Early British capitalism and its fear of organised workers.
The Combination Acts of 1799 and 1800 made it illegal for workers to “combine” (early roots of workers unions) to raise wages, reduce hours, or improve their working conditions. Essentially, the capitalist class criminalised trade unions before they properly existed. Left to be trialed by local magistrates, who mostly were industry owners or landlords, could convict and jail workers for collective bargaining. The mere whiff of workers organisation alone was enough for local magistrates to reach for the gavel.
These acts were introduced during the wars with revolutionary France, at a time when the British ruling class feared unrest at home. The French Revolution had made “Jacobinism” shorthand for subversion. At the same time, early industrial capitalism was expanding and this new class of proletariat were beginning to organise strikes and mutual trade societies. For the state, industrial combination and political radicalism were treated as the same threat.
The Acts were significant because they helped stabilise British capitalism in its formative industrial phase. The factory system depended on a disciplined, wage-dependent workforce, the proletariat. Profits came from the subjugation of the workers, on keeping wages down and production uninterrupted. By criminalising collective bargaining and streamlining prosecutions through employer-aligned magistrates, the state ensured that labour remained fragmented while capital could organise freely. With the English revolution giving this other new class, the bourgeoisie, the ability to create laws that secured the conditions necessary for capital accumulation.
A Repeal came in 1824 after sustained pressure, but a strike wave followed and the capitalists reimposed restrictions in 1825, limiting picketing and collective pressure while offering the concession of the ability to unionise to the workers, it was tightly managed. The objective was not freedom of association; it was containment and control. Allowing the workers the belief they had a say, then imprisonment when they did.
From a class perspective, the Combination Acts expose the class character of the state in early British capitalism. The state did not stand above society as a neutral arbiter. It intervened directly to defend property relations and suppress the growing class consciousness within the proletariat.
The issue was not abstract “public order” but control of labour in a system built on exploitation.
The Class Consciousness Project
The Combination Acts of 1799 and 1800 made it illegal for workers to “combine” (early roots of workers unions) to raise wages, reduce hours, or improve their working conditions. Essentially, the capitalist class criminalised trade unions before they properly existed. Left to be trialed by local magistrates, who mostly were industry owners or landlords, could convict and jail workers for collective bargaining. The mere whiff of workers organisation alone was enough for local magistrates to reach for the gavel.
These acts were introduced during the wars with revolutionary France, at a time when the British ruling class feared unrest at home. The French Revolution had made “Jacobinism” shorthand for subversion. At the same time, early industrial capitalism was expanding and this new class of proletariat were beginning to organise strikes and mutual trade societies. For the state, industrial combination and political radicalism were treated as the same threat.
The Acts were significant because they helped stabilise British capitalism in its formative industrial phase. The factory system depended on a disciplined, wage-dependent workforce, the proletariat. Profits came from the subjugation of the workers, on keeping wages down and production uninterrupted. By criminalising collective bargaining and streamlining prosecutions through employer-aligned magistrates, the state ensured that labour remained fragmented while capital could organise freely. With the English revolution giving this other new class, the bourgeoisie, the ability to create laws that secured the conditions necessary for capital accumulation.
A Repeal came in 1824 after sustained pressure, but a strike wave followed and the capitalists reimposed restrictions in 1825, limiting picketing and collective pressure while offering the concession of the ability to unionise to the workers, it was tightly managed. The objective was not freedom of association; it was containment and control. Allowing the workers the belief they had a say, then imprisonment when they did.
From a class perspective, the Combination Acts expose the class character of the state in early British capitalism. The state did not stand above society as a neutral arbiter. It intervened directly to defend property relations and suppress the growing class consciousness within the proletariat.
The issue was not abstract “public order” but control of labour in a system built on exploitation.
The Class Consciousness Project
Forwarded from Red Rick
“Liberalism is a manifestation of opportunism and conflicts fundamentally with Marxism. It is negative and objectively has the effect of helping the enemy; that is why the enemy welcomes its preservation in our midst. Such being its nature, there should be no place for it in the ranks of the revolution.
We must use Marxism, which is positive in spirit, to overcome liberalism, which is negative. A communist should have largeness of mind and he should be staunch and active, looking upon the interests of the revolution as his very life and subordinating his personal interests to those of the revolution; always and everywhere he should adhere to principle and wage a tireless struggle against all incorrect ideas and actions, so as to consolidate the collective life of the Party and strengthen the ties between the Party and the masses; he should be more concerned about the Party and the masses than about any private person, and more concerned about others than about himself. Only thus can he be considered a communist.”
Mao Zedong, Combat Liberalism
🔥6
Here’s a clip of Liverpool legend John Barnes. A brilliant footballer in his day and always thoughtful when he speaks.
If you’re into football it’s an enjoyable listen. If not, it’s still worth hearing his take on the British working class and racism in the game.
https://youtu.be/y5i0RAonTVs?si=Sl9Plg9mmswPCnwM
If you’re into football it’s an enjoyable listen. If not, it’s still worth hearing his take on the British working class and racism in the game.
https://youtu.be/y5i0RAonTVs?si=Sl9Plg9mmswPCnwM
YouTube
John Barnes: Liverpool Legend, Battles with United & Tackling Racism | Stick to Football EP 112
Welcome back to Stick to Football, brought to you by ARNE.
Gary Neville, Jamie Carragher, Roy Keane, Jill Scott and Ian Wright are joined by John Barnes to reflect on a remarkable career and life in the game.
Barnes looks back on his early years and pathway…
Gary Neville, Jamie Carragher, Roy Keane, Jill Scott and Ian Wright are joined by John Barnes to reflect on a remarkable career and life in the game.
Barnes looks back on his early years and pathway…
Forwarded from Red Rick
"The thinking worker knows that the most dangerous of advisers are those liberal friends of the workers who claim to be defending their interests, but are actually trying to destroy the class independence of the proletariat and its organisation. It is therefore our bounden duty to open the workers’ eyes to the manner in which the liquidators are destroying the organisation…"
Lenin, The Liberals’ Corruption of the Workers.
👍4🔥2👌1😴1
Dirty tricks by Reform.
These types of incidents aren't new. Labour has done it for years.
https://manchestermill.co.uk/exclusive-reform-uk-just-broke-electoral-law-in-gorton-denton/
These types of incidents aren't new. Labour has done it for years.
https://manchestermill.co.uk/exclusive-reform-uk-just-broke-electoral-law-in-gorton-denton/
The Mill
Exclusive: Reform UK just broke electoral law in Gorton and Denton
People across the constituency thought they were getting a letter from a concerned pensioner, they didn’t know she was working for Reform
One of our most popular articles of last year. It was popular for a reason, because the idea of a British “Stolovaya” is something all workers could get behind.
People are waking up to how bad our food is under a capitalist system and how much we are being ripped off for it.
Once upon a time, British workers would have subsidised meals within certain industries; now even that has been exchanged for vending machines.
Imagine finishing work and, instead of having to attempt to put together a decent meal with what you've been able to afford that week, you can go to a dining room serving hot, nutritional food for a pittance, if not free!
Capitalism has no interest in the workers' health. Just keep them alive enough to work for a while and create new workers before ill health takes them from the workplace.
A planned economy would bring food security for all workers without the need to argue for it with the capitalists in parliament.
https://classconsciousnessproject.blog/2025/09/02/why-we-need-a-national-network-of-british-stolovayas/
People are waking up to how bad our food is under a capitalist system and how much we are being ripped off for it.
Once upon a time, British workers would have subsidised meals within certain industries; now even that has been exchanged for vending machines.
Imagine finishing work and, instead of having to attempt to put together a decent meal with what you've been able to afford that week, you can go to a dining room serving hot, nutritional food for a pittance, if not free!
Capitalism has no interest in the workers' health. Just keep them alive enough to work for a while and create new workers before ill health takes them from the workplace.
A planned economy would bring food security for all workers without the need to argue for it with the capitalists in parliament.
https://classconsciousnessproject.blog/2025/09/02/why-we-need-a-national-network-of-british-stolovayas/
Class Consciousness Project
Why We Need a National Network of British Stolovayas
I was inspired to write this after re-reading the excellent article written by comrade Chris, Cultural Capitalism. It set me thinking about the cultural dimension of ruling class manipulation, a si…
🔥6
In our latest article Comrade Luke examines the hyperalienated world of dating sites and the most basic human relations have been commodified.
http://classconsciousnessproject.blog/2026/02/13/dating-applications-and-the-commodification-of-intimacy/
http://classconsciousnessproject.blog/2026/02/13/dating-applications-and-the-commodification-of-intimacy/
Class Consciousness Project
Dating Applications and the Commodification of Intimacy
Alienation has reached new heights under late capitalism The romantic connection between men and women is the basis for our continuation as a species. It is such a fundamental part of the human con…
🥴1
The hypocrisy of Manchester United Co-Owner Sir Jim Ratcliffe.
His comments in a recent interview how he believes Britain cannot sustain high levels of immigration while so many people are claiming benefits, as if those two realities exist in a vacuum.
As though unemployment, low wages and precarious work simply happen and aren't all symptoms of imperialism
Sir Jim is a billionaire who relocated to Monaco in 2018, keeping his fortune beyond the reach of British income tax. When capital crosses borders to protect wealth, it is called efficiency. When workers cross borders to survive, it is called a crisis.
Ratcliffe’s company, INEOS, operates across continents. Its profits rely on global supply chains, international labour markets and cross-border trade. The modern petrochemical industry is not nationalist. Like all modern corporations it is a global initiative. Imperialism moving capital is not a problem when they generate profit for the likes of Jim Radcliffe.
Yet at Manchester United, hundreds of staff have faced redundancy under his ownership while the club continues to operate in a global marketplace, signing players from around the world, selling merchandise across continents and drawing revenue from international broadcasting rights.
The movement of labour and international relations are not an issue when billionaires benefit from it.
The suggestion that immigration and benefits are somehow causally linked is a familiar political narrative. It shifts attention away from the structural reality: deindustrialisation, weakened trade unions, privatisation of public assets, housing speculation, and decades of underinvestment in working-class communities.
- Immigration did not dismantle council housing.
- Immigration did not outsource industry.
- Immigration did not suppress wages, employers did.
When wages stagnate, when housing is scarce, when public services are strained, it is easier to blame the immigrants than the capitalist.
Under imperialism:
- Capital becomes concentrated in monopolies that dominate entire industries.
- Bank capital and industrial capital fuse into finance capital, forming a financial oligarchy.
- Capital is exported abroad in search of higher profits.
- The world’s markets and resources are divided among the major powers and their corporations.
That’s the mechanism.
Everything else — dependency, instability, migration, rivalry — flows from that structure.
But the movement of labour is framed as a threat as divided workers are easier to oppress than organised ones.
If there are too many people on benefits, the question is not why migrants arrive. The question is why a country as wealthy as Britain produces insecure work, poverty pay and chronic underemployment in the first place — while billionaires hide their wealth in safe haven's like Monaco.
The Class Consciousness Project
His comments in a recent interview how he believes Britain cannot sustain high levels of immigration while so many people are claiming benefits, as if those two realities exist in a vacuum.
As though unemployment, low wages and precarious work simply happen and aren't all symptoms of imperialism
Sir Jim is a billionaire who relocated to Monaco in 2018, keeping his fortune beyond the reach of British income tax. When capital crosses borders to protect wealth, it is called efficiency. When workers cross borders to survive, it is called a crisis.
Ratcliffe’s company, INEOS, operates across continents. Its profits rely on global supply chains, international labour markets and cross-border trade. The modern petrochemical industry is not nationalist. Like all modern corporations it is a global initiative. Imperialism moving capital is not a problem when they generate profit for the likes of Jim Radcliffe.
Yet at Manchester United, hundreds of staff have faced redundancy under his ownership while the club continues to operate in a global marketplace, signing players from around the world, selling merchandise across continents and drawing revenue from international broadcasting rights.
The movement of labour and international relations are not an issue when billionaires benefit from it.
The suggestion that immigration and benefits are somehow causally linked is a familiar political narrative. It shifts attention away from the structural reality: deindustrialisation, weakened trade unions, privatisation of public assets, housing speculation, and decades of underinvestment in working-class communities.
- Immigration did not dismantle council housing.
- Immigration did not outsource industry.
- Immigration did not suppress wages, employers did.
When wages stagnate, when housing is scarce, when public services are strained, it is easier to blame the immigrants than the capitalist.
Under imperialism:
- Capital becomes concentrated in monopolies that dominate entire industries.
- Bank capital and industrial capital fuse into finance capital, forming a financial oligarchy.
- Capital is exported abroad in search of higher profits.
- The world’s markets and resources are divided among the major powers and their corporations.
That’s the mechanism.
Everything else — dependency, instability, migration, rivalry — flows from that structure.
But the movement of labour is framed as a threat as divided workers are easier to oppress than organised ones.
If there are too many people on benefits, the question is not why migrants arrive. The question is why a country as wealthy as Britain produces insecure work, poverty pay and chronic underemployment in the first place — while billionaires hide their wealth in safe haven's like Monaco.
The Class Consciousness Project
💯4👏1
Forwarded from Class Consciousness Project
Any talk of an alliance, or “uniting the left”, means working alongside state-run bodies, Trots, pro-NATO liberals and openly anti-communist organisations. It means granting credibility and legitimacy to forces that have done more than most to sabotage the class struggle.
These groups are not a bulwark against reaction — they are one of its breeding grounds. Their confusion, moralism and constant retreat into liberal politics is precisely why British workers are so often pulled towards reactionary rhetoric in the first place.
We should treat these leftists (who are left of Imperialism, not opposed to it) no differently than the reactionaries themselves. Expose them for what they are: vital components of British capitalism, tasked with containing, redirecting and ultimately neutralising class consciousness.
These groups are not a bulwark against reaction — they are one of its breeding grounds. Their confusion, moralism and constant retreat into liberal politics is precisely why British workers are so often pulled towards reactionary rhetoric in the first place.
We should treat these leftists (who are left of Imperialism, not opposed to it) no differently than the reactionaries themselves. Expose them for what they are: vital components of British capitalism, tasked with containing, redirecting and ultimately neutralising class consciousness.
💯4👍1
Forwarded from Class Consciousness Project
Zionism and anti semitism are both promoted by the British ruling class and have been for many decades. One of the things that has become clear with the emergence of widespread anti-zionist sentiment over the last two years is that one way the ruling class will seek to deal with this is promoting old school anti semitism. They do this because if a worker who has started to wake up to the realities of the nature the Israeli regime can be pushed down the dead end of anti semitism then that is more than acceptable for the ruling class. Someone who becomes a fascist is comparable to a blindfolded man who starts to realise he cannot see and places another piece of cloth over his eyes to help him see better. This is why you get clowns like Nick Fuentes or Dan Bilzerian be promoted in the algorithms on youtube, the ruling class want rejection of zionism to promote fascism. We must see the truth, that these are all reactionary trends and must all be rejected by class conscious workers.
💯7
Here we are, revisiting an old series by our comrade Chris about the Misuse Of Language. In this series, Chris describes how a lot of words in the English language have been muted by popular culture to mean something completely different. It’s our duty to explain these mistakes, as they are often used politically in media and common discussions.
http://classconsciousnessproject.blog/2024/04/18/a-is-for-argument/
http://classconsciousnessproject.blog/2024/04/18/a-is-for-argument/
Class Consciousness Project
A Is For Argument
We as a group do not oppose free speech. Free speech is the free expression of ideas and thoughts. With this freedom comes responsibility. The responsibility to use words correctly, in order to get…
❤1
The next in the series of the Misuse of Language.
In this article the discussion of the term freedom and its misuse within capitalist societies.
http://classconsciousnessproject.blog/2024/04/28/f-is-for-freedom/
In this article the discussion of the term freedom and its misuse within capitalist societies.
http://classconsciousnessproject.blog/2024/04/28/f-is-for-freedom/
Class Consciousness Project
F Is For Freedom
What is FREEDOM? The freedom to bang your own drum, or the freedom from hearing someone constantly banging a drum? The freedom to drive at 90mph past a school, or the freedom to safely cross a road…
Another round of managers sacked in the Premier League.
Sean Dyche has been binned off after only 114 days in the job. The volatile owner Marinakis seems hell-bent on undermining Nottingham Forest after all the work that went into getting them back into the Premier League and the excellent last season they had under Nuno Espirito Santo. Patience appears to be in short supply.
Thomas Frank has also been jibbed after just half a season at Spurs. They finished in the bottom half of the table last season under Ange, and they remain there now. Frank was hailed as one of the better managers in the Premier League not long ago, praised for overachieving with limited resources at Brentford. Now his reputation is suddenly questioned because he hasn’t delivered instant results in a dysfunctional environment. If you watched Ange Postecoglou's interview on the overlap he spoke of a very poor environment at the club. Calling it a big club with a small club mentality.
Essentially, both managers have been sacked for failing to deliver immediately. Club owners, and increasingly fans, seem to believe that if something doesn’t click straight away then that's it. We see it every year, yet it’s been proven time and again that constant upheaval rarely builds anything sustainable. Chopping and changing managers creates instability, not success.
Continuity builds football teams. Stability builds standards. The impatience of board rooms and fans on social media only causes chaos. .
The Class Consciousness Project
Sean Dyche has been binned off after only 114 days in the job. The volatile owner Marinakis seems hell-bent on undermining Nottingham Forest after all the work that went into getting them back into the Premier League and the excellent last season they had under Nuno Espirito Santo. Patience appears to be in short supply.
Thomas Frank has also been jibbed after just half a season at Spurs. They finished in the bottom half of the table last season under Ange, and they remain there now. Frank was hailed as one of the better managers in the Premier League not long ago, praised for overachieving with limited resources at Brentford. Now his reputation is suddenly questioned because he hasn’t delivered instant results in a dysfunctional environment. If you watched Ange Postecoglou's interview on the overlap he spoke of a very poor environment at the club. Calling it a big club with a small club mentality.
Essentially, both managers have been sacked for failing to deliver immediately. Club owners, and increasingly fans, seem to believe that if something doesn’t click straight away then that's it. We see it every year, yet it’s been proven time and again that constant upheaval rarely builds anything sustainable. Chopping and changing managers creates instability, not success.
Continuity builds football teams. Stability builds standards. The impatience of board rooms and fans on social media only causes chaos. .
The Class Consciousness Project
❤3
Forwarded from SOVREV
The European Parliament has adopted two key decisions accelerating the EU's transformation into a closed military camp. With 408 votes in favor (184 against), the "Asylum Procedure Regulation" (APR) has been supplemented with a list of "safe countries of origin." Another 170 votes expanded the "Border Return Regulation," widening the scope for mass deportation of migrants to third countries.
The list of "safe countries" includes states with far-from-spotless reputations: Egypt, Morocco, Tunisia, India, Bangladesh, Colombia, and Kosovo. European officials now mandate that citizens from these countries be presumed to face no threats. The burden of proof shifts onto asylum seekers themselves. Given minimal access to lawyers and witnesses, this effectively means rejection of most claims.
The second regulation introduces the concept of a "safe third country" — a nation not the migrant's origin, to which they can be deported if they have relatives there, language ties, or simply passed through in transit. Dozens of countries fit this description, and the EU is already negotiating bilateral agreements.
Consider the position of the Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats (S&D) — the European Parliament's second-largest bloc with 136 seats. Formally, the faction opposed the measures, but 25 Social Democratic deputies from Denmark, Malta, Romania, and Sweden voted for the repressive provisions. Others abstained. This is no random glitch but a pattern.
Social Democrats in Denmark, Sweden, Romania, and Malta, abandoning principles of internationalism, consistently tighten anti-migrant legislation. They introduce border controls, restrict refugee rights, and cooperate with regimes that send people to camps. These parties, once connected to the workers' movement, now function to legitimize the far-right agenda in Europe.
The "Fortress Europe" policy is paid for in human lives. 2024 became the deadliest year in the Mediterranean. 2025 continued this trend.
In just the first 40 days of 2026, according to the International Organization for Migration, 524 people have died or gone missing attempting to cross from North Africa to Europe. Following a shipwreck off Libya's coast claiming 53 lives, an IOM representative stated:
"This is the worst start to the year in the past decade... And the deadliest."
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
From Mao to Madrid: Paul Breitner's Story.
Older football fans may remember the highly decorated footballer Paul Breitner. A brilliant pro that came through at Bayern Munich when Germany was still divided by east and west.
He was a full back that would have fitted into modern game with his style of playing, but he was more than just a left back. He was an outspoken political agitator who read Mao Zedong religiously. He even posed with Mao's Little Red Book. Publicly! At a time where doing so in West Germany was dangerous.
He spoke out against the evils of capitalism, about questioning the state. In a famous quotation he correctly declared footballers as workers who sell their labour like anyone else. In a Cold War climate where anti-communism was a state religion, that was very brave.
They called him 'Der Rote Paul', Red Paul! (like our very own Red Rick). His radicalism was real, not like how modern footballers who use their activism to inflate their position.
The early 1970s in West Germany being a 'red' meant surveillance, bans and hysteria about “extremism”. To openly identify with Maoism while representing the West German national team was a refusal to play the obedient sportsman. West Germany was essentially occupied by US forces at this point. The US where the MacArthur trials were hunting down communists in north America.
Having that socialist background made sure he didn’t separate football from society. He understood that football sits inside capitalism, not outside of it.
What saved him was fan support. He backed it up on the pitch. He scored in the 1974 World Cup final. Won European Cups. Dominated domestically. He wasn’t some fringe rebel shouting from the sidelines. He was directly bang in the center of the machine while criticising it.
That contradiction took shape and formed his future material conditions within the game.
When he moved to Real Madrid CF in 1974, the politics took a back step. They stopped being centre stage. Success in football, especially teams like Real Madrid, brings massive scrutiny. These big teams are footballing institutions that demand discipline. Radical language becomes inconvenient when you are part of a global sports brand.
Did he “sell out”? Maybe, but that feels too simple. Conditions change, family and work. We all have to survive within the boundaries of capitalism and without being a part of an organisation of advanced workers people can become disillusioned.
The revolutionary left in Western Europe was fractured and retreated. The 70s closed in and the post war concessions were starting to be removed. Individual careers don’t float above historical shifts.
What his journey shows is this: even at the very top of elite sport, class consciousness can surface. Even within a billion-pound industry, players are still workers selling labour power. The wage might be substantially higher and the contracts might be gold-plated. The relation to capital remains.
Breitner’s Maoism wasn’t a footnote. It was a reminder that football has never been politically neutral. The game produces rebels as well as celebrities.
The Class Consciousness Project.
Older football fans may remember the highly decorated footballer Paul Breitner. A brilliant pro that came through at Bayern Munich when Germany was still divided by east and west.
He was a full back that would have fitted into modern game with his style of playing, but he was more than just a left back. He was an outspoken political agitator who read Mao Zedong religiously. He even posed with Mao's Little Red Book. Publicly! At a time where doing so in West Germany was dangerous.
He spoke out against the evils of capitalism, about questioning the state. In a famous quotation he correctly declared footballers as workers who sell their labour like anyone else. In a Cold War climate where anti-communism was a state religion, that was very brave.
They called him 'Der Rote Paul', Red Paul! (like our very own Red Rick). His radicalism was real, not like how modern footballers who use their activism to inflate their position.
The early 1970s in West Germany being a 'red' meant surveillance, bans and hysteria about “extremism”. To openly identify with Maoism while representing the West German national team was a refusal to play the obedient sportsman. West Germany was essentially occupied by US forces at this point. The US where the MacArthur trials were hunting down communists in north America.
Having that socialist background made sure he didn’t separate football from society. He understood that football sits inside capitalism, not outside of it.
What saved him was fan support. He backed it up on the pitch. He scored in the 1974 World Cup final. Won European Cups. Dominated domestically. He wasn’t some fringe rebel shouting from the sidelines. He was directly bang in the center of the machine while criticising it.
That contradiction took shape and formed his future material conditions within the game.
When he moved to Real Madrid CF in 1974, the politics took a back step. They stopped being centre stage. Success in football, especially teams like Real Madrid, brings massive scrutiny. These big teams are footballing institutions that demand discipline. Radical language becomes inconvenient when you are part of a global sports brand.
Did he “sell out”? Maybe, but that feels too simple. Conditions change, family and work. We all have to survive within the boundaries of capitalism and without being a part of an organisation of advanced workers people can become disillusioned.
The revolutionary left in Western Europe was fractured and retreated. The 70s closed in and the post war concessions were starting to be removed. Individual careers don’t float above historical shifts.
What his journey shows is this: even at the very top of elite sport, class consciousness can surface. Even within a billion-pound industry, players are still workers selling labour power. The wage might be substantially higher and the contracts might be gold-plated. The relation to capital remains.
Breitner’s Maoism wasn’t a footnote. It was a reminder that football has never been politically neutral. The game produces rebels as well as celebrities.
The Class Consciousness Project.
❤🔥6