May 7, 2002 - July 1, 2002
Cell phones, Laptops, Pagers and Congo's Coltan
Posted: Monday, July 1, 2002
Originally Published, January 21, 2002, ABC NEWS
DRC is home to 80% of the world's coltan reserves PHOTO: BBC
You may not have heard of coltan, but you have it in your cell phone, laptops, pagers and other electronic devices. It is important to everyday communication in the United States, but it is making the conflict in Congo more complicated.
What Is Coltan?
Columbite-tantalite — coltan for short — is a dull metallic ore found in major quantities in the eastern areas of Congo. When refined, coltan becomes metallic tantalum, a heat-resistant powder that can hold a high electrical charge. These properties make it a vital element in creating capacitors, the electronic elements that control current flow inside miniature circuit boards. Tantalum capacitors are used in almost all cell phones, laptops, pagers and many other electronics. The recent technology boom caused the price of coltan to skyrocket to as much as $400 a kilogram at one point, as companies such as Nokia and Sony struggled to meet demand.
How Is Coltan Mined?
Coltan is mined through a fairly primitive process similar to how gold was mined in California during the 1800s. Dozens of men work together digging large craters in streambeds, scraping away dirt from the surface in order to get to the coltan underground. The workers then slosh water and mud around in large washtubs, allowing the coltan to settle to the bottom due to its heavy weight. A good worker can produce one kilogram of coltan a day.
Coltan mining is very well paid in Congo terms. The average Congolese worker makes $10 a month, while a coltan miner can make anywhere from $10 to $50 a week.
Financing the Conflict
A highly controversial U.N. Security Council report recently outlined the alleged exploitation of natural resources, including coltan, from Congo by other countries involved in the current war. There are reports that forces from neighboring Rwanda, Uganda and Burundi are involved in smuggling coltan from Congo, using the revenues generated from the high price of coltan to sustain their efforts in the war. By one estimate, the Rwandan army made at least $250 million over a period of 18 months through the sale of coltan, even though no coltan is mined in Rwanda. All countries involved in the war deny exploiting Congo's natural resources.
Environmental Consequences
In order to mine for coltan, rebels have overrun Congo's national parks, clearing out large chunks of the area's lush forests. In addition, the poverty and starvation caused by the war have driven some miners and rebels to hunt the parks' endangered elephants and gorillas for food. In Kahuzi Biega National Park, for example, the gorilla population has been cut nearly in half, from 258 to 130.
Tracing the Source
The path that coltan takes to get from Central Africa to the world market is a highly convoluted one, with legitimate mining operations often being confused with illegal rebel operations, and vice versa, making it difficult to trace the origin. To be safe, in recent months many electronics companies have publicly rejected the use of coltan from anywhere in Central Africa, instead relying on their main suppliers in Australia. American-based Kemet, the world's largest maker of tantalum capacitors, has asked its suppliers to certify that their coltan ore does not come from Congo or bordering countries. But it may be a case of too little, too late. Much of the coltan illegally stolen from Congo is already in laptops, cell phones and electronics all over the world.
Congo War and the Role of Coltan - Natalie D. Ware
Congo's coltan rush - BBC
Printer friendly version
Send page by E-Mail
New legal battle to keep White Zimbabwe farming
Posted: Wednesday, June 26, 2002
(Guardian UK) Two white Zimbabwean farmers took the government to court yesterday in an effort to block its order that they abandon their farms. It was a test case closely watched by 3,000 others also facing eviction.
A 45-day countdown for the white farmers to leave their land began yesterday, but many vowed to stay put rather than watch crops rot in a country short of food.
Zimbabwe's Commercial Farmers' Union has not joined the action, but is keenly awaiting the outcome, which is expected on Friday.
The order was the latest shot in the government's battle to redistribute farms to landless black Zimbabweans. MORE
Printer friendly version
Send page by E-Mail
Rastafari Speaks!
Posted: Tuesday, June 25, 2002
( empresschantee )
Greetings in the name of His Imperial Majesty Emperor Haile Selassie I Jah Rastafari Holy Emmanuel I King Selassie I...John Marcus Mosiah Garvey I
Blessed my Lord and Empress!!!
Yes InI give thanx for the reasonings here on this message board. I give thanx for the bredren and sistren here and the knowledge and Wise-eye they share.
I have been observing this board for quite some time and I notice a lot of issues raised here. One thing I have noticed is Non-Africans trying to tell or "suggest" to Africans how they should think and all this "I'm not white, or black,(sometimes they throw in alien colors{purple, green}...lol I'm just human". Yeah that's easy for you to say. InI have never been thought of as human so we are proud to say we are Africans period. Don't come and try to REIGN on our parade. I ask you Non-Africans do you go to the Aryan Nation and tell them they shouldn't say "white power" or such??? Do you talk to people in your white neighborhoods, talk to your families and tell them the truth about the western mindest and they have been lied to as well??? DO your part..I am interested in knowing. Tell us to leave out some words and lets not think like that and lets do away with Black Supremacy. But you always compare Black Supremacy to White Supremacy and now using the reVERSED discrimination saying Africans are racist. I can only chuckle when I hear such a thing. In order for a person to be racist there are three main negative ingredients:
-(Power x Prejudice x Priviledge)=|-Racist|.
Sorry my dear Africans know they do not have all three. The most important is the priviledge. Ask any so called "big timer" African. They are still reminded of their color everytime. We do not have the privilegde to be racist no matter how much material wealth no matter how much prejudice.
Now if you take that same word and make it a positive vibration you will notice the suffix -ist
means to be a specialist in a specified art, science, or skill eg: biologist, pianist, anthropologist etc. So that means the noun(person) that's assoicated with the suffix dedicate there lives and achievements to their specialty, so if that means I dedicate my life to my RACE, then I am proud to be a racist.
With no apology!!! Every man/woman should be under their own vine and fig tree. This is not hate in any way, but the Western mindset cannot allow you to open up your minds and hearts. We also hear this chat about "let's move on and it was so long ago", why must InI do that?? So the same thing can happen again?? "And lets not talk about it". Why is it too much to swallow??? InI forgive but we will NEVER forget and your conscious will remind you of your deeds. That is the burden you MUST carry and we have our OWN as well. When InI chant Nyahbinghi InI chant downpression from white and black. We know there are some careless Africans and they will be addressed as well... EVERYTHING HAS ITS SEASON.
The InI RAStafari came to conquer with love and truth. So chant Rastafari chant !!!! Jah Rastafari!!!!! When AFRICA is set Free and all are FREE. And that goes for each race, tribe people and tongue.
There is more to be said and I won't hold the floor too long cuz I like to listen and get some spiritual food as well. So I leave with these seven words:
Emmanuel is love so let us love!!!
Holy Emmanuel I King Selassie I Jah Rastafari
Ethiopian Royal Sons and Dawtas
Princess Chantee
________________________________________________________
( ras adam simeon )
Rastafari DOES speak, but many can't seem to hear his words or selectively edit them to fit their agenda.
**********
Empress Chantee explained that there is no such thing as a black racist by the argument that"..In order for a person to be racist there are three main negative ingredients:
(Power x Prejudice x Priviledge)=|-Racist|.
Sorry my dear Africans know they do not have all three. The most important is the priviledge. Ask any so called "big timer" African. They are still reminded of their color everytime. We do not have the privilegde to be racist no matter how much material wealth no matter how much prejudice"
*******
The quote above about "ask big timers" is very true. a disguised oprah winfrey was trying to shop on 5th ave. the attendand locked the door when he saw her coming. She thought it was closed until she saw white customers enter without problem. Actor Blair Underwood is often pulled over for driving a nice car in his own neighborhood.
about people implying Afrikan rascists on this board, I think it's a matter semantics.People are misuing that term because they feel rasicm is one set of folks hating on another set based on race period.
I think the issues that people are trying to bring up are BIGOTRY, PREJUDICE and Generalizing a whole set of people, and these sentiments are falling under the umbrella of RACISM because race is at the root of these arguments.
This debate isnt going anywhere. Like palestinians and jews, ethiopians and eritreans, etc.. the sides may never get that we are all kinspeople. not sure why people can't get MLK's message to judge individuals by their character and need to lump and stereotype whole races as being this or that. good and bad come in every color. idi amin, jeff dahmer, chairman mao, etc..
How about we agree to fight downpression and downpressors?
no one is "erasing/whitewashing history" or "taking over",just beacuse they suggest people shouldn't make sweeping generalizations and
biased statements. If you are a rastafarian you dont have to dig too deep to read the words of Haile Selassie on world citizenship. anyone of any color is free to Praise JAH. PEACE,
________________________________________________________
( Ayinde )
I am in disagreement with what may be implied in parts of your contribution and I will explain what parts and why.
"This debate isnt going anywhere." (sic)
It may appear this way to some but as new people come to the board they express their views and engage the issue from their point of view. Some views are valid and some need proper responses. Once racism, gender discrimination and their offsprings, poverty (mentally and materially), crime and economic exploitation persist, then these discussions should be ongoing.
It is easy to say it isn't going anywhere because some are 'probably' looking at the repetition of the debate and fail to see the new posters who are now jumping into the debate. This Palestinian and Jews issue, the Ethiopia and Eritrea issues can be rationalized but there is no way all people would agree on anything because not all people can balance simultaneous ideas. People are at different stages of awareness so they will interpret to suit their awareness. That means the issues will have to be revisited time and time again as people grow in awareness.
No one tells a child the alphabet once and expects the child to get it. (I am not saying this is what you meant but I am defining my position.)
I have previously explained my position of generalizations. Generalizations are for simplifying discussions. Not all generalizations are bad. Whether the generalization is true or false should be of concern. A generalization is never about specifics or could it ever mean that every single one is the same. It speaks about the majority in the range of some people's experiences. It is only when people engage the discussion and relay their issues could they deal with specifics.
Often people are condemned for a generalization that is true and many times people make bad ones. So the distinction must be made.
The main point I strongly disagree with is the notion that people could put aside those issues and "fight downpression and downpressors" (sic)
The issue of racism and gender discrimination is at the root of the oppression. It is about attitudes and 'power' play. So if one tries to address oppressive issues and neglect examining the attitudes of ones who claim to be on your side in the fight, you might find that you are sleeping with the enemy. That is the reason most struggles do not resolve disputes. People do not take the time to examine the character of people they align themselves with and examining attitudes along racial and gender lines are about discerning character. It is impossible to discern the character of someone without discussing racial and gender issues.
Very often people come with the 'one love' talk and after a while one quickly finds they do not have a clue about love or respect. They are simply massaging egos for attention. So in keeping with your premise about judging people based on character, sensible ones will have to test awareness on race and gender issues to ensure we are not inadvertently promoting an oppressor.
There is no agreement until there is proper respect to all of our history and the emulation of the best human values. Simply saying we are one human race never solved anything. Getting to the root of the attitudes is about building on a more solid foundation
.
Racism is a European invention and they openly promoted it and continue to this day so I find it funny that people want the discussions on the effect of it to be buried by some notion that it would get us nowhere. It is not as if proper African history is in the mainstream media and in schools to correct the misrepresentations. There is still a fight to bring these issues and discussions mainstream. So the debate must continue so new ones can test their awareness and learn from others who have learned.
All of this is about Rastafari. It is about each one teaching one and getting away from cosmetics and dealing with the hard nerve racking issues to bring about greater awareness.
I AM NOT SAYING THAT YOU IMPLIED ALL THAT I DISAGREE WITH.
But I felt to add my views.
________________________________________________________
( ras adam simeon )
Greetings,
wow. a very thoughtful post.
Thank you. i respect what you wrote and just wanted to clarify that when i typed the race debate is going nowhere. i meant it should still be on the table, in other words; it's not going anywhere(away) fast, is what i meant. not, its at a stale mate. but when i typed about middle east mess. i see do see a stale mate with the sides saying the same things over and over and not much concilliation(sp) to bend, so it reminded me of the race threads on this board sometimes. also by saying i think we should fight oppression + oppresors of all colors, that was not meant as a colorblind panacea that wipes away all racial problems.again i was trying to point out that there are wicked folks of every color out there doing dirty works not just whitey. you said we generalize for simplification reasons and i agree, but i think it can be very damning.
Anyway i appreciate your response. That is what i call intelligent + well written reasoning. respect to you. a sim
Printer friendly version
Send page by E-Mail
Turmoil fuels plunder of African 'Garden of Eden'
Posted: Monday, June 24, 2002
By John Kamau, herald.co.zw
Anthropologist Jacque Dimarosimana watched as women cradling bundles of firewood emerged from southern Madagascar’s Toliara forest.
Some few yards down the once-paved road, a large section of the forest had been cleared by charcoal dealers who were now packing the content into gunny sacks, ready for the 450-kilometre journey north-east to Antananarivo, the capital of this Indian Ocean island nation.
Charcoal made of hardwood from Madagascar’s famed forests has become the only source of energy for millions of people in a nation whose only oil refinery remains closed and where fuel paraffin has run dry — driving the fuel business underground.
To make matters worse, a power struggle between newly elected President Marc Ravalomanana and former president Didier Ratsiraka has engulfed the island in a political crisis since January. The rivalry has split the nation.
"If this crisis continues," Dimarosimana warns, "the spiny forests (of south Madagascar) will be lost for good."
Attempts to unite the political rivals and form a government of national unity have yet to bear fruit, although Ravalomanana made a gesture of reconciliation by dissolving the government on 16 June, with talk of being more inclusive with the opposition.
Ratsiraka, meanwhile, fled to France in early June as sporadic fighting flared across the island’s northern peninsula.
With fear of political violence running high in Antananarivo, those who can are packing their bags. Jean Habrokurouhou left his job as a clerical officer at the defence ministry and travelled south to his home village of Andranamaitso, some 12 km east of Toliara town.
"I have to be near my family," he said.
Every morning, the father of four boys enters Toliara forest to check his kilns, where hardwood from Madagascan forests is burned until it becomes charcoal.
The wood is arranged in these kilns and covered with leaves and soil. A fire is lit through a tiny opening at the bottom. Smoke escapes from another opening on top.
These openings allow the right amount of airflow — if there’s a leak, the wood could burn too fast or unevenly.
These charcoal kilns have now become a source of livelihood for Habrokurouhou’s family — one gunny sack fetches US$3 in his village, or as much as US$12 in the capital.
When asked about the long-term implications of forest destruction, he replies: "We have to eat; the next generation will take care of itself."
With every gunny sack that is filled, south Madagascar’s forests are slowly giving in to wanton destruction by both charcoal dealers and farmers who practice the traditional slash-and-burn farming methods.
"Madagascar will slowly bleed to its death," warns Racas Funtalorinana, a 25-year-old activist with a local environmental group.
Southern Madagascar is famous for impenetrable thickets of weirdly adapted succulents, cactus plants and bloated giant baobabs.
Its rich collection of plants and animals is one of the many tourist attractions on this island.
Far from netting profits from tourism, it is the poverty that sticks amid the surrounding beauty — like the hundreds of tombs that dot Madagascar’s hilltops.
Although Madagascar has one of the most unique ecosystems in the world, poverty and political uncertainty remain the new threats as thousands of villagers invade the forests in search of ever more fuel wood and agricultural land.
"Politicians are pushing this country into an abyss," Dimarosimana says.
With as many as 90 per cent of the people on the island subsisting directly on income from the land, and a per capita annual income of US$300, environmentalists here say that the country’s rulers will find it increasingly difficult in coming years to maintain such unsustainable livelihoods.
"The fate of the people and the forest are inextricably linked but the people do not know this," says Racas Funtalorinana of the Madagascar Environment Trust.
"The people want to be able to support themselves and better their lives. But at the moment there is growing temptation to cut down the forests in this lawlessness."
Scientists estimate that in the southern Madagascar province of Fianarantosoa alone there are 200 000 plus species of plants and animals that are found nowhere else on earth.
"Madagascar is an ecological Garden of Eden," says Adan Erow, a Canadian researcher.
"But all these cannot last a lifetime with all the poverty in this nation and if the current crisis continues."
Erow has been studying the adaptation of the white Sifaka lemur, a primate found only in Madagascar — in one of the poorest and most environmentally challenged parts of the country.
If the crisis gets out of hand, he says, Madagascar could go the Congo way — where too environmental poachers targetted forests and other natural resources.
He thumbs through a local Catholic newspaper La Kroan’i Madagasikara. The editorial was catchy. It said: "Time to be pessimistic."
Everybody in Madagascar is these days.
Madagascar may be a geological and ecological wonderland (it snapped from mainland Africa some 180 million years ago), but as the crisis continues there is only one option before its 16 million people. As one villager said, "It is survival." — Gemini News.
JOHN KAMAU is the editor of Nairobi-based Rights Features Service.
Reproduced from: http://www.herald.co.zw/index.php?id=11545&pubdate=2002-06-24
Printer friendly version
Send page by E-Mail
Farm Shutdown Looms In Zimbabwe
Posted: Monday, June 24, 2002
HARARE, Zimbabwe (AP) - With Zimbabwe facing a potentially devastating hunger crisis, nearly 3,000 white commercial farmers faced a deadline Monday to immediately forfeit their farms, some of which still had crops in the fields.
Under the government's "fast track" land seizure program to redistribute White-owned farms to landless blacks, about 2,900 farmers faced a midnight deadline to cease all farming activities, said Jenni Williams, a spokeswoman for the Commercial Farmers Union.
With hundreds of other farms already seized, about 95 percent of the nation's more than 4,000 white farmers would be out of business after the deadline passed, Williams said. MORE
Printer friendly version
Send page by E-Mail
A Look at the Myth of Reverse Racism
Posted: Monday, June 24, 2002
By Tim Wise
Recently, when speaking to a group of high school students, I was asked why I only seemed to be concerned about white racism towards people of color. We had been discussing racial slurs, and a number of white students wondered why I didn’t get as upset about blacks using terms like “honky” or “cracker,” as I did about whites using words like “nigger.”
Although such an issue may seem trivial in the larger scheme of things—especially given the more significant discussions about racism in the educational system that I had hoped to engage in that day—the challenge posed by the students was actually an important one. In fact, it allowed a discussion about the very essence of what racism is and how it operates.
On the one hand, of course, such slurs are quite obviously inappropriate and offensive, and ought not to be used. That said, I pointed out that even the mention of the words “honky” and “cracker” had elicited laughter; and not only from the black students in attendance, but also from other whites.
The words are so silly, so juvenile, so utterly pathetic that they hardly qualify as racial slurs at all, let alone slurs on a par with those that have been historically deployed against people of color.
The lack of symmetry between a word like honky and a slur such as “nigger” was made apparent in an old Saturday Night Live skit, with Chevy Chase and guest, Richard Pryor.
In the skit, Chase and Pryor face one another and trade off racial epithets during a segment of Weekend Update. Chase calls Pryor a “porch monkey.” Pryor responds with “honky.” Chase ups the ante with “jungle bunny.” Pryor, unable to counter with a more vicious slur against whites, responds with “honky, honky.” Chase then trumps all previous slurs with “nigger,” to which Pryor responds: “dead honky.”
The line elicits laughs all around, but also makes clear, at least implicitly that when it comes to racial antilocution, people of color are limited in the repertoire of slurs they can use against whites, and even the ones of which they can avail themselves sound more comic than hateful. The impact of hearing the antiblack slurs in the skit was of a magnitude unparalleled by hearing Pryor say “honky” over and over again.
As a white person I always saw terms like honky or cracker as evidence of how much more potent white racism was than any variation on the theme practiced by the black or brown.
When a group of people has little or no power over you institutionally, they don’t get to define the terms of your existence, they can’t limit your opportunities, and you needn’t worry much about the use of a slur to describe you and yours, since, in all likelihood, the slur is as far as it’s going to go. What are they going to do next: deny you a bank loan? Yeah, right.
So whereas “nigger” was and is a term used by whites to dehumanize blacks, to imply their inferiority, to “put them in their place” if you will, the same cannot be said of honky: after all, you can’t put white people in their place when they own the place to begin with.
Power is like body armor. And while not all white folks have the same degree of power, there is a very real extent to which all of us have more than we need vis-à-vis people of color: at least when it comes to racial position, privilege and perceptions.
Consider poor whites. To be sure, they are less financially powerful than wealthy people of color. But that misses the point of how racial privilege operates within a class system.
Within a class system, people tend to compete for “stuff” against others of their same basic economic status. In other words, rich and poor are not competing for the same homes, bank loans, jobs, or even educations to a large extent. Rich competes against rich, working class against working class and poor against poor. And in those competitions racial privilege most certainly attaches.
Poor whites are rarely typified as pathological, dangerous, lazy or shiftless the way poor blacks are, for example. Nor are they demonized the way poor Latino/a immigrants tend to be.
When politicians want to scapegoat welfare recipients they don’t pick Bubba and Crystal from some Appalachian trailer park; they choose Shawonda Jefferson from the Robert Taylor Homes, with her seven children.
And according to reports from a number of states, ever since so-called welfare reform, white recipients have been treated far better by caseworkers, are less likely to be bumped off the rolls for presumed failure to comply with new regulations, and have been given far more assistance at finding new jobs than their black or brown counterparts.
Poor whites are more likely to have a job, tend to earn more than poor people of color, and are even more likely to own their own home. Indeed, whites with incomes under $13,000 annually are more likely to own their own home than blacks with incomes that are three times higher due to having inherited property.
None of this is to say that poor whites aren’t being screwed eight ways to Sunday by an economic system that relies on their immiseration: they are. But they nonetheless retain a certain “one-up” on equally poor or even somewhat better off people of color thanks to racism.
It is that one-up that renders the potency of certain prejudices less threatening than others. It is what makes cracker or honky less problematic than any of the slurs used so commonly against the black and brown.
In response to all this, skeptics might say that people of color can indeed exercise power over whites, at least by way of racially-motivated violence. Such was the case, for example, this week in New York City where a black man shot two whites and one Asian-Pacific Islander before being overpowered. Apparently he announced that he wanted to kill white people, and had hoped to set a wine bar on fire to bring such a goal to fruition.
There is no doubt his act was one of racial bigotry, and that to those he was attempting to murder his power must have seemed quite real. Yet there are problems with claiming that this “power” proves racism from people of color is just as bad as the reverse.
First, racial violence is also a power whites have, so the power that might obtain in such a situation is hardly unique to non-whites, unlike the power to deny a bank loan for racial reasons, to "steer" certain homebuyers away from living in “nicer" neighborhoods, or to racially profile in terms of policing. Those are powers that can only be exercised by the more dominant group as a practical and systemic matter.
Additionally, the "power" of violence is not really power at all, since to exercise it, one has to break the law and subject themselves to probable legal sanction.
Power is much more potent when it can be deployed without having to break the law to do it, or when doing it would only risk a small civil penalty at worst. So discrimination in lending, though illegal is not going to result in the perp going to jail; so too with employment discrimination or racial profiling.
There are plenty of ways that more powerful groups can deploy racism against less powerful groups without having to break the law: by moving away when too many of "them" move in (which one can only do if one has the option of moving without having to worry about discrimination in housing.)
Or one can discriminate in employment but not be subjected to penalty, so long as one makes the claim that the applicant of color was "less qualified," even though that determination is wholly subjective and rarely scrutinized to see if it was determined accurately, as opposed to being a mere proxy for racial bias. In short, it is institutional power that matters most.
Likewise, it’s the difference in power and position that has made recent attempts by American Indian activists in Colorado to turn the tables on white racists so utterly ineffective.
Indian students at Northern Colorado University, fed up by the unwillingness of white school district administrators in Greeley to change the name and grotesque Indian caricature of the Eaton High School “Reds,” recently set out to flip the script on the common practice of mascot-oriented racism.
Thinking they would show white folks what it’s like to “be in their shoes” and experience the objectification of being a team icon, indigenous members of an intramural basketball team renamed themselves the “Fightin’ Whiteys,” and donned t-shirts with the team mascot: a 1950’s-style caricature of a suburban, middle class white guy, next to the phrase “every thang’s gonna be all white.”
Funny though the effort was, it has not only failed to make the point intended, but indeed has been met with laughter and even outright support by white folks. Rush Limbaugh actually advertised for the team’s t-shirts on his radio program, and whites from coast to coast have been requesting team gear, thinking it funny to be turned into a mascot, as opposed to demeaning.
Of course the difference is that it’s tough to negatively objectify a group whose power and position allows them to define the meaning of another group’s attempts at humor: in this case the attempt by Indians to teach them a lesson. It’s tough to school the headmaster, in other words.
Objectification works against the disempowered because they are disempowered. The process doesn’t work in reverse, or at least, making it work is a lot tougher than one might think.
Turning Indians into mascots has been offensive precisely because it is a continuation of the dehumanization of such persons over many centuries; the perpetuation of the mentality of colonization and conquest.
It is not as if one group—whites—merely chose to turn another group—Indians—into mascots. Rather, it is that one group, whites, have consistently viewed Indians as less than fully human, as savage, as “wild,” and have been able to not merely portray such imagery on athletic banners and uniforms, but in history books and literature more crucially.
In the case of the students at Northern, they would need to be a lot more acerbic in their appraisal of whites, in order for their attempts at “reverse racism” to make the point intended. After all, “fightin” is not a negative trait in the eyes of most white folks, and the 1950’s iconography chosen for the uniforms was unlikely to be seen as that big a deal.
Perhaps if they had settled on “slave-owning whiteys,” or “murdering whiteys,” or “land-stealing whiteys,” or “smallpox-giving-on-purpose whiteys,” or “Native-people-butchering whiteys,” or “mass raping whiteys,” the point would have been made.
And instead of a smiling “company man” logo, perhaps a Klansman, or skinhead as representative of the white race: now that would have been a nice functional equivalent of the screaming Indian warrior. But see, you gotta go strong to turn the tables on the man, and ironic sarcasm just ain’t gonna get it nine times out of ten.
Without the power to define another group’s reality, Indian activists are simply incapable of turning the tables by way of well-placed humor.
Simply put, what separates white racism from any other form, and what makes anti-black, anti-brown, anti-yellow, or anti-red humor more biting and more dangerous than its anti-white equivalent is the ability of the former to become lodged in the minds of and perceptions of the citizenry.
White perceptions are what end up counting in a white-dominated society. If whites say Indians are savages (be they of the “noble” or vicious type), then by God, they’ll be seen as savages. If Indians say whites are mayonnaise-eating Amway salespeople, who the hell is going to care? If anything, whites will simply turn it into a marketing opportunity. When you have the power, you can afford to be self-deprecating, after all.
The day that someone produces a newspaper ad that reads: “Twenty honkies for sale today: good condition, best offer accepted,” or “Cracker to be lynched tonight: whistled at black woman,” then perhaps I’ll see the equivalence of these slurs with the more common type to which we’ve grown accustomed.
When white churches start getting burned down by militant blacks who spray paint “kill the honkies” on the sidewalks outside, then maybe I’ll take seriously these concerns over “reverse racism.”
Until then, I guess I’ll find myself laughing at the thought of another old Saturday Night Live skit: this time with Garrett Morris as a convict in the prison talent show who sings:
Gonna get me a shotgun and kill all the whiteys I see. Gonna get me a shotgun and kill all the whiteys I see. And once I kill all the whiteys I see Then whitey he won’t bother me Gonna get me a shotgun and kill all the whiteys I see.
Sorry, but it just isn’t the same.
Tim Wise is an anti-racist essayist, activist and lecturer. He can be reached at timjwise@msn.com
Printer friendly version
Send page by E-Mail
"Nepad, no thanks," say African progressives
Posted: Thursday, June 20, 2002
By Patrick Bond ZMag
South African president Thabo Mbeki made the cover page of the international edition of Time magazine in early June, with the misleading heading: `He has finally faced up to the AIDS crisis and is now leading the charge for a new African development plan. Will the rich world listen?'
Mbeki's opportunity for a day-long hearing at the G8 meeting at the end of June in Kananaskis, Canada, will centre around requested annual commitments of US$64 billion in aid, loans and investments. Anticapitalist demonstrators massing in Calgary and Ottawa will be told by the G8 and Canadian press that they must not worry anymore about corporate globalisation's flaws and can go home now, because Mbeki is here to ensure Africa ends its `marginalisation' from international capitalism.
But is the plan--the New Partnership for Africa's Development (Nepad)--really a `new framework of interaction with the rest of the world... based on the agenda set by African peoples through their own initiatives and of their own volition, to shape their own destiny'--as claimed in the base document (http://www.nepad.org)?
Or is it a sell-out of Africa's legitimate aspirations for social, environmental and economic justice?
And even if a case can be made that it is the former, can it work? Have anybody or any organisations aside from a few ruling elites and their international capitalist allies and backroom technocrats been party to its authorship? What do Mbeki's meanderings on AIDS tell us about the nature of partnership, and of Africa’s ability to confront its holocaust-scale challenge?
`We do not want the old partnership of a rider and a horse,' Mbeki insisted in mid-June when Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi criticised Nepad for its obeisance to `former colonisers and racists.'
Gaddafi may have money to bail out both the African Union—formerly the Organisation of African Unity--in the run-up to its July launch, as well as his bankrupt continental allies who include Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe, a Nepad spoiler due to debt default, retreat from structural adjustment, malgovernance and the stolen presidential election in March.
Mbeki and Nigerian leader Olusegun Obasanjo, the plan’s two main backers, are considered disingenuous for `talking left’ on human rights and democracy, while `acting right,’ by endorsing Mugabe’s election as `legitimate’ so as to maintain unity amongst African rulers.
Transcending the distractions of venal nationalists like Mugabe, Africa's progressive movements and intellectuals are uniting in anger mainly because Mbeki’s plan surrenders so much terrain to the international structural power relationships which are responsible for Africa’s last quarter-century of social dislocation, economic austerity and deindustrialisation, ecological degradation and state fragmentation.
Nepad evolved under conditions of smoke-filled-room secrecy, in close contact with Bill Clinton and Tony Blair (several times during 2000), the G8 (in Okinawa in 2000 and Genoa in 2001), the Bretton Woods Institutions (in repeated meetings) and international capital (at Davos in 2001). As a result, the plan denies the rich contributions of African social struggles in its very genesis. Instead, it empowers transnational corporations, Northern donor agency technocrats, Washington financial agencies, Geneva trade bureaucrats, machiavellian Pretoria geopoliticians and Johannesburg capitalists, in a coy mix of imperialism and South African subimperialism.
Critical conclusions such as these have come from more than a dozen major consultations within and between social movements and intellectuals across the continent, beginning in January with the African Social Forum's summit in Bamako, Mali (many statements are collected at http://www.aidc.org.za).
The first public protest against Nepad occurred in early June, at the World Economic Forum’s Southern African regional meeting in Durban, where anti-apartheid poet Dennis Brutus--now acting secretary of Jubilee South Africa--led more than a hundred nonviolent demonstrators against horse-charging policemen. Brutus held up a sign for national television viewers: `No Kneepad!' and gave Pretoria a taste of protests that will grow in coming months (http://southafrica.indymedia.org).
The main concern is Mbeki’s promotion of the failed neoliberalism of free market economic policies. Nepad's slippery premise is that poverty in Africa can be cured, if only the world elite gives the continent a chance: `The continued marginalisation of Africa from the globalisation process and the social exclusion of the vast majority of its peoples constitute a serious threat to global stability... We readily admit that globalisation is a product of scientific and technological advances, many of which have been market-driven... The locomotive for these major advances is the highly industrialised nations.'
All of these arguments are better put by reversing the logic. Africa's continued poverty (`marginalisation') is a direct outcome of excess globalisation, not of insufficient globalisation, because of the drain from ever declining prices of raw materials (Africa’s main exports), crippling debt repayments and profit repatriation to transnational corporations.
Technology lubricates but does not cause international economic dynamics. The advanced capitalist economies have witnessed substantially lower profits and growth since the mid-1970s, compared to the 1950s-60s, and the dot.com craze is only one indication of technology's failure to resolve intrinsic capitalist crisis tendencies.
As a result, the main organisations of the African left, including women's groups which know very well who must pay the bill, are expressing skepticism about Nepad's main strategies:
• privatisation, especially of infrastructure such as water, electricity, telcoms and transport, will fail because of the insufficient buying power of most African consumers;
• more insertion of Africa into the world economy will simply worsen fast-declining terms of trade, given that African countries produce so many cash-crop and minerals whose global markets are glutted;
• multi-party elections are held, typically, between variants of neoliberal parties, and cannot substitute for the genuine democracy required to restore legitimacy to so many failing African states;
• grand visions of information and communications technology are hopelessly unrealistic considering the lack of simple reliable electricity across the continent; and
• South Africa's self-mandate for peace-keeping provides no peace of mind, in the wake of Pretoria's ongoing purchase of US$5 billion worth of offensive weaponry and its unhappy record of regional military interventions.
As for economic aspirations, such as lower foreign debt, more stable capital financial flows and increased foreign investment, Mbeki offers only the status quo.
Instead of promoting full and immediate debt cancellation, as do virtually all serious reformers, the Nepad strategy is to `support existing poverty reduction initiatives at the multilateral level, such as the Comprehensive Development Framework of the World Bank and the Poverty Reduction Strategy approach linked to the Highly Indebted Poor Country debt relief initiative.' Jubilee South labels these a `cruel hoax’ and even the World Bank now concedes its HIPC plan has failed to make Africa’s foreign debt `sustainable.’
Only after implementing these discredited strategies, replete with neoliberal conditions such as further privatisation, can African leaders `seek recourse' through Nepad. Malawi's worsening starvation, due to a famine amplified when the country's grain stocks were sold thanks to International Monetary Fund `advice’ to first repay commercial bankers, is emblematic, and so extreme that even that wretched country’s leaders are publicly blaming the IMF.
When it comes to other financial flows, speculative `hot-money' investments in emerging markets such as South Africa have harmed not helped the vast majority. And most foreign loans over the past thirty years have detracted from local capital accumulation, because they have allied corrupt African state elites with foreign bankers who drain the continent by facilitating capital flight. Nepad calls for more of each.
Nepad's solution to foreign investment drought includes `Public-Private Partnerships' in privatised infrastructure: `Establish and nurture PPPs as well as grant concessions towards the construction, development and maintenance of ports, roads, railways and maritime transportation... With the assistance of sector-specialised agencies, put in place policy and legislative frameworks to encourage competition.'
But most infrastructure is of a `natural monopoly' type, for which competition is unsuitable: roads and railroads, telephone land lines, water and sewage reticulation systems, electricity transmission, ports and the like. Nepad cannot make a case for competition in these areas. There is, in contrast, an extremely strong case, based on `public-good' features of infrastructure, for state control and non-profit operation. Most noticeably, privatisation of infrastructure usually prevents the cross-subsidisation required to serve poor consumers, especially women-headed households.
Finally, Nepad is at its most self-contradictory when appealing `to all the peoples of Africa, in all their diversity, to become aware of the seriousness of the situation and the need to mobilise themselves in order to put an end to further marginalisation of the continent and ensure its development by bridging the gap with the developed countries.'
The hypocrisy is breathtaking. Africans falling further into poverty as a result of leadership compradorism and globalisation do not need to `become aware of the seriousness of the situation,' as much as do the elite rulers who generally live in luxury, at great distance from the masses. And when progressive Africans express `the need to mobilise themselves,' they are nearly invariably met with repression.
Pretoria's own practice in all these regards--repaying apartheid debt, allowing speculative finance and capital flight to wreck the currency, privatising basic services like water and electricity at great social cost (especially damage to public health and the standards of living of women, the youth, elderly and HIV+ people), and meting out repression to those who object--are reminders of the fact that Nepad is being tried at home, and isn't working.
As for `mobilising,' Nepad does not mention the mass civil-society protests that threw off the yokes of slavery, colonialism, apartheid and dictatorships. Those protests are increasingly turning against Pretoria's neoliberal, subimperialist agenda.
One burst of activism occurred in May, when thousands of Treatment Action Campaign supporters went to the South African Constitutional Court to make the case that the country's five million HIV+ people have a human right to anti-retroviral medicines.
On May 2, just two weeks after Mbeki's cabinet announced an alleged U-turn on AIDS medication policy, the government’s defense in the court case rested upon denying that AIDS drugs could help due to the canard of toxicity. Still today, the SA Department of Health continues prevaricating on AIDS treatment, including inexpensive nevirapine for pregnant women--to prevent transmission to their babies--and rape survivors.
If Mbeki told a jejune Time journalist that he has `finally faced up to the AIDS crisis,' that reporter missed abundant evidence of the president's continuing denialism, such as the recent circulation to African National Congress branches of a 114 page dissident rant allegedly drafted by the late Peter Mokaba, but with Mbeki’s embedded signature on the formatted Word document and quotes by Mbeki’s favourite poet, Yeats (see http://www.mg.co.za).
Following the G8 meeting, at which George W. Bush, Jean Chretien, Tony Blair and the rest will seek legitimacy for more trade and financial liberalisation by fronting their plans with Nepad, African progressives will have two important opportunities to make a different case to the local and global public. In early July, the African Union will be launched in Durban, with Mbeki as chairperson in 2002-03. In late August, the UN World Summit on Sustainable Development convenes in Johannesburg's plush Sandton suburb, with Nepad.already serving as a key chapter in the Chairman’s Text (http://www.johannesburgsummit.org).
At all these elite events, progressives will protest neoliberalism, imperialism, global ecological degradation and other manifestations of what even Mbeki terms `global apartheid.’ They will argue that the alternatives to Nepad, like South Africa’s own Freedom Charter (1955) and the Reconstruction and Development Programme (1994) in previous eras, are to be found embedded not in Western free market ideology, but in the struggles of Africans for a thorough-going transformation of society that ultimately breaks, not shines, the chains of apartheid.
(Bond is editor of a new book, Fanon's Warning: A Civil Society Reader on Nepad, available internationally through Africa World Press at http://www.africanworld.com)
Reproduced from:
http://www.zmag.org/
Printer friendly version
Send page by E-Mail
Zimbabwe puts UK ambassador under surveillance
Posted: Tuesday, June 18, 2002
HARARE (Reuters) - Zimbabwe has placed British ambassador Brian Donnelly under surveillance over accusations that he is co-ordinating efforts to overthrow President Robert Mugabe, government officials say.
The officials, including the chief police spokesman, confirmed an article printed on Saturday in the government-controlled Herald newspaper reporting that Donnelly had been placed on 24-hour surveillance by security agents for "activities to undermine the legitimate government of President Mugabe".
Britain's Foreign and Commonwealth Office said the allegations against Donnelly, who was posted to Zimbabwe a year ago from Belgrade, were false. MORE
Printer friendly version
Send page by E-Mail
Genocide of African-Colombians
Posted: Sunday, June 2, 2002
by Willie Thompson, Jun 02, 2002
Choco, Colombia, South America, is the ancestral home of 18 million poor and marginalized African Colombians. On May 2, 302 people, 32 percent of the population of Bellavista, a town in Choco of more than 800 people, were killed, wounded or disappeared. Four other massacres have been committed against these small internally displaced African Colombians - at La Mejor Esquina, Machuca, El Naya and Baudo. These massacres reaffirm the charges by African Colombians that they have been targeted for physical and cultural genocide.
The Unified African Colombian Movement, in an email on May 9, says that the current massacre of African Colombians is related to the "massive abduction of women and men from Africa to be enslaved in the Americas." The enslavement of our ancestors, the report continues, "was one of the most abominable violations of human rights. ... Enslavement violated the right to life, to liberty, to the family, to sexuality, to religion and to the exercise of our right to think freely for ourselves."
The Movement believes that the world is witnessing the extermination of African Colombians, emphasizing that the "barbarities committed against civil society and the holocaust at Bojaya are historical war crimes that damage the consciousness and human dignity." This is a clear allusion to the United Nations' Final Resolution and Plan of Action that makes crimes against humanity actionable under the U.N. Charter.
These acts as well as the social and economic conditions of the African Colombians, which are worse now, 150 years after enslavement ended, deserve to be repudiated by the national and international communities. The Unified African Colombian Movement invited all institutions and the social and political groups throughout the country to convene on May 8, 2002, to demand an end to violence and the exclusion of the African Colombian population from the armed conflict. Further, the Movement demands that the United Nations Human Rights Commission against Racism be invited to Colombia.
A second email from an African Colombian about the massacre in Colombia states, "We have repeatedly asked the Congressional Black Caucus to collaborate with us and help us by dismantling Plan Colombia as an apparatus of war and to make greater social investments, especially in the most critical sectors." Plan Colombia is a multi-billion dollar United States aid package to Colombia which goes mostly to the anti-African Colombian military and paramilitary,
"We hope this year," continues the report from an African Colombian professional, "that we are able to attend the meeting of the Congressional Black Caucus (in September 2002) in order to expose the desperate situation in which we live. As leaders, members of civil societies, academics, artists and sports persons, we expect more than solidarity and compromise."
This message ends in tears: "Dear Willie, forgive my language today, but my tears gush forth from the futility of our protest. We survive day by day."
African Colombian leaders meeting recently in Bogota, Colombia, declared 2002 the year for African Colombian unity. They are demonstrating to their country and the international community that African Colombians can work together, that they agree on the proposals for meeting the needs of the African Colombian community and that their differences will be dealt with by themselves.
Most African Colombians live in the green and hot regions of the coast and the inter-Andean valleys. Two of the principal areas are the Caribbean region, including Guajira, Magdalena, Atlantico, Bolivar, Cordoba, Antioquia and the islands of San Andres and Providencia, and the Pacific Coast, including Choco and the Coastal Zones of the Departamiento del Valle del Cauca, Cauca and Narino. (See "El Negro en Colombia" by Alquilles Escalante, July 1964, Sociology Faculty of the National University of Colombia.)
This becomes important because of the violence that has been taking place in Colombia since about 1946, when the Conservative Party halted the liberal land and other reforms of the 1930s. The violence has taken 200,000 lives, and 2 million Colombians have emigrated or been displaced, according to the Spring 2002 edition of Inside CLAS, a publication of UC Berkeley’s Center for Latin American Studies.
The CLAS publication also quotes Mary Roldan, professor of history at Cornell, whose research established that African Colombians are concentrated in areas neighboring Antioquia. Antioquia itself, Roldan says, which was hard hit by violence from 1946 to 1957, is a wealthy population center. It self identifies as "white and hard working, legitimately married, religiously devout and politically conservative." The peripheral area, which includes Choco, is identified by others as racially inferior to the Antioquian "white ideal." This is the area of Bellavista where the Catholic church was bombed on May 2, killing, wounding and scattering 302 African Colombians
Enslaved African Colombians mined the gold and silver and produced the agricultural products of Colombia. It was said that much smaller groups of Africans were more useful in mining than 1,500 Indians. According to Escalante (page 121), half-nude Blacks lashed by the enslaver’s whip were the base of the colonial economy.
Today, says Professor Roldan, the extractive industries of logging, gold mining and oil, plus capital intensive cattle ranching and commercial agriculture, are concentrated in the towns peripheral to Antioquia. In addition, Antioquia’s access to the Caribbean Sea and the Magdelana River are through the peripheral towns.
These towns have had little investment from the government. Having no police, army or customs officers, they suffer violence at the hands of armed bands hired by both liberals and conservative extremists. The bands prey on workers and poor settlers. Certain sectors of the regional government spearhead violence to achieve political control over historically uncooperative and politically left-leaning populations, Inside CLAS reports (page 12). They deploy police and paramilitary forces to remove locally elected authorities from office and recalcitrant populations from strategic areas.
Liberal groups or guerillas have come to resist the increasing number of official and paramilitary forces. In Western and Eastern Antioquia, state agents or paramilitary groups, endorsed by regional governments, instigate local disorder.
Sociology Professor Emeritus Willie Thompson, a member of the Program Council of KPFA Radio 94.1 FM and the Malcolm X Chapter of N’COBRA, is on the steering committee for the Millions for Reparations March in Washington, D.C., on Aug. 17.
Printer friendly version
Send page by E-Mail
Guardian reporter sent for trial in Harare
Posted: Friday, May 31, 2002
by David Pallister
The Guardian
The Guardian's Zimbabwe correspondent, Andrew Meldrum, and a local reporter were yesterday the first journalists to be sent for trial under President Robert Mugabe's draconian new media law which carries penalties of up to two years in jail.
Harare magistrate Joyce Negonde said Mr Meldrum, a US citizen, would stand trial on June 12 and Lloyd Mudiwa, of the Daily News, on June 20. They are charged under the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act with publishing "falsehoods".
They are among 12 journalists charged under the act since it came into force 10 weeks ago. Bornwell Chakaodza, the editor of the independent Standard, has been charged on five separate occasions.
Critics of the law - which makes it an offence to get any facts in a story wrong, however trivial - have protested that it is really about muzzling the press and suppressing dissent.
The case against Mr Meldrum and Mr Mudiwa originated from a story run in the Daily News and the Guardian about allegations that Mr Mugabe's vigilante supporters had beheaded a woman. Although the Daily News apologised to the ruling Zanu-PF after failing to find a grave, the woman's body has since been found.
Neither journalist spoke after yesterday's hearing. Their lawyer Beatrice Mtetwa said: "We are happy the state has finally set a date and we hope we can prove our case that the state is being vindictive with these prosecutions."
Printer friendly version
Send page by E-Mail
War vets leader arrested
Posted: Friday, May 17, 2002
By Lovemore Mataire
THE Zimbabwe National Liberation War Veterans Association secretary for projects Andrew Ndlovu was on Wednesday arrested for allegedly threatening members of the Indian community to leave their properties or risk eviction.
At least twelve other rogue war veterans who were allegedly working in cahoots with the war veterans’ leader were also nabbed as police intensify efforts to ensure peace and order in the post-presidential election period.
In an interview with The Herald yesterday, the Minister of Home Affairs, Cde John Nkomo said people should not take advantage of the Government’s land reform programme to pursue their own personal agendas. MORE
Printer friendly version
Send page by E-Mail
Defining Democracy Down
Posted: Sunday, May 12, 2002
By Tim Wise
Webster’s New World Dictionary defines democracy as, among other things, “the principle of equality of rights, opportunity and treatment, or the practice of this principle.” Keep this in mind, as we’ll be coming back to it shortly. Now, imagine that the United States were to abolish our Constitution, or perhaps had never had one to begin with. No Bill of Rights. No guarantees of things like free speech, freedom of assembly and due process of law. And imagine that Congress were to pass a law stating that the U.S. was from this point forward to be legally defined as a Christian nation. As such, Christians would be given special privileges for jobs, loans, and land ownership. Furthermore, political candidates espousing certain beliefs--especially those who might argue that we should be a nation with equal rights for all, and not a “Christian nation”--were no longer allowed to hold office. And imagine that next month, new laws were passed that restricted certain ethnic and religious groups from acquiring land in particular parts of the country, and made it impossible for members of ethnic minorities to hold certain jobs, or live in particular communities. And imagine that in response to perceived threats to our nation’s internal security, new laws sailed through the House and Senate, providing for torture of those detained for suspected subversion. This, on top of still other laws providing for the detention of such suspects for long periods of time without trial or even a formal charge against them. In such a scenario, would anyone with an appreciation of the English language, and with the above definition in mind, dare suggest that we would be justified in calling ourselves a democracy? Of course not: and yet the term is repeatedly used to describe Israel--as in “the only democracy in the Middle East.”
This, despite the fact that said nation has no constitution.
This, despite the fact that said nation is defined as the state of the Jewish people, providing special rights and privileges to anyone in the world who is Jewish and seeks to live there, over and above longtime Arab residents.
This, despite the fact that said nation bars any candidate from holding office who thinks Israel should be a secular, democratic state with equal rights for all.
This, despite the fact that non-Jews are restricted in terms of how much land they can own, and in which places they can own land at all.
This, despite that fact that even the Israeli Supreme Court has acknowledged the use of torture against suspected “terrorists” and other “enemies” of the Jewish state. For some, it is apparently sufficient that Israel has an electoral system, and that Arabs have the right to vote in those elections (though just how equally this right is protected is of course a different matter). The fact that one can’t vote for a candidate who questions the special Jewish nature of the state, because such candidates can’t run for or hold office, strikes most as irrelevant: hardly enough to call into question their democratic credentials. But of course, the Soviet Union also had elections, of a sort. And in those elections, most people could vote, though candidates who espoused an end to the communist system were barred from participation. Voters got to choose between communists. In Israel, voters get to choose between Zionists. In the former case, we recognize such truncated freedom as authoritarianism. In the latter case, we call it democracy. If it was not already obvious that the English language was dead--what with the inanities introduced to it by the business-speak of corporate capitalism, such as “thinking outside the box,” “managing one’s human assets,” and “planned shrinkage”--this should pretty well prove the point. If what we see in Israel is indeed democracy, then what does fascism look like? I’m sorry, but I am over it. As a Jew--hear me now--I am over it. And if my language seems too harsh here, that’s tough. Because it’s nothing compared to the sickening things said by Israeli leaders throughout the years. Like Menachem Begin, former Prime Minister who told the Knesset in 1982 that the Palestinians were “beasts walking on two legs.” Or former P.M. Ehud Barak, who offered a more precise form of dehumanization when he referred to the Palestinians as “crocodiles.” And speaking of Barak, for more confirmation on the death of language, one should examine his April 14 op-ed in the New York Times. Therein, Barak insisted that democracy in Israel could be “maintained” (ahem), so long as the Jewish state was willing to set up security fences to separate itself from the Palestinians, and keep the Palestinians in their place.
Calling the process “unilateral disengagement,” Barak opined that limiting access by Arabs to Israel is the key to maintaining a Jewish majority, and thus the Jewish nature of the state. That the Jewish nature of the state is inimical to democracy as defined by every dictionary in the world matters not, one supposes. Barak even went so far as to warn that in the absence of such security fences, Israel might actually become an apartheid state. Imagine that: unless they institute separation they might become an apartheid state. The irony of such a statement is nearly perfect, and once again signals that words no longer have meaning. They are but the sounds that emanate from one’s throat and are accompanied by breath and occasionally spittle. They mean nothing. Define them as you choose. Interestingly, amidst the subterfuge, other elements of Barak’s essay struck me as surprisingly honest: much more honest, in fact, than when he had been Prime Minister and supposedly made that “generous offer” to Arafat about which we keep hearing.
You know, the one that would have allowed the maintenance of most Jewish settlements in the territories, and would have restricted the Palestinian state to the worst land, devoid of its own water supply, and cutoff at numerous chokepoints by Israeli security. Yeah that one. The one that has been described variously (without any acknowledgement of the inconsistency) as having offered the Palestinians either 93%, or is it 95%, or maybe 96%, or perhaps 98% of the West Bank and Gaza. Well, in the Times piece, Barak finally came clean, admitting that Israel would need to erect the fences in such a manner as to incorporate at least one-quarter of the territories into Israel, so as to subsume the settlements. So not 93 percent, or 96%, or 98%, but at best 75%, and still on the worst land.
Furthermore, the fences would slice up Jerusalem and restrict Arab access to the Holy Basin and the Old City: a direct swipe at Muslims who seek access on a par with their fellow descendants of Abraham. That this was Barak’s idea all along should surprise no one. And that such a “solution” would mean the final loss for the Palestinians of all but 17% of their pre-Israel territory will likely not strike many in the U.S. media or political elite as being terribly unfair.
If anything, we will continue to hear about the intransigence of the Arabs, and their unwillingness to accept these “generous offers,” which can only be seen as generous to a people who have become so inured to human suffering that their very souls are in jeopardy. Or to those who have never consulted a dictionary. For once again, it defines generous as: “willing to give or share; unselfish; large; ample; rich in yield; fertile.” In a world such as this, where words have lost all meaning, we might as well just burn all the dictionaries. Sometimes, the linguistic obfuscation goes beyond single words, and begins to encompass entire phrases. One such example is the oft-repeated statement to the effect that “Jews should be able to live anywhere in the world, and to say otherwise is to endorse anti-Semitism.” Thus, it is asked, why shouldn’t Jews be able to settle in the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem? Of course, whoever says such a thing must know of its absurdity beforehand. After all, the right to live wherever one chooses has never included the right to live in someone else’s house, after taking it by force or fraud.
Nor does it include the right to set up house in territories that are conquered and occupied as the result of military conflict: indeed, international law expressly forbids such a thing.
And furthermore, those who insist on the right of Jews to live wherever they choose, by definition deny the same right to Palestinians, who cannot live in the place of their choosing, or even in the homes that were once theirs. Needless to say, many Palestinians would like to live inside Israel’s pre-1948 borders, and exercise a right of return in order to do so. But don’t expect those who demand the right for Jews to plant stakes anywhere we choose to offer the same right to Arabs.
Many of these are among the voices that insist Jordan is “the Palestinian state,” and thus, Palestinians should be perfectly happy living there. Since Palestinians are Semites, one could properly call such an attitude “anti-Semitic”--seeing as how it limits the rights of Semitic peoples to live wherever they wish--but given the transmogrification of the term “anti-Semitism” into something that can only apply to Jew-hatred, such a usage would seem bizarre to many, one suspects. The rhetorical shenanigans even extend to the world of statistics. Witness the full-page advertisement in the New York Times placed by the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, which ran the same day as the Barak op-ed.
Therein, these supposed spokespersons for American Judaism stated their unyielding support for Israel, and claimed that the 450 Israeli deaths caused by terrorism since the beginning of the second intifada, were equal to 21,000 deaths in the U.S. from terrorism, as a comparable percentage of each nation’s overall population.
Playing upon fears and outrage over the attacks of 9/11, the intent was quite transparent: get U.S. readers to envision 9/11 all over again, only with seven times more casualties! A brilliant move, indeed. But of course, honesty--an intellectual commodity in short supply these days, and altogether missing from the rhetorical shelves of the Conference of Presidents--would require one to point out that the numbers of Palestinian non-combatant (that is to say civilian) deaths, at the hands of Israel in that same time period, is much higher, and indeed would be “equal to” far more than 21,000 in the U.S., as a comparable share of respective populations.
To be honest to a fault would be to note that the 900 or so Palestinians slaughtered with Israeli support in the Sabra and Shatilla camps during the 1982 invasion of Lebanon, would be equal to over 40,000 Americans. Even more, the 17,500 Arabs killed overall by Israel during that invasion would be roughly equivalent to over 800,000 Americans today: the size of many large cities. In the dictionary such a thing might fall under the heading of terrorism. But remember, words no longer have any meaning. Sounding eerily like Adolph Hitler, Ariel Sharon once said, “a lie should be tried in a place where it will attract the attention of the world.” And so it has been: throughout the media and the U.S. political scene, on CNN in the personage of Benjamin Netanyahu, and in the pages of the New York Times. And in my Hebrew School, where we were taught that Jews were to be “a light unto the nations,” instead of this dim bulb, this flickering nightlight, this barely visible spark, whose radiance is only sufficient to make visible the death-rattle of the more noble aspects of the Jewish tradition.
Unless we who are Jews insist on a return to honest language, and an end to the hijacking of our culture and faith by madmen, racists and liars, I fear that the light may be extinguished forever.
Tim Wise is an antiracist essayist, activist and educator. He can be reached at tjwise@mindspring.com
Printer friendly version
Send page by E-Mail
The History of Racism and Terrorism
Posted: Saturday, May 11, 2002
Book Review
by P. Barton
"A History of Racism and Terrorism, Rebellion and Overcoming," pub. by: Xlibris, 436 Walnut Street, 11th Floor, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States, 19106 www.xlibris.com 1 (888) 795-4274 or 1 (215) 923-4686
A HISTORY OF RACISM AND TERRORISM, REBELLION AND OVERCOMING.
THE INVENTION AN APPLICATION OF RACISM
One of the most powerful, exciting and important books on the reasons for the present, past and future conditions of Blacks in the Americas, Africa, the Middle East, South Asia, Melanesia, Australia, Europe and the Far East has been written. The title suits perfectly to the historical facts outlined in the book about how racism and terror were used to reduce Blacks and other people, including some Europeans to slavery and bondage.
The book begins with the invasion of ancient Black India by a number of nomadic wanderers from Northern Europe/Central Asia, who spoke languages called "Aryan" tongues. These groups waged a long series of wars against the Blacks of India and after many centuries were able to subjugate the population and establish a system of racism called "varna" (color consciousness) based on religion. This system is called the "caste" system and still affects Black Untouchables and other Untouchables in South Asia to this very day.
The books details the struggles that led to the rise of Buddhism in South Asia and how Buddha, a member of the Sakya Clan and a native Indian fought and established a separate religious ideology from that of the caste system. The book looks at the work of many Dalits and others of India who have been victims of caste/racism and their past and present genetic, cultural and racial connections to present-day Africans, African-Americans and Blacks in the rest of Asia.
THE LACK OF RACISM DURING THE GREEK AND ROMAN PERIOD
It may shock some to realize that racism was not invented by the European/white nations that exist in Europe. To be specific, the first form of racism to enter Europe and be followed as a religion appeared during the 1700's to the 1800's when the Europeans were using the Bible to justify the enslavement of Blacks and many pseudo-sciences and racist theories were advanced. The Europeans during the Greek and Roman period 1000 B.C. to 400 A.D., did not have the type of putrid racist feelings against Blacks that came after the time of Shakespeare. In fact, many European cultures had been culturally influenced by Blacks. Greek, Roman and others borrowed heavily from Black culture.
Some of the Greek writers such as Herodotus describes the "Ethiopians" the term used for the People of Sudan and the rest of Africa, as being the "most handsome of men; the inventors of pomp and ceremony, laws," and culture. The Greeks quote the Egyptian priests as saying that the Greek Isles were inhabited and developed by Egyptians long before the Greeks arrived. In fact the first Greeks to adopt Egyptian ideas appear to be the Dorian Greeks who came from Central Asia between 1700 B.C. to 1500 B.C.
RACIST SEMITIC RELIGIOUS WRITINGS HOLY BOOKS
One of the main perpetrators of racism through the ages have been said to be religious writings that appear in the Bible and other religious texts. The "curse of Ham" myth found in Genesis is one of these writings that have been used to reduce Blacks to enslavement. This fable is used by many of those whose religions are influenced by the ancient Semitic religions. Yet, these writings are thought by many writers to be based on Semitic envy (see History of Racism) of the Black Egyptians and other Blacks in ancient times.
The very continuation of enslavement of Blacks in Sudan, Mauritania and attacks on Blacks in West Papua and Melanesia, or the callous disregard for Black people in East Africa is evidence of the type of philosophy that promotes religious racism against Blacks, yet, many Blacks have fallen for and continue to follow religions that continue to promote the enslavement and destruction of Blacks, rather than developing and promoting the traditional religions of Africans/Blacks.
SLAVERY AND REBELLION
African slavery on a wide scale began by the very same people practicing and promoting African slavery in Sudan and Mauritania today.
In the past, Africans did not unite to stop this evil and today nothing is being done. Yet, the total destruction of African civilization in Nubia-Kush, the destruction of great cities and centers of civilization the enslavement of men, women and children, the mixing and wiping out of the African identities of Africans in places like Sudan (the invader takes African woman and the child is not considered African is racist genocidal scheme, which is unacceptable to Africans whose children must claim the African grandfather's race and the African mother's race and not the race of a conqueror or violator) continues today in a continuing and systematic application of the old Semitic system of racism.
SLAVERY IN THE AMERICAS
The book, "A History of Racism and Terrorism, Rebellion and Overcoming," pub. by www.xlibris.com presents a detailed explanation of how slaves were created in the Americas through the application of brainwashing, violence, terror, and genocidal policies. The "Willie Lynch Letter to the Planters of Virginia," is discussed and broken down chapter by chapter. The effects of the techniques applied to creating mental slaves continue to exist to this day.
SLAVE REBELLIONS AND REVOLUTIONS
Hundreds of slave rebellions took place in the America from Canada to Argentina. Some of these rebellions, such as that of Nat Turner and Denmark Vesey were crushed. Others such as the Haitian Revolution, the rebellion of the Maroons of Jamaica and various Maroon peoples in Latin America were successful. In fact, some of the most effective forms of martial arts and military techniques (guerilla fighting) came from slave rebellions, where Africans were applying techniques of warfare that came from Africa. A large percentage of African slaves including women were captured in the wars in regions like Dahomey (Benin), Nigeria, Congo/Angola and the Sudan/Ethiopia region.
HOW BLACKS OVERCAME DESPITE RACISM AND JIM CROW
The book ends with the struggles of Blacks after slavery and the introduction of a new form of slavery called "Jim Crow." When added to "sharecropping," where Black tenant farmers were kept on the land as semi-slaves for decades, slavery in the South had only taken a different form. Yet, Blacks created their own schools, businesses and institutions as well as secret organizations and continued to exist Before the Civil Rights Era, the use of confinement of Blacks for any little "crime" was established all over the South in order to create another form of slavery. Today's "Three Strikes," and "Mandatory Minimums" is nothing new, but simply a continuation of the type of slavery-related system used to keep Blacks in perpetual confinement and under control in the South. In lands like Australia, Britain, Latin America, West Papua and North America, these genocidal laws are being used as a means of keeping Blacks at a disadvantage. In many lands, Blacks are retaliating through population expansion, establishing and making sure bodies like the United Nations enforce their rights and working to stop such racist laws.
SLAVERY TODAY AND WHY AFRICANISM MUST BE ESTABLISHED AND ENFORCED ALL OVER AFRICA:
THE THOUGHTS AND FEELINGS OF PAN-AFRICANS
The time has come for African leadership and the people to STOP THE RACIST AND RELIGIOUS IMPERIALISM OF THE SEMITES.
Any attempt to turn Africa into "Land of the Abeds," ('abed' being the racist Semitic term for Africans, including those who follow the Semitic religions; it means "slave.").
No African in their right mind, regardless of religion should accept this form of colonialism. Show the African people the love and respect that the Semites have for Black Africans when they violate, ravage and carry off our mothers, sisters and women. Where is the love when they destroy our villages, culture and commit extermination?
Semitic colonialism through religious imperialism is just as racist as European colonialism and South African apartheid. Are we Africans without our own ideas and culture that we have to sit back and allow others to dominate and destroy what has been ours for tens of thousands of years?
The time has come for an ideology based on the needs of the African people, African culture and traditions and African realities and spirituality. We should develop African religions and reject those that continue to teach that Blacks are to be slaves. No religions should take priority over African religions.
Chinese believe in Confucianism, Japanese in Shintoism, Indians in Hinduism, Europeans in Christianity, Semites believe in their own religions. WHAT DO AFRICANS BELIEVE IN?
WELL HERE IT IS. WE BELIEVE IN HONORING OUR ANCESTORS, PRESERVING OUR CULTURE AND ENSURING THE RIGHTS OF AFRICNS ARE RESPECTED AND LANDS OF AFRICANS REMAIN AFRICAN.
THAT IS CALLED AFRICANISM. In the case of lands like Sudan, Ethiopia, Somalia, Kenya, and all the Black African lands, including the Blacks of Egypt, the idea that our ancestors created and built a great civilization in North Africa before the invasion of the Semites should be known and taught to those who need to know. Therefore, while others return to their religions as a means of applying their ideas and culture, IT IS TIME WE BLACK AFRICANS IN NORTH-EAST AFRICA FIND OUT WHO WE REALLY ARE AND RETURN TO OUR ROOTS CULTURE AND CIVILIZATION.
We are not Europeans or Semites. We are Black Africans and the core of Black civilization is the region from Egypt to Kenya. Both Kenya and Ethiopia is the original homeland of the Black race and the human race, for that matter. The world's religions began in Egypt, material civilization began in the area between south Egypt to South Sudan.
So, why would any African leader continue to allow their culture to be destroyed by the new type of imperialism and racial genocide that is being carried out on Blacks in Sudan and as far as Mauritania and West Papua. It is time to unite to stop it. The life of Black Africans fighting against Semitic occupation and religious imperialism in Sudan, is as important as the lives of those fighting against occupation and domination in the Middle East. Would the world accept the wiping out of two million Semites in the Middle East, as they have accepted the wiping out of two million Sudanese? There is no way that would be tolerated.
Blacks in the Americas, Europe, Christians and Africanists in the Americas and Africa do not and should not accept the attempt by Semites to re-enslave Africans and implement Semitic colonialism in any part of Africa. (See the great book, "The History of Racism and Terrorism, Rebellion and Overcoming" published by Xlibris, 436 Walnut Street, 11th Floor, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, U.S.A. www.xlibris.com
A History of Racism and Terrorism, Rebellion and Overcoming clearly shows that terror and oppression as a means of imposing racism and cultural chauvinism based on religious beliefs continues today and is behind the present atmosphere of worldwide conflict today.
BLACK NUBIAN EMPIRE PAN-AFRICAN INTERNETWORK
http://community.webtv.net/nubianem
Printer friendly version
Send page by E-Mail
President expected to address UN session
Posted: Friday, May 10, 2002
www.herald.co.zw
PRESIDENT Mugabe is today expected to address the UN General Assembly Special Session on Children during which he will highlight strides made by Zimbabwe on the welfare of children since the last summit in 1990.
This year's conference, which began on Wednesday, is a follow up to the one held in 1990 when 180 countries attended and out of these, 155, including Zimbabwe submitted their national plans of action to the UN.
Zimbabwe's permanent representative to the UN Ambassador Tichaona Jokonya told Zimbabwean journalists that the country had fulfilled its plan of action on children and had set in motion a lot of programmes focused on the welfare of children.
The country had made great strides in health and education. It was now one of the countries in the world that had eradicated polio and tetanus through its child immunisation programmes. MORE
Printer friendly version
Send page by E-Mail
African rights body set to visit
Posted: Tuesday, May 7, 2002
By Itai Musengeyi
www.herald.co.zw
THE African Commission on Human and People’s Rights has requested to visit Zimbabwe on a fact-finding mission and the Government has welcomed the request.
Addressing the 31st ordinary session of the Commission in Pretoria, South Africa, yesterday, the head of the Zimbabwean delegation to the meeting, Mr Godfrey Dzvairo, said Zimbabwe had always welcomed those who wish to examine the human rights situation in the country with an open mind.
"It is in this spirit that Zimbabwe welcomes the commission’s request to come to Zimbabwe on a fact-finding mission. MORE
Printer friendly version
Send page by E-Mail
Share your views on the Online Forums
View last 5 days / Advance search
