Ackroyd Jackson - In today’s climate, one naturally hurries to endorse any trace of sanity.
Peter Jackson - Having always felt myself to be part of the left, despite the frustrations of dealing with the IMG, CPGB, IS and WRP at University thirty years ago, it’s been frustrating to see the accommodations that the supposed flag-bearers have made with intolerance and misogyny in recent years. A restatement of principles was needed; I’m glad to add my signature to that restatement.
Hazel Jackson paul
John Jacobs - This document represents, to me, the core values of Leftist politics in the tradition of the Occident’s greatest thinkers (Locke, Rousseau, et al). I adhere to these principles.
Mary Jacobs - No sane person could disagree with the principles outlined here. I particularly value the manifesto’s responsible and reasonable position on U S policy and history; and its clear stand on the development of ant-semitism within some Left alliances.
Judith S. Jacobson
Stephen Jakobi - I believe that internationalism based on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is the only Way forward for this planet,region and country though I also believe that the UN is virtually redundant and regional prganisations such as the EU are the true way forward.
Robert Jakobson - I think that unsatisfactory behavior such as violence towards women does not come from the Other, i.e. the Muslim tradition, but from our own fragility. The search for a new harmony - a ethics of subjectivity free from terror and secular in essence is a question towards the thinkable - and thought as thought is the essence of intelligence and not just routine talking-towards-oneself. I am against behavior and not against people as human beings or ideas as the unthinkable or impossible.
Cliff James - I signed the Euston Manifesto because it defends certain rational, humanist values which, I believe, are the only means of preventing the world from sliding into religious, ideological and tribal self-destruction. The spirit of the 1948 UN Declaration of Human Rights has been reaffirmed.
Debra James - Over fifty years ago the United Nations produced a document that all Member states were called upon to recognise as proclaiming the rights of every person: the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Article 1 states: ‘All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.’ But what about women born in certain countries who, from the moment of birth, are ‘owned’ by their fathers? Article 4 states: ‘No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms.’ Women born in the countries referred to above are sold by their fathers to their future husbands, who then own them. Slaves are ‘sold’ and ‘owned’. Therefore, these women are slaves. Article 16 states: ‘2. Marriage shall be entered into only with free and full consent of the intending spouses’. Women who are sold by their fathers to men they have never met cannot be said to have given their ‘free and full consent’ to the marriage. Many of the countries where this situation is the cultural norm have in abundance something the rest of the world craves: oil. Therefore, the enslaved condition of millions of women continues unchallenged.
Wessel Janse van Rensburg - I would have liked for a shift in emphasis here or there. The scant reference to the massive environmental challenge we face and the possibility of this truly global issue to help us mobilise and transcend national interest, being my main gripe. But essentially this is a wonderful document. It practically resonates globally and locally. As a South African its a rallying cry for the left in South Africa and Africa to follow the lead of Cosatu and meaningfully oppose the oppressive Mugabe regime in Zimbabwe and other even more oppressive African regimes. Also to stand up for women’s, immigrants and gay rights in the face of an deadly assault from ultra conservative governments, vigilantes and religions (both Christian and Muslim) in Africa. As usual the best remedy is development. In a global economy is it not time we stop calling government contributions to the third world ‘Aid’ instead of progressive global taxation? And the sooner as that other trendy left debate, blaming it all on corporations, shifts to its focus onto the real issue, the selfishness of the all powerful developed country consumers/ citizens, the better.
Jonathan Jenney - For a non-political person with sympathy for the aims of the left I value the thoroughness of thought that has gone into the Euston Manifesto. I also abhor the influence of the wonkish, political middleware with their salesmen souls that have crippled the Labour party’s progress and look inevitably to be doing the same to the Conservatives. At least you can still see the cracks in the Liberals. But mainly it is the seriousness of the issues that current politics treat as spotfires to be rushed to when a particularly big flame flares up rather than facing them full on. I hope the agendas of the Euston Manifesto Group stay clear and public and the organisation proves a rallying point for good and change.
Adrian Jessup - I signed the Euston manifesto because it may be the first step towards a universally accpeted right to rational argument.
Jewcy Magazine - This represents an institutional signature on behalf of Jewcy magazine. The editors are in solid agreement on our shared commitment to the principles of the Euston Manifesto.
Adam Johnson - To support greater ideological resolve and action on the part of liberals and leftists who stand in opposition to prevailing discourses on multiculturalism, terror, failed states and humanitarian interventionism.
Brian Johnson - The Labour Party’s Left wing seems to be seem to be adopting some absurd debating positions on the situation in the Middle East in their campaign to unseat Tony Blair. I’m afraid that they have been seduced by their seeming allies in the Media, aka the Greg Dyke’s Revenge Association, and the political right to espouse arguments which only serve to discredit the Labour Party and increase the probibility of a Tory revival or, even worse, the rise of the National Front as a credible parliamentary party.
Leonard V. Johnson
Merritt Johnson - Love of liberty places us in common cause with all those who seek freedom in the world.
Rick Johnson - When I was young I was a Democrat and a rocker. At 60 I am a conservative and listen to country music. Why? Because both the Democrats and rock ‘n’ roll lost their way long ago.
Rich Johnston - I’m anti-Iraq war. I’m critical of the current US administration. I have a grudging respect for George Galloway, even after Big Brother. But there’s not a word in this document that I disagree with, not a principle I don’t support, and not a tone I’m uncomfortable with. It’s a stand worth making.
Christopher Jones - To be “of the Left” is to stand for two things: fairness and rationality. Unlike our anti-American comrades, we’ve remained rational.
Jon Jones - Universalism
Martin Jones - I have signed because I believe that there are certain principles which are essential to any decent society. I have been shocked by the willingness of certain members of the left to betray these principles simply because of so- called “anti- imperialism” or cultural relativism. I do not believe that these people will win as they have not got the intellectual or moral resources to win. However they could drag the rest of us down in their failure.
Nicholas Jones - A genuinely progressive, decent, moral, and thoroughly modern way of renewing the global Left
Ben Judah - Because nobody should be cut out or made to feel like an outsider, Because evreybody desrves to be free, Because being a liberal means fighting to make this true.
Matthew Judge - Finally, something to identify with.
Mike Julian - I signed because I read the Statement of Principles and agreed wholeheartedly with what was said there; its about time that politics changed, I am glad to be part of the revolution 😉