14 Dec 2017

Surveillance That Never Sleeps

John W. Whitehead

“He sees you when you’re sleeping
He knows when you’re awake
He knows when you’ve been bad or good
So be good for goodness sake!”
—“Santa Claus Is Coming to Town”
Just in time for Christmas, the Deep State wants to give America the gift that keeps on giving: never-ending mass surveillance. I’m not referring to the kind of surveillance carried out by that all-knowing and all-seeing Jolly Old St. Nick and his informant the Elf on the Shelf (although, to be fair, they have helped to acclimate us to a world in which we’re always being watched and judged by higher authorities). No, this particular bit of Yuletide gift-giving comes courtesy of the Deep State (a.k.a. the Surveillance State, Police State, Shadow Government and black-ops spy agencies).
If this power-hungry cabal gets its way, the government’s power to spy on its citizens will soon be all-encompassing and permanent.
As it now stands, Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act—the legal basis for two of the National Security Agency’s largest mass surveillance programs, “PRISM” and “Upstream”—is set to expire at the end of 2017.
“PRISM” lets the NSA access emails, video chats, instant messages, and other content sent via Facebook, Google, Apple and others. “Upstream” lets the NSA worm its way into the internet backbone—the cables and switches owned by private corporations like AT&T that make the internet into a global network—and scan traffic for the communications of tens of thousands of individuals labeled “targets.”
Just as the USA Patriot Act was perverted from its original intent to fight terrorism abroad and was used instead to covertly crack down on the American people (allowing government agencies to secretly track Americans’ financial activities, monitor their communications, and carry out wide-ranging surveillance on them), Section 702 has been used as an end-run around the Constitution to allow the government to collect the actual content of Americans’ emails, phone calls, text messages and other electronic communication without a warrant.
Under Section 702, the government collects and analyzes over 250 million internet communications every year. There are estimates that at least half of these contain information about U.S. residents, many of whom have done nothing wrong. This information is then shared with law enforcement and “routinely used for purposes unrelated to national security.”
Mind you, this is about far more than the metadata collection that Edward Snowden warned us about, which was bad enough. Section 702 gives the government access to the very content of your conversations (phone calls, text messages, video chats), your photographs, your emails. As Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., warned, “This is not just who you send it to, but what’s in it.”
Unfortunately, Big Brother doesn’t relinquish power easily.
The Police State doesn’t like restrictions.
And the Surveillance State certainly doesn’t look favorably on anything that might weaken its control. Even after Congress limited the NSA’s ability to collect bulk phone records, the agency continued to do so, vacuuming up more than 151 million records of Americans’ phone calls last year alone.
A government that doesn’t heed its constituents, doesn’t abide by the law, and kowtows to its police and military forces? That’s a dictatorship anywhere else.
Here in America, you can call it “technotyranny,” a term coined by investigative journalist James Bamford to refer to an age of technological tyranny made possible by government secrets, government lies, government spies and their corporate ties.
Beware of what you say, what you read, what you write, where you go, and with whom you communicate, because it will all be recorded, stored and used against you eventually, at a time and place of the government’s choosing. Privacy, as we have known it, is dead.
For all intents and purposes, we now have a fourth branch of government.
This fourth branch came into being without any electoral mandate or constitutional referendum, and yet it possesses superpowers, above and beyond those of any other government agency save the military. It is all-knowing, all-seeing and all-powerful. It operates beyond the reach of the president, Congress and the courts, and it marches in lockstep with the corporate elite who really call the shots in Washington, DC.
The government’s “technotyranny” surveillance apparatus has become so entrenched and entangled with its police state apparatus that it’s hard to know anymore where law enforcement ends and surveillance begins.
The short answer: they have become one and the same entity.
The police state has passed the baton to the surveillance state.
Having already transformed local police into extensions of the military, the Department of Homeland Security, the Justice Department and the FBI are preparing to turn the nation’s soldier cops into techno-warriors, complete with iris scanners, body scanners, thermal imaging Doppler radar devices, facial recognition programs, license plate readers, cell phone Stingray devices and so much more.
This is the new face of policing in America.
Enter big data policing which gives the nation’s 17,000 police agencies access to a growing “investigative” database that maps criminal associates and gangs, as well as their social and familial connections.
As Slate reports, “These social network systems, which target ‘chronic offenders,’ also include information about innocent associates, family members, and friends, creating extensive human maps of connections and patterns of contacts.” Those individuals then get assigned a threat score to determine their risk of being a perpetrator or victim of a future crime.
In Chicago, for example, “individuals with the highest scores on the Chicago Police Department ‘heat list’ get extra attention in the form of home visits or increased community surveillance.”
In Baltimore, police are using Cessna planes equipped with surveillance systems to film entire segments of the city, then combining that footage with police reports in order to “map the comings and goings of everyone—criminals and innocents alike.”
In this way, big data policing not only expands Big Brother’s reach down to the local level, but it also provides local police—most of whom know little about the Constitution and even less about the Fourth Amendment—with a new technological weapon to deploy against an unsuspecting public.
The end result is pre-crime, packaged in the guise of national security but no less sinister.
All of those individuals who claim to be unconcerned about government surveillance because they have nothing to hide, take note: pre-crime policing—given a futuristic treatment in Steven Spielberg’s Minority Report—aims to treat you like a criminal before you’ve ever even committed a crime.
This hasn’t fazed President Trump who, much like his predecessors, has thus far marched in lockstep with the dictates of the police state.
If approved, this would be yet another secret government agency carrying out secret surveillance and counterintelligence, funded by a secret black ops budget that by its very nature does away with transparency, bypasses accountability and completely eludes any form of constitutionality.
According to The Washington Post, there are more than a dozen “black budget” national intelligence agencies already receiving more than $52.6 billion in secret government funding. Among the top five black ops agencies currently are the CIA, the NSA, the National Reconnaissance Office, the National Geospatial-Intelligence Program, and the General Defense Intelligence Program.
A significant chunk of that black ops money has been flowing to Silicon Valley since before there was an internet, itself a creation of the military/security industrial complex.
Earlier this year, Amazon announced that it would be storing classified information for U.S. spy agencies in its digital cloud, part of a $600 million contract with the nation’s intelligence agencies.
Two decades earlier, America’s spy agencies tapped Silicon Valley to spearhead research into ways of tracking individuals and groups online. That research, as documented by Jeff Nesbit, the former director of legislative and public affairs at the National Science Foundation, culminated in the creation of a massive public-private surveillance state that hinged on a partnership between the NSA, the CIA and Google.
“The research arms of the CIA and NSA hoped that the best computer-science minds in academia could identify what they called ‘birds of a feather,’” writes Nesbit. He continues:
Their research aim was to track digital fingerprints inside the rapidly expanding global information network, which was then known as the World Wide Web… By working with emerging commercial-data companies, their intent was to track like-minded groups of people across the internet and identify them from the digital fingerprints they left behind, much like forensic scientists use fingerprint smudges to identify criminals. Just as “birds of a feather flock together,” they predicted that potential terrorists would communicate with each other in this new global, connected world—and they could find them by identifying patterns in this massive amount of new information. Once these groups were identified, they could then follow their digital trails everywhere.
The problem, of course, is that the government always sets its sights higher.
It wasn’t long before the government’s search for criminal “birds of a feather”—made much easier with the passage of the USA Patriot Act—lumped everyone together and treated all of the birds (i.e., the public) as criminals to be identified, tracked, monitored and subjected to warrantless, suspicionless surveillance.
Fast forward to the present moment when, on any given day, the average American is now monitored, surveilled, spied on and tracked in more than 20 different ways by both government and corporate eyes and ears.
Every second of every day, the American people are being spied on by the U.S. government’s vast network of digital Peeping Toms, electronic eavesdroppers and robotic snoops.
Whether you’re walking through a store, driving your car, checking email, or talking to friends and family on the phone, you can be sure that some government agency is listening in and tracking you. This doesn’t even begin to touch on the complicity of the corporate sector, which buys and sells us from cradle to grave, until we have no more data left to mine. These corporate trackers monitor your purchases, web browsing, Facebook posts and other activities taking place in the cyber sphere and share the data with the government.
Just about every branch of the government—from the Postal Service to the Treasury Department and every agency in between—now has its own surveillance sector, authorized to collect data and spy on the American people. Then there are the fusion and counterterrorism centers that gather all of the data from the smaller government spies—the police, public health officials, transportation, etc.—and make it accessible for all those in power.
These government snoops are constantly combing through and harvesting vast quantities of our communications, then storing it in massive databases for years. Once this information—collected illegally and without any probable cause—is ingested into NSA servers, other government agencies can often search through the databases to make criminal cases against Americans that have nothing to do with terrorism or anything national security-related. One Justice Department lawyer called the database the “FBI’s ‘Google.’”
In other words, the NSA, an unaccountable institution filled with unelected bureaucrats, operates a massive database that contains the intimate and personal communications of countless Americans and makes it available to other unelected bureaucrats.
Talk about a system rife for abuse.
Ask the government why it’s carrying out this warrantless surveillance on American citizens, and you’ll get the same Orwellian answer the government has been trotting out since 9/11 to justify its assaults on our civil liberties: to keep America safe.
Yet warrantless mass surveillance by the government and its corporate cohorts hasn’t made America any safer. And it certainly isn’t helping to preserve our freedoms. Frankly, America will never be safe as long as the U.S. government is allowed to shred the Constitution.
Now the government wants us to believe that we have nothing to fear from its mass spying program because they’re only looking to get the “bad” guys who are overseas.
Don’t believe it.
The government’s definition of a “bad” guy is extraordinarily broad, and it results in the warrantless surveillance of innocent, law-abiding Americans on a staggering scale. They are conducting this mass surveillance without a warrant, thus violating the core principles of the Fourth Amendment which protects the privacy of all Americans.
Warrantless mass surveillance of American citizens is wrong, un-American, and unconstitutional.
Clearly, the outlook for reforming the government’s unconstitutional surveillance programs does not look good.
As I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, whenever the rights of the American people are pitted against the interests of the military/corporate/security complex, “we the people” lose. Unless Congress develops a conscience—or suddenly remembers that they owe their allegiance to the citizenry and not the corporate state—we’re about to lose big.
It’s time to let Section 702 expire or reform the law to ensure that millions and millions of Americans are not being victimized by a government that no longer respects its constitutional limits.
Mark my words: if Congress votes to make the NSA’s vast spying powers permanent, it will be yet another brick in the wall imprisoning us within an electronic concentration camp from which there is no escape.

Towards A New Palestinian Beginning

Ramzy Baroud

Now that the American mask has completely fallen, Palestinians require an urgent rethink in their own political priorities, alliances and national liberation strategy.
Business should not go on as usual after US President Donald Trump accepted Israel’s definition of Jerusalem as its capital, thus violating the overwhelming international consensus on the matter.
The Fatah movement, which has controlled the Palestinian Authority (PA) since its inception in 1994 has preempted people’s anger over the US move, by declaring a ‘day of rage.’ Several Palestinians were killed and many wounded in clashes throughout the Occupied Territories in what is understandably justified anger over the unwarranted American decision.
But the manipulation of Palestinian emotions by their leadership is contemptable to say the least. The ‘politics of rage’, which has been used by the Palestinian leadership in the past has often worked to deflect popular discontent and criticism.
Sure, Israel and the US deserve all the condemnation for their role in sustaining, funding and defending the military occupation and subjugation of the Palestinian people. But the Palestinian leadership is deserving of much condemnation as well. Those who have willingly participated in the futile game of the ‘peace process’, dangling the dim prospect of a ‘two-state solution’ before despairing Palestinians should not get off the hook so easily.
Palestinian leaders and an army of officials, politicians, pundits and contractors made billions of dollars from foreign funds to keep the ‘peace process’ charade going for over 25 years, while the general population grew poorer and more despondent than ever.
Those who resisted, outside the acceptable political framework as presented by the Palestinian leadership were harassed, imprisoned and severely punished. This was the case not just in Gaza, but in the West Bank as well. Many journalists, academicians, artists and activists were treated harshly for questioning the PA’s methods throughout the years.
Yet here we stand; the PA is calling on those very Palestinians to rage. Hamas too is calling for a new Intifada. Oddly, Palestinian factions never learned from history. Real, sustainable popular uprisings are never a response to a party’s or a politician’s call. It is a spontaneous, genuine cry for freedom that originates from the masses, not the political elites.
While some Palestinian factions are hoping that the people’s anger directed at the Israeli occupation will create a protective buffer so that they may survive another day, other groups are riding the wave for their own political interests.
But this is not a strategy. Sending bare-chested people to fight armed soldiers only to communicate a media message will neither pressure Israel nor the US. In fact, most American media outlets are centering their debate on ‘Palestinian violence’, as if the violence of the Israeli occupation is a non-issue, and as if the safety of Israelis is the most compelling concern at the moment.
Nor will polite appeals to the US to reconsider its decision and pressure Trump to rescind his embassy move make a difference.
The final statement presented by the Arab League foreign ministers in Cairo on Saturday was an example of the lackluster language that will prove ineffective.
Calling on Trump to reverse his decision will not, on its own, make an iota of difference. The Palestinians need their Arab brethren to articulate a strong, unified position on the issue, without hesitating to explore new political routes and put real, tangible pressure on the US and Israel to relent.
The Palestinian leadership that has downgraded the Palestinian struggle, and wasted precious years chasing after an American mirage, must be held accountable.
Why are Palestinian leaders still holding so tightly to their chairs considering the amount of damage they have inflicted upon the Palestinian cause?
If the Palestinian leadership had a minimal degree of accountability and self-respect it would issue a heart-felt apology to the people for all the squandered time, energy and blood. It would immediately issue a total overhaul within its ranks, activate all Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) institutions; bring all factions together, under the umbrella of the PLO, to declare a new strategy regarding the increasingly bleak-looking future.
None of this has happened yet. Angry statements and calls for Palestinian mobilization without a common strategy will only feed the interests of the factions, but will, eventually prove of no help to the Palestinian people and their national aspirations.
In truth, ordinary Palestinians need neither Fatah nor Hamas to call for a ‘day of rage’ or a new Intifada. Their hate for the occupation and love for their city of Jerusalem requires no official communications. It is their fight. It has always been their fight, one that they have fought every single day in the last 50 years.
What Trump has done will have terrible consequences on the region for years to come. But one of the early outcomes is that it exposed the peace process as a complete charade and the US role for what it is, neither honest nor fair. But it should also expose the Palestinian leadership, for all of its failings and corruption.
If Palestinians are to start anew, they have to commence their journey with a new political discourse, with new blood, and a new future outlook that is based on unity, credence and competence. None of this can ever take place with the same old faces, the same tired language and the same dead-end politics.
It is time for a new beginning.

Top Peruvian businessmen arrested in Odebrecht bribery scandal

Cesar Uco 

At 4:00 in the morning on Monday, December 4, Judge Richard Concepción issued warrants for the arrest of five of Peru’s most powerful business executives: José Graña Miró Quesada (former board chairman of Graña y Montero—GyM), Hernando Graña Acuña (former director of GyM), Gonzalo Ferraro (former CEO of GyM), Fernando Camet (president of JJ Camet) and Fernando Castillo (managing director of ICCGSA).
The businessmen are all charged in connection with the massive bribery scandals involving the Brazilian construction giant Odebrecht. These scandals, which were first exposed in Brazil’s “Lava Jato” corruption probe surrounding that country’s state-run energy conglomerate Petrobras, have since implicated governments throughout Latin America.
The businessmen are accused of crimes of collusion and money laundering in connection with a $20 million bribe allegedly paid to Peru’s fugitive former president, Alejandro Toledo. GyM is charged with coming up with $15 million of the bribe money paid to secure lucrative highway projects.
Four of the five arrived at the court in handcuffs. Afterward, four of them were transferred to the maximum security prison in Piedras Gordas to serve 18-month sentences of preventive detention while prosecutors prepare their case. Ferraro was placed under house arrest because of his health. If convicted, they could face sentences ranging as high as 11 years in prison.
Judge Concepción based his decision on “the statement of Jorge Barata—Odebrecht’s man in Latin America, the minutes of the shareholders’ meeting of the consortiums that built the Interoceanic Highway, the distribution of profits for additional risks and the effective payments made by Odebrecht,” reported the Peruvian daily La Republica.
The arrests represent a significant turn in the largest bribery investigation in the history of Latin America because the charges are directed against the most powerful families of the Peruvian bourgeoisie.
In Peru, the Odebrecht corruption scandal has intersected with the endemic national corruption stemming from the economic model adopted in April 1993 by President Alberto Fujimori—today imprisoned for crimes against humanity—when he executed a coup d’état, dissolving Congress and rewriting the constitution to favor private investment, both foreign and national. Neoliberal free market policies were imposed, based on selling off public enterprises to the capitalist class and transferring the exploitation of natural resources to transnational companies.
The Fujimori constitution also gave capitalist employers free rein to eliminate collective bargaining agreements with the trade unions, using third-party “outsourcing” instead in order to slash salaries and eliminate benefits such as medical insurance and vacations that workers are entitled to by law.
The Odebrecht scandal has played an increasing role in deepening Peru’s economic and political crisis, with everyone from the country’s president, the Wall Street-connected Pedro Pablo Kuczynski (PPK), to the right-wing Fujimorista opposition and sections of the so-called left under investigation.
The Peruvian economy, which is totally dependent on the exports of minerals to China and other countries, has been severely affected by the Odebrecht scandal.
It is estimated that 100,000 construction workers lost their jobs in 2017 as result of a ripple effect resulting from paralyzed projects involving Odebrecht and GyM, its main Peruvian partner.
There are another 40,000 workers’ families—directly linked to Odebrecht—in danger of losing their livelihoods. Furthermore, a new law passed by Congress limits pension contributions to 5 percent for companies implicated in corruption. This will have an adverse effect on the private pension fund (AFP) of the 26,000 GyM employees.
The Lava Jato Commission of the Peruvian Congress has ongoing investigations involving three former presidents, as well as the former Lima mayor, Susana Villaran, who was supported by the Peruvian pseudo-left.
Also implicated is Veronika Mendoza, the former presidential candidate of the bourgeois “left” Frente Amplio coalition. The Lava Jato Commission accuses Mendoza, who began her career in the apparatus of the Nationalist Party of the now-jailed former president Ollanta Humala, is being investigated for having written a bank account number in the agenda of Humala’s wife, Nadine, who, like her husband, is serving an 18-month sentence of preventive detention.
President Kuczynski has admitted to being an advisor on projects in which Odebrecht was involved. Three of these projects were negotiated when he was a minister in Toledo’s government—the Olmos 1 and 2 land irrigation projects to divert water to agribusiness, and the Interoceanic highway. In each case, other construction companies were eliminated from the bidding process, ensuring that Odebrecht was the only firm left.
In addition to the president being implicated in corruption and cover-up, leading to demands for his resignation, there have been demands for his US-born wife, Nancy Lange, to be brought before the Lava Jato Commission. According to the television news program Cuarto Poder: “The first lady was a partner of the Latin American Enterprise Capital Corporation, founded by PPK and his partner, the Chilean magnate Gerardo Sepulveda. This company has the same address in Miami as First Capital, owned by Sepulveda, which between 2005 and 2006 advised Odebrecht projects in Peru.”
In another development, Keiko Fujimori, the leader of the right-wing Fuerza Popular (FP) party that controls Congress, has protested government raids at two FP headquarters last Thursday. The raids were carried out as part of the investigation into Keiko Fujimori for money laundering that was launched after a note was found written by Marcelo Odebrecht, head of the Brazilian construction company bearing his name, saying “raise Keiko to 500 and pay a visit.” Under questioning by Peruvian prosecutors, Odebrecht confirmed that money was given to Keiko Fujimori and her 2011 campaign. Three laptops and several hard drives, along with other documents, were confiscated in the raids.

Italy’s “Black Wave” of neo-fascist attacks

Marianne Arens & Peter Schwarz 

Around 10,000 demonstrators protested last Saturday in the northern Italian city of Como against the “Black Wave”, the increase in neo-fascist attacks throughout the country.
The motive for the demonstration was an attack by the “Veneto Fronte Skinheads” on the meeting room of a refugee relief organization in Como, which was captured on video. It shows 15 neo-Nazis in black bomber jackets, standing around the support workers with their legs wide apart and arms crossed while their leader reads a proclamation. The confused text about “turbo-capitalism”, globalization and the immigration of foreign peoples ends with the words, “One loves one’s own people, one does not destroy it”. Then the leader calls out, “Now you can continue discussing how you are ruining our country”.
The newspaper La Repubblica placed the video on its web site, and it then spread rapidly throughout the country. This is just one of many incidents in which fascist gangs are terrorizing refugee workers, left-wing groups or even members of the press.
In northern Italy, such intimidation takes place on a regular basis. In Como, it is directed against the local organization “Como without borders”, and also the charity Caritas, Save the Children and other humanitarian organizations. The “Veneto Fronte Skinheads” are the most active in this regard. The group, which advocates an ethnically and culturally homogeneous society, is recruited mainly from the Ultras (hard core fans) among the followers of the football teams of Milan and Verona.
But other fascist groups are also active. For example, on December 6, the editors of Repubblica received a visit from Forza Nuova. Ten masked, black-clad supporters of the right-wing extremist group screamed slogans in front of the editorial office building, firing off flares and firecrackers at passing journalists and unrolling a banner calling for a boycott of the newspaper. This was “only the first act” of a systematic and militant boycott of supporters of immigration, the group said on Facebook. Forza Nuova is a far-right party, with which Alessandra Mussolini, the granddaughter of the dictator, was involved for a time.
On November 9 in Ostia, a member of the local mafia clan broke the nose of a reporter from state television RAI on camera when asked about support for the CasaPound neo-fascist organization. CasaPound won nine percent of the vote in the local seaside resort just outside Rome with the help of the mafia. Three mafia clans control drug trafficking, beach operations, and social housing in completely neglected tenements for the homeless constructed in the 1970s by the Italian Communist Party (PCI) administration. One mafia boss had openly called for the election of fascists.
The brutal actions of the right-wing extremists evoke memories of the beginnings of Mussolini’s fascist movement one hundred years ago. At the end of the First World War, small, armed gangs of 20 or 30 Blackshirts spread terror and attacked workers’ rallies and demonstrations, where “they managed to disrupt the disorderly gatherings of tens of thousands without much effort,” as Ignazio Silone writes in his book Fascism.
Today this right-wing pack dares to act so openly and outrageously because it senses a tailwind from official politics. It is now seen as possible that a right-wing alliance of Forza Italia, the racist Lega Nord and the fascist Fratelli d’Italia (Italian Brothers) will win the parliamentary elections in March. It had its first successes in municipal elections in June and the Sicilian regional election on 5 November.
Silvio Berlusconi, who is pulling the strings in the background, is experiencing a political comeback, even though the billionaire media entrepreneur and four-time former head of government is now over eighty years old and cannot take political office until 2019 because he is convicted of tax fraud, accounting fraud and judicial corruption.
The members of the alliance all refuse to condemn the neo-fascist terror. Forza Italia has not even commented. The head of the Lega Nord, Matteo Salvini, said he does not understand the excitement “over a few guys” reading a tract. The problem of Italy was not fascism, but immigration without control, he said. Although the Fratelli d’Italia disapproved of the intimidation, they stressed that the men had not used force, as left-wing extremists did.
The rise of the right and neo-fascists can only be understood against the background of the policies of the centre-left parties and their pseudo-left appendages. Since 1991, when the traditional Italian party system sank into a huge corruption scandal, so-called centre-left governments were responsible for the attacks on the working class. While Berlusconi and his followers lined their pockets using public funds and formed pacts with ultra-right and criminal elements, they restructured the state finances at the expense of social spending and in meeting the requirements of the European Union and NATO.
Whenever the various centre-left governments faced a crisis, they could always rely on the support of Rifondazione Comunista and other pseudo-left organizations. This has completely discredited them all. Since voters rejected Matteo Renzi’s constitutional referendum a year ago, the democratic and pseudo-left camp has broken apart into ever-changing parties. It now faces a crushing defeat in the coming election.
For a while, comedian Beppe Grillo’s Five Star protest movement had been able to fill the vacuum left by the Democratic Party (PD) and its allies. But as the right-wing, bourgeois character of this movement became clear, it stopped growing and has now long since passed its zenith.
The Five Star Movement now also agitates against refugees, but does this more ambiguously than the right wing. For example, it rejected supporting the demonstration in Como because it agreed with the spirit of the action, but was against the “political instrumentalization” of the incident.
The PD and pseudo-left parties, who through their anti-working-class policies had paved the way for the fascists, used the demonstration in Como to cover their tracks and close ranks under the banner of “anti-fascism”.
The Democratic Party had called for the demonstration, with party leader Renzi coming in person and talking about it being a “wonderful day”. At Renzi’s side, other PD figures, trade union representatives, Rifondazione Comunista, Sinistra Italiana, and the recently formed Liberi e Uguali (Free and Equal Party) marched under red, green, and rainbow colours. They swore allegiance to the Italian constitution, warned that “democracy is in danger” and called for a stop to the “Black Wave”.
These words are hollow and empty. In reality, it is precisely the PD that bears the greatest responsibility for the revival of fascist tendencies. Its predecessor, the Stalinist PCI, had prevented a settling of scores with Mussolini fascism at the end of the Second World War. In 1946, PCI chief Palmiro Togliatti, as Minister of Justice, signed a general amnesty for convicted fascists.
Over the last five years, PD leaders Enrico Letta, Matteo Renzi and Paolo Gentiloni have organized the worst social cutbacks. With the “Jobs Act”, pension and school “reforms” and other laws, they have destroyed the livelihoods of the working class.
Leading trade union figures like Guglielmo Epifani and Susanna Camusso are closely linked to the PD. For years, they have ensured that all the struggles of the working class have been paralyzed and sold out. At the same time, PD politicians such as Marco Minniti (Interior Minister), Roberta Pinotti (Defence) and Federica Mogherini (EU foreign policy chief) have sealed off the Mediterranean against refugees and upgraded the Italian military for new wars in Africa.
Resistance to the “Black Wave”, like the fight against war, unemployment and social cuts, requires the development of an independent movement of the working class based on an international socialist programme.

13 Dec 2017

HEINEKEN International Graduate Programme for Graduates Worldwide (€ 3.441 monthly salary + numerous benefits) 2018

Application Deadline: 9th February 2018
Eligible Countries: All
To Be Taken At (Country): Mostly Amsterdam, The Netherlands
About the Award: You will begin the journey at our Head Office in Amsterdam where you will be introduced to the HEINEKEN history, products and values, and start meeting the people that make the company great!With three one-year assignments you will have challenging and contrasting learning experiences within a Function. Every year, you explore a new country, start a new job, and learn a different culture, professionally and personally. This will test your learning agility and provide you with unforgettable experiences.
Fields of Employment:  
Marketing & Sales
Finance
Procurement
Human Resources
Corporate Affairs
Supply Chain
Information Technology
Type: Internships/Jobs
Eligibility: You need to be learning agile, self-sufficient, open to feedback, humble but also adventurous enough to take ownership wherever you are, standing true to our HEINEKEN values with a passion for quality, enjoyment of life and respect for people and for our planet.
To apply for this programme, you should at least:
  • Have a degree or will graduate by September 2018 – preferably a Masters degree
  • Have affinity with the particular field you wish to apply into
  • Have no more than 2 years of professional work experience in February 2018 (voluntary and internships do not count)
  • Be at least fluent in English – preferably multilingual
  • Have the ambition to have an international career at HEINEKEN together with a genuine interest in other cultures – preferably already lived abroad
Selection Criteria: 
GLOBALLY MOBILE
  • Have a desire to live and work abroad, anywhere in the world, including hardship countries
  • Preferably already lived outside your home country, and a candidate should have a genuine interest for other countries and cultures
  • The ambition to have an international career
LEADERSHIP
  • To have proven leadership skills gained from collaborations in groups
BACKGROUND
  • Have no more than 2 years of professional work experience (volunteering and internships do not count)
  • Have a degree or will graduate before September 2018 – preferably a Masters.
  • Preferably speaks multiple languages, but the candidate should at least speak business fluency in English.
    • If applying to Finance, you need a Bachelor in Finance, Economics, Business or a similar field
    • If applying for Procurement, your degree needs to be in Business, Finance, Commerce, Economics, or any other technical discipline
    • There is no specific degree requirement for Marketing & Sales, Supply Chain, Corporate Affairs, GIS (IT), or Human Resources, however we do believe that you should have affinity with the chosen Function.
  • Marketing & Sales applicants should have a drivers’ license
Number of Awards: Not specified
Value of Award: People are in the heart of our company. Next to meaningful work, we believe it is important that you are satisfied with your remuneration, and that it motivates you in relation to your development and performance.
  • An initial salary amount of € 3.441 gross per month, plus additional allowances
  • Accommodation
  • Private health insurance
  • Flights and Immigration support
  • 30 leave days per assignment, excluding national holiday
Duration/Timeline of Program: 
  • ONLINE TESTS – FEBRUARY 2018
    If you have the qualifications and the experience that meet our standards, we’ll invite you for the online tests.
  • VIRTUAL INTERVIEW – FEBRUARY 2018
    Pass the online test and we’ll ask you to do an virtual interview to see if you fit our profile.
  • FACE-TO-FACE INTERVIEW – MARCH 2018
    If you impressed us so far, we’ll ask you to have a face-to-face interview with two company representatives through Skype.
  • ASSESSMENT CENTRE – APRIL 2018
    Pass the Face-to-face interview and we’ll invite you to the home of HEINEKEN, Amsterdam, to attend the assessment centre.
  • START YOUR JOURNEY! – SEPTEMBER 2018
    If you have everything we’re looking for, you will be offered to join the HEINEKEN International Graduate Programme!
How to Apply: Apply for the distinct positions on the Program Webpage (see Link below).
Award Providers: HEINEKEN

Cattolica Africa Scholarship Program for African Masters Students 2018/2019 - Italy

Applicati,on Deadline: 
  • 1st Round: 22nd November, 2017 – 1st February, 2018
  • 2nd Round: 2nd February 2018 – 15th March, 2018
  • 3rd Round: 16th March 2018 – 16th April, 2018
Eligible Countries: Africa countries
To be taken at (country): Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Italy
Subject Areas: This program consists of seven 2-year MSc programs (Laurea Magistrale), all taught in English. These programs are preparing for an academic and/or professional career. Graduates of MSc programs are also eligible to enter PhD programs at Italian universities.
  • MSc in Banking and Finance (Milan Campus) – Commencement in September 2017
  • MSc in Economics (Milan Campus) – Commencement in September 2017
  • MSc in Management (Milan Campus) – Commencement in September 2017
  • MSc in Global Business Management (Piacenza Campus) Commencement in September 2017
  • MSc in Agriculture and Food Economics (Cremona Campus) Commencement in September 2017
  • MSc in Healthcare Management – Laurea Magistrale in Management dei Servizi (Roma Campus) Commencement in September 2017
  • MSc in Methods and Topics in Arts Management – Laurea Magistrale in Economia e Gestione dei Beni Culturali e dello Spettacolo (Milan Campus) Commencement in September 2017
About Scholarship: Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, as part of its mission to foster relationships with developing countries, has developed a special program for students from the African continent. This program will enable students to study for undergraduate and postgraduate degree programs taught in English at UCSC’s Milan, Piacenza and Cremona campuses.
Through the Cattolica Africa Program all accepted applicants will be offered tuition fee reductions (see the chart below). However, students will still be responsible for their own living expenses, hence the Cattolica Africa Program is NOT a program through which full scholarships can be obtained.
Type: Taught Masters degree
Eligibility: Students, either citizens or residents, of all African countries may apply for the Cattolica Africa Program, which is applicable only for the degree programs taught in English.
Admission requirements for all Master Degree programs include:
■ Completion of at least a Bachelor Degree from a recognized university (2nd class upper division / 2.1 degree or higher)
■ English Language Test score: IELTS 6.0 (Academic) or TOEFL IBT 80 if English is not your first language.or successful completion of a degree program taught in the English language.
An application fee of 75€ is due in order to submit the candidacy.
Number of Scholarships: Not specified
Value of Award: €5540 tuition waiver per year
Duration: Cattolica Africa Scholars Program will be offered for 2 years
How to Apply
  1. Select the degree program of your choice.
  2. Log in the online application and fill it in.
  3. Remember to select “degree-seeking” when asked for your “program type”. Upload the following documents:
    1. Copy of bio-data page of your passport or ID (in Latin alphabet);
    2. If you are a Non-EU citizen already living in Italy: copy of your “permesso di soggiorno” ;
    3. Transcript of academic records, including grading and credit system explanation;
    4. Bachelor-level Diploma, if you already graduated from university;
    5. Secondary School Diploma;
    6. English Language Certificate
    7. GMAT or GRE score (optional)
    NOTE: Candidates have to upload the originals of the transcript of academic records, bachelor-level Diploma (if available), and Secondary School Diploma, plus their official translation into Italian or English. If the documents are issued in English, French or Spanish, the translation is not required.
  4. Submit your application.
Visit scholarship webpage for details
Sponsors: Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Italy
Important Notes: Due to the restrictive and lengthy nature of the student pre-registration process required by the Italian Consulates/Embassies, we strongly advise non-EU students residing abroad to apply by April 15.

Thomson Reuters Foundation Rural Poverty and Agricultural Development Workshop (Funded to Italy) 2018

Application Deadline: 31st December 2017
Eligible Countries: Developing Countries
To Be Taken At (Country):  Rome, Italy
About the Award: In order to ensure the daily issues faced by rural poor people and their communities are acknowledged, it is important that their stories are heard and their voices are amplified.  With funding from the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD), the specialised UN agency, we will bring together journalists from around the world in Rome to attend IFAD’s event on innovative approaches to inclusive financing for rural transformation.
The 2030 Global Agenda requires the development of innovative approaches incentivizing sustainable and inclusive investments. Such approaches are about aligning private and public investors around shared sustainable development objectives and mobilizing diverse sources of development finance (including climate finance and private finance), channeling it towards rural investors, including smallholder farmers and rural small and medium enterprises (SMEs).
Being at the conference will allow journalists access to high profile delegates, leading experts in the issues, including IFAD and UN technical experts, as well as a number of small holder farmers who will be invited.
IFAD works with those most affected by poverty, food security, gender inequality, environment and climate change.
This should not be seen as a one-off workshop; indeed, we would expect all journalists who are selected to attend to pursue stories along these issues in their home countries after the workshop.
Type: Workshop
Eligibility: 
  • Applicants must be full-time journalists or regular contributors to a media organisation.  Applicants must be able to demonstrate a commitment to a career in journalism in their country, and should have at least two years’ professional experience and have a good level in spoken and written English.
  • Journalists who cover finance are particularly encouraged to apply.
  • We would also like to see professional evidence of your interest in the field of rural peoples’ issues and development.
Number of Awards: Not specified
Value of Award: Bursaries would include air travel expenses (economy class), accommodation, local transfers and meals. Please note that you need to check visa requirements and ensure you have the necessary documentation required.  The cost of your visa and any other related costs will be the responsibility of the participant. This arrangement is subject to variation.
Duration of Program: 12 February to 15 February
How to Apply: Please provide the following:  Statment explaining your motivation to attend; your CV or biography; and two examples of your work.
Award Providers:  International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD)

International Undergraduate Scholarship Program at University of Adelaide 2018/2019

Application Deadline: 19th January 2018
Offered annually? Yes
Eligible Countries: Students from all countries except Newzealand and Australia
To be taken at (country): Australia
Eligible Field of Study: Any discipline except Bachelor of Medicine, Bachelor of Surgery (MBBS), Bachelor of Dental Surgery (BDS), Bachelor of Oral Health and Bachelor of Science (Veterinary Bioscience)
About the Award: The University of Adelaide, Australia is offering a scholarship program to eligible applicants completing Foundation Studies or secondary studies overseas or in Australia, or those transferring into the later years of an undergraduate degree with advanced standing
Type: Undergraduate
Eligibility: The selection process for the Adelaide International Undergraduate Scholarships is competitive, with academic achievement forming the main basis for scholarship selection. As a general guide, the University of Adelaide will consider candidates who have achieved an academic level which is the equivalent of a GPA of 6/7 (85%) for a scholarship.
As the aim of the scholarship program is to attract excellent candidatesvfrom a wide range of countries, factors such as country of citizenship and program of study may also be taken into consideration in some cases in the scholarship selection process.
Selection Criteria: 
  • Applicants must have received an offer of admission from the University before lodging their scholarship application (applicants with a conditional offer may apply, but will need to accept and meet the conditions of their offer before a scholarship can be confirmed)
  • Scholarship selection is based on academic merit (in certain cases country of citizenship and program of study may also be taken into consideration when awarding scholarships)
  • Applications will be considered and scholarships offered on a rolling basis until all scholarships have been awarded
  • Successful applicants will be notified within 4 to 6 weeks of lodging the scholarship application; unsuccessful applicants will NOT be contacted.
Number of Awardees: Up to 40 scholarships available each year
Value of Scholarship: The scholarship will provide each successful candidate a waiver of 25% of the annual tuition fee for each year of the program for the full duration of the program.
Duration of Scholarship: Four(4) years
How to Apply: Applicants may apply online for a scholarship here.
Award Provider: University of Adelaide

Canon Collins Thekgo Bursaries for South African Students 2018/2019

Application Deadline: 16th December, 2017
Offered annually? Yes
Eligible Countries: South Africa
To be taken at (country): South Africa
Eligible Fields of Study: 
  • Languages and Literature
  • Media Studies
  • Gender Studies
  • Education
  • Arts (Digital Arts, Drama/Performance Studies, Visual Arts/Fine Arts, History of Art, Film and Television Studies, Music)
About the Award: In 2018 these bursaries will only be awarded to students studying at public universities in Limpopo and North-West provinces: University of Limpopo, University of Venda, University of North-West.
Type: postgraduate and undergraduate
Eligibility: To be considered for a scholarship under this programme you must:
  • be a national of, or have refugee status in any African country.
  • be accepted to study at a university in Limpopo and North-West provinces, South Africa in 2018, for a full-time programme. Applicants must be in their first year (undergraduate or post-graduate).
  • be able to demonstrate academic merit
  • be studying a course within one of the areas listed above
  • be able to demonstrate financial need
Number of Awardees: 5-7 applicants
Value of Scholarship: R7500. The selection committee decides on the actual amount that will be awarded to individual successful applicants, up to a maximum of R7500.
How to Apply: We are now accepting applications. You can apply by sending your completed application form and supporting documents to scholarships@canoncollins.org.uk. The deadline for applications is Wednesday 16 December 2017, at 11pm GMT. Late applications will not be considered.
Award Provider:  Canon Collins Trust

In Patriarchy, Sexual “Misconduct” Not Surprising

Robert Jensen

“I’m not surprised,” women say, in response to the flood of revelations of sexual “misconduct” by men, especially men in positions of power.
But none of us—women or men—should be surprised, because the United States is a patriarchal society and in patriarchy men routinely claim the right to own or control women’s bodies for reproduction and sexual pleasure. Men—liberal and conservative—know that just as well as women.
In such a society, conservative and liberal men will often disagree in public about the conditions under which they can rightly claim ownership. Conservative men argue for control of women within the heterosexual family. Liberal men argue for more expansive access to women. In public, the policy debates about reproductive rights and sexual access rage on. In private, conservative and liberal men claim their “right” to do as they please, which is why women sometimes find it difficult to tell conservative and liberal apart when it comes to behavior.
What kind of world has that produced? A sexually corrosive pop culture (both in dating practices and mediated images), with expanding sexual-exploitation industries (primarily prostitution and pornography), and routine sexual intrusion (the spectrum from sexual harassment to sexual assault). Women are routinely objectified in pop culture, reducing complex human beings to body parts for male pleasure. Men routinely buy and sell those objectified bodies for sexual pleasure, in person and on screens. And when men believe they can take those bodies without challenge, some men do just that.
Male or female, we are should not be surprised when in a patriarchal society—a society based on institutionalized male dominance—men exercise that dominance. Of course patriarchy is not static nor unidimensional, nor is it the only system of illegitimate authority. Patriarchy in 2017 is not exactly the same as in 1917; patriarchy in the United States is not the same as patriarchy in Saudi Arabia. Race, class, religion, and nation affect how patriarchy plays out in a specific time and place.
Patriarchy also is not immune to challenge. Feminism makes gains, patriarchy pushes back, and the struggle continues Women advance in business, politics, and education, and men assert their control over women’s bodies where they can get away with it.
Radical feminism is the term for that component of the second wave of feminism (in the United States, the phase of the movement that emerged in the 1960s) that most directly confronts men’s sexual exploitation of women. In the three decades that I have been involved in radical feminist projects, this analysis has become more useful than ever in explaining an increasingly corrosive society, the mainstreaming of sexual exploitation, and the epidemic levels of sexual intrusion.
Yet both conservatives and liberals routinely dismiss radical feminism as dangerous, out of date, irrelevant. Why would an analysis that offers a compelling explanation of social trends be ignored? My experience suggests that it’s precisely because of the power of the radical feminist analysis that it is avoided. U.S. society is unwilling, or unable, to confront the pathology of patriarchy, a system of illegitimate authority woven so deeply into the fabric of everyday life that many people are afraid of naming it, let alone confronting it.
I remember clearly my first exposure to radical feminist ideas, when I was 30 years old, in the late 1980s. I knew that the women making these arguments, specifically about men’s exploitation of women in and through pornography, had to be crazy—because if they weren’t crazy I not only would have to rethink what I had learned about the sex/gender system in patriarchy but also change my own behavior. But radical feminism wore me down—with evidence and compelling arguments, along with an undeniable emotional honesty. Once I let myself listen carefully, radical feminism not only explained the oppression of girls and women but also helped me understand why I had never felt I could live up to the pathological standards of masculinity in patriarchy.
I had been taught that feminism, especially radical feminism, was a threat to men. I came to understand that it is a gift to us. Not the kind of gift that makes one feel warm and fuzzy but instead challenges us to be better than our patriarchal culture asks of us, to reject patriarchy’s glorification of control, conquest, and aggression.
I’m about to turn 60, and the half of my life lived with a feminist analysis has not always been easy, nor have I magically overcome all my flaws. But radical feminism allowed me to stop worrying about how to be a “real man” and start figuring out how to be a decent person.

The roots of intelligence: What the study of whales and dolphins can reveal about the basis of human intelligence

Philip Guelpa

The study of the origins and development of human cognitive abilities is a fascinating and vitally important field of research. The results of an investigation recently published in the journal Nature, Ecology & Evolution(“The social and cultural roots of whale and dolphin brains,” Fox, Muthukrishna, and Shultz, November 2017) seeks to elucidate the basis for intelligence in another advanced group of mammalscetaceans, which encompasses whales and dolphinsand to assess the implications regarding humans.
Two bottlenose dolphins preparing to receive a reward after working together on a social task.
It has long been theorized that advanced intelligence in primates, especially humans, is based on their complex social structures. This is known as the social brain hypothesis (SBH), and suggests that a dialectical interaction between members of a social group is required to enable each individual to “model” in their own minds the anticipated behaviors of other group members, including the consequences of their own actions, thereby acting and reacting in a potentially appropriate manner. This is called “theory of mind.”
Obviously, as the numbers of individuals in a group increases, the complexity of the dialectic expands exponentially. When the effects of individual and group behaviors on the external environment are also factored into the equation, each individual’s mental model must become increasingly sophisticated in order for the group as a whole to survive. Failure to do so would represent a severe selective disadvantage.
Cetaceans and humans both have exceptionally large and anatomically sophisticated brains as well as complex behaviors, including cultural transmission of knowledge and hierarchical social organizations. Anatomically, cetaceans have the largest nervous system of any animal group. The possible correlation between social behavior and neurological development was the focus of the study by Fox and colleagues.
Many cetaceans exhibit behaviors that have analogs among humans. “Cetaceans show overwhelming evidence for sophisticated social and prosocial behaviour (including complex alliance relationships; social transfer of hunting techniques; cooperative hunting; complex vocalizations including regional group dialects, vocal mimicry, and ‘signature whistles’ unique to individuals; interspecific cooperation with humans and other species; alloparenting [i.e. shared parenting]; and social play)…” This makes them highly suitable for conducting comparative studies with humans.
The researchers “compiled a comprehensive dataset for body mass, brain mass, group size and social organization characteristics” for 90 species. They then conducted a number of comparisons, such as relationship between group size and brain size, controlling for body size, and evaluated correlations between body size, brain size, and indices of sociality.
The results included the finding of a strong correlation between social categories and brain size: “Cetaceans found in mid-sized social groups had the largest brains (in both absolute and relative terms), followed by those that form large communities (mega-pods); those predominantly found alone or in small groups had the smallest brains.” The authors suggest that this indicates a relationship between social cognition and brain size.
Through further analysis, they defined a “social repertoire” based on “the presence of within-group alliances, caregiving or alloparenting, interspecific cooperation, group hunting, social defence, social play, social learning and complex vocalizations for each species.” This led to the conclusion that “the relationship between social structure and brain size is partly driven by increasing social-behavioral flexibility: a diverse repertoire of social behaviors pays the greatest dividends when all individuals are recognizable to one another and interact regularly.” It is not merely group size, but the quality of social interactions that correlate with brain size. These are similar to behaviors likely to have occurred in early hominin groups.
A group of bottlenose dolphins milling after engaging in a group social interaction.
The study also found that “species with larger relative brain size had richer diets” and tentatively suggest that “large-brained cetaceans are more ecologically flexible.” The diversification of early hominin diets, by the exploitation of a greater variety of food resources, especially the increased proportion of meat (including fat) obtained by hunting, is strongly thought to have provided the nutritional support necessary for brain enlargement that was a key part of human evolution.
The authors observe that, aside from anthropoid primates (humans, apes, and monkeys), these correlations found in cetaceans have been identified in no other mammalian groups.
They conclude that “our results are consistent with theoretical models that predict how culture, behavioral richness and cognition are intertwined and can create a positive feedback loop or ratchet: larger brains can support a larger social repertoire and a larger repertoire can support a greater carrying capacity, potentially offering learners greater opportunity and variety for learning. A large social repertoire combined with sufficiently high-fidelity transmission between conspecifics [i.e., the passing down of cultural information] could have triggered the emergence of the cumulative culture characteristic of the past few million years of human evolution.”
Based on our current understanding, when early hominins (humans and their evolutionary predecessors after the split with their common ancestor with chimpanzees) were forced from forested environments onto the open savannah of Africa, they were anatomically ill-prepared to cope with this new ecological setting. However, hominins had two principal resources. First, they had already relatively developed cognitive abilities, based on the complex social interactions of their forest-dwelling ancestors. Second was their increasing ability to manipulate objects with their hands, due to an existing trend toward bipedalism, which reduced their reliance on upper limbs for locomotion, as indicated by the early hominin fossil Ardipithicus ramidus.
The dialectic between these two pre-existing characteristics, coupled with the intense selective pressure imposed by life in a new and harsh environment, led to hominins following a novel evolutionary trajectory—reliance on increasingly sophisticated technology and the concomitant development of abstract, symbolic thought and language.
Cetaceans have the first, but not the second. Their ability to physically manipulate and modify their environment is highly limited. Therefore, whereas humans employed their pre-existing theory of mind to create cognitive models of the “behavior” of the external world, with which they were in constant, dialectical interaction (i.e., making and using tools), the possibility of such a path for cetaceans was effectively blocked due to their pre-existing adaptation to marine life.
The sophisticated social interactions and interdependencies among early hominins are likely to have been key to the cultural development of technology and, consequently, their survival and unique evolutionary development.