#especially when so many countries are suffering under dictatorship right now

[baconcolacan]

This may be a loaded question or get into spoiler territory so if you don’t want to answer that is totally fine. With regards to the Regimen and Stay AUs: is the world generally better since the RA took over? Are people being treated better? Is there more equality than before?

I ask because as we’ve seen many times before in history class when a tyrant/dictator takes over they always claim they are doing it for the right reasons, noble reasons, and some seem to really have honest intentions at first. But as time passes, they become less concerned about the welfare of their citizens and more concerned about holding on to their power.

So I am asking cause I genuinely am curious.

Wellll, its sort of a,,,,mixed bag for both.

I won’t get too political about it since the world setting is fictional, especially for Stay who will have a different political climate due to the apocalypse, but remember that I source most stuff I write partially from real life but not totally, so this is from the perspective of somebody who lives in a country that HAD a dictatorship and is still kinda threatened with one lol (I laugh but it hurts fisjdhf)

In Regimen, RA is a total threat, anybody that isn’t with them is against them, and those against them get annihilated. And we know how that looks like. So countries under RA are,,,at peace, I guess. They don’t get bombed or, yknow, massacred so thats nice, and RA generally just lets them get on with their lives without much change other than being an annexed country.

So basically a they caused the problem then sold the solution kind of deal.

Plus under one sovereign (who mind you will not hesitate to shoot underperforming politicians) most political tiffs are pretty much non-existent now, since RL is prone to violence when things aren’t running smoothly. Which can be a good or bad thing depending on who you ask.

Countries can’t function without its people after all, and despite his firepower, it would be a hassle to keep squashing angry rebellions from dissatisfied people. Tord makes it a point to keep citizens as secure as possible, and as long as they wont cause trouble when he’s been so nice about trying to keep them happy….

Well you know the rest.

For Stay, like I said, its a bit more complicated due to the different political climate and general state of the earth. People definitely don’t like that RA is taking over and eating up other countries, but Tord is firm and goes about his power grab with an iron fist, and extenuating circumstances make it difficult for opposition to stop him.

But generally its also like Regimen, annexed and allied countries are generally left alone to continue as normal, albeit all political power bends towards RL and his laws, and Tord is very TIGHT about how politics are run, executions are VERY MUCH a returned consequence for running your country aground via corruption and ineptitude. If a country starts suffering/does not improve/its people are unhappy, losing your head as a politician might be the least of your problems. How quick the death will be is ENTIRELY up to you.

Tord in this universe genuinely believes he’s doing the right thing, but is also unabashed about his want for total power. So he has both a selfless and selfish reason for it and its pretty much up to other people to say if he’s an evil dictator or not.

Some people are grateful to RA, some people hate them for threatening status quo. Either way, building an empire will always have a foundation of blood, and for Tord, he sees that as necessary for change.

Now whether or not RA maintains itself as mostly benevolent after the Thompson-Larsin family disappear from their seat, as RL, is another conversation entirely.

[chyarnoe]

When an artist you were following makes "cute anime couples" out of fascist dictators and romanticizes dictatorship in general.

[ghoul-haunted]

hi AHHHHH not bebop related + please don’t feel obligated to reply to this but I just wanted to say YES what’s going on right now with the marcoses is. So wrong and it baffles me how their supporters can’t (or choose not to) see that

I’m honestly really terrified because so many people I know (including my parents) support them and I just can’t wrap my head around how and most importantly WHY

Anyway thank you so much for always sharing your thoughts on what’s happening here :’) it truly needs to be talked about

- a fellow Filipino (merry christmas, po!)

it's really awful! it really drives me nuts because supporting the marcoses is such a morally bankrupt and selfish thing to do.

I like to study history a lot, and I'm especially interested in trying to untangle filipino history because nothing published under marcos can be trusted (I'm so sorry I'm using your ask to start rambling about how furious I am at how the government has been letting down filipinos since marcos msdfhgh) and a lot of what marcos did has created a gilded image for a lot of filipinos. you open a biography on rizal, marcos name is there. historical sites preserved credited to the marcos family. all of it creates this very beautiful image that distracts from the absolutely horrifying atrocities he committed, the people dead that were never found, the money stolen, the absolutely insane displays of wealth the family flaunted. the rich prospered, the poor suffered. he didn't preserve those sites or commission works or anything out of a moral imperative to preserve our history: it was propaganda to secure power.

he imprisoned a TV broadcaster for five years without trail and then exiled them and put one of his own people in charge. the same tv station that duterte spent a lot of time getting shut down.

I think a lot about how one of the marcos daughters threw a TEN MILLION DOLLAR WEDDING. I think about all those shoes imelda owns. they were listed in the panama papers. they should have been driven out of the country. they never should have been allowed to continue into politics. government corruption, self interest, and the way marcos destroyed freedom of speech made possible so that they stayed. the politicians who preach about honor and ideals let all of us down with their own self interest and greed.

and so many people in the filipino government let it slide because they benefitted from it! they were friends with the marcos family. there's an established blogger here I can't stand because she supported duterte, and duterte was a step for marcos to make a return. those families were always going to end up running on a ticket together. and the way that we have government officials who say that they aren't pro-dictatorship, but are friends with the marcos family? with duterte? who wanted to give marcos a hero's burial? and the department of education, oh my god. the way that the teaching of history washes the stains of extremely recent events is so frustrating, we shouldn't have so many books talking about how the dictatorship atrocities were definitely real, and yet we do because people keep denying them! people in positions of power!! what the hell!!!

I feel like people who support marcos think that somehow, if they do too, they'll get a slice of the gold and glory. they're willing to look past all the people who died because their own selfish desires and greed outweigh our heroes who fought tooth and bloody nail to keep from being under the foot of a tyrant. rizal didn't die for this. mabini didn’t get exiled for this. forget our heroes--- our own relatives, our own countrymen, our neighbors died. so many people died under that dictatorship, and one of the dictator’s daughter’s goes on tv and says enough time has passed. now marcos jr is running for office. the absolute disgrace of it all.

I hateeee that family so much. I didn't say anything when duterte was running. I regret it a lot. I hope that, even with the small audience I have, if I can somehow bring awareness to what marcos did or bring some kind of comfort by being angry when other people can't, then I'm glad!

(smdhghgh sorry again for using your ask to start ranting, I've been thinking about how marcoses destroyed history lately)

I'm sorry that your parents support marcos :( if you ever need to complain or vent about it, my ask box is always open! it's a scary time in politics for sure.

maligayang pasko at manigong bagong taon sa inyo po, anon!

[qqueenofhades]

Hi there, I really liked what you had to say about the upcoming election. I was wondering if you have published any articles recently in regards to that? I know you said you were a historian.

Aha, thank you so much, this is very flattering. Alas (?), the book that I have just published is about the crusades, as I am a medieval historian by training. However, one of my main research interests is the role of the “imagined medieval” in modern culture, I have written a book chapter about the role of the crusades in post-9/11 political and cultural rhetoric, and I am developing a research project that examines the current crisis of public history through a medievalist perspective. That, however, is still in draft stages.

That said, I absolutely DO have a mini reading list for you (and a lecture to go with it, because as noted, I am an academic and this is how we function!) The topic of today’s class is “Why Accelerationist Ideology Is And Always Has Been Horrifically Racist and Genocidal Throughout History, and White Americans Only Like It Because They Don’t Live In Countries Where It Was Done (By America).” Not very snappy, but there you have it.

The reading list, to start off, is:

The Cold War: A World History by Odd Arne Westad

The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism by Naomi Klein

The Silk Roads: A New History of the World by Peter Frankopan

Stamped from the Beginning: The Definitive History of Racist Ideas in America by Ibram X. Kendi

Drift: The Unmooring of American Military Power by Rachel Maddow

The Bridge Betrayed: Religion and Genocide in Bosnia by Michael Sells

These are all hefty books (though the Maddow and Sells books are shorter) but they’re accessible and written for the layperson, and we always have time to educate ourselves. Why are they relevant to the 2020 election, you might ask?

First: the Cold War book lays out in great, GREAT detail the consequences of a global world order absolutely gripped by a competing standoff of ideologies (American capitalism vs. Soviet socialism) and how these two forces gulped up the politics of the rest of the world, destroyed numerous satellite states, and tried to rebuild them from the ashes into new ideological utopias -- precisely what a lot of people are suggesting now with the ridiculous “just burn everything down and it will magically fix itself!” theory that is somehow presented as the Moral Alternative to voting for Biden/Harris. You know what this caused during the Cold War? Yep. Human suffering on a massive scale, and absolutely zero utopian perfect states, whether capitalist or socialist. It also makes the extremely salient point that in the 1930s, German leftists and liberal democrats were infighting among themselves as to who was Less Morally Pure, and couldn’t agree on a candidate or a moral imperative to oppose the other guy, and figured that their flawed liberal idealists were “just as bad” as said other guy. Was that guy’s name Adolf Hitler? Why yes. Yes it was. Is there a lesson here for us? Who can say. Seems hard to figure.

Leaving aside the tragedy and pointlessness of the Korean and Vietnam Wars, both fought as proxy battlefields between Americans and Soviets, let’s consider the Great Leap Forward, in China (1958-1962) under Chairman Mao Zhedong. The idea was to dismantle traditionalist Confucian Chinese society and rebuild it as a modern socialist state, which was the goal of a lot of twentieth-century old-school socialist/Marxist “people’s republics.” Mao took this exact “burn conservative society down and rebuild it according to Enlightened Leftist Principles” approach and it was... a disaster. A total and epic disaster that caused both short and long-term suffering to the Chinese people and, wouldn’t you know it, did not result in a utopian Chinese state. This is also the reason you cannot say anything complimentary about Fidel Castro, especially if you want to win Florida, no matter how “good” you think his socialist principles were in the abstract, because: Cubans and Cuban-Americans fuggin’ hated the guy. You know why? Because he also destroyed their lives.

Obviously, there is a ton of distance between old-school Communism in the 20th century and 21st-century modern democratic socialism such as that run in Norway (and the Scandinavian countries in general), no matter if your racist uncle on Facebook insists on conflating the two and howling about the Red Menace like it’s still 1962. But the point is that radical leftist accelerationist theory hasn’t changed from 1962 (or frankly, from Karl Marx) either. It still figures that by some miraculous principle, the entrenched systems and ideologies will either just disappear or be “torn down,” the Peasants will Rise Up and Overthrow the Aristocracy, and something something socialist utopia. Except that was tried multiple times in the 20th century and it always failed. More than that, even if it was supposedly “leftist,” it inflicted just as much suffering on its own people as fascist right-wing dictatorships. Americans have always been infused with the triumphalist confidence that they “won” the Cold War because socialism was bad, and it was the inherent flaws in socialism as a world order that doomed it to defeat, unlike rah-rah Red White and Blue American Capitalism. So capitalism, ignoring its own fatal flaws, went hog-wild in the 80s and 90s, establishing Reaganite deregulation as the core and unimpeachable tenet of the market, and we’re all living in the increasing wreckage of that economic system now. Obviously the right wing uses “socialism” as a bugaboo to scare us that Things Could Be Worse, but I haven’t seen the faintest trace of historical context or awareness from the particularly deluded breed of hard leftists who still cling onto the magical theory that a Perfect People’s Uprising Will Fix Everything.

On that note, let’s move to Naomi Klein. The Shock Doctrine lays out in similar excruciating detail how the U.S. systematically destroyed the economic systems of countries particularly in Asia and Latin America (and the entire shameful history of Uncle Sam in Latin America should be required reading for EVERYONE) and sold them a bill of goods about “free market economics” in the Keynesian model. Guess what resulted from this attempt to destroy entrenched societies overnight and rebuild them in the name of Ideology? If you guessed “massive human suffering and ongoing generational devastation and dysfunction” you’d be right again! This was accompanied with constant political interference from the CIA and the State Department to support right-wing dictators and military takeovers in a way that have left the politics and institutions of Central America in permanently broken disarray, because it turns out it’s a lot easier to keep exploiting those brown people in governmental systems that don’t allow dissent or democracy, no matter the exalted principles you like to preach about Freedom and Liberty. The U.S. likes to act as if the Central American refugee crisis is this unwarranted invasion of these dirty immigrants, as if it didn’t play a DIRECT AND LONG LASTING EFFECT in destroying the infrastructure of these countries to the point where they’ve become incapable of functioning as healthy democracies. If you think “banana republic” is the name of an upscale clothing store, I beg you, research the history of that term.

This hasn’t even gotten to the absolutely horrible history of Africa’s treatment at the hands of white Europeans (see the Kendi book for obvious anti-racism education and also how those racist ideas are directly built into the ideological infrastructure of America). Somehow white leftists, while professing to be allies of Black Lives Matter and proclaiming themselves Woke, have managed to overlook this, and I don’t know how??? (Answer: it’s racism Jan.) First it was the transatlantic slave trade and the large-scale kidnapping, sale, and chattel bondage of generations of people. Then it was 19th-century colonialism and imperialism, where Europe thought it could “civilize” the “Dark Continent” and rebuild it to an “enlightened standard.” This was not a right-wing project; this was solidly mainstream and it was enthusiastically advocated by many liberals and intellectuals who busily composed an entire academic and “scientific” literature to support it. Did the European wholescale destruction of traditional societies in an attempt to build a Perfect Ideological Utopia result in... massive human suffering, by any chance? Leopold II of Belgium might have something to say about that. Then when an overstretched Europe was finally forced out of its overseas colonies in the aftermath of World War II, guess what resulted? Did African society spring from the ashes and remake itself in a perfect image? Nope! It became subject to decades-long civil wars and bloody military dictators because its infrastructure had been so crippled (very deliberately so) by its departing colonialist overlords that it likewise had no sustainable model for development. It turns out when you break things out of the idea that they’ll magically fix themselves, they just stay broken and they get worse. Now we once more have the West acting like Africa is a hotbed of Primitives while ignoring its own role in destroying it (and the situation in the Middle East, but that’s a whole OTHER can of worms! So many cans! So many!)

The Peter Frankopan book is an excellent exploration into the flourishing medieval trade networks across the East, the function of the Silk Road in bringing culture and commodities across the known world, and how Europe’s intervention and eventual ascendancy was marked by profound violence, the destruction of these networks, and the outright pillage of non-white people and riches. Which we know, but... read it. Europe and its heir (America) started the crusades, colonialism, imperialism, two world wars, and other conflicts that always contained a virulent aspect of spreading Ideology and getting people to Believe The Right Thing. These cumulative conflicts have devastated the planet repeatedly and we are still feeling their effects right up to this minute. They were all connected to Establishing Supreme Ideology and Supreme Whiteness (and Supreme Christianity). I’m detecting a pattern. The Rachel Maddow book explores how from the 1980s onward, America went absolutely hog-wild with the military/military ideology as a central way to solve its problems, which was tied to the Cold War, capitalism, and extreme individualism. All of which are tied to our current mess today.

Obviously, the most extreme examples of putting ideology above people result in outright holocausts, which is why you should read the Michael Sells book about Bosnia. Everyone knows about the WWII Holocaust of the Jews (and we have already seen how that is busily being denied along with the return of anti-Semitism, which never goes away), but the Bosnian holocaust was happening while most of us were alive. The West deliberately ignored it, because it was framed as the “last crusade” against Muslims in Europe and they needed to be removed in order to create a Pure Christian Europe; hence the Bosniaks were apparently an acceptable sacrifice in achieving this. I have some words on my tongue, I think they start with “massive human suffering,” and how that is constantly what results when an existing society, no matter how flawed, is attacked by ideological zealots who see huge amounts of death as an acceptable price to pay for their brave new world, as long as it’s not theirs (and sometimes even when it is). In fact, the accelerationist theory of social change is so profoundly racial and genocidal (and is indeed being used in exactly that way by the neo-Nazis and white paramilitary elements today) that it’s even more shocking to see supposedly progressive and moral people advocating so enthusiastically for it. It is a white supremacist Nazi wet dream of an ideology in which all the “flawed” people just vanish (spoiler alert, they don’t vanish, they are brutally murdered or allowed to die from deliberate and arrogant negligence) and the Aryans cavort in paradise. Just replacing that with some socialist jargon buzzwords doesn’t change the underlying framework.

And this is STILL NOT GETTING to America’s own history, and you know, the fact that this continent was occupied when white settlers arrived, declared it “terra nulla” or “empty land,” and set about slaughtering the existing advanced civilizations and their people in the name of! You guessed it! SUPERIOR IDEOLOGY! Funnily enough, destroying the Native Americans “for their own good” didn’t result in utopia for them. It resulted in.... yeah, I think we get it by now, but just in case, one more time: MASSIVE HUMAN SUFFERING.

Tl;dr: The accelerationist theory of social change (just destroy everything and it will magically rebuild according to our preferred ideology) is a racist and genocidal fantasy of orgiastic destruction that has caused untold damage throughout history. White Americans whether on the right or left are fond of it, because they have never lived in a country where this has been repeatedly and horribly done to them (often by America itself) and which has cost uncountable Black, brown, Muslim, Jewish, Latin American, Native American, etc lives. The deliberate or deliberately negligent destruction of society does not lead to regeneration. It leads to long-term and unfixable damage, and the people who profit the most from deliberate disaster are the capitalist corporate overlords that the left professes to hate. This country is a racist garbage fire and nobody denies that it needs to change or die, but buying into this theory about how you should just stand back and let it burn/obstruct efforts to work within the system and mitigate the damage IS BULLSHIT and RESULTS IN MASSIVE HUMAN SUFFERING AND DEATH. Which, so far as I know, wasn’t supposed to be a progressive value, but hey, I could be mistaken.

Learn some history. Wear a mask.

Don’t be a whiny pissbaby that makes the rest of us die.

Vote Joe Biden and Kamala Harris 2020.

[a-stitch-in-time-and-space]

Cardassians aren’t Nazis (and also not quite the USSR, but I see where you’re coming from)

TW: for much discussions of Nazism, fascism, persecution, no details

So tottering around as a lover of DS9 and (disclaimer) as a major fan of the Cardassians as a not-yer-generic-villain type villain that then become less of a villain, because you can’t assign villainy to a whole species + also being German and hearing/watching/reading a lot of analyses that compare them to Nazis is inspiring me to write this (gasps for breath at the end of that sentence).

@tinsnip , @handsome-anne

1. Who were the Nazis that the Cardassians are specifically being compared to (versus neo-nazis/alt-rights, etc. that they’re not being compared to)

Short version: Post WWI the Versailles Treaty fucked over Germany in a way that left it wide open to the sort of megalomaniacal little bastard on a powertrip that fed on people’s fear and pushed them into a far-right disaster. The Nazi party itself didn’t have a ton of members, but it basically eroded any kind of democracy the country had and decided it would scapegoat Jews, Romani, communists, queer people, and other “intelligent elite”/political dissident and then spread those ideals across the world like a demented wannabe roman Caesar state. This didn’t last too long in the grand scale of world history, but left a body count of 6 million+ dead, mainly Jewish.

2. Germany and its relationship to this history

So Germany tries pretty hard to teach people this history in schools, through memorials, in film, etc. It’s not perfect by any means, there’re still discussions on how to make reparations, as well as neo-nazis and other far-right people around still, sadly just like in the rest of the world. 

But it’s not covering up these atrocities, because there’s a belief that the way to make sure it doesn’t happen again is to be honest. Sadly, not everyone around the world gets as detailed a history surrounding its origins, happenings, and aftermaths, nor does every country engage with its own past like that.

3. Let’s get fictional (Cardassians, first impressions)

The Cardassians are a species that we mainly meet first through their subjugation of the Bajoran people, and then on DS9 following the immediate aftermath of the occupation on Bajor and everything that follows on from there. Throughout the story we discover various bits about what they had done - labour camps, mass executions, forced prostitution, and in that one Voyager episode I’m not a fan of because it didn’t have the range, experimentation.

On the surface, pretty comparable to the nazis, I get it. Hell, often that’s definitely “the source” of where the writers are getting their ideas.

4. So they’re... Nazis?

The problem comes when using one fascist regime as a go-to for these atrocities. It ignores the reality of fascism beyond this particular point in history and also it’s just not that simple. 

When looking at Nazi Germany we also have to look at the source of its making, the climate around it (countries like the UK having a nazi party, Italy and Spain having fascist dictators, hell, the list of dictators that were/are not German is disgustingly long, the worldwide anti-semitism making surrounding countries apathetic or even sympathetic to the Nazis, etcetc.) and the aftermaths of WWII.

The Cardassians are not Nazis. (As an aside the Federation are not the brave allies, but that’s another post for another day.) I’ve seen them compared to the USSR - both by official writers and fandom - which I won’t comment on seeing as I am not from anywhere that was affected by that (I’m not East German, but I do have East German friends), but at least this points out that one cannot compare Cardassians to a specific atrocity that happened at a specific time with specific connotations surrounding it. 

Is the Obsidian Order the Gestapo or another secret police? Which secret police? Is Garak “the good Nazi” trope - but then how does that align with Cardassians living under a repressive regime for centuries, not a few years, and therefore take into account an indoctrination and climate of fear created over several generations? No child “born” into the nazi regime became an adult while it was still lasting, unlike the Cardassians (and many other real life dictatorships and fascist states - as well as "democratic” states that have similar kinds of surveillance, oppression, mass-imprisonment and disappearances, and camps).

Is every Cardassian soldier a “nazi”? How does one compare that to polish and french prisoners (see Pierre Seel for a particular harrowing account, all the trigger warnings apply) who were forced to fight for the Germans and put on the front lines? 

Eugenics, labour camps, and every other atrocity has been practised by numerous regimes, both in history and now, can we shrug off every country that’s participated in them for the sake of making the metaphor “easier”?

How does the aftermath of the Cardassian Union - when they’re attacked by the Klingons and themselves occupied by the Dominion and then have their main planet bombed to the point of millions dead - align with Nazi Germany?

5. It doesn’t.

It doesn’t. It doesn’t neatly align with any other fascist or military dictator-led regime either. This is not saying that there aren’t aspects obviously borrowed from history (and can easily apply to now). This is saying that in trying to bend the Cardassians into Nazis specifically, people are ignoring every other aspect about them and in my opinion doing a disservice to those who suffered under the actual regime. This is a fictional world, with fictional people that is based on an oppressive society template. It is also a fictional world in which the people themselves are oppressed (especially if you align with what’s written in Andy Robinson’s book) - I’ll be getting back to that point in a bit.

 I would argue that making it “about Nazis” is too easy. This isn’t about “us” this is about “them” those evil bastards from wwii. It strips the Cardassian story of any current-day relevance. One can look no further than one’s own society to see people struggling against acknowledging histories, being treated as second-class citizens, etc. No need to go back in time to do so.

It also strips the Cardassians of any three-dimensionality. If they’re just villains then why are we rooting for their uprising to succeed at the end of season 7? Why do we want their society to flourish, their people to no longer have a broken court system, and their secret police to stop training and recruiting children if they’re Nazis, the convenient shorthand for über-evil?

Cardassia isn’t about a past society, it’s about our society. If we empathise with the Cardassians and don’t cast them as villains, then it’s a discussion about our own oppression and privilege. And it’s a damned good scifi allegory (even if I sometimes don’t think the writers and showrunners quite understand it themselves - death of the author and all that).  

6. To conclude

I didn’t mention Bajor as much in this, because I was very focused on Cardassians, but I would argue that while there is value in casting them as “space Jews” (as I’ve seen here and there) because I understand the value of representation and I am not taking that away from anyone (I hope), similarly if one reads this take as the only valid one  it ignores the reality of religious oppression on a wider scale and also that the Bajorans’ oppression at the hands of the Cardassians didn’t happen for the same reasons as the Jewish genocide at the hands of the Nazis - I would also argue that in making Cardassians = Nazis / Bajor = Jews, we similarly ignore that the Nazis were and are not alone in perpetuating anti-semitism, which kinda again leans into the “Good Federation (the Allies) Versus Evil Cardassians (Nazis) - because none of the Good Allied Countries have ever/are currently involved in persecution or dehumanisation *stares into the void*

And lastly - bringing back a point I made earlier about Cardassians themselves being oppressed by their own government - something that is often forgotten when people talk “Nazi tropes in genre fiction” is that the first country the Nazis occupied was Germany. I’m mentioning this, because it’s interesting in the metaphor, but it’s also conspicuously is absent in the simplification of how these reads are applied. It’s easy to cast the Cardassians as a whole as Bad People, but it makes for worse story-telling and has uncomfortable undertones of how the world reads Germany’s people as being at fault as a whole as well, without taking into account the specific events that we were globally complicit in - and once again the metaphor falls apart, because allegory doesn’t work so easily, and it shouldn’t.

TL; DR In general I am uncomfortable by “Nazi’s used as tropes” in any fictional world. One shouldn’t sacrifice analysis nor simplify history for the sake of making it easier to make a quick point about “bad guys” and forcing allegories into one shape makes them lose their power.  

Also watch German films on Nazism and European ones on WWII if you’re looking for some better takes (also Cabaret, one of the best movies ever made).

[theothercarter-arc]

POST TFATWS + (not) POWER BROKER — HEADCANON

　　　　WARNING. Plots with Sharon as the Power Broker must be discussed first and will fall into a separate selective verse.

　　　　Sharon was never the Power Broker, but she did work for them doing what she does best: being a double agent. That did help her survive in Madripoor during the very tough years that went between CA:CW and TFATWS, considering she was alone and on the run and in need for money to survive. Mostly, though, working for them gave her the opportunity to keep the situation under control and help people that suffered due to the sort of economical dictatorship the PB had established in Madripoor. She bought PB’s trust so well they even gave her access to satellites and important affairs, the most important of which was to keep supersoldiers in check. Of course, she didn’t. Quite on the contrary, she did grow affectionate to Karli Morgenthau especially, which she started to consider almost like a little sister. Karli was one of the few friends Sharon had in Madripoor, to the point that she found a way for the Flagsmasher to escape with the serum. This, of course, turned into heartbreak the moment Karli started to spiral into terrorism and news came of the people she had killed for her mission. Sharon helped Bucky and Sam and went back to America in order to stop Karli, possibly to save the kid. She most certainly never intended to kill her. What happened was nothing but an accident. As Sharon tried to talk to Karli and make her reason, the situation got chaotic and a bullet got out of control. Karli’s death is what Sharon feels most guilty for, together with the fact that she wasn’t able to save her from herself. It’s a huge weight she feels on her conscience and it made getting a pardon a very bitter victory.

　　　　What happened with Karli is probably the peak of several dark years Sharon lived through since being appointed Enemy of the State. Although being able to come back home is an opportunity to have a fresh start and get back to her job, the past years have left her with many scars. She did feel abandoned by Steve and everyone else she had helped, her own country included. That didn’t turn her into a criminal, however the betrayal she felt by the hands of the government and her friends did make her reconsider things, her life choice especially. It turned her rationality into cynical thinking and her faith in good falter in many ways, to the point that sacrificing herself for other doesn’t come as easy anymore. Her moral code is much grayer now, as Sharon was forced to bend law several times in order to survive. She never had a stable partner when she was an agent and she’s even more of a lone wolf now, fighting for herself and taking care of her life because she received proof that no-one else was going to have her back. Loneliness definitely followed her during her years in Madripoor, a city in which she never considered home, and it follows her now as Sharon is even more wary about people she lets into her life. Being able to go back to the United States was definitely the first good news in years, but it didn’t automatically fix everything. Most certainly, it didn’t make her forget how it felt to be left behind all that time. Right after her pardon, she’s struggling to find a middle ground between her desire to go back to her job and protect her country and the fact that she’s not the same person she was when they used to call her Agent 13.  

[somedaywithflyingcolors]

Tymee Thoughts Tuesday #1

February 25, 2020

1. EDSA Revolution and Imelda Marcos

Today, the Filipino people celebrates the 34th year  that we were able to overthrow a dictator, Ferdinand Marcos through collective action. And this was not a single dictatorship, it was conjugal. Ferdinand Marcos ruled hand in hand with her wife, Imelda Romualdez Marcos. The “beautiful” and extravagant Imelda.

Under the Marcos Regime, they were able to stay in power for as long as 21 years. They declared Martial Law which lasted a good eight years with the excuse of extinguishing rising communist threats (exaggerated to extend and increase their power). During the regime, 70,000 were jailed as political prisoners. 35,000 were tortured. Almost 3,000 were killed. Human rights were violated.

Luckily, this week, I have had the chance to watch two documentaries featuring the iconic First Lady. Ramona Diaz’ Imelda (2003) and Lauren Greenfield’s The Kingmaker (2019). 

While Ferdinand Marcos seems to be very predictable and lawyerly-like, Imelda, with her beauty, wits, and charm, is very spontaneous. The narcissistic woman and her edifice complex seems to make her appear someone not to be taken seriously. This was all part of the act. The 3,000 pairs of shoes, the lavish dresses, the terno, the hair, it was part of her brand. She wants to appear as someone laughable but she does that with the intent to manipulate us.

In the Ramona Diaz documentary, she goes on explaining her absurd theories of life from apple to apple and here obsession with beauty as part of the Circle of Life -- how beauty is love applied. It was funny at first and would make you believe that she needs psychological help (fun fact: in the kingmaker it was revealed that she was actually brought in a psychological hospital in New York where the doctor aid that she’s okay, she just could not take politics, so Ferdinand said that he will give up politics for her, which obviously didn’t happen, but after that incident, Imelda is a new person). Afterwards, it starts becoming horrifying.

This quote from the documentary reveals how out of touch Imelda was with the reality of the situation. Truly, the best villains in a story are those that think they're the hero.

Let’s now jump to the Kingmaker!!! This one talks more about the rise authoritarianism, how the Marcoses are going back power. It acknowledges that Imelda is an unreliable narrator but is a very instinctive and powerful political animal.

A great point that hits home is when a footage jumped on the kids in a high school asking what their thoughts were on martial law. All they said were positive (but untrue) accounts of the Marcos regime. The history was revised. The memory of tortured heroes, forgotten. The children had a Utopian view of the Martial Law Era, seeing it as a time of economic progress and discipline, when it fact it is very far from the truth.

That said, it show the importance of writing our histories, sharing them with the world, because with the rise of authoritarianism, the strong-man narrative of Rodrigo Duterte (our current president), one the only ways that we do not fall to the same mistakes of history is to study it, remember it, and learn from it. It is scary to imagine another Martial Law, but seeing the political climate now, the future is not very far. We need to educate more, be vigilant. Hold our line and contribute in our nation-building. Contribute in defending our freedom.

 Another feature of the film that I didn’t know before was how Imelda displaced 254 families, a community in Calauit, an inhabited island, just to house the animals coming from Kenya. Now, the safari and its animals, with no budget, no veterinarians, are suffering. The community in there were suffering as well. This is a metaphor for the Regime’s way of using their power as well as their priorities once in power.

Some key takeaways:

- The EDSA Revolution was not bloodless. The revolution began 14 years ago. Saying that it is peaceful and bloodless disregards the unsung heroes that were killed in the process.

- The Filipinos are very forgiving. What we Filipinos should learn is that while we can forgive, it is also important that we hold those that wronged us accountable. It is almost unthinkable how a family of someone that plundered an estimate of half a trillion peso can still return to power.

- As much we can, we must also continue to speak of the people that were against this dictatorship as someone to emulate. One person from the panel said that for every time we are angry and mention the Marcoses name, we must spread the names of the people who toppled the dictatorship ten times so as to have someone to emulate and be known. People like Edgar Jopson, Archimedes Trajano, Primitivo Mijares, Pete Lacaba, Emmanuel Lacaba, Lorena Barros. They are the heroes that need to be broadcasted more in this narrative. Less of the narcissism of Imelda and more of the injustice and violations of democracies during that time.

-Duterte and Marcos are experts of the Filipino Psychology. While we academics tend to be very rational and logical, these politicians know how to tickle the minds of the Filipinos to allure them into believing that they are someone that they could trust. Now, they not only use the media. They also use weaponize the Internet in a way that would benefit their narrative. Their propaganda continues with all the lies and the fake news.

Sorry this was mostly me talking about Imelda and their injustices during their time in power. I still have so many words and I really can’t help but be outraged. It was just so outrageous to think that (1) they are slowly going back in power, (2) they have no remorse nor guilt over what they did, (3) they have single (double??)handedly affected the influenced major key factors of today’s time, mostly relating to the economic status of the country.

ANYWAY, here are some of the other thoughts that have passed through and plagued my mind through the week!!

2. Valentines Day Podcasts

Because it is still February, go on and check some of the cool podcasts about it!

Here’s Usapang Econ Podcast that discusses the economics of love and valentines!! (In Filipino, sorry international audience :( ) 

And this episode of Debatable by Nina and Kyle that discussed some debate motions about love and valentines. I really enjoyed their chaotic energy there. I ship the two too, so that’s a plus! (Seriously Kyle, why would you leave Nina hanging on your Valentines Dinner for a Bumble Date??)

3. You will be judged not by what you do but by what you did not do. Some musing on where best to spend my time.

I have been thinking about the organizations that I need to join and the things I need to do to be able to land a good job once I graduate. I want to do an internship. In the my course, an internship is voluntary. In the Philippines, unlike in the US or other Western Countries, becoming an Intern just because you want exposure on something is not the fad. Internships are a mandatory thing needed before you graduate. However, I don’t want to just go with the flow.  I want to gain real life experience on real things, especially on the work that I am most interested in. This was triggered by this Rappler Article regarding internship, wherein, apparently, aside from a CV, I also need to pin a portfolio of a work that I’ve done. I am beginning to become convinced that for me to land a good job someday, I need to begin looking for connections related to the job that I want to do. A thick CV won’t cut it. I want to maximize my skills and opportunities here in college while I still can.

Tomorrow, I will be awarded as one of the University Scholars of my University. It can be assumed that I am a good student, I get good grades, pass my work on time. But am I really limited just by the grades that I earned inside the classroom? Should I rush into looking for a workplace or should I just continue doing the things that I’m currently doing (because it seems to be working). Should I dare to be more than what I am now?

Because that entails sacrifice. It may mean less time for family, less sleep, less time for myself. God knows how much I value my time alone. But God also knows how much time I waste for resting and sanity breaks (a little bit too much break tbh). Another fear that I have is going against the harmonious relationship that I think I have now with my family. Saying that I want to do an Internship, which is not included in the curriculum, may raise some eyebrows from the people in my family. I think I need more courage to explain to them the value of doing such things. I remember a saying that I don’t know where I remember from (maybe in the Bible, but I can’t find it): You are judged not by the good that you do, but by the good that you choose not to do. What am I not doing? How can I be better? 

[lairofsentinel]

i'm looking at the stuff you're showing about chile and tbh. i just. why are cops always on the side of the government, and never on the side of the very fucking people they're supposed to protect and whose money is used to pay them. why do they always beat up people. why are they like that in pretty much every single protest ever every fucking where. literally why. (tho yours are especially fucking bad, they sure as hell are using the fact that it won't get as much reporting or punishments)

In a oversimplified way to answer this: because the system allows the accumulation of power and resources of a small group [rich people, bourgeoisie, corporations, external interests, pick the one you want, in all cases, all of them are part of the 90% of the political system/parliament/executive power of the country, so this idea of democracy has always been a lie] and they are  protected by their "dogs" [cops, military shit, soldier crap]. Those dogs are also poor people who are paid to beat, kill, and rape other poor people in order to protect the group with accumulated power/resources.

This show of power is Shock Doctrine in its finest. This is all about keeping the masses filled with fear and paralysed [after all, poor people are a LOT more massive than rich groups and could seize a whole country with a massive coordination of disobedience]. Powerful groups know this. And they FEAR this. This is why they use a lot of money in security that reinforces all types of fears and fear to retributions.Of course, their first step is propaganda.

First, they want you to convince you with capitalist propaganda that this is the ONLY system which gives you happiness if you work hard enough, and "freedom" and "peace" and a lot of crap so you focus on it. You keep breaking your bones with three or more jobs so you can “reach” happiness, eventually, since you are working hard like hell. This system also reinforces the individuality, the self-made man [you need to behead everyone to be successful, no matter the cost] and tries to isolate you [this is why the system hates unions and cooperatives or any action that means empathy and cooperation with others].

A lot of poor people share this idea and defend it. This is explained in a sentence by Simon de  Beauvoir: “the oppressor would not be so strong if he did not have accomplices among the oppressed themselves”. That's why they want to engrave such propaganda in everyone, it guarantees “social peace” at the expense of many many social groups under terrible living conditions. However, things can't be endured forever, and they explode. And when that happens, you need to install fear in the masses, in order to paralyse them and make them betray each other [Shock Doctrine again. Remember this doctrine was crafted in Canada and USA around the 50-60's and applied, first, in Birmania, aka Vietnam with the terrible war there, and later in South America under the several dictatorships in the region.]

Latinoamerica never liked neoliberalism. This is why the Plan Condor was applied all over the region: to force the neoliberalism in all of its countries. Chile could return to "democracy" with a neoliberal system around 1990 [check dates, I'm rounding everything]. Chile was a social-democracy before their dictatorship, so you can see why it was needed a dictatorship with gringo puppeteers that wanted to destroy “the red”.[A lot of people will say it was communist or some other bullshit... “opinions” go wild here depending of how much History you read].

During the terrorism of State [please, don't call it dirty war – a terrible translation used in books of History written in English, NOT by chance--, it was never 2 armed sides in a battlefield, it was the state [army] massacring and torturing its population], the level of torture and the torture systems used and the dire perversion in it that our parents suffered is something that I CANNOT explain [not because I dont know, I read a lot of heavy stuff related to it, and I tell you, it's impossible to speak these things without feeling your humanity breaking into pieces]. It's because it's too horrible for someone who is not asking details. If you read Shock Doctrine from Naomi Klein, she narrates the slightest versions of it. If you want to know about it from raw material, check just one page of the book Nunca más (Never Again), a report of how the Gov. went savage against their own people. Chile, Brasil and Argentina have a book of this type narrating the atrocities that each dictatorship did on their people, since in those countries it was where the dictatorship was more brutal.

What these pacos [these military shit] is doing is just reopening the fear of all that [as you can imagine, this is more than simple fear. It’s terror.]. Our parents are the traumatised one, and all of them are feeling the looming threat that it was supposed to be closed by now. There is a deep deep scar in South America social memory on this matter. and they are using it to spread fear, and also, to revive the old methods of torture that latinoamerican millenials only read [after all, our parents were the one who lived those shitty times].

Police and military never were supposed to "protect" people in south america. They are sustained by the gov. to repress people. They are the tool for the foreign interests and the bourgeoisie to control the massive poor people. I want to make this clear: they never were meant to defend people. Like gringo army was never meant to “defend” democracies elsewhere.

Military here [in Chile, in Brasil, in Argentina] were instructed in the 70′s in the School of Americas, a fucked up gringo military school where they learnt all the torture system that they used back then [they kept using it in Afghanistan and in Guantanamo, so it’s not “ancient history”].  It's not by chance that Chile had been sending military in the last 5 or 8 years to the SCHOOL OF AMERICAS again! [now under the fancy fucked up name of The Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation (WHINSEC) . They are supposed to “teach” our army to “defend democracy and life and freedom” and all that shit. You can see it. Lol. No latinoamerican will believe that shit that says wikipedia about them.

So, you can see the context. Military and cops never were meant to protect people. They have never been trained for that. They are meant to protect the bourgeoisie, the corporations, the big companies that are preying on Chile, on its sea and mining resources, on its water, on its mountains.That’s why this phtoshop is so on spot:

Tell a latino that cops protects them... they will laugh [if they are adult enough to understand the dark layers of our History]

[by the way, just to clarify, I'm not from Chile, but the country beside them: Argentina. Still, everything that's happening in Chile is touching a LOT this side too because both countries share the same scars with the same level of dehumanisation [and to be honest, this country has been boiling shit for a long time and it's just a matter of time to explode too]. I'm just trying to spread the word of my Chilean fellows. And considering how their media blockage is working, I'm afraid many people around the world are receiving a gov. version of the disaster happening there. Something that also happened during the dictatorship times, and before anything, I defend human rights. And what's happening there is a total massive violation of the human rights, and opening festering wounds that are hitting us all.]

[crimethinc]

The Yellow Vest Movement in France–Between “Ecological” Neoliberalism and “Apolitical” Movements

The past weeks have seen a massive confrontational movement arise in France opposing President Emmanuel Macron’s “ecological” tax increase on gas. This movement combines many contradictory elements: horizontally organized direct action, a narrative of being “apolitical,” the participation of far-right organizers, and the genuine anger of the exploited. Clearly, neoliberal capitalism offers no solutions to climate change except to place even more pressure on the poor; but when the anger of the poor is translated into reactionary consumer outrage, that opens ominous opportunities for the far right. Here, we report on the yellow vests movement in detail and discuss the questions it raises.

A las barricadas: the yellow vest movement has provided a venue for people to revolt without giving up their identity as consumers.

Preface: The Ruling Center and the Rebel Right

In the buildup to the 2018 elections in the US, we heard a lot of arguments that it would be better for centrist politicians to win control of the government. But what happens when centrists come to power and use their authority to stabilize capitalism at the expense of the poor? One consequence is that far-right nationalists gain the opportunity to present themselves as rebels who are trying to protect “ordinary people” from the oppressive machinations of the government. In a time when the state can do precious little to mitigate the suffering that capitalism is causing, it can be more advantageous to be positioned outside the halls of power. Consequently, far-right nationalism may be able to gain more ground under centrist governments than under far-right governments.

In attempting to associate environmentalism, feminism, internationalism, and anti-racism with neoliberalism, centrists make it likely that at least some of the movements that arise against the ruling order will be anti-ecological, misogynistic, nationalistic, and racist. That works out well for centrists, because it enables them to present themselves to the world as the only possible alternative to far-right extremists. This is precisely the strategy that got Macron elected in his campaign against Marine le Pen. In this regard, centrists and nationalists are loyal adversaries who seek to divide up all possible positions between themselves, making it impossible to imagine any real solution to the crises created by capitalism.

A social movement of anger and confusion.

In short: if the wave of nationalist victories still sweeping the globe eventually gives way to a centrist backlash, but anarchists and other revolutionaries are not able to popularize tactics and movements that adequately address the catastrophies that so many people are facing, that could pave the way for an even more extreme wave of far-right populism.

We should study populist social movements under centrist governments in order to identify the ways that far-right groups can hijack them—and figure out how we can prevent that. This is one of the reasons to pay close attention to the “yellow vests” movement unfolding right now in France under the arch-centrist President Macron.

The “yellow vests” movement shows the strange fractures that can open up under the contradictions of modern centrism: above all, the false dichotomy between addressing global warming and addressing the ravages of capitalism. This dichotomy is especially dangerous in that it gives nationalists a narrative with which to capitalize on economic crisis while discrediting environmentalism by associating it with state oppression.

Against the dictatorship of the rich: a banner seen near Nantes.

What is taking place in France is reminiscent of what happened in Brazil in 2013, when a movement against the rising cost of public transportation provoked a nationwide crisis. This crisis gave tens of thousands of people new experience with horizontal organizing and direct action, but it also opened the way for nationalists to gain ground by presenting themselves as rebels against the ruling order. There are two significant differences between Brazil in 2013 and France today, however. First, the movement in Brazil was initiated by anarchists, but grew too big too quickly for anarchist values to retain hegemony—whereas anarchists have never had leverage within the movement of the “yellow vests.” Second, the movement in Brazil took place under a supposedly leftist government, not a centrist one. The hijacking of the movement against the fare hike in Brazil set the stage for a chain of events that culminated in the electoral victory of Bolsonaro, an outright proponent of military dictatorship and extrajudicial mass murders. In France, the context seems even less promising.

What should anarchists do in a situation like this? We can’t side with the state against demonstrators who are already struggling to survive. Likewise, we can’t side with demonstrators against the natural environment. We have to establish an anti-nationalist position within anti-government protests and an anti-state position within ecological movements. The “yellow vests” movement provides an instructive opportunity for us to think about how to strategize in an era of three-sided conflicts that pit us against both nationalists and centrists.

Burning barricades.

The Yellow Vest Movement in France

Several weeks ago, the Macron government officially announced that, on January 1, 2019, it will once again increase taxes on gas, which will raise the price of gas in general. This decision was justified as a step in the transition to “green energy.”

Diesel vehicles comprise two thirds of vehicles in France, where diesel is less expensive than regular gas. After decades of political policies aimed at pushing people to buy cars that run on diesel, the government has decided that diesel fuels are no longer “eco-friendly” and therefore people must change their cars and habits. Macron reduced taxes on the income of the super-rich at the beginning of his administration; he has not taken steps to make the wealthy pay for the transition to more ecologically sustainable technology, even though the wealthy have been the ones to benefit from the profits generated by ecologically harmful industrial activity. Consequently, Macron’s ecological arguments for the gas tax been largely ignored. Many people see the decision to increase the tax on gas as yet another attack on the poor.

The French government is responsible for creating this false dichotomy between ecology and the needs of working people. Decades of spatial planning have concentrated economic activity and job opportunities in bigger metropolises and developed public transportation in those same areas while isolating rural areas, making cars necessary for a large part of the population. Without any other option, many people are now completely reliant on their cars to live and work.

Blocking a toll collection point.

In response to Macron’s announcement about the tax on gas, people started organizing on the internet. Several petitions against the increase of the price of gas became viral, such as this online petition that is about to reach a million signatures as this text goes to press. Then, on September 17, 2018, a driver organization denounced the “overtaxation of fuels,” inviting its members to send their gas receipts to President Macron along with letters explaining their disapproval. On October 10, 2018, two truck drivers created a Facebook event calling for a national blockade against the increase of gas prices on November 17, 2018. As a result, more and more groups appeared on Facebook and Twitter sharing videos in which people attack the president’s decision and explain how difficult their financial situations already are, emphasizing that increasing the taxes on gas will only make it worse.

On the eve of the national call, about 2000 groups across the country were announcing their intention to block roads, toll collection points, gas stations, and refineries, or at least to hold demonstrations.

In order to identify the participants during this day of action, demonstrators decided to wear yellow emergency vests and asked sympathizers to show their support to the movement by displaying these vests in their cars. The symbolism behind this vest is simple enough. The French driver’s manual mandates that every driver must keep an emergency vest inside their car in case of accident or other issues on the road. In view of their dependency on cars, fearing to see their living conditions worsen, protestors chose these emergency vests as a symbol of resistance against Macron’s decision. By extension, protestors and media came to call this movement the “yellow vests.”

A blockade near Nantes on November 17.

Thousands of actions took place during the weekend of November 17. Approximately 288,000 “yellow vests” protestors were present in the streets for the first day of national blockade. This was a success for the movement, especially considering that it did not receive any assistance from trade unions or other major organizations.

Unfortunately, things escalated when fights broke out between “yellow vests” and other individuals. One “yellow vest” protester, a woman in her sixties, was killed by a driver, a mother who was trying to take her sick child to the doctor and attempted to drive through a blockade when people in yellow vests started smacking her car. Altogether, more than 400 people were injured, one protestor was killed, and about 280 individuals were arrested that weekend.

The movement remained strong despite these incidents. The blockades continued over the following days, even if participation diminished. In order to maintain the pressure on the government, the “yellow vests” made another national call for the following Saturday, November 24. Once again, various “yellow vest” groups on Facebook planned actions and demonstrations everywhere in France and circulated a call to converge in Paris for a big demonstration.

Facing a water cannon.

At first, this demonstration was planned for the Champs de Mars, near the Eiffel tower, where law enforcement would have surrounded and contained the protestors. However, this official decision did not satisfy some “yellow vesters,” and other calls circulated on social media. The November 17 demonstration in Paris had failed to reach its objective, the Presidential palace; consequently, the “yellow vesters” who were about to converge in Paris decided to repeat that effort on November 24. So it was that, rather than gathering at the base of the Eiffel tower, people converged and blocked the Champs Elysées, a target with powerful symbolic status. This luxurious avenue is the most visited in Paris; the Elysée palace where President Macron resides is located at the end of this avenue.

As they had the preceding week, demonstrators tried to get as close to the Presidential palace as possible. Barricading and confrontations took place all day along the most well-known Parisian avenue. It was reported that this second round of actions gathered about 106,000 participants throughout France, with about 8000 in Paris. These figures suggest that the movement is losing momentum. In the course of the demonstration in Paris, 24 people were injured in clashes and 103 people were arrested, of whom 101 were taken into custody. The first trials took place on Monday, November 26.

Bonfire on the Champs Elysées.

What Kind of Movement Is This?

The “yellow vests” movement describes itself as spontaneous, horizontal, and without leaders. It is difficult to be certain of these statements. The movement started via social media groups that facilitated decentralized actions in which people decided locally what they wanted to do and how to do it. In this regard, there is clearly some kind of horizontal organizing going on.

Regarding whether the movement is truly leaderless, this is more complicated. From the beginning, “yellow vesters” insisted that their movement was “apolitical” and had no leader. Instead, it was supposed to be the organic effort of several groups of people working together on the basis of their shared anger.

Nevertheless, as in practically every group—anarchist projects included—there are power dynamics. As is often the case, some people manage to accumulate more leverage than others, due to their access to resources, their capacity to persuade, or simply their skills with new technologies. Scrutinizing some of the self-proclaimed spokespersons of the “yellow vest” movement, we can see who has been able to accumulate influence within the movement and consider what their agenda might be.

Christophe Chalençon is the spokesperson for the Vaucluse department. Presenting himself as “apolitical” and “not belonging to any trade union,” he nevertheless presented his candidacy for the 2017 legislative election as a member of the “diverse right.” When we dig deeper into his personal relations and Facebook profile, we can see that his discourse is clearly conservative, nationalist, and xenophobic.

In Limoges, the organizer of the November 17 action of the “yellow vests” in the region was Christophe Lechevallier. Once again, the profile of this “angry citizen” is quite interesting. The least we can say is that Christophe Lechevallier seems to be a turncoat. In 2012, he presented his candidacy for the legislative elections as a member of a centrist party (the MoDem). Then he joined the extreme-right Front National (now called the Rassemblement National) and invited in 2016 its leader Marine Le Pen to a meeting. In the meantime, he was also working with the French pro-GMO agricultural organization FNSEA (the National Federation of Agricultural Holders’ Unions), known for defending the use of chemicals, such as the Glyphosate, to intensify their productions.

In Toulouse, the “yellow vest” spokesperson is Benjamin Cauchy. This young executive has been interviewed several times on national and local media. Again, this spokesperson is hardly “apolitical” if we consider his past. Benjamin Cauchy speaks freely about his political experience as a member of the traditional neoliberal right (at that time, the UMP, now known as Les Républicains). However, during law school, Benjamin Cauchy was one of the leaders of the student union UNI—well-known for its connections with conservative right and far-right parties and groups. But even more interesting, Benjamin Cauchy has not publicly acknowledged that he is now a member of the nationalist party Debout La France, whose leader, Nicolas Dupont-Aignan, made an alliance with Marine Le Pen (of the Rassemblement National) during the second round of the last presidential election in hopes of defeating Macron.

There are frustrated consumers on both sides of the barricades.

</figcaption> </figure>

So it is clear that conservative and far-right groups are hoping to impose their discourse, spread their ideas, and use this “apolitical movement of angry citizens” as a way to gain more power. This has not gone entirely unopposed. The yellow vesters of Toulouse decided to evict Benjamin Cauchy from their movement due to his political views. On November 26, while invited at a radio show, the latter said that as an answer to his eviction, he was creating a new national organization entitled “Les Citrons” (the Lemons) to continue his fight against tax rises and took the opportunity to denounce the “lack of democracy that exists within the ‘yellow vests’ movement.”

Finally, it seems that the so-called “leaderless movement” completely changed its strategy in the aftermath of the second Parisian demonstration. On Monday, November 26, a list of eight official spokespersons of the movement was presented to the press. Apparently, the preceding day, yellow vesters were asked to vote online to elect their new leading figures. These nominations and strategic decisions are already creating tension within the movement. Some yellow vesters are now criticizing the legitimacy of the election, raising questions about how these leaders got selected in the first place.

Meanwhile, some members of the movement have called for another day of action on Saturday, December 1. The demands are clear: 1.) More purchasing power; 2.) The cancellation of all taxes on gas. If these demands are not granted, demonstrators say that “they will march towards Macron’s resignation.” So far, 27,000 persons have announced that they will participate in this event. Once again, the unity that was the watchword several weeks ago seems to have evaporated, as several local organizers have dissociated themselves from the movement in opposition to the more confrontational path that the movement seems to be taking.

A blockade by night.

Rather than addressing the question of horizontality, corporate media outlets have been focusing on another question: is the protesters’ anger legitimate?

Many media outlets have suggested that this movement is mostly composed of undereducated low-income people who are against protecting the environment; they describe the demonstrations as violent in order to delegitimize the anger of the participants. Despite this, some media outlets have shifted their discourse over time, becoming somewhat less condescending and more whiling to broadcast demonstrators’ concerns. For example, after the confrontations at the Champs Elysées last Saturday, Christophe Castaner, the new Minister of the Interior, said: “the amount of damages is poor, they are mostly material ones, that’s the most important thing.” Quite a surprising statement, considering how corporate media outlets and politicians have decried similar actions during the demonstrations on May Day and the protests against the Loi Travail.

From our perspective, there’s no doubt that their anger is legitimate. Most people who take part in this movement speak of the difficult living situations they have to deal with every day. It makes sense that they are saying that they have had enough; the gas issue is just the straw that broke the camel’s back. The lower-class population has to struggle harder and harder to survive while everyone else remains comfortable enough not to be affected by economic shifts and tax increases targeting consumers. For now, at least.

So anger—and direct action—are legitimate. The question is whether the political vision and values that are driving this movement can lead to anything good.

“Well, let’s give them biofuels - Brigitte Macron.”

Troubled Waters

Numerous racist, sexist, and homophobic acts have taken place during yellow vest actions. During the November 17 demonstration in Paris, several well known anti-Semites and nationalists were seen among the crowd of demonstrators. Members of far-right and nationalist groups participated in the demonstrations on November 24 in Paris, as well. Some comrades have reported that the presence of the far right in the Paris demonstration is “undeniable.” They describe seeing a group of monarchists with a flag; the crowd considered their presence “insignificant” compared to the water cannons that law enforcement used during the clashes.

The same report also mentions several elements that are difficult to interpret. For example, while the crowd in Paris chanted some classic slogans of May 1968 (“CRS SS”) and the Loi Travail demonstrations (“Paris debout, soulève toi!”), they also chanted the first verse of the Marseillaise, which is currently associated with traditional republican parties and the far right, not radicals. This chant could be understood as a reference to its origins in the French Revolution, but the song has been coopted by its role as the French national anthem, giving it a patriotic and nationalist tone.

Yellow bloc.

Another example: while marching down the Champs Elysées, the crowd chanted “We are at home.” For an English-speaking reader, this statement seems innocuous enough, an affirmation that the demonstrators had taken the streets, as the authors of the above report framed it. However, this chant echoes the one regularly used by National Front supporters during their meetings. Understood in that context, “we are at home” has a more sinister connotation. For nationalists, it means that France is and will always be a white, Christian, and nationalist country. Everyone who doesn’t fit their identity and political agenda is therefore considered a stranger or an intruder. In other words, this slogan creates a narrative about who belongs and who doesn’t. The use of these words during the yellow vest demonstrations is poorly chosen, if not ominous.

Paris is not the only place reactionary tendencies have emerged in the movement. Indeed, on November 17, in Cognac, yellow vest protestors assaulted a black woman who was driving a car. During the altercation, some protestors told her to “go back to [her] country.” The same day, at Bourg en Bresse, an elected representative and his partner were assaulted for being gay. In the Somme department, some yellow vesters called the immigration police when they realized that migrants were hiding inside a large truck stuck in traffic. The list goes on.

Finally, some participants in this “apolitical” movement have openly expressed contempt for social movements in general—including the movement for better education, the movement to defend hospitals and access to health care, and the movement of the railworkers. In effect, this movement that purports to dissociate itself from collective struggles so it can benefit “everyone” ends up promoting individualistic self-interest: the right of isolated consumers to keep using their cars however they want at a cheap price, without any real vision of social change.

Police block the freeway as yellow vesters make representations of themselves.

How Should We Engage?

Among anarchists and leftists, we can identify two different schools of thought regarding how to engage with the “yellow vests” phenomenon: those who think that we should take part in it, and those who think that we should keep our distance.

Arguments to distance ourselves:

The yellow vest movement claims to be “apolitical.” By and large, the participants describe themselves as disgruntled citizens who work hard but are always the first to suffer from taxes and government decisions. This discourse has a lot in common with the Poujadisme movement of the 1950s, a reactionary and populist movement named for deputy Pierre Poujade, or, more recently, with the “Bonnets rouges” movement (the “red beanies”).

The idea that the movement is “apolitical” is dangerous in that it offers a perfect opportunity for far-right organizers, populists, and fascists to insinuate themselves among protesters. In other words, this movement offers the far right a chance to restructure itself and regain power.

As soon as the movement gained widespread attention, extreme-right politician Marine Le Pen and other conservatives and populists expressed support for it. So much for the talk about being “apolitical”!

“The ultra-right will lose!”

</figcaption> </figure>

Arguments in favor of participating in the movement:

This appears to be a genuinely spontaneous and decentralized movement involving low-income people. In theory, we should be organizing alongside them in order to fight capitalism and state oppression. Mind you, the concepts of class war and anti-capitalism are far from being accepted or promoted among the demonstrators.

Some argue that we should participating in order to prevent fascists from coopting the movement and the anger it represents. Some radicals believe that we should take part in these actions as a way to make new connections with people and spread our ideas about capitalism and how to respond to the economic crisis.

For some radicals, being skeptical of the current movement and not wanting to take part in it can also indicate some sort of class contempt directed at the “apolitical” poor. Others argue that in every situation, we should always aim to be actors rather than spectators. Some even assert that if we are “true” revolutionaries, we should leap into the unknown and discover what is possible instead of passively criticizing from a distance.

All these arguments are valid, but if they lead to anarchists participating in a movement that offers fascists a recruiting platform—as some anarchists did in the Ukrainian revolution—that will be a disaster that opens the way for worse catastrophes to come.

“Down with the state, the police, and the fascists.”

The fundamental problem with the yellow vest movement is that it begins from the wrong premises, attempting to preserve conditions that we should all have been fighting to abolish in the first place. Rather than seeking to protect today’s alienated and miserable consumer way of life, which is itself the result of a century of defeats and betrayals in the labor movement, we should be asking why we are so dependent on cars and gasoline in the first place. If our ways of surviving and traveling had not been constructed in such an isolating, individualized way—if capitalists were not able to exploit us so ruthlessly—we would not have to choose between destroying the environment and giving up the last vestiges of financial stability.

We have to change our habits and give up our privileges in the course of fighting for another world (or another end of the world), but as always, governments and capitalists are forcing us to bear the brunt of the problems they caused. We must not permit them to frame the terms of the discussion.

“Overthrow Macron, disband the government, and abolish the system.”

Open Questions

Incidentally, the situation is quite different outside the French homeland. On the island of Reunion, since November 17, there has been a social upheaval in which all strategic sites have been blocked—the port, the airport, and the prefecture. Fearing that they might lose control of the situation and being concerned about the impact on the economy, French authorities established a curfew on November 20 that lasted until November 25.

In Europe, as the yellow vest movement attempts to restructure itself after being weakened by leadership issues and conflicts over strategy, this might be an opportunity to create new bridges and make proposals about more systemic solutions to the problems that caused this movement.

Regarding ecology, we have to emphasize that the rich are the ones chiefly responsible for climate change, and that they will have to be the ones who pay to deal with it—if we are not able to dethrone them first. To some extent, this seems to be what the current blockading movement against capitalism and climate change Extinction Rebellion is trying to do in England. It is ironic that two different blockading movements about capitalism and ecology are taking place on either side of the English channel right now—one making ecological demands of the state, the other reacting to state environmental measures.

About nationalism, we must assert that it is no better to be exploited by citizens of our own race, gender, and religion than it is to be exploited by foreigners, and emphasize that we will only be able to stand up to those who oppress and exploit us if we establish solidarity across all the various lines of difference—race, gender, religion, citizenship, and sexual preference. We are inspired by the yellow vest protesters in Montpellier who formed a guard of honor to welcome the feminist and antisexist march on November 24.

Above all, we need an anti-capitalist, anti-fascist, anti-sexist and ecological front within the space of social movements. The question is whether that should take place inside the “yellow vests” movement, or against it.

Chaos for Christmas.

[mattkennard]

Jeremy Corbyn: My goal is to lead a government devoted to social justice

Published: La Jornada (6 November 2018)

Arriving at the Houses of Parliament in London, I worried that I would find Jeremy Corbyn downbeat and nervy. The leader of the Labour Party, the official opposition to the British government, has been the victim of fierce attacks over the past six months -- the crescendo to a campaign that has been rolling since he was elected leader of the Labour Party in 2015.

In a near-universally hostile British media, he is regularly portrayed as an anti-semite, a misogynist, a terrorist sympathiser, a communist agent -- the list is literally endless. Every day, there is a new line of attack on a politician who for just about his whole political life was a largely unknown, marginalised left-wing voice in British politics.

But, like so much when it comes to Jeremy Corbyn, the opposite is the case. He is upbeat and relaxed. I meet him at his offices where he is surrounded by young and enthusiastic staff buzzing round the office. As he greets me, he hands me a double espresso. Someone has got his order wrong. “Want it?” he asks smiling.

He is quick to crack a joke, is intensely interested in other people, and seems at peace. His aura is one of enviable calm. Considering the storm around him, it’s disorientating. You take a lot of hits, I say. People worry this must have an effect on you: are you happy? “Absolutely,” he cries with his characteristic wry smile, raising his eyebrows. “Absolutely!” he adds again for emphasis. “I’m extremely happy. I do my work in Parliament, I spend a lot of time touring around the country doing campaigning events, meeting people. And I travel when I can, I was in Jordan this summer visiting refugee camps.” He then adds: “I lead a very balanced life. I read quite widely. I have an allotment, which I'm very proud of, and I keep myself fit and healthy. We want people to be able to lead full lives, and I lead a very full life, and I'm very happy doing it.” As we chat casually -- he is disarmingly open -- I have to keep reminding myself that I am sitting opposite the biggest threat to the British establishment maybe ever. There have been important anti-imperialist socialist figures throughout Britain’s history, but none has ever got as close to power as Jeremy Corbyn is right now. His rise has been improbable, but, after constant destabilisation campaigns (often by his own party) he is obviously going nowhere.

In the General Election of 2017, when he was roundly predicted to crash and burn, he increased Labour’s seat count and the Tories lost their majority in the Houses of Parliament. Some say it was the most important moment for progressive politics in modern British political history. The left finally proved that its ideas could be popular with the general population. Socialism is back, and many predict that if Britain’s unstable Prime Minister Theresa May falls and a general election is called, Corbyn and Labour would win a landslide.  

Corbyn, unlike many in parochial British politics, is and has always been an internationalist. He links struggles for democracy and human rights across the world and has travelled extensively throughout his life. But Latin America, and especially Mexico, has a special place in his heart. I glance over to his desk where a miniature Mexican flies above his papers. Further back is a framed picture of his Mexican wife Laura Alvarez at her graduation.

Corbyn has been rereading A History of Mexico in preparation for the interview and he is clearly enthused by the fact Mexico has turned red with the election of Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador -- the first time, he points out, Mexico has elected a real left-winger since Lazaro Cardenas in the 1930s. In fact, he is so excited by what AMLO represents that he announces he will be travelling to Mexico for the inauguration of AMLO in December.  “AMLO has shown amazing personal and political courage over many decades,” he tells me. “He was one of the most reforming of mayors of Mexico City in history. Indeed, it's quite humbling when you go to the supermarket at the time of the month when the older people get their food vouchers, and they call them AMLOs.”

Does Corbyn sees similarities between himself and AMLO? “I see similarities in the sense that we're both of about the same age, both been in politics all of our lives, and both have an absolute commitment to human rights and to righting injustice. I support him in the difficulties I know he's going to face in searching for all the disappeared, as well as dealing with the Ayozinapa 43, and the dreadful case that that is.”

Corbyn first went to Latin America in the late 1960s when he was 20-years-old. He was living in Jamaica working with Voluntary Service Overseas and when he finished he embarked on a solo trip around South America. He fell in love with the region and has since visited nearly every country in Latin America. “There is a huge ethnic diversity across Latin America that's often not understood by people outside. Understanding the history of Latin America is very limited in the rest of the world. The diversity of Bolivia, for example, with Quechua being actually the dominant language not Spanish. When that diversity is recognized you tend to get more inclusive governments. For example, in Chile the great Salvador Allende recognized the needs of the Mapuche people, which had often been ignored until then. I see the strength of Latin America as bringing people together.”

This is the side of Latin America that has inspired the left across the world in the past century. But there is another, darker, side to the region that, in places like Brazil, is coming back. Corbyn is aware of this too. “I also see elites in Latin American that have often been interlinked with the armed forces and global corporations ... hence the problems that the Allende suffered. I think an ongoing issue is the question of control of resources, and the economic development of the continent. I was looking recently at my diaries from 1969, and I've got an entry from May the 1st, 1969, in Santiago. That was the time when Popular Unity had been formed which eventually led to the election of President Allende a year later. Remember it was the first past the post system, so Allende got elected on, I think, 36% of the vote. He faced opposition from the very beginning, particularly from the mining companies, and the CIA, much of it led by Kissinger. It's all very well recorded.”

Corbyn pauses then adds: “There are powerful forces that move around in the world that want to oppose those who want to bring about economic and social justice. The only way to combat it is insertion of democratic values and humans rights, and that is exactly what I'm determined to do.”

Corbyn has been called by some Britain’s answer to Salvador Allende. Except the powerful reactionary forces he mentions will be much more concerned about Britain going red than Chile. No core capitalist country has ever had an anti-imperialist socialist in power. The political and economic system is sick and immoral. It remains to be seen whether such a system will ever allow a decent and principled human being to rise to its apex. Do you worry, I ask, about the forces that brought down Allende doing the same thing to you? “Well, I understand a lot of the media are very unkind towards me here,” he says. “Extremely unkind,” he adds with a wry grin. “I think what we showed in the general election and since then is our ability to communicate with people was critical. Things like social media, and local organizations, have created a confidence amongst a lot of people in Britain that we can bring about political change, we can be a government of social justice and we can have a foreign policy based on human rights and justice. I'm utterly determined to achieve it.”

The Labour Party in Britain is nominally left-wing yet at least since Tony Blair won leadership of the Party in 1994 -- and arguably long before -- it has allied with reactionary forces across the world, from George W Bush to Silvio Berlusconi to the dictatorship in Saudi Arabia.  That meant it showed no solidarity at all with the “pink tide” movement of the late 1990s and 2000s which saw progressive governments come to power in Venezuela, Bolivia, Argentina, Ecuador, Paraguay and Brazil. In one of most exciting times for left politics in history, the Labour Party under Tony Blair and Gordon Brown was completely absent - only offering ritual denunciations of “authoritarianism” and “populism” in the liberated countries.

I wonder if that will now change under Corbyn, that the Latin American left can expect solidarity from the Labour Party now. “I'm very clear that we have to build an international movement, which deals with economic injustice and inequality, and challenges the neoliberal agenda. We need governments that think alike to work together on economic justice and we'll absolutely do that.” He is particularly interested in the progress that Bolivia has seen under the government of Evo Morales and the social movements that catapulted him to power. “I had a very interesting visit to Bolivia some years back when I led a parliamentary delegation there. We were looking at the control of water, and the mining industry, but also the enfranchisement of the diversity of Bolivia. The idea that a non-Spanish speaking woman should be the author of the constitution of Bolivia was amazing and historic in so many ways. I've got a lot of respect for what they've achieved in Bolivia.”

Before we finish up I ask him if he has a message for Mexicans as AMLO takes power, and he shoots back, in perfect Spanish: “Saludos y buena suerte para el futuro, y paz y justicia para todo el pueblo de Mexico.” He smiles and then says tapping his Mexican history book, and back in English now, “I’m really looking forward to being in Mexico.”

[israelyahc668]

According to the “Big Mac Index” invented by The Economist in London, the rand in January was the weakest currency on the earth. With perhaps the worst named currency on the planet, no less than based on western ears, this former foe and ally have had a tricky time of it financially, although a recent rise in tourism helps. Vietnam continues to be on its onerous path from a centralized economic system to a market one, and consequently this country’s forex could be very devalued right now.

Is it legal to own Iraqi dinar?

It is illegal in the U.S. and most other major economies to market an investment without appropriate securities registration.

When exchanging a single US dollar, you will receive around zero.seventy five Great British pounds in return. This forex pair (USD/GBP), is often known as “cable” and is the 3rd most traded currency pair on the planet. Open a demo account and check your speculations on our foreign currency trading simulator. The Swiss franc is also the 7th most traded foreign money in the world, gaining its reputation as a protected bet when trading or storing currency, because of its strict monetary policies and low debt ranges. 1 US greenback will purchase your round zero.98 Swiss Franc, so the Swiss franc comes in as the first currency to be greater worth than the US dollar. This, nonetheless, is not any surprise given that Switzerland is certainly one of the most secure and wealthy international locations on the planet.

Iraqi Dinar: 1 Usd = 1,192 Iqd

Of comparable worth to the Omani rial, when trading 1 US dollar you will obtain 0.38 Bahraini dinar. The Gibraltar pound or GIP is the national forex of Gibraltar and is exchangeable with the British pound sterling at face value. [newline]The Swiss franc or CHF is the national foreign money of both Switzerland and Liechtenstein. ​, but remarkably only comes tenth when ranked as a contender for the world’s strongest forex. Tanzanian Shilling, also called Shillingi, is the official currency of Tanzania, a rustic in japanese Africa. This was a replacement of the East African rupee which was introduced during the colonial interval.

Is pound or dollar stronger?

Key Takeaways. For over 20 years the GBP has been stronger than the USD. Brexit weakened the British pound currency. In the 21st century, the GBP/USD pair has seen highs of around 2.00 and lows of around 1.22.

The greenback is getting weaker against the opposite world currencies, especially against the "commodity" currencies. Pet enterprise can also be almost recession proof and this is sensible. Even though we went via a sharp market correction in March 2020, ProShares Pet Care ETF outperformed the market throughout and after the correction. PAWZ “invests in a spread of corporations that stand to probably profit from the proliferation of pet possession.

To make issues worse, lockdowns and other measures taken by the government to restrict the spread of the coronavirus forced many households to remain house, leaving them unable to earn an income. Rich in gold, oil, uranium and diamonds, the Central African Republic is a really rich country inhabited by very poor individuals. However, after claiming the title of the poorest in the world for one of the best a part of the final decade, this nation of simply 4.seventy five million is displaying some indicators of progress. Political instability, endemic corruption and now the coronavirus pandemic proceed to frustrate that potential. Adding to these components, new instances of Ebola resurfaced in the northeast of the country last February, less than a yr after one other outbreak claimed the lives of more than two thousand people. Since gaining independence from Belgium in 1960, the Congo has suffered many years of rapacious dictatorship, political instability and fixed violence.

Tps Eastern Africa To Supply 200 Million New

The weakest hyperlink proved to be the currencies of nations with either very excessive inflation or very excessive uncooked materials publicity, or maybe each. An instance is the Argentine peso, of which fifty four per cent more had to be given for one euro at the finish of the yr than firstly of the year. Cheap currencies shouldn't be confused with “undervalued” currencies, which implies these currencies are changing arms for lower than they perhaps ought to be as a result of various components and economic circumstances. Before the global upheaval of 2020, the Seychelles rupee had been secure for years. Add our free customizable foreign money converter and trade fee tables to your site at present. In the early Nineteen Twenties Germany experienced one of the most extreme inflations of all time.

Additionally, CAD is a very fashionable option when forex trading, and accounts for round 5% of day by day trades in the world overseas trade market.

The appreciation of the British pound was most likely triggered principally by developments within the UK oil industry and by the monetarist type of UK macroeconomic coverage.

Indonesian currency image is IDR, This is the authorized forex in Indonesia.

If you encounter my articles, you will notice that I write about money, economics and expertise.

In the map under, currencies for North America are shown with the change rate of 21 totally different international locations.

However, the united states dollar stays some of the useful currencies on the earth. The euro is the main rival of the U.S. dollar in international markets, and it was value slightly extra as of 2020. … In general, extra valuable currencies are usually stronger, largely because weak currencies lose value in the lengthy run. $100 in 1947 is equal in buying energy to about $1,179.forty three right now, an increase of $1,079.43 over 74 years.

The preparations known as the Snake within the Tunnel , which have been arrange by members of the European Economic Community , one of the forerunners of the European Union, lasted till 1979. Each member agreed to restrict, by market intervention, the fluctuations of its currency’s trade price when it comes to other members’ currencies. The most divergence between the strongest and the weakest currencies was 2.25%. In this article, we combined this year’s weakest currencies as listed by The Telegraph and Naija Quest.

[queenofmahishmati]

The send me a character meme: The Baahubali crew (i.e., Baahu, Devasena, Mahendra, Sivagami, and oh-all-right Bhalla ;)

Hai. I will try to be as less critical as possible. If you wanna send more characters→

AMARENDRA BAAHUBALI

general opinion: fall in a hole and die | don’t like them | EH ((only sometimes)) | they’re fine I guess | like them! | love them!! | actual love of my life hotness level: get away from me | meh | neutral | theoretically hot but not my type | pretty hot | gorgeous! | 10/10 would banghogwarts house: gryffindor | slytherin | ravenclaw | hufflepuff ((a gryffinpuff where he’s more the puff))best quality: The way he sees everyone as equal, including himself, even the Lord. And when he loves, he loves with all of his heart, he loves everyone equally. He is perfect and too good to be true!! I said it.worst quality: Those rose tinted glasses he wears while seeing everyone as equals. Like, would you remove it for one bloody second and look only at your brother who is not your brother at all man?? And honestly, you could have at least mentioned your wife if not your son with your dying breath, but of course you sentimentally say ‘amma jakardha.’ It wasn’t your mum who suffered but your wife, through 25 years of torture. I’m so salty about that okay??ship them with: He is the other half of Devasena. There can be no one, absolutely no one… ((well maybe that blue lady among those three dancing ladies from that one song??))brotp them with: Bhalla. If not for all the hatred from his brother, I see a Thorki kinda relationship between them. And also, Kattappa of course. needs to stay away from: Mahishmati’s people. He could have at least lived without earning Bhalla’s ire. ((I still think Bhalla wouldn’t have killed him if Baahu hadn’t played the people’s king role *smh*))misc. thoughts: He is so honorable, sincere in his love, way too heroic, extremely kind, exceedingly intelligent and did I mention, he is boring?? He is such a simple and plain character that we have seen lit in every other story ((look at lord Ram)). His sense of humour is the only thing that kept him interesting.Sorry but not sorry, Baahu wouldn’t have made the best king of Mahishmati because he couldn’t even see the plot against him from three feet away. How would he see it if it comes from countries that are thirty leagues away?? He is unbelievably naive. But I still love him with all my heart because he is a big innocent baby that needed to be protected. 

the rest are under the cut and it gets progressively worse ↓

DEVASENA

general opinion: fall in a hole and die | don’t like them | eh | they’re fine I guess | like them! | love love super love them | actual love of my life hotness level: get away from me | meh | neutral | theoretically hot but not my type | pretty hot | 1001% gorgeous! | 10/10 would banghogwarts house: gryffindor ((now this woman is a true gryffindor)) | slytherin | ravenclaw | hufflepuffbest quality: The way she is unapologetically herself. She is such an inspiration especially for the women of today. She stands up for herself not caring about how powerful the people she’s standing against are. She stands up for the right things and not righteousness like her naive husband, and that’s one heck of an admirable trait. worst quality: Impatient. She lacks patience when she’s angry and thus speaks things she won’t utter if she was a cool cucumber and thought twice about it. I’d relate her goal driven attitude to her impatience as well, like when she was determined to shoot two arrows together but didn’t stop to think on how exactly to do it. If she had, trust me, she’s smart enough to figure it out all by herself. Or during the scene were they hunt for boars in the field, if she had given up her goal of shooting even one boar down and turned to look at how Kumara Varma was being victorious, she’d have cracked the truth about Baahu. She needed a lot of patience and guess Bhalla gave it to her eh?? ship them with: She can live without Amarendra but he can’t. AmarSena it will always be!!brotp them with: Bhalla. If he wasn’t a psycho and she wasn’t so stubborn, they’d make an awesome team against clueless Baahu. ((as proved by all the fanfics))needs to stay away from: Sivagami maybe?? So many things would have been different. And distance could have made the heart grow fonder…misc. thoughts: Because of what I listed as her worst qualities, I don’t think she could have made any better Queen than Sivagami, the only other queen stand-in I could compare her to within the story verse. But she was more aware of what would be the right thing for the welfare of the people unlike Sivagami who was all about her word being the only law, so she would have definitely made a better Queen-mother I suppose. But yeah, she was kind of awful at politics erk!!

MAHENDRA BAAHUBALI

general opinion: fall in a hole and die | don’t like them | eh | they’re fine I guess ((only because he sports his papa’s face)) | like them! | love them | actual love of my life hotness level: get away from me | meh | neutral | theoretically hot but not my type | pretty hot | gorgeous! | 10/10 would banghogwarts house: gryffindor ((he takes after his kinda-crazy mum)) | slytherin | ravenclaw | hufflepuffbest quality: His thirst for adventure. He is a risk taker and the ultimate risk he took landed him where he should have been right from the beginning. And he seeks out new things fearlessly, like that come what may attitude, he knows he will figure out a way to deal with it.worst quality: His obsession. He was obsessed with climbing that waterfall. And then he was obsessed with that mask. When he saw the face behind the mask, he got obsessed with that girl. His obsession bordered on stalking and he went as far as drawing tattoos on the said girl’s body without her permission. And then, when the girl rightfully kicks his ass ((or tries to)) for everything he did to her, he is more intent upon showing her, her own beauty that he got obsessed with in the first place and then– honestly, I could keep on going until we realize Mahendra is no better than Bhalla…ship them with: None. Maybe with Avanthika in a better explained universe, I mean the girl did have the gall to fly kick him. I didn’t bat an eye when she drove that sword through his chest after he spoke those cheesy dialogues. brotp them with: Kattappa. Now Kattappa would have kept him in line if he had grown up under his tutelage right from the start. needs to stay away from: Avanthika duh. But also anything climbable, I was surprised when he didn't climb Bhalla's statue.misc. thoughts: I’m actually worried about the state of Mahishmati under this boy-king. Like yeah, there won’t be any of the cruetly or dictatorship that it underwent during Bhalla’s rule. But is he really fit enough to be the King without Kattappa going think-like-Baahubali every five seconds?? What happens when the too-old Kattappa and weather-beaten Devasena pass away??

SIVAGAMI

general opinion: fall in a hole and die | don’t like them | eh | they’re fine I guess | like them! | love them I LOVE HER OKAY | actual love of my life hotness level: get away from me | meh | neutral | theoretically hot but not my type | pretty hot | super gorgeous!!! | 10/10 would banghogwarts house: gryffindor ((hear her roar)) | slytherin | ravenclaw | hufflepuffbest quality: Her knowledge of politics and righteousness ((but what use eh??)). She was pretty much fair in bringing up Baahu and Bhalla as equals. And of course, until they were ready, she managed an entire Kingdom without a King all by herself. That too after dramatically thwarting an assassination attempt with a baby in her hand. ((I’m sure there must have been plenty other attempts at her and princes lives too))worst quality: Her Ego– the thought that she was always in the right. There’s a thin line between righteousness and being right, and Sivagami unfortunately, was too blind to see it despite her lovely big eyes. Also, I don’t think this is an unpopular opinion, but she was a good mother, just not a very good nurturer. She believed she could never be wrong and in that way, justified the partial love she was giving her sons to herself. Now don’t you dare come to fight me about this, she always always tenderly caresses Baahu’s head every time they’re shown in the same screen ((like ever since he was a baby)), and when we get a glimpse of Bhalla and her in the same screen at long last, she doesn’t even look in his eyes properly while speaking. If you don’t believe me, go watch the scene where she gifts him things to make up for refusing him the throne. Grrrr.ship them with: No one deserves her, especially Bijju. In fanon though, I love all these lady loves that @puppyloveblog24 & @avani008 gave her!!brotp them with: Kattappa. They made a kickass team alright!! I love how she dramatically yells Kattappa every time. needs to stay away from: Amarendra and Devasena. She should have sent them to Kuntala but of course her love for Baahu doesn’t let her…misc. thoughts: Seriously, from where do you think Bhalla got it into his head that power was everything one ever needed?? He literally grew up watching Sivagami overlord his own father. He kept on hearing that her word was the only law, to which Baahu too conforms when he remembers how she said righteousness alone must prevail. And only because of that does he conclude he can stand against his mother’s own words. She had a flare for dramatics but was also the most powerful person that held the fate of the entire kingdom in her hands. Now think again and tell me why her sons turned out to be the way they did??

BHALLALADEVA ((I admit I couldn’t wait to get to this part teheheheee))

general opinion: fall in a hole and die | don’t like them | eh | they’re fine I guess | like them! | love only them | actual love of my life ((not really but yes also))hotness level: get away from me | meh | neutral | theoretically hot but not my type | pretty hot | unbelievably gorgeous!!!! | 10/10 would bang ((this hot mess…totally))hogwarts house: gryffindor | slytherin ((perfect slyth)) | ravenclaw | hufflepuffbest quality: His ruthlessness. Trust me, being ruthless will get you so far in your life. But you need compassion along with it to be human, which he very obviously lacks. But still, he is strong, clever and confident. Along with these traits, his heartlessness got him the throne he so coveted, it made him the most powerful character in the story. He’d have truly been a formidable King in his years of rein, a nightmare to any enemy of Mahishmati.worst quality: His discontent. He kept desiring for more and more, greed is not the right word for it though. He was jealous of his brother and wanted everything that Baahu had. He got the throne but lost the girl. He stripped Baahu off all his powers to make him pay for it. But still, even after banishment, Baahu had the love of the people, something he had always wanted as seen in the scene where he converses with the crown. So, he sought to destroy Baahu completely, and in that one moment, we see his absolute descent into darkness and insanity. He goes on to kill his mother, who never gave him enough love. He chains the woman who refused to choose him. He tortures the kingdom that preferred his brother over him. And maybe, for a minute there, we were led to believe he was finally satisfied with what he had. But no, he then rattles Devasena’s chains and tells her how he craves to slaughter his brother one more time with his bare hands. He was never truly satisfied. Not even in his deathbed, where he urges Devasena to join him. He is the most powerful character of them all, but also the lowest form of a being to ever exist. ship them with: Bhalla probably ships him with himself in canon because he deserves none. In fanon though, I would kill for IndiraBhalla. brotp them with: His Ghada in canon and maybe that one second witty banter he and Baahu has in Singapuram made me brotp them. In fanon, Devasena and sometimes with Mahendra. They are the fun lot amongst all the boring ones. needs to stay away from: Everyone. Pfft.misc. thoughts: Maybe Bhalla was influenced by his father’s greed and foul thoughts while he was young, but I’m pretty sure he soon figured it out that he was useless and only kept Bijjala around cause he alone had made him feel important while his mother tended more to his brother. And feel free to fight me, but I’m pretty sure he would have made a decent King if those silly people had let him and just like that, Baahu might have lived. But then we wouldn’t have our epic story. What I’m trying to tell is, hate him all you want, but without him this story would get nowhere just like Bijjala. Bhalla is a deranged psycho that wants to be God, yes. But he is a boon to this story like the writer KVV sir said. Bhalla's words are measured unlike his father’s. He knows whatever he does is right or wrong unlike his mother who believes everything she does is right. He considers love and compassion as weakness unlike his brother. His temper is controlled and flames only at critical points unlike Devasena who keeps raging at every spark. He thinks before he acts unlike his hasty nephew Mahendra. There was also this one time where Kattappa unnecessarily jumps in to save his life from the bull because of his sense of duty and Bhallaladeva appreciates it by offering him a boon like any King would, any boon that he might ask for despite knowing Kattappa wishes to kill him in the deepest of his heart, and he even grants that wish with a twist of his own— that single defining moment, that is when I started stanning this character as hard as I do now and will forever. He is the most interesting of them all!!

[khalilhumam]

‘The war in Karabakh has made the possibility of conflict resolution even more distant’, fears Armenian politician Mikayel Zolyan

New Post has been published on http://khalilhumam.com/the-war-in-karabakh-has-made-the-possibility-of-conflict-resolution-even-more-distant-fears-armenian-politician-mikayel-zolyan/

‘The war in Karabakh has made the possibility of conflict resolution even more distant’, fears Armenian politician Mikayel Zolyan

As fighting rages in Nagorno-Karabakh, what are the chances for peace?

Armenian politician and analyst Mikayel Zolyan. Photo courtesy of Mikayel Zolyan, used with permission.

The conflict currently raging in Nagorno-Karabakh does not only concern Armenia and Azerbaijan.Thus this conflict has significant international dimensions: neighbouring countries with interests in the South Caucasus can play a significant role in inflaming or de-esclating the violence. As a member of the Russian-led Collective Security Treaty Organisation (CSTO), Armenia has close ties to Moscow. Meanwhile, Turkey appears to have offered extensive political and military support to Azerbaijan during the recent fighting. Nearby Iran and Georgia watch warily. Much has changed in Armenia since a ceasefire in 1994 cemented the status quo in Nagorno-Karabakh. Rulers have come and gone, several of them made and unmade by their approach to this bitter dispute. In 2018, Armenians launched mass protests and ousted longtime President Serzh Sargsyan, himself a native of Nagorno-Karabakh. These events, which became known as the Velvet Revolution, brought a new generation of politicians to power — key among them Nikol Pashinyan, a former journalist turned opposition deputy who became Armenia's prime minister. Another is Mikayel Zolyan, who entered politics in the 2018 parliamentary elections as a deputy for Pashinyan's ruling My Step Coalition. Zolyan is also a member of the Standing Committee on Foreign Relations of Armenia's National Assembly. Before starting his political career Zolyan, who holds a phD in political science, was a prominent analyst and commentator on the South Caucasus for various research institutions. In this interview, he shares his thoughts about the latest violence in Karabakh and what it means for Armenia and beyond.

In this interview, Zolyan uses certain terms to describe territories and locations that reflect his own perspective. These do not imply an editorial position on their status. For more on the issue of disputed names, check our explainer here. This interview has been edited for brevity and style.

Filip Noubel (FN): In which way is the escalation that started on September 27 different from previous fighting between Azerbaijan and Armenia?

Mikayel Zolyan (MZ): The short answer is that it is not an “escalation” any more. It is a full-blown war, with artillery, tanks, missiles, airplanes and killer drones. All this weaponry is being applied against the civilian population: Stepanakert [the capital of Nagorno-Karabakh] and other towns of Artsakh [an Armenian name for Nagorno-Karabakh] have been under heavy shelling for days, with casualties among the civilian population. The First Karabakh war — we can already call it that — ended in 1994, leaving behind an unstable ceasefire. It was often broken by more or less significant incidents, but still allowed most Armenians and Azerbaijanis to live in relative peace. The current war represents a completely new level of violence, unseen for 26 years. And many of the young people dying on the frontline on both sides were born long after the end of the first war. Another major difference is that this time we know for sure what has happened: this war started around 7 a.m. on Sunday, September 27. The order to start the offensive came from Azerbaijan’s president Ilham Aliyev, with encouragement from Turkey’s president [Recep Tayyip] Erdoğan. These two people bear the full responsibility for all the deaths and destruction happening today. The fact that it was Azerbaijani forces who started the full-scale offensive is so obvious that even Aliyev’s propaganda is hardly trying to deny it. So is the fact that Turkish military are taking part in the fighting on Aliyev’s side, together with pro-Turkish mercenaries from Syria, recruited and transported by Erdoğan.

FN: Why is Turkey so prominently and openly supportive of Baku this time? What does that mean for Turkey’s ambitions and for Armenian politics?

MZ: The war in Artsakh is part of the regional strategy of Turkey’s Erdoğan, who seeks to re-create some version of the Ottoman Empire. Artsakh is just another piece in the chain of Erdoğan’s aggression along with Northern Syria, Northern Iraq, Libya, Greece, and Cyprus. His aim is to project power and make Turkey a key player in all these regions. He is competing with both Russia and the West. And in this case, Erdoğan made Azerbaijan’s president Aliyev a tool for his neo-imperialist agenda. Aliyev has been willing to allow that, since his hereditary petro-dictatorship is under severe strain because of the weight of economic difficulties and lack of popular legitimacy. “A small victorious war” is the perfect way to salvage a crumbling autocracy, especially since anti-Armenian sentiment is pretty much the only thing that unites Aliyev supporters and critics in Azerbaijan. For Armenia, Turkey’s involvement means that what is happening today is an existential matter. It takes only a little bit of empathy to understand what Turkey’s direct involvement means for a people that still vividly remembers the 1915 genocide in Ottoman Turkey, which by the way Erdoğan’s government continues to deny.

FN: Do you think Russia is unable or unwilling so far to impose a ceasefire, perhaps because of Pashinyan’s ambiguous position on Armenia’s dependency on Russia?

MK: Russia is one of the mediators in the conflict, as co-chair of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) Minsk Group, together with the US and France. For years, the Karabakh conflict was one of the few remaining areas where Russia and the West had a relatively efficient cooperation. The current war presents a major challenge to all the three mediators, since it undermines their role in the region, It is an especially acute challenge for Russia, since it is happening in the vicinity of its borders. Russia is also a military ally of Armenia, as member of the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO), however the CSTO guarantees apply to the territory of the Republic of Armenia proper, while the Republic of Artsakh is not a member of CSTO. Finally, Russia also has a working partnership with Azerbaijan, which it is not willing to lose. Moreover, there is a strong Azerbaijani lobby in Russia, which is trying to paint Armenia’s current government as “secretly pro-Western”. In any case, Armenia after the [2018] revolution has been loyal to all its commitments. What we are doing today is keeping our partners, both Russia and other co-chair countries, informed about the situation, and it is up to them to choose which actions can be more efficient in stopping the war. We see that today both Russia, France, and the US are working to stop the conflict.

FN: In your view, what are most optimistic and pessimistic scenarios for the coming days and weeks?

MK: Well, we all hope that the fighting will end as soon as possible. However, it is hard to tell. The blitzkrieg strategy of the Aliyev regime has failed to achieve his goals, but he is doubling down, like a gambler who has already lost a lot. Erdoğan is encouraging Aliyev to keep raising the stakes, both through public statements and continuing flow of weapons and mercenaries into Azerbaijan. If this continues, the escalation of the war can become uncontrollable and have disastrous consequences for all sides involved. Today the South Caucasus is seen as the meeting point of Eastern Europe and post-Soviet Central Eurasia: both Azerbaijan and Armenia are members of the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS), the Council of Europe, OSCE, EU's Eastern Partnership. If this war continues, especially with the involvement of mercenaries and terrorists, the South Caucasus may become the gate through which instability floods both Eastern Europe and the post-Soviet space. That is why I believe it is in the interests of both Russia and the West to stop this war as soon as possible.

FN: Do you see space for dialogue in Azerbaijan and in Armenia? What voices are calling for it? If so, whose and where?

MK: Official negotiations can start only after the aggression against civilian population is stopped. As for contact between civil societies, it is hard to imagine such contacts at this point. In any case, Armenia is ready for dialogue, both on the government level and on the society level, but right now we are fighting to defend the lives of people in Artsakh, our freedom, our independence and the gains of the Velvet Revolution of 2018. I don’t know what Azerbaijanis are fighting for, but I assume they believe that they are defending some kind of a just cause. So, dialogue is hard to imagine today. When the war is over, there will be a lot of work to do in order to establish a new dialogue. I am sure that one day Armenians and Azerbaijanis will be able to come together and talk about their issues not as enemies, but as people who want to resolve them. But this war has made the possibility of conflict resolution even more distant. After the war in the 1990s there already was a lot of pain and suffering separating Armenians and Azerbaijanis. Unfortunately, the new war has made this gap even more difficult to bridge.

Read an interview with the Azerbaijani journalist Rovshan Aliyev here

Written by Filip Noubel

[adsproject94]

Looking Back (Another Story)

As we are facing a lot of trials or challenges this year, let me share with you a political speech from the past. Since the country I am residing in are stressed out right now.

Prepared Speech by Benigno Aquino Jr.

I have returned on my free will to join the ranks of those struggling to restore our rights and freedoms through nonviolence.

I seek no confrontation. I only pray and will strive for a genuine national reconciliation founded on justice.

I am prepared for the worst, and have decided against the advice of my mother, my spiritual adviser, many of my tested friends, and a few of my most valued political mentors...

A death sentence awaits me. Two more subversion charges, both calling for death penalties, have been filed since I left three years ago and are now pending with the courts.

I have opted to seek political asylum in America, but I feel it is my duty, as it is the duty of every Filipino, to suffer with his people especially in time of crisis. I never sought nor have I been given any assurances, or promise of leniency by the regime.

I return voluntarily armed only with a clear conscience and fortified in the faith that in the end, justice will emerge triumphant. According to Gandhi, the willing sacrifice of the innocent is the most powerful answer to insolent tyranny that has yet been conceived by God and man...

I return from exile and an uncertain future with only determination and faith to offer, faith in our people and faith in God.

Three years ago when I left for an emergency heart bypass operation, I hoped and prayed that the rights and freedoms of our people would soon be restored, that living conditions would improve, and that blood - letting would stop.

Rather than move forward we have moved backward. The killings have increased, the economy has taken a turn for the worse, and the human rights situation has deteriorated.

During the martial law period, the Supreme Court heard petitions for habeas corpus. It is most ironic after martial law has allegedly been lifted, that the Supreme Court last April ruled it can longer entertain petitions for habeas corpus for persons detained under the Presidential Commitment Order, which covers all so - called national security cases and which under present circumstances can cover almost anything.

The country is far advanced in her times of trouble. Economic, social, and political problems bedevil the Filipino. These problems may be surmounted if we are united. But we can be united only if all the rights and freedoms enjoyed before September 21, 1972 are fully restored.

The Filipino asked for nothing more, but will surely accept nothing less, than all the rights and freedoms guaranteed by the 1936 constitution, the most sacred legacies from the founding fathers.

Yes, the Filipino is patient, but there is a limit to his patience. Must we wait until that patience snaps?

The nationwide rebellion is escalating and threatens to explode into a bloody revolution. There is a growing cadre of young Filipinos who have finally come to realize that freedom is never granted, it is taken. Must we relive the agonies and the blood - letting of the past that brought forth our republic or can we sit down as brothers and sisters and discuss our differences with reason and goodwill?

I have often wondered how many disputes could have been settled easily had the disputants only dared to define their terms.

So as to leave no room for misunderstanding, I shall define my terms:

Six years ago I was sentenced to die before a firing squad by a military tribunal whose jurisdiction I steadfastly refused to recognize. It is now time for the regime to decide. Order my immediate execution or set me free.

I was sentenced to die for allegedly being the leading communist leader. I am not a communist, never was, and never will be.

National reconciliation and unity can be achieved, but only with justice, including for our Muslim and Ifugao brothers. There can be no deal with a dictator. No compromise with dictatorship.

In a revolution there can really be no victors, only victims. We do not have to destroy in order to build.

Subversion stems from economic, social, and political causes and will not be solved by purely military solution: It can be curbed not with ever increasing repression, but with a more equitable distribution of wealth, more democracy, and more freedom.

For the economy to get going once again, the working man must be given his just and rightful share or his labor, and to the owners and managers must be restored the hope where there is so much uncertainty if not despair.

On one of the long corridors of Harvard University are carved in granite the words of Aarchibald Macleish. "How shall freedom be defended? By arms when it is attacked by arms; by truth when it is attacked by lies; by democratic faith with determination and faith."

I return from exile and an uncertain future with only determination and faith to offer — faith in our people and faith in God.

With the speech above, does it relate to what is happening around us? With the speech above, have you grasped a lesson that can help our society today? With the speech above, can it be helpful to who we are today as a citizen of a nation?

I'll be hoping that you've been informed, entertained, and have realized an important matter that you can use.

(Photo not mine)

[commiedervish]

Masterpost on the United States of America

[posted by /u/user_name_101ofcl on /r/communism]

This master post is divided into 2 parts:

The failure of the USA to protect its citizens

A list of US imperialism and the crimes they have committed

The Failure of USA to protect its citizens and the crimes committed in her own country

The USA is the largest and most powerful capitalist country to have ever existed. It has had the pleasure of

Being the most powerful country in its continent for about 150 years

Has the most favourable terrain imaginable. With fertile river valleys covering its land and all of its borders surrounded by forests, a large desert or oceans, practically making an invasion almost impossible.

Has plentiful resources like iron, coal and oil.

And lastly, a large amount of immigration. So a lack of a labour force won't ever be a problem

With such favourable material conditions, if we want to prove that capitalism works, the USA should be the best example of it. Let's look at how the US population is doing.

Worker rights and public services in the USA

The US has always repressed its workers. The federal minimum wage (7.25 $) is so low it barely allows people who are paid in it to live. The workers can not ask for a better wage, because they will get fired if they do.

The US has the least powerful unions and the workers stand alone against the capitalists. Basic things like paid maternity leave are optional and up to the employer. The US used to imprison and assassinate Union leaders so they wouldn't spread a pro worker message.

Privatisation is also a major thing in the US. The railways have always been private and this has resulted to them underperforming in speed, cost and affordability. In countries where it is nationalised, like China, the railways are extremely efficient.

The healthcare system in the US is private and this, according to Harvard, results in 45 thousand preventable deaths each year.

An other thing that is privatized, at least partly, is the prison system. Private prisons cost less to the government, about 17 $ less per prisoner per day but have more violence, worse facilities and are less likely to give parole than government ran prisons.

Poverty in the USA (statistics)

41 million Americans go hungry, including 13 million children and 5.4 millions seniors

More than 1 in 5 children in America (21.8%) are living under the official poverty line. Half of all children will be on food stamps before they turn 20, including 9 out of 10 black American children

Only 48% of Americans can handle a $400 emergency

For every 22 empty homes, there is 1 homeless person

Democracy in the USA

The USA prides itself in being the most democratic country, "the leader of the free world" but in reality the citizens of the USA have no real say on what their government does. The United States government only serves the interests of the bourgeoisie.

Don't believe me? Well, a recent report shows that about half of Congress and two thirds of the Senate are millionaires.

The elections are also completely undemocratic. The power of political lobbying in the USA is unprecedented. Both parties rely on the support of the bourgeoisie to win.

We shouldn't also forget the extreme gerrymandering that has been happening lately by both parties. Voting districts have been purposely redrawn across the country so the parties can keep their seats.

Now let's talk about voter suppression. The US has suppressed the vote of minorities since its creation. When the USA was created, only white male protestant land owners were allowed to vote. Gradually the USA was forced by civil rights activists to allow minorities and women to vote, but this doesn't mean that voter suppression doesn't exist. To this day incidents of voter suppression happen in states like Texas, south Carolina and Georgia. They specifically target black Americans, to stop them from voting.

An other way the US tries to stop black Americans from voting is felony disenfranchisement. Basically in most of the US, if you commit a felony, you are no longer allowed to vote (end in some states even if you get out of prison). This targets black and hispanic people in more than a few ways. They commit more crime than usual but they also get arrested more often than white people for the same crime.

The awful treatment of minorities in the USA

The US has historically oppressed every minority in its territory. From blacks to native Americans, from Latino communities to asians.

As I said above, only white men where allowed to vote when the US was created. In fact, not only where black people not allowed to vote, but they were slaves and where worth "three fifths of a white person". They were also not considered citizens despite them being born in the US.

When slavery was abolished the oppression continued. Segregation was the official policy of most states. They claimed that it was a policy of "separate but equal" but in reality it was far from that. White people had access to better schools, healthcare, housing and transportation.

Today although segregation being officially over, black people still face discrimination and disadvantages in schooling, police (we will get to that in a minute), healthcare, voting (as I showed you above), housing, and many other fields. Let's also not forget that the US has not paid ANY sort of reparations to black Americans. This and the effects of the institutionalized discrimination has left a unimaginable difference in the average wages and living standards of black Americans.

The median net worth of whites remains nearly 10 times the size of blacks. Nearly 1 in 5 black families have zero or negative net worth — twice the rate of white families.

(This even comes from a liberal source)

Let's also not forget the awful conditions in native reservations, with some lacking safe drinking water and some suffering from overcrowding. There is also a lack of wifi on a lot of these places.

And finally, the US literally has literal concentration camps in the border to place illegal migrants and their children, even though the illegal immigrants are fleeing violence and poverty the US caused in Central America (we will get to that)

Police brutality

Police brutality in the US has always been an issue. The main target are black people, worker rights activists, Muslims (especially after 9/11) latinos and some LGBTQ rights activists.

Police killed 1,147 people in 2017. Black people were 25% of those killed despite being only 13% of the population.

Black people are 25% more likely to be killed by police than white people

21% of black victims were completely unarmed

(This doesn't account for the people that were armed but didn't do anything wrong and cooperated with the police)

In 99% of cases the police officer was not convicted of a crime

A list of US imperialism and the crimes they have committed

This will be a list of US interventions from 1946 to 2019, this proves that the US remains an imperialist power and the primary threat to democracy

1 ) The US openly backs Greek nationalists in the Greek civil war against the communists, despite the communists having by far more support(1946)

2 ) The US helps with the creation of Israel(1948-1949)

3 ) The US helped in the establishment of the FRG (West Germany)

In 1957, 77% of the ministry's senior officials were former Nazis, which, according to the study, was a higher proportion that during Hitler's Third Reich government, which existed from 1933 to 1945.

A report released late last year found that between 1949 and 1970, 54% of Interior Ministry staffers were former Nazi Party members, and that 8% of them had served in the Nazi Interior Ministry, which at one point was run by SS chief Heinrich Himmler.

Also when the Stalin notes came, calling for a neutral unified Germany with elections , the US refused

4) CIA directs war against Huk Rebellion in the Philippines (1948-54)

5) Independence rebellion crushed in Ponce, Puerto Rico (1950)

6) The US, after expelling a workers government in South Korea, establishes a fascist dictatorship and helps it fight the communists (1951-53)

7) CIA overthrows democracy in Iran, installs Shah. (1953)

8) The CIA directs a coup in Guatemala after the democratically elected government nationalised fruit land from cooperations that were exploitating the Guatemalan people(1954)

9) The Suez crisis in Egypt (1956)

10) Army & Marine occupation against rebels in Lebanon (1958)

11) Fought South Vietnam revolt & North Vietnam, 1 million killed, atomic bomb threats in 1968 and 69 (1960-75)

12) CIA-directed Bay of Pigs exile invasion fails in Cuba (1961)

13) Caused an international crisis over missiles in Cuba while they had similar ones on Turkey (1962)

14) CIA organizes coup in Iraq that killed the president, brings Ba’ath Party to power, Saddam Hussein as secret service head (1963)

15) The terror to black American communities and the black Panthers massively increased. Assassinations left and right, including M.L.K (1963-66)

16) People in Panama shot for urging canal’s return (1964)

17) 3 million dead in a CIA backed coup in Indonesia (1965)

18) CIA backed coup in Greece against democratically elected leftist (1967-73)

19) Cia backed dictator, up to 2 million killed in decade of bombing, starvation, political chaos (1969-75)

20) US directs Iranian marine invasion in Oman (1970)

21) US directs South Vietnamese invasion in Laos,“carpet-bombs” countryside around Ho Chi Minh Trail (1971-73)

22) Democratic elected leftist president in Chile replaced with a fascist US backed regime (1973)

23) Telling Turkey to invade Cyprus so they can't join the Warsaw pact(1974)

24) Assists South African-backed UNITA rebels in Angola (1976-92)

25) Iran, raid to rescue embassy hostages, 8 troops die in helicopter-plane crash, bombing aborted. Soviets warned not to get involved in revolution. (1980)

26) The US helped Islamic extremists against socialist Afghan government(1981-1989)

27) CIA directs exile (Contra) invasions, plants harbor mines against Sandinista revolutionary gov’t. (1981-90)

28) Lebanon, Marines expel PLO and back far-right Phalangists, Navy bombs and shells Muslim rebels, Syrian forces (1983)

29) Invasion topples 4-year leftist revolutionary gov’t in Grenada (1984)

30) Honduras, Maneuvers help build bases near Nicaragua borders (1985)

31) Air strikes to topple Qaddafi gov’t in Libya (1986)

32) Army assists raids on cocaine region in Bolivia (1986)

33) U.S. intervenes on side of Iraq in the Iraq - Iran war (that Iraq started by the way), defending reflagged tankers & downing civilian jet (1987-88)

34) Panama, Noriega gov’t ousted by 27,000 soldiers,2000+ killed. Canal Zone & bases returned in 1999 (1989-99)

35) Iraq countered after invading Kuwait. 540,000 troops stationed also in Oman, Qatar, Bahrain, UAE, Israel. (1991)

36) No fly zones and sanctions on Iraq (1991-2003)

37) Intervention in Croatia(1992-94)

38) Rigging of Russian elections so the communists would not win (1993)

39) No-fly zone in civil war; downed jets, bombed Serbs (1995)

40) Zaire, Troops at Rwandan Hutu refugee camps in the area where Congo revolution began. (1996-97)

41) Heavy NATO air strikes after Serbia declines to withdraw from Kosovo. NATO occupation of Kosovo. (1999)

42) The US invades Afghanistan (2001-now)

43) Yemen, Drone missile attack on Al Qaeda, including US citizen (2002)

44) The war on Iraq, Saddam Hussein regime toppled in Baghdad. 250,000+ U.S. personnel participate in invasion. US & UK forces battle Sunni & Shi’a insurgencies. 160,000+ troops & many private contractors stationed on bases (2003-11)

45) Haiti, Marines & Army land after right-wing rebels oust elected President Aristide, U.S. forces him into exile (2003-04)

46) Pakistan, CIA drones, air strikes, Special Forces raids on alleged Al Qaeda & Taliban refuge villages kill multiple civilians. Drone attacks on Pakistani Mehsud network (2005-now)

47) Libya, NATO coordinates air strikes and missile attacks vs. Qaddafi government during uprising by rebel army (2011)

48)Air strikes & Special Forces intervene vs. Islamic State insurgents, training other Syrian rebels, bomb alleged Syrian gov’t chemical arms sites (2014-now)

49) Coup in Bolivia against a democratically elected president, replaced with a religious fascist that also hates indigenous people (2019)

50) Meeting with and funding the Hong Kong protestors (2019-now)

51) The killing of an Iranian general (now)

The photo I used - http://imgur.com/gallery/HvyTkEh

List of US atrocities: https://github.com/dessalines/essays/blob/master/us_atrocities.md

Sources

https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2009/09/new-study-finds-45000-deaths-annually-linked-to-lack-of-health-coverage/

https://www.rollcall.com/news/hawkings/congress-richer-ever-mostly-top

https://kairoscenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/Poverty-Fact-Sheet-Feb-2015-final.pdf

https://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2014/01/09/most-lawmakers-are-millionaires

https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/court-north-carolina-voter-id-law-targeted-black-voters/

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/oct/19/georgia-governor-race-voter-suppression-brian-kemp

https://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/felon-voting-rights.aspx

https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/race/reports/2019/08/07/472617/systemic-inequality-displacement-exclusion-segregation/

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2019/10/24/us/ice-kids-detention-invs/index.html

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/09/28/black-and-hispanic-families-are-making-more-money-but-they-still-lag-far-behind-whites/%3foutputType=amp

https://www.britannica.com/topic/Police-Brutality-in-the-United-States-2064580

https://mappingpoliceviolence.org

https://sites.evergreen.edu/zoltan/wp-content/uploads/sites/358/2019/11/InterventionsList2019.pdf

[The rest of the sources were not included in this post due to the character limit. However, they can be seen in the original post on reddit.]

[wileymarch]

George Washington_Coward or Revolutionary Pacifist?

With the current political climate, Trump's blatant violation of law and The United States Constitution, I felt it important to take a look at the past, to answer for myself the question:  Have all of our political leaders in effect been corrupt, dismissed so casually human rights and law?  Starting from the beginning, we'll take a look in the coming days at each president, from George Washington to Trump, a brief history of 45 presidents and the ways they've benefited or harmed our nation. George Washington was not initially the successful military general history would have us believe.  In fact, more often he was an overwhelming failure, defeated twice by the French, a third time his biggest success was in his ability to turn tail and run.  Washington lost almost every battle he ever fought, yet somehow, he had the charisma to hold his troops together, even when they were watching their comrades fall.  The win he achieved against the British could be seen as a fluke.  So how, you might wonder, did he become the first leader of the free world?  He wasn't. That's correct.  Technically, George Washington was not the first president of the United States.  Let that sink in a moment, your history teacher lied to you!  Okay, for many of us knowing that history is predominately lies and embellishments to make a prettier version of the truth and create a sense of indoctrinated patriotism is not surprising.  In fact, many of us have learned to take it in stride and educate ourselves instead of wholesale believing what we're told. There were actually 14 presidents before Washington, actually presidents of the Continental Congress.  We'll evaluate them in the next post.  Washington is credited with laying the foundation of our country.  In truth, it was his fourteen predecessors that built the groundwork for our country, declaring our independence from the British Crown, establishing Executive, Legislative and Judicial branches of government to create a checks and balances system, and prevent us from becoming a dictatorship. Washington suffered with low self-esteem and a nearly unbearable anxiety over becoming president of the United States.  I'm sure the sixty-nine members of the Electoral College saw this as a benefit to themselves and their own designs on power.  Indeed, Washington likened his election to presidency as a "death sentence". Trump is not alone in being venerated as a "savior".  Washington's own cabinet singled him out as appointed by "Divine Providence"  to be the "savior".   One might wonder how a cowardly general became the first "American Messiah" and was referred to as "Your Excellency" as opposed to Mr. President.  The answer, Propaganda, the same as today. Many of the men involved in Washington's election as president were worried that their puppet would back out, turn tail and run once again.  Even Washington's own wife Martha did not believe her husband fit for the duties of presidency. Washington was treated on his journey from his home to New York as if he were being coronated.  He was a "Federalist", later to be known as the first Republican and those who pushed him into presidency told him, "you are now king, under a different name."

Newspapers such as the Federal Gazette, owned by a leader of the Federalist Party John Fenno, touted Washington's kingly procession, labeling him the unitor of our country, "savior" of our country and a "great patriot".  Washington however, did not initially enjoy all the ceremony and pageantry, at one point even sneaking out of town ahead of his travelling party to avoid it.  It all seemed to have been a bit too arranged and over the top that as he rode over the bridge into Trenton, he was greeted with women and young girls draped in white gowns throwing flower petals at the feet of his horses as they rode through, proclaiming him the defender of women.  Shocking, seeing as how the battle at Trenton had been a very small one but history would have us all believe Washington had led his forces against insurmountable odds and a vast enemy, neither of which were true.  And many of the Hessian troops stationed at Trenton escaped Washington's attack.  

The association with Fenno is of note all throughout the early years of the United States because Alexander Hamilton and John Adams both bailed Fenno out of bankruptcy in exchange for his loyalty in printing whatever Adams and Hamilton saw fit.  Hamilton himself frequently wrote under pseudonyms to influence public opinion.  Thomas Jefferson, so enraged by the lies spread by the Federal Gazette set up his own papers the Aurora, edited by Benjamin F. Bache and the National Gazette, edited by Phillip Freneau.  

Washington, upon adoration of lovely women, finally gave in to all the pomp and pageantry bestowed in his "honor" when he arrived at his new home, Cherry Street in Manhattan, New York.  He was the first president to give an inauguration speech and spent much of it defending himself, claiming he hadn't done it to gain wealth or power.  This would immediately lead one to believe that was precisely why he'd become a puppet to these men, especially since much of his personal wealth was actually that of his wife, Martha from her first marriage.  Washington himself was bankrupt.  

James Madison attempted to keep the speech out of public circulation. Because of George Washington being a soft-spoken man, the crowd hadn't heard his actual words anyway giving Madison the opportunity to lie about what Washington had said and felt.  Madison then took it upon himself to completely rewrite Washington's speech for print so that no one would know the truth, which is the one most history books defer to.  Madison in turn wrote the response from Congress and the return response from Washington, which shows, Washington's presidency was a well-planned and well-executed means of rallying people to do the bidding of wealthy, power hungry white men by the intentional manipulation of people's perception.   The buttons on the brown suit from Washington's inauguration were engraved with eagles, establishing Washington as a down-to-earth patriot and was made by Jeremiah Wadsworth's Woolen Manufactory.  Wadsworth would later become a congressman.  

The "Holy Bible" only became a part of the inauguration proceedings at the last moment when it was decided by Congressional committee that this would indeed make Washington a "man of the average people".  Having no bible anywhere, a mad scramble resulted in a Masonic lodge providing one, which is delightfully amusing in hindsight.  The church service after the inauguration was held at St. Paul's Episcopal Church, still standing today.  

In these early years is where the extreme partisan battle between Democrats and Republicans was born.  So as you can understand, propaganda, puppeteering, money and aggrandization have all been a part of the political landscape in the United States since its inception.  

While much of this post points out George Washington's flaws, it is important to note, though many white people saw slavery as an accepted institution, Washington was not among them. Though a slave owner himself, he came to see the practice of "owning" other human beings as something reprehensible and amoral, and attempted to prevent the importation of any more slaves into the United States.  It was his full intention to free all enslaved people in the United States and he worked tirelessly toward this goal.  

In the case of his military career, Washington hated violence, he hated fighting and killing.  Yet, when his men were in the worst of circumstances, he stood by them, fed them, clothed them, cared for the sick and wounded, spending his own money and resources to take care of them.  Washington often tried to remain neutral in matters of foreign politics, wishing instead to maintain peace and economic growth.  His death by epiglottitis and hypovolemic shock (rapid blood loss) is interesting, considering he remained a very vocal opponent to slavery, and the egregious treatment of indigenous peoples after his retirement from office.  However, his spoiled and tempestuous wife's notorious temperament and pro-slavery beliefs seemed to derail Washington's attempts to perpetuate a gradual ending to the practice of enslavement and theft of native land until the day he died.  

The many men who played a part in George Washington's election were schemers, thieves and conmen.  Gathering from his initial speech, Washington was somewhat aware of this and felt trapped by it.  In coming posts, we'll take a look at how these untrustworthy, greedy men used Washington as a pawn to control the American people and unite minorities to be duped into frauds like the National Bank, established by Alexander Hamilton, who was the direct cause of America's first financial crisis and the beginning of national debt.

Washington was a soft-spoken, kind and humble man who truly cared for the troops and the people he led, often willingly suffering immense hardships right alongside them.  George Washington was "chosen" by malicious and ambitious men because people trusted his simple nature.  He was honest, and in many respects, he was the "every man" of the time.  They knew people would unite behind him and this would further their own agendas.  His own wife had feared when he left to take the oath of presidency that she might never see him alive again.  He lived two years after he left office only to be killed at the hands of his physician.  As George Washington was an incredibly healthy and vibrant man, even for the time given his age, a conspiracy theorist might wonder if his death was indeed a cleverly disguised assassination or a case of medical malpractice as our high school history books suggested. Sources:  Smithsonian        National Park Service        Mount Vernon                History.com