15 Mar 2016

Youth Violence Solution?

Dave Lindorff

London and Philadelphia
Over three thousands miles and more than forty years in age separate anti-violence activists Bilal Qayyum and Noel Williams, yet each advocates a similar solution to ‘the problem’ they seek to solve in their respective cities located on separate sides of the Atlantic Ocean.
Qayyum, 69, of Philadelphia, Pa and Williams, 25, of London, UK each see employment as the critical tool needed to counter violence among youth and young adults living in low-income communities.
“In all my years of working to reduce violence, it’s very clear to me that jobs are a major solution to reducing violence in low-income communities,” Qayyum said, speaking about his roots in violence-reduction efforts dating back to the 1970s when he was an anti-gang worker.
“Jobs, well-paying ones, give people a strong feeling of worth. Poverty breeds violence.”
Sadly, Williams and Qayyum each see the same roadblock on violence reduction: the persistent failure of public sector authorities on both sides of the Atlantic to fully engage community-based persons with the front-line experiences required to effectively resolve the “violence problem” that authorities proclaim they want to solve.
Williams, an ex-gang leader in southwest London turned university student, said, “Who comes to me and asks for advice? I know gangs. I know how it feels to be shot and how it feels to walk down the road feeling oppression from police.”
Williams bristles at the fact that authorities continually employ persons with no life-connection to violence as paid staff to lead violence-reduction initiatives.
“If you want to help people who’ve been to prison, why is it that people who’ve been in prison are never hired?” ex-inmate Williams asked.
“Yes, you need academics and people with college degrees, but you also need people who understand,” he explained.
Williams, who works with youth while attending a university outside of London, said, “Authorities are polite at meetings but they just don’t listen to us when it comes to the policies and programs they do.”
Both Williams and Qayyum said greater private-sector involvement is essential to reverse the crisis in unemployment among youth and young adults.
“Corporations have to buy into solving the jobs problem,” Qayyum said.
Connections between London and Philadelphia extend beyond William Penn, the London native who founded the American city in 1682.
Philadelphia has the highest level of poverty among America’s ten largest cities. The city’s poverty rate of 26.9 percent is statistically the same as in London, where 27 percent of the residents of that rapidly gentrifying city live in poverty.
In London, unemployment among 16-24 year olds is 2.5 times higher than among persons aged 25-64, according to the “London Poverty Profile” released in October 2015. In Philadelphia unemployment among 16-24 years olds is slightly less than twice that of persons aged 25-64.
Investigators often cite youth unemployment as a major factor underlying the August 2011 riots that rocked London and nearly a dozen other cities around England. That outburst followed the fatal police shooting of a young black man in the impoverished Tottenham section of North London.
The 2012 report from North London Citizens, an alliance of 40 civic institutions in the Tottenham area, found that 53.1 percent of the 700 people interviewed listed unemployment as the “key cause” of rioting in Tottenham. Another “major cause” of the rioting was poverty, according to 32.9 percent of those respondents.
An investigation into the 2011 riots by London’s Guardian newspaper in collaboration with the Social Policy Department of the London School of Economics found that 79 percent of the riot participants listed unemployment as a riot cause and 86 percent listed poverty as a cause.
While top officials of Britain’s national government and much of British media cited greed as the main motivation of rioters, riot participants interviewed during the Guardian/LSE investigation listed greed below seven other factors that included policing, government policy and the fatal shooting of Mark Duggan, along with poverty and unemployment.
An inquiry into the 2011 riots commissioned by the British government also listed unemployment and poverty as underlying issues. But the government’s written response to its own inquiry declared: “It is not acceptable that poverty, race and the challenging economy were used as excuses for the appalling behavior we saw on our streets in August 2011.”
Dr. Jacob Whittingham, who operates a youth program in London that emphasizes education and entrepreneurship, said Britain’s national government, after the 2011 riots, seemingly focused on stiff imprisonment for rioters and budget cuts, including funding reductions for youth programs.
“Basically people give lip service. There was no attempt by the central government to understand why the riots happened,” Whittingham said. “There was no urgency to do something because people don’t listen.”
In 1985, an earlier riot seared Tottenham after the death of a woman during a police raid. The governmental inquiry into that earlier riot criticized unemployment and poverty in Tottenham along with abusive policing -– the same elements that drove the 2011 outburst that spread across England.
According to the 1986 report of the “Broadwater Farm Inquiry,” unemployment for “young Black men was a terrible 83%.” Over 90% of Tottenham adults interviewed during that inquiry saw “unemployment as a big problem.”
Veteran Tottenham rights activist Stafford Scott said the recalcitrance in Britain to earnestly addressing unemployment and poverty among non-whites is rooted in racism. That Broadwater report from three decades ago cites testimony Scott gave to the inquiry.
“White Britain does not accept racism in real time,” Scott said during a recent interview, “now there is an admission that racism existed in the 1980s. But back then when we raised the issue of racism, they told us to F – – k off.”
While Noel Williams and Bilal Qayyum have never met one anothe,r they have had experiences with the hometown of the other.
Williams visited Philadelphia in 2012, when he spent time in North Philadelphia, an impoverished area riddled with crime that is similar in some ways to his London community of Wandsworth.
“One big similarity I saw was we are all broke. We have no money,” Williams said. “In North Philadelphia there were no places for youth to socialize…there were few [recreation centers]. They are shutting down the [recreation centers] here due to government austerity and that puts young people out on the streets where they don’t need to be.”
Qayyum has never traveled to London but he vividly remembers a meeting with a group of young people from London years ago. Some in that interracial group that Qayyum met with had participated in gang activities.
“They all talked about the lack of opportunities and getting work,” Qayyum said. “They talked about dropping out of school and living in neighborhoods with high numbers of folks using drugs. Sounded like Philly.”
London activist Temi Mwale, 20, became engaged in anti-violence activities after the murder of a close friend five years ago.
“There is no chance to solve violence without ending the ‘state violence’ of poverty, hopelessness and police brutality,” Mwale said, criticizing government officials at local and national levels for failing the see the sources of that create violence.
Government officials, Mwale said, “don’t want to hear the deep story on youth violence. All they see is gangs as the problem, not the poverty that contributes to gang activity. One of my frustrations in dealing with government officials is they ask the same questions over and over. That shows they are not listening.”
A report released in January 2016 by the Centre For Crime and Justice Studies of Manchester Metropolitan University documented the inaccuracy of claims by British police, who declare that since young blacks dominate gang membership they are demonstrably the most violent thus deserve enhanced enforcement like Britain’s version of America’s infamous “Stop-&-Frisk.”
Police and court data cited in the Centre’s report document that black youth were not those responsible for the most serious youth violence.
In London for example, police list blacks as 72 percent of that city’s gang members. But official justice system data collected for that report found that non-blacks committed 73 percent of the serious youth violence in London.
British Prime Minister David Cameron, leader of Britain’s Conservative Party, has made public pronouncements during recent months about his intent to address persistent race-based inequities.
While Cameron’s words may represent a step forward, Simon Woolley, Director of Britain’s Operation Black Vote, said the issue is holding the Prime Minister accountable when his government is meanwhile “undermining civil society,” particularly with austerity budget cuts that disproportionately impact non-whites.
Woolley remains critical of the national government’s lack of investments after the 2011 riots, for example in festering areas like unemployment among youth and young adults –- including young adults who have college degrees. That lack of investment arose from a consensus among the elite that the cause of the 2011 riots was “anti-social behavior with no connection to social and economic inequalities,” Woolley said.
Woolley warns, “There is a young underclass out there that can explode at anytime.”

America's Gestapo: The FBI's Reign Of Terror

John W. Whitehead

We want no Gestapo or secret police. The FBI is tending in that direction. They are dabbling in sex-life scandals and plain blackmail.”—President Harry S. Truman
Don't Be a Puppet” is the message the FBI is sending young Americans.
As part of the government's so-called ongoing war on terror, the nation's de facto secret police force is now recruiting students and teachers to spy on each other and report anyone who appears to have the potential to be “anti-government” or “extremist.”
Using the terms “anti-government,” “extremist” and “terrorist” interchangeably, the government continues to add to its growing list of characteristics that could distinguish an individual as a potential domestic terrorist.
For instance, you might be a domestic terrorist in the eyes of the FBI (and its network of snitches) if you:
  • express libertarian philosophies (statements, bumper stickers)
  • exhibit Second Amendment-oriented views (NRA or gun club membership)
  • read survivalist literature, including apocalyptic fictional books
  • show signs of self-sufficiency (stockpiling food, ammo, hand tools, medical supplies)
  • fear an economic collapse
  • buy gold and barter items
  • subscribe to religious views concerning the book of Revelation
  • voice fears about Big Brother or big government
  • expound about constitutional rights and civil liberties
  • believe in a New World Order conspiracy
Despite its well-publicized efforts to train students, teachers, police officers, hairdressers, store clerks, etc., into government eyes and ears, the FBI isn't relying on a nation of snitches to carry out its domestic spying.
There's no need.
The nation's largest law enforcement agency rivals the NSA in resources, technology, intelligence, and power. Yet while the NSA has repeatedly come under fire for its domestic spying programs, the FBI has continued to operate its subversive and clearly unconstitutional programs with little significant oversight or push-back from the public, Congress or the courts.
Indeed, as I point out in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, the FBI has become the embodiment of how power, once acquired, can be easily corrupted and abused.
When and if a true history of the FBI is ever written, it will not only track the rise of the American police state but it will also chart the decline of freedom in America.
The FBI's laundry list of crimes against the American people includes surveillance, disinformation, blackmail, entrapment, intimidation tactics, harassment and indoctrination, governmental overreach, abuse, misconduct, trespassing, enabling criminal activity, and damaging private property.
And that's just based on what we know.
Whether the FBI is planting undercover agents in churches, synagogues and mosques; issuing fake emergency letters to gain access to Americans' phone records; using intimidation tactics to silence Americans who are critical of the government;recruiting high school students to spy on and report fellow students who show signs of being future terrorists; or persuading impressionable individuals to plot acts of terror and then entrapping them, the overall impression of the nation's secret police force is that of a well-dressed thug, flexing its muscles and doing the boss' dirty work of ensuring compliance, keeping tabs on potential dissidents, and punishing those who dare to challenge the status quo.
As the FBI'spowers have grown, its abuses have mounted. 
The agency's National Security Letters, one of the many illicit powers authorized by the USA Patriot Act, allows the FBI to secretly demand that banks, phone companies, and other businesses provide them with customer information and not disclose the demands. An internal audit of the agency found that the NSL program to be riddled with widespread violations.
The FBI's spying capabilities are on a par with the NSA.
The FBI's surveillance technology boasts an invasive collection of spy tools ranging from Stingray devices that can track the location of cell phones to Triggerfish devices which allow agents to eavesdrop on phone calls.  In one case, the FBI actually managed to remotely reprogram a “suspect's” wireless internet card so that it would send “real-time cell-site location data to Verizon, which forwarded the data to the FBI.”
The FBI's hacking powers have gotten downright devious.
FBI agents not only have the ability to hack into any computer, anywhere in the world, but they can also control that computer and all its stored information, download its digital contents, switch its camera or microphone on or off and even control other computers in its network. Given the breadth of the agency's powers, the showdown between Apple and the FBI over customer privacy appears to be more spectacle than substance.
The FBI's reach is more invasive than ever.
Today, the FBI boasts an annual budget of more than $8 billion, employs more than 35,000 individuals and operates more than 56 field offices in major cities across the U.S., as well as 400 resident agencies in smaller towns, and more than 50 international offices. In addition to their “data campus,” which houses more than 96 million sets of fingerprints from across the United States and elsewhere, the FBI is also, according to The Washington Post, “building a vast repository controlled by people who work in a top-secret vault on the fourth floor of the J. Edgar Hoover FBI Building in Washington. This one stores the profiles of tens of thousands of Americans and legal residents who are not accused of any crime. What they have done is appear to be acting suspiciously to a town sheriff, a traffic cop or even a neighbor.”
If there's one word to describe the FBI's covert tactics, it's creepy.
The agency's biometric database has grown to massive proportions, the largest in the world, encompassing everything from fingerprints, palm, face and iris scans to DNA, and is being increasingly shared between federal, state and local law enforcement agencies in an effort to target potential criminals long before they ever commit a crime. This is what's known as pre-crime.
As countless documents make clear, the FBI has no qualms about using its extensive powers in order to blackmail politicians, spy on celebrities and high-ranking government officials, and intimidate dissidents of all stripes.
It's an old tactic, used effectively by former authoritarian regimes.
In fact, as historian Robert Gellately documents, the Nazi police state was repeatedly touted as a model for other nations to follow, so much so that Hoover actually sent one of his right-hand men, Edmund Patrick Coffey, to Berlin in January 1938 at the invitation of Germany's secret police. As Gellately noted, “[A]fter five years of Hitler's dictatorship, the Nazi police had won the FBI's seal of approval.”
Indeed, so impressed was the FBI with the Nazi order that, as the New York Times revealed, in the decades after World War II, the FBI, along with other government agencies, aggressively recruited at least a thousand Nazis, including some of Hitler's highest henchmen, brought them to America, hired them on as spies and informants, and then carried out a massive cover-up campaign to ensure that their true identities and ties to Hitler's holocaust machine would remain unknown. Moreover, anyone who dared to blow the whistle on the FBI's illicit Nazi ties found himself spied upon, intimidated, harassed and labeled a threat to national security.
So not only have American taxpayers been paying to keep ex-Nazis on the government payroll for decades but we've been subjected to the very same tactics used by the Third Reich: surveillance, militarized police, overcriminalization, and a government mindset that views itself as operating outside the bounds of the law.
This is how freedom falls, and tyrants come to power.
Secret police. Secret courts. Secret government agencies. Surveillance. Intimidation. Harassment. Torture. Brutality. Widespread corruption. Entrapment. Indoctrination. These are the hallmarks of every authoritarian regime from the Roman Empire to modern-day America.
Yet it's the secret police—tasked with silencing dissidents, ensuring compliance, and maintaining a climate of fear—who sound the death knell for freedom in every age.

America's Laughable ‘News' Media

Eric Zuesse

As of Friday March 4th, democracy ended in Turkey, but you'd hardly have known it by reading the international ‘news' at the major (and at most of the minor) U.S.-based ‘news' sites, as of around 4PM Eastern time in the U.S., nearly a day after the event. Nor has it been announced even now, ten days after that historic event occurred.

Here was the ‘news' coverage the next day, March 5th, 24 hours after the event:

The New York Times World News section online buried nearly a third of the way down the main page, "Turkey Seizes Newspaper, Zaman, as Press Crackdown Continues,” immediately below “Gunmen Kill 16 at Nursing Home in Yemen.” The news report didn't even mention that the government-seizure of Turkey's largest newspaper and its associated equivalent of America's AP news-service constitutes the signal event in Turkish President Erdogan's ending of his country's democracy. It's like: when did the NYT ever report that George W. Bush had lied about the evidence he had regarding “Saddam's WMD”? Never.

Nonetheless, that page's box which was headlined “Most Emailed” showed: “1. Turkey Seizes Newspaper Zaman, as Press Crackdown Continues.” No matter how much the Times's management wanted to downplay the event and its significance, readers still were emailing it more than any other story in the entire section. Apparently, reader-interest is one thing, but what the management want the readers to be informed about is something quite different (and that's not even talking about accuracy, but deception is rampant in America's mainstream and almost all of its non-mainstream ‘news' reporting). Perhaps the corporation makes up for it in advertising-income from their major advertisers, who don't want the public to have their eyes focused on certain things (such as that NATO, and Turkey's being in  NATO, aren't about ‘American values' nor ‘U.S. national security', but about ultimately conquering Russia). And people still subscribe to it? Yes, they do; they pay their good money for that bad ‘journalism'; after all, that's ‘journalism' which wins lots of U.S. national awards (not that that's any authentic indication of the newspaper's quality — it's not).

By contrast: Britain's Independent  came closer to the mark of reality, placing the story front and large on its homepage as the top news-story of all, which it actually is: “Seizure of Newspaper Could Cost Turkey Its Place in Europe, Warns EU Official.” (But, maybe not its place in the American-run NATO — after all, the U.S. aristocracy needs Turkey for things like shooting down Russian bombers that are killing jihadists who want to replace Russia's ally Bashar al-Assad's secular, non-sectarian, government, which the U.S. has long been trying to overthrow.)

The Huffington Post's homepage had as its lead headline, “155 Delegates at Stake,” and 20% down the page headlined “Turkish Police Fire Tear Gas At Newspaper As EU Officials Lament Press Record”. That news-report was from Reuters, not HuffPo, and the headline was rather ho-hum and certainly ignored the real story here, but having to go 20% down the homepage to find it isn't quite so terrible, even if that's not where it belongs — it belongs at the very top of the homepage (and with a headline like “Democracy Ends in Turkey,” which fairly represents both the event and its significance).

Meanwhile, HuffPo's World post section itself also  didn't lead with this story, but instead with, “A Dangerous Country for Women: The Shocking Reality Of The Sexual Violence In Papua New Guinea” — a tragic cultural reality there, but no actual news-story, much less a news-story that will possibly affect the future history of the entire world. Then, was shown as only an AP headline, down below all of the featured stories (the ones that had pictures there), down in the lower portion of Huffpost's Worldpost section, was this: "Protestors Met With Tear Gas After Turkey Seizes Control Of Newspaper.” That's even worse than the NYT. However, unlike the NYT, a reader's access to all of HP is free; so, readers' pocketbooks aren't being charged to read whatever it is.

And then, on March 9th, if one googled the phrase “Democracy Ended in Turkey”, what did one find? 

The first listing was “The End of Turkey's Experiment With Democracy”; that's dated 16 November 2015, and it's a professor's allegation that Turkey's parliamentary elections on November 1st shouldn't be called “free and fair.” Perhaps not, but sometimes even Presidential elections in our own country are similarly challenged, without alleging “The End of America's Experiment With Democracy.” 

Another leading listing there was “Turkish Democracy Is Being Quietly Stolen”; that's dated 4 August 2015, and it's a Bloomberg columnist's argument that Erdogan's policies were set on a path to “revive the ethnic hatreds that mired Turkey in a 30-year war starting in the mid-1980s, costing an estimated 40,000 lives and untold economic opportunity.”

Googling “Democracy Ends in Turkey” produced only one article, my own on March 4th.

Even as of now, there is nowhere the headline “Democracy Ended in Turkey,” despite the fact that it did happen, ten days ago on March 4th, when the Erdogan government took over the nation's largest newspaper and replaced the personnel. Do American ‘news' media not think that, if, say, the U.S. government took over and replaced the personnel at The New York Times, we'd have any excuse whatsoever for still calling the U.S. a “democracy”? Maybe they think that freedom of the press to criticize the government isn't really necessary  in a ‘democracy'. That appears to be the virtually universal opinion in our press.

What does this say about whether the United States is  a democracy?

Not only did just a few small websites run my news-report, which I had submitted (free-of-charge) to all U.S. ‘news' media; but, even five days later, none of the ones that didn't run it had yet reported that democracy had ended in Turkey. Though it's major news, only few and small news-media in the U.S. have reported it, even now, ten days after it happened. Will they ever  report it? Each day that they don't, makes it even more embarrassing for them that they didn't. Thus, the best business-decision in such a case is: don't report it at all. So: maybe they won't. Ever (except in history-books, perhaps). It's similar to the situation: there has been no headline “George W. Bush Lied About WMD.” But he did; it merely wasn't reported, not even after the fact (until I wrote about it in a 2004 book, which few people bought). (When I told major ‘news' reporters, at the time of the evidence, in September 2002, none were interested; none reported on it, when it was  news.)

Why one would pay for any ‘news' medium, in the U.S., is a problematic question, given the almost uniformly low quality of the news-service they're all providing to their readers.

Has the U.S. aristocracy's manipulation of its ‘news' ‘reporting' ever been more blatant than is the case today? Not only does the ‘news' lack the important relevant historical, cultural, and political, context, in order for it to be able to be at all accurately interpreted and understood by readers, but the news-placement  is obviously driven by other considerations than to serve the readers' needs — such as the readers' needs for the most-significant stories to be in the most-prominent positions. 

Ulterior motives obviously drive America's ‘news' media. To call that a ‘free' press is to beg the question: Who owns the press, and whose interests are the employees of ‘news' organizations (the reporters and the editors) actually being hired to serve? The advertisers'? The owners'? Surely not  the subscribers.

If America's ‘news' media aren't trusted, there's very sound reason for that: they shouldn't  be; and that's because there's no intelligent reason for the public to trust them. None.

The History Of Hollywood: Propaganda For White Supremacy At Home And US Militarism Abroad

Garikai Chengu

For centuries American film has been one of the most important apparatus used for perpetuating American white supremacy and justifying American military adventures.
Racism in film and white supremacy are so intricately interwoven into the fabric of America that they have become virtually undetectable, much like carbon monoxide, until the deadly damage has occurred. Film is a reflection of society and society in turn is influenced by film.
Ever since the Lumiere brothers first developed film in 1896, it has been an astoundingly effective racial propaganda tool. As the first universal mass medium it efficiently utilized high drama through the fixation of emotional sequences. Put simply, effective propaganda starts precisely where critical thinking ends.
To create drama, particularly in action and war movies, Hollywood needs bad guys, and through the consistent use of racial stereotypes these enemies have included the Vietnamese during the Vietnam war, the Russians throughout the Cold War, Muslims during the ongoing War on Terror and the Japanese after Pearl Harbor.
In American film and media, during the Yellow peril the widespread image of the Japanese as sub-human created an emotional context which formed a justification for the nuclear bombings in Hiroshima and Nagasaki that instantly slaughtered 140,000 innocent people, as well as the establishment of concentration camps for Japanese-Americans on US soil.
The first group in Hollywood history to have been depicted as dangerous savages is Native Americans.
The gross misrepresentation of Native Americans has been a longstanding problem for American film makers ever since the rise of 19th-century Western frontier literature, which portrayed pioneers as struggling with restless natives, without acknowledging the genocide committed by white men.
Despite vast evidence of Native American technological advances and complex civilization, Hollywood films depict native culture as a "blanket ethnicity," thereby pigeonholing the various groups and cultures into one group defined by stereotypical tropes.
To this day white actors portray Native Americans using "Redface", which is the practice of wearing feathers, war paint, etc. by non-natives, which propagate American Indian stereotypes. Johnny Depp recently wore Redface in the movie the Lone Ranger. Disturbingly, but hardly surprisingly, the movie won an Oscar nomination for "Best Makeup and Hair Styling".
According to a recent YouGov survey, "make believe" childhood games like Cowboys and Indians are more popular amongst children than video games from the $60 billion gaming industry. One may ask oneself if the popular American childhood game of Cowboys and Indians is essentially the cultural equivalent of Germans playing a game with the same rules that might be called Nazis and Jews? Why then should we tolerate one and not the other, if not for a deep seeded racism towards Native Americans that we too are unwilling to acknowledge?
Most Hollywood financiers, directors and Oscar voters are rich, old white men. As in pretty much all facets of American capitalism, minorities are underrepresented in every stage of film and television production; from writing to directing to acting to producing.
Racism towards Blacks in American mass entertainment spans centuries.
This discrimination began during the minstrel era of 1830 to 1890. Minstrel shows were comprised of various skits, music and comedy that revolved around the ugliest stereotypes of Blacks. The stereotypical Black characters of the minstrel shows have played a large part in spreading racist images and perceptions across the world.
For half a decade, minstrel shows were the most popular form of entertainment in the United States.
The term Jim Crow is named after a popular 19th-century minstrel song that caricatured African Americans. "Jim Crow" eventually came to represent the brutal system of state-sanctioned apartheid and racial oppression in America.
The American minstrel show was effectively dead by WW1, and it was replaced by Hollywood's Blackface later in vaudeville, Broadway, silent movies, and eventually talking pictures and film.
Historian Ken Paget notes that one of the first Blacks to perform in Blackface for white audiences was the man who invented tap dancing, William Henry Lane, aka Master Juba. Lane's talent and skill were extraordinary and ultimately he became famous enough that he was able to perform in his own skin.
Early film rose with the dissemination of racial stereotypes to large audiences across the world. Early silent movies such as The Wooing and Wedding of a Coon in 1904, The Slave in 1905, The Sambo Series 1909-1911 and The Nigger in 1915 perpetuated negative depictions of Blacks through an exciting new mass medium.
Throughout Hollywood's history Black entertainers and directors have always been ghettoised and segregated from mainstream film. Northern Blacks resorted to making silent movies of their own known as "Race movies" that were highly critical of American racism. To this day, Black narratives are ghettoised within a separated Black films industry. In America, Black is not merely a skin color it is also a movie genre, for films made by Blacks for Blacks because the understanding is that whites could not possibly be interested in movies with Black characters.
Mr. Paget illustrates how between 1930 and 1950, animators at Warner Brothers, Walt Disney, MGM, Looney Tunes, and many other independent studios, produced thousands of cartoons that unashamedly perpetuated the same old racist stereotypes. This period is now known as the golden age of animation, and right up until the mid 1960s, cartoons were screened before all feature films.
Up to the mid twentieth century in Hollywood, Blackface was used in well over 90 instances. There eventually was a transition from Blackface to whitewashing, which marked the simultaneous, and intertwined persistence of white supremacy and so-called present day post-racialism. Whitewashing, whereby white actors depict characters of color without the use of Blackface is the poster-child of post-racialism: the idea that America is devoid of racial preference, discrimination, and prejudice. On the contrary, post-racialism is in fact the new racism. Post-racialism pretends that there is equal opportunity while ignoring the institutional and economic racism that infects inner cities and fills prisons.
The majority of people in America are minorities and yet this year every single Oscar nominee was white and ninety five percent of Oscar voters where white. It is hard for Black actors and actresses to gain prominence when white people are playing their roles.
For instance, the past year alone has seen the Scotsman Gerard Butler play the Egyptian God, Set, in Gods of Egypt, Emma Stone played an Asian American woman in Aloha, and Ridley Scott cast white actors in Exodus: Gods and Kings, the movie based on Moses.
Director Ridley Scott explained why Hollywood engages in the practice of whitewashing: “I can’t mount a film of this budget, where I have to rely on tax rebates in Spain, and say that my lead actor is Mohammad so-and-so from such-and-such. I’m just not going to get it financed. So the question doesn’t even come up”.
Perhaps, nothing shows Hollywood's racial insensitivity quite like the recent casting of actress Zoe Saldana in Blackface as Nina Simone in the upcoming biopic Nina. Nina Simone was one of the Black is beautiful movement's most powerful historical figures.
The light skinned Saldana appears in Blackface. Ms. Saldana's skin has been darkened, her hair has been made to look more ethnic, and prosthetics have been used to widen out her nose, alter her features and give her buck teeth.
Nina Simone made it very clear that her "job as a singer is to tell Blacks that Blackness, Black power and Black culture are from civilizations of unmatched beauty but we just don't know it, and I will educate Blacks by whatever means necessary".
The very darkness of Simone’s skin and her distinctly African features defined both her music and her politics. Therefore, to portray her in this way is nothing short of criminal, it is a tone-deaf gross whitewashing of unapologetic Blackness.
Nina Simone is part of a small group of women who came from being considered the least valuable human beings in all of the United States, a dark-skinned Black woman from Jim Crow South, and who became a music icon whose insistent Blackness has inspired generations.
Today's generation of Muslims depicted in cinema are virtually limited to terrorists and national security threats, which serves to justify a dangerously oversized military abroad and unprecedented surveillance and erosion of civil liberties at home.
For many millennial Americans, the first exposure to Muslim "others" was the 1992 Disney classic Aladdin, in which most good characters were Westerners and the savages where invariably dark skinned. The children's movies song lyric is instructive:
I come from a land, from a faraway place where the caravan camels roam / Where they cut off your ear if they don’t like your face / It’s barbaric, but hey, it’s home.
Ever since Aladdin, there have been a litany of propaganda films that lionize American military aggression across the Middle East. Hollywood's Islamophobia operates in the service of American militarism and American militarism in turn operates in service of Hollywood. The U.S. military has had a dominant presence in Hollywood since the early 1900s through the Pentagon's Film Liaison Office. The Liaison Office's propaganda mission is clear: review American war movie scripts and decide whether to offer them support depending on if they conform with the interests of the country's military leaders. In short, the Pentagon only supports Hollywood's pro-war propaganda films.
America's war on terror has cost Americans trillions of dollars and Arabs millions of lives and Hollywood has pumped billions of dollars into creating movies that endorse America's disastrous foreign policy. In a single year at the Golden Globes, there were awards for Argo, where a bearded CIA hero saves American hostages from Iranian hordes; and Zero Dark Thirty, depicting the heroic hunt for Bin Laden; and President Obama's favorite TV show Homeland, showing courageous Americans battling endless Muslim jihadis at home and abroad.
Then of course there is American Sniper, the highest grossing war film in US history. The American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee reported a spike in Islamophobia and hate crimes after the release of American Sniper which culminating in the recent slaying of three young Muslims in North Carolina who were shot in the head sniper execution style.
Despite the fact that the FBI confirms that white supremacists commit far more acts of domestic terrorism than their Muslim counterparts, Hollywood's penchant for white supremacy continues to depict Muslims as sinister and exotic brutes incompatible with American civility, rather than portraying the full spectrum of human density of their lives.
White terrorism founded America, built the nation through slavery, and continues to be the nation's largest domestic terrorist threat. From Redface, to Blackface, to Yellowface, to Brownface, Hollywood's long and torrid history of white supremacy through their depiction of other races as dangerous or inferior has been a pillar of American racism at home and an integral weapon for American militarism abroad.

The Climate Emergency: Time To Switch To Panic Mode?

Ugo Bardi

The latest temperature data have broken all records (image from "think progress"). At best, this is an especially large oscillation and the climate system will be soon back on track; following the predictions of the models - maybe to be retouched to take into account faster climbing temperatures. A worst, it is an indication that the system is going out of control and moving to a new climate state faster than anyone could have imagined.
James Schlesinger once uttered one of those profound truths that explain a lot of what we see around us: it was: "people have only two modes of operation: complacency and panic."
So far, we have been in the "complacency" mode of operation in regard to climate change: it doesn't exist, if exist it is not a problem, if it is a problem, it is not our fault, and anyway doing something about it would be too expensive to be worth doing. But the latest temperature data are nothing but spine-chilling. What are we seeing? Is this just a sort of a rebound from the so-called "pause"? Or something much more worrisome? We may be seeing something that portends a major switch in the climate system; an unexpected acceleration of the rate of change. There are reasons to be worried, very worried: the CO2 emissions seem to have peaked, but that didn't generate a slowdown of the rate of increase of the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere. If nothing else, it is growing faster than ever. And then there is the ongoing methane spike and, as you know, methane is a much more potent greenhouse gas than CO2.
What's happening? Nobody can say for sure, but these are not good symptoms; not at all. And that may be a good reason to switch to panic mode.
The problem is that societies; specifically in the form called "states" do not normally show much intelligence in their behavior, especially when they are in a state of panic. One of the reasons is that states are normally ruled by psychopaths whose attitude is based on a set of simple rules, mainly involving intimidation or violence, or both. But it is not just a question of psychopaths in power; the whole society reacts to threats like a psychopath: with the emphasis on doing "something", without much concern about whether it is the right thing to do and what would the consequences could be. So, if climate starts to be perceived as a real and immediate threat, we may expect a reaction endowed with all the strategic finesse of a street brawl: "you hit me - I hit you."
A possible, counterintuitive, panic reaction might be of "doubling down" in the denial of the threat. That could lead to actions such as actively suppressing the diffusion of data and studies about climate; de-funding climate research, closing down climate research centers, marginalizing those who believe that climate is a problem; for instance classifying them among "terrorists." All that is already happening in some degree and it may well become the next craze, in particular if the coming US elections will handle the presidency to an active climate denier. That would mean hard times for at least a few years for everyone who is trying to do something against climate change. And, perhaps, it would mean the total ruin of the Earth's ecosystem.
The other possibility is to switch all the way to the other extreme and fight climate change with the same methods used to fight terrorism; that is, bombing it into submission. Of course, you cannot bomb the earth's climate into submission, but the idea of forcing the ecosystem to behave the way we want is the basic concept of "geoengineering".
In the world of environmentalism, geoengineering enjoys more or less the same reputation that Saddam Hussein enjoyed in the Western press in the 1990s. That's for good reasons: geoengineering is often a set of ideas that go from the dangerous to the impossible, all ringing of desperation. For a good idea of how exactly desperate these ideas can be, just take a look at the results of a recent study on the idea of pumping huge amounts of seawater on top of the Antarctic ice sheet in order to prevent sea level rise. If it were a science fiction novel, you'd say it is too silly to be worth reading.
However, it may be appropriate to start familiarizing with the idea that geoengineering might be the next world craze. And, perhaps, it is better to take the risk of doing something that could go wrong than to do nothing, considering that we have been doing nothing so far. Don't forget that there are also good forms of geoengineering, for instance the form called "biosphere regeneration." It is based on reforestation, fighting desertification, regenerative agriculture and the like. Removing some CO2 from the atmosphere by transforming it into plants can't do too much damage, although it cannot be enough to solve the problem. But it may stimulate also other fields of action against climate change; from adaptation to switching to reneable energy. Maybe there is still hope..... maybe.

What is the Efficacy of Sanctions on North Korea?

Sandip Kumar Mishra


The United Nations Security Council decided to impose more sanctions on North Korea on 2 March 2016. This time, it took around two months for the UN to agree on ‘tougher sanctions’ on North Korea after Pyongyang conducted its fourth nuclear test on 6 January. While the international community was deliberating the nature of the sanctions, North Korea conducted a satellite launch that was alleged to be long-range missile, and fired short several short-range missiles. Even after the sanctions, North Korea does not look ready to change its behaviour. In fact, there are reports that North Korea may mount a nuclear attack without warning and that North Korean leader Kim Jong-un has ordered more nuclear tests in the near future.

The North Korean nuclear conundrum has become South Korea and the US' Achilles Heel. The leaders of both the countries have no clue how to deal with the situation except their blindfolded belief that a tit for tat action is the right choice. Every incident of provocative behaviour is seen as a product of North Korean desperation, and more sanctions are considered the right choice in being able to force the North Korean regime to either change its behaviour or for it to collapse.

It seems that both South Korea and the US are still not ready to review their North Korea policy. Even after the recent episode, they were adamant to impose more sanctions and pressure on North Korea. When the UNSC took longer to deliberate the issue because of certain Chinese and Russian reservations, both Seoul and Washington went ahead with their bilateral sanctions. On 18 February, US President Barack Obama signed new sanctions on North Korea into law for its nuclear and missile tests and also because of suspected cyber attack incidents. Similarly, South Korea declared the closure of the Kaesong Industrial Complex (KIC) in February, and on March 8, blacklisted dozens of North Korea entities and people for the first time, along with banning ships that have visited North Korean ports. 

In addition to sanctions, South Korea and the US have been more direct in criticising China for its failure to contain North Korean provocative behaviour, indicating the frustration in Seoul and Washington. However, in China’s perspective, South Korea and the US obdurate stands is also to be blamed for North Korea’s behaviour. Furthermore, it may be said that these antics are not because of China but rather in spite of it. In fact, both the US and South Korea accepted that China cooperated with the international community in putting sanctions on North Korea in an unprecedented manner after the third North Korean nuclear test in February 2013. China has nothing to gain from aggressive North Korean nuclear and missile programmes.

North Korean provocation, on the other hand, would only help the US make its presence in the region more elaborate and stronger. For example, South Korea’s desire to join the Terminal High Altitude Air Defense (THAAD) system and the increasingly significant annual joint military exercise between the US and South Korea are against the national interests of China. Open criticism of China after the North Korean nuclear test was therefore premature and could have been avoided. China may think that it has not been appreciated for what it has done, and instead been blamed for not doing enough. Such an approach runs the risk of pushing China closer to North Korea, and the delay in the passing of the UN resolution on the North Korean test could be attributed to China’s reluctance to cooperate. In the case of Chinese and Russian reluctance to implement sanctions on North Korea, there may be doubt about the success and effectiveness of the policy.

It is time to re-think the efficacy of sanctions: despite increasing the quantum of sanctions with every instance of provocation, why has the international community  not been able to achieve satisfactory results? The answer to this question is that sanctions hurt a country if and to the extent it is connected and interdependent with other countries. North Korea has less than US$8 billion external trade and around of half of it is with China. Since the North Korean economy has negligible connections with the outside world, putting more sanctions may not be as effective as they are considered in other cases. Even if sanctions have some small impact on North Korea, it would be felt more by the common people and not by the ruling elite.

Thus, a regime of more strict sanctions on North Korea, which has been sought by the US and South Korea, does not have potential to change North Korea's behaviour. Rather, it may lead to a more hostile North Korea and any miscalculation or accident would lead to disastrous consequences for the Korean peninsula.

Sri Lankan government refuses to release Tamil political prisoners

Subash Somachandran & S. Jayanth

Fourteen Sri Lankan Tamil political prisoners ended a hunger strike of nearly three weeks last Friday at Welikada prison in Colombo after Prison Reforms and Rehabilitation Minister D.M. Swaminathan claimed he would expedite their cases. The government, however, refused the hunger strikers’ demand for the unconditional release of all Tamil political detainees.
The continued incarceration without trial of hundreds of Tamils not only exposes the ongoing repression and discrimination against the country’s Tamil minority. It is part of an escalating attack on the democratic rights of all sections of the Sri Lankan working class.
On February 29, 75 detainees at the Welikada prison held a one-day hunger strike in support of the 14 Tamil hunger strikers. Relatives and supporters of the protesting Tamil prisoners also held pickets and sit-down demonstrations in Jaffna, Vavuniya and Mannar in the north of the island over the past two weeks. Last Friday, Jaffna University students demonstrated to demand the release of the Tamil detainees.
There are still over 160 Tamil political prisoners being held without trial in Sri Lankan jails. Some were arrested during the nearly 30-year communal war against the separatist Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE). Others were taken into custody after the military defeat of the LTTE in May 2009.
All are held under the draconian Prevention of Terrorism Act, which allows the police to use so-called confessions to charge and detain people for more than 18 months. The police force and its intelligence wing are notorious for extracting false confessions by torture.
The latest hunger strike was the fourth such prison protest in the last six months. In October 2015, over 220 detainees in 14 jails began an indefinite hunger strike over their ongoing imprisonment. The protests ended after the Tamil National Alliance (TNA), a coalition of the Tamil bourgeois parties, convinced the hunger strikers to end their action, claiming the government was ready to release them.
President Maithripala Sirisena and Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe have repeatedly insisted there are no political prisoners and that those in custody are being held on criminal charges. Defence Minister Ruwan Wijewardena reiterated this claim, telling the media last Wednesday that “legal action will be taken against those whose crimes are proved.”
In the face of widespread popular opposition, the government in recent months has released over 60 detainees but under stringent bail conditions. It has also established several special courts to try some detainees.
The flimsy character of the cases against the Tamil prisoners was again exposed when a special high court in Vavuniya released Murugaiah Komahan and Ganesaratnam Santhadevan on February 29. Imprisoned for seven years, they were released 15 months after a previous high court hearing rejected police charges based on supposed confessions of the detainees.
As it did last October, the TNA pressured the latest group of hunger strikers to halt their protests. On February 28, TNA parliamentarians Sivasakthi Ananthan and Selvan Adikalanathan visited Anuradhapura jail to try to persuade two of the protesters to end their strike.
A week later in Colombo, the TNA leaders again appealed to the detainees to end their fast, promising to take action to release them. While the hungers strikers rejected the empty promises from the TNA leadership, they could see no way forward and reluctantly decided to abandon the protest.
The TNA, led by parliamentarian R. Sambandan, has close relations with the pro-US Sirisena-Wickremesinghe government. During last year’s presidential election campaign, the TNA backed Sirisena. Like other political groups supporting Sirisena, the TNA highlighted the previous government’s war crimes and attacks on democratic rights, insisting that a new president would release the Tamil prisoners.
The TNA acted in line with advice from the US and India, which wanted former President Mahinda Rajapakse ousted. Washington’s efforts were aimed at scuttling Rajapakse’s close relations with Beijing and lining up Sri Lanka as part of the US war preparations against China.
The TNA wants to cut a deal with Colombo for the administration of the North and East of Sri Lanka. In line with this strategy, it opposes any struggle that might destabilise the present administration and backs its attacks on the working class.
The Socialist Equality Party and International Youth and Students for Social Equality are holding a public meeting in Jaffna on March 20 to expose the pro-imperialist stance of the various Tamil nationalist parties and explain the socialist perspective needed to fight the growing danger of war.
World Socialist Web Site reporters recently spoke to the families of several Tamil political prisoners.
Nadesan Tharmarajah, who has been detained at Magazine prison since September 2013, was involved in the latest hunger strike. He has been arrested, detained and tortured three times since the end of the war in 2009. His wife Naagalojini, 37, and a mother of five, is living with a relative in a small house at Achchuveli in Jaffna.
Naagalojini said: “We were previously living in the refugee camp at Vavuniya. My husband was arrested by police and tortured at a military camp in September 2009. He was released but arrested again in November of the same year and detained for three years.
“We feel sad about the prisoners’ fasting campaign. Our children are very worried about their father and don’t like even to play with other children. Our eldest son is 20 years old. He has abandoned his studies and is now working as a day labourer.
“Many times we were starving because we didn’t have a proper income. My husband lost his leg in a military shell attack as we were fleeing the fighting during the war. We visited the prison several months back and were only able to speak to him for a few minutes. We’ve not been able to see him since because we can’t afford to travel to the prison.
“Every two weeks they take my husband to the court and then send him back to the jail. He hasn’t committed any crime. The politicians claim that Sirisena’s ‘good governance’ is better than Rajapakse’s but if that’s the case why they don’t release the detainees?”
Ganeshan Darshan, 26, was arrested at Nawalapitiya in Sri Lanka’s central hill district, his father’s birthplace. He was detained by the Terrorist Investigation Department in 2009 and held at Anuradhapura jail. His mother Chithra Ganeshan said he had been involved in several hunger strikes and, although the government and TNA parliamentarians promised to secure the release of the Tamil detainees, nothing had happened.
“When my son and his fellow prisoner Mathiyarasan Sealskin started fasting on February 25, the TNA parliamentarians visited the prison asked them to stop the hunger strike. They promised to take action to produce them in court soon. They stopped fasting but since then we’ve been unable to contact the MPs.
“I’m sick because I’m always thinking about him. He was shot in his knee during the war and finds it difficult to walk. We can’t afford the fees for lawyers and to visit the courts in the North. He has been jailed for six years but the government cannot produce any charge sheets against him because they have no evidence. My son is a talented artist and has won several prison competition awards. His life is being unnecessarily wasted in the prison.”
Sri Lankan workers—Sinhala and Tamil alike—must take a warning from the ongoing frame-up and incarceration of Tamil political prisoners. These methods will be used against all sections of the working class and the poor as they oppose the government’s attacks on social conditions and democratic rights.
The fight for the unconditional release of political prisoners and the ending of the military occupation of the North and East is part of the struggle to unite Sinhala, Tamil and Muslim workers in defence of jobs, living standards and fundamental democratic rights. This is an integral part of the fight for Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka and Eelam and socialism throughout South Asia and internationally.

Study: Worsening conditions for young people throughout the developed world

Nick Barrickman

Incomes for young people born between 1980 and 1994 have hit unprecedented low levels in the aftermath of the 2008 financial collapse, according to a recent investigative series conducted by the UK’s Guardian publication titled “Millenials: The Trials of Generation Y.” The study draws on income statistics from eight of the world’s 15 most advanced economies, including the US, Canada, Great Britain, Australia, France, Italy, Spain and Germany to paint a picture of dimming social prospects for young people throughout the developed world.
The Guardian cites as contributing factors “a combination of debt, joblessness, globalization, demographics and rising house prices” which “have grave implications for everything from social cohesion to family formation.” Whereas during the 1970s and 1980s people in their 20s averaged more than the national income, the study found that young couples and families in five of the eight countries listed made 20 percent less than the rest of the population today.
“It is likely to be the first time in industrialized history, save for periods of war or natural disaster, that the incomes of young adults have fallen so far when compared with the rest of society,” the British newspaper states.
In the US and Italy, incomes were lower in actual figures than they were a generation ago, with Americans averaging a yearly salary of $27,757 in 2010 compared to $29,638 in 1979. The study notes that young US workers currently make less than those in retirement. In France, households headed by individuals under the age of 50 made less disposable income than recent retirees. In Italy, an 80-year-old pensioner possesses more income than someone under the age of 35.
In many cases, the 2008 financial collapse simply accelerated trends that were already underway. Housing prices in Great Britain and Australia are among the most expensive in the developed world. The average price for a home in Sydney, Australia, is $1 million in Australian dollars, more than 12 times the median household income in the city. The average home loan for first-time buyers in New South Wales is A$424,000. This figure has increased by 43 percent in the past four years alone.
According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics, housing prices have increased more sharply and for a longer period in the past 20 years than at any time since 1880. The Guardian notes that housing costs in the UK and Australia have been increasing at a “neck and neck” pace ahead of the average household income. “We’re heading for a world where rates of home ownership among young people are below 50 percent for the first time,” states Alan Milburn of the Social Mobility and Child Poverty Commission, adding that the UK is heading toward becoming “a society that is permanently divided.” Income for those in their late 20s in the UK remain below levels seen in 2004-2005.
A recent survey by British polling firm Ipsos Mori found that 54 percent of those questioned thought the next generation was or would be worse off than the previous. “It’s the highest we’ve measured—it’s completely flipped around from April 2003,” stated Bobby Duffy, managing director of Ipsos Mori’s Social Research Institute of the findings.
In addition, more than a quarter of individuals in this age group live with their parents. An average woman in this age group today waits 7.1 years longer to become married than in 1981; and the average age of childbirth for young families is nearly four years later than those in 1974.
“My greatest worry is working all my life, constantly chasing debt and never being to own a house or have children,” writes a millennial named “Gemma” in a section of the series entitled “#Itsnotjustyou: Millenials share their secret fears.” Continuing, she states: “The cost of renting privately is rising, the cost of travelling is rising, the cost of living is rising and yet the salaries don’t reflect this rise. … I am worried that capitalism is pushing this and creating a greater wealth inequality gap. It seems unsustainable and to be driving people apart—a recent example is the demonization of our own NHS service and the junior doctors.” Many others share similar nightmares.
The study comes amid other findings revealing similar declines in living standards for youth in the developed world. A 2013 Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) report found nearly 30 million youth in the developed capitalist countries without a job or an education, the basic requirements for functioning in society.
The circumstances faced by young people throughout the world speak to a systemic breakdown of the social order in both the so-called developing and advanced countries, which has been compounded by war and militarism, consecutive attacks on living standards and cuts to social programs, which invariably hit the youngest and most vulnerable the hardest. Though not covered by the study, European nations such as Greece have been reduced to conditions unseen in the developed world, with youth unemployment at over 60 percent due to attacks on living standards demanded by the European Union and enforced by consecutive governments, both right and “left,” under Syriza.
The authors of the Guardian investigation, in an effort to divert rising anger away from the social system responsible for the poverty, destruction of living standards and attendant social misery, single out the relatively-better off living conditions of retirees in order to make a case for attacking pensions and other benefits accruing to the older generation. The publication quotes a recently published interview with Mario Draghi, head of the European Central Bank (ECB), who states “in many countries the labor market is set up to protect older ‘insiders’—people with permanent, high-paid contracts and shielded by strong labor laws. … The side-effect is that young people are stuck with lower-paid, temporary contracts and get fired first in crisis times.”
Rather than receiving expanded employment, pay and access to better living conditions, it is proposed that the young and the old fight over the rapidly diminishing resources made available by bourgeois public officials and the wealthy. While Draghi advocates attacking the pay and benefits of older workers, the ECB head has funneled billions into the hands of European banking institutions; recently upping the monthly total of cash infusions to €80 billion from €60 billion previously and adding to the wealth of the financial elite.
The fate of retirement benefits and wages under the profit-system is pointed to when the newspaper notes “pensioners’ incomes are likely to rise for at least the next decade, after which future generations will be unlikely to benefit [due to] a drop in home ownership, weaker private sector pension schemes and the expectation that state pensions will be less generous in the future.”