Yevgeny Yevtushenko, Darcus Howe and the MSM: Cultural Musings


The deaths of two people came to notice particularly in the past week. One person had been a significant cultural influence in the Soviet Union, was world-famous, is still oft-quoted. The other was a West Indian immigrant to the UK, best known for his support for black rioters, gangster criminals and others, as well as his assault on British cultural norms.

The first was Yevgeny Yevtushenko [] about whom The Guardian newspaper published this by way of obituary:

The second was one Darcus Howe: [], about whom the Guardian said this:

It can surely be seen that even the Guardian was unable to make out Darcus Howe as being a greater cultural figure or a more positive one than Yevtushenko.

Comment and Personal Musing

I knew neither of the two recently deceased. I had heard of Yevtushenko vaguely, en passant, as a child and teenager, about the poet who was able to fill stadia in Russia with fans listening to his declamations. Black and white pictures from Life magazine and books. Later, in my twenties, I knew a few people who had been well-acquainted with Yevtushenko in Moscow. I even met his third wife on a couple of occasions during that time and once swam with her and her children (Yevtushenko’s) in a semi-private wooded beach area in some expensive part of Bournemouth, on England’s southern coast.

I never met Yevtushenko himself, though I heard plenty about him. His private life was messy, not always commendable, but that is hardly unusual in the biographies of poets and artistic people generally. One cannot judge a poet primarily by his private life (think of Byron etc). At a distance, he seemed to me to be a Soviet cultural windvane, able to change direction not so much with the prevailing wind but at the moment before it changed. Thus Yevtushenko was seen by some , e.g. Irina Ratushinskaya [] as an “official poet”, with all the moral compromise and material benefits which that term implied; by others, as a brave and anti-official –even a little bit anti-Soviet– quasi-dissident.

Certainly Yevtushenko was willing to argue even with such as Khrushchev on occasion. He was lucky, perhaps, to have been born in 1932 and not 1922 or 1912. He escaped Stalinism to a large extent. Also, he was born and mainly brought up in Siberia, where (ironically) the Stalinist pressure was slightly less. Having said that, he lived in Moscow from age 18, studied there, was never in political trouble. I once heard privately that his mother had been an informant (“secret co-worker”) for the KGB and went weekly to an address not far from the Lubyanka to receive her stipend, signing for it on a list which had all the other names blanked out via a kind of stencil. Perhaps. That would not imply, however, that Yevtushenko himself was implicated with such work (and as I heard it, his mother only went through the motions anyway, giving little but avoiding conflict).

Certainly, Yevtushenko lived rather well by Soviet and indeed Western material standards. Robert Conquest [] described that as “well-rewarded collaboration”. By the 1970s, if not before, he had a house or “dacha” at Peredelkino [] with (I believe I was told), 4 or maybe 5 bedrooms –unheard of luxury in the Soviet Union for all but the highest-regarded citizens. He also had an apartment near the Kremlin with no less than (from memory) 14 rooms (a friend of mine was offered the chance to stay there for a week while it was unoccupied; she returned to London gushing about how wonderful it was and how she had not realized that people in the Soviet Union lived like that!); the apartment had been occupied at one time, I was told, by Beria [] though Beria did have a mansion in Moscow, perhaps in addition. Yevtushenko also had a house on the Black Sea, situated, I believe, at Yalta.

Yevtushenko is now known for several “soundbites”, in today’s terminology, as much as for his poems: “in Russia, a poet is more than a poet”; and the 1962 lines usually slightly changed to (and improved?) “double and triple the guard on Stalin’s tomb, lest he return….and with him, the past” [].

Whatever one’s view of Yevtushenko, there is no doubt that he was a significant cultural figure, who personified the changes in the Soviet Union from Stalin’s rule, through the Thaw of the 1950s and early 1960s and on to the retrenchment which led up to Gorbachev, corrupt laxity and then complete collapse. Yevtushenko himself spent his later years living partly in the USA, paid generously by the University of Tulsa (Oklahoma) and the City University of New York (CUNY). A weathervane to the last.

As to Darcus Howe, I know little of him beyond a few items recently read, though I do recall that rather menacing figure on “British” TV from time to time, always promoting the idea that the blacks in the UK had been and were oppressed by white British people and culture.

I cannot imagine that Howe ever contributed much to the UK, though others, in the mainstream media especially, seem to think otherwise. On Twitter, the death of Yevtushenko was like an express train at night, flashing quickly through a country station (Zima Junction?) without stopping. Darcus Howe’s death was trending for far longer. The mainstream TV and radio almost ignored Yevtushenko’s death (and life), while eulogizing about the life of the West Indian rioter and troublemaker. Channel 4, the tax-subsidized “independent” channel, was especially loud in its praises.

Where the msm did notice Yevtushenko’s death, the reports concentrated mainly on his poem “Babi Yar”, about the death of Jews in the Ukraine during the war with Germany. Typical.

The cultural sickness of the West can be seen in the juxtaposition of the two recent deaths and how they have been treated. The time must come when real merit is respected, when people are able to properly discriminate between what is worthwhile and what is not. Most of the existing cultural organizations and faces must be removed.

24 thoughts on “Yevgeny Yevtushenko, Darcus Howe and the MSM: Cultural Musings”

  1. George Galloway now 6/1 (12.4.17) to win Gorton. Down from 33/1 Galloway is the only candidate the bookies reckon can now win! What did I tell you?


  2. Yevtushenko was a hero of mine. I bought all his poetry that was available where I lived. Even in translation his ability and perception was superb.

    I’d already had several poems published by the time I first read him at age 15. I must have re-read his work at least a hundred times.

    Darcus Howe was a parasite who lived off other people’s anger and violence. It is the parasites in our society that lauded him. (((Those))) people know one of their own types and adulate them because in their hate of us they are the same as Darcus.

    Yevtushenko was inspiring, Howe was depressingly negative and representative of our dictators and their evil ways.

    ‘Nough said.


    1. Darcus Howe was introduced on at least two TV programmes I saw as “barrister Darcus Howe”, though in fact he dropped out after supposedly studying for 2 years (books saying that he studied “at Middle Temple” cannot be accurate, because even if he belonged to it as student, actual study was done elsewhere, even in those days). I wonder whether he signed up somewhere, joined Middle Temple on the basis that he was a law student, then basically dropped out after a short time. Maybe he was just too thick. Who knows?

      As you say, the UK was worse for having him in it. He came to the UK already its enemy (read the notes on his Wikipedia entry). Also, as you note, he was lauded in death and life by the Channel 4 parasites and enemies of the people who always try to subvert, while at same time driving Porsche cars and drinking champagne.


      1. Howe came from quite a comfortable and well-connected middle-class background in Trinidad, an aspect of him that was rarely, if ever, mentioned – for obvious reasons. His uncle was the writer C.L.R. James (author of The Black Jacobins – quite a good book), and it was James who pulled strings after Howe abandoned a legal career.

        Howe’s story is quite typical of high-profile black agitators in Britain from the mid-20th. century onward. He was a privileged son of the British Empire who, lacking any real brains or innate talent, and not wishing to do real work, drifted into a vague career as a political activist and sort of journalist.

        He became a sworn enemy of the society and the people that had welcomed him and treated him with kindness. His life’s work basically consisted of condescending to the white working class and expressing his vindictive spite for us, for no other reason than that we are easier targets than the whites (and Jews) who gave him a comfortable living, the sort of life that most white people can only dream of.

        As a privileged man, he also regarded the white working class as his inferiors and in common with a lot of non-whites who come here, he looked down on us with contempt, something that shines through in everything he said and did. He was in the vanguard of the effort to mock and belittle the views and mores of the ordinary white man.

        He was a vile and despicable man and I am glad he is dead.


      2. That’s telling them!

        Howe’s demise called forth all the usual virtue-signallers and “me-too” London metro hypocrites such as that little Indian on Channel 4 News, Krishnan Guru-Murgatroyd or whatever the hell the bastard’s name is. All wanting to express what a loss Howe’s death had been to the UK. This attitude is what many find hard to understand. It took me years to accept that many of those eating away the most at the structure of British society are the very individuals and families (and/or clan in the case of “them”) which benefit the most, especially materially, from our society. Same is true in France.

        People in the UK are usually too polite (or afraid of the legal repression that now exists thanks to “a certain group”) to tell people such as Howe just to get the hell out and go back to wherever they came from.


  3. Generally I avoid the main stream media where ever possible…therefore have not watched a television programme for 17 years now, nor listened to a radio programme for about 9 years. Newspapers I get free and use them to wrap rubbish in to go in the bin…seems apt as all they print is rubbish.

    Consequently deaths I only hear about by chance now since the real news websites rarely mention that sort of thing.

    The thing that made life possible for the Long Range Desert Group was a contraption called the ‘sun compass’ that was used against a clock. It looked a bit like an old fashioned spinning top. You held it up at certain times say 9am, 12 noon, 3pm etc so that the sun cast a shadow from the upright centre post, to determine your course. Developed in the 1920s by an explorer I forget the name of now.

    The Royal Geographical Society in Kensington has lots of stuff on this together with analyses of sand dune types etc which meant that the British Army had a head start over the Whermarcht re desert navigation.

    But as I say…’no more brother’s wars’, as it is always started by (((them))) to our people’s detriment! The problem was Churchill was in thrall to Rothschilds who not only ran the Bank of England but also all secret service and intelligence operations in the UK.

    Churchill was an enemy of the people. It is my belief that Hess was strangled to death by MI6 to prevent him from showing up how Churchill betrayed Britain and Hitler.

    I believe that Churchill did a deal with Hitler not to attack Germany while it launched Operation Barbarosa. Germany would never have attacked Russia without first securing its rear. I’m pretty sure that Hess knew all the details so he was murdered to cover up this betrayal.


    1. Not sure that I agree re. Churchill and Barbarossa. Hitler knew, none better, that Germany needed to avoid a 2-front war. The experience of 1914-1917 taught that. I think that Hitler did not believe that Britain alone, or even with its Empire, was a credible threat on the Western Front in 1940-41. In fact, as so often, Hitler was right in that, but of course did not foresee the success of Roosevelt’s attempts to get America into the war. Britain on its own was no real threat to the Reich.

      As to Hess, I keep an open mind as to whether the Hess who died mysteriously in 1987 was the real Hess or a substitute. Probably the real one, but maybe not. In either case, he was probably murdered by British operatives in 1987 because it was likely, even then, that the Soviet Union would not keep troops in the DDR for long. Either, as you say, Hess “knew too much” or he was not the real Hess, or was simply an embarrassment if Germany was eventually to reunify. His very existence would have posed questions as to whether the continuation of the war (Western front), and after 1940, was the responsibility of Britain (and its allies) and not Germany.


  4. A couple of points…May appointed Johnson because she was ordered to by the man who appointed her PM, Rothschild.

    He, Rothschild, clearly has plans for Johnson which I am pretty certain will one day be PM. Johnson has done all the usual a*se licking tricks…wearing a kippa at the Wailing Wall, visiting Rothschild in his mansion, receiving instructions re Rothschild operations etc etc. The FO is just a steep learning curve for thicko Johnson who will likely one day be given a Churchillesque facade.

    Johnson is a clever man with the usual failings of his sort, a total lack of common sense, short termism and unbridled greed. All the things Rothschild likes about aspiring goyim! And he is a Turk which means he is easily bribed if the sum is big enough.

    The other point is that the only way your Nationalist community in the West Country could work is if the land it was situated on was bought and held for the individual in a company format.

    In fact there should be a legally constituted company established in British law to handle not only the purchase of the new land/properties, but also to handle the disposal of property being sold elsewhere in Britain or the world.

    This would permit the sale of no longer used properties at a time when the price is advantageous rather than having to dispose of it immediately if the market is depressed.

    The company could also handle all money matters such as transfer of personal funds from one state to another, as a legal entity regarding pensions and providing protection through the courts in cases of abuse or persecution. English law is very advantageous for companies and a company would provide a bastion against oppressors, which a group of individuals could not.

    My personal preference though would be a community in Wales quite simply because land prices are cheaper and farming/industrial opportunities greater. But where ever it is I also think we should speak Welsh as this was the original language of Britain before the Romans arrived, and it would give us our own private language most liberals/leftists/Zionists could not understand.


    1. The idea I proposed should not be confused with a commune or the like. My view was that, already, white people are gravitating out of certain parts of England to other parts, so the basic current is already there. If a family move from, say, London to, say, Devon or Cornwall, they do so because they have some idea of how to survive there via jobs, businesses or capital accumulation and investment income, or, at lowest level, State benefits. They are independent of the proposed political organization but can still participate in it. If even a few thousand people move into one Westminster constituency, they can influence its politics and probably get their choice of MP elected, whether MP belongs to a new party or an existing one (with secret membership or support for social nationalism).


      1. Yes I understand all that, but moving lock, stock and barrel without advice and help from a legal entity, especially from the US, Australia or New Zealand, is a very daunting prospect.

        We are talking about establishing a British nation solely for British people. We wish that unwelcome non indigenous peoples living here go and that our nation return from being scattered throughout the world to their ancient home lands, their birthright, the heartlands of their soul.

        One MP in one constituency is neither here nor there. We need every constituency possible to have a Nationalist MP, that our people can have their own government free from economic slavery to our unelected masters.

        We need to recreate our nation and bring in those people who desire to construct a white homeland safe for white children, while moving on the traitors that live in our midst, both alien and indigenous, as well as the immigrants.

        Surely you can see the advantages of a legal entity? I’m not talking about a new political party per se, but rather a legal entity to handle the affairs of our people. Eventually a separate entity might be formed to fight elections.

        First we need the people and a legal valid entity through which to invest their savings and through which their possessions (house, land, art etc) could be sold on for them to enable them to come and live here to create what our people could be, as opposed to what they are now…oppressed slaves to userers.


      2. A “legal entity” to hold the monies of those who might support social nationalism? Speaking not only as former barrister (as you know, I was disbarred for political reasons) but also as a usually common sense person, this is absurd. I find it highly unlikely that anyone would trust some legal entity or vehicle set up by me (or anyone else) rather than simply to instruct a solicitor in the normal way to handle the sale and purchase of houses and transfers of funds.

        It is not a question of getting one MP somewhere but of creating a social-national redoubt in one part of England, as a base area. The MP (or several MPs) elected would be just a part of that. It is all very well to talk of somehow creating out of the sky a national movement and society. Logic dictates concentration of forces in one geographic area, or mainly such.


  5. This is how Herzl did it. It is a proven system. This is how he coordinated a disparate world of people in to a nation. You should read your history and then use it to your advantage.

    Unfortunately you assume that everyone has your knowledge. It is dangerous to assume. And you think because you have that knowledge you know it all. And besides, your knowledge of what it is like for ordinary people is flawed, writing as I do from my experience of life.

    Herzl created a nation out of a dream purely because he willed it. To do it he used two legally functioning registered entities. Might be an advantage to use your enemies’ ideas to get your way, rather than clinging to your prejudicial (and in my opinion) arrogance over nation building.

    Just saying…

    And blocking people because they have no understanding of basic economics through being brainwashed that the fault is not with immigrants but with employers, is self defeating too!

    Most people are not taught economics, where as in your degree course you spend a year of the three studying financial matters. Reasoned argument rather than temper tantrums resulting in blocking people for their ignorance might be a bit more effective in bringing them round to your view.

    You seem to have a quick temper which does not help your intolerant attitude to people who have not had your opportunities and do not possess your abilities. Difficult for you. More difficult for them!


    1. I have approved your comment despite it being neither diplomatic nor polite in part. I suppose that one has to accept some criticism in the name of free speech. As far as Twitter is concerned, I do sometimes mute or block nuisances and people who plainly have ingrained ideas which long-drawn-out debate will not change.

      You may be wrong that I have no experience of life on a basic or struggling (financial) level. You may be surprised to know that I worked in the UK and in several other countries not only as a lawyer/barrister, but (when young: teenage years up to mid-twenties, from mid-1970s to early-1980s) doing work such as basic labourer, motorbike dispatch rider, office work (commercial intelligence), dismantling dodgem car constructions, forklift-truck driver, warehouse operative, unpaid volunteer on an organic farm and in many other jobs, even briefly in uniform in a foreign army (tropical zone).

      As to your point about my degree course, it was in law and contained no directly economic element. Whatever I have picked up about economics has been self-taught. I do believe, though, that the nexus between supply of labour and the level of pay is something that almost everyone knows. The exceptions seem to be those blinded by a wish to have things work the way they want rather than the way they must. They therefore believe that you can import millions of immigrants without that affecting in any substantial way pay, housing, transport, social services or health. Those people have to be put right.


      1. In reply to your replies [the comment system won’t allow me to apply my comments to the relevant posts, for some reason]:

        I’m trying to think of ways of putting your proposal into effect. Maybe a starting point would be to form some kind of steering group with a view to raising funds to buy such an estate or land? Once purchased, this location could act as the ‘Centre’, at which events would be held so that the social-nationalist community concept could be further expounded and promoted.

        Probably to buy a farm in Cornwall or Devon, you’re looking at a minimum of £500k. If you had maybe 100 people on-board who could each raise a few thousand, then the money could be raised. The money for the project could be held in a trustee account, perhaps overseen by an independent solicitor. The title to the property could be held by an investment company, which would also act as the project’s management/operational arm, and the investment could work on a dividend basis, with the founders receiving annual dividends from the profits of the company (if any) as a reward for their initial contributions. Of course, then real reward would be assisting the Movement. Further money would then be raised for the renovations, perhaps turning the property into a working farm and initial focal point for an embryonic social-nationalist community.

        If all else fails and the project doesn’t get off the ground, then the money put into the fund can be disbursed back to the contributors after a due period of time. If the project is aborted after an acquisition, then the project can be turned into a normal commercial venture and the shareholders, as they would be, can decide if they wish to liquidate their investment or continue with it on some basis, perhaps letting out the farm. Either way, as long as safeguards are put in place, the risks shouldn’t be greater than those involved in any other similar property investment.

        Another point to consider is that even if the project is aborted after a while, as long as it has been competently run, it should act as a solid precedent for action and co-operation among nationalists.

        Some regard would need to be had to FCA compliance issues, but I’m sure those matters can be circumvented within the law or addressed head-on quite easily, depending on how you want to go about promoting this.

        It’s ambitious – but it’s feasible. It’s certainly within the realms of possibility rather than fantasy and is something that could be done.

        Regarding the ‘women’ comment, I was assuming your interlocutor above is a woman and was just pulling your leg. Please don’t report me to the police, as I have a rottweiler and a budgie to take care of.


      2. Re your “women” comment, in fact I believe that that commentator is (notwithstanding the balletic pseudonym) not a woman. I thought that that was what you meant, but was unsure.

        On your main point, your proposal is good in principle, but there are two aspects that I would comment upon.
        1. The amount you mention would not today be enough to buy even a small farm, smallholding or a house with a few acres in Cornwall. The UK price bubble madness reached the South West some years ago. For example, the house of which I had a lease in Cornwall about 15 years ago was then valued at £1.5M-£2M as a sale (I asked the owner once, out of interest), depending on how many secondary accomodations were included (the house had 20 bedrooms, ballroom, drawing room, library and other rooms; my lease had only 4 acres of grounds, being gardens, lawns etc, but there were another 100 acres of forest with deer etc which I could use. The house in the 19thC had 5,000 acres, it seems. The other buildings were a farmhouse, 2 cottages, two lodges at the North + South exits etc).

        I think that even a modest base today would be in the million-pound category. Refer to Rightmove website.

        2. The idea I envisage would not be based on a “commune” or “community” living together, but on freestanding people, with their own properties (whether bought or rented) in a particular area. As you say, one substantial property does need to exist as a base, ideally anyway, but in the first instance that would belong to one or another supporter, I hope or imagine.


      3. 1. There are properties in Cornwall with several acres listed online for around £400k upwards (that’s asking price, not auction guide price). Admittedly, they are not huge estates, and most of them are in need of re-development until you get to about the £800k price point, but £500k would be sufficient to comfortably purchase land and a rundown farmhouse for development. The price situation may also improve over the next 5 years or so if the predicted economic crash occurs (though that depends on whether land owners are motivated to sell).

        There are also other novel strategies that could be pursued to get control of some land. It just requires a few committed people and a plan of action.

        2. There was no misunderstanding on my part about this point. I’m completely clear in what you are proposing here with social-nationalist communities and I believe it is a good idea. All I am saying is that, to get things started, it is possible a group of motivated people could club together to purchase the Centre. The pattern of individual commitment and investment that you mention would still apply and the onus would still be on individuals and families to buy or rent their own properties as well, as needed, when they re-locate. However the idea would be to have a ‘Centre’ property, as the initial focal point at least. That would become the location (at least in the early stages) for shared activities such as events, conferences, fairs, concerts, political education, and maybe as you say some business and economic activity, and so on.

        A lot can be done just with some land and just the existence of the Centre, even if modest, would motivate nationalists and boost morale. It would be a place where people could hold events safely – especially if it is set up as non-sectarian – and things could be built up and developed from there.


      4. I agree with all or most of that. I have blogged about it. Somewhere such as I lived in before would be ideal as a central focus: ballroom (separate colonnaded carriage entrance) for meetings, receptions etc, privacy. What is required is a small and focussed group, preferably each able to buy an estate or farm.


    2. The difference with Herzl’s plan is that he was seeking a territorial concession from the Ottoman Empire with a view to exploiting an area that had no infrastructure, and so it was appropriate to have in place the quasi-state structure that could be provided by an English limited company. Apart from anything else, this would have assisted in giving both Jews and the Ottoman bureaucracy confidence in the enterprise.

      In contrast, the plan proposed here is more low-key and involves the quiet infiltration of existing communities by militant nationalists under hostile political conditions. We are few in number and talk of formalisation is not likely to be a priority for a very long time, assuming some sort of community endeavour can be launched at all. It will be a challenge enough to find a handful of people who are interested.

      What might be a good idea is to set up some sort of property investment consortium that interested nationalists and other sympathisers can invest in. The scheme could be organised so that it is not specifically tied to nationalism and so complies with FCA requirements – e.g. a British Property Fund, run by a social enterprise with the aim of enabling cultural rejuvenation in the neglected regions of England, such as the north-east.

      The investment could work in a similar way to a unit trust, and properties purchased could be let to nationalists who wish to participate in such a community endeavour, using a nomination arrangement with a separate housing association entity that nationalists would establish.

      There are other strategies that could pursued, such as setting-up an accommodation bureau in the target area that would arrange to move nationalists into the locality.

      Perhaps the first stage is to find a suitable area and then test the market at somewhere like the London Forum to see if there is interest in pursuing this, and then organise follow-up meetings as necessary. It is of course a chicken-and-egg problem. Once you reveal the location, even confidentially, the information will eventually find its way into hostile hands. I also doubt you will find much demand for re-location in the first place, but if the idea could get some money behind it, and if it was presented in the right way – as a ‘patriotic and cultural’ initiative, rather than nationalist – it may develop its own momentum.


      1. I see the idea as being based in one or two counties, probably Devon and Cornwall, where conditions are favourable, where there are some opportunities for small-scale self-employment (eg in the tourism sector) as well as employment in the small urban areas such as Exeter and Truro. Within those counties, there might be a focus on certain villages or country house estates, money permitting. I think that the idea could snowball once launched.


      2. I must admit, I am not very familiar with the south-west. Do you think some headway could also be made by aligning with Cornish nationalists, as cover for a ‘British’ nativist agenda? I know that Dick Cole’s Mebyon Kernow are left-wing civic nationalists, but there was an ethno-nationalist Cornish Nationalist Party in existence at least until a few years ago.


      3. I would not bother with Cornish nationalists as a party. Very small and powerless, though Cornwall is still very much a place with its own distinct identity. I was there for a couple of years, then for a further 2 years about 10-15 miles away on the Devon side of the Tamar (in a less-grand place, a remote farmhouse). I do not think any cover is required. “A city on a hill cannot be hidden”.


  6. Babi Yar is now (I think) regarded as just another Jewish fraud. It’s amusing to compare the parasitism of Yevtushenko with that of Howe. I think Yevtushenko was probably far more of a state-subsidised and licensed official entertainer than Howe.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s