Category: Opinion

  • SPECIAL REPORT: By Yamin Kogoya

    Shocking video footage showing brutal and inhumane treatment of a deaf Papuan teenager named Steven has emerged from the Merauke region of Papua and sparked outrage.

    This assault occurred on Monday, July 26, 2021, around Jalan Raya Mandala, Merauke (Jubi, July 27).

    The video shows an altercation between the 18-year-old and a food stall owner. Two security men from the Air Force Military Police (Polisi Militer Angkatan Udara, or POMAU) intervened in the argument.

    One of the officers grabbed the teenager and pulled him from the food stall. The victim was slammed to the pavement and then stomped on by the Air Force officers.

    The two men, Serda Dimas and Prada Vian, trampled on Steven’s head and twisted his arms after knocking him to the ground. The young man was seen screaming in pain, but the two men continued to step on his head and body while the officers casually spoke on the phone.

    In response to this assault, the commander of POMAU in Merauke, Colonel Pnb Herdy Arief Budiyanto, apologised for the actions of the two military policemen.

    Assaukt of deaf Papuan teenager 26 July 2021
    Two Indonesian Air Force military policemen stomping on the head of a deaf Papuan teenager in the Merauke region on 26 July 2021. Image: Screenshot from video

    In a press statement released on Tuesday, July 27, Colonel Herd stated that his men had overreacted and acted as vigilantes. The victim (Steven) and his adoptive mother, along with Merauke Police Chief, Untung Sangaji, and Vice-chairman of the regional People’s representative, Marotus Solokah, attended Tuesday’s press briefing (Jubi, July 27).

    Military policemen detained
    Kadispenau from the Air Force stated that the two men had now been detained under Commander J.A. Merauke’s supervision while POMAU Merauke investigates the incident.

    Kadispenau said: “The Air Force army does not hesitate to punish according to the level of the wrongdoings.”

    Papuan human rights defender Theo Hesegem said the two Air Force officers’ actions were unprofessional and should immediately be dealt with in accordance with the law applicable in the military judiciary in Papua, not outside Papua.

    “They should be dismissed and fired,” Hesegem said.

    Tabloid Jubi report of 'knee' assault
    How Tabloid Jubi reported the assault in an article three days later on 29 July 2021. Image: Tabloid Jubi

    Natalius Pigai, Indonesia’s former human rights commissioner, slammed the incident as “racist”.

    Pigai said on his Twitter account: “Not only members of the security forces, but Indonesia’s high officials who are racist should also be punished.”

    “Unless,” Pigai added, “Indonesia’s president Jokowi nurtures the racism committed by his tribe.” (Warta Mataram, July 27).

    Suitable place for the ‘lazy’
    Recently, Tri Rismaharini, Social Affairs Minister of Jokowi’s government, said that “lazy people” in the state civil service would be moved to Papua. Inferring that Papua was a suitable place for lazy, useless, and low-IQ humans.

    The racism issue will not be solved if people like Tri Rismaharini are not punished for their offensive remarks to Papuans.

    Pigai remarked as such because of countless denigrating comments and statements from Indonesia’s highest office, in which he himself is often the target of racism.

    But still, the country’s justice system fails to deliver justice for Papuan victims and hold the perpetrators accountable.

    These incidents are not isolated incidents – they are just the tip of the iceberg of what Papuans have been facing for 60 years under Indonesian rule. Tragic footage like the one in Merauke attracts public attention only because someone captured it and shared it.

    Most inhumane treatment in Papua’s remote villages rarely get recorded and shared in this way.

    Growing up in a highland village, I witnessed these barbaric behaviours by members of Indonesia’s armed force. They were walking around in uniforms with guns; they did many horrible things to Papuans — just as they wished, without consequence.

    Submerged in dirty fishpond
    One elder from my village was forced to stay underwater in a dirty fishpond. They military tied a heavy log to his legs so that his body remained underwater all day.

    I also remember that my cousin, a young girl aged 13 -14 with whom I went to school, often provided sexual services to a nearby Indonesian military post.

    Many soldiers would have their way with her. Not just her, but many young female children face the same fate throughout the villages.

    The video of the inhumane treatment of deaf Papuan youth Steven a few days ago in Merauke by Indonesia’s Air Force officers reminded me of many horrible things I had witnessed in the highlands of Papua.

    Unfortunately, these crimes hardly get resolved, and perpetrators walk free while victims get punished.

    George Floyd street art
    The killing of 46-year-old black man George Floyd in Minneapolis, USA, on 25 May 2020 triggered massive street protests worldwide – and also street art. Image: Soundcloud

    This inhumane treatment brings to mind the tragic killing of George Floyd after a white Minneapolis police officer, Derek Chauvin, pressed his knee on Floyd’s neck for nine minutes as he lay face down in the street on 25 May 2020.

    However, in this case, the four officers involved were dismissed from their jobs and prosecuted. Derek Chauvin was sentenced to more than 20 years for the killing on June 25, 2021.

    Rarely face justice
    Tragically, in Papua, the perpetrators of these sorts of crimes rarely face justice and may even get promoted despite their atrocious acts.

    Although Jakarta has already apologised for the Merauke atrocity, Jakarta elites are delusional, thinking that empty apologies alone will solve Papua’s protracted conflicts.

    If anything, this cheap word “sorry” does more damage and rubs even more salt in the Papuans’ wounds.

    Jakarta’s favourite word, “sorry”, has its own value when used appropriately in a specific place and time, like when you accidentally tip over your friend’s coffee cup.

    Papuans and Indonesians protracted wars are not fought over spilling a cup of coffee; these wars are fought are over serious gross human rights violations committed by Indonesia’s state-sponsored security forces, supported by Western powers.

    Hence, neither Papuans’ wounds nor their dignity can be healed or restored with a cheap apology. Papuans need and demand justice.

    Yamin Kogoya is a West Papuan academic who has a Master of Applied Anthropology and Participatory Development from the Australian National University and who contributes to Asia Pacific Report. From the Lani tribe in the Papuan Highlands, he is currently living in Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.

     

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • ANALYSIS: By Dominic O’Sullivan, Charles Sturt University

    The arrest of nine Fijian opposition politicians, including party leaders and two former prime ministers, once again exposes Fijian democracy’s fragility. The intimidation doesn’t bode well for the parliamentary elections due next year (or early 2023).

    The political crisis has been overshadowed by Fiji’s covid-19 crisis, which has seen more than 25,000 infections and more than 100 deaths since April. Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama even used a covid analogy when he called those arrested “super-spreaders of lies”.

    While no charges have been laid, the nine are accused of inciting unrest by opposing a government bill to change the management of iTaukei (indigenous) land rights.

    The original iTaukei Land Trust Act 1940 allows for long-term land leases to private interests. The idea is to maximise the economic return on land, while protecting it against permanent alienation.

    The act aims to protect indigenous interests by prohibiting the sub-lease or raising of mortgages on leased land without the consent of the iTaukei Land Trust Board.

    The proposed amendment would remove the requirement to obtain the board’s consent, and prevent land owners going to court to dispute land use.

    Arresting the opposition
    Bainimarama, who also chairs the board, says the bill’s purpose is to remove bureaucratic obstacles to minor activities such as arranging electricity or water supply. He says the board takes too long to provide consent and this is a constraint on economic development.

    But critics of the bill, including some of those arrested, argue it will weaken iTaukei land rights. Opposition MP Lynda Tabuya was accused of a “malicious act” after she posted a “Say no to iTaukei Land Trust Bill” cover picture on Facebook last week.

     

    In a separate post, demonstrating the low threshold for “malice” in modern Fiji, she asked:

    What protection is left for landowners? This is absolutely illegal and a breach of human rights of landowners. This is not a race issue, this is a human rights issue and breaches Section 29 of the Fijian Constitution.

    Tabuya is not alone. The National Federation Party has said the government has not properly consulted on the bill, and party leader Professor Biman Prasad was among those arrested, along with former prime ministers Mahendra Chaudhry and Sitivini Rabuka.

    Limited media scrutiny
    Media coverage, too, has felt the effects of the arrests. For example, the Fiji Sun’s one story on the issue in its July 28 edition cited only supporters of the bill and offered no insight into why it was controversial.

    This isn’t surprising, given Fijian journalism operates under a constitutional provision limiting its rights and freedoms “in the interests of national security, public safety, public order, public morality, public health or the orderly conduct of elections”.

    The Fiji Times took a risk last week by publishing an opinion column arguing poor drafting and failure to consult meant the bill goes further than its purported aims of administrative simplicity and efficiency.

    Beyond the legal complexities of the land bill, however, the real problem is political. As the article asks, “What’s the issue?”.

    As I discuss in my book Indigeneity: a politics of potential — Australia, Fiji and New Zealand, the issue is that Fiji is a fragile, reluctant and conditional democracy.

    Frank Bainimarama
    A military grip on power … Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama. Image: The Conversation/GettyImages

    Military interference
    Coups in 1987 and 2006, and a putsch in 2000, happened because democracy failed to provide the perpetrators with the “right” answers to complex political questions at the intersection of class, military power and personal interest.

    The rights of indigenous Fijians were always a side issue, as the present conflict shows.

    The 2013 constitution established that “it shall be the overall responsibility of the Republic of Fiji Military Forces to ensure at all times the security, defence and well-being of Fiji and all Fijians”.

    Military oversight of the workings of government is intentional and explicit. When
    Bainimarama (then head of the military forces) led the 2006 coup, he was dismissive of accusations of political interference. If the military did not act against the government, he said, “this country is going to go to the dogs”.

    He also claimed then-prime minister Laisenia Qarase was trying to weaken the army by attempting to remove him: “If he succeeds there will be no one to monitor them, and imagine how corrupt it is going to be.”

    But critics of the bill, including some of those arrested, argue it will weaken iTaukei land rights. Opposition MP Lynda Tabuya was accused of a “malicious act” after she posted a “Say no to iTaukei Land Trust Bill” cover picture on Facebook last week.

    No room to move
    Intimidation is political strategy in Fiji. The proposed amendments to the iTaukei Land Trust Act are not what is at stake — a functioning parliamentary process could identify and resolve any substantive disagreements.

    The bigger issue is that autocratic leadership, and the national constitution itself, leave little room for Fijian citizens to work out for themselves the kind of society they want.

    This also leaves little room for Fijians to demand more effective policy responses to their country’s covid-19 crisis.The Conversation

    Dr Dominic O’Sullivan is adjunct professor in the Faculty of Health and Environmental Sciences, Auckland University of Technology and Professor of Political Science, Charles Sturt University.This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons licence. Read the original article.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Last week, Annabel Crabb’s outstanding ABC series Ms Represented included accounts from women across the political spectrum on what Julie Bishop called ‘gender deafness’.

    Gender deafness is a phenomenon well known to women. It is the experience of a woman saying something in a meeting, being ignored or treated as if she hasn’t spoken, and then a man makes exactly the same point a few minutes later and is heard. Worse still, the man is often congratulated, even celebrated (and perhaps, on occasion, someone has offered to host a party for him) – such is the recognition of his brilliance as exhibited in the point he just made. You know, after a woman had already made that point, just before he did.

    As a woman, it is likely that your ideas will be appropriated this way, or ‘bro-propriated’ as I now like to call it – the ‘bro’ being slang talk for ‘brother’.

    When one of the ‘bros’ repeats a good idea you have shared a few minutes later and the room erupts into a chorus of ‘For he’s a jolly good fellow’, it can be confusing. As many of the women on Ms Represented this week showed, a common reaction is to feel perplexed and ask yourself, ‘Did I not just say that?’. It appears you didn’t, because everyone in the room is congratulating someone else.

    Another common reaction, particularly after one realises this is an ongoing and pervasive phenomenon that works to silence women, is fury. Every single woman I have mentored over the past couple of decades has experienced bro-propriation. Every. Single. One. It’s remarkable. And infuriating.

    A few years ago, I’d had enough of gender deafness and I started calling bro-propriation out. I now do the following every time I see bro-propriation in a meeting: When a woman’s ideas are repeated by a man in a meeting, I say something like, ‘Great idea [insert man’s name]. I’m not sure if you heard it, but that’s exactly what [insert woman’s name] said just a few minutes ago.’

    Sometimes when I do this, I get a response like, ‘Yeah but I think [insert woman’s idea]’ from the man. I politely wait for him to finish before repeating the point that [insert woman’s name] also thinks the same thing and said it a few minutes before he did.

    Men don’t like this. I’ve been taken aside more than once after a meeting and had it mansplained to me that I embarrassed the man by doing this. I have then calmly and politely explained back that the man had appropriated the views of the woman and expressed them as his own, and I didn’t feel that was right.

    Sometimes it is a man who calls bro-propriation out. I love these moments so much. They’re rare but they do happen. They let me know that things are changing in positive ways. I always follow up with these men after a meeting to note and acknowledge what they did, thank them and let them know their actions are making a positive difference.

    If you’re a man and you want to help women at work, you could consider stepping in when bro-propriation happens. All you need to do is say something like, ‘Great idea, Dave, that’s exactly what Sophie said a few minutes ago.’ Dave will look confused. Too bad. After the meeting, you could help Dave understand that he heard Sophie say the same thing, processed it, and then somehow believed he just thought of it on his own. Either that, or he wasn’t listening when Sophie spoke, which is a bit rude. And a bit sexist.

    This is an edited abstract of Marcia Devlin’s book Beating the Odds: A practical guide to navigating sexism in Australian universities. 

    The excerpt is published with permission.

    The post Gender deafness is widespread, but can be cured appeared first on BroadAgenda.

    This post was originally published on BroadAgenda.

  • COMMENT: By Shailendra Singh in Suva

    This poignant photo by Max Vosailagi captures Fiji’s fixation with rugby sevens, with winning a second Olympic Gold last night by beating New Zealand 27-12 in the men’s final.

    Two young boys, glued to what is apparently a TV screen through a neighbourhood front door during the Tokyo Olympic qualifiers, oblivious to their surroundings.

    Covid restrictions could have prevented the boys from getting closer to the action.

    Some quick Fiji reflections:

    • The sevens addiction starts young;
    • It’s inescapable — during game time every house with a TV will be tuned in;
    • If your house doesn’t have a TV, not a problem — the neighbour’s house probably has one;
    • Sevens is escapism from the country’s myriad problems, from politics to poverty.
    • It is more than escapism — it’s a career and income for players, not to mention the strongest uniting force in a country beset by ethnic tensions; and
    • Every young Fijian dreams of donning the national white team jersey one day.

    Fiji is also playing in the women’s rugby sevens Olympic competition which begins today and ends with the gold medal match on Saturday.

    Dr Shailendra Singh is senior lecturer and coordinator of the journalism programme at the University of the South Pacific. This comment is from Dr Singh’s social media posts and is republished by Asia Pacific Report with permission.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • So, maybe it didn’t begin there, but is that where it all came together and became the lip signed treaty between President and Party? Was the infamous 2017 around-the-table butt-kissing spectacle the inflection point; the official surrender of the Republican Party to Donald Trump?

    They took turns demeaning themselves and the America people, with Reince Priebus offering up the best summation: “On behalf of the entire senior staff around you, Mr. President, we thank you for the opportunity and the blessing that you’ve given us to serve your agenda … and the American people.”

    It might have come as a surprise, even to him – not just the willingness, but the seeming eagerness with which they bent over publicly and gave up their human dignity and the charade of serving their country. They were all in. If he hadn’t already known it, Trump must surely have looked around the table that afternoon and realized he could do anything; anything at all and there would be no resistance. “What a bunch of gutless suckers,” he likely thought. “I can work with these people.”

    The scene was made more deplorable in knowing the subsistence level of all those present. All were men and women of enviable means. Their economic livelihoods were not at risk. Their families were not held in jeopardy. Each could have stepped away to un-toady respectability and a more than comfortable lifestyle. But none did. They instead made political reality of Trump’s Access Hollywood braggart admission of sexual assault: “They let you do it. You can do anything.”

    What if they had laughed when Mike Pence first pursed his lips and commenced the parade of abdication: “It’s the greatest privilege of my life to serve as vice president to a president who is keeping his word to the American people, and assembling a team that’s bringing real change, real prosperity, real strength back to our nation.” What if even just one of them had spontaneously laughed out loud, would it have broken the spell? Could the Party (and perhaps the country) have been saved with some animating laughter at the cringe-worthy pandering?

    More than four years have lurched by since that memorable day. They’re not sitting around the adoration table anymore, and many of the faces have changed, but the groveling still goes on. They now pay homage individually with trips to Mar-a-Lago and testimonials on Fox News, Trump TV, or any media outlets offering a kneeling bench.

    In absentia, the former president presides over an emasculated Party. Trump’s presidency is now gone, but his will is still here. His Party is still here, but its will is now gone. They are letting him do it. The Republican Party (and American democracy) is dissolving under the acidic tongue of political butt-kissing. The dissolution is too far along. The 2017 potential off-ramp was missed; the spell can’t be broken with awakening laughter. The Republican Party has immolated itself. The residue still left is the Party of Trump. The POT platform has but one unstable pillar: the autocratic will of Trump.

    What happened to the once proud, even macho-inclined culture of the Republican Party? How was it so easily seduced into fulfilling the desires of a man whose moral credo is: “They let you do it. You can do anything.”

    An acclaimed social psychology study might offer a clue. The Righteous Mind (2012) by Jonathan Haidt explored social/political morality. He examined the perceptions we hold that nudge us towards liberal or conservative stances and often into left-leaning or right-leaning political parties. Haidt delineated a moral matrix of six primary spectrums that influence our social and political leanings: Care/harm, Liberty/oppression, Fairness/cheating, Loyalty/betrayal, Authority/subversion, and Sanctity/degradation. Through widespread survey and scrutiny, he discerned a difference in weighting to the components held by liberal, libertarian, and conservative mind-sets.

    As charted below, the liberal moral matrix heavily weights the first three components (but especially Care/harm), the libertarian moral matrix heavily weights the second two components (but especially Liberty/oppression), while the conservative moral matrix weights all components about equally (none are heavily weighted).

    It’s been almost a decade since publication. There appears to be a “new kid” on the block who wasn’t present in 2012. The balanced weighting of Haidt’s conservative moral matrix is not evident in what has become the POT, nor does it conform to either of the other two moral matrix mixes. If its values were charted, it would likely show an extremely heavy line drawn to the Authority/subversion component. It would be the one line of significant breadth. The overwhelming propensity of the POT is to reflect the will of its leader. All other matrix components have been marginalized. The POT is an authoritarian political entity that fell out of the conservative moral matrix once characterizing the GOP.

    So what really changed? It wasn’t a wholesale swap of physical bodies. Most of the prior GOP constituency is intact; many of its stewards are still there, but somehow it has managed to mutate into a POT morality with hardly more than a hiccup. How could that be? It’s as if a congregation went to church one Sunday morning, found its traditional god replaced, yet was still able to sing familiar hymns as if nothing of substance had occurred.

    The Righteous Mind’s aim was not to denigrate one camp over another, but to explore their differences in hopes of stimulating awareness and receptive dialogue between opposing advocates (its subtitle is, Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion). That said, the transformation of the GOP into the POT begs at least one partisan sounding question: Does the GOP’s morph into the POT indicate that the conservative moral matrix mix is unstable and prone to transmutation? Put another way, despite the air of individualistic bravado, are conservative minds more easily manipulated into abandoning former values and embracing authoritarian voices?

    Again, looking at the charts, the liberal moral matrix is moored to Care/harm and the libertarian matrix is tethered to Liberty/oppression. It’s only the conservative moral matrix that is equally weighted, showing no anchor to any particular component. Is that a clue to its apparent instability?

    “Equally weighted” usually speaks to stability, but as a moral matrix feature, it means just a little weight added to any component makes that component dominant. The conservative moral matrix has no preexisting heavily weighted component to resist such manipulation. With relatively little effort, a demagogue can add a thumb to the weight of any component, suddenly giving it (and the demagogue) overriding influence.

    The conservative moral matrix is not moored to the Care/harm component, nor is the libertarian matrix. Both are thus susceptible to bypassing or devaluing its import. Broadly speaking, Care/harm is a measure of one’s sensitivity to the distress and well-being of others. Its exclusion or downplay is dangerous to humanity. A political party without Care/harm sentiment is like a physician without a “first, do no harm” principle; pretext is easily justified and ruthlessness has little hindrance.

    It may not have begun with Trump, but a transmutation of this sort has certainly “blossomed” under his watch. His thumb has altered the POT matrix into something that is no longer the conservative moral matrix. When he pushes the Authority/subversion button, all other values are marginalized. The party voice might sound the same; the choir might sing long familiar hymns (freedom, independence, patriotism, etc.) but it does so while dismantling its prior core values (and with it, American democracy). The “only I can fix it” former president presides while his minions “fix” democracy to his authoritarian liking. It’s happening now. In state after state, suffrage is being suppressed, past elections are being invalidated, and future elections are being primed for manipulation. If he and his party prevail, democracy won’t. “American democracy,” like “Russian democracy,” will be a misnomer.

    The POT threat to democracy is coming from the right. Could it just as easily have come from the left? It’s another partisan sounding question, but an almost automatic follow-on to the first.

    Does its anchor in Care/harm protect liberal ambition from authoritarian intrusion and manipulation? Might an “only I can fix it” liberal arise to such prominence that Care/harm values could be abandoned in pursuit of another supposed need? Or could the Care/harm value be so threatened that only the power of a demagogue could save it?

    Demagogues and authoritarians usually arise through promises to address the fears/concerns of one part of a population over another. Demagogues are willing to inflict pain and suffering on one group in order to cement support from another. It’s hard to imagine a would-be leader infused with Care/harm values seeking power in such manner. It’s equally hard to imagine a Care/harm constituency that would be taken in by such tactics. But, “hard to imagine” doesn’t mean impossible. Twenty years ago, could one have reasonably imagined a proud GOP’s devolution into the POT? Could one have imagined “strong” and outspoken GOP leaders like McConnell, McCarthy, Pence, Graham, Cruz, Meadows, Jordan, and too many others so weakly offering themselves up to a wuss-demanding figure like Trump? Could one have imagined a GOP constituency willing to follow and support such sheepish leaders?

    But there’s no point right now in imagining which party or matrix might be most susceptible to decay or manipulation. One has already disintegrated; the GOP is gone. There’s no conservative moral matrix holding party left on the field. There’s only the POT and an authoritarian leader in its place. Its moral matrix is whatever its leader wishes it to be. His supplicants have assumed the position: They are letting him do it. They are letting him do anything.

    Not everyone; they didn’t all bend over. There still are individuals with a balanced conservative moral matrix base. They still do have some grounding in its Care/harm component. While the POT easily presides, perhaps as many as 34% of the former GOP would rather that it didn’t. It’s a minority, but a significant minority. It’s one that can’t control the POT’s direction, but it can determine its fate. Trump is taking the country down the road to authoritarianism. Today, the easy way there is through the ballot. Tomorrow, the only way back will be through blood, the blood of our children. The POT will let him do it; they will let him do anything. But it will take more than just that. He needs all of what used to be the GOP. He needs the acquiescence of its 34% to succeed.

    So, it’s a question for the 34%, the one that must be answered: Will you let him do it?

    The post The 34% Question first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • The TV program Sex/Life dropped on Netflix late June it’s a show that has got the world talking.

    All of a sudden, thousands of folks were responding to the TikTok challenge that went like this:  “View episode 3 Sex/Life 19:50 and film your blind response”

    Exhibit A:

    @madheadbaldwin#tiktoktrend #couplestiktok #sex/lifenetflix #foryoupage #fyp♬ Monkeys Spinning Monkeys – Kevin MacLeod

    Netflix Sex/Life has been out for two weeks, and become a global viral sensation with over 26.1 Million views of this TikTok challenge. Mainly this challenge shows how little society is used to seeing male nudity in popular culture and the emphasis and value we place on male genital size.

    But after the TikTok challenge has faded why has Sex/Life remain on Netflix’s top ten streaming lists globally?

    The premise of Sex/Life is straight forward. Billie is a housewife who had a wild past in New York City as psychology PhD student at Columbia; sex, drugs and music formed a major part of her life, and she was entwined with Brad, a troubled record label owner.

    She eventually marries Cooper – a safe, kind man who loves her unashamedly. The pair movee out to Connecticut to have babies, while Cooper commutes to the city daily for work. Billie can’t reconcile her present with her past so writes about it in her journal. Cooper reads this journal and life begins to unravel.

    I binge-watched the whole series. My best friend was in lockdown, and I insisted he too watch it so we could discuss. More than once in the 700 messages exchanged during watching, we asked ourselves: “This is trash tv, why are we watching it? Why do we love it?”

    A scripted masterpiece it is not. But one key reason women are so obsessed with the show is that it explores themes from a female perspective which we don’t see enough in mainstream media.

    I related to Billie, having a wild-ish past around the globe; I found myself with child living in my hometown, a normal suburban family life. It was like an expensive designer jumper I really wanted; I saved, bought it and adored it; but was not sure how to wear it. It took me a long time to reconcile the change in my life and embrace the new world that had opened for me. Of course, this is an age-old scenario, popularised by the American feminist, Betty Friedan in the 60s.

    The fantasy sex scenes are all shown from a female perspective with female pleasure being the central theme. It accurately portrays the passionless reality of sex with babies and small children. Often it isn’t a spontaneous wild shedding of clothing in every room in the house; there’s rogue breast milk, kids interrupting and work exhaustion. It also addresses how women struggle to reconcile a sense of sexual self with a body that doesn’t quite feel like their own anymore.

    Most of the reviews have been dismissive citing the lead character’s perfect life. They don’t feel empathy for her situation, without digging further into the themes that appear obvious to most women who watch the show.

    I decided to canvass others in my social circle and found there was a similar theme. These are some of the things my female friends said to me:

     “It’s not perfect there are parts that I think are worth thinking about. As a mum I can relate to feeling bored at home with young kids, wanting more intimacy and longing for our pre children lives and wanting it all”

    “When you’re at home sitting on couch alone with mastitis and a baby that won’t latch screaming; that hook up with a DJ behind the booth at Fabric Nightclub is looking mighty appealing.”

    “When I think about my sexual past, I wish my pleasure had mattered, as much as the woman does in this show. Its refreshing to see sexual content that doesn’t degrade women”

     “It was the leaking breast milk for me- that took a long time for me and my husband to recover from- no one warns you about it, when I saw this scene I just wanted to say – YES”

    Most of these comments were received via sending out questions on social media. Most responses were sent through privately, and occurred during discussions that happened in private groups.

    These informal forums provide a safe place for women to discuss sexuality, and desire without fear of a moral judgement from participants. I’d argue there’s an urgent need to discuss female sexuality and how it is represented in pop culture. It’s such a relief to see something not designed solely for male or abusive gaze! We need to break this taboo and discuss female sexuality from all angles, including the messy bits (not just versions of women’s bodies which are santised, commodified and homgensied through advertising and pornography). As a society we still tie morality to all aspects of women’s behaviour ranging from sexuality, politics to safety.

    Friedan famously claimed that the problem had no name. We know better than that. The problem has a name: patriarchy. The patriarchal structures governing our society continue to regulate women’s bodies, making them the ‘other’, while the male bodies are the norm.

    Billie attempts to be the perfect housewife after her husband discovers her raunchy past. Photo courtesy of Netflix © 2021

    Women in popular culture are no strangers to being shamed in the media; winner of I’m a celebrity, Abbie Chatfield, has led a movement in pushing back and challenging norms on how young women own their sexuality and the torrent of hate that unleashed on her is unfathomable.

    Women in leadership are used to being attacked and having their moral compass questioned by men who are anything but.

    Most recently we’ve seen women’s sports teams fined for not wearing bikini bottoms to compete, and other women being fined for wanting to wear their bikini uniforms. Women’s sports has complicated history of uniforms, and unless there is a specific safety issue they should just be allowed the wear what they want.

    It is a shame that the show catapulted to mainstream notoriety due to a brief glimpse of a male appendage. The naked female body has been so thoroughly sexualised, that we don’t even bat an eyelid when it enters our screens. Heck, even statues celebrating the work of women are still erected naked.

    But in reality, this is a show about women, for women. It is clunky in places, but the global conversation it has generated shows there is a gap.
    People – including myself – are relishing women taking centre stage with in-depth discussions of female sexuality.

    • Kat is the Associate Director of the 50/50 by 2030 Foundation. In her spare time she consumes pop culture, new music and trash TV while  raising her 4 year old daughter in Canberra.

     

     

    The post Why women can’t stop talking about Sex/Life appeared first on BroadAgenda.

    This post was originally published on BroadAgenda.

  • “How many of you knew that this place existed?” a man called Dave Bangs says to a 300-strong crowd. I look around and see two hands up. Most people here are locals, but have never been to this beautiful little haven of nature, just a couple of miles from Brighton city centre.

    We are taking part in a mass trespass, organised by Landscapes of Freedom, a coalition of ‘free walkers’ fighting for our right to roam in England, in collaboration with the national Right to Roam campaign.

    The trespass is happening in a place called Pangdean Bottom, which has been out of bounds to the people of Brighton since its public purchase by Brighton Council in 1924. In fact, two-thirds of Brighton’s downland is in public and social ownership and yet the vast majority is closed off from the public.

    Why trespass?

    So why, exactly, have we all felt the need to join the trespass? When you look at the statistics, it should be obvious. 92% of land in England is off-limits to normal people. The land-owning elite keeps us out with barbed wire and ‘KEEP OUT’ signs, designed to intimidate us and make us feel like we’re criminals. It is even more shocking to learn that Brighton and Hove council, who should be acting for the public, are complicit in keeping us out. By trespassing, we’re reclaiming what is rightfully ours.

    Guy Shrubsole, author of Who Owns England?, explains to me:

    I think it is really important that we are trespassing today because we only have a right to roam over 8% of England. Even on this land, which is owned by Brighton council, there’s not a right for the public to access it. That needs to change. We need to have a greater right to roam, to reconnect with nature. Lockdown has shown how important it is that people have access to nature on their doorstep. And for the people of Brighton not to have access to this amazing downland is just really shocking.

    He continues:

    Brighton council could change that tomorrow if they wanted to. They could give a full right to roam on all the 10-15,000 acres of the downland they own. They’re reviewing the future of the downland estate now, and it’s exactly what they could do if they decided that they want public land to be used for the greater public good.

    “We need to be in nature in order to defend nature”

    For those of us who are excluded from the land, we can’t protect what we had no connection with – or even clapped eyes on – in the first place.

    Andrea Brock, who is part of Landscapes of Freedom, argues that we can only defend nature if we are not excluded from it. She says:

    We are part of nature. We shouldn’t be separate from nature; in fact we need to be in nature in order to defend nature: to see the destruction going on and to stop that destruction. To learn about the ecocide that’s happening really close to us that we weren’t aware of and therefore weren’t stopping.

    She continues:

    We always talk about how indigenous communities are defending their land, and we always look at really far away places. We don’t necessarily make the connection that we should be doing the same thing here, rather than just being in solidarity with people in the Amazon, for instance.

    Trespass Brighton

    Who’s really misusing the land?

    There’s a classist narrative that if the masses are given access to land, they will trash it. The mainstream press often backs this up, gleefully running stories that the working classes and Traveller communities leave mountains of litter, and even human faeces, when given the right to roam. This complicity by the media gives land owners the justification they need to continue to keep us out. And it makes it easier for the government to pass racist laws around trespass, such as the Policing Bill, which will make it a criminal offence to trespass with the intention to reside in or near a vehicle.

    But Shrubsole explains that it isn’t the public, or the Traveller community, who are the problem:

    I think a lot of people think that if the public have access to the countryside they’re going to damage it. But many of the land owners are damaging the countryside through [doing] things like introducing millions of pheasants into it every year, and that’s killing the adders, killing the other species in the ecosystem.

    Indeed, the very land that 300 of us are trespassing on is being used as a pheasant shoot. As the crowd approaches the pheasant pen, the farmers, accompanied by the police, drive up to us hurriedly in their 4X4s.

    After the trespass, I speak to Quinn, a hunt saboteur who tries to stop blood sports. He tells me exactly how the farmer uses the land:

    Brighton and Hove council leases the land to a man called David Gorringe, who hosts shoots. The shoot itself is owned by a man called Steven Attwood, who runs shoots across the south-east in Sussex and Kent. There’s a few cover crops on the land to create breeding grounds for game birds. It’s essentially a whole valley in the South Downs which people don’t have access to, and which has barely any use beyond blood sports throughout the shooting season. There’s a lot of money to be made from lucrative shooting sports.

    Shrubsole explains to me the absurdity of pheasant shooting in this country:

    We release 50 million pheasants into the British countryside every year – almost the same number of pheasants as there are people in this country! So maybe we should take a little bit less land for pheasants, and more for the public.

    A very small number of people enjoy pheasant shooting. It’s not quite as elitist as shooting on grouse moors, but it’s not something that people need to do. You end up with pictures in the press of piles of pheasant carcasses being thrown away after shoots. It’s gotten out of control and it’s starting to have a big impact on the eco system.

    The trespasses will continue

    As the trespass ends and the hundreds-strong crowd goes their separate ways, it’s clear to me that mass trespasses like this will continue, both in Brighton and across the country. We are sick and tired of being told that we have no rights to the very nature that we belong to.

    Kim Turner, an activist with Landscapes of Freedom, tells me:

    We are trespassing for the love of the land and for the love of all those who dwell and grow there. We used to say “this land is our land” to claim it from the elites and give everyone some land to grow. But that is not correct; this land is not anyone’s land.

    She continues:

    We’ve been fenced off from this beautiful land for far too long, by history of violence, ejection and exclusion. We are told to keep to public rights of way – to merely look at the land – not to walk on it, enjoy it, know it or love it. This most basic aspect of human life has been wrenched from us, yet we collectively yearn for it, seek it, need it.

    It is exactly this yearning that will see us coming back to trespass more. Exclusion from land most affects working class people, BAME people, traveller communities and those with disabilities. And we are all uniting to fight together for our most basic of freedoms: to roam our land.

    Featured images by Eliza Egret

    By Eliza Egret

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • With a population of 118 million (expected to top 200 million by the end of 2049) Ethiopia is the second most populous country in Africa. 70% (c.80 million) are under thirty, the median age being just 20.

    The majority of people live in rural areas where infrastructure is poor or non-existent: around 67 million are currently without electricity; for millions of others (including in the capital, Addis Ababa) the supply is inconsistent, with frequent power cuts, 62 million, according to the WHO Joint Monitoring Programme, do not have access to safe drinking water (7.5% of the global water crisis is in Ethiopia); farmers are routinely hit by floods or drought, millions are food insecure.

    In an attempt to address these basic needs, some would say rights, in 2011, Ethiopia revised plans first drawn up in the 1950s, and began constructing the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD). Owned by the Ethiopian Electric Power Corporation (EEPCO), the $5 billion “Peoples’ Project” has been largely funded by the Ethiopian government through the sale of government bonds, together with donations from Ethiopian citizens with an initial investment by China of around 30%.

    Situated in the western region of Benishangul-Gumuz (about 40 km from the Sudan border) on the Blue Nile, the dam is 80% complete, and to the jubilation of Ethiopians everywhere the reservoir has been part filled (in 2020 5 billion m3 – total capacity is 74 billion m3) for the second year in succession.

    The GERD is the biggest hydroelectric dam in Africa (the seventh largest in the world), it harnesses water from the Blue Nile and will provide millions of Ethiopians with secure electricity and a reliable water supply. The Blue Nile is the major tributary of The Nile: it flows from Lake Tana (the largest lake in Ethiopia) in the Ethiopian Highlands and supplies 86% of the great river’s water. Despite this fact, it is Egypt and Sudan that use almost the entire flow.

    Since its inception, Egypt and Sudan, with political support from the U.S., Britain and Co., have attempted to derail the project and maintain their historic control over the Nile, which both countries depend on. In the early days there was even talk, by Egyptian leaders, of war, and in March 2021, Egypt’s President Abdel Fattah El-Sisi stated hyperbolically: “No one can take a drop of water from Egypt… If it happens, there will be inconceivable instability in the region that no one could imagine. This is not a threat.” To their credit the Ethiopian government, which holds all the Nile cards, has ignored such inflammatory rhetoric, and persevered with the work of construction. When the project was first announced in 2011 the Ethiopian government invited Egypt and Sudan to form an International Panel of Experts (IPoE) to understand the benefits, costs and impacts of the GERD. The recommendations made by the IPoE, however, were not adopted.

    For decades, access to, and control of, the life-giving waters of The Nile has been governed by various unfair agreements dating back to British colonial rule (Egypt and Sudan were both British colonies). 1902, 1929 and 1959 agreements all gave control of the Nile to Egypt and Sudan, primarily Egypt. The 1959 agreement allocated 75% of the total flow of the Nile to Egypt and 25% to Sudan, and nothing at all to Ethiopia, not a drop.

    Enraged by these lop-sided, antiquated “agreements” in May 2010, the upstream states of the Nile (including Ethiopia) signed a Cooperative Framework Agreement pronouncing the 1959 Treaty dead in the water, and claiming rights to more of the river’s bounty. Egypt and Sudan, unwilling to share what they had hoarded for decades, refused to sign. As a result of this intransigence no mutually acceptable agreement between upstream and downstream countries exists, and Egypt and Sudan worried, they say, about water security, have consistently argued against the project.

    Egypt in particular has been pushing for a legally binding agreement on the operation of the GERD and the filling of the reservoir. At the request of Tunisia the matter was recently heard at the UN Security Council (UNSC), a completely inappropriate forum for such a topic: the Security Council is set up to establish and maintain international peace and security (something it has serially failed to do), not intervene in development issues, and the GERD is a development project. Negotiations are set to continue under the auspices of the African Union, and early signs are more positive. Ethiopia’s willingness to work towards an agreement (not a legal requirement) is in itself an act of goodwill, and augers well. Any agreement must reject totally the colonial constructs and recognize that Ethiopia has a right to utilize the natural resources that lie within its territory, a right that has been denied for generations.

    A vital resource

    The GERD is badly needed.  It will play a significant part in reducing poverty and transforming the country. Among the many potential benefits to Ethiopia, it will quadruple the amount of electricity produced, providing millions of people with access to electricity for the first time while allowing surplus electricity to be exported to neighbouring states, generating national income. It will provide clean water, which will lower the spread of illness, provide decent drinking water to those who currently have none, and irrigate 1.2 million acres of arable land – helping to create successful harvests, therefore reducing or eliminating food shortages.

    All dams have an impact on the natural environment and surrounding ecosystems, and the GERD is no exception. However, while solar and wind are the ideal, hydroelectric dams are preferable to nuclear or fossil fuel power plants and the broader positive effects are potentially substantial. Without electricity, millions of people burn wood or dry dung to cook with. This causes de-forestation and greenhouse gas emissions, as well as respiratory illnesses. As electricity is generated and supplied, these practices, which are embedded in many communities and have been followed for generations, can be dropped, resulting in a decrease in GHG emissions, the revitalization of natural habitat, and enable dung to be used as a fertilizer by farmers.

    The dam will also help manage the impact of climate change by providing consistent water flow. Not only for Ethiopia, but also for downstream countries (particularly Sudan) that are frequently hit by drought or flooding. As Meles Zenawi (Ethiopian PM when construction began) said, “when the dam becomes operational, communities all along the riverbanks and surrounding areas, particularly in Sudan, will be permanently relieved from centuries of flooding.”

    The GERD is rightly a source of national pride, a unifying symbol in a dangerously divided country and an essential resource if the country is to move into a new phase of economic and social development. Its successful completion is a significant achievement, and reaffirms Ethiopia’s place as a major regional power, not just within the Horn of Africa, but the continent as a whole. Once the dam is fully operational, Ethiopia will once again become a beacon of hope and empowerment to other nations in Africa, many of which have lived under the shadow of poverty, conflict and external control for far too long.

    A powerful Ethiopia, however,  is something neither Egypt or “the West”, meaning the U.S. and her allies, welcome. Ethiopia has been a thorn in their imperialist side for centuries; never colonized by force, fiercely proud and independent with a rich diverse culture. An example to nations throughout the continent, Ethiopia and the Ethiopian flag have long been a symbol of defiance for other African countries, many of which incorporated the colors of the Ethiopia flag (red, yellow, and green) into their own.

    This is a crucial moment in Ethiopia’s long history; the country has just staged its first democratic elections, which should be seen as extremely positive, but millions are displaced and armed conflicts in Tigray and elsewhere continue. Ethiopians are faced with a choice: unite and prosper or withdraw into ethnic rivalries and fall into further conflict and discord. While there are those inside and outside the country that are fanning the flames of division, hatred and fear, the vast majority yearn for peace and social harmony. It is these voices that must prevail if this wonderful country is to flower once again.

    The post Ethiopian Renaissance Dam: A Unifying Peoples’ Project   first appeared on Dissident Voice.


    This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Graham Peebles.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • On 18 July, The Canary highlighted Brandon Lewis’s attempt to whitewash Britain’s war crimes in Ireland with an amnesty for British forces and all combatants of the conflict. That article also noted opposition from victims’ families and the Irish government to Lewis’s proposal.

    And since we published that article, a number of key developments have shown why we must block any attempt to lie about or airbrush Britain’s dirty war in Ireland.

    A key moment this week

    As extensively reported by The Canary, Britain fought a dirty war in Ireland against Irish republican paramilitaries (mainly the IRA) between 1968 and 1998. Some commentators euphemistically call it ‘The Troubles’. British forces engaged in direct combat with republicans and colluded with British loyalist paramilitaries to fight that war. They also deliberately attacked and took innocent civilian life.

    On 22 July, a shortened meeting between human rights group the Pat Finucane Centre (PFC) and the Northern Ireland Office (NIO) demonstrated Britain’s intentions clearly. Because in that meeting, the NIO refused to clarify or withdraw its claim from its July 2021 “command paper” – Addressing the Legacy of Northern Ireland’s Past – that:

    Security Forces were responsible for around 10% of Troubles-related deaths – the vast majority of which were lawful

    And it’s hardly the first time Britain has tried to minimise its role in the conflict. Nor is it the first time people have pulled Britain up on such claims. The PFC represents families of the people that British forces killed, so it felt it couldn’t continue in a meeting as long as that statement remained. It said:

    We also take issue with the 10% claim, which excludes deaths where collusion is either suspected or proven. Taken together with recent judgements in the #BallymurphyMassacre inquest and the #BloodySunday Tribunal report, we believe the Command Paper must be revised with the “lawful” claim removed.

    Then it added:

    in all conscience, and out of respect for the families we represent, we feel unable to do so until @10DowningStreet has, at least, either produced evidence to back up its claim in the Command Paper or agrees to withdraw it

    The “command paper”

    In one respect, this command paper may not be a bad idea. In fact, it could be the beginning of some kind of solution to the aftermath of the 30-year conflict. Almost 50 years on from a number of conflict killings, families and loved ones are still fighting for justice. So Lewis is possibly correct when he says in the paper:

    The intense focus on divisive legal processes continues to drive wedges between communities and undermine public confidence in the police as they go about their work today. Lengthy, drawn out and complex legal processes stifle the critical information recovery and reconciliation measures that could help many families and frequently lead to years of uncertainty for those under scrutiny.

    But what he fails to do (deliberately or otherwise) is to acknowledge that successive British governments caused this ‘divisive legal process’ and “uncertainty”. The British government has the power to investigate and come clean about its past, but it continually refuses to do so. And regardless of the few crumbs it occasionally throws to campaigners, it’s failed to commit to real justice.

    This command paper references the 2014 Stormont House Agreement (SHA) – an agreement designed to deal with the past – which the British refuse to implement. Instead, this paper proposes setting up a new body to allow people to “seek and receive information about Troubles-related deaths and injuries”. It’s also proposing a “major oral history initiative” that would “further mutual understanding and reconciliation”. But most controversial is the already-mentioned amnesty for “all Troubles-related incidents”.

    A human rights lawyer in Belfast summed it up best when he tweeted:

    A number of falsehoods masquerading as fact in that document.

    Britain’s hand exposed

    In addition to this paper demonstrating Britain’s inability to be an honest broker, there were other revelations this week. On 22 July, the police ombudsman said there were “significant investigative failures” and evidence of police collusion in the loyalist murder of a Belfast teenager in 1993.

    Then on Friday 23 July, a High Court judge ruled that the 1998 Omagh bombing in County Tyrone (the worst atrocity of the conflict) could have been prevented. The judge said the UK government should investigate the bombing. It seems that each week brings forward a new example of either British intransigence or collusion. Its false 10% ‘statistic’ is utterly laughable at this stage.

    But maybe we can also acknowledge some good in this latest document. Because it’s possible that the truth and reconciliation forum to which the document alludes could work. But truth and reconciliation can only work when those involved are truthful and determined to reconcile. And so far, we haven’t seen that from the British. If they persist with their mythical 10% figure and refuse to properly investigate, we’ll get nowhere. But maybe that’s what they want?

    This command paper, with its mealy-mouthed mass of contradictions, shows yet again that Britain lacks integrity. An approach that pushes a wedge between communities and causes an untold amount of uncertainty.

    Featured image via Pixabay – TayebMEZAHDIA

    By Peadar O'Cearnaigh

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • COMMENT: By John Minto

    US ice cream manufacturer Ben and Jerry has announced it will no longer sell icecream in the occupied Palestinian Territories.

    This is a welcome development while Israel is continuing to flout international law with their new government approving the building of 31 more illegal Jewish-only settlements in the occupied West Bank alongside the destruction of Palestinian homes and on-going ethnic cleansing of Palestinian families from occupied East Jerusalem to make way for Jewish settlers. 

    It appears this move may be linked to last week’s request from the UN Special Rapporteur, Michael Lynk, for countries to recognise Israel’s sponsoring of Israeli settlers on Palestinian land in the Occupied West Bank as “a war crime under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.”

    The Special Rapporteur calls these settlers (680,000 across almost 300 illegal settlements) “the engine of Israel’s 54-year-old occupation, the longest in the modern world”. 

    This UN report gives the government the opportunity to make public New Zealand’s abhorrence at these ongoing racist policies against Palestinians.  

    New Zealand has been silent since 2016 when the last National-led government co-sponsored United Nations Security Council resolution 2334 which declared Israel’s illegal settlements to have “no legal validity” and constitute a “flagrant violation of international law”.  

    The next step — as requested by the United Nations last week, is for New Zealand to declare this Israel settler policy as a “war crime”.

    Five years of silence is complicity with Israel’s war crimes. It is not acceptable.

    Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa (PSNA) has written this week to the Minister of Foreign Affairs about this. We are expecting the government to speak out.

    John Minto is national chair of the Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa (PSNA).

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Just days after NHS workers recoiled at a meagre 3% pay offer from the government, the Tories are set to spend £195m on killer drones. After 18 months of living through a pandemic, with its terrible toll on healthcare and other frontline sectors, this is insult on top of insult.

    UK Defence Journal report that thirteen more war drones will be added to the existing fleet of three. After an unconvincing rebrand in 2016, the aircraft are now known as ‘Protectors’. The truth is they’re built from the same model as the infamous Reaper drone, which have terrorised the Middle East and Central Asia for years

    Milestone?

    The deal was announced by senior RAF air commodore Richard Barrow. As head of the project, Barrow enjoys the comical title “Protector Programme Senior Responsible Owner”.

    He told press:

    The contract for the additional 13 Protector aircraft, taking the total to 16, is a major milestone for the UK.

    Adding that:

    When Protector enters service in 2024, UK defence will take an enormous jump forward in capability, giving us the ability to operate globally with this cutting-edge, highly-adaptable platform.

    Certainly some parties absolutely will benefit. For example, General Atomics Aeronautical Systems Inc, the global arms firm which aims to have the drones in service by 2024.

    And once again, while key workers on the frontlines lose out, British militarism goes on a spending spree.

    Costs of war

    In a vaguely sensible country, the £195m destined for the accounts of arms firms would be spent on something of social value. For example, it could cover training for an estimated 1,176 doctors. It could also cover one year’s salary for 7,583 new teachers outside London, or the annual wages of around 6,138 trained firefighters.

    Yet, at a time when some nurses are still relying on foodbanks, tens of millions are available for the next set of military toys.

    This has to be a question of priorities.

    Priorities

    Military equipment isn’t the only area enjoying massive injections of cash. £195m is a mere drop in the pond of Matt Hancock’s controversial Track and Trace Scheme. Some estimates put the cost for that at £37bn.

    And yet there’s a clear pattern. There’s always money for the next million or even billion pound arms project – be it for drones, tanks, or aircraft carriers. But while arms firms fill their pockets, nurses and teachers have to fight for every last scrap.

    Featured image via Wikimedia Commons/Noah Wulf

    By Joe Glenton

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • “100 years of ‘firsts’: The story of women in Australian parliaments started with a blunder from an inept man with a not-quite-so-ingenious plan.”  

    Ebenezer Ward, an anti-women’s rights politician thought he would ‘kill the bill’ by adding the right to stand for Parliament. How wrong he was – the Bill passed 31 to 14.

    With the ABC’s Ms Represented, host Annabel Crabb presents us with a very powerful and important series about women in Australian politics, one hundred years after Australia elected its very first female parliamentarian. She takes us from Votes for Women, through the years in-between, to today’s Parliament and women politicians’ experiences now.

    Ms Represented begins powerfully and refreshingly with our women politicians literally rejoicing in how the women in South Australia became the most enfranchised women anywhere in the world, being granted the rights to both vote and stand for Parliament on 18 December 1894.  Although Aboriginal Women were also able to vote, it was not always made easy for them to do so. We hear later how Aboriginal women (and men), amongst others, were appallingly denied voting rights in Federal elections in the Franchise Act of 1902.

    Annabel cleverly interviews these leading, prominent politicians through each episode, using an extraordinary collection of vignettes to depict significant issues that arose within our Parliament over the years and how our Parliamentary women had to deal with them.  All the women express very similar experiences of their time in Parliament, despite their varied political alliances.  One states that Parliament has ‘the most unsafe workplace culture in the country’ without any code of conduct.  It has been hard for women politicians to take a stand on the abuse of power and misogyny in Parliament, as they are expected to publicly support and defend their party’s stance. However, when leading women stay silent, the message communicated to others who are similarly suffering is to do nothing.

    From the beginning, there have been four hurdles for women entering Parliament:

    • excuses (no women’s toilets and none installed in WA as women in Parliament were seen as a temporary aberration – Edith Cowan! The Senate didn’t install a women’s toilet until 1974!)
    • questioning women’s resilience, whether tough enough
    • needing to fit the formula
    • women’s experience being viewed differently to men’s (for example Joan Pilone – an experienced local politician versus John Howard – an inexperienced accountant)

    Undoubtedly we need “the best person for the job”, and they insist it is decided on merit, but were all the male politicians really selected on merit?   Amanda Vanstone expressed her strong opinion on this!

    The question of gender quotas has been endlessly debated:

    • this was managed well by Labor, though it was hard fought
    • however, the Liberal party is against gender quotas, despite Menzies pioneering affirmative action when bringing anti-Labor groups together in forming the Liberal Party.

    Different standards are applied when reporting on women in politics, especially when the woman in question is Julia Gillard.  She was judged on appearance rather than policy or the economy and ‘one image brought the suggestion that she wasn’t fit to serve.’

    Women as change agents is not seen as the norm however, as Annabel shows, Australia has had many such women.

    Annabel, WOW and thank you, you’ve done it again, and this time with a real BOOM. The timing of this series is highly relevant and appropriate for all Australian women, in this year and even this month.

    I say this because our Federal Parliament’s unregulated workplace culture has been exposed and shown to be dangerous; both older and current women politicians have spoken out; Brittany Higgins’ spoke of her experience; the Women of Australia (plus many men) Marched saying #Enough! But what has happened? – It appears to be very little or NOTHING. So, regretfully, Annabel’s message is indeed timely.

    Watch the whole Ms Represented series on iview.

    • Gillian Lewis, SA State Representative on BPW Australia Board and former senior government policy writer, is a passionate campaigner for gender equity and anti-men’s violence against women

     

     

     

     

    The post Review: ABC TV’s Ms Represented appeared first on BroadAgenda.

    This post was originally published on BroadAgenda.

  • By Ena Manuireva and Tony Fala

    About 35 people joined an Auckland rally last Sunday in solidarity with a Mā’ohi Nui Lives Matter demonstration by thousands of Tahitians happening in Pape’ete, the capital.

    In solidarity and in sync with the Pape’ete event, the Mai te Paura Atōmī i te ti’amara’a: From Bomb Contamination to Self-determination rally was organised by Les Tahitiens de Nouvelle-Zélande (Tahitians of New Zealand) and hosted at Auckland University of Technology.

    Ena Manuireva and colleague Tony Fala were the main organisers at AUT.

    With the live feed from Tahiti in the background, the message was clear to those who attended:

    • French nuclear tests were wrong, killed people, and destroyed the environment; and
    • France must now pay reparations.

    The organisers wanted to remind the audience about the important date of July 17, 1974, as the largest radioactive nuclear test named Centaur — a test that contaminated more than 100,00 people which was nearly the entire population of Mā’ohi Nui at the time.

    Nine takeaways from the event

    1. This rally is the start of more solidarity action for Mā’ohi Nui people. We hope to engage more members of the Mā’ohi Nui community living in Aotearoa in this work.
    2. It is reassuring to have the support of rally speakers in Auckland who represent different peoples of Oceania.
    3. The nuclear issue in Mā’ohi Nui is being commemorated in other ways in Aotearoa. The Auckland Museum launched an exhibition on Remembering Moruroa and the Christchurch Art Gallery Te Puna o Waiwhetū is celebrating the artistic vision of one of Aotearoa’s most significant artists, the late Ralph Hotere. His collection includes the Moruroa watercolours — which has a fitting title, Ātete! (to resist).
    4. The organisers plan to have further meaningful discussions with the Green MPs concerning the Mā’ohi Nui issues. They hope to work with Green MPs to develop concrete proposals so that the issue of nuclear waste in Mā’ohi Nui can be tabled in Parliament.
    5. The organisers intend to reach out to the Department of Disarmament and Arms Control. They plan to talk to Nuclear Disarmament Minister Phil Twyford about this issue.
    6. In the same vein, the organisers will approach the Ministry of Education to propose changes to the new school curriculum emerging in 2022 — changes that would include the teaching of the history of the anti-nuclear stand that New Zealand took in Oceania.
    7. Rally organisers Ena, David, James, Mua, and Tony acknowledge the support of Greenpeace, former members of NFIP, and Peace Movement Aotearoa.
    8. The organisers thank Mahealani Coxhead, Tasha Dalton, Ma’ara Maeva, Sally Manuireva, and Jos Wheeler for their invaluable contributions to the rally.
    9. The organisers thank the Auckland rally audience and express solidarity to Oscar Temaru over the continuing struggle in Mā’ohi Nui.

    The MC and speakers

    Reverend Mua Strickson-Pua. Image: Jos Wheeler
    Reverend Mua Strickson-Pua. Image: Jos Wheeler

    Reverend Mua Strickson-Pua is an activist, educator, and poet. He was the master of ceremonies for the rally and event co-organiser. He introduced all the speakers.

    Ena Manuireva. Image: Jos Wheeler
    Ena Manuireva. Image: Jos Wheeler

    Ena Manuireva is a Mangarevan-Tahitian, Mā’ohi Nui activist whose story started back on his native island of Mangareva. Mangarevans were the first people in French-occupied Polynesia to be used as guinea pigs and contaminated during the first so-called “clean” French nuclear tests on July 2, 1966. Ena narrated the personal story of how his mother became sick and vomited as her lips bled after she unknowingly ate contaminated fish; of how his older sister had weak bones as a baby, and how she developed a vulnerable body that forced his family to flee to Tahiti to save her life and find refuge. Manuireva challenged France to restore truth and justice through reparations and to return independence to Mā’ohi Nui.

    The generation that paved the path for activism in Aotearoa and around the Moana-Nui-a-Hiva:

    Hilda Halkyard-Harawira. Image: Jos Wheeler
    Hilda Halkyard-Harawira. Image: Jos Wheeler

    Hilda Halkyard-Harawira is a distinguished Māori activist, community worker, educator, and founder of the Nuclear Free and Independent Pacific Movement (NFIP). She shared some rich impressions regarding her work as a Māori activist working in the NFIP movement from 1980. Hilda told the moving story of travelling with Māori activists to Mā’ohi Nui in 1995; of witnessing the vibrant anti-nuclear struggle in Tahiti, and of meeting Mā’ohi anti-nuclear protest leaders Charlie Ching and Oscar Temaru. She read extracts from an important address she presented at a 1995 anti-nuclear activist gathering in Tahiti. Moreover, Hilda spoke of her great friendship with Oscar Temaru while expressing her abiding support for Mā’ohi Nui’s struggle for nuclear justice and for independence from France today. Hilda Halkyard-Harawira’s rich address reminded the audience of the profound whakapapa interlinking Māori activists with Mā’ohi Nui, the wider Pacific, and the NFIP Movement.

    Maire Leadbeater. Image: Jos Wheeler
    Maire Leadbeater. Image: Jos Wheeler

    Maire Leadbeater is of Pākehā heritage. She is an activist, former Auckland city councillor, historian, and writer. Maire is a member of West Papua Action Auckland. Maire expressed solidarity with Mā’ohi Nui in her oration. She explained why West Papua is not on the United Nations list of territories to be decolonised. Maire provided an important update on the contemporary West Papua struggle. Maire Leadbeater’s speech allowed the rally audience space to consider the significance of the West Papua struggle alongside that of the noble Mā’ohi Nui resistance in wider Oceania.

    David Robie. Image: Jos Wheeler
    David Robie. Image: Jos Wheeler

    Dr David Robie is a Pākehā environmental activist, editor of Asia Pacific Report, and retired founding director of the AUT Pacific Media Centre. He sees events during his career around the Pacific, including French-occupied Polynesia, as a “game changer”. Those events include the publication of the book Moruroa Mon Amour in the 1970s by Bengt and Marie-Therese Danielsson, Tahiti-based activists, describing their outrage regarding the use of Moruroa as the testing site, leading up to the recent publication of the book Toxic and its damning revelations about France’s persistent lies over the nuclear tests. (He also mentioned his Blood On Their Banner on Pacific independence struggles, first published in Swedish in spite of censorship thanks to the Danielssons’ contacts, and his inspiration from meeting Oscar Temaru which contributed to his commitment to the Mā’ohi Nui cause.) David demands compensation for the harm done by the nuclear tests, a formal apology to the Mā’ohi Nui people, and a return of their independence.

    Political support to the cause shown by the Greens:

    Teanau Tuiono. Image: Jos Wheeler
    Teanau Tuiono. Image: Jos Wheeler

    Teanau Tuiono is of Māori and Atiu heritage. He is a member of parliament for the Green Party and a long time indigenous environmental activist. Teanau articulated the story of the abiding relationships interconnecting the peoples of Atiu and Mā’ohi Nui. He spoke powerfully about the visits of Atiu men to Mā’ohi Nui to work in the phosphate industry in years gone by. Teanau affirmed Oceanian solidarity towards the peoples of Mā’ohi Nui in his korero. Further, he acknowledged that Oceania’s peoples are bound together by the twin whakapapa of both genealogy and shared struggle. Teanau narrated the story of how he marched in support of the Mā’ohi Nui people as a student activist in 1995. Moreover, he spoke of being part of the group who hosted Oscar Temaru at Waipapa Marae at the University of Auckland after the march. Tuiono’s oration provided the audience opportunity to understand the solidarity Māori and Pacific Island peoples have extended to Mā’ohi Nui in Aotearoa since the 1990s.

    Golriz Ghahraman. Image: Jos Wheeler
    Golriz Ghahraman. Image: Jos Wheeler

    Golriz Ghahraman is of Iranian descent. She is a member of parliament for the Green Party, a lawyer, and a community advocate for migrants and refugees. Speaking as a former refugee to Aotearoa, Golriz extended her solidarity to Oscar and the Mā’ohi Nui people in her speech. She illuminated the connections between Mā’ohi Nui; struggles in the wider Pacific; refugees, and migrants. Golriz spoke of the importance of the Palestinian struggle in her labours. She provided the rally audience with the ability to reflect upon the interconnections between the Mā’ohi Nui struggle — and that of the Palestinian, refugee, and migrant communities within and beyond Oceania.

    The emergence of the young generation of activists:

    James Hita. Image: Jos Wheeler
    James Hita. Image: Jos Wheeler

    James Hita is a Māori Greenpeace activist and coordinator for Greenpeace Deep Sea Mining. His message was unequivocal: nuclear tests are not isolated threats; they are part of the many perils that are directly impacting our Ocean. Climate change, nuclear tests, and deep-sea mining all negatively impact upon our most important natural food supply, Te Moana-Nui-a-Hiva. His message was a constant call to awareness for all of us that we must stand united and fight together against the many wrongdoings inflicted upon our Moana-Nui-a-Hiva.

    Anevili. Image: Jos Wheeler
    Anevili. Image: Jos Wheeler

    Anevili TS is a Samoan activist and media worker who represents Indigenous Pacific Uprising (IPU) and Te Ara Whatu activist organisations. A link for her oral presentation at the conference can be found here. Anevili critiqued French colonialism in Mā’ohi Nui. Further, she reminded her audience that the climate change and nuclear issues cannot be separated in Mā’ohi Nui or in wider Oceania. Anevili extended solidarity to Oscar and the Mā’ohi Nui people and invited the French to get out of the Pacific. Anevili’s powerful address articulated the message that younger people in the Moana in Aotearoa stand in solidarity with Mā’ohi Nui today.

    India Logan-Riley. Image: Jos Wheeler
    India Logan-Riley. Image: Jos Wheeler

    India Logan-Riley is a Māori climate change activist, an Indigenous rights campaigner, and a member of Te Ara Whatu. She talked about the whakapapa (genealogy) that the Mā’ohi Nui people have with their land and how France is trying to steal and destroy the land. She highlighted the difficult position New Zealand occupies at the UN- New Zealand is in alliance with other colonial powers such as France. However, she commended the resilience of the Mā’ohi Nui population after more than a quarter of a century since the last nuclear tests were done. She reiterated her support for justice and reparations for the Mā’ohi Nui people. India’s talk reminded the audience of the immensely strong relationships between indigenous Pacific peoples and their lands.

    The panel of speakers included young activists as the organisers wanted to acknowledge the increasingly vital role that young people will play in the future by standing up to all kinds of challenges — while acknowledging the vital role of our activist elders who have come before us.

    Emerging young activists will be the ones to hold the New Zealand government to account for their lack of action on environmental issues.

    Younger activists will also have to stand up and reprimand other countries when other nations’ actions threaten the people and the planet.

    Acknowledgements
    The Auckland rally was only one expression of solidarity for the Mā’ohi Nui people beyond Tahiti: Messages of solidarity from Fiji (Claire Slatter), Micronesia, and the wider ‘Sea of Islands’ were presented to the people of Mā’ohi Nui via video message and social media.

    On behalf of all the organisers, Reverend Mua Strickson Pua:

    • Acknowledged the kinship linkages connecting all of the peoples of Oceania.
    • Affirmed the continuing struggles of the indigenous peoples of Aotearoa, Australia, Hawai’i, Kanaky, Mā’ohi Nui, Micronesia, Rapa Nui, West Papua, and others.
    • Upheld the work of tangata whenua protectors and supporters in Aotearoa in the struggles at Aotea Island, Ihumātao, Pūtiki, and Shelly Bay.
    • Affirmed the interconnections between climate change, nuclear issues, and deep-sea mining as oceanic issues requiring collective responses from all peoples of the “Sea of Islands” together.
    Ma'ohi Nui Lives Matter solidarity rally in Auckland
    Most of the participants at the Auckland solidarity rally for Mā’ohi Nui Lives Matter. Image: Jos Wheeler


    This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • The fossil fuel industry used to deny that climate change was a thing, or that it had anything to do with it. With so much of the world now literally on fire, however, that argument no longer washes. So the industry has taken to what’s known as ‘greenwashing’ to protect its bottom line. Amid an avalanche of criticism over a planned new oilfield in the North Sea, the CEO of Oil and Gas UK (OGUK) has provided the perfect illustration of what greenwashing looks like.

    According to Deirdre Michie, the Cambo oil field “will actually help the UK cut its carbon emissions”. That’s right, apparently expanding fossil fuel production is an answer to the climate crisis.

    Nope

    Michie laid out her argument in the Scotsman. It was nuanced, as all good greenwashing is, but it was largely centred on the notion that “the UK will still need oil and gas for decades to come” to fulfil its “energy needs”. The OGUK CEO argued that to meet that “need” the country will have to import dirty energy with high emissions from overseas if it doesn’t litter the North Sea with more oil rigs.

    The Scotsman published a counter-argument article the following day. Written by the Scottish Greens’ Ariane Burgess, it drove an inconvenient wedge through Michie’s core argument, saying that:

    North Sea production already has more oil than we can afford to burn if we are to meet the Paris Agreement’s climate commitments

    As a Twitter user pointed out, even the International Energy Agency (IEA), which typically produces analysis that is fossil fuel industry-friendly, has called for limiting the exploitation of new sources of fossil fuels:

    Michie argued that the Cambo project is not “new” and that its “exploration licence was granted back in 2001”. However, some experts have asserted that much of the fossil fuel extraction already planned or underway needs to halt if we are to limit global warming.

    Essentially, just because the UK government gave the project a thumbs up back in 2001, that doesn’t mean it can or should ignore the current climate-related flames around the world and carry on regardless.

    Exports, anyone?

    Michie also failed to point out a critical fact related to her core assertion. Not all oil produced in the UK stays in the UK. In fact, the country became a net exporter of oil in 2020, when taking petroleum products into account too, for the first time in a decade. That means it exported more than it imported. The trend appears to be continuing with government statistics showing that in the first quarter of 2021, “the UK exported more primary oils than it imported for only the second time since 2005”.

    Funnily enough, though, the OGUK CEO didn’t argue for the government to ban all oil exports moving forward. In fact, she didn’t mention exports at all. Banning exports would also limit the ‘need’ for imports of emissions-heavy oil from elsewhere. But of course, it’s not in the fossil fuel industry’s interest to call for bans on trade.

    For growth’s sake

    The whole idea of the ‘energy needs’ of the UK deserves scrutiny too. Energy use is closely linked to another prominent ‘need’ in the UK – one that’s built into the economic system itself. It’s the ‘need’ to constantly expand that is at the core of the capitalist system, otherwise known as the never-ending and holy grail of economic growth (just for growth’s sake). But this economic system has caused the climate and biodiversity emergencies we are in, so its irrationality is now glaringly apparent. That’s why a number of reports have landed on the UK government’s desk this year calling for its overhaul.

    So no, the expansion of fossil fuel exploitation isn’t an answer to the climate crisis. System change is.

    Featured image via BBC News / YouTube

    By Tracy Keeling

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • COMMENT: By Professor Biman Prasad

    Pictures and videos emerging about the shocking and deplorable conditions for covid-isolated patients in Fiji hospitals are no surprise. Nor should they be.

    They are a direct consequence of the Bainimarama government’s failure to lead, failure to plan – and worst of all, failure to care.

    Two months ago Ministry of Health officials publicly warned us about the dangers of our health system breaking down under the weight of covid numbers.

    The government refused to listen to advice. It arrogantly refused to lock down.

    And now this disaster is upon us.

    There is a video circulating about a dead patient being left in a temporary hospital ward for hours. Everyone knows a story about ambulances being called which never turn up.

    We hear about a case where a person’s body stayed in a car for five hours in the hospital car park because no one had time or resources to help.

    We were warned – by our own officials
    Tragically, people affected by non-covid conditions are now dying because they cannot get into hospitals for care.

    These were all things we were warned about, by our own health officials.

    Up to now the bulk of our cases has been in the Central Division, which is serviced by the best hospitals. As the disease spreads around Viti Levu, the situation will get much worse.

    This damage is now too late to fix. These desperate stories will continue.

    We all know that deaths from this outbreak will be measured in the hundreds, and the horror of this is just beginning.

    And yet, our leaders are silent. They offer no support, no information. They do not want to talk about this crisis because they have difficult questions to answer about their utter failure to lead.

    Do your best to protect yourselves
    Where were they when their own officials were warning them?

    And where are they now?

    We plead with people to do their best to protect themselves.

    Wear masks, follow the physical distancing rules. Please get vaccinated, if not for yourself for the health and safety of your nearest and dearest around you.

    We have a government that cannot lead and which is too ashamed and cowardly to lead.

    It is now up to each of us to look after and care for each other until we rid ourselves of this failed leadership in the next elections.

    Professor Biman Prasad is the leader of Fiji’s National Federation Party.

    • RNZ Pacific reports that Fiji has recorded 1054 new cases of covid-19 in the 24 hours to 8am yesterday. That compares to 784 cases and 15 deaths in the previous 24-hour period.
    • The government also confirmed 12 more deaths between 13 and 19 July, taking the death toll to 125 with 123 of these from the latest outbreak that began in April.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Photo credit from the archives of Newsonline

    Exits of Netanyahu and Trump: chance to dial down Mideast tensions

    The Iraqi geopolitical analyst, Ali Fahim, recently said in an interview with The Tehran Times: “The arrival of [newly elected Iranian President] Ebrahim Raisi at the helm of power gives a great moral impetus to the resistance axis.” Further, with new administrations in the United States, Israel, and Iran, another opportunity presents itself to reinstate fully the 2015 multilateral nuclear agreement, as well as completely lift the US economic sanctions from Iran.

    Let us wait and see after Raisi is in power in August 2021. It is a fact that, since the Trump administration pulled out of the 2015 multilateral nuclear deal, tensions have been on the rise. One can legitimately suspect that the Trump pull-out had as its real intentions: first, to provoke Tehran; second to undo one of the only foreign policy achievements of the Obama administration, which was negotiated by John Kerry for the US. The Trump administration also used unfair economic sanctions on Iran as a squeeze for regime-change purposes. This was a complete fiasco: the Islamic Republic of Iran suffered but held together.

    As far as military tensions in the region, there are many countries besides Syria where conflicts between Iran-supported groups and US-supported proxies are simmering, or full blown. The US does its work, not only via Israel in the entire region, but also Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates in Yemen, and presently Turkey in Syria. Right now conflicts are active in Syria, Iraq, Yemen and Palestine, but something could ignite in Lebanon at any time.

    Photo credit from the archives of Newsonline

    Iran views itself as the lead supporter of the resistance movement, not only through its support for regional allies like Hezbollah and Bashar al-Assad, but also beyond the Middle-East, for Maduro in Venezuela. The upcoming Iranian administration does not hide its international ambition. For better or worse, Iran sees itself as a global leader of smaller nonaligned countries that are resisting US imperialism, be it Syria, Yemen, Palestine, Lebanon, or Venezuela. Even though Iran is completely different ideologically, it has replaced the leadership of Yugoslavia’s Tito or Cuba’s Castro. Both were not only Marxists but also leaders of the nonaligned movement during the Cold War, when the US and the USSR were competing to split the world in two. Now the dynamics have shifted because of China’s rising global influence, and the Iran Islamic Republic thinks it has a card to play in this complex geopolitical imbroglio.

    Photo credit from the archives of Newsonline

    In the US, Europe and Gulf States, Raisi has been categorized as a hardliner cleric and judge, but this gives Raisi more power than he will have as president. In Iran, major foreign policy issues are not merely up to the president to decide but a consensus process involving many. In the end such critical decisions are always signed off by Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei. Khamenei has already indicated that he supports going back to the 2015 nuclear deal. During his electoral campaign, Raisi, who is close to Khamenei despite previous opposition, said that if elected he would uphold the 2015 landmark nuclear agreement.

    Photo Credit:  Gilbert Mercier

    Ottoman empire revival under Erdogan

    Turkey’s President, Recep Erdogan, often behaves as a modern day Sultan. He is shrewd and extremely ambitious. He fancies himself to be the global leader, politically and militarily, of Sunny Islam. Under Erdogan, Turkey has flexed its military muscles, either directly or through Syrian proxies, not only in Syria, but also in Libya, as well as in Turkey’s support for Qatar in the small Gulf State’s recent skirmish with Saudi Arabia. Erdogan thinks he now has a card to play in Afghanistan. More immediately and strategically, the serious issue on Erdogan’s plate is called Idlib.

    Photo credit from the archives of Newsonline

    The problem of the pocket of Idlib has to be resolved, and unfortunately, for all the civilian population that has been and will be in the crossfire, it can only be solved by a full-on military operation, with troops from Bashar al-Assad and Russia. Turkey is, of course, adamant about keeping a military presence and influence within Syria to prevent a complete Assad victory. Time will tell, but the war of attrition has to end. For this to happen, Russia has to commit to face Turkey from a military standpoint. If Russia is ready for a direct confrontation with Turkey, then Bashar al-Assad’s troops, and Russian forces bringing mainly logistic and air support, should prevail.

    What should make this easier is the fact Erdogan has overplayed his hand for quite some time. This includes his tense relationships with his supposed NATO allies, many of whom, including France, Greece and even Germany, would not mind having him out of NATO altogether.

    There are important factors that explain, not only why Erdogan is quite popular with Turks, but also why his position could become precarious. Erdogan is playing on the Turkish nostalgia for the Ottoman Empire.

    From one Empire to two others: the Sykes-Picot agreement

    To understand better this imperial dynamic, we must go back to the middle of World War I, when the Ottoman Empire was allied with Germany. In 1916, the Sykes-Picot secret agreement effectively sealed the fate of post World War I Middle-East. This British-French agreement, in expectation of a final victory, was a de-facto split of the Ottoman Empire. In the resulting colonial or imperial zones of influence, a euphemism for an Anglo-French control of the region, the British would get Palestine, Jordan, Iraq and the Gulf area, while France would take control of Syria and Lebanon. More than 100 years later, the misery created by this imperialist deal lingers in the entire region, from Palestine, with the 1948 English-blessed creation of the Zionist state of Israel, to Iraq. France put in place two protectorates in Syria and Lebanon, in which the respective populations did not fare much better. Even today, French governments still act as if they have a say in Lebanese affairs.

    Photo Credit from the archive Magharebia

    The weight of history and the nostalgia of 600 years of rule in the Middle-East are why some Turks — especially Erdogan — feel entitled to an intrusive role in the region. The unfortunate story of the Middle-East has been to go from one imperialism to another. With the American empire taking over in the mid-1950s, the only competition during the Cold War became the USSR. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the US had carte blanche. It became more blunt about the exploitation of resources, regime-change policies and its role as the eternal champion of the sacred state of Israel. Quickly, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Qatar became the US’ best friends in the Arab world. I have called this alliance between the West, Israel and the oil-rich Gulf states an unholy alliance. It is still at play, mainly against Iran.

    Photo Credit: David Stanley

    Since the collapse of the USSR, the US empire has tried to assert a worldwide hegemony by mainly two different approaches: support of autocratic regimes like those in the Gulf States, or pursuit of regime change policies to get rid of sovereign nations. This is what I have identified as engineering failed states: a doctrine at play in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, and Yemen. Often, Islam soldiers of fortune — called at first freedom fighters as in Afghanistan, or the so-called Free Syrian Army — have mutated down the line into ISIS terrorists. Once the mercenaries developed independent ambitions, they served a dual purpose: firstly, as tools of proxy wars; secondly as a justification for direct military interventions by the empire and its vassals. Since the US-led invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq the bottom line results have been the same: death and destruction. Tabula rasa of Iraq, Libya and Syria, with countries left in ruins, millions killed, and millions of others turned into refugees and scattered to the winds. The numbers are mind boggling in the sheer horrors they reflect. According to the remarkable non-partisan Brown University Costs of War project, since the start of the US-led so-called war on terror, post September 11, 2001, in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Pakistan and elsewhere the direct cost in people killed has been over 801,000. So far, the financial burden for US taxpayers has been $6.4 trillion.

    Photo credit from the archives of Newsonline

    Does Erdogan think he can do better than Alexander the Great with Afghans?

    Apparently Erdogan’s imperial ambitions reach as far as the land of the Pashtuns. The Taliban already control about 85 percent of Afghanistan. While most NATO troops have either left or are in the process of doing so, Erdogan has volunteered Turkish troops to secure Kabul’s airport. Some in the Middle-East speculate, rightly or wrongly, that Erdogan plans to send to Afghanistan some of his available Syrian mercenaries, like those he has used in Libya. Even if this is rubber stamped by regional powers like Pakistan or Iran, which it won’t be, such a direct or proxy occupation will fail. If Turkish or Syrian mercenaries, or any other foreign proxies for that matter, try to get in the way of the Taliban, they will be shredded to bits.

    Does Erdogan think he is a modern day version of Alexander the Great? This is plainly laughable! The Taliban are resuming control of Afghanistan, and that is the reality. Something Afghans agree upon is that they want all occupying foreigners out. This will include Turkish and Syrian mercenaries.

    Photo Credit:  Gilbert Mercier

    Post Netanyahu Israel: more of the same for Palestinians?

    For the Palestinians living either in Gaza or in the occupied territories, one element that has changed in Israel is that Netanyahu is no longer in power. It would be naive to think that the new Israeli administration will be less Zionist in its support for Jewish settlers expanding their occupation of Palestinian land, but we might see a small shift, more like a pause in Israel’s bellicose behavior.

    Lebanon on the brink: opportunity for Israel to attack Hezbollah?

    Despite Lebanon’s dreadful political and economic situation, Israel would be ill advised to consider any military action. Hezbollah is a formidable fighting force of 70,000 men, who have been battle hardened for almost a decade in Syria. Vis a vis Iran, a direct aggression of Israel is even less likely. With Trump gone, it seems that Israel’s hawks have missed out on that opportunity. Furthermore, it would be borderline suicidal for the Jewish state to open up many potential fronts at once against Hezbollah, Hamas, and Bashar al-Assad’s army. All of them would have the backing and logistic support of Iran.

    Once the 2015 nuclear agreement is in force again, with the Biden administration, the tensions in the region should significantly decrease. It is probable that in the new negotiations, Iran will request that all the US economic sanctions, which were put in place by the Trump administration, be lifted.

    Photo credit from Resolute Support Media archive

    Neocolonial imperialism: a scourge that can be defeated

    One thing about US administrations that has remained constant pretty much since the end of World War II is an almost absolute continuity in foreign policy. From Bush to Obama, Obama to Trump, and now Trump to Biden, it hardly matters if the US president is a Democrat or Republican. The cornerstone of foreign policy is to maintain, and preferably increase, US hegemony by any means necessary. This assertion of US imperial domination, with help from its NATO vassals, can be blunt like it was with Trump, or more hypocritical with a pseudo humanitarian narrative as during the Obama era.

    The imperatives of military and economic dominance have been at the core of US policies, and it is doubtful that this could easily change. Mohammed bin-Salman‘s war in Yemen is part of this scenario. Some naively thought MBS would be pushed aside by the Biden administration. The clout of the Saudis remained intact, however, despite the CIA report on the gruesome assassination of a Washington Post journalist in Turkey. All evidence pointed to bin-Salman, but he was not pushed aside by his father. Under Biden, MBS is still Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince, and de-facto autocratic ruler. The Saudis’ oil and money still have considerable influence in Washington.

    The Saudis understand very well that, since the 1970s, their real geopolitical power has resided in the way they can impact global oil prices. They can still make the barrel price go up or down to serve specific geopolitical interests. For example, recently the Saudis tried to help the US regime change policy in Venezuela by flooding the global market to make oil prices crash. Saudi Arabia and its United Arab Emirates ally have used the black gold as an economic weapon countless times, and very effectively.

    The great appetite of the Saudis for expensive weapons systems is another reason why they have a lot of weight in Washington and elsewhere. How can one oppose the will of a major client of the corporate merchants of death of the military-industrial complex?

    Photo Credit from archive of DVIDSHUB

    History will eventually record the 20-year Afghanistan war as a defeat and perhaps the beginning of the end for the US empire that established its global dominance aspiration in 1945. People from countries like Yemen, Palestine, as well as Mali, Kashmir, and even Haiti, who are fighting against an occupation of their lands, respectively, by the imperial little helpers Saudi Arabia, Israel, France, India and the United Nations, should find hope in what is going on in Afghanistan. My News Junkie Post partner Dady Chery has explained the mechanics of it brilliantly in her book, We Have Dared to Be Free. Yes, occupiers of all stripes can be defeated! No, small sovereign nations or tribes should not despair! The 20-year US-NATO folly in Afghanistan is about to end. The real outcome is a victory of the Pashtuns-Taliban that is entirely against all odds. It is a victory against the most powerful military alliance ever assembled in history. Yemenites, Palestinians, Tuaregs, Kashmiris, Haitians and other proud people, fighting from different form of neocolonial occupations, should find inspiration from it. It can be done!

    Photo Credit from the archive of Antonio Marin Segovia

    The post Afghanistan War Outcome: Hope for Sovereign Nations Fighting the Scourge of Neocolonial Imperialism first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • EDITORIAL: By the editorial board of The Jakarta Post

    The unanimous House of Representatives decision in Indonesia last week to endorse the revised Papuan Special Autonomy Law shows, yet again, the propensity of the Jakarta elite to dictate the future of the territory, despite persistent calls to honor local demands.

    This “new deal” is not likely to end violence in the resource-rich provinces, which stems in large part from Jakarta’s refusal to settle past human rights abuses there.

    On paper, the revision offers some of the substantial changes needed to help Papuans close the gap with the rest of the nation. For example, it extends special autonomy funding for Papua and West Papua to 2041 and increases its amount from 2 percent to 2.25 percent of the general allocation fund, with a particular focus on health and education.

    The Jakarta Post
    THE JAKARTA POST

    The Finance Ministry estimates that over the next 20 years, the two provinces will receive Rp 234.6 trillion (US$16 billion).

    The revisions also strengthen initiatives to empower native Papuans in the policy-making process by allocating one fourth of the Regional Legislative Council to native, nonpartisan Papuans by appointment. They also mandate that 30 percent of those seats go to native Papuan women.

    Under the new law, a new institution will be established to “synchronize, harmonize, evaluate and coordinate” the implementation of special autonomy. Headed by the Vice President, the new body will answer to the President and will have a secretariat in Papua. The previous government formed a presidential unit to accelerate development in Papua and West Papua (UP4B), but President Joko “Jokowi” Widodo dissolved it shortly after taking office in 2014.

    The chairman of the special House committee deliberating the revision, Komarudin Watubun, a Papuan, described the new law as “a breakthrough” as it would require the government to consult the Papuan and West Papuan governments in the drafting of implementing regulations.

    But this is where the core problem of the special autonomy law lies. In democracy, respecting the will of the public, including dissenting views, is vital to the lawmaking process, precisely because the laws will affect that public. Public scrutiny should precede rather than follow a law, but in the case of the special autonomy law, that mechanism was dropped from the House’s deliberation, which lasted seven months, under the pretext of social distancing to contain the spread of covid-19.

    The Jakarta elite have clearly left the Papuan People’s Assembly (MRP) behind as a representation of the customs and will of the provinces’ people, as well as the Papuan Legislative Council (DPRP), not to mention civil society groups, tribes and those who mistrust special autonomy and the government. In the words of MRP chief Timotius Murib, the revisions reveal Jakarta’s lack of good intentions for Papuan development.

    This is not the first time the executive and legislative powers have colluded to bypass public consultation on a highly controversial bill. The tactic worked in the passage of the Job Creation Law last year, as well as the new Mining Law, and the approach is apparently repeating in the ongoing deliberation of the Criminal Code revision.

    As long as the obsolete, Jakarta-centered approach remains intact, Papuan peace and prosperity will remain elusive.

    This Jakarta Post editorial was published on 21 July 2021.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • There’s no need to venture abroad and end up in quarantine right now – I’m getting all the blistering heat of the Mediterranean right now in my back garden in the North of England.

    The UK saw its hottest day of 2021 at the weekend as temperatures soared, leading the Met Office to issue its first ever extreme heat warning. Elsewhere in the world, temperatures and weather are hitting even more worrying heights.

    While this country gets off relatively easily with its heatwaves, the cataclysmic effects of the climate crisis are becoming more and more apparent as extreme weather events become a regular fixture in the headlines.

    And it’s become increasingly clear that whittling away at decade long emission targets isn’t going to cut it.

    The west on fire

    In the west of America, forests are currently burning.

    The Bootleg fire in Oregon is the largest of them, and one of the largest in Oregon’s history, and it’s expanded to cover an area half the size of Rhode Island. Thousands have been evacuated and firefighters have faced dangerous conditions as they attempt to put out the erratic flames.

    This is only one of 70 wildfires that were burning across the west on 17 July.

    Climate change has caused the region to become hotter and drier over 30 years, and with that has come an increasing amount of less-containable wildfires.

    Temperatures beyond human tolerance

    In Canada, hundreds died at the beginning of the month in a vicious heatwave in British Columbia that saw fires break out across the Pacific Northwest.

    Along with western America, western Canada is now in its fourth heatwave in five weeks, and the fires are continuing to burn.

    In Jacobabad, Pakistan summers now reach 52 degrees, which is hotter than the human body is built to withstand – and scientists estimate it could get hotter.

    So as global warming promised, it’s already dangerously, terrifyingly hot. But the climate crisis isn’t just driving up the heat – it’s causing an increase in the frequency and intensity of extreme weather events around the world.

    Floods beyond scientist predictions

    Within only 48 hours in Germany last week, areas near the Rhine experienced nearly twice as much rainfall as they usually do in the whole of July.

    As a result, floods ravaged tens of thousands of homes, killing at least 58 people.

    Their intensity and size was beyond what climate scientists had predicted, leading to concerns climate change’s effect on extreme weather is accelerating faster than we thought.

    All of this has happened just within the last couple of months. Beyond that, extreme weather events have significantly increased during the last 20 years.

    The human cost

    From 2000 to 2019, the world saw 7,348 major natural disasters. They killed 1.23 million people and cost the planet nearly $3tn.

    The poorest countries are hit the hardest by extreme weather events. According to The Global Climate Risk Index 2021, Haiti, Puerto Rico, and Myanmar were the countries most affected by extreme weather events from 2000 to 2019.

    Zimbabwe and Mozambique were the most affected in 2019, after an intense tropical cyclone hit them and Malawi. Over one thousand people died, and three million were impacted. Residents who survived were left homeless, many of their livelihoods ruined.

    Another devastating cyclone hit Mozambique just six weeks later.

    And the future looks no less bleak – a UN report in 2019 warned of a coming “climate apartheid” as rich people find ways to protect themselves from extreme weather and leave the poorest to suffer.

    So, what are we doing?

    We have the Paris Agreement – accords signed by 196 countries pledging to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees.

    But despite that, we remain tied to fossil fuels. UK councils have invested nearly £10bn into fossil fuels through pension funds; Brazil continues to decimate the Amazon, and Norway has given gas and oil exploration rights to 30 companies including Shell.

    Climate scientists have already warned current global policies wouldn’t be up to scratch even if we met them, and could very likely see the planet warm by more than two degrees.

    Former UN secretary-general Ban Ki-moon said last year:

    We have lost a lot of time. Five years after the agreement in Paris was adopted with huge expectations and commitment by world leaders, we have not done enough.

    There are whispers of phrases like ‘green new deal’ and ‘green recovery’, because adding green in front of something is a quick way to make us all feel like we’re doing something.

    The way forward

    It’s fairly clear the once seemingly far-off effects of the climate crisis are already here. If the apocalyptic flames in the west right now aren’t evidence enough, the Amazon rainforest now officially emits more carbon dioxide than it absorbs.

    We need urgent action.

    We need quicker divestment from fossil fuels, so we can cut emissions by the drastic amount needed. We need to work to reduce deforestation and forest fires, switch to electric vehicles more quickly, and yes, recover from the pandemic by creating jobs in green industries and investing in renewable technology.

    Even with all this, particularly in the west, we’re going to have to accept and make the effort to change our individual lifestyles to reduce emissions where possible – change needs to happen both structurally and individually.

    We’re hosting COP26 this year, which has instructed countries to update their emissions plans to get back on track for 1.5 degrees warming.

    This is the chance for world leaders to recognise the world is already burning and commit to real actions. If they don’t, and continue fanning the flames, it’s the world they’ll have to answer to.

    Featured image via YouTube/CNBC Television

    By Jasmine Norden

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • ANALYSIS: By Dan McGarry, The Village Explainer

    I wasn’t invited to the inaugural Vanuatu media awards a couple of weeks ago. Nor was I asked to participate.

    Instead, I spent the weekend preparing the final draft of the Media Association of Vanuatu’s Code of Ethics and Practice. I am proud to say it was adopted by the MAV executive last Friday.

    If I had been there, and if I had been asked to say something, this is what I would have said (seriously: when did I ever wait for someone to ask me for my opinion?): Journalism isn’t just a profession; it’s a public service. It consists of sharing, broadcasting or publishing information in the public interest.

    That’s the first paragraph in the new preamble of an updated Media Code of Ethics and Practice.

    This code is integral to our work. It guides us from day to day. It tells us what we must do, what we should do, and what we should aspire to. It will help us serve the community better.

    By describing how we should report the news, it helps us to decide what is news, and what’s not.

    I agreed to help with this final draft because I know how important it is to think carefully about these things. Agonising over each word of this code has been an invaluable process for me. It’s taught me new things. It’s reinforced others. And it’s led me to do the one thing required of every reporter:

    Challenge assumptions
    Challenge every single assumption.

    Reporting starts with asking questions. Who? What? When? Where? Why?

    Socrates, one of humanity’s most famous inquiring minds, reportedly said, “The unexamined life is not worth living.”

    The professional journey of every reporter begins with that phrase.


    The Media Association of Vanuatu awards 2021. Image: MAV

    In that spirit of examination, I want to take a moment to consider where we are as a media community, where we’ve come from, and where we need to go.

    Vanuatu’s media can congratulate themselves for a number of things:

    Our populace has a more nuanced and subtle understanding of the law and governance than many others. We joke about bush lawyers, but our interest in the law — and respect for it — is a product of how we in the media portray it.

    We are bound to defend and protect the truth. The truth is the seed we sow. And from that seed, we reap a better democracY.

    — Dan McGarry

    Understanding politics
    The same is true of our understanding of politics and Parliamentary procedure. Vanuatu follows Parliament the way some nations follow football. Our society is more engaged with the process of government than a great many others. The media plays a role in that, and we should be proud of it.

    The status of women has advanced by leaps and bounds, both in media industry, and in society at large. Of course, the lioness’ share of the work has been done by two generations of fearless women who have campaigned tirelessly, selflessly to improve their lot.

    But we have been there to mark their progress, to celebrate their wins, and to shine a light on the countless obstacles that still impede their progress.

    The number of prosecutions and convictions for spousal abuse, sexual violence and other gender-based crimes is rising. These crimes are still happening far too often, but we can fairly say that the new, tougher sentences being handed out are a result of an awareness that we helped raise.

    Our nation’s environmental awareness has been assisted greatly by the media. Again, we aren’t the ones saving the planet, but we are celebrating the people who do.

    By giving space to the wisdom of kastom and the knowledge of science, we can exercise our right and our duty to protect this land.

    The list of our achievements is long. I’m grateful that we finally found time to recognise and celebrate them. We have much to be proud of, and we should take this moment to applaud ourselves for a job well done.

    About our failures
    Now… let’s talk about our failures.

    The Code of Ethics requires that we be frank, honest and fair. It also instructs us not to leave out any uncomfortable facts just because they don’t fit the narrative. But we cannot ignore the fact that we could do much, much more, and we could do far, far better.

    Fear still dominates and diminishes us. Don’t pretend it’s not there. And don’t you dare tell me it hasn’t made you back off a story. Every single press conferences reeks of faltering confidence.

    We’re all guilty of it. Every single one of us. Back in 2015, I made sure my ABC colleague Liam Fox was in the room when Marcellino Pipite announced that he had exercised his power as Acting Head of State and pardoned himself and his cronies.

    I made sure he was there because I knew he would ask the one question that mattered: “Aren’t you just trying to save your own skin?”

    I’m grateful to Liam for stepping up. But now I wish I’d been the one who had the courage to ask.

    We have to find a way past our fear, and we can only do that together. If we all enter the room ready to ask hard questions, it’s easier for each one of us to quit wishing we could and just do it.

    Stand up for each other
    We have to learn to stand up for each other. Ten years ago, media pioneer Marc Neil-Jones was savagely assaulted by a minister of state.

    That bullying act of injustice upset me deeply. It’s also what inspired me to take Marc’s place when his health forced him to step aside.

    But what upset me even more was the failure of the media community to say one thing, and say it clearly: Violence against the media is never OK.

    Never.

    The only way we can be sure that those days of violent intimidation are past is if we hold that line, and condemn any act of coercion or violence loudly and in one voice.

    To this day, I’m ashamed that we didn’t do at least that much for Marc.

    Where is Marc’s lifetime achievement award? How much longer are we going to ignore his bravery, his leadership? Is his courage and determination going to be forgotten?

    Not by me, it won’t.

    Standing up to threats
    I know how hard it is to stand up to disapproval, verbal abuse, threats of violence, abusive language, rumours, lies and prejudice. I know how hard it is to stand up to my own peers, to take it on the chin when I find out I’m wrong, and to refuse to bend when I know I’m right.

    I’ve learned this lesson: They can take your job. They can take your livelihood. They can stab you in the back. They can grind you down. They can attack your dignity, they can shake your confidence.

    But they can’t change the truth. Because it’s not my truth, or yours, or theirs.

    You can find another place to work. You can find other ways to ply your trade. You can bear up under pressure, even when nobody else believes you can. You can learn to carry on.

    You can do all of that, if you’re faithful to the truth. The truth is what we serve, not the director, the producer, the editor.

    The truth is our republic. We have a duty to defend it. All of it. Not just the bits that please us. All of it. All the time. Even when it costs us. Especially when it costs us.

    We are bound to defend and protect the truth. The truth is the seed we sow. And from that seed, we reap a better democracy.

    Holding power to account
    Democracy unchallenged isn’t democracy. The people can’t rule if they can’t ask questions.
    This principle underpins the media’s role in keeping democracy healthy, and rebuilding it when it’s under threat. The role of the media is to hold power to account.

    In Vanuatu, this basic idea needs to be better understood by the government and the governed alike. We can do this by helping journalists better understand their role, and helping them get what they need to fulfil that role more effectively.

    The revised Media Code of Ethics and Practice is a milestone on that road. But it’s meaningless if we don’t stand by it.

    To my media colleagues, I say: Forget your jealousies, your rivalries. Reject pride, collusion and corruption wherever you see it, even in yourself. Especially in yourself.

    Stand with MAV. Uphold this code, and we will stand together with the truth. Because the truth is our republic.

    Dan McGarry is former media director (pending an appeal) of the Vanuatu Daily Post / Buzz FM and independent journalist and he held that position since 2015 until the government blocked his work permit in 2019. His Village Explainer is a semi-regular newsletter containing analysis and insight focusing on under-reported aspects of Pacific societies, politics and economics.


    This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • The latest Corbett Report podcast1 is essentially an update on the developments in genetic engineering, especially in combination with neurological research.

    When genetic engineering was first introduced to the public I recall my abhorrence. Unlike many people I do not believe in “neutral” technology. For me a techne is always motivated and developed to transport interests. There are developments by humans that derive from general human needs and those which arise from specific activities. Moreover I believe knowledge and technology are principally derived from organisation and organisation is never neutral.

    Genetic engineering — one of the speakers cited compares it albeit favourably with the development of the atomic bomb — is weapons technology and was from the very start.2

    It becomes clear among these compulsive technologists that they are interested foremost in any and every kind of control over others. At the same time the entirety of the rhetoric is focused on perceived needs that this weaponry will satisfy.

    Social organisation and technology to produce without polluting water, air, or soil is not the objective of these people or their projects. Nor are they interested in supplying safe housing or infrastructure to the masses of the population — all of which require less technology and, of course, less theft.

    The best one could say about these people is that they are lazy and want solutions to problems for which they are paid but do not have to work. They spin fantasies of problems solved that only rich or middle class people perceive. The unstated assumption is that more equitable distribution of income and healthy living conditions would impede their own accumulation.

    In fact, however, one can see the extent to which all this research has borne fruit in the course of the past two years. The success with which the bulk of the Western population has been induced to wage war on itself — not on the ruling class, of course — is amazing to say the least. The hysteria that launched the Great War was phenomenal; however, nowhere so saturated. Yet it was the Americans who perfected the war propaganda and policing methods essential to perpetuate the war and its profits for DuPont et al.3

    There is a scene in Corbett’s presentation where someone tries to show that neural modelling technology can permit people who are completely paralysed to use their brain to perform physical tasks mediated by digital technology and high volume computing capacity. Aside from the hysterical nature of such a show — choosing an extreme medical case to promote the expansion of work for entirely other purposes — one has to ask how, given all the ostensible communication barriers, can anyone actually verify that this person actually is doing anything besides lying as a “dummy” to persuade the observer that she is driving the machine when, in fact, the machine is merely performing on its own.

    Then there is another aspect, besides the impossibility of verifying whether the “dummy” is really thinking. The underlying assumption of all these demonstrations is that the “dummy” is thinking and the electromagnetic charges are translation of thoughts. The problem with this assumption is just as in the first case — the stimulus field is limited to peripherals or tools that have specific functions and purposes. Assigning the manipulation of a defined stimulus field as “thought” based on the ability to induce action from electromagnetic pulses just reflects the concept of thought, which these people have. One can reverse the argument and say that the researchers have done nothing but show that certain electromagnetic pulses can be used to drive a machine calibrated to operate on those pulses. Other pulses clearly cannot — or it would be irrelevant where the electrodes are placed.

    Hence we return to the point Weizenbaum (Computer Power and Human Reason) made in his study of AI, namely that AI is only the modelling of intelligence based on the needs of operating machines. 4 Any intelligence that might exist but cannot be so used is discounted/discarded. Attention is deliberately focused on humans as beneficiaries but this is a distraction from the machines that are the real centre of activity. This attitude is not new. All warrior/barbarian states have had this focus on humans as mere vehicles for delivering violence. However, that is precisely the point: there is nothing humanistic about AI or genetic engineering. These are technologies rooted in the belief that the mass of humanity has no other purpose than as tools/machines for the benefit of the ruling class.

    In short, behind all the flashy lights, song and dance, and pwogish rhetoric, AI and genetic engineering are concepts for reducing humans to the primitive notion of machines that the ruling class applies to valuing the bulk of the species.

    Here we see the real damage done by the continuous destruction of the humanities as a component of education. Compulsive technology is fed by people who have been educated to see themselves as more or less efficient machines and not as spiritual beings. The Whitney Webb article5 on Wellcome’s LEAP surveillance program describes the degree to which the machine model of human beings is central to the oligarchy’s control objectives. Children in the thousands are to be monitored electromagnetically in order to generate models of human infant machine behaviour that can then be reverse engineered to produce digital control devices to mechanise children from birth. The reason for this is clear. The more sophisticated AI theorists know that digital control of anything requires very carefully defined parameters. The hyper-volume data is supposed to permit fine modelling to reduce randomness by recognising minuscule “subroutines”– something like photo resolution. There is nonetheless a risk of randomness since the only data that can be processed is that for which there is a device and a measuring parameter. Data, itself, is nothing more than what any given machine makes and as such is meaningless independent of the machine and its user.

    Thus the creation of a massive repertoire of human developmental subroutines can only be useful once the new devices — new-born children — are calibrated within the limits of that system. Ideally this would lead to production of children who from birth are controlled by the ruling class ideological priorities and constituted as mere peripherals to the enormous data processing system the elite maintain in lieu of a society. Since they have no way of being certain, however, that this technology will only produce the kind of human machines they program, it will still be necessary to cull those who do not respond according to the user manual.

    Only constant purging of the population to remove those who cannot be effectively controlled will assure the stability intended. That is the only purpose of any of this technology. Perhaps there are meanwhile — given the success of the past thirty-odd years of indoctrination — those who feel that their lives would be more fulfilled if they were better machines. Already there are many who believe that their fulfillment comes from having more comprehensive machines rather than a more mature self.

    1. Episode 405 Designing Humans for Fun and Profit (9 July 2021) at Corbettreport.com
    2. George M Church, credited as one of the founders of so-called synthetic biology, as well as his doctoral advisor Walter Gilbert, were entrenched in the transatlantic biological weapons research scene that still operates under cover of health research. Genetic engineering was funded by the State for the same reason basic atomic (weapons) research was supported—the development of weapons of mass destruction and/or control. (See: “The Health which I see is Disease (… if the Hierarchical Church so Defines)“,  Dissident Voice, 5 March 2021.)  As pertains to the genetic engineering of the SARS and its derivatives.  See Dr David Martin, The Fauci/Covid-19 Dossier, available at truthcomestolight.com. Dr Martin shows on the basis of US Patent Office records that all the essentials of the SARS-CoV 2 were patented by November 2019!
    3. Bigger Than Snowden. Neuro Weapons. Directed Energy Weapons. Mind Control. Targeted Individuals (video 23 minutes, 16 September 2019.
    4. Joseph Weizenbaum (1923-2008) Computer Power and Human Reason (1976). This author had the privilege of hearing Weizenbaum speak in Berlin after he had returned to his birthplace in retirement. The moderator introduced him as a computer scientist who while teaching at Case Western Reserve University was told the university needed a computer and so Joseph Weizenbaum built one. Weizenbaum replied scathingly that “Case did not need a computer and in fact nobody needs a computer.” The focus of his talk was simple. Machines process data but they do not produce information—people do. Needless to say his critique of AI has been entirely marginalised and forgotten. This is due mainly to the propaganda of “progress” which leads people to believe that simply because something is young or new it is automatically better or improved. We only need to recall “planned obsolescence” to debunk this cultivated prejudice.
    5. Whitney Webb, A “Leap” toward Humanity’s Destruction, Unlimitedhangout.com. See also her other posts at this site on the military-industrial-financial complex (especially the intelligence sector) role in the events leading to 2020 et seq.
    The post AI: Ignorance and Stupidity are Machine-Made first appeared on Dissident Voice.


    This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by T.P. Wilkinson.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • It is so-called Freedom Day. The masks can come off and social distancing no longer applies. We can meet in crowds – although football fans have already been doing this in their tens of thousands.

    Freedom Day comes at a time when the government is embarking on a massive herd immunity experiment. A time when the Delta variant is sweeping the country; when our own health secretary has the virus, and when our prime minister is having to self-isolate.

    It is ridiculous, although unsurprising, that Johnson and his cronies have the audacity to go ahead with their plan at this critical time. An estimated 468,358 people currently have symptomatic Coronavirus (Covid-19), and this figure doesn’t include all those who are asymptomatic. The ZOE Coronavirus study stated that there has been a 40% increase in symptomatic cases in fully or partially vaccinated people. In fact, ZOE predicts:

    With cases in the vaccinated group continuing to rise, the number of new cases in the vaccinated population is set to overtake the unvaccinated in the coming days.

    Of course, there’s evidence that being fully vaccinated decreases your likelihood of serious illness, but vaccines clearly aren’t the exit strategy that the government has been spinning to the population. Rather, vaccines need to be used along with the very methods that the government is now abolishing.

    A catalogue of dire mistakes

    The Canary has extensively covered the government’s catalogue of errors throughout the pandemic. At every stage, Johnson & co have made terrible decisions: locking down too late, or having to go back on decisions to open up.

    Back in early 2020, Johnson was reluctant to lock down at all, saying that he shook hands with people with coronavirus. And then during Christmas 2020, the government said it would open up the country for travel for the festive period, but hastily reversed its decision at the last minute for some of the population. After this, they sent children back to school, before the government once again had to change its mind and send them home again. The government’s bad decisions have contributed to the rising cases in the first, second and third waves, and have highlighted that they are incompetent at dealing with the virus.

    So all of this begs the question: why on Earth do we think the government is making the correct decision now?

    Our government has consistently looked to Israel as a model for tackling coronavirus. But one month after dropping its social distancing and mask rules, the Israeli government has had to admit that its vaccination programme isn’t enough to fight the Delta variant, and may face another lockdown.

    Leaving vulnerable people on the scrapheap

    It is, of course, those with chronic health conditions who are most affected by Freedom Day, and who won’t be celebrating in a crowded club. For them, the easing of restrictions is terrifying. Lara Montgomery was diagnosed with womb cancer in 2019. She said that she felt a “growing fear” that the virus will spread uncontrollably. She told PA news agency:

    I think the terminology of ‘Freedom Day’ is awful, it just doesn’t capture the feeling of the whole country…

    For a lot of people… it’s not freedom day at all. People are just going to become too relaxed (and) the situation for people like ourselves… is going to become really frightening.

    On top of this, coronavirus is going to cause a new wave of people with chronic health conditions. More than two million people in the UK may have contracted long Covid, and we don’t yet know the full effects. But scientists are learning that long Covid can have devastating effects on the brain. Hospitals have also seen a number of cases of acute Covid injury, particularly among young people, who are suffering with lung and kidney damage.

    The Canary spoke to Ed Jones, who has lived with a chronic illness for many years. He said:

    As someone with a chronic health condition, I know the devastating impacts it can have on your health, on your ability to work, on your relationships with other people. I wouldn’t wish that one anyone, let alone hundreds of thousands more people.

    He continued:

    People do not realise how individualistic and ableist society is until they become disabled, how little support there is for disabled people, how difficult it is to get sickness benefits, and how little you get. It can make surviving difficult when you need to rely on benefits for a long time.

    The Conservative government has made it more difficult to get sickness benefits: it has put up barriers and you get less. The system is designed to make it very hard to access benefits, which, when you’re ill, is the opposite of what you need.

    You’re on your own

    Will our government be there for the hundreds of thousands that are likely to get health conditions because of its recklessness? As Jones pointed out, it’s very unlikely. As we continue to be the laughing stock of Europe, who knows what long-term effects the Tories’ decisions will have on society?

    The government is, essentially, giving up and letting us all get on with it. Johnson & co are giving a clear message: “You’re on your own. And guess what? It’ll be your fault when it all goes wrong”.

    By Eliza Egret

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • Ten years ago Turia Pitt had her career mapped out. She was a mining engineer, working in the Kimberleys. One day, she planned to be CEO of a global firm.

    “That never happened,” Turia told an engrossed audience at the National Press Club in Canberra, “I entered an ultramarathon, I was trapped by a grassfire during the race. I received burns to 65 percent of my body [and] spent six months in hospital and I was told that I’d never run again.”

    “So what did I do? I rewrote my story. I reinvented myself,” Turia continues.

    The evidence of this fact stands before us, larger than life telling one amusing and powerful anecdote after another. (Later, Turia privately tells me in the NPC boardroom that she’s learned to use humour as a way to get people to pay attention to the things she cares about.) 

    There’s the story about Frank, the gangsta-like physiotherapist who taught her to walk again, while Turia sobbed into his thick gold chain from the pain. There’s the yarn about how her husband, Michael, brought in the pest exterminators right before a film crew arrived. The driveway was littered with a carpet of dead cockroaches.

    “The hair and makeup artist and the stylist were just looking around and looking at me. And I was just like: ‘So great to meet you! Welcome to my home! Come on in. It’s so great to have you here!’ So I just literally pretended I couldn’t see them,” Turia recalls to a chuckling crowd.

    But it’s not all laughs. The athlete and best-selling author has some serious messages for those attending the Women in Media address.

    Reflecting back on the agony of her rehabilitation, she says: “I remember thinking: ‘I can’t even stand up by myself. How the hell am I going to be able to walk again? Run again? Compete again? And I realised that day that I couldn’t think too much about what my future would look like…And so I choose to literally just focus on one step at a time.”

    Day after day, Turia worked at getting well: “You guys are all presumably really high achievers, so you would know this already: being consistent is what drives results.”

    Turia Pitt at the National Press Club

    Turia Pitt speaks to an engrossed crowd at the National Press Club.

    Despite all her personal and professional successes, Turia explains that there are still days when seemingly small things related to her injuries get her down.

    The example Turia gives is a harrowing story about finding herself in a New York subway station, unable to pick up the change from the ticket seller after purchasing her ticket. She was apparently holding up the queue, and the man screamed at her. 

    “I was travelling to the NBC [TV Network] premiere of the Ironman event that I had competed in, and in that moment it felt as if all of the work I had done up to that point was futile because I couldn’t do this simple, ordinary task of taking my change for my subway ticket,” she says. 

    Although Turia is grateful for the opportunities the media has afforded her – and that generally she has a strong relationship with the press – she notes that journalists aren’t always respectful. Recounting the story of a recent interview, a reporter who (she refuses to name) hounded her with tasteless and inappropriate questions.

    “He asked me what it was like to have people stare at me, how I could possibly come to terms with my changed appearance and how my partner could find me attractive. And then, he questioned me as to why I’d been on so many of my book covers, and justified this line of interrogation by saying: ‘I’ve written 3 books, and I’ve never been on the cover of any of them,’” Turia recalls. 

    With characteristic humour, she retorted: “Well mate, no one knows who you are so obviously putting you on the cover would not be a selling point.”

    (But as an aside, might I say that this is both sexist and ableist questioning and does not adhere to the Journalist Code of Ethics.)

    In response to questions from the audience, Turia notes that while she’s been privileged with plenty of public visibility and opportunities, this isn’t necessarily the case for other minority women.

    She says that when she was on the cover of Australian Women’s Weekly, the magazine sold 70 percent more copies: “There’s a business case for having someone who looks like me on the cover. So I don’t know why the media…aren’t listening to that.”

    Turia urges those working in the media – many of whom are in the room – to “set themselves a target” and think about who is on the front of their magazines.

    “Say, ‘For this year we’re going to have four women who are diverse, whether they’re black, indigenous, disabled, older, whatever it is’.”

    Although Turia repeatedly made it clear that she’s a storyteller and not a politician, she did have words to say on the topic of gender equality: “I love this country. Genuinely I do. I migrated here when I was a baby, and I’m proud to call this sunburnt country my home. But it’s hard for me to reconcile my love for this country with the fact that women are not equal here.”

    She believes in gender quotes for workplaces: “When you have these goals and ambitions…they don’t get achieved.”

    “I really think it needs to be a legal requirement,” she says, and “there needs to be harsher [financial] penalties to help businesses achieve that.”

    Turia Pitt at the beach

    Turia Pitt is an athlete, an adventurer and author. Photo: Juli Balla

     

    The post Turia Pitt: How to rewrite your own story appeared first on BroadAgenda.

    This post was originally published on BroadAgenda.

  • Lenin dismantled in Berdiansk, Ukraine. Confederacy President Jefferson Davis in Richmond. Lieutenant-general Cornwallis in Halifax, Nova Scotia.


    Empires rise and fall. And usually burn themselves out rather quickly. What else is new? ‘American decline’ is a Wikipedia page. You can feel it in the air. One greets it with dread or hope, or better dread-hope. America’s sins are adding up, yet the US is a behemoth for well over two centuries and will not go in peace.

    It’s biblical in dimensions: elites brazenly steal from the poor, then use the money to lobby, privatization, to make ever more money, with God’s wrath hovering like a sword overhead, as such vile behaviour undermines the whole system.

    It’s so painful to watch, yet again, how perverse capitalism makes people act. How it rewards scoundrels unimaginable fortunes. It’s the same with atom-splitting, computers, drones, what happens to good leaders everywhere who don’t follow the script, in short: everything capitalism touches (which is by now just about everything, including sex, now retouched as gender) turns to sh*t.

    And what about the US? It presides over this bacchanalia, consuming/ destroying all it touches (consumption is derived from the Latin ‘destroy’, so I could just leave it at ‘destroy’). And what does America produce? Not an awful lot in real terms, and less and less all the time. Actual industrial output in the US has been falling for decades. What the US is producing is more and more debt. The world ‘buys’ US debt and sells it consumer goods, chained as it is to US dollars. I.e., chained to US debt. But Americans themselves are slaves to personal debt. Now, as the US totters on, ruling the waves and waving the rules, the world has reached an apotheosis.

    A quick history of the American story/ epic/ saga is:

    *20,000 years of tribal hunter gatherers, in harmony with nature,

    *settler colonialism, i.e., war, theft, genocide,

    *declaration of bourgeois revolution promising life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness (scaled back to life, liberty and private property in the constitution),

    *2 centuries of wild, uncontrolled, ‘creative destruction’, using and discarding resources at an insane pace, blanketing the continent in square grids of endless roads, cookie-cutter suburbs, cities turning into ghost towns, arriving at

    *a car-choked dead end, where the threat of nuclear war and environmental Armageddon loom ever closer.

    There is already a cottage industry of Chicken Littles on US collapse, collapsarianism, Dmitry Orlov the oldest and most celebrated. Orlov is a Russian American engineer, born in 1962 in Leningrad. He emigrated with his parents in 1970s. Like the Soviet Union, the US collapse will be the result of huge military budgets, government deficits, an unresponsive political system, plus, for the US, declining oil production. Orlov’s Reinventing Collapse: The Soviet Experience and American Prospects (2008, 2011) and  The Five Stages of Collapse (2013) are entertaining as well as informative, as is his legendary 2006 article ‘Closing the ‘Collapse Gap: the USSR was better prepared for collapse than the US’ which brought the collapsarianism into the mainstream.

    Martyanov, like Orlov, was born in the 1960s, though Martyanov hails from Baku, and studied at the Caspian (Kirov) Naval Academy. Their writings are both polemics by engineers. Sort-of Marxist:

    Orlov: *When faced with a collapsing economy, one should stop thinking of wealth in terms of money.

    Martyanov: *The Republican embrace of China in the 2000s shows how the capitalist will sell the very rope on which he will be hanged.

    *America’s cultural and political decline are direct consequences of its precipitously diminishing ability to make—produce, that is—things which matter and that Americans need.

    Ex-Soviets are tough nuts. And they pull no punches. Engineers, more so. Having had to bite their lips too many times pre-fall, they are unqualified in their openness and critical faculties, and generally love/hate America in equal portions. A popular saying of the day in the USSR was: “They tell us that capitalism stinks, but what a delightful smell.” Orlov enjoys the stink. (His blog ClubOrlov’s latest: Why are empires, especially dying ones, drawn to Afghanistan like moths to a flame?)

    Martyanov is unrelentless and unapologetically contrarian. He has a lot of bones to pick, with lots of detours into modern Russia.

    *He argues Germany’s economy is in free fall, overburdened by a green energy chimera, refusing to air condition airports. (Greta Thunberg is dismissed as an ‘illiterate girl from Sweden’).

    *He (and, news to me, Putin) insist climate warming is not due to human activity (not a shred of viable evidence, except for ever unreliable models, that humanity’s activity drives climate change), (p71)

    *Covid is a fraud,

    *American environmentalists are pushing an agenda which undermines the very foundation of modern human civilization.

    US mass culture a straitjacket

    He is right, though, to argue that consumerism as an ideology is a straitjacket. The rise of postmodernism since WWII has accelerated the decline of American culture. Harold Bloom observes that “instead of the pursuit of truth, there is an adolescent certainty that all is uncertain.” He criticizes such cultural icons as Mick Jagger, who portrays himself as  a nihilistic rebel, both hetero and homosexual, embracing drugs and “the rock ideal of universal classless society founded on love.” Because youth bond with such decadent anti-heroes, they miss embracing the positive heroes of the past, never achieving a deep love for culture.

    Weimar Germany is the classic example of decadent culture before the deluge. Rome in its later years was famous for its decadence, sexual promiscuity and homosexuality. It’s happening again before our very eyes. The current obsession with transsexualism, and the reforming of our sexuality according to a radical critique of ‘hetero-patriarchy’ and its replacement with an array of designer sexualities, is perhaps the strongest indicator of imminent collapse.

    Saul Bellow’s The Dean’s December (1982) chronicles the state of urban culture and race relations in Chicago in the 1960s as compared to socialist eastern Europe, where traditional culture ruled. Already by the 1980s, within sight of the collapse behind the Iron Curtain, their culture was beginning to look good to outsider Bellow. The farther we ‘progress’ from those days, the better things there look.

    Just as the Soviet Union denounced western decadence, Russia too is the empire’s spoilsport. Again, today’s news: the European Court of Human Rights determined that Russian law, which defines marriage as only between a man and a woman, breached the right to private and family life enshrined in the European Convention on Human Rights.The decision obliges the country to legislate for recognition of LGBT+ marriages. The Court also awarded €2,200 in costs to the claimants.

    The backlash against the new sexuality being promoted by the West has begun, with protest politics in Hungary, Poland, and half the US pitted against the other half, with sexual politics at the centre of the divide. It seems Putin’s rush to change the constitution to limit marriage to male-female last year was just in the knick of time.

    On the consumer side of ideology, Veblen identified the importance that status takes on in a consumer-oriented society, where spending more on goods is a status symbol, the Veblen effect. This effect cancels the upper limit on personal consumption. The sky is literally the limit, as the billionaires Bezos and Branson  with their trips into outerspace a mere drop in their financial buckets. Where one’s worth is measured solely in money, society becomes a stage for moneyed giants to act out for the rest of society, who worship these successful, glamorous idols. And feel worthless.  With the ascendancy of Black Lives Matters, with the gay liberation forces martialed behind it, US culture lies in shreds. Consumption as the be all and end all is literally destroying the planet. Help!

    Magic numbers

    Having dispensed with lots of damned MAGA lies, we are left with statistics. When Simon Kuznets invented GDP in the 1930s (I’m not joking), he deliberately left two industries out of this then novel, revolutionary idea of a national income: finance and advertising. Kuznets’ logic was simple, not mere opinion, but analytical fact: finance and advertising do not create new value, they only allocate, or distribute existing value (Marx’s unproductive labour), in the same way that a loan to buy a television isn’t the television, or an ad for healthcare isn’t healthcare. They are only means to goods, not goods themselves.

    Congress ignored Kuznets, and included advertising and finance in the statistic. As a result, actual American GDP is formed primarily by non-productive sectors such as finance, insurance, and real estate, known as the FIRE economy. (I’m not joking, though I can’t resist fantasizing about lighting a match to all that paper ‘wealth’.)

    Martyanov’s Soviet education allows him to step back from the appearance (illusion) of wealth in US stats, and recognize that real wealth is not in financial ‘services’ — mutual shining of each other’s boots by two close friends and then paying each other $10 for doing this does not produce $20 of value, something that seems to escape most American economists.

    All the above does is yet further monetize our lives. Real value resides in food on the table, a roof over your head, a secure job and good education. There are lots of modern day shoe shiners, busily shining every day, inflating statistics, but producing no value. Viewed in real teams, the US looks more and more like a 3rd world country.

    Subtract finance and advertising from GDP, and what’s left? Well, since more than 50% every year of GDP comes from finance and advertising,  we would immediately see that the economic ‘growth’ that the US chases never actually existed at all, that the actual size of the American economy is grossly inflated. Growth itself has only been an illusion, a trick of numbers. I.e., the economy is a hollow shell. When the dollar goes, it will take the US ‘economy’ with it. That explains the consistent pattern of the ever-increasing overall trade deficit for the United States since 1970, when Nixon took the US off the gold standard.

    Food insecurity

    Martyanov and Orlov are weak on ways out of our dead end. That’s not their purpose. (Orlov: hope that the rest of the world manages to come together and build at least the scaffolding of a functional imperial replacement) but we need to prepare.

    Orlov urges us to look to Soviet experience for lessons. There is already a germ of Soviet thinking at play in food banks. Any national crisis (WWII, today) pushes us towards a communal (i.e., socialist) answer. Covid-era news has highlighted the growing  importance of food banks throughout the US, where lines of cars circled the block and shelves were constantly depleted.

    It’s as if Basic Income was being invented out of dire necessity. 30+% of Americans have food insecurity. This phenomenal growth of food banks is a clear symptom of decline, dread-hope. My foodbank is called the ‘Essentials Market’, and is always stocked with bread, some vegetables (in season or as spillover from imports from Mexico and the US), plus bizarre things like chicken flavoured peanuts. This week, sweat peas, delicious but with black spots. Also goods with package flaws, or funny shaped potatoes and carrots. It was bi-weekly before covid but is now weekly and looks like this will continue. Portions are equal, and quantity depending on supply.

    It is much more enjoyable shopping than at a ‘super’market. i donate monthly, so i’m probably not saving much on what I take home. I only go to Loblaws for frozen orange juice and canned pineapple.

    I lived in Soviet Union in its twilight years, when ”defitsiti’ were the norm, but even then, shopping was an adventure, a hunt, and your spoils brought a feeling of accomplishment. Gift parcels at work were a cause for celebration. We are programmed to think that mind-numbing, ice-cold supermarkets are the pinnacle of personal happiness, but there are other ways of structuring consumption: solidarity, social justice, modesty, gifting.

    You share or trade with others what you don’t really want. The fact that money doesn’t enter into the equation (or in Soviet times, was not important), makes it more like a social gathering. But then my foodbank is small, well-run and adequately funded. Large foodbanks are less welcoming but still provide an essential service for free. There isn’t a lot of waste — if a big load of toothpaste comes in, you might get two tubes. If you are lucky, you might get the last cake or brick of cheese, but there’s always tofu, frozen meat, potatoes and carrots.

    As for food production, while the US is roughly balanced on food imports/ exports now, there are serious problems of water access and increasing wild fires which will lead to troubles, even if government starts right now to address them.

    National myth? Israel?

    Martyanov makes an unwieldy comparison of US and Russia on the culture front. He approves of the new Russian constitution where the State language on all the territory of the Russian Federation is the Russian (Russkii) language, the language of the State-founding people. That it helps bind the nation. He then argues that nowadays in America anything even remotely comparable to acknowledging that Euro-Americans represent the core nationality of the United States would be an anathema for the primarily globalist establishment. 

    His logic should mean recognizing the natives as the founding people. No one invited the white settlers, who Martyanov seems to be arguing are the ‘founding nation’. Russian nation building was radically different, where Russians lived more or less peacefully alongside natives across Siberia, so fit well with the first ‘founding fathers’. And his attempt to square the Trumpian circle is to include black slaves and hispanics and forget the Philippinos, Vietnamese and other flotsam, doesn’t work either. Captives and other settlers are no more ‘founding peoples’ than these other settlers.

    But he’s right that America’s lack of a myth-that-fits-all is at the heart of its disintegration, and that Russia indeed has big advantage as it limps along, trying to recover. It has many moments that all Russian citizens can relate to, though the two images that stand out as icons in all Russians’ minds are surely these.

    Russians are powerful myth makers, and even look back fondly on their Soviet experience and increasingly honour it. Their Soviet national myth crashed on the hidden rocks of commodity fetishism. The ‘soviet man’ was supposed to be ascetic, a consumer minimalist, devoting himself to study, self-improvement, social activities, preserving nature, things we all wish we had time for but don’t, until retirement, when you are too old and lame to be much good to anyone. That’s good for priests and revolutionaries, maybe 10%, but not as a founding myth.

    Though flawed, Martyanov is worth reading for his details, the Russia asides. It’s fascinating to see a sharp Soviet-Russian mind at work, deconstructing the US. Martyanov would probably be writing the same book if he were still Soviet, living in still extant socialism. I’m sure Putin’s advisers think along similar lines.

    What really is missing in both Orlov and Martyanov is a chapter on how Israel contributes to US disintegration. Or rather a framing of the whole topic as referring to US-Israel, as they function as siamese twins, joined at the hip, with two heads, one much more clever than the other. Israel has pushed the US for the past 7 decades to do much self-harm, to discredit the US on the world stage, to push the entire Middle East into ceaseless, tragic turmoil. Without Israel, the US would be in much better shape, perhaps not even disintegrating.

    Hopeful signs

    If politicians heeded Hudson on debt forgiveness, maybe we could reboot the US. But it would still mean revolution.The Bezoses and Bransons stick out like sore thumbs. In the meantime, decline is relentless. There are good signs in the slow-motion US disintegration:

    *Biden’s backing off Nord Stream 2 allowing Europe to manage its own energy,

    *Biden’s bid to nab corporations in tax havens. Even Canada and Europe are on board. Can this plug the hole in the dyke propping up the rise sea of toxic dollars? As with the climate, storms are more frequent and more lethal. It’s hard to see a happy ending in all this but it won’t hurt.

    *Pride Month’s black eye, when Supreme Court allowed the Catholic church to exclude same sex couples in adoption in Philadelphia,

    *a groundswell of support, with young people at the forefront on global warming and against Israeli apartheid. As with South Africa in the 1980s, the world is slowly mobilizing to bring the Israeli part of US-Israel to justice.

    These groundswells, which Martyanov got wrong, ignores or belittles, are the seeds of a new, better post-US-imperialism. Martyanov and Orlov are engineers, not writers. Just as Martyanov dismisses nonengineers from climate policy, we can’t take engineer think as the last word to resolve the complex problems engineers have created that brought us to this fix. Orlov, dubbed a survivalist, currently is producing affordable house boats for apres le deluge.

    As for a credible founding myth, it’s not going to happen, unless you go back to the distant past. 1619+ meant slavery and genocide, 1776 meant a bourgeois revolution glorifying profit, wealth, and reaffirming slavery and genocide, 1899 seizing Philippines meant empire, though now minus slavery. Canada doesn’t have the slavery baggage, [Myth? See “Canada’s slavery secret: The whitewashing of 200 years of enslavement” — DV Ed] but the native genocide was pretty much the same. This year’s Canada Day on July 1 was without major fireworks, more a day of reflection, contrition. We’re already wrestling with a new national myth. It’s not easy. But it’s gonna be a lot hard south of the border.

    Inspired by Trump’s angry circus performance at Mount Rushmore, [the renaming of what the Lakota people called Tȟuŋkášila Šákpe, Six Grandfathers — DV Ed] last year, a landback movement has begun. We land’owners’ can give back our lands to natives whose land it really is, and let them be custodians, our high priests. We must embrace the native cultures where we live. That should be our founding myth. Such a post-consumer-settler-colonial society has a chance. We can do our accounting according to a happiness index, ridding ourselves of the financial intermediaries sucking up the real wealth and leaving only debt.

    The post Needed Urgently! New US National Myth first appeared on Dissident Voice.


    This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Eric Walberg.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • A petition urging the government to make verified ID a requirement for opening a social media account has gained over half a million signatures. Model Katie Price launched the petition in response to the abuse her son receives online. The government has provided a brief response suggesting they wouldn’t be in favour of the move. But the petition gained traction in July following the racist abuse of Black England football players after the team’s Euro 2020 defeat.

    Although we need accountability for online abuse, this very well-meaning campaign isn’t helpful. Because it could result in denying many marginalised people access to a social media account. And it would give a draconian government greater powers to police our activity. If we want to see an end to vile online abuse, we must deal with its root causes.

    Anonymity isn’t the problem

    We urgently need accountability for anyone spreading hate, racism, and abuse online. In many cases, anonymity serves as a cloak for trolls to hide behind. But as England footballer Marcus Rashford highlighted, some perpetrators are happy to put their face, name, and even their profession to the abuse. Having received ample racist harassment and abuse online, I can confirm that not everyone shrouds themselves with anonymity. Anonymity isn’t the problem here. Social media isn’t even the problem here. Individuals feeling emboldened to send racist abuse online is just a symptom of the deeply racist society we live in. If we don’t work to tackle structural racism at its root, online abuse will inevitably prevail.

    Disenfranchising marginalised people

    The Electoral Commission found that 8% of the UK electorate – over 3 million people – don’t have any form of photo ID. That doesn’t even account for those who aren’t eligible to vote. As campaigners challenging the government’s plan to introduce voter ID have highlighted, those who don’t have ID tend to belong to marginalised groups. These groups include People of Colour, disabled people, homeless people, immigrants, refugees, undocumented people, people seeking asylum, and non-binary people. Many people can’t afford ID. Passport fees can cost up to £95.

    The government is proposing free voter ID cards as part of the electoral change, and CitizenCard offers “reduced cost or free ID cards to the most vulnerable in society”. But introducing mandatory ID for social media is still has the potential to push vulnerable groups further to the margins as many people won’t be aware of this, will be scared to apply, or simply won’t apply.

    In other cases, anonymity provides safety from harm. From domestic abuse survivors to whistleblowers, many people rely on anonymity online to protect themselves.

    Another obstacle for community organisers

    In spite of its many flaws, the beauty of social media is its relative accessibility. As the widespread resurgence of the Black Lives Matter movement demonstrated, it’s a powerful tool for grassroots organising on a local, national, and global scale. In the face of the systems and institutions that oppress them, marginalised people fighting for social justice are more likely to organise and build communities online. This is especially true for campaigners whose safety is often compromised when organising in public, such as People of Colour, sex workers, LGBTQI+ people, and disabled people. The coronavirus (Covid-19) pandemic has only exacerbated this.

    With its draconian Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill, the government has made it clear that any opposition to the establishment – particularly from marginalised people – will be met with aggression. Having ID linked to social media accounts would give the authorities greater powers to police and surveil our social media use. Predictably, organisers from marginalised groups would likely bear the brunt of this. In the wake of the Euros 2020 backlash, social media companies have been working with police, handing them the details of accounts connected to racist abuse against England football players. Police have made four arrests so far. If this power was weaponised against activists seeking to disrupt the status quo, the consequences could be devastating.

    Time for action

    Hussein Kesvani has warned that “mandatory ID verification would allow certain politicians to act as if the issue had been solved, leaving underlying causes untouched”. Indeed, it would be a helpful tick-box exercise used by the government to prove that it has tackled racism. This move would leave the racism of the state and its institutions perfectly intact.

    The same goes for white society at large. I’m glad to see the outpouring of support for England’s Black players, who have demonstrated unity, integrity, and determination on and off the pitch. But I have become disillusioned by endless performative displays of ‘solidarity’ followed by inaction. Angela Epstein has already weaponised the turnout of white supporters at Rashford’s mural to argue that this isn’t a racist country. I feared that would be the case, and predict that once the furore dies down, so will the widespread support for Black humanity and dignity.

    We must hold the government, social media platforms, and online abusers to account. But rather than well-meaning, short-sighted attempts to curb online anonymity, we should be working to disrupt and dismantle the systems of racist oppression that created the conditions for the ugly Euro 2020 aftermath. That means turning out in droves to support and uplift marginalised people regardless of their merits or mediocrity, not just talented football superstars.

    Featured image via dole777/Unsplash

    By Sophia Purdy-Moore

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • In today’s world, the principal contradiction is between imperialism and humanity. Giant multinational corporations are fleecing the globe for their own interests, forming international networks of monopoly capital through the geographic expansion of corporate power. This has involved transferring parts of production, commercial, and financial service to peripheral countries in search of cheap labor. Super-profits are being reaped through a production system based on the enormous wage differentials that persist between the Global North and the Global South. If these rules of exploitation are broken by any country, imperialist powers use a discourse of humanitarianism to justify: military buildups and threats of war; the carrying out of actual military interventions; economic sanctions and blockades; political interference in the elections of other countries; and the launching of “color revolutions”.

    Taking into account the pervasiveness of imperialist power arrangements, national liberation in the Third World continues to be an indispensable process. As Anouar Abdel-Malek writes in Nation and Revolution: Volume 2 of Social Dialectics:

    The central problem in social dialectics is the problem of the combination of scope, intensity and continuity, that is, the problem of finding the largest possible front of allied forces aiming at the most intensive possible action rallied around the issues most capable of achieving maximal intensity of action. And such is, specifically, the privileged role of national movements, throughout the various phases of their unfolding. Here, and here alone, do we witness the greatest possible concentration of different social groups, classes, forces, trends, united broadly to achieve the fundamental tasks of liberation and socio-economic transformation.

    In contrast to the reactionary nationalism of the developed countries – which involves xenophobia and expansionist perspectives – national liberation is the struggle against dependency which has as its objective, beyond the clearing of the national territory, the independence and sovereignty of the state and the comprehensive eradication of the deeply entrenched social force of imperialism. In other words, national liberation is the reconquest of the power of decision in all domains of national life, a process of renaissance undertaken on the basis of fundamentally national demands, and a struggle for sovereignty. These ideas are crystallized in the concentrated concept of “self-reliance”. Abdel-Malek writes:

    Self-reliance is…to be seen as the assertion of national independence within the interdependence of nations, regions and areas, with the emphasis always on the national position of the problem, and not vice versa.

    The stress on the national element was similarly formulated by Antonio Gramsci in the following way:

    The international situation should be considered in its national aspect…the line of development is towards internationalism, but the point of departure is ‘national’.

    Thus, socialist thought must root itself in the concrete context in which it is situated; i.e., it should develop on the basis of a national position, not from any a priori cosmopolitan vision under the mask of internationalism. When the global Left confronts diverse national soils, it is bound to face the deep structures of national formations, the historical specificity of each society.

    Hence, leftists need to respect the peculiarity which the revolutionary creativity of the peoples of the former colonies and semi-colonies tends to introduce into national liberation movements because of the specific conditions in the countries themselves and also in consequence of the specific features of the present-day international situation. The national movements’ struggle for independence, national liberation and social revolutions asserts itself as a struggle for the recovery of national identity, sovereignty and socio-economic clout against imperialist hegemony. It thus follows that national movements are bound to exhibit a potent density of explicit specificity-content – precisely in as much as this specificity lies at the very heart of their liberation struggles and revolutions. In effect, national liberation arrives at the proclamation of socialist goals not through the class-based negation of capitalism, but through anti-imperialist nationalism.

    In this respect, they recapitulate to a definite extent the social logic of the revolutionary process. If national unity is now placed “above” class struggle, the “nation” and “national unity” at issue is as a rule understood in a new way – as excluding the “forces of reaction” (usually feudal landlords and the big bourgeoisie). If the nationalism puts national interest above all else, the class factor is already represented in this interest (in a specific, nationalist way, of course). The use of nationalism as a key political grammar for anti-systemic struggles is necessary because – in the words of Max Ajl:

    The core uses its own states’ mechanisms to reshape, if not shatter, state mechanisms in the periphery to protect and expand the gap between such zones, either turning the state against the nation or ripping the state from the nation.

    It would be odd to suggest that national and nationalist logics for organizing struggles for human emancipation and structures for human social reproduction and flourishing should be abandoned as imperialism seeks precisely that abandonment through the political shattering of states by the dismantling of institutions and dissolution of ideas of state and nation.

    The core component of national liberation movements – the establishment of national productive forces under sovereign and national control – has proven to be a strong counter-balance to the influence of imperialism. As Ajl elaborates:

    [National liberation was a successful attempt to] break the patterns of primitive accumulation, secured by colonial violence and manifest in ongoing colonial drain and unequal exchange, through which the core countries continued to extract wealth from the periphery. National liberation’s limited achievements were still achievements, something missed in chatter eager to assimilate one nationalism to the next, one set of capitalist contradictions to the next, and one passel of elites to their successors…Gains for human dignity occurred because decolonization was seldom just about hoisting a flag over an alabaster statehouse….decolonization…put a stop to colonial income deflation… Colonial famines ceased…Investment in enhancing agricultural productivity by national governments was one of the harvests of decolonization, and it arrested and reversed secular declines in food-grain availability, and stopped deindustrialization… Public health networks spread and per capita food-grain absorption gradually increased…This occurred by putting the “process of development of the productive forces under the control of petty bourgeois elements that tended to the basic needs of the formerly colonized population.

    The Third World’s national elaboration of a general line – directly linked to the transformation of actual societies in the real world of our times – has involved the institution of repressive measures. Criticized by many as authoritarian, these actions are necessary to protect the gains made under their chosen development model; to protect against regime change operations being organized, sponsored, armed and financed by an imperialist world that will stop at nothing to dismantle sovereign nations and to assert hegemony. Abdel-Malek notes:

    Autocratic power…which so often seems to be necessary during the first phase of nationalitarian construction…revolts those who restrict themselves to seeing it in itself, as a structure so to speak, instead of locating it within the framework of historical evolution – instead of conceiving liberty within the framework of necessity.

    Moreover, the maintenance of a strong state means actively and substantively defending national sovereignty as the carapace within which to resolve internal contradictions.

    The indispensability of national liberation processes in the current conjuncture can’t be emphasized enough. Intensified neo-colonial strangulation of the Global South necessitates the opening of socialist, anti-imperialist fronts which can effectively stanch the flows of value from the periphery and semi-periphery to the core and the uneven accumulation such flows forge and reinforce. In November 1919, after the establishment of the world’s first workers’ and peasants’ state, Vladimir Lenin said:

    The socialist revolution will not be solely, or chiefly, a struggle of the revolutionary proletarians in each country against their bourgeoisie – no, it will be a struggle of all the imperialist-oppressed colonies and countries, of all dependent countries, against international imperialism.

    This clear statement serves as a forceful clarion call for the mobilization of the Third World people in a national liberation struggle against imperialism and capitalism.

    The post The Contemporary Importance of National Liberation first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • Social media is biased, not to the Left or the Right, but downward.
    Jaron Lanier

    Critical race theory, according to Wikipedia, is “a body of legal scholarship and an academic movement of civil-rights scholars and activists in the United States that seeks to critically examine U.S. law as it intersects with issues of race in the U.S. and to challenge mainstream American liberal approaches to racial justice.”

    Critical race theory (CRT), according to the Republican House Freedom Caucus, is “teaching American students to hate each other,” “tears people apart,” is “teaching our children that America is evil and is a “divisive ideology that threatens to poison the American psyche.”

    All of the above is false or maybe it’s true. Who knows? Who cares? None of it matters anyway. CRT is now as informative a term as “family values” or “diversity” or “Black lives matter” or “socialism” or “common good” or “tolerance” or “social justice” or “freedom of speech” or… you get the idea. These terms are weapons. Whether you vibe with them or not, you use them as disingenuous weapons — without a hint of concern about the accuracy or deeper meaning. They are straw men in a bigger game of distraction and denial. While the Fake News swirls and mesmerizes, those in charge gain more power and more wealth. Same as it ever was.

    Are there some on the Right who are using anti-CRT rhetoric to mask their racist tendencies? Of course. Are there some on the Left using their pro-CRT rhetoric to mask their fascist tendencies? Of course. But most of those talking about CRT right now are uninformed dupes. They’re regurgitating the talking points of their TV network or social media platform of choice — without a hint of concern about the accuracy or deeper meaning. It’s virtue signaling yet again.

    Useful debate is impossible so we’ve moved on to utter deception. You can blame CRT for whatever bothers you about the world with no worries. No one will ever bother looking it up. What good is fact-checking in a time of alternative facts? Besides, if you’re a Republican blah-blah-blahing about CRT on Fox News, your colleagues and your opponents aren’t concerned with what you’re actually saying. In their minds, all that matters is that you’re a Republican on Fox News. They pre-emptively agree or disagree with you before you even open your mouth. This is what passes for “debate” in 2021.

    CRT is merely this year’s villain of choice and the media always profits from the creation of villains (Isis, communists, right-wing radio hosts, maskers, anti-maskers, Antifa, MAGA, etc., etc.). They only exist to scare or slander or bully or demonize others. So if you’re expecting me to present an annotated dissertation on the deep meaning critical race theory, you’re barking up the wrong tree. I could but there is no value in any such discussion when people can’t even agree on what words mean. The window for meaningful discussion on CRT slammed shut a long time ago. All sides made certain of that.

    As a result, CRT is nothing more than the latest bogeyman for the Right and the latest cudgel for the Left. To gain credibility within your narrow hive mind, there is no need to comprehend the nuances and related issues. All you need to do (depending on which echo chamber you call home) is declare your undying love for CRT or denounce it to Hell. Your fellow cult members will adore you and assure you that you’ve broken the code.

    Reminder: Regardless of which sect you’ve joined, the vast majority of U.S. students aren’t particularly interested in what they learn in school anyway. They were conditioned a long time ago to temporarily memorize what they need to know. Once the exams are over, they can just forget it all to make room for the important stuff, you know, like TikTok.

    This entire “debate” is teeming with bad ideas from all players on all sides. The solution for bad ideas should never be the silencing of those with whom you disagree. Almost always, the solution for bad ideas is better ideas. Pro tip: Skip the dog and pony shows. Focus instead on rediscovering the subversive pleasure of thinking for yourself — and helping as many others as you can along the way.

    The post Critical Race Theory: Echo Chamber vs. Echo Chamber first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • EDITORIAL: By the Samoa Observer editorial board

    When Australia’s second-longest ever serving Prime Minister faced a complete wipeout at the national elections after 10 years in power — even being voted out of his own seat — he realised that he had lost but only as part of a process much bigger than he was.

    It was not the sheer scale of his loss that was extraordinary.

    All political careers end in tragedy, as the saying goes. But it was the belief he displayed in ideals more important than his own self-interest.

    Samoa Observer
    SAMOA OBSERVER OPINION

    “This is a wonderful exercise in democracy,” John Howard said at a small ceremony at a local primary school held to acknowledge that he had been voted out by the constituents whom he had represented for more than three decades.

    “You can count on the fingers of one hand the countries which have remained democracies for over 100 years.

    “It is a privilege to be part of that process.”

    Howard’s end, and the steely manner in which he went out to meet it, is a lesson in principled graciousness and other attributes Samoa’s Human Rights Protection Party (HRPP) has failed to display since losing the election.

    Most noticeably lacking is a sense of pride in democracy being part of our nation’s character and respect for its rules being a form of patriotism.

    Instead, we have seen in Samoa a caretaker Prime Minister, Tuila’epa Dr Sa’ilele Malielegaoi who lost the election, and continues to lose seats by the day, refuse to even contemplate defeat.

    He has openly defied (it comes right after “decline” in the dictionary, Tuila’epa, should you need help to check the grammatical correctness) the voters, the judiciary and now ultimately the nation because he is unwilling to look past beyond his own seat in power and towards the better interests and future of this nation.

    In doing so he has actively contrived to plunge this nation into a constitutional crisis and disparaged all the democratic institutions which our country must respect for it to function.

    Remarkably, he has shown very little care for being seen plainly and for what he is in this whole national crisis: a stubborn and self-regarding roadblock to process.

    In the past three months a stream of excuses have emanated from the caretaker Prime Minister’s mouth about who is to blame for our current constitutional predicament.

    On Tuesday he was attempting to blame the courts for the nation’s prolonged political uncertainty; a favourite target of his; and another critical democratic institution.

    “This whole process has been prolonged because they [Supreme Court] had added back ends to the decisions they have delivered after the elections,” he said.

    “For instance, the decision they delivered on the ten per cent for women representation in Parliament.”

    Well, that is simply not the case. The Prime Minister has tried to hide behind the claim that only until the question of female representation in the Parliament has been settled can it convene.

    The courts have ruled twice now that there is no grounding in fact whatsoever for his statements.

    But as his pronouncements have become increasingly divorced from reality and even ridiculous he has shown next to care.

    All the while as his numbers on the floor of Parliament are dwindling. He is perhaps hoping that most voters don’t pay attention or care enough about politics to let him get away with this political double-dealing.

    Ultimately Tuila’epa has shown that he does not conceive of Samoa as a democracy; he sees it as an island on which he and the HRPP are meant to rule.

    That explains the extreme casualness with which he walked into his election defeat at the hands of the Fa’atuatua i le Atua Samoa ua Tasi (FAST) party – and his seeming inability to face up to the truth after.

    But as a story on Tuesday’s front page made clear, the ability to accept defeat was a precondition of any functioning democracy (Samoa risks decline into dictatorship: Harvard professor).

    This is certainly a serious democratic crisis, and the behavior of both the Prime Minister and the Head of State can certainly be deemed anti-democratic,” said Dr Steven Levitsky.

    “It is essential in a democracy that losers accept defeat and not seek to remain in power via other means. What the HRPP has done is similar to Donald Trump’s reaction to defeat in the US, which has weakened US democracy.”

    Luckily for America its democratic institutions were strong enough to withstand a coordinated attack on accepting its election, as the institutions and gatekeepers of that republic proved they could not be corrupted by political rants from a man who had just lost an election and, like that, had his power next to nearly instantly evaporate.

    “Any time the incumbent party loses and refuses to accept defeat and seeks to remain in power by other means, democracy is in crisis,” the professor continued.

    “That is Samoa today.”

    But as he makes clear, Samoa is on the downward slide toward — but has not yet reached — the depths of political dictatorship.

    “It may be too soon to call the PM a dictator and the regime a dictatorship. Samoa is still mid-crisis,” Dr Levitsky said.

    “But if the PM and Head of State persist and are successful in thwarting this election, democracy will have been (at least temporarily) derailed.”

    “It would be at that moment that Samoa will have slid into dictatorship, he said: “If the PM remains in power indefinitely despite losing an election, then I think you can say Samoa has slid into dictatorship.”

    Indeed. The worrying thing for Samoa is that neither Tuilaepa, nor the various officials he has used as shields in his ongoing battle to frustrate court rulings, have shown the slightest inclination to avoid such a slide.

    These are indeed dark days for Samoa. At nearly 60 years of age, we stand on the precipice of backsliding from our extraordinary achievement to have thrown off colonial shackles and become a successful democracy.

    All that stands on the edge of being destroyed if the caretaker Prime Minister continues to act as if he cannot hear court rulings. Or if, as seems like an increasingly course of action, the Head of State convenes Parliament on August 2 and despite a FAST majority, rules that no government can be formed before sending the nation back to the polls.

    That too, though it will involve a fresh election, will be a killer blow to our reputation as one of the world’s democracies: finding ways to throw out the people’s verdicts and starting again fresh with the hope of securing another is utterly undemocratic.

    And voters could never trust that those in charge of the country will honour their wishes again.

    The caretaker Prime Minister, a man fond of bombastic rhetoric, has shown little evidence that he has contemplated the shattering fact that the people of Samoa have voted and decided that no longer want him to run the country.

    Until he comes to peace with that fact and realises that by acting as he has he imperils the future of this nation — not only for now but for generations — but also shows contempt for its history.

    This Samoa Observer editorial, 14 July 2021, is republished with permission.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Content warning: this article contains descriptions of racist language

    The disgusting racism that followed England’s Euro 2020 final isn’t just proof that football is racist. It’s yet more proof that the UK itself is institutionally racist at all levels. And it shouldn’t have to fall upon young Black footballers to point this out, but this is exactly what’s happening.

    The Tory government continues to do what it is does best. It gaslights the nation, pretends to be disgusted by racism, and all the while actively allows racism to thrive. Priti Patel previously encouraged racist football fans when she said that it’s “a choice” for them to boo players who were taking the knee before matches. And yet she had the audacity to argue that racism “has no place in our country” after the Euro 2020 final. England player Tyrone Mings called out Patel on social media, arguing:

    What? No racism here!

    In March 2021, the government commissioned a review into racism. Unsurprisingly, it declared there was no evidence that it was institutionally racist. Britain’s right-wing press had a field day, with the Daily Mail calling it a “race revolution“.

    The government report said:

    Put simply we no longer see a Britain where the system is deliberately rigged against ethnic minorities.

    In fact, the report put the blame squarely on BAME communities, saying that people of colour won’t overcome “obstacles” if they:

    absorb a fatalistic narrative that says the deck is permanently stacked against them.

    Even so, we have a home secretary who calls Black Lives Matter protesters “thugs“, who is in the process of introducing a law that would imprison people for up to ten years for damaging statues. This same home secretary is passing through yet another bill to enable the state to imprison refugees for up to four years.

    We have a prime minister who has made so many racist comments there are too many to list here. To summarise a few of his nasty words, in 2002 Johnson described people living in the Congo as “tribal warriors” with “water melon smiles”. He continued his racist drivel, calling Black people “piccaninnies”. In 2005, he wrote one of the most venomous Islamophobic articles ever, harping on about suicide bombers and their ‘rations’ of “virgins”, saying “Islam is the problem”. In 2018, he said Muslim women wearing the burka looked like “letter boxes“.

    We allowed this man, with his poisonous tongue, to be voted in to lead the country. And we allowed this man to appoint others like Patel who would continue to implement the Tories’ hostile environment policies. These people are now also trying to push through laws that will imprison those who take a stand against racism.

    Police racism

    Of course, it isn’t just our leaders that are the problem. Institutional racism exists at all levels.

    BAME people disproportionately die at the hands of the police, and police officers are rarely held accountable. In June 2020, PC Benjamin Monk was found guilty of the manslaughter of ex-footballer Dalian Atkinson. But disgracefully, this was the first time in 35 years that a UK police officer had been found guilty of murder or manslaughter following a death in police custody or contact.

    And as reported by The Canary’s Sophia Purdy-Moore:

    Black people make up around 3% of the UK population, but they account for 8% of deaths in police custody. According to 2019/20 data from HMICFRS, police are over 5 times more likely to use force against Black people than their white counterparts. They are 9 times more likely to draw tasers on Black people. Tasers – which deliver a high-voltage electric shock – can cause severe physical and mental harm.

    Meanwhile, young Black men in London are 19 times more likely to be stopped and searched on the street than the general population, and they are 28 times more likely to be stopped by police on suspicion of carrying weapons.

    Racist policing of events

    Institutional racism can also been seen in the way that the police handle different events, from the Euro final to Black Lives Matter protests. Hundreds of ticketless fans easily stormed Wembley on 11 July, taking up seats and crowding into the disabled viewing area. Inside the stadium, footage showed football fans beating up some of those who broke in and repeatedly kicking a person of colour in the head. There’s barely a police officer in sight.

    Compare this to the policing of the 2020 Black Lives Matter protests. Network For Police Monitoring found that Black protesters were disproportionately targeted by police using batons, horses, violent arrests, and pepper spray. Protesters were held for up to eight hours in ‘kettles’ with no access to water or toilets. On top of this, the police failed to stop violence from racist counter-protesters.

    And let’s look at the policing of recent Bristol demonstrations. Bristolians came out in their thousands to protest the racist Policing Bill which will enable the state to imprison those who damage statues, and which could imprison Gypsy, Roma and Traveller communities for trespass. Police were brought in from all over the country to crush any resistance on the streets. Officers on horses charged at people, while lines of police crunched their riot shields down onto protesters’ heads, and police dogs hospitalised people. At least 65 people have been arrested since March.

    It’s clear that whenever people rise up to resist white supremacy, they will be crushed by a state that is sustained by the status quo.

    It’s up to all of us

    There’s many other ways that institutional racism manifests in our society. One stark example is the way that the pandemic has disproportionately affected BAME people. They are more likely to be exposed to coronavirus, become severely sick from it, or die. The reasons for this are numerous, and are squarely the government’s fault: poverty and inadequate housing, having to work in higher-risk jobs while the middle classes are able to sit at home on their laptops, and a hostile environment which makes health care impossible to access for people without papers.

    So let’s stop asking the question, “Is Britain a racist country?” There’s no question that it is. And it shouldn’t just be down to young Black footballers to point this out. It’s up to all of us to call out racism, whether it be online or in person. If you’re white, remember that you’re in a position of privilege. You might feel discomfort at challenging racism, but you need to step up if we’re going to change society.

    After all, white silence is violence too.

    Featured image via Wikimedia Commons & MSN / screengrab

    By Eliza Egret

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • The Omar al-Mukhtar neighborhood of Gaza City after it was pounded by Israeli airstrikes, 12 May. Mohammed ZaanounActiveStills


    The world needs to  know the horrendous dimensions of the ongoing Palestinian Genocide, and of the gross Apartheid Israeli maltreatment of 5.2 million Occupied Palestinians and in particular of the 2 million inmates of the blockaded and bombed Gaza Concentration Camp. A numbers-based summary of these ongoing  atrocities will strengthen global Boycotts, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) against the intolerable obscenity of Apartheid Israel and its racist supporters.

    (A). Background of the ongoing Palestinian Genocide.

    Gaza per se dates back over 3,000 years and “Palestine” and related terms (e.g. “Falastina”) come from the Philistine inhabitants of circa 1,200 BCE.

    In 1880 90% of the Palestinian population were Muslims and about 10% were Christians, and there were about 25,000 Jews (about 50% immigrants).

    The ongoing Palestinian Genocide  has been associated with 2.2 million Palestinian deaths from violence, 0.1 million, and from imposed deprivation, 2.1 million, since the British invasion of the Middle East in 1914 for oil and imperial hegemony – in contrast, 4,000 Zionists killed by Palestinians since 1920. Christians are only 1% of the Palestine population today.

    The 1916 Anglo-French Sykes-Picot Agreement divided the formerly Ottoman-ruled Middle East between the UK and France. WW1-related Palestinian Famine (0.1 million deaths).

    The Australian Light Horse Charge at Beersheba (31 October 1917) was pivotal to the defeat of the Turks. The UK Balfour Declaration giving Semitic Palestine to the non-Semitic and genocidally racist Zionists was issued 2 days later (2 November 1917) in a quid pro quo connected with getting Zionist Jewish Communists to try to keep Russia in the war against Germany.

    On 10 December 1918, the Surafend Massacre of about 100 Palestinian men and boys was carried out by Australian and New Zealand Army Corps (ANZAC) soldiers.

    Overt Jewish immigration was stopped by the British 1939 White Paper designed to pacify British Muslim subjects during WW2. Circa 1944 the British War Cabinet secretly decided to Partition both Palestine and India, supporting European Zionists and Indian Muslims, respectively. Racist mass murderer and pro-Zionist Winston Churchill hated  Indians (“They are a beastly people with a beastly religion.”), hated Indigenous Palestinians, Indigenous people of North America, and Indigenous Australians  (“I do not admit for instance, that a great wrong has been done to the Red Indians of America or the black people of Australia [i.e. Australian aborigines]. I do not admit that a wrong has been done to these people by the fact that a stronger race, a higher-grade race, a more worldly wise race to put it that way, has come in and taken their place.” Source.), and hid the WW2 Bengali Holocaust for which he was responsible (6-7 million Indians deliberately starved to death for strategic reasons by the British with Australian complicity).

    1948,  Deir Yassin Massacre (107 killed, village razed); the Nakba or Catastrophe (800,000 Palestinians expelled, 500 villages emptied); Zionists seized 78% of Palestine for their settler colonial state.

    1966, Palestinians in  Israel given Israeli citizenship, albeit qualified  under race-based laws (presently over 60 such laws).

    1967, a now nuclear-armed Apartheid Israel attacked all its neighbours and seized territory from all of them, including the Sinai (Egypt), Shebaa Farms (Lebanon), the Golan Heights (Syria) and 100% of Palestine; 400,000 Arabs expelled in the Naksa (Setback). US Alliance-backed Apartheid Israel presently has 90-400 nuclear weapons as well as biological weapons,  chemical weapons and delivery systems.

    30 March 1976, First Land Day protesting Israeli land theft (6 Palestinians killed, 100 wounded and hundreds arrested).

    1982 Sabra and Shatila Massacre (3,500 Palestinians killed by Lebanese Phalangists in Israeli-occupied West Beirut.

    2002, West Bank Massacres, notably in Jenin, with 497 Palestinians killed, 1,447 wounded, and 7,000 imprisoned (30 Israelis killed, 127 wounded).

    2018 Apartheid Israeli nation state law passed  that officially makes Palestinian Israelis Third Class citizens (presently subject to over 60 race-based laws).

    2020 Apartheid Israeli parliament rejects equality for all Israeli citizens.

    2021, over 90% of Palestine ethnically cleansed of Indigenous Palestinians; Tom Pickering,  former US Ambassador to Israel and the UN, says Israel would concede only 4.4%   of Palestine for a Palestinians State in a “2-state solution”, and predicts future complete Palestinian removal from the West Bank and Gaza to elsewhere in the world (a “no state solution”).

    Apartheid Israel rules all of a 90% ethnically cleansed Palestine (plus ethnically cleansed parts of Syria and Lebanon) and of its 14.4 million Subjects, 6.8 million (47.2%) are Jewish Israelis, 0.4 million (2.8%) are non-Jews and non-Arabs, 2.0 million (13.9%) are Palestinian Israelis, and 5.2 million (36.1%) are Occupied Palestinians with zero human rights. Despite a century of a Palestinian Genocide involving killing, deprivation and repeated mass expulsions, 7.2 million Indigenous Palestinians still represent 50% of the Subjects of Apartheid Israel in Palestine, but over 72% of the Indigenous Palestinian Subjects of Apartheid Israel are excluded from voting for the government ruling them i.e. are subject to egregious Apartheid.

    (B). Geography and  Demographics of Gaza.

    Area 360 square kilometres.

    Population 2.0 million (5.2 million Occupied Palestinians in  Gaza plus the West Bank).

    Population density 5,556 people per square kilometre.

    Gaza is the 3rd most densely populated entity in the world.

    0-14 years: 42.53% (male 418,751/female 397,013).

    15-24 years: 21.67% (male 210,240/female 205,385).

    25-54 years: 29.47% (male 275,976/female 289,277).

    55-64 years: 3.66% (male 36,409/female 33,731).

    65 years and over: 2.68% (male 27,248/female 24,191) (2020 estimates).

    About 50% are children and about 75% women and children.

    (C). Administration of Gaza.

    In 2006 the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas) won a majority in the democratic Palestinian Legislative Council elections held under Israeli guns – Hamas won a plurality of 42.9% of the total vote and 74 out of 132 total seats (56%). The Hamas representatives were variously killed, imprisoned or exiled to the Gaza Concentration Camp or elsewhere by the genocidally racist, nuclear terrorist, state terrorist and  neo-Nazi Israelis who, together with their pro-Apartheid US Alliance backers, declared Hamas to be a terrorist organization.

    Land borders are  hermetically sealed by Apartheid Israel and Israeli-beholden Egypt; air, sea and land are violently controlled by Israeli drones, warplanes, navy and army.

    Maritime rights  are illegally appropriated by serial war criminal Apartheid Israel.

    A wide range of decent people from scholars and human rights activists to religious and political leaders have referred to Gaza as ”an open air prison” ,“the Gaza Concentration Camp”, and indeed as the world’s biggest open air prison and concentration camp.

    5.2 million Occupied Palestinians,  50% children and 75% women and children, are highly  abusively and indefinitely confined to the  Gaza Concentration Camp (2 million) or to West Bank ghettoes (3.2 million) without charge or trial but for the asserted “crime”  of being Indigenous Palestinians living on part of the land continuously inhabited by their forebears for thousands of years.

    “Coronavirus closure” is applied by Apartheid Israel on top of other draconian restrictions on movement in and out of Gaza.

    (D). Employment in Gaza.

    Unemployment rate 43.1% .

    Total employed people 280,000 (end 2019) , 222,000 (end 2020).

    Average monthly wage $207 versus $323 (West Bank).

    Public sector workers (39.2%) earn $29 per day.

    Private sector workers (60.8%) earn  $11 per day.

    Women unemployment rate 65% (3rd quarter 2020), 60.4% (4th quarter 2020).

    Women workforce  participation rate 18.7% (beginning 2020), 12.4% (end 2020).

    Youth (under 30) unemployment rate 65.5% (end 2020).

    (E). War criminal Israeli collective punishment of Gaza by mass murder.

    2006 Gaza Massacre – 400 Palestinians killed, 1,000 wounded (11 Israelis killed, 82 wounded).

    2008-2009 Gaza Massacre – 1,400 Palestinians killed, 5,300 wounded, 51,000 homeless, huge infrastructure damage (13 Israelis killed, 518 wounded).

    2014 Gaza Massacre – 2,300  Palestinians killed, 11,000 wounded, 7,000 homes destroyed (73 Israelis killed and 556 wounded).

    2018-2019 Great March of Return Gaza Massacre – 223 killed, 9,200 wounded (0 Israelis killed, 11 wounded).

    2021 Gaza Massacre – 256 Palestinians killed, 2,000 wounded (13 Israelis killed, 217 wounded).

    In the last 2 decades Gaza rockets have killed about 40 Israelis but Israeli reprisals have killed over 4,600 Gazans, an over 100-fold disproportionality.

    In the last 2 decades Israelis have murdered about 2,600 Israelis but Apartheid Israel has not  killed 100 x 2,600 = 260,000 Israelis in response.

    On average in the last 20 years, Apartheid Israel has violently killed about  500 Occupied Palestinians each year (10,000 in total) and killed a further 4,000 Occupied Palestinians annually  through imposed deprivation (80,000 in total)

    “Coronavirus closure” is  presently applied to Gaza by Apartheid Israel on top of other draconian restrictions by way of collective punishment.

    (F). Fourth Geneva Convention, GDP, infant mortality, avoidable mortality, health, trauma, food, water, electricity, and homelessness in Gaza.

    Apartheid Israel grossly violates Articles 55 and 56 of the Fourth Geneva Convention (the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War) that unequivocally demand that  an Occupier must supply life-sustaining food and medical services to its Conquered Subjects “to the fullest extent of the means available to it”.

    Apartheid Israel violates 15 International Law Conventions, most notably the Fourth Geneva Convention and the UN Genocide Convention.

    GDP per capita $1,500 for Gaza ($3,240 for Occupied Palestine and $46,400 for Apartheid Israel).

    Poverty kills: annual under-5 infant deaths 1,100 in Gaza (2,800 for Occupied Palestinians, 500 for Apartheid Israel).

    Poverty  kills: annual avoidable deaths from deprivation 1,500 in Gaza (3,900 for Occupied Palestinians and essentially zero for Apartheid Israel).

    Apartheid Israel deliberately restricts Gaza imports to carefully estimated bare survivability needs.

    Apartheid Israel stops many asserted “dual function” goods including critical  medical supplies from getting into Gaza.

    Economic growth has declined and gone negative in the last 25 years and unemployment has increased.

    Occupied Palestinians in Gaza live in dire poverty.

    Trauma and Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD): “At least 90 percent of Gaza residents are in need of mental health support and treatment because of the repeated military attacks and devastating humanitarian conditions in the Strip”.

    Tens of thousands with life-changing permanent disabilities from Israel violence.

    Hospitals, schools, power and water infrastructure bombed and barely functioning.

    Electricity supplies intermittent and Gaza’s electricity is normally supplied by its sole diesel power plant (nominal rating 60-140 MW) plus 125 MW (from Israel) and 27 MW (from Egypt) for about 300 MW total (Apartheid Israel has 16,250 MW power capacity or 54 times more than Gaza).

    Apartheid Israel controls water supply, notably that from the largely West Bank-based Mountain Aquifer with 9.1 million Israelis getting 87% of Mountain Aquifer water whereas 5.2 million Occupied Palestinians get a mere 13%. WHO minimum daily per capita water allocation is 100 litres, Israelis get 240-300 litres and West Bank Palestinians get 73 litres; Israelis have deliberately demolished 50 water extraction facilities in the West Bank. Israeli bombing has destroyed water and sewerage infrastructure in the Gaza Concentration Camp to the point that it is approaching unliveable conditions.

    Homelessness – Israeli bombing in 1 week alone in 2021 made 58,000 Gazans homeless.

    (G). Covid-19, Occupied Palestinians and Gaza.

    Apartheid Israel leads the world in Covid-19 vaccination for its Israeli Subjects but  refuses to vaccinate its 5.2 million Occupied Palestinian Subjects except for 5,000 front-line medical workers and 120,000 Occupied Palestinians who work in Israel or in illegal West Bank settlement as cheap “captive labour”.

    Ventilators per million (/M) people are 504/M (Occupier US), 173/M (Occupier Australia) and 407/M (Occupier Apartheid Israel) versus 8/M (Occupied Afghanistan), 38/M (Occupied Palestine) and 13/M (Gaza Concentration Camp).

    Gaza’s sole Covid-19 testing laboratory was damaged by Israeli bombing; Apartheid Israel blocked Russian Sputnik V vaccine entry to Gaza but 20,000 doses entered via Egypt; fewer than 2% of Gazans have been fully vaccinated; with an Apartheid Israeli-crippled hospital system, densely populated Gaza faces an Apartheid Israeli-imposed Covid-19 catastrophe.

    As of  early July 2021 many Occupied Palestinians had died (686 Covid-19 deaths per million of population; 3,565 deaths or about 1% of 314,000 cases) but notional extrapolation to a maximum of 5.2 million cases would indicate that Apartheid Israel has deliberate intent to kill about 50,000 Occupied Palestinians.

    (H). Apartheid Israeli  “intent  to destroy” and ongoing Palestinian Genocide.

    Article 2 of the UN Genocide Convention defines “genocide “ as “acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group”.

    Genocide experts describe an ongoing Palestinian Genocide. Thus Professor Francis Boyle (University of Illinois) re the Palestinian Genocide (2013): “The Palestinians have been the victims of genocide as defined by the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, under which a government can be guilty of genocide even if it intends to destroy a mere “part” of the group”.

    90% of Palestine has been ethnically cleansed of Indigenous Palestinians with Zionists adumbrating 95% and even ultimately 100% ethnic cleansing of the West Bank and Gaza.

    Zionist leaders from Theodor Herzl to Benjamin Netanyahu have explicitly advocated removal of the Palestinians from Palestine.

    Of 15 million Palestinians today, 8 million are forcibly Exiled from their homeland and 7 million Indigenous Palestinian Subjects of Apartheid Israel live under threat of killing and expulsion.

    Deaths in the ongoing Palestinian  Genocide (2.2 million Palestinians killed by violence or imposed deprivation) are similar to deaths in the WW2 Jewish Holocaust (5-6 million deaths from  violence or imposed deprivation) or the “forgotten”, British-imposed and Australia-complicit  WW2 Bengali Holocaust (6-7 million deaths from  violence or imposed deprivation) (see “Palestinian Genocide”).

    Conclusions.

    I have a large, 2-sided and big- black-capital-letters-on-white placard that I take to public rallies in support of Palestinian Humans Rights. One side says WORLD: STOP PALESTINIAN GENOCIDE and the other says BOYCOTT APARTHEID ISRAEL. The Gaza Concentration Camp and the  ongoing Palestinian Genocide shame Humanity and the pro-Apartheid US Alliance in particular. Decent Humanity must (a) inform everyone they can, and (b) urge and apply Boycotts, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) against Apartheid Israel and all its supporters.

    The post Ongoing Israeli Genocide of Palestinians first appeared on Dissident Voice.


    This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Gideon Polya.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Dr. Dietrich Klinghardt, born in Berlin in 1950, is a German medical doctor, a scientist and teacher. He practices foremost in the US, but also gives regular seminars in Germany.

    In the following one-and-a-half-minute video, Dr. Klinghardt says it all. What to do to totally control, dumb and eventually kill people: You spray their food with Glyphosate (Bayer/Monsanto), contaminate the air with aluminum dust from chemtrails, and add some more aluminum to vaccines, for example, Covid-19 injections. Actually they are not vaccines.

    The US CDC has only granted manufacturers of the mRNA-type inoculations temporary permissions to call them “experimental gene therapy”. They are not to be named vaccines. If governments, the media and the medical community at large does it anyway, they are lying to you.

    What is further needed, Dr. Klinghardt says, are certain electromagnetic frequencies (5G), to kill the detox enzymes in your body. And precisely these frequencies are brought to us via our cell-phones, to which 99% of people living in western societies are virtually “married”.

    In conclusion, he observes, that behind such a diabolical plan, there must be evil scientists and evil politicians. See the video (in German with English translation), here.

    What to do? Abstain from taking PCR tests which have nothing to do with actually detecting the never isolated SARS-CoV-2 virus. They are based – unnecessarily – on taking slime samples from way up in your nose, touching the thin membrane that separates your sinuses from the brain. You may bet that the tests have another agenda. The “tests” introduce chemicals into your brain which dull your Pineal gland, so as to diminish and eventually kill your sensibility and sensitivities.

    What these non-vaxxes also do is they have a strong sterilizing effect on women and drastically reduce men’s sperm count. It all fits in with the eugenists’ agenda of massive depopulation.

    What to do? Simple. Abstain and don’t let yourself be coerced into taking PCR tests and mRNA-type experimental gene therapy jabs.

    Yes, you may be temporarily confronted with many restrictions for travel and attending public events. Stick it out. This crime of epic proportions is in the process of being laid open. Lawyer Dr. Reiner Fuellmich, and his team of the international-German Corona Investigative Committee has already begun filing class-action suits in Canada and the US, and is suing institutions and individuals in Germany and in Europe at large.

    The post How to Dull People’s Minds and Then Kill Them first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.