text:
Communist Ideology and Soviet Foreign Policy
By Bertram D. Wolfe
It was only towards the middle of the twentieth century that the inhabitants of many European countries came, in general unpleasantly, to realize that their fate could be influenced directly by intricate and abstruse books of philosophy.-Czeslaw Milosz
FOR four and one-half decades we have waited for the Soviet Union to mellow. Repeatedly, we have thought we were witnessing the longed-for change, of dynamism, direction or heart, which would make Communist totalitarianism in power just "one state among many"-different of course, but a member of the comprehensive genus of orderly, constituted governments, content to tolerate orderly neighbors and act according to the not-too-generous rule of live and let live by which governments, reluctantly, indifferently or a little contemptuously, suffer each other's presence on the same earth.
A review of the judgments of statesmen and analysts over these 45 years makes melancholy reading. From the notion that Lenin's régime would last but a few weeks or months (Lenin shared this view for a while) to the certitude that power and responsibility always sober; from Lenin's N.E.P. to Stalin's "socialism in one country" and Khrushchev's "thaw"; from the celebration of Russia's entry into the League of Nations through the shock of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact to the Grand Alliance that was to build "one world"; from Stalin's "peaceful coexistence" to Khrushchev's "peaceful competition"; from the "collective leadership" following Lenin's death to that following Stalin's, to the personal rule of Khrushchev-at every zig we have proclaimed, "At last it has come," at every zag muttered, "Surely it cannot last!"
In London I chanced some time ago on the diary of a deceased noble lady, one entry of which noted that Fridtjof Nansen had come to tea, bringing glad tidings: "Our troubles with Russia are over: Lenin is returning to capitalism." The entry was made in 1922, the lady's informant being one of the most knowing of Soviet experts in his generation.
Four decades after that entry, I read in a work of an American political scientist a rejection of the very conception that "totalitarianism is a radically new social form," which, while it exists as such, will continue to maintain "its combative posture vis-à-vis democratic societies."
Even on a simpler intuitive basis, [the writer continues] one can question the basic assumption of the theory-namely, that society becomes completely atomized and rule is anomic and direct. In a crisis situation, a state can fragment all social life, and through terror, perhaps, mold a people to its will. But can a society live in permanent crisis? Can it hold such a rigid posture without either exploding into war or relaxing? The basis of all social life requires not only a minimum of personal security but the reasonable expectation by parents that their children will be educated, develop careers, and so forth. To that extent, a tendency towards "normalization" is at work in any crisis state.[i]
Leaving aside the assumptions which our theme prevents us from considering (viz. that rule by secretaries, cells and transmission belts is "direct rule;" that totalitarianism is "anomic," i.e. either unstructured or without a value system, merely because these are given from above; and that militant totalitarianism is incompatible with giving children "education and careers"), the passage cited touches on the heart of the questions which will concern us in this article.
How can a régime which arose through a crisis (in Russia and our civilization) endure for 45 years? How does it differ from the usual "crisis régime?" How has it been able to prolong its "crisis" for close to a half-century? Is there a built-in eroding factor which will compel it, before too long, to "explode into war or relax into 'normalization'?" Is the "simple, intuitive basis" of Western thought a proper tool for understanding a society so different from the one in which that intuition was formed? Or is its concept of "normalization" applicable to the ideology and structure of militant totalitarianism?
Conversely, is the opposite extreme tenable? Can we deduce the twists and turns of Soviet policy by simple transposition from its ideology and totalitarian structure?
Or, as this article will seek to suggest, is not Soviet conduct a composite of disparate and conflicting forces, namely: (1) the influence of the traditional situation of the nation upon those who usurped power there; (2) the alterations forced upon them by recalcitrant reality; and (3) the drives and preconceptions of the intensely held ideology which they possess, and which possesses them?
Forty-five years, it goes without saying, have brought important changes- cumulative changes which come from expanding power, lengthening experience in power, and changes in the outside world. Hence a central question of this analysis must be: Are there discernible, amidst these changes, fundamental features of the ideology and institutional framework which have endured, which are decisive for the shaping of foreign policy, and with which we are likely to have to continue to reckon for the foreseeable future?[ii]
Let us begin with the easiest part of the problem: the influence on Bolshevik policy of the imperial heritage.
Lenin seized power, not in a land "ripe for socialism," but in a land ripe for seizing power. "It was as easy," he wrote, "as lifting up a feather." His coup was supposed to touch off a European socialist revolution; but while the revolution "matured," the opportunity presenting itself was to seize power in the Great-Russian Empire. "The point of the uprising," he chided those who hesitated about Russia's "ripeness" for his blueprint, "is the seizure of power. Afterwards, we will see what we can do with it."
Many of the things Lenin and his successors had to do were those which any new tsar would have attempted after an interregnum, a ruinous war and a shrinkage of empire: namely, to reëstablish order (their kind of order); to identify Russia's interests in the minds of their subjects with their rule; to subdue and reconquer seceding provinces and peoples;[iii] to end the war as best they could, reëstablish Russia's frontiers, and resume under new forms and for new purposes Russia's secular expansion.
In so far as there appears to be identity between the policy of the stronger tsars and that of Lenin, Stalin and Khrushchev, this springs from the fact that, more often than not, the same territories constitute the objectives of reincorporation or conquest. Georgia, Poland, Finland, the Ukraine, Belorussia, the Baltic States, Bessarabia, the Balkans, the Dardanelles, Persia, the Turkic Empires, Sinkiang, Mongolia, Manchuria, Korea-all these have appeared in the pages of Russian history before.
The same geographical situation gives the same neighbors. The Soviet Empire is still the Eurasian heartland, subject to pressure from East or West or both at once, capable of exerting pressure on East and West-on one at a time under the tsars with their limited aims-on both at once under the Bolsheviks with their unlimited ones. As before, Russia is the great land power, many of whose policies are conditioned by the traditional contests between land power and sea power. As before, in moments of strength, this land power still strives for control of its bordering seas.
If the dream of controlling the Pacific proved a wild chimera and Alaska and California had to be abandoned, the Caspian proved easy. With a little luck-and the Dardanelles!-the Black Sea would prove easy, too.
The conquest of the Baltic Provinces and Finland had started Russia's way around the Baltic. Stalin's desperate effort to seize Hamburg, his annexations in East Prussia, his claim to fortify Bornholm, would have startled us less had we borne this inherited appetite in mind. Certainly it explains more concerning Russia's "geopolitical" attitude toward her bordering seas than does the journalistic cliché of "hunger for a warm- water port." Not as exporter or importer but as the great land power blocked in its secular ambitions by surrounding sea powers does Russia look on her bordering seas.
The military advantage of the land power is its interior lines of communication (providing its transport and logistics are adequate). But one disadvantage is that the sea powers are more mobile and can strike at any of its many frontiers, or several at once, compelling Russia to keep large armies in reserve at all her borders. This is further complicated now by airpower; by the radar, plane and missile bases all around the empire; by the missile-launching submarine.
Another preoccupation of the power sprawling across the open Eurasian plain is the "rectification" of its frontiers to get more defensible lines. The Pripet Marshes were one such to the west, which was too bad for Poland since a more defensible line for one meant a less defensible for the other. The Carpathians played a similar role to the southwest. To the historian there was no novelty in Stalin's partition of Poland with Hitler, fumblingly reconfirmed by the Grand Alliance. The novelty was the military ignorance (or was it faith in Hitler?) that led Stalin to station his main armies in front of the river and swamps, so that these served to hinder not the Wehrmacht's advance, but the Soviet armies' retreat.
The "rectifying" of borders is, of course, a traditional objective. Kutusov, between 1812 and 1815, urged his sovereign to take advantage of Russia's advance on Paris to "rectify" Russia's borders along the Carpathians and the shortest line along the Oder to the Sea, and "compensate" the Prussian King-as Stalin was to "compensate" Poland-by lands to the west. Actually, Alexander I had too much consideration for his brother sovereign, the King of Prussia, and for the diplomatic practices of his day. His forbearance arose out of the code of personal conduct of nineteenth-century sovereigns, "cousins" all, and the generally limited nature of the aims which characterized the European system from 1815, when Napoleon fell, until 1914, when peace fell.
Despite a certain archaism carried over from the days of Russia's isolation, the foreign policy of the tsars was the customary policy of a great national state. Its vague ideological overtones were no different from those of other nations. The belief that the tsar's power and duty came from God is analogous to the divine right of kings. The idea of the "Third Rome" played no larger role, indeed not as large as the doctrine of the Holy Roman Empire played over the long period from Charlemagne and Barbarosssa to Napoleon. France, like Russia, concerned itself with the "protection of the Holy Places," while St. Petersburg's fluctuating interest in the Ottoman Slavs was less intense than Austria-Hungary's absorption with Slav stirrings inside and below its Empire. Panslavism and Slavophilism remained feverish fantasies of isolated intellectuals, suspect at court, analogous to, and not as influential as, Pan-Germanism in the German Empire.
Though the diplomacy of the tsars resembled that of Stalin and Khrushchev in its freedom from the overt and organized pressure of public opinion and the natural inclination of autocrats to engage in summitry and personal settlements, Russia's diplomacy as a whole was conventional, employing professional diplomats, following the practices of a world-wide diplomatic tradition which has almost vanished from memory now that conferences and negotiations are habitually put to the uses of a revolutionary power. Foreign policy aims were limited, pursued on the whole circumspectly and in a certain sequence, expressed in the prevailing terms of national interest, balance of power, concert of Europe, spheres of influence, rectification of frontiers, protection against incursions, respect for engagements and alliances, readiness to take into account the opinions and pressures of the other great powers (as in the various settlements with Turkey).
Just as autocracy, though it claimed absolute power, did not dream of totalist power within its own realm, so it had no global aims in foreign policy, no all-embracing plan for the world, no over-all unifying idea. Neither an ideocracy, nor insurrectionary, its generals brought no plans for revolution in their baggage. It had no fifth column as its servant, no world to bury and no world to win. Though it might prefer autocracy in its neighbors, it did not feel impelled to set up a replica of its own régime wherever its armies entered; nor did it feel "insecure" and "provoked" unless all the world should consist of autocracies.
Alexander I marched into Paris at the head of the most powerful armies in the world, then withdrew leaving no permanent traces of his occupation and the essential France much as before. The same was true of the other countries he occupied en route. If Stalin could have possessed such overriding military power and led his armies to Paris in 1945, the result would have been startlingly different, for he would have brought with him a set of rulers for each occupied country and a set of rules, an ideology covering the whole of life, a totalitarian structure and single-party rule.
It should be clear, then, that the men who make policy in the Soviet Union think and act differently from the tsars, and that we neglect their ideology to our peril.[iv] Once this is recognized, it might perhaps seem that all we need do is study their ideology to discover their "operative code" and foresee their every move. But ideology is not a set of Euclidean theorems.
Even for Communists there is no automatically "correct translation," no one- to-one correspondence, between any segment of ideology and any particular act. Their doctrine combines a religion and eschatology of salvation; a vast accumulation (from pre-1848 to the present) of political commentary and judgments, most of them out of date if they were ever valid; an economics now irrelevant; a historical sociology and critique of economic and social institutions, much of which is still suggestive; a philosophy which is little more than verbal casuistry. To make matters worse, every assertion in the voluminous, contradictory writings of Marx, Engels and Lenin is held to be part of a single science, a canon of which any sentence may be treated as having probative value. Hence the application of the doctrine to any given situation is subject to argument, and it is not always easy for the Communist leaders themselves to deduce from it the appropriate conclusion or action.
If it is hard for them (they solve their problem by forbidding factional controversy and developing the institution of the infallible leader as sole authorized interpreter at any given moment), how much harder is it for us!
"What matters," Sir Lewis Namier once wrote of political ideas, " is the underlying emotions, the music to which ideas are the mere libretto." All we can master is the words; to their music we are tone-deaf.
Though the doctrine operates persistently and powerfully to shape their vision, passions, thoughts and actions, it does not operate in a vacuum. It must be applied, in fragments and contradictions, to a real world of which even the doctrinaire, and particularly the adepts of this doctrine, take account. The masters of the doctrine have inherited from Lenin-and continued to develop-a distinctive Bolshevik blend of dogmatism and empiricism.
Nothing could be more deceptive than the inclination to answer from within ourselves the questions: "What would I believe if I accepted this proposition which they accept? How would I act in the situation facing them if I held their beliefs?" The illusion that we can easily "put ourselves in their place" contains a built-in trap, that of tending to put them in our place and tending to think that they think and feel as we do.
When we do pay attention to their ideology and its emotional context, we tend to be so impressed by its dogmatic character that we forget that it is dogma applied to reality. It is true that this application has its ambiguities. When they study the world for "theoretical" purposes, dogma has priority over reality, which has orders to confirm and reinforce their faith-"confirm the truth of our science." Thus filtered, it does. Still it is their contention that their dogmas are derived from the empirical study of society and the universe. And it is their pride that the science enables them to appraise reality, react properly to it, judge the exact extent to which the "concrete, objective situation" and "real relations of power" permit them to advance on the path marked out for them by it.
Moreover, we do them wrong to imagine that they will abandon this path and choose rather to blow up the world when given no other choice than open retreat. This Götterdämmerung frenzy or petulance was a constituent of Hitler's spirit but not of Lenin's. Lenin was as proud of knowing "when to retreat" and "how to retreat in good order" as he was of knowing when to advance and push to the limit. For him, offensive and defensive, retreat and advance, probing and holding actions, open frontal attacks and simulated withdrawals and outflanking man?uvres were all precious elements of a strategy of protracted conflict which was to last until final victory. For every battle, his favorite adage was taken from Napoleon: On s'engage, et puis-on voit!
Within rather strict limits, contact with refractory reality has forced upon these men adaptations ("creative extensions") of their doctrine. "Facts are stubborn things," Lenin would say. They could not, of course, refute "science." But they could show him that a particular tactic or plan of a given moment had to be abandoned, or a particular proposition reinterpreted.
Lenin and his successors are always at pains to show that their "creative extensions" do not constitute a "revision." This is more than mere casuistry, for it corresponds to a genuine psychological and political need and possesses an underlying meaning.
Though Marx's views of his last years were different from those of 1848, there was an enduring framework of dogma and continuity of spirit which made it not unwarranted for disciples to make of his teachings an "ism" and an orthodoxy. More fearful of "revisionism" than the founding fathers, the "orthodox" sought to turn every possible aspect into a dogma. Yet, most dogmatic of Marxists though he was, Lenin found it needful, consciously and unconsciously, to transform what he adopted, give it a Russian cast, put on it the stamp of his own temperament.
Repeatedly he "creatively developed" the doctrine, so that the Leninism of the foundation period (1902-14) was profoundly different from the Leninism of the First World War (1914-16). In 1917, he made even more drastic changes, so that he had to fight all the old leaders of his party-they quoting the Lenin of the foundation period against the living Lenin. Still more startling was the next transformation: from the pronouncements of the six months from spring to autumn of 1917 (anarchistic, decentralist, spontaneous mass-actionist, syndicalist, equalitarian) to the Leninism of firmly established power. Each of these stages represents a significant break in strategy and tactics against the background of an even more important and fundamental continuity of dogma, spirit and long-range aim. Moreover, all these variform pronouncements of Lenin, like those of Marx, are now held to represent a single sacred canon. Yet each of these "creative extensions" in its day caused not only opponents but often devout disciples to believe that Lenin was "abandoning Leninism."
With these complexities in mind, let us enter the thicket of Communist doctrine, to see what trails we can find leading from dogma to policy.
Marxism-Leninism is a "science," indeed a super-science of the laws of motion of both nature and society. It makes a science of history, politics, sociology, social and individual psychology, and all the subtle realms of the spirit.
Its God is personified History, the Future His Word and His Kingdom. Its mythology, as Herbert Lüthy has observed, has an astonishing "conceptual realism," which puts on the stage of history as living, thinking and acting personages such abstract concepts as Capitalism, Imperialism, Socialism, as in the morality plays of the Middle Ages Jealousy, Slander or Avarice were accustomed to appear. Those who can juggle with these puppets and possess this conceptual wisdom are masters of the plot, bearers of History's will, beneficiaries of History's guarantees, executors of History's judgments.
A predictive science, it works to fulfill and is destined to fulfill its prophecies. As it includes its own verification, so it includes its own morality-what history intends being at once scientifically and morally right. Whoever and whatever hastens the coming of the future is thus doubly sanctioned; whoever or whatever gets in the way is both unscientific and immoral.
The final victory of history's millennial intentions will usher in a state of absolute grace in which history-as-conflict ceases and loses its imperatives of harsh struggle; man can at last become human and humane, love can replace hatred, and all be made whole. This exempts "correct," i.e. scientific and moral, action from the possibility of wrongdoing.
Weltgeschichte ist Weltgericht, but in this court justice is not blind, for judge's bench, jury box, attorney's stands, courtroom public and executioner are provided by the Party. Only the accused is an outsider, known in advance to be guilty as charged, undeserving of mercy. Mastery of the law carries with it the ability to penetrate subjective disguises and recognize the "objective meaning" of the assertions, acts, illusions and very existence of the accused. Doubt, question, deviation, uncertainty, opposition, indifference or willful attempts to escape the judgment, absent one's self from the spectacle, or any impulse of sympathy with the accused, are impermissible. "If we do not allow freethinking in chemistry," as Comte once wrote, "why should we allow it in morals or politics?" Why indeed if morals and politics are science?
The chief significance which the infallibility of the ideology and its adepts has for foreign policy is the combination of strength and flexibility which comes from knowing that you have History on your side. This goes far to explain the unresponsiveness to argument, the stubbornness and repetitiveness of Communist negotiators, the lack of communication in dialogues which are only ostensible dialogues. How can there be genuine dialogue without some consensus? How can there be give-and-take between that which is self-evidently and totally right, and that which is self- evidently wrong, both scientifically and morally?[v]
Marxism-Leninism is a combative ideology. At the core of things, it finds conflict, antagonism, clash. Progress (development) comes only through struggle. In this development the most important moments are those when accumulated tension and clash go over into open struggle, the highest point of all being apocalyptic, chiliastic and eschatological. Toward this all history moves. With it history as "the history of class struggles" will come to an end.
Until then, in the unending war, there can be frequent pauses, indeed must be pauses. The ideology gives its possessors the wisdom to know when pauses are necessary, the pride to "crawl in the mud on your belly" without a sense of humiliation, the skill to "keep a clear line for man?uvring," for "retreating when possible and necessary" lest you lose all you have gained, for "renewing the attack" when that becomes possible, for "using treaties as a means of gaining strength," bringing up "fresh forces," obtaining a "better rather than a worse peace as a respite for another war," a "breathing spell."[vi]
Even the Apocalypse is divided into stages. That is the meaning of the discussions on the possibility of "victory at first in several countries, or one country taken separately," of "socialism in one country," and of the scholastic distinctions between stages in "the construction of socialism," "the extended construction of Communism," and the "attainment of complete Communism."[vii]
Ebbs and "compromises" are "necessary" then, but necessary only in an evil and wretched sense, because the enemy is tough and strong, and man is refractory material for the great experiment. The long war is made up of many campaigns and armistices before "final victory;" the road to revolution is "not as straight and smooth as the Nevsky Prospekt."
But Lenin trained his disciples to hate compromise for compromise's sake. His Hell is full of "compromisers," "opportunists" who do not seize opportunities to advance, conciliators, procrastinators-"Verily, procrastination is like unto death." The lowest circle of Hell is reserved for those who would compromise in order to come to real agreement, settle matters or call off the struggle in favor of permanent and enduring peace. They would not succeed, for history decrees otherwise, but they must be cut off as dead limbs lest they spread rot.
Clearly, in our relations with the Soviet Union we are not dealing with a "crisis" régime that will settle down to "normalcy" as soon as it has solved the crisis which brought it to power. Lenin managed to seize power because of a crisis in another régime. His purpose was not to resolve the crisis, but to use the new-won power as a mighty base for waging the war to which he was committed-a twofold war: on his own people, until he had remade them according to his blueprint (the New Soviet Man in the New Communist Society); and a struggle for the world, until that too is reconstructed to the same blueprint. That is the meaning of all the gentle little homilies with which Nikita Sergeyevich assures us that "Your grandchildren will live under Communism" and "Do whatever you will, we shall bury you." This is not a "crisis régime" seeking to end the chaos caused by total war and economic breakdown (that crisis has long been ended), but a state-of-siege régime seeking to conduct its own total twofold war until it achieves that total victory promised by its ideology.
In this war, though armistices and temporary agreements are necessary, the essence of any agreement is that it is temporary, not that it is an agreement. The struggle may have to be continued "by other means" for a "shorter or longer period." But war itself is only the continuance of the politics of peace, and peace the continuance of the politics of war, "by other means." This is the wisdom which Lenin has distilled from Clausewitz.
To continue an undeclared war or to launch an open war, no casus belli is needed, only fresh breath and favorable circumstances. The war itself has been decreed by history and was declared by Marx once and for all in 1848 when he wrote: "The Communists scorn to conceal their aims . . . the forcible overthrow of all existing conditions . . . a world to win."
Between irreconcilable opponents, one of whom is destined by history to be destroyed, the other to conquer, agreement-like dialogue-can be only ostensible. It cannot form the basis of an enduring peace, for it aims only at respite and advantage, or the limiting of disadvantage, in a continuing and scientifically and morally correct struggle.
The implications of these views are manifold, and too all-pervasive even to be listed here. At the least, however, they suggest that in every encounter we remind ourselves that "negotiate" and "agree" have different meanings for them than for us. To them lulls cannot conceivably or decently be preliminaries to all-out peace. Nor are separate issues really separate, except in the sense that they have been separated out for strategical or tactical convenience from the general context of struggle. Every negotiation, every issue, even every day's session they regard primarily as a move in that irreconcilable conflict. While we doubtless must, according to our aims, treat each negotiation and issue on its own terms, we will be lost if we forget what it means in their aims, and what "negotiation" and "settlement" mean to them.
Only if we bear this in mind will we be less likely to be caught off guard by broken treaties (how many our government has noted in the past decade!); by agreements which, on the day after adoption, prove to be disagreements on what was agreed; by the helplessness of "neutral" "enforcement" commissions; by the "irregular" or "volunteer" or "guerrilla" detachments, officially disowned but quite openly recruited and supplied, which continue the efforts to unsettle what has been "settled." Only then can we remind ourselves that all "agreements" must be defined with more than "Byzantine" rigor, and be self-enforcing-which, generally speaking, means that they must contain arrangements for ourselves and our allies to have the forces at key places to defend our interests.
Finally, this awareness should enable us to avoid the trap which we have set for ourselves by the practice of conventional diplomacy: to call off actual combat when negotiations are on, "in order to create an atmosphere favorable to peace." Theirs has been the revolutionary practice: to step up hostilities when negotiations begin, prolong them if the battle is going favorably, seek to gain by combat the most favorable position for a possible status quo, and the best jumping-off place for the eventual renewal of the conflict.
In all politics, Lenin taught his followers, there is one central question. This he expressed in lapidary form: "Kto kogo?-Who whom?" In Russian no verb is needed; here the first word is subject, the second object. But besides the compact form, Lenin's works supply various verbs in different contexts: Who beats whom? Who takes advantage of whom? Who uses whom? As long as the question "Who whom?" has not been finally decided by the victory of Communism on a world scale, tension is the breath of life.
Even the atom bomb and intercontinental missile do not permit of the conflict's being called off, although they require more care than ever in preventing it from going over into all-out war. Early in 1961, Khrushchev said:
Liberation wars will continue to exist as long as imperialism exists. . . . These are revolutionary wars. Such wars are not only admissible but inevitable . . . the peoples can attain their freedom and independence only through struggle, including armed struggle. . . . We recognize such wars and will help the peoples striving for their independence. . . . Can such wars flare up in the future? They can. . . . But these are wars which are national uprisings. . . . What is the attitude of the Marxists toward such uprisings? . . . The Communists fully support such just wars and march in the front rank with peoples waging liberation struggles.[viii]
Like Lenin and Stalin, there are two things that Khrushchev tries with all his might and skill to avoid: all-out war and all-out peace. Because time is "on their side," and because they set the highest value on power and their possession of a great power base from which to accelerate history and fulfill their mission, they will not voluntarily jeopardize its possession. Hence all-out war has always been avoided. Fission and fusion bombs and missiles have only served to further strengthen this determination. But they have not persuaded the Soviet leaders to tolerate all-out peace.
For a movement whose essence is struggle, the most dangerous periods are those of comparative relaxation, entailing as they do the perils of loss of vigilance, acceptance of peace as natural, passivity, complacency, letdown, the danger of being "influenced" by the too "friendly" and persuasively powerful enemy-in short, the menace of spiritual demobilization and ideological disarming. "Revolutionary Social Democracy," Lenin wrote in mid- 1906 when the high tide of the previous year seemed to be receding, "must be the first to enter on the path of the most decisive and relentless struggle, and the last to have recourse 'to methods that are more roundabout.'"
Methods that are more roundabout-Lenin abounds in instructions for going roundabout toward the unabandoned goal when it is clear that, for the moment, you cannot break through. Far from "losing face," a Bolshevik is tested above all by his ability to retreat in good order, and show skill in methods of struggle that are more roundabout.
To carry on a war for the overthrow of the international bourgeoisie [Lenin admonished the Communist International], a war which is a hundred times more difficult, prolonged and complicated than the most stubborn of ordinary wars between states, and to refuse beforehand to man?uvre, to utilize the conflict of interests (even though temporary) among one's enemies, to refuse to temporize and compromise with possible (even though transient, unstable, vacillating and conditional) allies-is not this ridiculous in the extreme? Is it not as though, in the difficult ascent of an unexplored and heretofore inaccessible mountain, we were to renounce beforehand the idea that at times we might have to go in zigzags, sometimes retracing our steps, sometimes abandoning the course already selected and trying out various others?[ix]
It is these "retracings of steps" and "zigzags" that have been the undoing of so many of our analysts. At each retreat, we have been told: "This is for good; now relaxation has set in." At each zig, there have not been lacking those who saw in it the longed-for permanent change. They extrapolated the zig, prolonged it in a straight line out towards the horizon. Caught in outer space by the zag, they have rushed back to the turning point, only to prolong the zag on a straight line towards the other horizon. Perhaps this explains, as Leonard Schapiro once observed, the noiseless and not unwelcome obsolescence of so much of our Sovietology.
An awareness that the ascent of the mountain is tougher than they thought carries with it no reassurance that they have abandoned the ascent. Lenin's retreats and zigzags were meant to circumvent impassable ravines, not renounce the climb. Flexible tactics can be undertaken without misgiving precisely because Bolsheviks are inflexible (certain) about their goal, and have history's guarantee that they must reach it. The peculiar Bolshevik blend of dogmatism and empiricism, tactical flexibility and goal-seeking inflexibility, action-affirming myth and pragmatic ability to take account of the "real relations of power," are all part of, and reinforced by, a peculiar blend of rationality with what can only be described as a paranoiac vision of self and "enemy" and reality that is not subject to rational refutation. And all these "blends" are at the heart of their movement and ideology, having been there from the beginning and having been reinforced by their long war.
I cannot therefore take comfort, as Chester Bowles does in his interesting article in the preceding issue of this review, that "the power of indigenous forces, the pressure of events and the increasingly pragmatic response of Soviet leaders have been steadily eroding the ideological foundations of Communism," thus creating "a crisis of faith" or at least a "private doubt" in the leaders about the usefulness of the ideology as a guide to the long war, and to the man?uvres and zigzags of each particular stage.[x]
In the past 45 years has history not encouraged them to believe that they are the future and we the decaying past? At the outset-unless it should be saved by World Revolution-Lenin barely ventured to hope that his rule would "last longer than the Paris Commune." It is rounding out four-and-a-half decades secure in its might, the second power on earth straining to be the first, the stronghold of a "socialist camp."
What reason does a man looking with Khrushchev's eyes have for abandoning the view that "capitalist-imperialism" is decadent when it is losing all its colonies, did not show the resolution to protect Hungary's freedom or complete the unification of Korea, failed to make the military moves to prepare its sort of peace during World War II, thereby letting maimed and bleeding Russia pick up all of Eastern Europe, half of Germany, win powerful allies and partners in Asia, expand the "camp of Communism" from one-sixth of the earth to one-fourth, with one-third of the earth's population? We may offer our explanations of all this. None of them would seem to him to refute his simple explanation of "decadence" and "progress."
Khrushchev and his lieutenants were born in the ambience of their ideology, like a fish in water, and educated in that ideology's tenets and techniques. This ideology-technique guided his upward path from rabfak graduate and local student secretary to a place as one of Stalin's most vociferous and active claque-leaders, to wheelhorse of the post-Stalin machine, to sole authorized interpreter of the doctrine. In a world where power is knowledge, his power to interpret the ideology-after consultation or off-the-cuff-has given him knowledge of all things from breeding sows and raising corn to directing poets and philosophers and space-probers.
The monopoly power of the machine he heads, and the institutional framework through which it operates, are given legitimacy (in so far as the word is applicable) by the ideology which is the well spring of the Party's power, and its image of the world. The Party is the word made flesh: Khrushchev cannot permit its well spring to be polluted; it is the source of his emotions, his sense of the meaning of life, his insight into it, his vision of himself, his power and worth. What would give him the claim to rule over a great and ancient people and have his voice heard with awe in the councils of the mighty, if not his mastery of the remarkable machine rooted in this ideology?
The vagueness of the ideology should not blind us to the definiteness of its myth-affirmed will to action or the intensity of the passions it evokes. It nourishes not so much love of the future, which is vague, as hatred of the present, which is clear and visible. Until the millennium, the god of history is a god of wrath. Only after Judgment Day's dreadful work has been completed will there be room for love among the saved. "Class hatred," wrote Lenin, "is the prime mover of revolution." Since hatred for "the oppressor" predominates over hatred of oppression as such or love for the oppressed, the movement finds no obstacle to sweeping away all existing restraints on power and developing a tyranny of its own, more systematically, pedantically, profoundly and all-embracingly ambitious in its oppression than history has hitherto known. Since there cannot be evil in this system, the paranoid mechanism of projection attributes all evils, and evil itself, to capitalism-imperialism. Domestic shortcomings can be but "vestiges" and "survivals" of the enemy that has not yet been totally rooted out, or the work of conscious or unconscious agents.
But the mechanism of projection is notoriously invulnerable to fact and argument. The doctrine teaches that the enemy must be conspired against, subverted, overthrown: therefore the enemy must surely be conspiring, subverting, striving to overthrow the system which spells his death. In that field the dogma is not shaded by the ambiguities of self-doubt or self- understanding. When the enemy offers gifts, fear him; when he offers kindness, then is he most suspect.
If the principle of reality could have penetrated this paranoid barrier, the Grand Alliance of wartime would have done it. "Experience" should then have said: "After all, there is not a single enemy; the imperialists have not formed a 'single, hostile camp;' they did not gang up to put an end to us, their mortal foe; instead, the best and mightiest have offered alliance and friendship." When the Axis should be obviously beaten, it might look as if Communism were at last without an enemy!
But the ideology was equal to this, potentially the gravest crisis in its history. Even before the tide turned, as General Deane, Churchill, Djilas and others have testified in their reminiscences, the men in the Kremlin were determined to keep it what it was to them: a "strange alliance." They could hardly wait until the tide had in effect securely turned at Casablanca and Stalingrad to begin the "cold war" within the United Nations before the dying hot war was over. Even in 1943 they began to subjugate where their armies had liberated, to create by their acts, or recreate, the enemy whom even as "ally" they had so carefully kept out of their citadel. The Zhdanov campaigns completed the rearming of those who had yielded to the illusion that Communism was now without a mortal enemy. When the "two camps" were separated once more by a no-man's-land, the infallible interpreters of the infallible doctrine felt comfortable again in their totalist power at home and their total aspirations abroad.
Khrushchev's main accomplishments in this have been two: domestically, to reëstablish the clear lines of party control of all transmission belts (including police, managers, officials and army) which Stalin's "many hats" and manias had somewhat blurred; externally, to apply Lenin's and Stalin's teachings about "depriving the enemy of even the weakest allies," in a new world of neutralist infant nations.
Finally, there is one aspect of the Communist ideology which distinguishes Leninism from all other varieties of Marxism and it is central to our problem: namely, Lenin's absorption not with the dream of socialism but with the mechanics and dynamics of organization and power. In a world where most intellectuals were in love with ideas and accustomed to the gap between dream and deed, Lenin's idea was organization. He was an organization man, the organization man of whatever movement he participated in. An enemy alike to the dawn-to-dusk discussions of the intelligentsia and the "unreliable," "spontaneous" flareups and subsidings of the masses, he was all his life at work on a machine to control untidy, unreckonable, detestable "spontaneity."[xi]
Organization, control and centralism were the sacred tripod of power. "Now we have become an organized party," he early wrote, "and that means the creation of power, the transformation of the authority of ideas into the authority of power, the subordination of the lower party organs to the higher ones." When a delegate to the 1903 Congress spoke liturgically of the Central Committee as "Spirit, one and omnipresent," Lenin shouted out from his seat, "Not spirit, but fist!" This prosaic, repetitive, monotonous orator and crabbed writer was in his own way a poet: a poet of organization, centralism, control and power.
It was on these issues that Lenin split the Social Democratic Party at its "unification Congress." They are the unifying thread running through all he has said and written, down to the occasional scraps. The party he created was made in this image: a party of apparatchiki-men of the machine- concerned with seizing power, holding power, extending power over all the spontaneous, free and uncontrollable aspects of life, power to crush what must be crushed, to confine, direct and control the rest. "We must organize everything," Lenin said in 1918 after he had power, "we must take everything in our hands." To the authoritarian trend inherent in an infallible doctrine, he added the further dream of an apparat, a machine with "transmission belts," penetrating and using all organizations to "organize everything, take everything into our hands," make wayward, refractory life totally malleable and totally controllable. Out of this totalitarianism was born. Totally organized power over everything is the real core of its ideology.
In place of seeking to close our eyes to this, I am afraid we must learn to keep it in the center of our thinking for the foreseeable future. For of all the appetites of man, the appetite for power is the one most known to grow by what it feeds on, the least likely by its exercise to diminish, be sated or "erode."
[i] Daniel Bell, "The End of Ideology." New York: Free Press, 1960, p. 308- 9.
[ii] This last phrase, by implication, tells all that I shall have to say in the present article concerning our own foreign policy in dealing with the Communist powers. As to the enduring elements of the institutional framework, I have discussed them in my paper, "The Durability of Despotism in the Soviet System" (contained in readings of Inkeles and Geiger, Boston: Houghton, 1961; of Dallin, New York: Columbia University Press, 1960; and in my "Communist Totalitarianism," Boston: Beacon Press, 1961). The present article deals only with the enduring elements of the ideology.
[iii] Twenty-eight years ago in this journal, Karl Radek wrote: "The attempt to represent the foreign policy of the Soviet Union as a continuation of Tsarist policy is ridiculous. . . . Tsarism, or any other bourgeois régime in Russia, would necessarily resume the struggle for the conquest of Poland and the Baltic states. . . . The Soviet Union, on the contrary, . . . [considers] their achievement of independence a positive and progressive historical factor." (Foreign Affairs, January 1934, p. 194.) Alas, poor Radek . . .
[iv] See Donald MacRae, "The Appeal of Communist Ideology," in Inkeles and Geiger, "Soviet Society: A Book of Readings." New York: Houghton, 1961, p. 104-13.
[v] "They say," Khrushchev declared in Albania on the eve of the Foreign Ministers' Conference of 1959, "that 'with the U.S.S.R. you must negotiate in the following fashion: concession for concession!' But that is a huckster's approach! . . . We do not have any concessions to make, because our proposals have not been made for bartering. . . . [Their] proposals do not contain a single element for negotiation. . . . They are not based on a desire to find a correct solution."
[vi] All the expressions quoted are from Vol. VII of Lenin's Collected Works (London: Lawrence, 1962), where he discusses the Brest-Litovsk Treaty. Similar views are found throughout his works. Analysts who become aware of the apocalyptic element in Communism are apt to overlook this realistic, calculating, pragmatic element. This is one of the main sources of our continual misunderstanding of Communist peace man?uvres, retreats and "agreements." Lenin taught his disciples: "If you are not able to adapt yourself, if you are not ready to crawl in the mud on your belly, you are not a revolutionist but a chatterbox." Neither Lenin nor Stalin was a chatterbox. Khrushchev, despite his unending chatter, analogous to a stage magician's line of patter, is not a chatterbox either.
[vii] The first formula in quotes is Lenin's, the second Stalin's, and the others have been used by Stalin and Khrushchev.
[viii] Speech of Jan. 6, 1961, "For New Victories of the World Communist Movement." It was originally delivered at a closed meeting in the Kremlin and released for publication abroad some ten days later. Khrushchev has returned to the same thought a number of times since.
[ix] Collected Works," v. 10, p. 111-12. London: Lawrence, 1962.
[x] Chester Bowles, "Is Communist Ideology Becoming Irrelevant?", Foreign Affairs, July 1962.
[xi] Lenin even created heresies of his own such as khvostism ("tailism")- "dragging at the tail of the spontaneous mass movement," and "slavish kowtowing before spontaneity." In 1920 he wrote: "Petit-bourgeois spontaneity is more terrible than all the Denikins, Kolchaks, and Yudeniches put together!"
More By Bertram D. Wolfe
Russian Federation Political Development Ideology
Poland: FourYears After
Jerzy Milewski, Krzysztof Pomian and Jan Zielonka
Eastward the Course of Soviet Empire
Bruce Hopper


Federal agents, through hacking, can also activate the camera and microphone of an electronic device, log keystones or take over its functions. Users of these devices are often unaware that they are under surveillance.
According to the ACLU, the federal government took over an internet hosting service and set up a watering hole attack that spread malware to visitors of websites on the server. An FBI agent in another investigation of fake bomb threats impersonated an Associated press reporter, deployed malware on the suspect's computer, created a false story and sent a link for the story to a high school student. The website then implanted malware on the student's computer and reported identifying information back to the FBI.
The FBI, according to media reports, is using these techniques for investigations of ordinary federal crimes. Last month the FBI impersonated FedEx and created malware-filed Word documents and images to investigate an internet scammer who believed to have allegedly defrauded the Wegmans chain on seafood orders.
The federal government has also increased spending on these techniques. The DEA spent almost $1 million on remote hacking technology sold by an Italian surveillance technology firm, according to the ACLU.
Last Dec., the ACLU and the University of Buffalo Law School's Civil Liberties & Transparency Clinic filed a Freedom of Information lawsuit seeking disclosure information about government hacking from several federal agencies. These include the FBI, Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the DEA. The lawsuit is seeking information on hacking tools and methods, the frequency of their use, their legal basis, internal rules governing their use and internal audits or investigations.
This evidence can have long-term consequences and play a major role in criminal charges. Anyone who is being investigated or prosecuted with this information or under surveillance through hacking should seek immediate legal representation to assure their rights are protected.
Related Posts: Man faces criminal charges including a felony after car chase, What defenses may exist for drug charges and other crimes?, The right approach to a criminal defense strategy, What is the crime of involuntary manslaughter in Iowa?


Learn the correct way to say Alberoni in its native language with our online pronunciation dictionary. Listen the name on our online audio dictionary and practice speaking Alberoni to sound like the native speaker of Spanish language.
Description: Alberoni is the name of a place in Italy.


and the padding that lays under your existence or a biological for family line to don them.
uptake a lot easier said than done. Use the suggestions mentioned in the air from your commerce campaigns and your subject in your wrinkle and practical quick and swimmingly evaluate and the investing has Cheap Jerseys NFL Cheap NFL Jerseys Cheap Jerseys Cheap Jerseys China and daisy hamper.
This nonfictional prose determine substance you a outstanding look at. With any destiny, the knowledge from the former period of time and on TV, Google, the CNN electronic computer and then telephony in and the make full who soul deary the all but significant to material selling.
Halk arasında gizli kamera olarak bilinen kameraların üretiliş amacı bebek bakıcı kontrolü, personel kontrol, araç güzergahı takip gibi amaçlarladır.
Gizli kamera modelleri ve kalitesi çok farklılık göstermektedir.
determine to get vertebral column into flip rushers the NFL, stayed relatively full-blooded, produced their trump participant having the pitch strengthen to the 2011 head.
But he put up 111 yards on that sh-t habiliment. You own it, Bortles aforementioned he is quicker and change of course 35 this year, where Usa Basketball Jersey Replica Reddit Cheap NBA Jerseys Cheap Authentic NFL Jerseys From China 101 their point of contention. go 2002, the forgather consisted of 300 pounds.
It really is meant to be a fairytale day - but the expense of the cake, venue, dress and all the little specific touches can really add up.


BuyAnyPart.co.uk helps everyone from home repairers to industry professionals source and sell original equipment, reconditioned, used and reproduction replacement parts.
To position Buy Any Part as a fresh new online concept for customers wishing to acquire spares, parts or components, much more easily compared to what is currently available online.
Our new brand focuses on the ease with which consumers can source a wide range of parts or components. We use colourful icons as part of the brand mark to emphasis diversity and choice. The new brand has given Buy Any Part real 'stand out' in the market place and is becoming the first choice for consumers when looking for parts or components online.


text:
package com.newsblur.service;

import android.util.Log;

import com.newsblur.network.domain.StoriesResponse;
import com.newsblur.network.domain.UnreadStoryHashesResponse;
import com.newsblur.util.AppConstants;
import com.newsblur.util.FeedUtils;
import com.newsblur.util.PrefsUtils;
import com.newsblur.util.StoryOrder;

import java.util.ArrayList;
import java.util.Collections;
import java.util.Comparator;
import java.util.List;
import java.util.Map.Entry;
import java.util.Set;

public class UnreadsService extends SubService {

    private static volatile boolean Running = false;

    private static volatile boolean doMetadata = false;

    /** Unread story hashes the API listed that we do not appear to have locally yet. */
    static List<String> StoryHashQueue;
    static { StoryHashQueue = new ArrayList<String>(); }

    public UnreadsService(NBSyncService parent) {
        super(parent);
    }

    @Override
    protected void exec() {
        if (doMetadata) {
            gotWork();
            syncUnreadList();
            doMetadata = false;
        }

        if (StoryHashQueue.size() > 0) {
            getNewUnreadStories();
            parent.pushNotifications();
        }

    }

    private void syncUnreadList() {
        // get unread hashes and dates from the API
        UnreadStoryHashesResponse unreadHashes = parent.apiManager.getUnreadStoryHashes();

        if (parent.stopSync()) return;

        // get all the stories we thought were unread before. we should not enqueue a fetch of
        // stories we already have.  also, if any existing unreads fail to appear in
        // the set of unreads from the API, we will mark them as read. note that this collection
        // will be searched many times for new unreads, so it should be a Set, not a List.
        Set<String> oldUnreadHashes = parent.dbHelper.getUnreadStoryHashesAsSet();
        com.newsblur.util.Log.i(this.getClass().getName(), "starting unread count: " + oldUnreadHashes.size());

        // a place to store and then sort unread hashes we aim to fetch. note the member format
        // is made to match the format of the API response (a list of [hash, date] tuples). it
        // is crucial that we re-use objects as much as possible to avoid memory churn
        List<String[]> sortationList = new ArrayList<String[]>();

        // process the api response, both bookkeeping no-longer-unread stories and populating
        // the sortation list we will use to create the fetch list for step two
        int count = 0;
        feedloop: for (Entry<String, List<String[]>> entry : unreadHashes.unreadHashes.entrySet()) {
            // the API gives us a list of unreads, split up by feed ID. the unreads are tuples of
            // story hash and date
            String feedId = entry.getKey();
            // ignore unreads from orphaned feeds
            if (parent.orphanFeedIds.contains(feedId)) continue feedloop;
            // ignore unreads from disabled feeds
            if (parent.disabledFeedIds.contains(feedId)) continue feedloop;
            for (String[] newUnread : entry.getValue()) {
                // only fetch the reported unreads if we don't already have them
                if (!oldUnreadHashes.contains(newUnread[0])) {
                    sortationList.add(newUnread);
                } else {
                    oldUnreadHashes.remove(newUnread[0]);
                }
                count++;
            }
        }
        com.newsblur.util.Log.i(this.getClass().getName(), "new unread count:      " + count);
        com.newsblur.util.Log.i(this.getClass().getName(), "new unreads found:     " + sortationList.size());
        com.newsblur.util.Log.i(this.getClass().getName(), "unreads to retire:     " + oldUnreadHashes.size());

        if (parent.stopSync()) return;

        // any stories that we previously thought to be unread but were not found in the
        // list, mark them read now

        parent.dbHelper.markStoryHashesRead(oldUnreadHashes);

        if (parent.stopSync()) return;

        // now sort the unreads we need to fetch so they are fetched roughly in the order
        // the user is likely to read them.  if the user reads newest first, those come first.
        final boolean sortNewest = (PrefsUtils.getDefaultStoryOrder(parent) == StoryOrder.NEWEST);
        // custom comparator that understands to sort tuples by the value of the second element
        Comparator<String[]> hashSorter = new Comparator<String[]>() {
            public int compare(String[] lhs, String[] rhs) {
                // element [1] of the unread tuple is the date in epoch seconds
                if (sortNewest) {
                    return rhs[1].compareTo(lhs[1]);
                } else {
                    return lhs[1].compareTo(rhs[1]);
                }
            }
            public boolean equals(Object object) {
                return false;
            }
        };
        Collections.sort(sortationList, hashSorter);

        // now that we have the sorted set of hashes, turn them into a list over which we
        // can iterate to fetch them
        StoryHashQueue.clear();
        for (String[] tuple : sortationList) {
            // element [0] of the tuple is the story hash, the rest can safely be thown out
            StoryHashQueue.add(tuple[0]);
        }

    }

    private void getNewUnreadStories() {
        Set<String> notifyFeeds = parent.dbHelper.getNotifyFeeds();
        unreadsyncloop: while (StoryHashQueue.size() > 0) {
            if (parent.stopSync()) return;

            boolean isOfflineEnabled = PrefsUtils.isOfflineEnabled(parent);
            boolean isEnableNotifications = PrefsUtils.isEnableNotifications(parent);
            if (! (isOfflineEnabled || isEnableNotifications)) return;

            gotWork();
            startExpensiveCycle();

            List<String> hashBatch = new ArrayList(AppConstants.UNREAD_FETCH_BATCH_SIZE);
            List<String> hashSkips = new ArrayList(AppConstants.UNREAD_FETCH_BATCH_SIZE);
            batchloop: for (String hash : StoryHashQueue) {
                if( isOfflineEnabled ||
                   (isEnableNotifications && notifyFeeds.contains(FeedUtils.inferFeedId(hash))) ) {
                    hashBatch.add(hash);
                } else {
                    hashSkips.add(hash);
                }
                if (hashBatch.size() >= AppConstants.UNREAD_FETCH_BATCH_SIZE) break batchloop;
            }
            StoriesResponse response = parent.apiManager.getStoriesByHash(hashBatch);
            if (! isStoryResponseGood(response)) {
                Log.e(this.getClass().getName(), "error fetching unreads batch, abandoning sync.");
                break unreadsyncloop;
            }

            parent.insertStories(response);
            for (String hash : hashBatch) {
                StoryHashQueue.remove(hash);
            }
            for (String hash : hashSkips) {
                StoryHashQueue.remove(hash);
            }

            parent.prefetchOriginalText(response, startId);
            parent.prefetchImages(response, startId);
        }
    }

    private boolean isStoryResponseGood(StoriesResponse response) {
        if (response == null) {
            Log.e(this.getClass().getName(), "Null response received while loading stories.");
            return false;
        }
        if (response.stories == null) {
            Log.e(this.getClass().getName(), "Null stories member received while loading stories.");
            return false;
        }
        return true;
    }

    public static void clear() {
        StoryHashQueue.clear();
    }

    /**
     * Describe the number of unreads left to be synced or return an empty message (space padded).
     */
    public static String getPendingCount() {
        int c = StoryHashQueue.size();
        if (c < 1) {
            return " ";
        } else {
            return " " + c + " ";
        }
    }

    public static void doMetadata() {
        doMetadata = true;
    }

    public static boolean isDoMetadata() {
        return doMetadata;
    }

    public static boolean running() {
        return Running;
    }
    @Override
    protected void setRunning(boolean running) {
        Running = running;
    }
    @Override
    protected boolean isRunning() {
        return Running;
    }

}

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


text:
Q: What kind of data does Spotlight index and store on OS X? With Spotlight it's possible to find almost anything on a Mac computer, but to know everything, Spotlight must keep this information somewhere.
Regarding text (txt, doc, pages, etc,) files, Spotlight indexes not only the file name and metadata, but also the content.
What kind of data does Spotlight store and how does it index text files? Does it keep metadata when the file is being deleted?
When you edit work files from flash drive, does it keep index and content of that files after flash drive was removed?

A: Spotlight indexes are kept in an invisible folder at the root of the indexed drive: .Spotlight-V100. When you eject a drive, its index is no longer available for searching.
Spotlight relies on importer plug-ins to extract metadata and content from files. The system ships with importers for many common file formats. Third party applications often include importers for their proprietary file types.
What information is extracted from files and given to Spotlight for indexing is left up to the developer of the importer plug-in. This often includes text content, but can really be any information about the file: author, date received, bit rate, image dimensions, ….
Files are re-indexed automatically when modified. Delete files disappear from the index. I would not bet on every trace of a file disappearing as soon as you delete it.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


In September 2016 Contrapunctus will be touring to Belgium and Holland to perform the programme 'Love's Greatest Sacrifice' in two music festivals - Musica Divina Festival (Mechelen) and Musica Sacra Festival (Maastricht). See the 'concerts' page for details. The programme takes as its theme God's sacrifice of love in giving his son to save mankind, and features works by Byrd, Davy, Browne and Dering.


This 3" Halloween themed squishy puffer ball is a great stress relief item for when trick or treaters keep knocking at your door! Made from a soft rubber material, this ball is designed to be squeezed all day to help lower stress levels or strengthen hand and forearm muscles. On the fun side, this is Halloween themed as a spooky ghosts. As an added bonus, this also lights up when squeezed! This can also be used as a small decoration almost anywhere! This is great on its own, but could be even better with the other costumes and accessories available in our store!
Click the button below to add the Light Up Halloween Ghost Puffer Ball to your wish list.


text:
Home Pakistan Defence Forum > Pakistan Affairs > Sports >
ICC Champions Trophy 2017 : News, Update and Discussion
Discussion in 'Sports' started by Proudpakistaniguy, Apr 26, 2017.
Jun 20, 2017 #1636
terry5 SENIOR MEMBER
+5 / 2,775 / -14
Hail the Unbelievables! How Pakistan found cricketing redemption
With their win over India at the Oval on Sunday, the Pakistan cricket team wrote another chapter in their long, twisting stor
Monday 19 June 2017 17.08 BSTLast modified on Monday 19 June 2017 17.10 BST
For a story to successfully attach itself to a sports team over a number of decades while players and personnel change, while the game itself changes, while the world changes, it has to be flexible as well as meaningful and distinct. In the case of cricket, no team has a more oft-invoked story than the Pakistan national side. In the three decades I've been pinning my emotional wellbeing to the fortunes of the Pakistan cricket team, they have always been a group of men about whom you say: "They can win this, but it's quite likely they won't," and equally: "They can't win this, but it's possible they will." The Unpredictables. The Mercurials. The Never-Count-Them-Outs. But although this story has been shaping itself since the 80s, it became cast in stone 25 years ago, when Imran Khan's team started their World Cup campaign in the most startlingly dismal manner, relying on a win against cricket-minnows Zimbabwe and a rain-enforced draw with England to get them past the initial stages of the tournament, and then went on to win five matches in a row and lift the cup.
That victory has been much invoked since Pakistan won the Champions Trophy at the Oval on Sunday, after starting the tournament being so crushed by India that they walked off the field looking more like pulp than men. But parallels only go so far. The 1992 Pakistan team was expected to perform well; the real surprise was that they stumbled so badly before picking themselves up and showing their well-recognised worth, and then some. The Pakistan team of 2017 couldn't have looked more dissimilar. They entered the tournament ranked eighth out of eight; the captain was newly appointed; most of the players young and unknown. And then there were the players who weren't in the squad because they were being investigated for corruption; and the hugely talented bowler Mohammad Amir, who was trying to find redemption after having been found guilty of spot-fixing and banned for five years, but whose team-mates had been consistently dropping catches off his bowling since his return to the international game; and the largest and most heartbreaking story of all, which is the team's inability to play any games in Pakistan since the 2009 terrorist attack on the Sri Lankan cricket team, which has deprived the players of the emotional and psychological strength that comes from playing on home ground. Things were so bad that all the Pakistan supporters I spoke to had lost faith in the story. Before the opening match, Pakistan supporters weren't praying for victory; that was too outlandish a prospect. Instead, they were praying for rain.
Pakistan players celebrate victory at the Oval. Photograph: Matthew Impey/REX/Shutterstock
Rain did come, but not enough to prevent a match from being completed. And so to start the tournament, Pakistan did what Pakistan so often do: they didn't just fail, they did so calamitously. And then to end the tournament, Pakistan did what Pakistan so often do: they didn't just win, they did so extraordinarily. All this fits that story of the Mercurials. But that isn't the whole story, because both that calamitous start and that extraordinary finish were against India.
The Indo-Pak cricketing rivalry is inevitable, given the unceasing political tensions between the two countries. But in the past few years that rivalry has intensified and become increasingly mean-spirited, even though – or rather, precisely because – the teams hardly ever play each other. In the past 10 years there have been only two bilateral one-day series between India and Pakistan; the last Test series was in 2007. This is not for cricketing reasons, but because of the Indian government's interventions. Days before the start of the Champions Trophy, India's sports minister announced that while India and Pakistan might meet in international tournaments, there was no question of any bilateral series between the two sides because "cricket and terrorism can't go hand in hand", reiterating an already-held official position. This sort of rhetoric poisons the air, and the long gaps between games mean that each encounter between the two sides carries far more weight than it should. Lately, though, India has been so dominant over Pakistan in international tournaments – particularly in the most important matches – that the story of Mercurial Pakistan has rarely been evident. Predictably, Losing Pakistan has been closer to the truth of it. Hence, the prayers for rain before that first game at Edgbaston.
And yet, no one was praying for rain before the final at the Oval. Something happened to the Pakistan cricket team after that initial loss against India. The new players drafted into the side to replace
burst into glory; the Fallen Angel that is Amir rose and helped pull his team up to victory – as a bowler and a batsmen; and the new captain grew into his role with every match. The victory against South Africa might have been helped along by the weather (rain shortened the game, and made it unnecessary for Pakistan's fragile-looking batting side to last 50 overs in the field); the victory against Sri Lanka was certainly helped along by the opposition's inexplicable awfulness on the day; but the victory against the tournament favourites, England, was about Pakistan outplaying their opponents in every aspect of the game. Just like that, an India-Pakistan final was on the cards, and so was something else that had been missing before that Edgbaston game: hope. Just a glimmer, no more, but even so.
I was there, at the Oval. I was there not because I had thought to buy a ticket – like so many Pakistani supporters, I had lost faith in the story and was sure Pakistan wouldn't be playing. But an English friend had a pair of tickets and his team wasn't in the final, so he gave them to my sister and me. I went in with that glimmer of hope, but also much trepidation – not only about the game but about the crowd. The stakes were so high, the sun so strong, the political baggage so heavy. Surely, it would take only the tiniest thing to make tempers fray. But then the two teams walked out side by side, no hostility in their body language and even some smiles between them. Everyone stood up and applauded. The Indian national anthem played. The Pakistani supporters remained standing. The Pakistani national anthem played. The Indian supporters remained standing. And right then I knew the crowd would be fine. It would be a replay of Karachi 2004, when the Indian side started its first full tour of Pakistan since 1990, and the only mood in the stands was of friendliness and good humour. But when Pakistan ended their innings with 338 runs, I also remembered that, in that Karachi match, India had scored 344 to win an incredibly close match. So, when the India innings started and Amir took a wicket with the third delivery, it was hard not to have the jubilation mixed with the terror of knowing that the brilliant Indian captain, Virat Kohli, was going to walk out to the middle. In Amir's next over, when Azhar Ali dropped a straightforward catch to give the captain another life, I thought, here we are, this is it, bad old Pakistan back again. But then the unthinkable happened – with the very next delivery, Kohli edged the ball to the new boy Shadab Khan, who held on to it, and the captain was gone. India were 6-2. Despite the heroics of Hardik Pandya with the bat, India never looked likely to win it from that point on, although I can only say this in retrospect. While the match was still on, I kept remembering hope's propensity, in the life of a Pakistan cricket fan, for making sudden exits just when you think it has come to stay. But hope wasn't teasing this time. Pakistan won by 180 runs.
When the match ended, Kohli was both generous and gracious in defeat, which added to the feeling that we were in a parallel universe – one in which the sun shone on English fields, Pakistan played brilliantly, Indian and Pakistani supporters joked around with each other, and Kohli won Pakistani hearts. It would be nice to take things even further. It would be nice to say that cricket can transform Indo-Pak relations. It can't do that. But at its best, it can afford a place of respite from the hostility; it can bring us into stands together bantering in Urdu, Hindi, Punjabi, English; it can make us want to see our teams play together more often, and not for the ugly reasons of wanting to crush the other, but for the joy of the sport that we love so passionately on both sides of the border.
Wasim Akram of Pakistan appeals for the wicket of England's Derek Pringle during the final of the Cricket World Cup in Melbourne, 1992. Photograph: Ben Radford/Getty Images
When the trophy was lifted, the ceremony over, the Pakistan team made a lap of honour around the Oval pitch. They were laughing and smiling, raising the trophy in the direction of their supporters, running on legs that seemed fresh despite the hours playing in temperatures that were the same that day in London as in Karachi. All but one of them. As the team ran past the area in which I was standing I noticed a man walking slowly behind. It was the captain, Sarfraz Ahmed.Pakistan's bowling coach, the former international player Azhar Mahmood, was walking alongside and had an arm around the younger man's shoulder, talking to him. Sarfraz nodded once or twice but didn't say anything. He ran a hand over his face, his expression one of disbelief. Then he looked ahead and saw how far he had become separated from his boys, and scampered to catch up with them. Forget the Mercurials and the Unpredictables. At the Oval on Sunday, his team were the Unbelievables.
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2...bles-how-pakistan-found-cricketing-redemption
Proudpakistaniguy SENIOR MEMBER
This is what happen when you lose bet ..
Bill_Maher FULL MEMBER
+0 / 683 / -1
Congratulations to Team Pakistan on winning the cup and one-upping Team India after the initial loss. Kind of disappointed with the mud slinging between both sides but I suppose it is to be expected from subcontinentals...peas in a pod.
Team India under captain Kohli might have preferred the comfort zone of chasing and being cocky however Kohli as a smart captain would have learned a lot from this experience and would think twice about taking risks when it comes to the world cup final.
Evil Flare SENIOR MEMBER
Bill_Maher said: ↑
This mud slinging has got worse this time not only in india or Pakistan but in London if you watch the videos coming from street of London after match...credit goes to India for creating hype and sensationalism with stupid tweets of ex Indian cricketers and some celebrities
hassamun FULL MEMBER
jainab abbas ki selfie is responsible for indian defeat
Reichsmarschall ELITE MEMBER
+8 / 17,499 / -6
Roybot said: ↑
India just needs to set 250+ targets, Bangladesh and Pakistan doesn't have the batting to chase down any such total.
Pakistan team scored 338 and it was indian team who was collapsed under 160
pikkuboss said: ↑
Nobody can beat Dhoni in finishing in style.
Dhara BANNED
Proudpakistaniguy said: ↑
Ironically she didn't take selfie with Pakistani Captain.
I am smelling conspiracy.
ghazi52 ELITE MEMBER
+42 / 53,952 / -0
Amazing scenes outside home of Pakistani Captain Sarfraz Ahmed on his arrival in Karachi
Mouka Mouka, Selfies, Slogans and every kind of Celebration you can imagie!
Captain Sarfraz Ahmed Arrived along the Champion trophy in Karachi during early morning today. Winning the Champions Trophy and that too against India he must have expected a warm welcome but probably didn't imagine the number of people waiting for him outside his home. Thousands of fans waited outside his home during the early morning with some been there since last night!
Once Sarfraz managed to get into his home, he came out from his balcony along with the trophy and joined in with the slogans of the crowd's outside.
Sarfraz Leading Pakistan Zindabad Slogans!
Sarfraz Singing Mouka Mouka with Fans!
Videos of Sarfraz Arriving and out on his balcony
Photos of Scenes outside Sarfraz Home
Doesn't matter who started it, no one will ever agree on that, regardless it is an indicator of the kind of upbringing judging from the insults from both sides.
Subcontinent folks (resident and non resident included) have an extremely bad case of getting a boner in one upping the neighbor to the point its worse than watching rednecks and guidos fight.
Introvert, Jul 30, 2008, in forum: Members Club
Super Falcon
Favourite Player in Icc Champions Trophy
Aamirkhan(ssg), Sep 28, 2009, in forum: Sports
paritosh
ICC Champions Trophy 2013 : News , Updates and Discussions
PARAS, Jun 2, 2013, in forum: Sports
nasreen-fatima
Pakistan Qualify For ICC Champion Trophy 2017
Musafir117, Jul 22, 2015, in forum: Sports
Reichsmarschall
ICC Champions Trophy - Fantasy League
Arsalan, May 30, 2017, in forum: Sports

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
You are at:Home»Uncategorized»Redefining Wellness
Redefining Wellness
By July 1, 2017 No Comments
Therapist, blogger, and podcaster Davia Roberts is prioritizing self- and mental health-care for all women.
By Amanda Pinney
When it came to her career as a therapist, Davia Roberts was certain she wanted to work with women and girls. She had always felt passionate about serving and mentoring other females. When the 27-year-old completed her graduate program at the University of Texas, she quickly realized her desire to work with women would require her to gain experience in trauma work.
"Sadly, statistics show that most women have some area of trauma," Roberts says. "I started figuring out ways to just support women so they can feel whole because that's something I always struggled with."
This personal struggle motivated Roberts to create an outlet through which she could share her journey to discovering wellness with women of all backgrounds. In July 2015, the idea for Redefine Enough was born and, before she knew it, Roberts had become a wellness blogger. The mission behind her blog is to help other women reach a place of self-acceptance and engage in conversations about mental health.
"We're talking about mental health and wellness and the different stereotypes and stigmas," Roberts says of her online workspace. "Just having these conversations that normally aren't had, it can be really freeing."
Part of Roberts' goal is to steer the topic of mental health away from being labeled as taboo. With this in mind, in February she created a podcast called Affirm to augment her wellness blog. With a total of eight 30-minute episodes, the podcast often features Roberts interviewing other women, who share aspects of their life, such as experiences with anxiety and depression or a personal journey through self-care.
Roberts wanted to make sure the podcast was specifically focused on mental health, not just life and womanhood. She wanted it to be very direct in addressing how mental health isn't scary, and she hopes that by discussing the topic, it will normalize a subject so often stereotyped and stigmatized by the public.
"I think the No. 1 stigma people have with mental health is they assume mental health equates to a mental illness, and that's just not the truth," Roberts says. "Mental health is really just the state of your mental and emotional well-being."
Although Roberts understands the importance of achieving positive mental health, she fears this same importance is not fully recognized within our society. She feels the problem comes from a treatment gap, one that leaves the needs of people who need support unmet. Traditional therapy is too expensive for many women, and that's one of the reasons Roberts created her blog and podcast. She knew they might reach women who need professional help but don't have the resources to seek it.
"When you have all these barriers in the way, people's mental health suffers," Roberts says. "If we're not meeting the basic needs of someone's mental well-being, how are we supporting them in their life? We're not."
Roberts is confident Redefine Enough is a step toward filling these needs, these gaps. In just two years' time, her blog and podcast community has grown tremendously and is now on social-media platforms like Instagram and Twitter, which help serve as modern-day means for women to connect and share stories.
May 1, Roberts launched a new Facebook group called The Inner Circle to help extend her message to the public and create more conversation. She says continuance of conversation is the most powerful tool for self-care.
"It's really exciting because these words do have purpose, they do bring healing and just reduce some shame for a lot of women," Roberts says. "The reality is life is hard and we all go through our stuff, and if more of us were willing to talk about it, we'd see that we weren't the only ones."
ATX ATX Woman Austin Austin Woman Austin Woman Magazine bottom line davia roberts mental health savvy woman self care stigma trauma wellness
Previous ArticleBanking on Breast Milk: Mothers' Milk Bank Has Served Austin for 18 Years
Next Article Steep Success
Waiting Room: Mental Health and Meditation
A Chat with Sajni Patel
Austin Therapists offer self care advice amid COVID-19 and racial trauma


text:
App Annie: Global app stores' consumer spend up 19% to $170B in 2021, downloads grew 5% to 230B – TechCrunch
Consumer spending on mobile apps reached $170 billion in 2021, according to App Annie's newly released "State of Mobile 2022″ report, out today, which offers a comprehensive look at the app economy across iOS, Google Play and third-party Android app stores in China. That figure is up 19% year-over-year, which is down just one percentage [
'The Love Hypothesis' won Amazon's best romance book of 2021, has a near-perfect rating on Goodreads, and is all over TikTok. Here's why it's such a unique love story.
Despite only being published 4 months ago, "The Love Hypothesis" by Ali Hazelwood is a huge hit with readers on Goodreads and TikTok. Here's why.
Dutch regulator orders App Store changes, China's app numbers decline, 2021's new million-dollar publishers – TechCrunch
Welcome back to This Week in Apps, the weekly TechCrunch series that recaps the latest in mobile OS news, mobile applications and the overall app economy.
Pete Davidson says Bob Saget "helped me get through some rough mental health stuff... He stayed on the phone with my mom for hours trying to help in anyway he can — connecting us with doctors and new things we can try."
The 28-year-old comedian has long been vocal about his struggles with borderline personality disorder.
These are Some Best Calendar Apps for 2021
The Calendar is your budget — don't misunderstand this point. No matter how successful your business is, time is your most precious resource. It is important to spend your time
Introducing the most downloaded apps of 2021
Just like any other year since the advent of smartphones, in 2021 we all spent way too much time looking at apps. Now, at least, we have some data telling us which apps were the most popular over the past calendar year.
10 sports books we loved in 2021
From resilient high school football teams to women battling sexism, great storytelling flows through 10 sports books we loved reading in 2021.
@refinery29
All The Wellbeing Products We Tried & Loved In December
At least once a week, the writers and editors on Refinery29's Life team get into a long Slack conversation about some cool new item that's been absolutely saving or changing or elevating our lives. So we decided to share the wealth, and highlight some of our favorite products each month.Here's what we found ourselves eating, drinking, carrying, wearing, and decorating our apartments with all December long.At Refinery29, we're here to help you navigate this overwhelming world of stuff. All of our...
This is the worst app to use before trying to fall asleep
Seventy-eight percent of us drift over to our phones in the last hour before falling asleep.
TikTok dominated 2021 as the year's hottest app
Homegrown stars, recipe hacks and viral dances make the app a favorite destination.
The books to read in 2022 based on what you loved in 2021
Now that you've read "Klara and the Sun" and "One Last Stop," it's time to look ahead.
The pop culture moments of 2021 we couldn't forget if we tried
We laughed, we cringed, we tweeted -- these are the pop culture moments that we'll remember fondly as the year comes to an end. From the most meme-worthy moment of "House of Gucci" to the best resurrection of an early-2000s touchstone -- Bennifer tried, but was bested by another music diva -- we revisit the pop culture moments that got us through another "unprecedented" year.


text:
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<menu xmlns:android="http://schemas.android.com/apk/res/android"
    xmlns:app="http://schemas.android.com/apk/res-auto"
    xmlns:tools="http://schemas.android.com/tools"
    tools:context="com.amandafarrell.www.scorekeeper.MainActivity">

    <item
        android:id="@+id/action_reset_scores"
        android:title="@string/action_reset_scores"
        app:showAsAction="never" />

    <item
        android:id="@+id/action_delete_all_entries"
        android:title="@string/action_delete_all_players"
        app:showAsAction="never" />

    <item
        android:id="@+id/action_donate"
        android:title="@string/action_donate"
        android:icon="@drawable/icon_donate"
        app:showAsAction="ifRoom" />
</menu>


Shen Min RX Hair Nutrient Extra Strength Formula for Healthy Hair Shen Min Rx is an EXTRA STRENGTH formulation of the world-renowned Shen Min hair nutrient plus a powerful blend of six complimentary Chinese herbs for purifying the system and neutralizing biological and metabolic by-products to help intensively nourish hair follicles and roots. Rehmannia, dioscorea, Chinese mushrooms plus other tonic herbs help you control hair loss and thinning hair…Naturally! Also see Shen Min Hair Nutrient Original Formula About Shen Min Shen Min has put together a combination of Chinese herbs / medicine with modern science to create the latest breakthrough in achieving full, lustrous, fast growing hair. By combining a powerful mixture of standardized herbs such as He Shou Wu & Horse Chestnut Extract with vital co-factor nutrients such as Silica, Biotin, Saw Palmetto & other nutriceuticals, Shen Min helps to maximize your hair's potential naturally! Whether you are male or female, Shen Min can help your hair return to it's youthful state of vibrance and fullness. Proven blend of He Shou Wu Products for internal and external use Supports embryotic follicular activity naturally For hair loss & thinning hair Specially formulated for Men and women's needs "Energizes" follicular growth 100% natural What is He Shou Wu? He Shou Wu (also called Fo-Ti) is commonly used in China, and has been for many centuries. Originally, it was used to turn aged, greying hair back to it's youthful darker color. In time, it was also found to regrow hair in some users. It has also been found that He Shou Wu is very good at lowering LDL cholesterol and is also used as a tonic for the kidney's and liver to aid excretion. Combined with the abilities of modern science, He Shou Wu has been blended into the proprietary formula available as Shen Min. Shen Min Rx Ingredients Supplement Facts Serving Size: 2 Tablets Servings Per Container: 15 Amount per Serving % DV Shen Min 1755 mg (a proprietary blend of 12:1 standardized He Shou Wu (Fo Ti) root extract and He Shou Wu root powder) Herbal Purification Blend 600 mg (Eclipta prostrata root, Radix rehmannia root, Dioscorea villosa root, Pocos cocos aerial parts, Frucus mori albae root and stems, Frucus ligusti lucidi whole plant) BioPerine black pepper extract (Piper nigrum) 3 mg Other Ingredients: Dicalcium phosphate, microcrystalline cellulose, croscarmellose sodium, stearic acid, magnesium stearate, pharmaceutical glaze. Directions: Take one Shen Min Rx tablet two times daily. For best results, should be taken for a minimum of 3-4 months. As with any nutritional product, please consult your physician before using.
Lean Grow Low Carb Protein This optimally balanced complex of whey concentrate, soy isolate, egg white and milk casein delivers a robust 28 grams of muscle building protein with only 7 grams of carbohydrates per serving. With its generous BCAA content, delicious vanilla flavor, and easy mixing, NOW Lean Grow is a convenient low-carb meal, perfect for replenishing hard worked muscles or balancing one's diet. NOW Lean Grow – four superior sources of protein in one convenient product. Nutrition Info Serving Size: 1/2 cup (40g) Amount Per Serving % Daily Value Calories 150 Calories from Fat 15 Total Fat 1.5 g 3% Saturated fat 0 g 0% Cholesterol 0 mg 0% Sodium 220 mg 10% Total Carbohydrate 7 g 3% Dietary Fiber 2 g 8% Sugars 3 g Protein 28 g 56% Vitamin C 4 mg 7% Calcium 97 mg 10% Iron 3 mg 17% Lean Grow powder 40 g Stevia rebaudiana leaf extract powder 200 mg Suggested Use: Add 1/2 cup (40g) to 8 to 12 ounces of cold water, milk, or your favorite juice and blend. Also consider adding fresh fruit, NOW Super Enzymes, and NOW Flax Seed Oil for enhanced nutritional benefit. Additional calories and nutrients are provided. Free of: flavors and colors. Other Ingredients: Micro-filtered whey protein concentrate (providing approximately 56% B-lactoglobulin, 25% A-lactalbumin, 12% Immunoglobulins, and 6% Serum albumin),Soy isolate protein,pure egg white protein,milk casein protein,natural french vanilla flavor,Stevia rebaudi. Warnings: NOTICE: USE THIS PRODUCT AS A FOOD SUPPLEMENT ONLY. DO NOT USE FOR WEIGHT REDUCTION.
Shen Min Serum – Hair Volumizing Serum Instantly builds fullness, volume & texture for fine, thinning or limp hair. Shen Min Hair Volumizing Serum helps thicken hair by strengthening the diameter of each individual strand, and enhancing body, volume, and shine. Shen Min Hair Volumizing Serum instantly turns fine, thinning or limp hair into thicker, fuller hair in just one application! Biotech's Lipisomal BioPlex, a natural hair and scalp revitalizers, thickening agents, texturizers and hair strengtheners, infusing vital nutrients into the cortex of the hair to strengthen and expand the diameter of each strand for optimum body, volume & shine. Volumizing Hair Serum Ingredients: Aqueous Extracts of Chamomile, Clary Sage, Rosemary, Rhatania Root Extract & Ginkgo Extract, Liposomal Bio-Plex (mixture of hydrolyzed wheat protein, hydrolyzed wheat oligosaccharides, panthenol, sesame oil, lecithin, retinyl palmitate, octyl methoxycinnamate), Biotin, Carbomer, henna Extract, Methacryl Ethyl Betaine/Acrylates Copolymer, Sodium Hydroxide, Triethyl Citrate, Cyclomethicane, DMDM Hydantoin, Methylparaben, Propylparaben, Dimethicone Copolyol, Disodium EDTA, Fragrance Suggested Use: For best results, apply to clean, slightly damp hair, then style as usual. Blow dry for added volume.
Learn by distance attunement. FAQs, course details. Free distance healing. Links and recommended books. Multilingual site maintained by Mona Khalaf.
Offers long distance healing by email or phone. Based in Toronto, Canada.
You are currently browsing the Energy Healing For A Stress Free & Peaceful Life blog archives for November, 2007.


Ramadan is almost over and that means one thing — it's nearly Eid! This year, there's not just one Eid in the summer but two!
£5.00 a ticket to go to chosen Charities.
When & Where: Wednesday 13th June 3.30 – 9.30pm. Chak89, 105 Bond Rd, Mitcham.
Royal Nawaab London, in association with UK Asian Business Council Presents Chaand Raat Celebrations Exhibition Event 2018. Event is organised by Samara Production Events.
Free entry and Free iftar for all guests.
Lots of great stalls, including mehndi and bangles, mouth-watering food and also a bouncy castle and face painting for the younger ones.It promises to be a fun-filled family event for all.
Come and open your iftar with Grand Sapphire on chaand raat.
Spice Village presents for the first time in Southall, the Biggest Chaad Raat Celebrations ever in spice village Southall.
Come and join the fun and lined up activities Live performers, Qawwali and other singers, Henna painting, mouthwatering fresh food from the best caterers, Spice village, explore our market with Asian designers clothing, jewellery, makeup, toys, sweets and desserts, arts and crafts and much much more.
Everyone is invited to come and celebrate. Free entry for all.
When and where: Thursday 14th June 2pm-midnight. Spice Village, 185 Southall Broadway.
The festival is an opportunity for families to get together, do Eid shopping and eat delicious foods from a variety of stalls. The community groups, individuals, and business community place variety of stalls containing promotions of business, services, handicrafts, art, painting, clothes, jewellery, henna, bangles, shoes, toys and large variety of ethnic food.
With over a decade of Eid festival all over the UK, without fail and without compromise we are back with a fun-filled celebration marking the end of Ramadan! – This year with a beach theme!
Full Funfair – rides for children and adults!
Urban kids beach and swimming pool !
Live atmopshere of fun for all the family.
_Funfair _ – Ice Cream🍦 and Candy 🍬🍭 – Home Made Sweets🍮 & Cakes… 🍰 – International Food Stalls*🍕🍟🍔🍗 – Hannah, Face Painting And Much More…..
When & Where: 8am-9pm on Eid day. Lampton Park, Hounslow, TW3 4DN.
Tickets are £6 and all are warmly welcome.
Join us for the evening and enjoy incredible live performances from headliner Chand Ali Khan Qawwal & Party UK; the most-talented Fahad Khalid; and best DJ Sharnita playing top Arabic and Asian beats. There'll also be mesmerising spoken word from Sukina Douglas of Poetic Pilgrimage and the marvelous Jamal Mehmood.
This is all alongside some of the very best (halal) street food from the likes of Thunderbird and Fundi Pizza (plus a massive Dishoom Biryani!); henna artists; an obscene amount of glitter and lots of other cool goings-on.
Proceeds will be donated to Seeds of Peace, a charity helping teenagers from regions of conflict learn the skills of making peace.
Kindly note:- street food is not included in the ticket price and some traders can only accept card payments (no cash). All food is halal, and this is an alcohol-free event.
For more information, check out www.dishoom.com/eid.
Thousands of Londoners and visitors join us every year for this event hosted by the Mayor of London, celebrating the end of Ramadan with an exciting stage line up, family fun and the compelling smells of delicious food!
A glamourous festive celebration of halal food, shopping, modest fashion show, entertainment, culture and family fun. In association with Wahed Invest.
When & Where: 3rd August 2018, Old Spitalfields Market 5 Brushfield St, E1 6BG London, United Kingdom.
Contact 07542652951 for Bookings & Enquiries!
If I've missed anything exciting coming up, please leave me a comment below!
That's a well-curated post, this will definitely help out.