernesto 'Che' Guevara 

"Above all, always be capable of feeling deeply any injustice committed against anyone, anywhere in the world. This is the most beautiful quality in a revolutionary"- .Ernesto 'Che' Guevara 

"Wherever death may surprise us, let it be welcome, provided that this our battle cry may have reached some receptive ear and another hand may be extended to wield our weapons."  -Ernesto "Che" Guevara.


Salute . Comrade Che is immortal! Patria o muerte y venceremos! Hasta la victoria siempre!



Photo: an activist paints a mural honouring Che on the apartheid wall in the occupied West Bank.

Thursday, 8 October 2026

Remembering The Life of Mexican-Catalan Surrealist Artist Remedios Varo (16 December 1908 – 8 October 1963)

 

 Kati Horna, Portrait of Remedios Varo in her studio, 1963 © Norah Horna; Image courtesy of Walter Gruen

Mexican-Catalan surrealist artist  María de los Remedios Alicia Rodriga Varo y Uranga was born in Angles, in Catalonia, on16 December 1908 in a home with a staunch Catholic mother and a free spirited father who was a hydraulic engineer. Her mother named her in honour of the patron saint of Anglès, Virgen de los Remedios (the Virgin of Remedies), after a recently deceased older sister.
Varo was heavily influenced by father, who taught her to draw, and her strict Catholic schooling, against which she rebelled. Varo took a critical view of formal religion, rejecting the dominant ideology of her childhood education, and hewed to the liberal and universalist ideas that her father had instilled in her. Catholicism still came to bear great influence on her work, and she often differed from surrealist contemporaries with these frequent religious references.
It was her father who taught her to draw and supported her desire to become an artist.  She was only 15 years old when she enrolled at the Academy of Fine Arts in Madrid, and during the 1920s she was influenced bt the city's artistic avant-garde, including Lorca, and  pursued surrealism and  political  change.
Varo moved to Barcelona in the mid-1930s and joined the Surrealist avant-garde art group Logicophobista. The increasing unrest in Spain in the 1930s led her to travel to Paris, where she became involved in surrealist circles. In Paris, Varo became deeply involved with the Paris-based Surrealists, associated and exhibited with them, exploring magic, alchemy, and analytical psychology. and her work was exhibited in the ground-breaking exhibition, Fantastic Art, Dada, Surrealism at The Museum of Modern Art, New York (1936), as well as multiple early Surrealist exhibitions around the globe: Exposition Internationale du Surréalisme (Tokyo, 1936), Surrealist Objects & Poems (London, 1937), Exposition Internationale du Surréalisme (Paris, 1938), Exposición Internacional del Surrealismo (Mexico City, 1940), to name a few.   
She had an unconventional personal life involving multiple lovers and partners, and often worked odd jobs or even forged paintings in order to remain independent.
Encountering many events of political unrest throughout her life, she was frequently starting afresh.In 1939, the Nationalists claimed victory in Spain and Francisco Franco disallowed anyone associated with the Republicans from entering the country. Varo became permanently unable to return to her home and was isolated from her family. This deeply affected her and was a source of pain and regret throughout her life.
 After World War II began, the poet Benjamin Péret was arrested by the French government for his political beliefs, he was a member of the Trotskyist POUM  and Varo was imprisoned as his romantic partner. 
A few days after Varo was freed, the Germans seized Paris, and she was forced to join other refugees leaving the city. In 1941 Varo boarded the Serpa Pinto in Marseilles to flee Nazi-dominated Europe. The terrors she experienced in her earlier years impacted her significantly.  
She moved to Mexico in 1942 where she remained for the rest of her life, “in this country I have found the tranquility that I have always searched for”. 
She settled in Mexico City and became part of a vibrant community of Mexican and European artists who drew inspiration from Mexico’s culture and geography, among other things  and connected with other exiled artists such as Alice Rahon, Wolfgang Paalen  and Gordon Onslow Ford.  
However, because Mexican muralism still dominated the country’s art scene, surrealism was generally not well received.  While there is little overt influence of Mexican art on her work, Varo and other surrealists were captivated by the seemingly porous borders between the marvellous and the real in Mexico.  Varo also turned to a wide range of mystic and hermetic traditions, encompassing her belief in magic and animistic faiths. 
She felt connected to nature and often illustrated the relationships between plant, human, animal, and mechanical worlds. Her fascination with science including Einstein’s theory of relativity and Darwinian evolution, has been noted by admirers of her art.  
She turned with equal interest to the ideas of Carl Jung as to the theories of George Gurdjieff, P. D. Ouspensky, Helena Blavatsky, Meister Eckhart, and the Sufis, and was as fascinated with the legend of the Holy Grail as with sacred geometry, witchcraft, alchemy, and the I Ching. 
Referred to as a ‘sorceress‘, Varo expressed her beliefs on witchcraft in a letter to English author Gerald Gardner: 

“personally, I don’t believe I am endowed with any special powers, but instead with an ability to see relationships of cause and effect differently, and this beyond the ordinary limits of common logic.” 

She often portrayed the spiritual journey as a solitary one—her characters are seekers, travellers, experimenters. They are caught mid-process: studying, weaving, conjuring, floating through celestial corridors. This speaks not only to the esoteric traditions she admired, but to her personal understanding of the artist as a kind of spiritual scientist,working in secret, transmuting inner experience into vision.  Her technical precision,detailed brushwork, refined draughtsmanship, and softly glowing light—supports the illusion of reality while simultaneously making the fantastic feel entirely plausible. The world she presents is not chaotic or dreamlike in the Freudian sense; it is structured, meaningful, filled with laws, tools, and rituals. 
It suggests a universe governed by hidden logic, one that can be glimpsed through spiritual discipline and creative work.  
Varo’s work resonates with the Hermetic principle of “as above, so below.” 
Her paintings frequently mirror cosmic and microcosmic scales—machines that replicate the movements of the stars, beings whose actions influence distant realms. This idea of correspondence reflects her belief that the inner world is not separate from the outer, but a reflection of it, and that art can illuminate that hidden correspondence.   
Her closest friends  and collaborators  in Mexico became the British artist Leonora Carringtonhttps://teifidancer-teifidancer.blogspot.com/2019/05/the-magical-world-of-surrealist-leonora.html  and the Hungarian photojournalist Kati Horna. They were so close that they were referred to as “the three witches”. 


The portrait above of Varo was taken by Horna in 1957, while Carrington made the mask she wears.  

Carrington and Varo formed one of the great creative friendships in modern art, the two women trading dreams, recipes and imagery for two decades.  
Carrington had her own harrowing route to Mexico first, including a breakdown that landed her in a Spanish psychiatric asylum in 1940.  
Despite widespread belief, Remedios Varo never became a Mexican citizen. Though she never returned to her homeland, she kept her Spanish citizenship, unlike her friend Leonora Carrington, who was naturalized as citizen of Mexico.[
During her early years in Mexico City, Varo honed her distinctive painting style while working various odd jobs, most notably creating illustrations for the pharmaceutical firm Casa Bayer between 1942 and 1949. 
It was not until 1949 that she was able to seriously engage in painting, and a few years later her marriage to the Austrian emigrant Walter Gruen meant that she did not have to worry about finances.
In the same  period  she began to develop her mature personal style. During succeeding decades, she devoted increased time and energy to her art, and she delved further into the fantastical sources that captured her imagination.   
Remedios Varo, who declared that “the dream world and the real world are the same,” attempted to combine vastly different techniques, ideas, and fantasies in an almost alchemical manner in her paintings, which have an enigmatic, cinematic character often incorporating hybrid creatures.  
She used the random processes of surrealism, but was at the same time incredibly precise, meticulous, and classical in her painterly expression and in her colour approach, which has clear relations to Italian painting from the late Middle Ages and early Renaissance.  


Tyveri af substans, 1955. Photo: Alex Aldaco.

Beginning in the mid-1950s, Varo experienced domestic stability that enabled her to devote the rest of her life to painting. During these years, she produced a body of work typified by its female and androgynous figures (often disguised portraits of Varo herself), mystical narrative content, and a quality of ambiguity, mystery, and dark humor. 

“Everything that she did or undid, however disparate that looked to an observer with prejudices, was done for what should be done, that is, with courage and without fear of consequences.” - Remedios Varo,


 Remedios Varo. Nightmare, 1947.

In this last decade of her career, she developed a unique and virtuosic painting style that paired detailed preparatory drawings and meticulous rendering of her primary subjects in the tradition of early Renaissance masters, with Surrealist-derived automatic techniques like decalcomania. 
The feminist dimension also occupies an essential place in Remedios Varo's career. The artist developed a conception of surrealism far removed from the dominant models of her time and formulated an imagery based on experiences, concerns, and forms of creativity linked to the female condition.  Her protagonists, especially the female figures, often appear as creators, explorers, scientists, or alchemists capable of transforming their environment. In this sense, her work can be read as a vindication of women's imagination and creative capacity in the face of cultural structures that had historically limited their autonomy.
Remedios Varo’s art is often read as a proto-feminist response to the overwhelmingly male voices of Surrealism.While Varo did not directly deem her work ‘feminist’, it was noted that “she stretches the limits of and directly challenges confabulated, patriarchal ideals of femininity”, as well as frequently focusing on female empowerment and agency. The androgynous figures characteristic of her later pieces also challenge gender, in that the figures do not fall neatly into normative categories. 
One critic stated, “because the female body, a sacred erotic artistic space, is transformed by Varo into non-gendered shapes and forms, namely animals and insects, the space becomes freed from monolithic sexual interpretation.”
While André Breton and his circle frequently depicted women as muses, objects of desire, or conduits to the unconscious, Varo reoriented this visual language. In her canvases, women are creators, seekers, and alchemists in their own right.


Remedios Varo, La creación de las aves (The Creation of the Birds), 1957


Remedios Varo, La llamada (The Call), 1961

Varo’s female figures are never passive. Instead, they actively shape their surroundings, wielding brushes, flasks, or arcane instruments. In La creación de las aves (The Creation of the Birds, 1957), the central figure (half-woman, half-owl) acts as a cosmic artist, channeling starlight into her creations. This image redefines creativity as a distinctly female, mystical power rather than a patriarchal privilege. Similarly, in La llamada (The Call, 1961), a robed woman strides through architectural ruins with flaming hair, embodying enlightenment and agency.  Domestic interiors, often coded in patriarchal society as sites of confinement, become in Varo’s hands spaces of experimentation and transformation. Kitchens, workshops, and bedrooms are transfigured into alchemical laboratories or portals to other worlds. By transforming the symbols of domesticity into metaphors of power, Varo blurred the boundary between the everyday and the magical, elevating women’s traditional spaces to arenas of liberation.
At the height of an era dominated by the great muralists, she created an inner universe that was meticulous and deeply intellectual. Her work serves as a bridge between science, alchemy, tarot, philosophy, botany, and astronomy.  
She was one of the first to place woman at the center of surrealism, not as a muse, but as a creator, scientist, and sorceress, demonstrating that art can be a laboratory for understanding the soul.
In 1956, Varo had her first major solo exhibition in Mexico City, and it catapulted her to the forefront of the art scene. She continued to exhibit widely thereafter.  


Remedios Varo. Armonía. 1956.

Her interest in bankers may be specifically tied to her Mexican context. The 1960s was a period of economic stability and growth in Mexico. She may have intended the bankers to be symbols of authority or social conformity, which the female character appears to avoid. Like many of her late works,Banqueros has an assertive, protofeminist charge and carry echoes of her own experience of migration and exile.


Banqueros en acción reveals Varo’s bold imagination and multidisciplinary study. 

Her  premature death of a heart attack  on 8 October 1963 at the  age  of  54  in  Mexico City occurred as she was reaching new renown.André Breton, https://teifidancer-teifidancer.blogspot.com/2016/09/andre-breton-1921896-28966.html who is considered the spiritual father figure of surrealism, paid tribute to her with the words: “The sorceress has left us too soon”.

 

Remedios Varo, "Bordando el manto terrestre" ("Embroidering the Earth's Mantle"), 1961

Eight years after her death, her 1971 retrospective at the Museo de Arte Moderno drew record crowds for the museum. The city she had arrived in as a refugee queued around the block for her.
Varo created roughly 400 works of art, over half of them drawings, which are now globally dispersed. Walter Gruen donated 38 significant artworks to the Museo de Arte Moderno in Mexico City. 
In 2023, Varo was the subject of the solo exhibition Remedios Varo: Science Fictions at the Art Institute of Chicago. In fall 2026, the Louisiana Museum of Modern Art in Denmark staged the first ever major solo museum exhibition in Europe dedicated to her work.    
Varo's work has been acquired by museums worldwide, including The Museum of Modern Art, New York; Art Institute of Chicago; Centre Pompidou, Paris; National Museum of Women in the Arts, Washington, D.C.; Museo Nacional Centro de Arte Reina Sofía, Madrid, Spain; Museum of Fine Arts, Boston; Detroit Institute of Arts, among others. She has had solo shows at the National Museum of Women in the Arts, Washington, D.C. (2000); Mexican Fine Arts Museum, Chicago, (2000); Museo de Arte Moderno, Mexico City (1971, 1983, 1994, 2001, 2016, 2018); and Museo de Arte Latinoamericano de Buenos Aires (Malba), Argentina (2020).     
Varo's work has been included in many group museum exhibitions, including Surrealism: Desire Unbound, Tate Modern Gallery, London, United Kingdom (2001); In Wonderland: The Surrealist Adventures of Women Artists in Mexico and the United States, Los Angeles County Museum of Art, California (2012); Exquisite Corpses: Drawing and Disfiguration, The Museum of Modern Art, New York (2012); Campo Cerrado: Spanish Art 1939-1953, Museo Nacional Centro de Arte Reina Sofía, Madrid, Spain (2016); The Moon: From Inner Worlds to Outer Space, Louisiana Museum of Art, Humlebaek, Denmark (2018); Fantastic Women: Surreal Worlds from Meret Oppenheim to Frida Kahlo, Schirn Kunsthalle Frankfurt, Germany (2020) and Louisiana Museum of Art, Humlebaek, Denmark (2020); Surrealism Beyond Borders, the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York (2021) and Tate Modern, London (2022); Surrealism and Magic: Enchanted Modernity, Peggy Guggenheim Collection, Venice, Italy (2022) and Museum Barberini, Potsdam, Germany (2022); and the 59th Venice Biennale, The Milk of Dreams (2022).
 Remedios Varo remains a fundamental figure in Surrealism and one of the most transcendent artists of the 20th century.Her legacy is that of the visionary as alchemist. She created a body of work that maps the spiritual journey not in abstraction, but in metaphor and image, tender, luminous, and filled with reverence for the hidden workings of the universe.
She is celebrated for her paintings that combine ideas of the occult, mysticism, psychoanalysis, astrology,alchemy, esotericism  and science. In her art, we are invited not just to observe, but to awaken.Her images blending nature with the built environment and feature characters and open-ended narratives that reflected her life and times. 63 years after her passing, lets remember her.


Wednesday, 7 October 2026

Remembering October 7 2023


Three years on, I remember the horrific events of October 7.The Hamas-led attack killed more than 1,200 people and saw 252 people abducted into Gaza. Those are facts that should not be forgotten. I  remember innocent lives lost, the families forever changed,lives shatterred and all those who continue to carry the pain of October 7.
What happened on 7 Oct shocked the world. The British Prime Minister, Rishi Sunak, flew to Tel Aviv to express support for Israel. He was not alone, a host of Western leaders came to stand by Israel against attack. 
But remembering October 7 should not become a justification for collective punishment or endless suffering. Israeli and Palestinian civilians have both paid an unbearable price. We should remember the victims, demand accountability for crimes committed by all sides. 
I remember  the wave of destruction in Gaza and the terrible suffering Palestinians have experienced since. Israel has killed and continues to kill hundreds of thousands more than they lost on Oct 7 (and lets not forget they killed some of their own that day as well, not to mention Bibi's refusal to do anything in response to warnings)  Israeli military intelligence sent Netanyahu several letters between March and July 2023, warning him of the dangers. On top of that, multiple foreign countries warned him—yet  he failed to  act.
During the October 7 assault, the Israeli army gave the Hannibal directive, instructing troops to kill Israelis in order to stop them being taken hostage. By the time the attack was over, at least 314 Israeli soldiers and 809 civilians were dead, with 252 taken hostage, with the intention of exchanging them for some of the 2500 Palestinian hostages held without charge in Israel.
Subsequently October 7 marked the beginning of a monstrous genocidal onslaught that has not yet ended. Since October 7, 2023, the terrible ongoing violence against innocent civilians in Gaza has resulted in the deaths of over 70,000 Palestinians mostly civilians. Supposedly in response to Hamas’s attacks, in the name of “self-defense”, the far-right extremist Israeli government did not take the time for reflection, mourning, or negotiations for the release of hostages. 
Instead, they immediately sought “revenge” as a cover for land theft, while collectively blaming and punishing the entire population of Gaza, including countless children, for Hamas’s actions. 
The corruption and brutality of this genocidal vengeance has been unprecedented, atrocious, tragic, and infuriating. Three years of children amputated without anaesthesia. Three years in which over 2,700 entire family lines have been wiped out in Gaza. Three years of annihilation. Three years of engineered starvation. 
Three years of cutting off clean drinking water. Three years of targeting healthcare, with 36 of Gaza’s hospitals either destroyed or no longer fully functional. Three years of missing loved ones, buried under the rubble of their own homes.
The ongoing incremental dispossession of the Palestinian people has reached a crescendo, where Palestinian civilians are being murdered while  being denigrated as “human animals”, “terrorists” or “terrorist supporters.”  This is not war. It is genocide.   
I also acknowledge Palestinians have lived through their own October 7s for decades.For decades, Palestinians in Gaza have lived through displacement, occupation, blockade, repeated Israeli aggressions, and the loss of thousands of lives.  
As we remember the third year of Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza, we must look beyond October 7 to the history that shaped the lives of Palestinians long before that day. I refuse to reduce this history to a single day or indulge in a one-sided account. If we talk about October 7 without talking about what happened in the years before it, we are missing important context. History did not begin that morning. There was already a long and painful history behind it.
I do though call today, and every day, for an end to the violence, for peace and safety for all. For me, remembering October 7 must mean holding on to our humanity and refusing to accept endless conflict as inevitable. Standing firmly against the dehumanization of innocent lives, regardless of nationality or political affiliation.Every person, regardless of their background, deserves freedom, opportunity, dignity, life, love, and nourishment.We must keep pushing for a future where all peoples can live with dignity, security and peace.

Monday, 5 October 2026

Zionism Is A Racist Ideology



The vote by the Green Party  on Sunday that was carried by 1,022 votes to 813 (55%–45%)  to .define Zionism as “a political ideology which called for the creation - and, now it exists, the continuation - of an ethnonationalist Jewish State in historic Palestine to the exclusion and/or domination of the non-Jewish population,” and states that this will be treated as any other form of racism. It commits the party to supporting “the establishment of a single democratic Palestinian State in all of historic Palestine with Jerusalem as its capital, equal rights for all, and the right of return for Palestinians and their descendants.” 
This happened on the 90th anniversary of the great anti-fascist victory at the Battle of Cable Street, making the symbolism significant. This historicaly makes it the first major party in the UK to recognise Zionism as a form of racism. Green Party leader Zack Polanski, who is Jewish, was immediately banned by the Israeli government from entering the nation after the motion was passed. 
As Israel lashes out against this I  personally beleive that the Green Party was right to vote the way  it did. Saying "Zionism is racism" cannot be racist because Zionism is not a race it is a political ideology, not a synonym for Judaism or Jewish identity and criticising it is not antisemitism. I have never been incidentally antisemitic in my life. It's as abhorrent as is all discrimination.
This is another important policy position the Green Party has adopted. For decades, the support for a non-existent two-state solution has been used as a bogus cover for Palestinian self-determination by politicians who, in reality, support Jewish supremacy and have granted Zionist Israel the time to achieve its goals. 
Even now, politicians and Zionists parrot this bogus commitment to equality, whilst a genocide of Palestinians has taken place and an annexation of Gaza and the West Bank is in process.  
A one-state solution does not deny the right to Jewish self-determination. Even this is a racist argument to make. 
It is a denial of the right of Jewish supremacists alone to determine what the state in the Holy Land should be. It says that all people Palestinian Muslims, Christians, and non-Zionist Jews, religious or non-religiou- should determine the future of that state as equal citizens.
Outrage at the UK Green party's new policy on Zionism equating with racism ignores the fact that that position had international support 51 years ago. In 1975, Resolution 3379 the UN General Assembly linked Zionism and the State of Israel to racism and racial discrimination. The UN overturned its resolution 16 years later, in 1991, under intense US pressure and after Israel refused to engage in peace talks unless it was revoked.
Since then, Zionism has shown not only that it is a racist political ideology but that it's a genocidal one too, like any ideology, it should be open to scrutiny, criticism and debate.  Yet watching much of the British media class climb over themselves to protect it from scrutiny has been extraordinary The sheer panic over simply putting Zionism under the microscope says a lot.
Historically before the establishment of Israel, Palestine was a society of multiple communities, religions and ethnic backgrounds. Muslims, Christians and Jews lived there. It was not an empty land waiting for an ethnically defined state. 
It was Zionism that recast Jewish identity as a homogenized national identity, disrupted centuries of coexistence, and projected the hostility generated by colonization onto the colonized.
The fundamental question is simple: how do you create and maintain a state built around the political and demographic primacy of one people in a land shared by others, without dispossession, displacement and unequal rights? Palestinian history tells us exactly what that has meant. No people has the right to secure its self-determination by denying it to another. 
The birth of “Political Zionism” is often dated to the 1896 publication of playwright and journalist Theodore Herzl’s Der Judenstaat (“The Jewish State”). In his pamphlet, he argued that the establishment of a modern, European homeland for Jews would provide a refuge for a persecuted people and prevent competition with non-Jews. 
Antisemitism would disappear and Jews would be able to ‘live at last as free men on our own soil’. In the years following the publication of The Jewish State, Argentina and east Africa would both be mooted as possible locations for the new homeland, but these territories lacked the draw of the Holy Land. Palestine – ‘our ever-memorable historic home’ – was the dream.  
Herzl’s vision was not accepted by all. The eastern European intellectual Ahad Ha’am, whose Zionism focused on renewing Judaism rather than fighting antisemitism, castigated Herzl for what he described as his ‘mechanical mimicry’ of Europe. Ha’am viewed Herzlian Zionism as just another form of assimilation, typical of western European Jews who knew little about their ancestors’ faith. He was more interested in establishing a country that was uniquely Jewish rather than a European-style state for Jews.  
Palestinian Arabs were, unsurprisingly, not supportive. In 1899 the mayor of Jerusalem, Yusuf Diya al-Din Pasha al-Khalidi, told Herzl that it was ‘pure folly’ to attempt to establish a Jewish country in Palestine because it was ‘inhabited by others’. 
Herzl, who viewed non-Europeans as backward (in The Jewish State he envisions the Jewish homeland as ‘a rampart of Europe against Asia, an outpost of civilisation as opposed to barbarism’), reassured the mayor that Zionism would benefit all Palestinians: ‘No one can doubt that the well-being of the entire country would be the happy result.’ Despite the opposition, Herzl ploughed on, conscious of the ever-growing threat to European Jewry.
One year after the publication of The Jewish State, Herzl convened the First Zionist Congress in Basel and established the World Zionist Organization (WZO). ‘Zionism seeks to establish a home for the Jewish people in Eretz Israel secured under public law’, declared the WZO. Zionism was now an organised movement subsequently, several waves of Jewish immigration to Palestine succeeded in creating a societal infrastructure of settlements there.
The Zionist movement emphasized its ideology as a response to antisemitic persecution against Jews across Europe. However Zionism expanded into a settler colonialist ideology that put the interests of a predominantly European religious group over the those of a multitude of people who had been living in Palestine for 1000s of years. The Zionist movement ultimately settled on Palestine for its nation-state project.Enabled by what the pre-eminent Palestinian historian Walid Khalidi termed “the British shield”, its project met with success in 1948 with the establishment of the Israeli state. It has resulted in 80 years of horror.
 Zionism is the political ideology that the state of Israel was founded on. It claims Jewish safety requires a “Jewish nation-state,” where the rights of Jews are privileged over others; a place of Jewish supremacy. In order to create a Jewish state on land that Palestinians had lived in for millenia., 
Zionism’s founders publicly embraced an explicitly colonial ideology: using ethnic cleansing, apartheid, and genocide to ensure their goal of “maximum land, minimum Palestinians.” 
Since the founding of the state of Israel in 1948, the Israeli government has used Zionism to justify massacring Palestinians, destroying villages, enforcing apartheid, running a military occupation that separates families with checkpoints and walls, enabling progroms by Jewish settlers, and the ongoing genocide of Palestinians in Gaza. 
Israel could not have been established as a Jewish state without the mass dispossession and expulsion of the Arabs of Palestine, and the wholesale usurpation of their lands and properties. Israel could not have developed as a Zionist state without the systematic application of structural racism against its non-Jewish citizens and the enforcement of apartheid regimes against Arab populations beyond its initial boundaries that would come under its control in subsequent decades.  
Crucially, the exact same pattern would have been implemented, by design, if the Zionist movement had opted for Uganda, Libya, or any other territory under its consideration instead of Palestine. It is this which distinguishes Zionism from most other nationalisms.
Zionism is the ideology that led to, and justified, the Nakba, the occupation, the apartheid, and the Gaza genocide which  is  ongoing.  A political system that gives one ethnic group supremacy over another is, by definition, racist.
Zionism means nonstop apartheid, ethnic cleansing, war, genocide, and abuse. And worse, Zionists think that they have the right to impose all that because they are "special". 
Even worse, the US, UK, Canada, Australia and many other countries do not step in to stop any of this behaviour. In fact, many send arms to Israel. It seems that the lives of some do not matter when there is a profit to be made.
Since its inception, Zionism has always been inherently racist and genocidal. The Israeli government, and the institutions that defend it, want us to think Zionism protects against antisemitism, and that to be Jewish is to be Zionist. None of that is true. 
As long as Zionism has existed, there were Jews standing in opposition to it. They rejected the idea that Jewish freedom from antisemitism is secured through a militarized apartheid state, or the power to oppress others. Instead, they built thriving communities across the world, deeply connected to their neighbors and Jewish traditions.
Many anti-Zionist Jews have visited Gaza over the years and have not only not been murdered, but feted for their courage. Many of the most consistent voices in support of the Palestinian cause have been Jews. To name a few: Norman Finkelstein, Medea Benjamin, Ilan Pappé, Avi Shlaim, Tony Greenstein, Gideon Levy, Gabor Maté, Alexei Sayle, Benjamin Moser and Max Blumenthal. I could go on.
In this following piece from a  few  years ago Ali Abunimah explains the true meaning of Zionism in a nutshell https://electronicintifada.net/blogs/asa-winstanley/why-zionism-racism .
There's no humane version of an ideology built on death, colonialism, destruction and supremacy. There is no non-racist Zionism. Zionism is racism. Period. End of story.

Sunday, 4 October 2026

Celebrating the 90th Anniversary of The Battle of Cable Street

 


                                Detail from Cable Street Mural

 I have made a point of annually remembering that on this day 4th October, 1936, the histotric Battle of Cable Street when Oswald Mosley's British Union of Fascists attempted to march through the predominately Jewish section of East London, their goal was to intimidate the local Jewish population and promote their racist and fascist ideology. Instead  thousands of local people organised by trade unionists and community groups put up barricades and turned out in large numbers to stop the march. 
This became known as the “Battle of Cable Street”. in which the people of the East End inflicted a massive defeat on  Mosley’s British Union of Fascists that must never be forgotten. 
During this time Britain was facing very serious economic problems,  with a climate of mass unemployment and economic depression, and far right forces were intent on using this in order to exploit division and stir up hate. Oswald Mosley, a former member of Parliament known for his public speaking skills, founded the BUF in 1932, and within two years membership had grown to 50,000. Mosley's  fascists held vile anti-semitic views and tried to blame Jews for the cause of the country's problems. Throughout the mid 1930s, the BUF moved closer towards Hitler’s form of fascism with Mosley himself saying that “fascism can and will win in Britain”. 
The British fascists took on a more vehemently anti-Semitic stance, describing Jews as “rats and vermin from whitechapel” and tried to blame Jews for the cause of the country's problems. Mosley’s blackshirts had been harassing the sizeable Jewish population in the East End all through the 1930s. By 1936 anti-semitic assaults by fascists were growing and windows of Jewish-owned businesses were routinely smashed. Hurrah for the Blackshirts!’ 
The notorious Daily Mail headline is just one chilling indication of the very real threat Oswald Mosley’s British Union of Fascists posed in the mid 1930s.

  
 As the fascist movement developed, so too did opposition to it. Led by Communists, socialists and trade unionists the anti-fascist movement grew, supported also by Liberals and some anti-fascist Tories.
However, those who interrupted fascist meetings found themselves dealing with unprecedented violence from Blackshirt thugs.
The notorious Olympia meeting of 7 June 1934 came to symbolise Blackshirt thuggery. After the Daily Worker posted the location of the West London meeting, a number of anti-fascists attended, intending to disrupt the meeting.
Hecklers were beaten by gangs of Blackshirts armed with knuckledusters and other weapons and thrown into the street. The BUF was roundly condemned by the mainstream and the violence of the meeting effectively ended Mosley’s pretence of respectability.https://teifidancer-teifidancer.blogspot.com/2026/09/olympia-1934-blackshirts-first-mass.html
Whilst the first Jews came to Britain following the Norman Conquest of 1066, the Jewish community of London’s East End mainly comprised of families that had arrived between 1881 and 1914.
Many of these families settled in England after fleeing antisemitism and murderous pogroms in Russia, Poland and many other Eastern European countries. They followed previous waves of immigration that had brought Huguenots, Irish and other smaller groups into the area.
By the 1930s some 183,000 Jews lived in London, the majority in the East End due to cheaper rents. Stepney was home to some 60,000 Jews and the heart of Jewish East London.
With its reputation in tatters following Olympia and increasingly under the influence of Hitler, BUF leaders sought to exploit the reservoir of antisemitism in the East End in order to save the party.
By 1936 the BUF was pouring most of its resources into holding meetings in the East End and distributing crude antisemitica. Mob orators such as Mick Clarke and Owen Burke sought to whip up violence on street corners night after night.
As this approach gradually gained support in poor neighbouring areas such as Bethnal Green, Mosley announced he would celebrate the fourth birthday of the BUF by staging a provocative march through Stepney, the heart of the Jewish East End, on 4 October, 1936, following months of BUF meetings and leafleting in the area designed to intimidate Jewish people and break up the East End’s community solidarity. 
The British fascists' parade aimed to emulate Mussolini's fascist march in Rome in 1922 and that of the Nazi brownshirts in Germany, as a symbol for them of fascism's seizure of power in the United Kingdom.
Political leaders in the East End then petitioned the Home Secretary Sir John Simon to ban the march; however, their request was denied. On 2nd October, the Jewish People’s Council presented a second petition with 100,000 signatures to request that the march be banned on the grounds that the “avowed object of the Fascist movement in Great Britain is the incitement of malice and hatred against sections of the population.”   
Despite these efforts, the British government allowed the march to proceed as planned and assigned 7,000 members of the police force to accompany it.  But the East End was having none of it. Jewish communists persuaded their comrades that this must be fought. The Irish dockers who lived among Jews in this deprived area, were willing to help. Fascists were no friend to the Irish immigrants,
 They were  not welcomed and were met by protestors, waving banners with slogans such as 'They shall not Pass'( no pasaron, echoing the International Brigade’s famous republican slogan  against the fascists in the Spanish Civil War. ) , 'No Nazis here' and 'East End Unite.'  A huge force had assembled prepared to defend their streets and neighbourhoods and their right to live in them. 
Even though uniformed policemen on horseback were employed to allow Mosley's march to pass through, anti-fascists blocked the route by barricading the street with rows of domestic furniture and the police were attacked with eggs, rotten fruit and the contents of peoples chamber pots. Local kids rolled marbles under police horses hooves. 
Eventually, after more than 12 hours of nonstop riots, the antifascists succeeded in preventing the Nazi parade through the neighborhood; the British führer Oswald Mosley, who was parading in a convertible like Hitler through central London, was warned by the police that he had to end the Nazi parade because they could not protect him from the antifascists and the police ordered the fascists to disperse, .  
The pitched battle was such that they had to set up a medical aid station to treat the wounded from the fight; about 150 demonstrators were arrested, the vast majority antifascists, and 175 people were injured, including women and children, due to the British police's repression in Cable Street and its surroundings, in their fanaticism to protect the Nazis' parade.  
Cable Street  is  now rightly remembered because it saw thousands of people, from many walks of life, women, children, local jews, Irish groups, communists, socialists, anarchists standing firm as one in an incredible display of unity who worked together to prevent Mosley's fascists from marching through a Jewish area in London. 
Remembering too the support of the Jewish community in the dock strikes of 1912, Irish dockers stood in solidarity with Jews against the fascists, ripping up paving stones with pickaxes handles to add to the barricades. Together, they won a famous victory and put the skids under Britain’s first fascist mass movement. The  fascists did not get to march and they did not pass, and were left in humiliation so today we look back on this living history in celebration and pride.   
Two days after the battle, Mosely was in Berlin to marry Diana Mitford. She was one of the celebrity Mitford sisters: six aristocratic socialites who made headlines for their controversial political views, including Diana’s overt fascism. She and Mosley were wed in the home of Nazi propaganda minister, Joseph Goebbels, no less, with Adolf Hitler as the couple’s guest of honour. 
Then, in early 1937, the Public Order Act came into force. Among its stipulations was the prohibition of political uniforms, such as the black shirts worn by the BUF. British fascists had been humiliated by the battle of Cable Street, although the BUF membership actually rose slightly in the weeks afterwards, and despite continued provocations and canvassing their political fortunes waned. 
But when the threat of conflict with Nazi Germany became more likely, and then inevitable, the BUF were done. Following the outbreak of the Second World War in September 1939, the Blackshirts were seen as a potential ‘fifth column’ aiding the Nazis from within Britain. 
By July 1940, the BUF was declared unlawful and banned. Mosley advocated for peace terms with the Third Reich. This went nowhere, and barely two weeks after Winston Churchill became prime minister in May 1940, Mosley was interned under Defence Regulation 18B. This authorised the British government to detain those suspected of undermining the nation’s war effort without trial.
 Hundreds of fascists met the same fate as Mosley, among them his wife Diana, a fanatical supporter of the Nazis. She was incarcerated 11 weeks after giving birth to their second son, Max, and the couple spent much of the war behind bars at Holloway Prison. 
After the war, Mosley attempted to revive his political career and the fascist cause through the Union Movement, which replaced a need of country-based nationalism with a European nationalism. Mosley’s new party remained extremely antisemitic, denying the atrocities of the Holocaust, but it was unsuccessful. He eventually resettled outside Paris and died in 1980, aged 84.
The anti-fascist message taken up by tens of thousands of people against Mosley and his Blackshirts stands as a significant moment in the history of Britain between the two world wars. It continues to serve as a touchstone for all those united in the struggle against racism to this day.
Significantly, for some people that were involved in the protest, Cable Street was the road to Spain, and many would go on to volunteer as soldiers for the Republicans there. The legend that was Cable Street became the lasting inspiration for the continuing British fight against the fascism that was spreading all across Europe and would eventually engulf the planet in a terrible world war, the event also launched movements for tenant rights, against economic injustice, and in defense of immigrants.
The surge in support for Mosley immediately after Cable Street helped convince many, including Communist Party organiser Phil Piratin, that to defeat the BUF they had to tackle the genuine socio-economic grievances exploited by Mosley within the East End rather than simply meet it with physical force.  
Working with a network of tenants committees before forming the Stepney Tenants Defence League (STDL), Piratin and colleagues tackled the high rents charged by slum landlords for substandard accommodation. The STDL orchestrated rent strikes aimed at bringing landlords to the negotiating table, winning vital concessions and rent reductions for beleaguered tenants.  
Although the STDL was organised by Communists – many of whom were Jewish – they also saved fascist tenants from eviction. The STDL soon extended its work into the heart of the “fascist” East End, particularly areas such as Duckett Street, Stepney. The BUF had done nothing for them. 
As a result BUF cards were torn up in disgust. By helping local people overcome their problems and helping them to understand that these were not caused by “Jews” or “immigrants” the STDL proved that it is unity, rather than division, which enables communities to overcome its social deprivation.
The same East End  community  also rallied around their German neighbours facing reprisals during the second world war and in the 1970s and 1980s they helped defend the local Bangladeshi communities against attacks from the National Front. Today, local communities in the east end organise support for refugees fleeing persecution from all over the world.
Commissioned in 1976 by the Tower Hamlets Arts Project, the artist Dave Binnington drawing inspiration from Spanish muralists and Picasso’s Guernica. Binnington after interviewing many local characters and includong them in the design, started painting a large mural commemorating the battle on the side wall of St George's Town Hall.  In 1982, the still uncompleted mural was vandalised with right-wing slogans, after which Binnington abandoned the project in disgust.  It was subsequently finished by Paul Butler, Ray Walker and Desmond Rochfort, and officially unveiled in 1983.  It has subsequently been vandalised, and repainted, several times. 
The mural depicts the events  of a very physical confrontation  between police and protestors  in stunning detail, anti-fascist protestors proudly carrying banners, punches being thrown, a barricade of furniture and an overturned vehicle across Cable Street manned by residents of all ages and ethnic backgrounds, a chamber pot being thrown under the hooves of horses being ridden  by baton-wielding police, and fascist  with a startling resemblance  to Adolf Hitler, looking very alarmed in just his underwear and socks. The mural stands today as a  proud powerful symbol of anti-fascism in the East End.
 

There is much to learn from the Battle of Cable Street about the power that individuals and groups wield in the face of intolerant policies and behaviours when they unite against racism and discrimination. Hopefully by engaging with this history, we can think critically about the choices made by the East End community and its allies in 1936 and then consider choices available to us as agents of change in the face of prejudice and discrimination in our society  and communities today.
The Battle of Cable Street is deservedly famous as a crucial moment in the struggle against fascism in Britain.  The 90th anniversary  today is an opportunity to learn more about the history of that struggle and the wide range of tactics that it used
Cable Street matters because it wasn’t some abstract debate about extremism. It was ordinary people refusing to let fascists intimidate their neighbours.  
Today trade unions and community groups will mark the anniversary with a march from Whitechapel to St George’s Gardens. The TUC says the anniversary is not just about heritage, but about organising against racism and the politics of division today.
Ninety years on, the lessons of the antifascist battle of Cable Street have never felt more relevant.  remembered as a crucial moment in the struggle against fascism in Britain. Lessons and inspiration from the past help us in the fight for a fair society. Cable Street matters because it wasn’t some abstract debate about extremism. It was ordinary people refusing to let fascists intimidate their neighbours.
In 2026, the politics of division, anti-semitism, racism and intolerance and hate is on the march again. As far right and fascist groups try to grow again. We have to organise to stop them. 
Their political vision is impossible to implement without violence and they know this. These are people who are calling for the forced deportation of millions of people who were born here in the UK.
A violent act that would tear families apart, and destroy the very social fabric of some communities that have lived in the UK for generations. 
They view “freedom of speech” as a tool to bolster their platform, yet they “dox” and ruin the lives of those who speak against their violent agenda. They view many of our countrymen as less human than they are because they are a different shade to they.
If you think that by simply ignoring their   dangerous, dystopian, violent policy plans and vision of the future then you are either one of them - a fascist yourself - or someone who has an extremely poor understanding of who these people are and what they will do to the people around you. Should they be left to spread their cancerous views unopposed, I  dont think so.   
Reflecting on the conditions that facilitated the rise of fascism in the 1920s and 1930s in his 1945 book, The Open Society and Its Enemies  Karl Popper argued that if a society is tolerant without limits, its ability to remain tolerant will eventually be seized and destroyed by the intolerant and to keep a tolerant society safe, that society must keep the right to not tolerate intolerant ideas. 
These words are as relevant as ever. There is no reason why we should tolerate the intolerant. The Battle of cable street saw our communities stand together and in one voice said no  to  this. We need to remember and recommit to these principles as standard. 
Today and tomorrow we must still rally around the cry of No Pasaran - They shall not pass. They didn’t pass in 1936. They will not pass in 2026.


W.H. Davies ( 3/7/1871 - 26/9/40 ) The Battle for Cable Street.

You ask me how I got like this, Sir
Well, I don't care to say
But I will tell you a little story
Of when I was in a big fray.

I'm not very well in my old age
And as I sits drinking my broth
My mind goes back to 1936
That Sunday,Otober the fourth.

I was walking down Bethnal Green Road, Sir
just walking about at my ease
When the strains of a famous old song, Sir
Came floating to me on the breeze.

I stoppe, I looked and listened
Now where have I heard that old song?
Then I dashed to the Salmon and Ball, Sir
I know I wouldn't go wrong.

It was the Intenationale they were singing
They were singing it with a defiant blast
And holding up a big banner
With these words: " THEY SHALL NOT PASS"

And we then marched on to the East End
They were five thousand of us , I am sure
And when we got to the Aldgate
We were met by three hundred thousand more.

'Red Front! Red Front! these workers cried
It was a sight I wouldn't have missed
To see these thousands of defiant workers
Holding up their Mighty Clenched Fist.

The police said 'Now move along please,
This is all we ask'
But we said 'No, not for those blackshirts
Those rotters THEY SHALL NOT PASS'

We then marched on to Stepney Green Sir
You could see that this fight was no sham
For there were thousands of and thousands of workers
Marching from Limehouse,Poplar, Stratford and East Ham.

You could see that Mosely wouldn't get through Sir
That our slogan that day was no boast
And I shouted 'Hip Hip hurrah'
And I saw our flag being tied to a lamp post

the children shouted from the windows "O, golly"
For Mosley, no one seemed sorry
But someone had the goodness
To lend us their two ton lorry

We got it over on its side Sir
It wasn't much of a strain
But the police kept knocking our barricade down
So we built the damn thing up again.

The police said we worked mighty fast
As with a hanky their faces they mopped
So we got out our big red banner
And stuck it right on the top.

The police then charged with their truncheons
They charged us, the working class
But they couldn't pinch our red banner
With these words THEY SHALL NOT PASS

I wish you had been there to see it
You would have said it was a ruddy fine feat
How we kept that old Red Flag flying
On those barricades of Cable Street.

So this is the end of my story
And I must get back to my broth
But I hope you will never forget Sir
It was Sunday October the fourth. 

 


Video Ghosts of Cable Street, set to the music of Men they couldn't hang


Cable Street - The Young 'Uns



On the fourth of October 1936
I was only a lad of sixteen.
But I stood beside men
Who were threescore and ten
And every age in between.

We were dockers and teachers,
Busmen, engineers,
And those with no jobs to do.
We were women and children
Equal in union — atheists, Christians, and Jews.

And we had so much to lose.

For with Hitler in Germany, Franco in Spain,
We knew what fascism meant.
So when Mosley came trouncing,
Denouncing the Jews,
To the East End of London we went.

For I’d met refugees, who had fled o’er the seas,
Germans, Italians, and Jews.
And I knew their despair
For what they’d seen there
And I couldn’t let them be abused.

We had so much to lose.

Now 3,000 fascists — their uniforms black —
Had set out to march on that day.
And 6,000 policemen
Intended to greet them
By making clear the way.

But we were there ready —
Our nerves they were steady —
One hundred thousand en masse.
And we planted our feet along Cable Street
And we sang: They shall not pass!

We sang: They shall not pass!

Then all us young lads,
We were sent to the side streets
To stop the police breaking through.
And with swift hands we made strong barricades
Out of anything we could use.

And they came to charge us,
But they couldn’t barge us,
With fists, batons, and hooves.
With as good as we got, we withstood the lot,
For we would not be moved.

We would not be moved.

And, yes, there was violence.
And, yes, there was blood.
And I saw things a lad shouldn’t see.
But I’ll not regret the day I stood
And London stood with me.

And when the news spread the day had been won
And Mosley was limping away —
There were shouts, there were cheers,
There were songs, there were tears,
And I hear them all to this day.

And we all swore then we’d stand up again
For as long as our legs could
And that when we were gone,
Our daughters and sons
Would stand where we stood.

Was the first time I’d heard two tiny words
Said by every woman and man.
Now I say them still
And I always will:
¡NO PASARÁN!

Lyrics and music  by Sean Conney