NORMAN BETHUNE AND BLOOD TRANSFUSION: A GREAT CANADIAN LIE

     If you visit pretty well any Canadian government site, or one receiving its funding from the government, you will come across the claim that the Canadian Communist surgeon Norman Bethune founded the first mobile blood transfusion unit in the world during his brief stay in Spain during the Spanish Civil War. This claim was set forth by Bethune himself, and it has been repeated by such institutions as Library and Archives Canada, Parks Canada, The Canadian Encyclopedia and the National Film Board. The reality is quite different, and to their credit both Wikipedia and the Centre for Blood Research briefly mention the actual facts. What were they ? In Catalonia the reality is well known.

     On July 17, 1936 the Spanish Civil War began with a military rising against the government of the Republic. The government dithered and procrastinated. The Spanish working class and peasantry, however, responded with vigor, and the rising was soon defeated in the major industrial areas in Spain, in Catalonia, Valencia, Madrid and the north of the country, excepting Galicia. This resistance was the signal for a far ranging social revolution that was the most profound of the 20th century. The centre of this revolution was perhaps Barcelona, the capital of Catalonia, where on July 19 the anarchosyndicalists of the CNT thoroughly defeated the uprising. Soldiers listened to the pleas of the people, and turned their guns on officers and recalcitrant units. Other desertions from the paramilitary forces followed, and the general in command of the rising, General Goded, flew from the island of Majorca to a speedy arrest.

     When the dust settled it was generally the workers of the socialist UGT and the anarchist CNT who held most of nonfascist Spain, excluding their allies amongst the nationalist Basques. Anarchist organized forces, with a minor contribution from the left communist POUM and an even more minor contribution from the communist controlled PSUC, set out for the Aragon front to attempt to recover the city of Saragossa, lost to the rising because of misplaced trust. Most of the advancing anarchist columns delayed by wasting time securing rural areas, and only the unsupported Durruti column ended up facing the fascists near to the city. The Aragon front was the most active in the early days, and fighting was chaotic and improvised on both sides. It is there that the story of front line blood transfusions began.

     In the rear of the anarchist front in Barcelona the Catalan doctor Frederic Duran i Jorda organized the first mobile refrigerated blood transfusion unit as an extension of a blood bank in Barcelona, the Barcelona Transfusion Unit. The first units of blood were carried to the Aragon Front in refrigerated trucks in September of 1936. All of this was organized under the dual influence of the CNT Syndicate for Sanitary Services, an outgrowth of the Syndicate of Liberal Professions, and the anarchofeminist Mujeres Libres who took a particular interest in health care. In Catalonia the anarchist doctor Felix Marti Ibanez became director of medical services and social assistance. Decisions about medical services were made by the plenary assembly of the Syndicate. Eventually the "informal leadership" of the CNT/FAI allowed Federica Montseny to become federal Minister of Health in the Madrid government.

     Despite the continued unwise compromises of the anarchists and efforts of sectarian control by the Communists that reduced efficiency and approached treachery the Catalan blood transfusion service remained operative and became, in essence, THE unit of Republican Spain. Communist attempts to control and actually subvert this system began early, even in Catalonia. Some hospitals ended up being controlled by the Communist front PSUC with help from their foreign network. In November of 1936 socialist members of the British Medical Unit resigned from their positions with the Communist controlled Spanish Medical Aid (British organization in supposed solidarity with Spain). They complained that the SMA was "entirely Communist in outlook", and cited the conspiratorial tactics of the Communists that poisoned the atmosphere of  the unit at the Aragon Front. Extreme coercion was applied to these non-communist socialists to join the PSUC Communist front. The resignees complained of several instances where this mania for control damaged the effectiveness of their unit. As if true-believer Communists could care.

     It was in this atmosphere that the late-comer Norman Bethune arrived in Spain in November of 1936. By this time the mobile blood transfusion units which he is credited with establishing were already a functional concern. Every innovation with which he has been credited by Canadian (and Stalinist) authorities was already in place. Mobile blood transfusion at the front - credit the Catalans. Refrigerated transport units - credit the Catalans. There is one thing where is was actually innovative, and I will deal with this soon. Aside from this his only idea was that the blood transfusion service should be "centralized". This is, of course, standard Stalinist procedure, but in Spain it came up against an improvised libertarian system that actually worked. It was also part and parcel of the favouritism that plagued the Spanish Republicans as Communist dominated units were allotted supplies that were denied to anarchist or independent socialist formations. This reached its apotheosis during the May events of 1937 and Lister's march through Aragon where anarchist units at the front saw their base destroyed by Communist controlled units that the Party thought could be better employed destroying its Republican opposition than in fighting fascists.

     The centralization option hardly lived up to its promise of efficiency. By the time he left Spain in July of 1937 Bethune had reduced the Spanish transfusion service to almost total chaos. This was not only because of his extremely unpleasant personality, attested to by pretty well all of his acquaintances before he left for China where he was hailed as a Saint by the Maoists. It was also because of his willing role as a Stalinist tool. His epigram to Spain was that "all those anarchist bastards should be shot". His party friends did their level best in the course of the civil war/revolution to carry this out, and they also added, or emphasized, dissident communists such as the POUM and "uncooperative socialists" who didn't see dictatorship as a sacred goal.

     Bethune had left the mess behind him, and despite the political reservations the central Spanish government had only one place to turn if they were to have a blood transfusion service that worked at all. Dr. Frederic Duran I Jorda of Barcelona, the originator of all that Bethune is credited for, became the director of blood services for the Spanish State. He continued in this function until the victory of Franco, and he later settled in Britain. His contributions were cited (with no mention of Bethune) by Dr. Janet M. Vaughan, the architect of blood services in Britain in WW2 in the British Medical Journal. Bethune got no mention because he deserved none. Stronger words such as saboteur might be appropriate.

     Where was Bethune's contribution unique, at least in the context of Spain ? It was the rather grim use of blood harvested from dead bodies for use in transfusions. Dr. Duran I Jorda was familiar with the technique which he dismissed as impractical and dangerous. His familiarity came from reading medical reports from the Soviet Union, and in 1937 he issued a pamphlet in which he stated that the reports from the USSR were heavily "political", and his objections to the real technical problems.

     The use of blood transfusion began in the Soviet Union in the early 1920s, and was pioneered by Lenin's friend Alexander Boganov. Bogdanov died in 1928 of a "transfusion accident". Maybe. By 1930 his organization had expanded from Moscow to Leningrad, and another Soviet, Sergei S. Yudin, began the use of cadaver blood in 1930. Yudin published his results in 1936, though, as with anything from Russia at the time, the encouragement for "good news" was a life or death matter for the person involved. Yudin's work had been widely trumpeted in the Communist press and when Bethune visited Moscow in 1935 he may or may not have had first hand knowledge with the process  during visits to various Soviet hospitals and clinics. In any case in February 1937 in Spain he stated that he would "use the latest Russian-American methods of blood transfusion".

     Be that it may another Communist doctor from England, Reginald Saxton, was probably more of a driving force behind the use of post-mortem blood than Bethune was. It it hard to say because the records of the Madrid blood transfusion unit under the reign of Bethune are notable for their abscence. Saxton later in September 1937 published an article in The Lancet in whiuch he extolled the use of dead body blood "as described by S.S. Yudin". It never happened. By this time under the directorship of Duran I Jorda  the non-political, often fatal, problems of cadaver blood led to a recognition of reality despite the political sympathies of the Communists. In the meantime, however, under Bethune use of cadaver blood became routine via the practice of the American (Communist !) geneticist who joined Bethune's team in Madrid. This culprit left Spain in May 1937, but transfusion of blood harvested from corpses continued at least in the Madrid zone well into 1938. Its use elsewhere in Spain awaits further historical research given the opposition of Duran I Jorda and the routinely conspiratorial practices of the Communist Party.

     What can we glean from this ? First of all is that Bethune's "contribution" to the attempt of the Communists to centralize (and control !) the use of blood transfusion is rather a "contribution" that is entirely sectarian and not medical. Second the real technical "contribution" of imitating ghouls by draining dead bodies of blood would have been seen much earlier had it not been for sectarian politics. This practice continued despite the efforts of an opponent nominally in charge of the blood transfusion service. Credit conspiracy. Given the historical and present practice of harvesting organs for transplant from those whom the government in China executes one should wonder about the source of the cadaver blood used in both the Soviet Union and under Communist influence in the Spanish Civil War. Human life is, after all, cheap to those who wish to build the Marxist Utopia.

     Note in Proof: This will be followed by a longer (shudder) examination of Bethune in Spain with all the appropriate references. As I mentioned the true story is well known in Catalonia, but I only read Spanish, and I will have to ask for help in translation. I have no desire to comment much on Bethune's earlier career in Canada and the USA except as it relates to his Spanish myth. Nor do I wish to comment much on the later Maoist hagiography of him in China where he may or may not have achieved humanity. The purpose of this piece is to attack a pervasive state-sponsored myth in my own country, Canada, and to correct some widely held falsehoods about the status of Bethune. At this point I do not presume to know the political opinions of Duran I Jorge. All that is demonstrable is that he was not Communist. My own opinion is that he was a Catalan nationalist of liberal opinions. I stand to be corrected on this matter.
    

Reading Mark Twain...'Christian Science'

Reading Mark Twain...'Christian Science'
     'Christian Science'....Mark Twain, Harper & Brothers, New York, 1907

     I was continuing my task of reading anything available, in print or on the internet, when I came upon this book, over a century old, in the recesses of one of my storage boxes. The volume life in 1899 in The Cosmopolitan magazine. This is the first half of the book. The second half, a worthy addendum to the first, also began life as a periodical series in the North American Review in 1907 even though it had been written about 4 years (Twain's estimate) earlier. The two halves were collected into book form in  the same year.

     At the time of composition Christian Science was the "cult of the day" in the USA, the very heartland of cults. It was actually newsworthy unlike its embalmed modern cadaver. A few decades earlier the Mormons were the most prominent item in the American bestiary of outr矇 religious opinion, but their appeal was minimal in comparison to Mary Eddy's creation.

     The appeal was so great put forward his opinion that CS would grow powerful enough to challenge the Catholic Church itself. He was obviously mistaken on that point, probably because as an American he had a poor appreciation of more sophisticated ways for shepherds to fleece their flocks than those employed by upstart cults in the USA. He based his belief on the supremely authoritarian organization of Christian Science, and the well demonstrated business acumen of its founder.

     The latter was pretty well the only thing that he found to praise Eddy's cult. His book is an extended demolition of the honesty, consistency and writing ability of Eddy. It also touches on Eddy's pretense to originality. As he drives his bulldozer through the Church's edifice the whole polemic is enlightened by Twain's well known wit and sarcasm.

     An examination of CS' documents and Eddy's other writings presents a picture of a very poorly disguised totalitarianism. Eddy is seen to be a grasping tyrant who evolved from a desire for riches to a person whose main desires were for fame and worship. She, in fact, evolved towards an underhanded claim to divinity. In the end she was divided between seeing herself as the modern Christ and seeing herself as the modern equivalent of her Virgin Namesake.

     Twain tears her written output to shreds. Probably an easy task. He does, however, have an admiration for the writing skills of the author of 'Science and Health', the cult's second Bible. He found it impossible what he considered the lucid and coherent style of this book with the confused muddle of pretty well everything else that Eddy put to paper. Thus he formed the opinion that Eddy's book was either ghost written or lifted in bulk from another author.

     While it is obvious true that Eddy borrowed the ideology of her cult from others - some of this Twain mentioned - I think that MT goes a bit too far in attempting to prove that 'Science and Health' had a hidden author. He relied on literary detective work that left too much to the imagination.

     Twain made one major concession to CS' methods. He recognized the power of suggestion and the efficacy of the placebo. Christian Science's methods of "healing" do occasionally seem to work. They are, however, no more efficient than those of a hypnotist. As an aside Eddy did have an earlier association with a hypnotist. In a later feat of bad temper (or bad faith perhaps) she forbade her devoted flock to have anything to do with hypnotism - on penalty of excommunication.

     Personally I think that MT goes too far in his estimation of what hypnotism could do. I am sure, however, that he would agree with the common sense observation that no hypnotist or purveyor of religion has ever performed the miracle...of...curing..an...amputee.

     Altogether this is an amusing little book on a topic that has, mercifully, shrunk into to obscurity. I wonder how Twain would treat the far more numerous cults of our own day.

The Spanish Inquisition by Joseph Perez

The Spanish Inquisition   [Joseph Perez, Yale University Press, 2005, ISBN 0-10790-0 ; Translated from the French]

     I found this brief history and analysis of the Spanish Inquisition to be a real eye opener. The institution is followed from its inception in 1479 to its final abolition in 1834. The book is structured into two parts the history per se and the setting of the 'Holy Office' in the political, economic and social life of Spain.

     It should be noted that the Spanish Inquisition, in contrast to the Inquisition elsewhere in Europe, was more a creation of the state as opposed to the Church.While the Inquisition everywhere operated separately from the regular ecclesiastic hierarchy uniquely in Spain it was under the control of the monarchy rather than the Papacy. The personnel of the Spanish Inquisition were, from the first, appointed by the monarch. The Holy Office soon became a lucrative cash cow,for the state as the benefits of property confiscation accrued to the Crown.

     The Papacy initially tried to assert control, but this was a total failure. In general the Vatican failed in many other efforts to extend its power over and against that of the "Catholic Monarchs" of Spain. Appointees to bishoprics were nominated by the Crown. The government also exercised its power to decide whether Papal Bulls would or would not be proclaimed in Spanish territories. The Bull condemning the enslavement of native populations in the New World, for instance, was forbidden to be read in Spanish possessions.

     Once established the Inquisition developed a bureaucratic apparatus. Unlike modern state bureaucracies the Holy Office was actually quite effective. This meant that it periodically "ran out of victims". This is in contrast to modern bureaucracies who simply can never reduce the supply of victims (called "clients" in modern social work bureaucratese). Actually changing the social conditions that produce the raw material that these kindly souls work on isn't even conceivable.

     The Inquisition had to shift its focus several times in its history. It was originally set up to ferret out 'crypto-Jews'. These were people who had publically converted (conversos) to Christianity in response to the long history of Iberian anti-Semitism culminating in the expulsion of the Jewish minority in 1492. They were suspected, occasionally with cause, of practicing Judaism in private. These were the golden days of Torquemada, the confessor of Ferdinand and Isabella who was appointed Grand Inquisitor.

     As the sixteenth century wore on the  'New Christians' , also known as marranos, became less and less a publicly acceptable target as the generations separating them from Judaism multiplied. Luckily (for the Inquisition at least) there were "crypto-Muslims", also known as moriscos  to search for. This population was forced to convert in the early 16th century. In contrast to the Jews these people lived in rather compact areas, and there was the possibility of rebellion to trouble the monarchs, along with a potential foreign ally in the Ottoman Empire. In 1568 they rebelled in the area of the former Emirate of Granada. Finally in 1609 the moriscos, along with unconverted Muslims, were expelled. The delay (and relatively less harsh treatment) as compared to the Jews was likely connected to the possibility of the Muslims fighting back.

    Jews and Muslims, actual or "hidden", became scarce despite the application of Blood Purity criteria that were used against the descendants of the minority religions. The Inquisition began to turn its "social work" to Protestantism, Humanism and Illuminism (Spanish alumbradors). The latter was a semi-mystical current of opinion with no connection to the more recent 'Illuminati'. Suspicion of witchcraft and sorcery, usually mislabelled peasant superstition, provided a small amount of busywork for the Holy Office functionaries, but the 'witch-craze' frenzies of Northern Europe were conspicuously absent. So-called "witches" were treated far more leniently than other targets.

     The Inquisition in its decline tried to assert jurisdiction over simple "sin" as opposed to "heresy". This lacked the enthusiastic backing of the Throne, but it at least kept the wheels turning.
     "

"By turning its attention to the mass of Old Christians and by, in many cases, quibbling over the meaning of words-sorcery, superstition, improper talk, deviant behavior- while continuing to pursue Judaisers and Protestants if any still came to their notice the Inquisition found a way to survive right up to the early nineteenth century". (pages 92-93)

   In its dotage the Holy Office became more and more what it was under the religious camouflage, a political police. The Inquisition was too useful to the state for it to be abolished.
    

"Above all, for the State authorities, it had become an instrument of control used for the repression of all ideological and political opposition.In this respect, it could still prove to be terrifyingly effective, as we shall see in relation to the Macanaz affair and the Olavide trial. By the end of the eighteenth century, essentially the Inquisition was operating as a political police force devoted to opposing the introduction of revolutionary and liberal ideas." (pages 93-94)

     Having drunk almost to the dregs of the blood and Jews, Muslims and their descendants, along with Protestants, Humanists, Illuminists and other "heretics" the Inquisition stumbled onwards until it was finally abolished in the Napoleonic wars and their aftermath. The Holy Office gradually declined in both importance and severity.When the liberals re-established the Constitution in 1820 the populace of Madrid rose up and stormed the Inquisition's prison. They found only one inmate there. The last person murdered by the institution was a Valencian deist, Cayetano Ripoll, in 1826. The final abolition came in 1834 when the Holy Office under another name, (the 'Faith Commissions') sunk beneath the weight of history. In 1838 the Spanish intellectual Larra coined its epitaph:
    

"Here lies the Inquisition, the daughter of faith and fanaticism. She died of old age." (page 100)

     As previously mentioned this book is only half chronological history. The latter half is a study of the personnel, operation and structure of the Holy Office.  There is also a chapter detailing the typical "trial" of the presumed heretic. The mutual effects of the Inquisition and economic trends, literature and science are looked at in detail. The penultimate chapter is concerned with the relations of the institution and the political authorities. The Holy Office was very much a weapon of regalist centralism. This work ends with a comparison of the Inquisition to modern totalitarian regimes such as Nazi-ism and Soviet Communism. In my opinion the latter case is closer to the mark, and a comparison of the Holy Office to modern "attitude correction" bureaucracies" might also be apt.

     Very interesting. This book seems to be about the right length for the simply curious, neither too brief nor too long. An excellent introduction to the subject.
."

    

CONJUNCTION

GREAT CONJUNCTION:
      A great conjunction in the east south east sky tonight. Perfect visibility here in Winnipeg with Jupiter slightly to the left and above the waxing Moon. Gotta get out there with binoculars, 41 below windchill or not.
Frozen but happy in Winnipeg.

A Freer Market

A FREE-ER MARKET
       One of the perpetual myths of our so-called capitalist society is that we have the closest approach to a "free market", and that this is all to the good as it connects with our other freedoms. Is this true ? Certainly some like the left libertarians who are in favour of an actual free market would disagree with the idea that our present system is approximating an such thing. The left libertarians are actually quite the dissidents as not just apologists for the present order but "critics" such as academo-Marxists assume that free market describes the present state of things. The proof of the assertion that we don't live in a free market I will leave to the left-libs with their criticism of the many monopolies that states grant to certain insitutions and individuals but not to others. I can do more better than recommend the works of Kevin Carson, an outstanding modern exponent of their views.

     How a real free market differs from what we call it today can be found in what is called dynamic pricing. This goes along well with internet marketing as it consists of constantly chaging prices to reflect an actual "market in the here and now". Obviously not all goods can be sold in such a way, and the ability of this much closer representation of marginal utility to the purchaser says nothing about the various advantages (monopolies) granted to some venders but not others prior to placing the commodity on the market.

     I came about this interesting development in a recent (Jan 21/2013) issue of Time Magazine. The article was titled 'This Offer Won't Last: Why Sellers are Switching to Dynamic Pricing' (page 56). I strongly recommend this article on how our version of a "market" is evolving back to how town markets used to be and still are in many minor ways

LIFE IN MUTUALISM:
IN THE BEGINNING PART ONE-THE TIMES OF GENESIS:

  Life probably began about 3.8 billion years ago.during the Eoarchaen Era (4  > 3.6 Billion years ago).This is the approximate time that we find the oldest rocks of Earth. Before this time the surface of the Earth was molten, and hence there there is no recoverable record., This was the Hadean eon. The Eoarchaen era left few signs in the fossil record, but of those which remain there is at least some evidence of bacterial colonies. Why 'colonies' ? Why was life undetectable until the arrival of a colonial lifestyle ? It's a question that can presently have no definitive answer, but there is the distinct possibility that colonial forms of life had an advantage in terms of natural selection. Individual organisms no doubt evolved before the colonial forms that give the first fossil evidence of life.Yet, invoking nothing but natural selection it seems that "collections" of organisms had a selective advantage over those who remain as singular cells.

     The evolution of a cooperative way of living, insofar as certain cellular organs such as mitochondria and chloroplasts were probably in place before the colonial stage came into being. But this is not necessarily so. It could be that the mass of a colonial group of organisms was an easier target for so-called parasites which later became indispensible to life.It would be interesting see if this question of priority will be addressed in the future. For the moment let us note that the earliest definite evidence of life is of "cells living together", and that these cells were either likely to become composites or were formed of cells that were already "mutualistic". Lets keep this in mind.

PREDICTABLE AND OTHERWISE PART 2
RECENT  REBELLIONS:
     Once more it has been an extended time since I posted here. All this time I have been quite (excessively ?) active on Facebook, Almost always reposting the stories of others. If this blog continues to exist it has to have some purpose. I think that its purpose is to be a sounding board for my own personal opinions. Too bad that it can no longer be a collection of links to other anarchist sites. All my links got dumped into the aether when I foolishly signed up for the 'new look' Blogger. Live and learn I guess, though I greatly miss all the hours I put into that list.

     All that being said I have delayed the second part of this article far too long. This has been not only because of a lack of time. In setting my beliefs out I have found that I have changed my opinion in the many years since I first formulated it. I am still of the opinion that managerial societies have been and will be racked by periodic crises and that the triggers for such crises are something beyond simple economics. What I now doubt is that idea that they can be predicted in terms of timing. The problem comes with the variable nature of such crises. When the duration of a crisis varies, and it is hard to set a reference point in terms of beginning, middle and end it is pure hubris to imagine that one can calculate a predictable timeline.

      I's still like to return to thius subject, but other matters call for attention. See you soon.