October 3 2025 Fourth Anniversary of the Women’s March for Reproductive Rights and Freedom of Bodily Autonomy

      Institutionalized sexual terror and state tyranny in the legislative assault on women’s reproductive rights and the primary freedom of bodily autonomy were challenged in a mass action on October Second of 2021 throughout America, organized by the Women’s March and coordinated with the riveting testimony in Congress of three of our representatives who have had abortions, Cori Bush, Pramila Jayapal, and Barbara Lee.

     There is no freedom without that of bodily autonomy.

      We continue to hold such national marches each and every year until we are all truly equal under the law as guaranteed by our Constitution and in our society as perform our stewardship of each other as co owners of the state and guarantors of each other’s universal human rights, the right of self ownership of our own bodies and of access to healthcare as a precondition of the right to life first among them.

     We can triumph over this wave of theft of our liberty which seeks to redefine the relationship of individuals to the state and render citizenship meaningless if we act in solidarity with coordinated mass action and legislative process. As the Oath of the Resistance given to me in 1982 in Beirut by Jean Genet goes; “We swear our loyalty to each other, to resist and yield not, and abandon not our fellows.”

     For we are many, we are watching, and we are the future.

     As reported by CNN; “Abortion rights activists are gathering at more than 600 marches across the US, holding placards and banners that read, “My mind, my body, my choice” and “Legal abortion for health and life,” as they demand reproductive freedoms.

     The “Rally for Abortion Justice” marches follow the anti-abortion bill in Texas that bans abortions after six weeks — before many women know they have conceived — with no exceptions for rape or incest.

     The Supreme Court, which returns Monday, denied a request to block the Texas measure, and activists now fear it will empower other states to follow suit.

     “Simply put: We are witnessing the most dire threat to abortion access in our lifetime,” the Women’s March website reads.

     The Women’s March is organizing the rallies in partnership with more than 90 groups, including Planned Parenthood Federation of America, a nonprofit that provides reproductive health care, and the Center for American Progress, a progressive public policy research and advocacy organization.”

     As written by Candice Norwood in The 19th; “Beyond Texas’ abortion law, state lawmakers have introduced hundreds of restrictive bills over the last several years. In December, the Supreme Court will hear a case out of Mississippi that directly targets Roe v. Wade. During the committee hearing on Thursday, Rep. Judy Chu spoke about her bill, the Women’s Health Protection Act, that would codify the right to abortion access.

     “I’m so proud that last week the House took the historic step of passing the legislation,” Chu said. “In fact, it was the first affirmative abortion rights bill in nearly 25 years, and it shows the American people that we will not abandon them.”

       As written by Emma Specter in Vogue; “Democratic representatives Cori Bush (Mo.), Pramila Jayapal (Wash.), and Barbara Lee (Calif.) about their own abortions.

     “In the summer of 1994, I was raped, I became pregnant, and I chose to have an abortion,” said Bush, explaining that she lived through an experience of sexual assault while on a church trip at age 17. “To all the Black women and girls who have had abortions and will have abortions, we have nothing to be ashamed of.” Jayapal noted that she sought out her own abortion when she was a young mother of a sick child attempting to deal with postpartum depression; her doctor told her that carrying a second child to term would be risky for both her and the baby. “I very much wanted to have more children, but I simply could not imagine going through that again,” Jayapal told the panel. Lee’s pregnancy occurred before abortion was even legal in the U.S., so her mother sent her to a friend in Texas who arranged for a “back alley” procedure at a clinic in Mexico. “A lot of girls and women in my generation didn’t make it—they died from unsafe abortions,” she said. “In the 1960s, unsafe septic abortions were the primary killer of African American women.”

     Hopefully, as Democrats seek to codify Roe v. Wade, the rest of this country’s predominantly male lawmakers can be as courageous in protecting women’s reproductive rights as Bush, Jayapal, and Lee were in discussing their own extremely personal experiences with abortion.”

     As I wrote in my post of September 5 2021, State Theft of Freedom as Bodily Autonomy: Case of the Texas Abortion Ban; Texas has outlawed all abortion, the Supreme Court has failed to overrule Texas and uphold freedom as our right of bodily autonomy, and patriarchs of Gideonite fundamentalist organizations of sexual terror and subversion of religious freedom are mobilized to enforce it. 

     This in parallel with Texas’ theft of voting rights and citizenship from nonwhite persons as institutionalized white supremacist terror.

     Texas is our Heart of Darkness. We must liberate the peoples of Texas from the grip of Patriarchy and white supremacy and a legislature of subversion of democracy and of fascist state tyranny and terror.

     And the most horrific thing in all of this is that Texas is not an abnormality in American politics, merely the most extreme and clearly evil example of a general condition, our dehumanization and subjugation by elites through the weaponization of fear and the infiltration and subversion of democracy by the Fourth Reich.

     I call for the abolition of the Republican Party as an organization of treason and racist and sexual terror, the proscription of its members from holding or running for any public office, the nationalization of its assets, and the revocation of citizenship and exile of its members and representatives on the grounds that there are no conditions in which the rest of us will be safe if those who would enslave us are not purged from the herd.

      Perhaps Afghanistan will welcome them as refugees; Republican ideas about women and racial tribalism would fit right in with that of the Taliban, one ethnic theocratic group among many. Actually, I wonder if they are really the same people as the Taliban whom they resemble, and just trade their cowboy hats for wool Pakol berets when they fly back and forth. 

      Let them go elsewhere and enslave each other, but we must not allow them to enslave us.

     As I wrote in my post of July 22 2021, Systemic Failures of Unequal Power: the Case of Abortion; To an article in the Washington Post calling out the Texas abortion ban as a canary in the coal mine for legislating away our freedoms, I commented; “There is no freedom without that of bodily autonomy.”

    I received a reply; “There is no freedom without personal responsibility.” This claim was supported by references to abortion as demonic child sacrifice, somewhat beyond the scope of reasonable argument.

     Here is my refutation to ideas of personal responsibility:

     I do not believe in the idea of the innate depravity of man on which our legal system is based as an extension of the doctrine of original sin, or its formulation by Freud as a polymorphosly perverse human nature which must be controlled rather than celebrated and explored, all versions of the Talmudic concept of the yetzer hara, the evil impulse; humans without the restraining force of law do not devolve to atavisms of ruthless barbarism and become dehumanized, but instead become prosocial and mutually interdependent so long as power is not the only thing which has meaning nor fear and its children  force and control the only means of exchange.

     Nor do I believe in law and order; law serves power and order appropriates; chaos autonomizes.

     There is no just authority.

     I believe in history, and in justice as revolutionary struggle.

     I find the origins of evil not in an evil impulse to be controlled, but in the systems and structures of unequal power; hence responsibility is not personal but social and belongs to us all.

      Fear is a co-equal origin of evil, for it is overwhelming and generalized fear coupled with submission to authority which allows fear to be weaponized in service to power, through divisions of exclusionary otherness and elite membership and belonging. Hence arise fascisms of blood, faith, and soil, and the centralization of power and the immunity of authority in a totalitarian carceral state of force and control.

     There is no basis for trying anyone for a crime, when we should be seeking to redress the interdependent, relational, recursive, and holistically distributed causes of our failure which produced it.

     Crime is a symptom of the failure of social systems, not of the unfitness or degeneracy of individuals whose choices are the products of forces they are the victims of; clearly perpetrators share in the responsibility for their actions, though not exclusively. They are simply the last domino to fall in a cascade failure of unequal and unjust initial conditions, and we must change those conditions to restore the balance.

     Crime is an illness of unequal power. Perpetrators are also victims; this does not imply moral equivalence between victims and their abusers. We must heal the flaws of our humanity, rather than punish transgression which centralizes power to an authoritarian carceral state of prisons and police.

     It is not the perpetrator who must answer to us, but we who must answer for them.

     If the purpose of government is to secure those rights which we cannot secure for ourselves, then justice negotiates and guarantees that no person’s liberty infringes on that of any other.

     What are the realistic alternatives to the social use of force? Processes of healing and restorative justice provide models and solutions; therapy not punishment, schools and hospitals not prisons. We all bear sacred wounds which can open us to the pain of others, and it is how we respond to the brokenness of the world and to the flaws, wounds, and pain of others which defines us. We humans are beautiful not in spite of our flaws, but because of them. If a tribe comes together to meet the challenges of its members actions and consequences for the lives of others when they are signs of trauma and crisis or harmful to others, to engage in healing process and restore the balance of power, we become a social organism which can heal itself, without the social use of force or vilification.

     And we can bring the redemptive power of love as healing and revisioning to bear on the issues we face in the world which are more terrible still, and which will require a united front of diverse and unlike persons to find answers. Let us discover our best selves in our kindness to others.

     The question we must ask is not if a thing is good or evil, but why it exists.

     Abortion is a symptom of our failure to confront and dismantle patriarchy; it is a fracture point of a flawed system which acts to relieve pressure, avoid change, and maintain unequal and unjust elite hegemonic power. Change the balance of power, giving women full control of their sexuality, and equality of social agency in general, and much of the nonmedical need for abortion vanishes; a solution I much prefer to the tyranny and state terror of enforcing other people’s ideas of virtue.

     Patriarchy is a special form of faith weaponized in service to power, and male dominion and control over women looks to Abrahamic faith for an apologetics of tyranny.

     As I wrote in my post of March 4 2020, Supreme Court Hears Access to Abortion Case; A Louisiana law which requires a doctor to have admitting privileges in a hospital within 30 miles has been used to deny access to abortions, one of a whirlwind of such laws designed to transfer the rights of self-governance and bodily autonomy from women to the state and the Patriarchy.

     At stake here are issues affecting every American citizen and other persons within the boundaries of our law; freedom and dehumanization as a means of  enslavement, and our universal human right of access to healthcare as a precondition of our right to life.

     How can the Gideonite fundamentalists and atavistic forces of Patriarchy deny the right of bodily autonomy, the first of all rights of property, our right to choose our own use of that body which speaks to the definition of being human and to the fundamental rights of a citizen in a democracy as a voting co-owner of our government, on the basis of our right to life which derives both from our citizenship and our humanity as a natural condition, when the right of the mother to life precedes that of her fetus and renders her the sole medical authorizing party in any such matter?

     Only a woman’s right to choose her own destiny matters here, and no state or any other authority which operates in the place of a father or husband under the Patriarchal legal fiction of in loco parentis, nor the will or judgement of any other persons especially actual fathers and husbands, has any just role in a free society of equals; all else is slavery.

      If one abrogates the separation of church and state and claims Biblical authority as a justification for government policy, surely an act of hubris if not madness, on abortion and for a definition of life, life clearly begins with breath. 

     As William Tyndale wrote in his beautiful poetic reimagination of traditional sources published as the King James Bible; “And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul,” Genesis 2:7.

     This is reinforced elsewhere; “By the word of the LORD the heavens were made, And by the breath of His mouth all their host” Psalms 33:6. And again; “Thus saith the Lord God; Come from the four winds, O breath, and breathe upon these slain, that they may live. So I prophesied as he commanded me, and the breath came into them, and they lived,” Ezekiel 10.  And yet again; “If he should set his heart to it and gather to himself his spirit and his breath, all flesh would perish together, and man would return to dust,” Job 34: 14-15.

     Plus there’s the abortion method authorized in Numbers 5:11-31, the Ordeal of the Bitter Water, and the penalty for causing an abortion outside of this ritual such as by a violent blow, which is a fine paid to the woman’s husband because it is a crime against property or future economic benefit and not a crime against person as there is no life before breath or natural birth. Abrahamic faiths regard as human only those who have been ensouled at first breath upon being born; prior to birth we are not human but part of the mother’s body; a fetus has no rights other than hers. This is because Abrahamic faiths regard the body as an organic machine and not a person until it is animated with a soul.

     To argue that abortion is murder is to argue that there is no soul, that we are human prior to the animating breath of the Infinite, and that as mere beasts and organic machines each of our cells are individually sacrosanct and legally persons. Haircuts are murder in this absurd construction.

      Let us not mistake the purpose and intention of those who would seize women’s power of bodily autonomy as both a human being and a citizen; this has nothing to do with faith, and everything to do with power.

Find or Organize an event for October 18 No Kings Day

https://action.womensmarch.com/local?page=2

Together We Rise: Behind the Scenes at the Protest Heard Around the World,

Rowan Blanchard, Jamia Wilson (Contributor)

Women Who March  CNN documentary

https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2018/politics/women-who-march-the-movement/

October 2 2025 Seventh Anniversary of the Khashoggi Assassination, Martyr in the Sacred Calling of Journalism to Pursue the Truth

Seven years ago today the state of Saudi Arabia, its head of state Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and his criminal conspirators Saud al-Qahtani and Ahmed al-Assiri, assassinated the Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi to silence his sacred calling to pursue the truth and to give witness, a crime against humanity for which the show trial of his killers ended with implicit exoneration of its masterminds and the sacrifice of their pawns to avoid sanction for this horrific crime of state terror and tyranny.

     It is a crime in which America is complicit as a conspirator after the fact, though Our Clown of Terror, Traitor Trump, and his minions and collaborators may well have known beforehand and abetted the murder of a journalist by their principal ally in the region, key to our global empire and hegemony of wealth, power, and privilege through partnership with Saudi Arabia in control of oil as a strategic resource and in the war in Yemen to counter the Iranian conquest of the Arabian Peninsula and dominion of the Middle East.

     Herein I signpost that the conflict between the Arab-American Alliance and the Iranian Dominion is coextensive, parallel, and interdependent with both of the two other major ongoing wars in this region and the world; the Gaza War and the Israeli-American genocide of the Palestinians and the imperial conquest and dominion to create a Greater Israel as, in Netanyahu’s words, “a Middle Eastern Sparta” which bears elements of the antique Sunni-Shia conflict as it pits the Arab-America Alliance versus Iran and her client states Iraq, Lebanon, and Yemen, and formerly Syria but we liberated her from Putin’s grasp, and the Third World War as Russia attempts to reclaim her former empire, Iran being Russia’s principal ally. From the Arab perspective, they fight a war of survival against a pincer movement to conquer the whole of the Arabian peninsula, hammered by Shia forces in Yemen and Lebanon, and they use both Israel and America as dogs of war.

     My first thought upon hearing of this assassination was that if I were an Iranian agent, I could think of nothing which might drive a wedge between America and Saudi Arabia more effectively than this; the violation of one of our last ideals combined with the political assassination of a man under our protection, living in America and working for our finest and most iconic institution of truth, The Washington Post.

     Because the assassination also spiked the Crown Prince’s social reforms and movement toward Westernization, it may as easily be attributed to reactionary forces within the Saudi kingdom, which once famously included al Qaeda.

     Though the geopolitics of this are interesting in terms of regional conflicts and the great game of empires between Iran and the Arab-American Alliance, what concerns me is more primary; the foundational necessity of a free press,  free speech, rights of dissent, and freedoms of information to the project of democracy as a free society of equals, and as a balance to the falsification and theft of the soul of propaganda and tyranny.

     Our world is a wilderness of mirrors, distorted funhouse images, rewritten histories, filled with surfaces which capture and reflect, in which the witness of history and the sacred calling to pursue the truth must be beyond the power of the state, the elite, or of anyone to silence and erase, or we become forgeries of ourselves and shadow puppets of authority. Our authenticity and uniqueness, our ownership of ourselves, is put at risk and in question by propaganda and thought control, repression of dissent, dehumanization, and subjugation.

     We need what Foucault called truth tellers, not merely as guarantors of our liberty, but also of our humanity and the inviolability of our souls.

    Of the silencing of dissent in service to the authority of the state and of the tyranny of force and control I have written often, for it touches upon the origins of evil and the centrality of fear, power, and force as an engine of violence, inhumanity, dehumanization, and the theft of the soul.

      Herein I find another purpose in defining the nature of truth, and of journalism as a sacred calling to pursue the truth. And this provides us with a yardstick against which to measure the legitimacy of the state; the test of a government is its transparency, its tolerance of dissent as a feature of democratic process, the degree to which it upholds freedom of speech and of access to information, and its reverence for objective and testable truth as a keystone of freedom. 

     As I wrote in my post of September 8 2020, A War of Truth and Lies for the Dominion of Humankind: the Khashoggi Murder Trial Ends, and With It the Legitimacy of the Saudi Dynasty; A farcical show trial attempts to obscure the brutality and arrogance of unjust power of the Saudi monarchy as its proxies destroy Yemen to deny Iran a fortress on the Arabian Peninsula and a port with which to interdict oil shipping to the West. That the beneficiaries of American imperialism have given tacit approval for the Saudi murder of Khashoggi is entirely due to the purpose of the Arab-American Alliance in protecting our hegemony of world power through control of oil as a strategic resource, without which any nation ceases to function. The same mutual interests of wealth and power now protect the Saudi regime of feudal aristocratic privilege, its head of state Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and his criminal conspirators Saud al-Qahtani and Ahmed al-Assiri. 

     In this one gruesome crime of murder and dismemberment to silence the sacred calling to discover truth the Saudi regime has revealed the lie at its heart; it serves its own wealth and power, and exploits and dehumanizes those who fall within its dominion rather than protecting them. As the protection of pilgrims as seekers of truth is the justification for its existence and hegemony of power over access to sacred sites, this reveals the falseness of its legitimacy and exposes their true nature as an aristocracy of state terror and crimes against humanity.

     They have lied; not to forge peace, nor as a ruse of war, nor to safeguard the amity of relations between husband and wife, the three canonical exceptions in Islam to the injunction to give truthful witness in all things, but to protect personal wealth and power and to escape responsibility for a horrific crime. 

    There are possible interpretations and constructions of the idea of the state under Islamic law and in a culture built on verbal contracts, in which a trial wherein the agents of unjust power, state terror, and murder are held responsible for the crimes of those who commanded them while the mighty escape justice is without force of law and abrogates the authority of the government and its leadership to act as the nation’s Head of Islam. This voids all treaties, subverts all authority to make laws and especially to operate courts, and frees all citizens from obligation to abide by its pronouncements and decrees.

     In Hadith 54, Truthfulness, as written by Al-Bukhaari (6094) and Muslim (2607), Abdullah ibn Mas’ud (may Allāh be pleased with him) gave this witness; “The Prophet ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam (peace and blessings of Allāh be upon him) said, “Truthfulness leads to righteousness and righteousness leads to Paradise. A man will keep speaking the truth and striving to speak the truth until he will be recorded with Allāh as a siddeeq (speaker of the truth).”

      What interests me in this today is the ideology of Islam as the path of becoming a Speaker of the Truth; I think of its parallels with Socratic method on which democracy is founded as a means of questioning authority which reveals and discovers hidden truths through reason, of Foucault’s truthtelling as a development of parrhesia, and of the idea of journalism as a sacred calling in pursuit and witness of truth. To be a journalist, a whistleblower, or a citizen protesting and calling out injustice is to be a pilgrim, and all such pursuit and witness of truth is an absolute right and a sacred duty.

     In choosing the path of tyranny and evil perpetrated for personal gain rather than the path of mercy and compassion for others, the Saudi monarchy has sacrificed its purity of purpose and become an instrument of the evil impulse in the struggle between good and evil within and for the soul of humankind.

     As I wrote in my post of October 2 2019 Anniversary of the Martyrdom of Jamal Khashoggi, Champion of Truth and Freedom; The House of Saud claims the throne of Arabia on the basis of its historical protection of the Pilgrimage and its holy places; ask then, how have they respected the house of the Infinite, our bodies, in this? How does the silencing of dissent fulfill the commandment to the faithful to learn throughout one’s entire life, no matter the source or where it leads? Or honor the sacred contract of one’s words? How can we trust the words of those who would keep the words of others from us? In the murder of Jamal Khashoggi, the royalty of Saudi Arabia has discredited itself and its reign. 

     In the words of his fiancée Hatice Cengiz writing in Time; “I can see that the day Jamal was killed was not simply the murder of a journalist. It was also the murder of fundamental values: human rights, the international rule of law, the norms of diplomacy.”

    As I wrote in my post of July 16 2022, America Chooses Power Over Principle: Biden’s Fist Bump With Tyranny; Or, Toadying to Tyrants: a Song of America;    What is this human rights and democracy? Balanced against our hegemonies of elite wealth, power, and privilege, our systemic patriarchy and white supremacy, our global imperial dominion?

     Nothing, it seems, only the lies and illusions of those who would enslave us.

     What does this mean? First, that Biden may have handed the next election to Trump, or rendered the differences between them meaningless. Second, that in sacrificing the moral high ground for the wealth required to maintain the state, the man we chose as our President and entrusted with the Restoration of America may have just signaled its incipient fall and robbed our democracy of its meaning and value.

     Odd, that; normally it’s the enemies of the state who stage performances of its delegitimation and subversion, as I have many times as a maker of mischief for tyrants. Perhaps we should reconsider Biden’s true motives, purposes, and role in the Fourth Reich’s plans to enslave us all to a tyrannical carceral state which embodies violence, repression of dissent, and authorized version of the truth, of our history, and of ourselves.

     As the line spoken by the antifascist hero Lt Aldo Raine goes in Inglorious Basterds, “I can’t abide it. Can you abide it?”

     As written by Simon Tisdall in The Guardian, in an article entitled What was Joe Biden thinking when he fist-bumped the Saudi Crown prince?; “Biden came to office determined to take a firmer line with the strongmen and autocrats beloved by Donald Trump. He had a particular enmity towards Prince Mohammed, the ambitious 36-year-old who deposed his uncle to become next in line as king, waged a ruinous war in Yemen, and locked up or killed his critics.

     On the campaign trail, in the aftermath of the gruesome murder of dissident journalist Jamal Khashoggi, Biden vowed to make Saudi Arabia a “pariah state”. He has since refused to speak to the crown prince directly, liaising instead with his ailing father, King Salman. Shortly after arriving in the White House, Biden released US intelligence findings – suppressed by Trump – which concluded that Prince Mohammed approved the operation targeting the Washington Post journalist at the Saudi consulate in Istanbul.

     When the US president brought up Khashoggi with the de facto Saudi ruler on Friday, the prince reportedly hit back, accusing Washington of hypocrisy by not investigating the killing of Palestinian-American journalist Shireen Abu Aqleh, and for allowing the abuse of inmates at Iraq’s Abu Ghraib prison.

     Yet Riyadh has been one of Washington’s closest strategic partners for decades for a reason that no US president can ignore. Biden has heard the siren song of the kingdom’s vast oil reserves: the war in Ukraine has unleashed chaos in global oil markets, and he can no longer refuse the call.”

     For myself; this is far more simple and direct, for we are captives now of an allegory from the dawn of history, in Genesis 25:29-34, wherein our universal human rights as a birthright inherent to our humanity have been sold for us by our betrayer, as did Esau for a mess of pottage.

     America has abdicated its role as a guarantor of our universal human rights, which leaves the United Nations as a court of final appeal.  Here follows the PEN America letter to the United Nations which you may sign in the link below

    Dear Secretary-General Guterres,

     As writers, journalists, artists, and Members of PEN America and the Authors Guild, we write to express our grave concern about the apparent horrific murder of Jamal Khashoggi, the Saudi journalist, Washington Post contributor, and U.S. resident who disappeared in Istanbul on October 2 after entering the Saudi Arabian consulate. If true, the murder of a journalist inside a diplomatic facility would constitute nothing less than an act of state terror intended to intimidate journalists, dissidents, and exiled critics the world over. The United Nations has rightly recognized the importance of ensuring the safety of journalists and fighting impunity for those who attack them with the publication of the UN Plan of Action on the Safety of Journalists and the Issue of Impunity, endorsed in 2012. In the spirit of that initiative, we respectfully call on you to immediately authorize an independent, international investigation into Jamal Khashoggi’s disappearance and apparent murder. 

     Since his disappearance, Turkish authorities have claimed to have evidence suggesting that Jamal Khashoggi was brutally murdered and dismembered inside the consulate, and that the operation was likely carried out by a team including individuals very close to Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, making it look extremely likely that the Crown Prince was behind Khashoggi’s assassination. After weeks of denying any involvement in his disappearance, on October 19 Saudi Arabia admitted that Khashoggi was killed inside the consulate, claiming his death was the result of a “fight” during attempts to detain him. Global leaders have responded to the details of this admission with significant skepticism. More recently, Saudi authorities have said the murder was “premeditated,” though the details and culpability remain unclear.

     The violent murder of a prominent journalist and commentator on foreign soil is a grave violation of human rights and a disturbing escalation of the crackdown on dissent in Saudi Arabia, whose government in recent years has jailed numerous writers, journalists, human rights advocates, and lawyers in a sweeping assault on free expression and association. It is also yet another data point in a global trend that has seen an increasing number of journalists imprisoned and murdered for their work. As writers and journalists ourselves, we fear the potential chilling effect of this trend, at a moment when the work of all those who would speak and expose the truth has never been more important.

     The UN Plan of Action states: “The safety of journalists and the struggle against impunity for their killers are essential to preserve the fundamental right to freedom of expression, guaranteed by Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights,” and goes on to say that attacks on journalists “[deprive] society as a whole of their journalistic contribution and [result] in a wider impact on press freedom where a climate of intimidation and violence leads to self censorship.” It is imperative that the United Nations send a clear, unquestionable message that a human rights violation of this gravity will not go without consequence.

     We therefore respectfully call on you to immediately authorize an independent, international investigation into the murder of Jamal Khashoggi that would lay the groundwork for identifying and holding accountable the perpetrators of this grievous crime.”

Arabic

2 أكتوبر 2025  الذكرى الرابعة لاغتيال خاشقجي ، الشهيد في الدعوة المقدسة للسعي إلى الحقيقة

      قبل أربع سنوات ، اغتالت اليوم دولة السعودية ، رئيسها ولي العهد الأمير محمد بن سلمان ومتآمريه المجرمين سعود القحطاني وأحمد العسيري ، صحفي الواشنطن بوست جمال خاشقجي لإسكات دعوته المقدسة لمتابعة الحقيقة و للإدلاء بالشهادة ، وهي جريمة ضد الإنسانية انتهت من أجلها المحاكمة الصورية لقتله بتبرئة ضمنية من مدبريها والتضحية ببيادقهم لتجنب العقاب على هذه الجريمة المروعة المتمثلة في إرهاب الدولة واستبدادها.

     إنها جريمة تتواطأ فيها أمريكا كمتآمر بعد وقوعها ، على الرغم من أن مهرج الإرهاب ، الخائن ترامب وأتباعه والمتعاونين معه ربما يكونون قد عرفوا مسبقًا وحرضوا على قتل صحفي على يد حليفهم الرئيسي في المنطقة ، مفتاح إمبراطوريتنا العالمية وهيمنة الثروة والسلطة والامتياز من خلال الشراكة مع المملكة العربية السعودية في السيطرة على النفط كمورد استراتيجي وفي الحرب في اليمن لمواجهة الغزو الإيراني لشبه الجزيرة العربية والهيمنة على الشرق الأوسط.

أول ما خطر في بالي عندما سمعت بهذا الاغتيال هو أنني لو كنت عميلاً إيرانياً، فلن أستطيع التفكير في أي شيء قد يدق إسفيناً بين أمريكا والمملكة العربية السعودية بشكل أكثر فعالية من هذا؛ انتهاك أحد مُثُلنا الأخيرة جنبًا إلى جنب مع الاغتيال السياسي لرجل تحت حمايتنا، يعيش في أمريكا ويعمل في أرقى مؤسسات الحقيقة وأكثرها شهرة، واشنطن بوست.

     على الرغم من أن الجغرافيا السياسية لهذا الأمر مثيرة للاهتمام من حيث الصراعات الإقليمية واللعبة الكبرى للإمبراطوريات بين إيران والتحالف العربي الأمريكي ، فإن ما يقلقني هو أكثر أهمية ؛ الضرورة الأساسية للصحافة الحرة وحرية التعبير وحرية الإعلام لمشروع الديمقراطية كمجتمع حر متساوٍ ، وكتوازن لتزوير وسرقة روح الدعاية والاستبداد.

     عالمنا عبارة عن برية من المرايا ، وصور مسرحية مشوهة ، وتاريخ مُعاد كتابته ، مليء بالأسطح التي تلتقط وتعكس ، حيث يجب أن تكون شهادة التاريخ والدعوة المقدسة للسعي وراء الحقيقة خارجة عن سلطة الدولة ، أو النخبة ، أو من أي شخص أن يصمت ويمحو ، أو نصبح مزيفين لأنفسنا ودمى في الظل للسلطة. إن أصالتنا وتفردنا ، وملكيتنا لأنفسنا ، معرضة للخطر والتساؤل عن طريق الدعاية والتحكم في الفكر ، وقمع المعارضة ، ونزع الصفة الإنسانية ، والقهر.

     نحن بحاجة إلى ما أسماه فوكو بقول الحقيقة ، ليس فقط كضامنين لحريتنا ، ولكن أيضًا لإنسانيتنا وحرمة أرواحنا.

    عن إسكات المعارضة في خدمة سلطة الدولة واستبداد القوة والسيطرة الذي كتبته كثيرًا ، لأنه يمس أصول الشر ومركزية الخوف والسلطة والقوة كمحرك للعنف ، اللاإنسانية ونزع الصفة الإنسانية وسرقة الروح.

      هنا أجد هدفًا آخر في تعريف طبيعة الحقيقة ، والصحافة على أنها دعوة مقدسة للسعي وراء الحقيقة. وهذا يوفر لنا معيارًا نقيس على أساسه شرعية الدولة ؛ إن اختبار الحكومة هو شفافيتها ، وتسامحها مع المعارضة كميزة للعملية الديمقراطية ، ودرجة دعمها لحرية التعبير والوصول إلى المعلومات ، وتقديسها للحقيقة الموضوعية والقابلة للاختبار باعتبارها حجر الأساس للحرية.

     كما كتبت في مقالتي بتاريخ 8 سبتمبر 2020 ، حرب الحقيقة والأكاذيب للسيطرة على البشرية: انتهاء محاكمة خاشقجي ، ومعها تنتهي شرعية الأسرة السعودية ؛ تحاول محاكمة استعراضية هزلية التعتيم على وحشية وغطرسة السلطة الظالمة للمملكة السعودية ، حيث يقوم وكلائها بتدمير اليمن لحرمان إيران من حصن في شبه الجزيرة العربية وميناء لمنع شحن النفط إلى الغرب. إن منح المستفيدين من الإمبريالية الأمريكية موافقة ضمنية على مقتل خاشقجي السعودي يعود بالكامل إلى هدف التحالف العربي الأمريكي في حماية هيمنتنا على القوة العالمية من خلال السيطرة على النفط كمورد استراتيجي ، والذي بدونه تتوقف أي دولة عن القيام بذلك. وظيفة. نفس المصالح المتبادلة للثروة والسلطة الآن تحمي النظام السعودي ذي الامتياز الأرستقراطي الإقطاعي ، ورئيس الدولة ولي العهد الأمير محمد بن سلمان ومتآمريه المجرمين سعود القحطاني وأحمد العسيري.

     في جريمة القتل البشعة هذه وتقطيع الأوصال لإسكات الدعوة المقدسة لاكتشاف الحقيقة ، كشف النظام السعودي الكذب في قلبه. إنها تخدم ثروتها وسلطتها ، وتستغل وتجرد من يقعون في نطاق سيطرتها وتجردهم من الإنسانية بدلاً من حمايتهم. بما أن حماية الحجاج كباحثين عن الحقيقة هي تبرير لوجودها وهيمنتها على الوصول إلى الأماكن المقدسة ، فإن هذا يكشف زيف شرعيتها ويكشف طبيعتها الحقيقية كأرستقراطية لإرهاب الدولة والجرائم ضد الإنسانية.

     لقد كذبوا. عدم إقامة السلام ، ولا كخدعة للحرب ، ولا للحفاظ على صداقة العلاقات بين الزوج والزوجة ، والاستثناءات الكنسية الثلاثة في الإسلام للأمر بإعطاء شهادة صادقة في كل شيء ، ولكن لحماية الثروة الشخصية والسلطة و الهروب من المسؤولية عن جريمة مروعة.

    هناك تفسيرات وإنشاءات محتملة لـ i بعد وقت قصير من وصوله إلى البيت الأبيض ، أصدر بايدن نتائج المخابرات الأمريكية – التي قمعها ترامب – والتي خلصت إلى أن الأمير محمد وافق على العملية التي تستهدف صحفي واشنطن بوست في القنصلية السعودية في اسطنبول.

     عندما أثار الرئيس الأمريكي خاشقجي مع الحاكم السعودي الفعلي يوم الجمعة ، ورد أن الأمير رد ، متهما واشنطن بالنفاق بعدم التحقيق في مقتل الصحفية الفلسطينية الأمريكية شيرين أبو عقله ، والسماح بإساءة معاملة النزلاء في سجن أبو عقل. سجن غريب.

     مع ذلك ، كانت الرياض من أقرب الشركاء الاستراتيجيين لواشنطن منذ عقود لسبب لا يمكن لأي رئيس أمريكي تجاهله. سمع بايدن نغمة الإنذار لاحتياطيات النفط الهائلة في المملكة: لقد أطلقت الحرب في أوكرانيا العنان للفوضى في أسواق النفط العالمية ، ولم يعد بإمكانه رفض المكالمة “.

     لنفسي هذا أكثر بساطة ومباشرة ، لأننا الآن أسرى قصة رمزية منذ فجر التاريخ ، في تكوين 25: 29-34 ، حيث تم بيع حقوق الإنسان العالمية لدينا باعتبارها حقًا موروثًا متأصلًا في إنسانيتنا من قبل خائننا. ، كما فعل عيسو في فوضى الطهي.

The Dissident film trailer

No accountability 5 years after Jamal Khashoggi’s murder

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/no-accountability-5-years-after-jamal-khashoggi-s-murder/vi-AA1hBjIY?ocid=socialshare

Killing Khashoggi: How a Brutal Saudi Hit Job Unfolded/ New York TImes

Timeline of the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/2/26/timeline-of-the-murder-of-journalist-jamal-khashoggi

Inglorious Basterds final scene I Can’t Abide it

The Killing in the Consulate, by Jonathan Rugman

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/51118424-the-killing-in-the-consulate

Say Your Word, Then Leave: The Assassination of Jamal Khashoggi and the Power of the Truth, Karen Attiah

The True Story of Riad Khashoggi – Rebel Sheikh: Based on the Memoirs of Riad Khashoggi, Brother of Jamal Khashoggi, Delaney Alan

ADD YOUR NAME: JOIN 100 WRITERS, JOURNALISTS, ARTISTS, AND ACTIVISTS IN CALLING ON THE UNITED NATIONS TO INVESTIGATE THE MURDER OF JAMAL KHASHOGGI

https://pen.org/justice-for-jamal/

https://www.theguardian.com/film/2021/mar/05/the-dissident-review-jamal-khashoggi-saudi-author-murder-documentary?CMP=share_btn_link

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2019/nov/10/killing-in-the-consulate-jonathan-rugman-review-jamal-khashoggi?CMP=share_btn_link

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/jul/16/oil-trumps-human-rights-as-biden-forced-to-compromise-in-middle-east?CMP=share_btn_link

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jul/15/saudi-arabia-exiles-dissidents-biden-crown-prince?CMP=share_btn_link

https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/the-saudi-sentences-in-jamal-khashoggis-murder-case-are-a-mockery-of-justice?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/oct/02/aftershocks-from-jamal-khashoggis-still-shake-the-middle-east

https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/26/politics/biden-administration-khashoggi-report/index.html?fbclid=IwAR3REMhrjHv7D6dejA4VWBtIBfBwEW4dLueDAlwLe5d1hkcszDQLLVKPCVI

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/oct/10/alleged-saudi-hit-squad-linked-to-jamal-khashoggi-disappearance

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/nov/04/saudi-arabia-mass-arrests-of-dissidents-and-torture-allegations-continue

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/nov/19/saudi-accounts-emerge-of-ritz-carlton-night-of-the-beating

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/feb/06/saudi-arabia-using-secret-court-to-silence-dissent-amnesty-finds

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jun/05/washington-urges-riyadh-to-end-military-crackdown-in-sudan

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/jan/31/iran-saudi-arabia-joe-biden-cooperation

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/dec/23/jamal-khashoggi-timeline-of-key-events

2 أكتوبر 2021 ذكرى اغتيال خاشقجي

      قبل ثلاث سنوات ، اغتالت اليوم المملكة العربية السعودية ، رئيس دولتها ولي العهد الأمير محمد بن سلمان ومتآمريه المجرمين سعود القحطاني وأحمد العسيري ، صحفي الواشنطن بوست جمال خاشقجي لإسكات دعوته المقدسة لمتابعة الحقيقة و للإدلاء بالشهادة ، وهي جريمة ضد الإنسانية انتهت من أجلها المحاكمة الصورية لقتله بتبرئة ضمنية من مدبريها والتضحية ببيادقهم لتجنب العقاب على هذه الجريمة المروعة المتمثلة في إرهاب الدولة واستبدادها.

     إنها جريمة تتواطأ فيها أمريكا كمتآمر بعد وقوعها ، على الرغم من أن مهرجنا من الإرهاب ، الخائن ترامب ، وأتباعه والمتعاونين معه ربما يكونون قد عرفوا مسبقًا وحرضوا على قتل صحفي على يد حليفهم الرئيسي في المنطقة ، مفتاح إمبراطوريتنا العالمية وهيمنة الثروة والسلطة والامتياز من خلال الشراكة مع المملكة العربية السعودية في السيطرة على النفط كمورد استراتيجي وفي الحرب في اليمن لمواجهة الغزو الإيراني لشبه الجزيرة العربية والهيمنة على الشرق الأوسط.

     على الرغم من أن الجغرافيا السياسية لهذا الأمر مثيرة للاهتمام من حيث الصراعات الإقليمية ولعبة الإمبراطوريات الكبرى بين إيران والتحالف العربي الأمريكي ، فإن ما يقلقني هو أكثر أهمية ؛ الضرورة الأساسية للصحافة الحرة وحرية التعبير وحرية الإعلام لمشروع الديمقراطية كمجتمع حر متساوٍ ، وكتوازن لتزوير وسرقة روح الدعاية والاستبداد.

     عالمنا عبارة عن برية من المرايا ، وصور مسرحية مشوهة ، وتاريخ معاد كتابته ، مليء بالأسطح التي تلتقطها وتعكسها ، حيث يجب أن تكون شهادة التاريخ والدعوة المقدسة لمتابعة الحقيقة خارجة عن سلطة الدولة ، أو النخبة ، أو من أي شخص أن يصمت ويمحو ، أو نصبح مزيفين لأنفسنا ودمى في الظل للسلطة. إن أصالتنا وتفردنا ، وملكيتنا لأنفسنا ، معرضة للخطر والتساؤل عن طريق الدعاية والتحكم في الفكر ، وقمع المعارضة ، ونزع الصفة الإنسانية ، والقهر.

     نحن بحاجة إلى ما أسماه فوكو بقول الحقيقة ، ليس فقط كضامنين لحريتنا ، ولكن أيضًا لإنسانيتنا وحرمة أرواحنا.

https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/the-saudi-sentences-in-jamal-khashoggis-murder-case-are-a-mockery-of-justice?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/oct/02/aftershocks-from-jamal-khashoggis-still-shake-the-middle-east

October 1 2025 Trump Stages His Own Ritual Humiliation: His Reprise of Hitler’s 1934 Imposition of the Fuhrer Oath On the Armed Forces Finds No Applause From Its Officers

      Preening and fussing with his signature orange stage makeup and the overcomb of his wretched failing coif, fake blonde as the rest of him is fake, Our Clown of Terror dreamed of re-enacting his role model Hitler’s 1934 imposition of the Fuhrer Oath, which changed the oath of the armed forces from one to a constitution to a personal and absolute allegiance to himself.

     Waddling onstage after Hegseth the Horrible attempted to warm up the audience with a rousing prayer to the White Christ and some unintelligible babble about a race and gender war and loosing the military against dissenters as forces of occupation, Trump was immediately unnerved by the total silence of the assembled officers. He blustered, threatened their jobs if they walked out, and declaimed his usual rambling diatribes, vulgarities, terroristic and white supremacist threats, and nonsense.

      No one clapped, no one cheered, no one bore him aloft on their shoulders as a champion of white privilege and the armed forces as its enforcer. He sputtered, mumbled like a deranged hobo at invisible boogeymen, and wandered away like a deflated and lost figment of macho tyranny that never was.

     On this day the tide of fascism may have turned.  

     It was glorious, the Silence of the Generals.

      Trump has no ravenous brutal hordes to unleash upon us all, with which to enforce our obedience and subjugation to his loathsome fascist regime, and his fantasies of military occupation of our cities in repression of dissent and resistance to his ICE white supremacist terror force and the ongoing campaign of ethnic cleansing can not become real, and this is because the one sector of society any tyrant must rule through has remained loyal to their oaths to the Constitution and to the idea of America as a democracy in which all citizens are equal under the law and co-owners of the state, and refused to be turned against civil society and enact the Fall of America.

     The significance of this victory cannot be overstated.

      America remains a Band of Brothers, guarantors of each others rights who leave no one behind and abandon not their fellows, and cannot be divided against each other.

       This, this, this.

       The loyalty of the Armed Forces may have just saved America, democracy, our rights as citizens and our parallel and interdependent universal human rights, presaged the Restoration of America and averted the Age of Tyrants and some eight centuries of global wars of imperial conquest and dominion fought with weapons of unimaginable horror and ending with human extinction.

     Nothing of this did I foresee, not in thousands of iterations of possible futures and alternate realities which I have lived, gamed out, and tested for chances of human survival relentlessly, in over sixty five years since I first realized our peril in a moment of consciousness outside of time as I lay Most Sincerely Dead in my mothers arms at Bloody Thursday, March 15 1969 People’s Park Berkeley, and beheld in a vision our myriad possible futures and the darkness which gathers to consume us.

      Every time we reach the Fuhrer Oath and Night of the Long Knives gates of possible futures, civil war engulfs America and we become a totalitarian empire of theocratic patriarchal sexual terror and white supremacist terror. Every time. But fortunately, something else happened instead.

      In so many wonderful and terrible ways, there is nothing more priceless in life than surprise.

     Here follows my initial reaction to the news of the summoning of the officers to a general meeting by Hegseth.

    When a boss with a fragile grip on his street enforcers calls for a sit down with everybody, you dont go unless you have leverage on him and maybe a guy in his crew who can take him out. If I went to such, it would be to stage a coup.

     This is a loyalty test, at worst Night of the Long Knives stuff. At best, some will subjugate themselves, some will be fired, and our military will be seized by a tyranny.

     Hegseth and Trump want to subvert and subjugate our military, so they can do the same to all of us. Trump intends to send them to occupy our cities and enforce obedience to his regime.

     Unique to America has been our armed forces, apolitical and sworn to the Constitution and not to a regime or a tyrant. If we lose this, America is fallen.

      This I wrote in reply to an article by someone far more optimistic than I who called this outcome correctly, speaking from a perspective within the culture of our military which is opaque to outsiders, Lt. Gen. Mark Hertling (Ret.), former  commander of U.S. Army Europe from 2011 to 2012. He also commanded 1st Armored Division in Germany and Multinational Division-North during the surge in Iraq from 2007 to 2009.    

     As he has written in The Bulwark, in an article entitled What to Expect at the Meeting of the Generals: This is not the kind of military audience Trump has addressed before; “ONE OF THE MOST CRITICAL ATTRIBUTES of any senior military leader is the ability to adapt. In combat, conditions change by the hour. The fog of war, the unexpected actions of an enemy, or the friction of weather, terrain, and myriad human factors all demand leaders who can adjust without losing sight of their mission and their values. The best generals and admirals know this because they’ve practiced it for years, and they have spent their careers either adapting or preparing to adapt—not only on the battlefield but in every professional setting.

     That ability has been tested the last several days, as hundreds of flag officers—generals and admirals serving around the globe—have been ordered, along with their senior enlisted advisors, to travel from their duty stations to Quantico to hear tomorrow from Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, and now, it was announced on Sunday, from President Donald Trump himself.

     How have they adapted? Well, at first, Tuesday’s gathering was billed as a seminar delivered by Secretary Hegseth on his views regarding the “warrior ethos,” a phrase he frequently invokes. But the officers and senior enlisted personnel who will gather in that room are already deeply familiar with that subject. The military ethos is not a slogan. It is a part of the professional culture built on four enduring elements: the oath to the Constitution, the various services’ values and creeds, and the four elements of the warrior ethos (I will always place the mission first. I will never accept defeat. I will never quit.

I will never leave a fallen comrade). Every officer and each enlisted person learns these norms from basic training or their first days at a service academy. Together, these elements are the base that reinforce the idea that service members fight not for party or president, but for the nation and its people, their units and their comrades.

     Later, anonymous voices from within the Pentagon described Hegseth’s real plans for this one-hour session in more grandiose terms: “It’s about getting the horses into the stable and whipping them into shape.” He reportedly wanted to read them what he expected of them, as though the warrior ethos were a groundbreaking innovation rather than the strength of the American military. That phrase—taking them to the stables—is more befitting a cowboy movie than a national security meeting, and it truthfully sparked unease among those who have actually led soldiers into combat over the last twenty years.

     It appears that when the event increasingly became a lightning rod over its staggering costs, the security risks of gathering every senior commander in one place, and the disruption to ongoing missions worldwide, the White House escalated it on Sunday. The president decided he too must speak to “his” generals. (I leave it to others to speculate whether having Trump address this audience was the plan all along.)

     I’ve watched President Trump address military audiences in the past. At the West Point graduation of the Class of 2025, cadets were reminded before the ceremony that they must remember their professional responsibilities while the president addressed them: remain disciplined, show no political bias, watch body language and facial expressions during the speech. I was seated facing the graduates, and they did exactly as I would expect them to do as new lieutenants. Even as the president veered into insulting the policies of past administrations, mocking former President Biden, and boasting about a rich friend’s “trophy wife,” the cadets kept their composure. Freshly commissioned second lieutenants, on the brink of careers of service, knew their duty was to project professionalism no matter what swirled around them. They showed they could adapt.

     The cadets were likely reminded to uphold their professional standards because of what Americans had seen a few weeks earlier. At Fort Bragg, Trump spoke to a carefully selected crowd of supportive young soldiers corralled into a televised backdrop. Their cheering and hooting, while wearing a uniform, violated both the professional creed and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. It was a troubling scene: indiscipline wrapped in partisan theater. Their actions harmed the reputation of the Army.

     This Tuesday’s audience will be different. These are not impressionable cadets or supporting soldiers who volunteer to be a backdrop. These are generals and admirals who have led troops into battle, commanded multinational alliances, and spent their professional careers steeped in the apolitical traditions of military service.

     I know many of these men and women. They are not an easy crowd to play to. Per protocol, they will be called to attention when the secretary and the president enter the auditorium, and they will assume that position again when their superiors leave. They will offer polite applause, but nothing more. Just like the Chiefs of Staff at the State of the Union address, they will not cheer for politics. That’s because they serve the Constitution. Their silence is not weakness—it is discipline, the kind of discipline that has carried them through war and loss. I believe they will maintain that silence and their poker faces; that is what I would do if in the audience. And those actions will speak volumes.

     If the president tries the same kind of speech he gave last week at the United Nations—veering into self-congratulation, derision of allies, and ridicule of adversaries in ways that play to a domestic political audience—the alarm inside that room will likely grow more palpable. These officers have sat across from NATO counterparts, briefed coalition partners in the Indo-Pacific, and negotiated with allies whose trust in America is essential. They will hear such rhetoric not as showmanship but as recklessness.

     What should Americans prepare to see when they watch this event? I hope it is our senior officers showing they know how to adapt to any environment, even this one, by falling back on the real ethos and values that guides their every action. I hope they will not become props or pawns. And I hope the loudest message they send is no message at all—only that they have the quiet, disciplined silence of professionals who know their oath is to the Constitution, not to a man.” 

      Brent Molnar described what happened on his Face Book page this way; “Quantico’s Verdict: Trump Meets the Sound of His Own Failure…

     Donald Trump strode into Quantico imagining a coronation. What he got was a tomb of silence. He expected the room to rise on cue. Instead, he met generals whose stillness spoke louder than any chant or clap ever could.

     From the very start, the tension was unbearable. “I’ve never walked into a room so silent before,” he confessed, his voice cracking under the weight of the quiet. Then came the pleading line: “If you want to applaud, you applaud.” That wasn’t authority speaking. It was the insecurity of a performer desperate to be carried by the crowd.

     What followed was no strategy session. It was Trump’s greatest hits of grievance politics. Obama wrecked the nation. Biden made it worse. Only Trump, imagining himself a president without limits, could restore greatness. It wasn’t a briefing. It was bad television with the volume turned down.

     The brass stayed unmoved. These are people who have stood under fire, written letters to grieving families, and buried their own. They’ve faced artillery with more composure than they offered Trump. Their silence was the judgment.

Then came Pete Hegseth, Trump’s self-styled “Secretary of War.” He thundered about “fat generals,” called for wars staged like reruns of Desert Storm, and waved scripture as though it were a battle plan. His act ended not in policy but in prayer, dragging the nation’s highest commanders into a forced revival meeting.

     In that instant, the Pentagon was reduced to a prop. Sacred duty blurred into spectacle. The wall between church and state dissolved into Trump’s ego, and the generals became unwilling extras in his pageant.

     Trump brags endlessly about sacking generals who “aren’t warriors.” But at Quantico, the only shot fired was silence. No applause. No nods. No polite acknowledgment. Just the hum of contempt that filled the room like static.

This was not a slip. It was an x-ray. Trump’s whole act depends on an audience. When the applause dries up, so does the illusion of power. At Quantico, the clapping machine broke, and he was stripped bare by the quiet.

     The military is far from flawless, but on this day they stood for something larger. They showed that silence can slice sharper than a jeer and stillness can hit harder than protest.

     Hegseth revealed himself as the zealot-in-chief, mistaking prophecy for orders. Trump exposed himself as the applause-addict-in-chief, lost without his audience. Together they offered only a cocktail of ego and extremism. The generals poured it back into the void.

     Quantico should not be filed away as an awkward meeting. It was a reckoning. Trump arrived demanding adoration. What he got was contempt. And that contempt, carried in silence, told more truth than all the screaming rallies he’s ever staged.”

     As described by Jown Olive on her Face Book page; “Unfortunately it’s not satire.

     Donald Trump walked into Quantico Tuesday expecting a rally. He got a funeral.

     The generals sat in perfect silence, faces locked in the kind of grim stillness that comes from years of watching idiots talk and choosing not to react. Trump, of course, couldn’t handle it. “I’ve never walked into a room so silent before,” he confessed, his voice trembling somewhere between wounded pride and panic. Then came the kicker: “If you want to applaud, you applaud.”

     This wasn’t leadership. This was a washed-up Vegas act begging the crowd to clap. The Commander-in-Chief turned into the Clapper-in-Chief, reduced to prodding the nation’s top brass like a sad carnival barker who forgot his punchline.

     A campaign rally in uniform.

     Instead of strategy, Trump delivered his usual medley of grievances: Barack Obama ruined everything, Joe Biden ruined it twice as hard, and only Donald J. Trump, self-proclaimed “two-term, maybe three-term president” could save America. It was less a military briefing than an episode of The Apprentice: Pentagon Edition.

     The generals, trained to withstand battlefield chaos, sat stone-faced through the barrage of nonsense. They have endured artillery fire with more enthusiasm.

     Enter Pete Hegseth, America’s Pastor-in-Arms. Trump’s “Secretary of War” took the podium with the intensity of a man who thinks Tom Clancy novels are actual military doctrine. He promised “fire and brimstone,” called for purges of “fat generals,” and announced he wants the next war to look exactly like the Gulf War, because apparently it’s still 1991 and CNN is running that same grainy footage of tanks in the desert.

     But Hegseth wasn’t done. He led them in prayer. Yes, prayer. The nation’s top generals, summoned by presidential ego, now folded into a forced altar call like extras at a megachurch revival. The separation of church and state? Obliterated. Constitution? Shredded. Jesus, apparently, is now Commander-in-Chief. Trump can play Vice.

     Weakness on parade

     Trump likes to brag about firing generals who “aren’t warriors.” But on Tuesday, the real firing squad was silence. Not one clap. Not one cheer. Just the steady hum of contempt vibrating off the brass like feedback from a dead microphone.

     These men and women have seen actual combat. They’ve buried soldiers. They’ve lived with the weight of real command. And now they’re expected to cheer for a man who brags about moving “a submarine or two” like it’s a toy in a bathtub, or who lectures about “two N-words” as though nuclear strategy were a stand-up routine.

     No wonder they didn’t clap.

    The pin-drop presidency

     What happened at Quantico wasn’t just awkward. It was diagnostic. Trump’s presidency is a hollow shell propped up by applause, and when the applause disappears, so does he.

     And Hegseth? He’s the zealot-in-chief, delivering sermons about war and Christ in equal measure, a man confusing the Book of Revelation with the Pentagon’s operations manual. Together, they make quite the duo: one desperate for claps, the other desperate for amens.

     The generals gave them neither.

     Instead, they gave silence, the most cutting judgment of all.” ~ Michael Jochum”

     What does this mean?

     As written by Moira Donegan in The Guardian, in an article entitled What do Trump and Hegseth’s inflammatory speeches to military generals signal? The Trump administration evidently seeks to transform the US military into a partisan tool of the president’s regime; “Shortly after Pete Hegseth, Donald Trump’s defense secretary, summoned all the military’s generals to Quantico, Virginia, from their positions around the world in an unusual demand for an in-person assembly, Ben Hodges, a retired general, took to social media to evoke a bit of history. “July 1935,” Hodges said. “German generals were called to a surprise assembly in Berlin and informed that their previous oath to the Weiman constitution was void and that they would be required to swear a personal oath to the Führer. Most generals took the new oath to keep their positions.” Hegseth’s account replied to Hodges post: “Cool story, General”.

     Yet when the meeting finally happened on Tuesday morning, the army generals and navy admirals were treated to a 45-minute speech by Hegseth, followed by a rambling, hour-long address by Trump, which confirmed at least some of what Hodges seemed to fear. The defense secretary emphasized the army’s appearance, decrying “fat troops” and “fat generals and admirals in the halls of the Pentagon”, and signaled his intent to reshape the military’s culture so as to purge “wokeness” and evoke a more masculine image. “No more identity months, DEI offices, dudes in dresses,” he said. “No more division, distraction and gender delusions. No more debris. As I’ve said before, and will say again: We are done. With that. Shit.” The military, Hegseth suggested, would become an advertisement for the Trump regime’s preferred cultural style, and this transformation will evidently involve many changes to what the armed forces look like when they are photographed.

     To this end, Hegseth announced that he would also be eliminating or drastically curtailing the equal opportunity, whistleblower, inspector general and complaint procedures that allow military personnel to report harassment and misconduct. The changes seemed designed to particularly roll back efforts undertaken over the course of the 2010s to reduce sexual assault in the military and end its impunity.

     “No more frivolous complaints, no more repeat complaints, no more anonymous complaints, no more smearing reputations,” Hegseth, who settled a lawsuit brought by a woman who accused him of sexual assault in 2020, said. (The settlement terms are confidential. Hegseth has said the allegations were false). “No more walking on eggshells.” One former official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, told CNN: “I think what this is, is people are sick and tired of not being able to make inappropriate or sexually explicit jokes at the staff meetings.” Hegseth, it seems, is committed to restoring this treasured freedom.

     Hegseth similarly declared that he would be changing procedures that have allowed the military to be more diverse – such as eliminating special permissions for soldiers to grow beards, frequently used by Black soldiers, and raising physical fitness standards for specialized, often high-pay and high-status combat roles to what Hegseth seemed to believe is a threshold only men will meet. Hegseth, who has opposed women serving in combat roles, said that candidates for such jobs will be held to the “highest male standard”, which he also said was “gender neutral”. “If that means no women qualify for some combat jobs, so be it,” Hegseth said. “That is not the intent,” he added, questionably. “But it could be the result.”

     As for the officers themselves, a group which included several Black men and women of various races, Hegseth seemed to offer what he evidently thought was a flattering assessment of their masculine violence and virility. “You kill people and break things for a living,” Hegseth said to the assembled generals. “You are not politically correct and do not necessarily belong always in polite society.” The speech was repetitive and heavy on moments of self-conscious macho posturing. “To our enemies,” Hegseth said at one point “FAFO” – or, fuck around and find out. The defense secretary paused, seeming to wait for applause, but nobody clapped.

     Trump, meanwhile, also signaled that he seeks to transform the military into a partisan tool of his regime, repeatedly telling the assembled leaders that they would be tasked with missions targeting Americans. “America is under invasion from within,” the president said. “We’re under invasion from within. No different than a foreign enemy, but more difficult in many ways because they don’t wear uniforms. At least when they’re wearing a uniform you can take them out. It’s war from within.” Trump, who just days ago deployed 200 national guard troops to Portland, Oregon, with orders to use “full force, if necessary” offered that he had instructed Hegseth to use American cities as “training grounds”.

     At other times, Trump meandered, as he often does, into off-script comments that were difficult to parse. “But they’re not going to stand in our way, ever again,” Trump said. “You’re not going to see four years like we had with Biden and that group of incompetent people that ran that should have never been there. Because we have the United States military, the best, the boldest, the bravest, that the world has ever seen, that the world has ever known.”

     Trump, like Hegseth, sometimes paused, seeming to expect the generals to clap or laugh. But the laughs were not forthcoming; the military audience was largely silent.

     There is something pathetic about Hegseth and Trump, who have schemed and failed their way into positions of power and prestige that are comically outsized to their character. It is telling that Hegseth is so preoccupied with making the military into a photogenic spectacle of masculine strength – an anxious fixation on surface and spectacle that only highlights the US’s declining influence abroad.

     It is telling, too, that Trump can barely string sentences together, appearing distracted, sleepy, and barely coherent as he tells the armed forces to train their guns on his own people. There is no pretext that can sustain the delusion that these are serious people, or that their instructions to the military come from any motive other than their own desire for narcissistic gratification.

     They do not want to be strong to pursue the nation’s interests; they do not want to be strong to pursue any principles; they certainly do not want to be strong so that they can ensure the safety of the innocent. They want to be strong so that they can look big and important on TV. And for that, they flew the generals in from around the world, at tremendous taxpayer expense, to force them to sit as a captive audience for a pair of speeches that sounded like poor imitations of an action movie monologue.

     But as Hodges suggested, the ostentatious idiocy of these men does not mean that the generals and admirals assembled will not follow their orders. These military leaders have received the signal that their troops are to become whiter and more male; they have received the instruction that their next missions will involve suppressing domestic dissent. They have a choice between following their orders and keeping their jobs, or following an abstract set of principles, and leaving them. Most of them will choose the former.

     The US military, for all its wreckage and violence it imposes abroad and for all the cruelty and exploitation of the poor that it inflicts at home, has one consistent virtue: it has always been under quite firm civilian control. Most of the time, that’s a good thing.”

    Herein the last word on the meaning of this pathetic and ominous event belongs to the always brilliant and insightful anthropologist James Greenberg, writing in his Face Book page; “I watched the CBS coverage in stunned silence. Trump stood before a room of military officers, invoking “the enemy within” and proposing that American cities be repurposed as training grounds for domestic combat. The words weren’t metaphorical. They were operational. And as they landed, I recoiled—not only in horror, but in a deeper, more disorienting sadness. Is this where we’re going?

     It wasn’t just the rhetoric. It was the reclassification: dissent reframed as insurgency, cities recoded as battlegrounds, the military recast from a steward of defense into an instrument of internal enforcement. The structural shift was not subtle. It signaled a collapse of civic motifs that once marked the boundary between politics and war.

     Trump’s recent language points toward a model of governance that treats dissent as insurgency. His definition of the “enemy within” is intentionally vague, shifting from day to day depending on who stands in his way. At times it is Democratic leaders like Adam Schiff or Nancy Pelosi, at times city governments, and at other moments judges, bureaucrats, or journalists. The category shifts by design. Its vagueness is the source of its usefulness.

     In anthropology, words are not just descriptions. They are practices that shape reality. To call someone an “enemy within” is to reclassify them. It redraws the boundary of belonging, transforming neighbors into adversaries and dissent into betrayal. This is cultural work carried out through language, and its effect is to redefine citizenship itself.

     At Quantico, speaking to military officers, Trump warned that “the enemy from within” would be their responsibility to confront. The remark was deliberate, meant as a signal. By invoking a domestic “enemy,” he collapsed the civic frame of politics into the military frame of war. Opposition was no longer disagreement among citizens but a threat to be suppressed.

    Ambiguity has a purpose. It allows him to raise the specter of treason without proof. It creates a climate of fear where loyalty is constantly tested. It recalls McCarthy-era tactics, though now suspicion can be converted into action almost instantly through executive orders and mass media. From an anthropological view, this is a ritual of exclusion: vague accusations become a means of producing solidarity among insiders while pushing others to the margins.

     The consequences extend beyond rhetoric. Trump has floated renaming the Department of Defense as the Department of War, a symbolic shift that reimagines the military’s purpose. He has proposed using the National Guard in cities without state consent. He has signed orders creating rapid deployment forces for “civil disturbances.” Institutions are not neutral machines. They are cultural systems. Changing their names, missions, and rituals alters their meaning and reshapes what they exist to do.

     The label “radical left” plays a similar role. It collapses ideological diversity into a single enemy category. Democrats, activists, journalists, academics, and entertainers can all be branded as “radical.” When a label can stretch to fit nearly anyone, it ceases to describe and becomes a threat in itself.

     Antifa follows the same script. A decentralized movement with no central leadership has been redefined by executive order as a terrorist organization, even though U.S. law has no such category for domestic groups. The designation was never about dismantling an organization. It created a precedent that protest itself can be treated as terrorism. From a necropolitical perspective, it marks groups as disposable, stripping them of protection and exposing them to state violence.

     Together, these terms — “enemy within,” “radical left,” and “Antifa” — reshape civic life. Protest is cast as insurgency, dissent as treason, cities as combat zones, and citizens as suspects. The vagueness of the language makes it possible to bypass the safeguards of law. It prepares the ground for violence by recoding opposition as a threat to the body politic.

     Trump’s allies have reinforced this drift. Pete Hegseth, his close advisor and defense nominee, has promised to remake the armed forces around “warrior culture.” Diversity and inclusion would be scrapped, protections against toxic leadership weakened, and disciplinary oversight loosened. Rebranding the Pentagon as the Department of War is more than administrative tinkering. It is cultural reprogramming. The military is recast from a steward of defense into an instrument of domestic enforcement, with loyalty redirected from the Constitution to the executive.

     Rallies operate in the same way. Chants replace debate, symbols substitute for argument, and repetition binds followers into a moral community defined against outsiders. In this ritual space, Trump’s words do not merely describe but enact a new order: one in which dissent is treated as heresy and loyalty as devotion. Anthropology reminds us that politics often relies on ritual to produce cohesion, and Trump has turned rallies into ceremonies of belonging and exclusion.

     The strategy is plain. Through ambiguous language, altered institutions, ritualized displays of loyalty, and necropolitical designations that mark opponents as expendable, Trump is reshaping both the role of the military and the meaning of citizenship. The protections of law are treated as obstacles to be worked around. Civilian rule is worn away through redefinition.

     This is how preparations for military dictatorship take shape. They emerge through language that reclassifies, institutions that are renamed and repurposed, rituals that bind followers, and the marking of neighbors as disposable. Democracy falters when categories of belonging are narrowed, when opposition is treated as insurgency, and when the state claims the power to decide who lives securely and who lives under threat.”

What to Expect at the Meeting of the Generals

Brent Molnar, Voice of Reason

https://www.facebook.com/BrentMolnarVoiceOfReason/subscribe/

Joan Olive

https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100009193689904

What do Trump and Hegseth’s inflammatory speeches to military generals signal? Moira Donegan

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/oct/01/trump-hegseth-speeches-military-generals

James Greenberg

https://www.facebook.com/james.greenberg.5

No more ‘woke’ in the US military: key takeaways from Pete Hegseth’s speech

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/sep/30/pete-hegseth-speech-takeaways?fbclid=IwY2xjawNKQzpleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHvypHq8bxDwrilAD-olxYEsIz8ZmBpNdr2PQqlLXLk7lefZz04r_uPFtEfJe_aem_HKQGGLpr1npCPXD3uF6KAQ

Veterans react to Hegseth’s ‘insulting’ address to generals and admirals

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/oct/01/pete-hegseth-generals-speech-veterans-react

September 30 2025 60th Anniversary of the CIA’s Jakarta Method of Imperial Conquest and Dominion, the 1965 Indonesian AntiCommunist Purge, and the Coup That Began America’s Suharto Puppet Regime

     In a monstrous reflection of the CIA’s parallel Operation Condor throughout Latin America and the coup in Chile that replaced Allende with Pinochet, on this day sixty years ago the CIA launched its loathsome Jakarta Method of imperial conquest and dominion in an inaugural coup of our puppet tyrant Suharto in the Indonesian AntiCommunist Purge.

      It is a history which is now being rewritten by Suharto’s former son in law and key ally, Prabowo, elected just last year to restore Suharto’s kleptocratic and terrorist regime.

     This is a signal identifier of tyranny; the rewriting of history, the replacement of truths and the witness of history with lies and illusions, misdirection and red herrings, authorized identities and alternate realities, strategies of tyranny and state terror and of the subversion of democracy and theft of the soul we should all be familiar with from the ridiculous and horrific crimes and propaganda of the Trump regime and his infamous Tongue of Lies, instrument of the demon he worships Moloch the Deceiver.

     Like Trump now deploys the lie that Antifascists are responsible for the crimes of his white supremacist terror force ICE among his many lies in service to power and the manufacture of consent for a police state, the Occupation of our cities, and the theft of meaningful citizenship, Prabowo now deploys an authorized version of national history and identity, so very like the Mayflower story Trump used to falsify the 1619 hypothesis and the history of slavery in America, as silence and erasure of the people of Indonesia’s long decades of heroic resistance to enslavement by ruling cliques and castes and subjugation by elite hegemonies of wealth, power, and privilege.

     This we must resist, where ever falsification raises its ugly head and opens wide it jaws, through witness, solidarity, and the pursuit of truth. As  Wednesday says to a collaborationist Authority in the telenovela, in summary of Foucault’s idea of truth telling; “If we don’t tell our stories, they will.”   

     As written by Michael G. Vann in Jacobin, in an article entitled Indonesia’s Rulers Are Whitewashing the Crimes of Suharto; “orking in the Ministry of Truth, Winston Smith obediently repeated the INGSOC slogan, “Who controls the past controls the future: who controls the present controls the past.”

     While I can’t confirm that Fadli Zon, Indonesia’s minister of culture, has read George Orwell’s 1984, it seems likely that he would have at least encountered it during his high school education in Texas or on his path to a PhD in Russian literature. In any case, his record in President Prabowo Subianto’s increasingly authoritarian administration has been shockingly Orwellian. Nowhere is this more evident than in his previously secret project to revise Indonesia’s official national history.

     Originally set for release on August 17, 2025, a “gift” to mark eighty years of Indonesian independence, the planned ten-volume oeuvre will radically distort the historical record. Fadli’s project will consign significant contributions from women, ethnic minorities, and left-wing political movements to a memory hole, along with acts of treason and horrific human rights violations committed by prominent right-wingers.

     Rehabilitating Suharto

     Apro-regime student organizer under the Suharto dictatorship that held power from 1966 to 1998, styling itself as the “New Order,” the bespectacled Fadli now occupies the office of minister of culture and is one of Indonesia’s more polarizing figures. Known for his populist theatrics, far-right nationalism, and Sinophobia, Fadli has long flirted with historical mythmaking.

     Now, with the launch of his controversial project to “revise” Indonesia’s national history curriculum and state-supported narratives, he is attempting something far more dangerous. It amounts to the rejection of more than twenty-five years of democratic reforms and increased academic freedom, and a return of the Suharto dictatorship’s propaganda machine. The project comes as political analysts, civil society organizations, and activists are raising the alarm about the government’s increasingly repressive actions.

     Known for his populist theatrics, far-right nationalism, and Sinophobia, Fadli Zon has long flirted with historical mythmaking.

Although Fadli has framed the initiative as a corrective effort to decolonize Indonesian historiography and purge it of alleged foreign distortions, it is, in fact, a thinly veiled crusade to rehabilitate the New Order legacy, demonize the Left, and entrench a narrow ethnonationalist and patriarchal vision of Indonesia’s past. In the process, it threatens to undo decades of hard-won efforts by progressive historians, civil society actors, and survivors of state violence to foster a more inclusive and democratic understanding of Indonesian history.

     Bonnie Triyana, a historian and member of parliament for the opposition Democratic Party of Struggle, has expressed alarm that major events, including human rights violations, were missing from the drafts that he had seen. He stated that such a project should be an open process involving a wide range of historians and academics, rather than a government-commissioned effort. Triyana accused Fadli’s work of lacking transparency.

     Avi Warman Adam, recently retired Research Professor of Socio-Political History at the National Research and Innovation Agency, has written extensively about the political engineering of history under the New Order dictatorship and has built historiography from the perspective of the victims. The respected senior scholar has condemned the project as a politically motivated whitewashing of history to promote President Prabowo’s increasingly authoritarian rule. Adrian Perkasa, a young postdoctoral researcher currently at the Royal Netherlands Institute of Southeast Asian and Caribbean Studies, is concerned that the project will marginalize women’s history and exclude ethnic and regional minorities in its Java-centric narrative.

     Yosef Djakababa of Jakarta’s International Relations Department Universitas Pelita Harapan noted that the outline of Fadli’s project leaves out the 1958–61 PRRI–Permesta Rebellion. Originally a putsch led by disaffected colonels in Sumatra and Sulawesi against the Javanese-dominated central government in Jakarta, the movement set up the rival Revolutionary Government of the Republic of Indonesia with CIA backing, challenging Sukarno.

     Sumitro Djojohadikusumo was a central leader who secured American funds for the rebels and served a minister in the treasonous regime. After over thirty thousand civilians and soldiers died in insurrection, he fled into exile. When Suharto seized power in 1966, he returned as the dictator’s chief economic strategist, running the so-called Berkeley Mafia and opening the country for US investment. The fact that he was President Prabowo’s father likely accounts for Fadli’s omission of this major event.

     Ghosts of the New Order

     It should come as no surprise that Fadli’s revisionist campaign places the 1965–66 anti-communist massacres at its center. These events, in which upwards of a million alleged leftists and Communist Party of Indonesia (PKI) sympathizers were slaughtered and a larger number imprisoned, tortured, and raped, remain one of the bloodiest and least accounted-for episodes of the twentieth century.

     For decades, the Suharto regime’s narrative, which claimed that the PKI had attempted a coup of its own and that the ensuing purges were necessary to preserve the nation, was officially enshrined as truth. In arguably the world’s most successful propaganda campaign, the New Order propagated its official history in school curricula, a robust collection of monuments and museums, feature films, and the naming of streets and airports across the archipelago — an imprint that remains to this day.

      It should come as no surprise that Fadli’s revisionist campaign places the 1965–66 anti-communist massacres at its center.

Following Suharto’s fall in 1998, this version of history came under intense scrutiny. Investigative journalists, historians, and survivors unearthed troves of evidence revealing the scale of the killings, the complicity of Western powers, and the orchestration of violence by the military and militias.

     Works like Joshua Oppenheimer’s Oscar-nominated films The Act of Killing and The Look of Silence, as well as The Jakarta Method by journalist Vincent Bevins, introduced Indonesia’s hidden genocide to a global public. While Westerners such as Oppenheimer and Bevins have the privilege to engage with this dangerous history without facing serious danger, many Indonesian scholars, activists, and artists have risked their physical safety to correct the historical record. The mainstream consensus seemed to be making room for this dark history.

     But now, with Fadli’s project, we are witnessing a state-backed attempt to reverse that process of reckoning. His newly formed National Historical Reconciliation Council is stacked with pro-military academics, Suharto apologists, and conservative Islamic figures. It has already begun publishing white papers that downplay the scale of the violence and reassert the PKI’s guilt. In recent speeches, Fadli has rationalized the killings as a necessary cleansing to protect the Republic.

     A “Patriotic” Curriculum

     The most immediate impact of Fadli’s campaign will be felt in classrooms. Drafts of the new national curriculum obtained by Tempo and other independent outlets reveal a wholesale revision of the standard account of Indonesian history. The revolutionary contributions of left-wing organizations like Lekra (the Institute of People’s Culture) and the labor movement are minimized or excised entirely. The new framework recasts the role of Sukarno, once revered as the architect of a pluralistic and independent Indonesia, in ambivalent tones, presenting him as an indecisive figure whose flirtation with communism nearly doomed the nation.

     In their place, the new curriculum lionizes Suharto and the military, portraying them as disciplined saviors who preserved unity in the face of Marxist anarchy. The anti-colonial struggle is reinterpreted through a lens of martial valor and cultural resilience, obscuring the complex alliances among secular nationalists, communists, and Islamic modernists that actually defined the independence movement.

     The new curriculum lionizes Suharto and the military, portraying them as disciplined saviors who preserved unity in the face of Marxist anarchy.

Even more troubling are the changes to the understanding of colonialism. Fadli’s committee emphasizes precolonial harmony and “Asian civilizational values,” suggesting that European imperialism was an unfortunate but morally clarifying event that strengthened Indonesian identity.

     This historical fantasy erases the brutal extraction of wealth and the dehumanization of indigenous peoples that underpinned Dutch rule. It also whitewashes Indonesia’s precolonial history by presenting it as a romantic fantasy of cooperation and downplays Indonesia’s postcolonial entanglements with global capitalism and Western military power.

     Nationalism as Cultural Weapon

     Fadli and his defenders claim that his project is a necessary corrective to “liberal bias” in historical scholarship. When grilled at a House of Representatives hearing in July, he asserted that his goal was “not to forget history, but to ensure that it serves as a constructive lesson,” and called for a focus on the “positive” side of Indonesian history.

     But this argument rings hollow. Since when has Indonesia’s national curriculum ever leaned left? Even during the Reformasi period, teaching about the massacres of 1965 remained taboo. Survivors were still harassed, blacklisted, and stigmatized, and there were no significant state reparations. The truth, insofar as it emerged at all, came from grassroots efforts: oral history projects, independent documentary films, and university seminars held outside official frameworks.

     What Fadli offers is not a “national” history but a hegemonic one: a state-sponsored myth of eternal unity, righteous violence, and ethnic authenticity. In this, he follows a pattern familiar across the Global South, where right-wing populists — from Narendra Modi in India to Rodrigo Duterte in the Philippines — have wielded history as a weapon to silence dissent and reassert patriarchal, militarized visions of the nation.

     Fadli’s invocation of “cultural sovereignty” is similarly suspect. Far from resisting foreign influence, his revisionist project aligns neatly with the interests of international capital and the Indonesian oligarchy. By vilifying the Left and glorifying military order, the revised history paves the way for more authoritarian governance and deeper collusion between the state and extractive industries. This is not about decolonizing history — it is about recolonizing it in the name of capital and control.

     Erasing the People’s Memory

     One of the more insidious aspects of the project is its effect on collective memory. If Fadli’s curriculum is implemented, an entire generation of Indonesian students will grow up learning a sanitized, nationalist version of their country’s past. This is a story that erases the poor, the landless, the laboring masses, and the women of Gerwani, the world’s largest feminist organization in the early 1960s, who were raped and murdered in 1965.

     There is widespread concern that Fadli will try to eliminate the history of the 1998 violence against democracy activists and ethnic Chinese in the dying days of Suharto’s New Order. Prabowo, who was a general at the time, was dishonorably discharged for his role in kidnapping, torturing, and disappearing activists. In June, Fadli suggested that the well-documented mass rape of Chinese women in 1998 was merely a “rumor.” Bonnie Triyana and his colleague Mercy Chriesty Barends challenged him on this dangerous historical denial in a committee hearing a few weeks later.

     This is a theft of memory, and with it the possibility of justice. Without historical truth, there can be no meaningful reconciliation. Without acknowledgement of past crimes, the victims and their descendants are condemned to perpetual silence.

     And yet, as history shows us, silence can be broken. If there is a silver lining to this dark chapter, it lies in the growing resistance to Fadli’s efforts. A coalition of progressive historians, student groups, and cultural workers has begun organizing teach-ins and publishing counter-textbooks online. Survivors’ organizations are holding public vigils and reading the names of the disappeared. International solidarity networks are amplifying the alarm.

     Hopefully they will seize this moment not only to oppose Fadli’s revisionism but to advance a radical vision of Indonesian history: one that centers the struggles of workers, peasants, women, and indigenous communities; one that tells the truth about imperialism, militarism, and genocide; one that equips the next generation to fight for a more just and democratic future.

     History is not a dead archive. It is a battlefield, and right now that battle is underway in Indonesia. What is at stake is not merely the past, but the possibilities of the future”.

     As I wrote in my post of February 28 2024, Return of the Empire of Demons: Darkness Gathers in Indonesia; Of the legacies of our history from which we must emerge, none are more terrible than those of colonial occupation and its consequences in the social use of force and violence to win security by becoming the arbiters of virtue.

    Of the legacies of our history which we must hold close and remember lest we be falsified, silenced, and erased, none are more valuable as informing, motivating, and shaping forces of becoming human than those of seizures of power against tyrants, hegemonic elites of wealth, power, and privilege, and those who would enslave us than our songs of liberation struggle and its costs.

     Memory, history, identity; there are stories which we must free ourselves from and those we must claim as ours, and if we are very lucky they are not always the same.

     Indonesia has just elected Prabowo as its new President, the apex predator of a political dynasty created by American and British anti-communist purges and a spectacular and bloody coup nearly sixty years ago, which became a blueprint for similar games of counter-revolution, imperial conquest, and dominion as The Jakarta Method.

     Beyond the epigenetic trauma of the capture of the state by oligarchs and proxies of distant colonial empires, like the dancing figures in a shadow puppet theatre of an Empire of Demons, the new leader of Indonesia is personally a commander of death squads implicated in war crimes, the brutal repression of dissent, and ethnic cleansing within his own nation and against ethnic minorities and independence movements in Timor and Papua. Yet he won a free election by the people he committed atrocities against; the adoration of the masses can be measured in blood. 

     In Indonesia’s elections, tyranny and democracy, fear and love, despair and hope, division and solidarity play for the kingdom of our hearts and the dreams of the future we struggle to make real, and I hope that Shakespeare’s words in Henry V still remain true; “When lenity and cruelty play for a kingdom, the gentler hand is the surest winner.” 

     As written by Thomas B. Pepinsky in Journal of Democracy, in an article entitled Why Indonesia’s Democracy Is in Danger; “Millions of voters in Indonesia, the world’s third-most-populous democracy, went to the polls on February 14 to choose their next president and members of parliament. Although the full results will not be known until early March, early counts show Prabowo Subianto handily defeating his two challengers for a first-round victory. His Great Indonesia Movement Party (Gerindra) is in a close race for second in the parliamentary contests. The Prabowo campaign is claiming victory; as he declared to his supporters on the evening of election day, “We should not be arrogant, we should not be proud, we should not be euphoric, we still have to be humble, this victory must be a victory for all Indonesian people.”

    From a distance, this was a normal Indonesian election cycle, with three viable presidential tickets and an array of new and established parties vying for seats in parliament. Campaigning was peaceful, with televised presidential debates, rallies that appealed to the country’s massive youth vote, and colorful banners and posters displayed throughout the archipelago. But for many Indonesians, the voting itself was just one important milestone in an election that had already shaken the foundations of Indonesia’s constitutional order. Prabowo, who serves as minister of defense under incumbent president Joko Widodo (popularly known as Jokowi), is a former general who rose to prominence under Suharto’s authoritarian New Order regime (1966–98). Prabowo’s campaign has tested Indonesia’s electoral laws and upended the norms of its presidential politics. With his dominance at the polls and the dwindling confidence in Indonesia’s political and judicial institutions to check executive authority, the outlook for Indonesian democracy in the coming years is grim.

     Prabowo faced two opponents in this year’s contest: Ganjar Pranowo, a former governor of Central Java, and Anies Baswedan, a former governor of Jakarta. Jokowi, who is broadly popular but term-limited after two five-year terms in office, threw his support behind Prabowo, most significantly because he nominated the president’s son, Gibran Rakabuming Raka, as his running mate. Prabowo, with his wide name recognition, substantial campaign war chest, and boost from the president, polled far ahead of Ganjar and Anies throughout the campaign.

     The three presidential candidates represented competing visions for Indonesian politics and society. Prabowo hails from an elite family who rose to prominence in the early independence period, and his brother Hashim Djojohadikusumo is one of Indonesia’s wealthiest and most prominent businessmen. Prabowo was once married to Suharto’s daughter Titiek, although they are long divorced, and he was a key ally of Suharto’s at the end of his reign. Under Suharto, Prabowo rose through the military’s ranks to become commander of the army’s special forces. In that capacity, he was directly involved in human-rights abuses during Indonesia’s occupation of Timor-Leste (1975–99) and complicit in the violent events surrounding Suharto’s downfall in May 1998. Although he was dishonorably discharged from the military, Prabowo’s campaign invoked his military legacy and recent record as defense minister to portray him as a strong nationalist leader who prioritizes order, stability, and national greatness.

     Prabowo ran unsuccessfully against Jokowi in 2014 and 2019, drawing on these same narratives and images, while also making appeals to conservative Muslims and religious identitarians. In 2024, it was Anies who focused on that segment of the electorate, while Ganjar appealed to the same pluralist and progressive constituency whom Jokowi had won. Ganjar, the chosen candidate of the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P), which supported Jokowi in 2014 and 2019, was especially popular among non-Muslim voters wary of Anies’s religious agenda, especially after Anies embraced Islamists in his campaign against a popular Chinese Christian governor of Jakarta in 2017. Ganjar did not, however, inherit Jokowi’s popularity, especially among young Indonesians; opinion polls showed young people to be squarely behind Prabowo and his 36-year-old running mate, Gibran.

     Millennials and Gen Z now make up more than half the electorate, and they are simply not old enough to remember Prabowo’s contentious rise and subsequent disgrace.

     Given all this, the 2024 contest followed established patterns in the country’s politics. Religion and identity have been important cleavages in Indonesian politics since the independence period, and voters have mobilized around these cleavages in recent elections too. Even Prabowo’s candidacy is nothing new: In addition to running and losing in 2014 and 2019, he was active in the 2004 and 2009 elections as well.

     In truth, most of the challenges facing Indonesian democracy long predate the current moment. They include the continued political dominance of the country’s wealthy elite, many of whom can trace their fortunes to the Suharto era or before; the oversized legislative coalitions required to govern in a multiparty presidential system, incentivizing legislative parties to collude rather than compete and minimizing the effectiveness of the rump parliamentary opposition; gross inequalities that produced marked differences in the quality of democracy across Indonesia; antipluralist and illiberal social forces; a military that remains stubbornly unwilling to cede full control of politics to civilian forces; high levels of official corruption; dynastic politics; and electoral clientelism and vote buying that distort representation and partisan politics from the local level on up.

     Nevertheless, citizens have participated in free, fair, and competitive multiparty elections since 1999. Indonesians have witnessed several peaceful rotations of executive power, and elections have been hard-fought contests in which powerful challengers have conceded defeat, albeit sometimes begrudgingly. Indonesia’s civil society is robust and active, print media is largely open and often critical, and many political parties compete for popular support. As in any consolidated democracy, there is broad agreement that elections are the sole legitimate route to political power: They are, to quote Juan Linz and Alfred Stepan, “the only game in town.” The risk of a catastrophic breakdown of representative institutions is low, as is the threat of violence of the type that rocked Indonesia during the turbulent 1960s.

     But democratic consolidation requires that the rules of the game be known and fixed rather than malleable and subject to change at the whim of elites. Indonesian democracy is not as consolidated as its repeated elections have suggested. The trends have been worrisome for the past decade, with the 2024 election only deepening fears and the country looking more and more like a clear case of democratic backsliding. Jokowi has, for example, used the legal means at his disposal to clamp down on challenges to his authority of any variety.

     During the 2024 election campaign, democratic decline accelerated because of decisions taken by ruling elites, especially the president himself—the first being his embrace of Prabowo as his chosen successor. Until now, presidents in post–New Order Indonesia have remained above electoral politics, a norm buttressed by legal limitations on presidents’ campaigning. Jokowi, however, openly stumped for Prabowo and Gibran, challenging longstanding interpretations of what a sitting president is allowed to do. Jokowi claims that presidents may campaign if they do not use state resources, as the letter of the law reads. But Anies and Ganjar say that Jokowi did just that, using state institutions such as the military and police—which ought to be neutral arbiters of the law, and which ought to show no partisan or political favoritism—against Prabowo’s opponents.

     A more direct blow to Indonesian democracy arrived in October 2023, when the country’s Constitutional Court issued a stunning ruling about Gibran’s eligibility to run for vice-president. According to the Indonesian constitution, the minimum age for presidential candidates is 40. Gibran will be only 37 on inauguration day, and therefore ineligible to run under any regular interpretation of the constitution. But in October, the Constitutional Court handed down an opinion by Chief Justice Anwar Usman (who happens also to be Jokowi’s brother-in-law) which held that the age limit did not apply to any candidate who had previously served in a regional elected office, thereby allowing Gibran, who is mayor of Surakarta (known as Solo), to register as Prabowo’s running mate.

     Although the public outcry against this decision was swift and substantial, and Anwar was subsequently found guilty of violating the court’s ethics code and demoted, Gibran’s candidacy was unaffected. The plain implication is that Indonesian constitutional law does not constrain elites seeking to circumvent it. Few would have seriously argued that Indonesian law treats the wealthy and powerful the same as it does regular Indonesians. Still, the Constitutional Court’s brazen decision to intervene on behalf of a sitting president’s son was shocking, and further proof that powerful interests with ties to state institutions and the country’s authoritarian past still direct the course of its politics.

     For this reason, it is important to separate Prabowo the individual from the politics surrounding his campaign. Prabowo’s history, political style, and personality are worrisome: He has a famously short temper, and his actions over the years inspire little confidence in his commitment to democratic institutions, to liberal values such as freedom of speech and conscience, or to the rule of law. Although he does not have the crassness or brashness of a Rodrigo Duterte or Javier Milei, it is hard to predict how he will react to unfavorable news or to any legitimate democratic challenge. But like Duterte and other world leaders, Prabowo’s politics replace a commitment to law and order with a preference for order over the law. For the many observers who believed that it was Prabowo’s 2014 defeat that allowed Indonesian democracy to survive, his victory in 2024 is a harbinger of the country’s democratic decline.

     But Indonesian democracy is more than just the attitudes and values of its political leaders. Presidents shape democratic politics, but they do not determine what democracy is. Democracy in Indonesia, as in any other country, is a political system that emerges from the actions of elites, the masses, and social groups together—working through established institutions, following norms of mutual tolerance and forbearance, and peacefully resolving legitimate political differences through the orderly rotation of power via free and fair elections. Institutions matter, but they are not self-directing; laws matter, but only when they are applied faithfully and in accordance with constitutional procedures and governing norms. Anwar, as chief justice, made his fateful decision on behalf of the Constitutional Court, the guardian of the constitution, for the benefit of Jokowi and his family as well as Prabowo himself.

     So it is unsurprising that in the final days before the election, Prabowo’s opponents feared that other state institutions, such as the armed forces and the electoral commission, would be similarly vulnerable to political manipulation on election day. Given that Prabowo’s campaign, which worried about a possible unified anti-Prabowo ticket in a second round, predicted a single-round victory, the other campaigns were afraid that electoral and security institutions might tilt the first-round balloting in Prabowo’s favor so as to avoid a runoff.

     Although it is still early, there is no evidence of any systematic irregularities. But representatives from the Anies and Ganjar campaigns are pledging to investigate the electoral process nevertheless, claiming that the election was marred by “structural, systematic and massive fraud.” Worryingly, Anies has been reported to authorities for commenting on a film released on February 11 that alleges the electoral process was subject to manipulation by Prabowo backers.

     In November 2023, just after the Constitutional Court’s decision, Indonesian journalist Goenawan Mohamad sat for an interview on KompasTV, a mainstream news channel. Known as a sharp-witted critic and thoughtful political analyst with decades of experience, Goenawan described the Indonesian state as “broken” (rusak). Although his use of this word received wide attention, less noted was what he used rusak to modify: not politics or elections or institutions, but the state (negeri) itself. And the term negeri refers to more than just the state in a formal sense. It connotes something closer to the state and society together—the country, its institutions, and its people. Goenawan was describing not just a crisis of democracy, but a crisis of Indonesia.”

     As written in The Guardian’s Editorial entitled  Prabowo’s win is dismal news for democracy; “When Joko Widodo took power in Indonesia 10 years ago, his victory brought relief as well as celebration. It was not merely that the former Jakarta governor was the first president to be elected from outside the political or military elite. It was also that he defeated ex-general Prabowo Subianto, who had attacked direct elections and said that he would take the country in a more authoritarian direction. There was every reason to take that threat seriously. Mr Prabowo was dismissed from the military ­– and barred from entering the US – due to allegations of the abduction and torture of activists by men in his unit, though he has always denied involvement.

     Yet now, as the president leaves office, Mr Prabowo is set to replace him – thanks in large part to his former rival’s (unofficial) support. With 205 million voters and 820,000 polling stations spread across the thousands of islands in the world’s fourth most populous nation, completing the final tally could take weeks. But Mr Prabowo, currently defence minister, enjoys a commanding lead in “quick counts” by independent polling firms, which have proved accurate in previous contests. That suggests he will not face a runoff.

     Having reached his two-term limit, the president – known to all as Jokowi – is leaving office with enviably high popularity ratings and a track record that includes steady economic growth, infrastructure development, slowed deforestation (though the country has fallen short of targets) and healthcare improvements. But he has also overseen a democratic backsliding. When he first took office, some supporters voiced concern that his principles might even hinder his ability to get things done. In reality, he has not only proved adept at making deals with the old elites but has undermined key institutions and strengthened restrictions on freedom of speech. The final straw, for many of his enthusiastic early supporters and reportedly for cabinet colleagues, has been his electoral manoeuvring.

     Jokowi said he was neutral. But it was plain that he had thrown his weight behind Mr Prabowo rather than his own party’s candidate, Ganjar Pranowo. His 36-year-old son, Gibran Rakabuming Raka, ran as Mr Prabowo’s vice-president, despite being four years short of the usual minimum age for the role, thanks to a handy ruling from the constitutional court. The chief justice happens to be married to the president’s sister. Many of those who once supported Jokowi have concluded that his priority is his legacy.

     Mr Prabowo also benefited from his improbable rebranding from fiery would-be strongman to a cuddly, cat-loving grandfather figure, aided by social media. Half the country’s electorate is under 40; many voters do not remember his past or the days of military dictatorship under his father-in-law, Gen Suharto.

     Those who do predict that “winter is coming”. Some suggest that the new president may conclude that he does not need outright autocracy, but can achieve what he wants within the current system. A better cause for optimism may be that Jokowi’s tenure saw the largest student protests since democracy’s return in 1998, prompted by his weakening of the anti-corruption commission and other harsh new laws. His political trajectory is further evidence that the work of defending reform and rights cannot rest on the shoulders of a single leader. But Indonesian democracy appears to have plenty of defenders, including among the young. There is every sign it will need them.”

     As written by Rebecca Ratcliffe and Richaldo Hariandja in The Guardian, in an article entitled Winter is coming’: activists’ fears as Prabowo Subianto likely wins Indonesia election: Former son-in-law of late dictator Suharto was discharged from military over alleged abuses dating back to 1980s; “The presumed election victory of Indonesian presidential candidate Prabowo Subianto – a former army general with a history of alleged involvement in torture and disappearances – marks a dark chapter in the country’s history, activists have warned, while vowing not to give up their fight for justice.

     Prabowo, 72, a former special commander under the Suharto dictatorship, is the apparent winner of Indonesia’s presidential election after unofficial counts gave him a strong lead. On Wednesday night he told supporters that his win would be a “victory for all Indonesians”.

     The results have provoked fear among activists, however, that accountability for past atrocities will fade even further under Prabowo, and that his future government will have little regard for human rights.

     “Winter is coming, whatever the name,” said Usman Hamid, executive director of Amnesty International Indonesia. “But the fight must go on … all of the perpetrators have to be brought to justice.”

    Prabowo, a former son-in-law of Suharto, was a longtime commander in the Kopassus special forces, but was discharged from the military after Kopassus soldiers kidnapped and tortured political activists in 1998.

     Of 22 activists kidnapped that year, 13 are still missing. Prabowo always denied wrongdoing and has never been charged in relation to the allegations, though several of his men were tried and convicted. Prabowo was previously banned from entering the US.

     Prabowo is also accused of involvement in rights abuses in Papua and Timor-Leste, including a 1983 massacre in which hundreds of people, most of them men, were killed in the Timorese village of Kraras. He has denied the allegations.

     Muhammad Isnur, head of the Legal Aid Institute Foundation of Indonesia (YLBHI), said the election of Prabowo may be “too painful” for the families of those who disappeared in 1998, who are still fighting for justice.

     “The result is as we predicted. But we are still disappointed,” he said.

     Prabowo had maintained a lead in pre-election surveys after rebranding himself as a cuddly grandpa-like figure and securing the tacit support of the outgoing president, Joko Widodo, whose son ran alongside Prabowo for the vice-presidency. The incumbent president, who is known as Jokowi, was accused of unfairly boosting Prabowo’s campaign in order to safeguard his legacy and establish a dynasty.

     “Too many intricate enabling conditions and manipulations have shown the involvement of Jokowi in the election. He had mobilised everything. That’s why the result is predictable,” said Muhammad. Jokowi’s office has denied that he sought to interfere in the election.

     Academics, journalists and civil society groups should prepare for the worst, Muhammad said. “We need to be aware of every risk that could happen to us in the future and try to make a list of mitigations. We need to be prepared.”

     In the runup to the election, Prabowo was the only presidential candidate who did not attend a press freedom event and did not respond to a questionnaire by Human Rights Watch on key rights issues facing Indonesians.

     As results emerged on Wednesday, Veronica Koman, a human rights lawyer living in exile in Australia, wrote on Twitter/X: “Many Indonesians are saying that they want to leave the country because Prabowo is winning – similar phenomenon to US citizens when Trump was winning. The big difference is … ours is out of FEAR.”

Position Among the Stars film trailer

The Act of Killing film trailer

The Year of Living Dangerously film trailer

               References

Indonesia’s Rulers Are Whitewashing the Crimes of Suharto

https://jacobin.com/2025/08/indonesia-suharto-genocide-revisionism-authoritarianism?fbclid=IwY2xjawNJHhRleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHjCh6w4Mjxbp45l0wTqKXjti03I4NgPsFCpB4ocCpP-nPLLT-F0DrMErzh3M_aem_L3A7JRZRFjcV9Va49kdsOA

The US Cheered On Suharto’s Massacres in Indonesia

https://jacobin.com/2025/09/suharto-massacres-us-conefo-sukarno?fbclid=IwY2xjawNJHQZleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHhAj7XK-uMLXq5Zdk0rCUc6m6lU4nvnqqBsEXLPF6XgDcB7TCz8IRVP6Vet5_aem_tomijNjwUhFOhiRI6ULiLA

The True Story of Indonesia’s US-Backed Anti-Communist Bloodbath

https://jacobin.com/2021/01/indonesia-anti-communist-mass-murder-genocide?fbclid=IwY2xjawNJGUhleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHjSzW2vQZ-3mRYQ4LbrziuyutMymci8_hx0srIbte433_5_7UAmrABMvsE2y_aem_RqRozBcWJbP8FxbDdr12JA

Indonesia Still Hasn’t Escaped Suharto’s Genocidal Legacy

https://jacobin.com/2021/09/indonesia-sukarno-suharto-communists-genocide-dictatorship-corruption?fbclid=IwY2xjawNJGo9leHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHuPHSGECoesv4kVFV1D_bBT3TB2EaSMlcuKEsT8J2sYyT0wVhT7NaEMmm2hy_aem_ptWeQqHWFfS8raiUBk4YEQ

The Forgotten Massacres

https://jacobin.com/2015/06/indonesian-communist-party-suharto-massacre-purge?fbclid=IwY2xjawNJGt9leHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHi2Ig0ZDfjTTLMI8j1HuIlrEAsk6CmxB5jTqLYHA13MMRuh4KfDqdLBueULD_aem_heqGkP2R5_ps21XeICC2Kg

The Indonesian Counter-Revolution

https://jacobin.com/2019/01/unmasked-graves-review-indonesia-genocide-communist-party?fbclid=IwY2xjawNJGylleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHp_H7KTAkx2a4p-cazcd7DYnkzDxT1lPZXAZPkXKnoBPoTuDZcgS3v4VzpRf_aem_sqW_M2m-2JPhrug8ZEYifQ

Indonesia’s Red Slaughter

https://jacobin.com/2018/06/killing-season-geoffrey-robinson-indonesia-communist-party-massacre?fbclid=IwY2xjawNJG85leHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHhHvuPiv2h-4kL5pYue7fZmu1GfBhEmU7gyeueVrPL0E4etazibh9FEGtrQh_aem_uxEnjxPLDvCmGURPZ5SliQ

Anti-Communist Massacres Killed Indonesia’s Hopes for National Liberation and Socialism

https://jacobin.com/2020/05/anti-communist-massacres-indonesia-brazil-communism?fbclid=IwY2xjawNJHB1leHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHiCHHtLH6O0v7uWGR6IMfriCPLs1DnFcI5-lYRb27p1akmmzdgHd_l2GphU5_aem_p8AUTNfJpQwJQWbIHZVAew

Suharto’s US-Backed Coup in Indonesia Supplied a Template for Worldwide Mass Murder

https://jacobin.com/2022/02/suharto-indonesia-us-coup-communism-history-mass-murder-postcolonial-state?fbclid=IwY2xjawNJHGlleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHjdCu8YC_GRkMVUH7uYdCsnfBk1FvxBz7zfqm8GFE70pjlE9nef3Mu05s_HN_aem_SoxZR44nPY2ORX2TjMlidw

Why Indonesia’s Democracy Is in Danger | Journal of Democracy

https://www.journalofdemocracy.org/online-exclusive/why-indonesias-democracy-is-in-danger/

The Guardian view on Indonesia’s elections: Prabowo’s win is dismal news for democracy | Editorial

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/feb/15/the-guardian-view-on-indonesias-elections-prabowos-win-is-dismal-news-for-democracy

Winter is coming’: activists’ fears as Prabowo Subianto likely wins Indonesia election

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/feb/15/indonesia-presidential-election-results-prabowo-subianto-likely-victory

January 11 2024 A Bifurcated Lens of Colonialism and Its Legacies: the Indonesian Colony of West Papua and the Fragile Democracy of Papua New Guinea

Foucault on the Politics of Parrhesia, Torben Bech Dyrberg

Wednesday telenovella

                  Indonesia, a reading list

The Jakarta Method: Washington’s Anticommunist Crusade and the Mass Murder Program that Shaped Our World, Vincent Bevins

Buried Histories: The Anticommunist Massacres of 1965–1966 in Indonesia,

John Roosa

The Killing Season: A History of the Indonesian Massacres, 1965-66,

Geoffrey B. Robinson

Revolusi: Indonesia and the Birth of the Modern World, David Van Reybrouck

Unmarked Graves: Death and Survival in the Anti-Communist Violence in East Java, Indonesia, Vannessa Hearman

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/42649825-unmarked-graves?ref=nav_sb_ss_1_16

Indonesia, Etc: Exploring the Improbable Nation, Elizabeth Pisani

Beauty Is a Wound, Eka Kurniawan, Annie Tucker  (Translator)

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/24826361-beauty-is-a-wound

In the Time of Madness: Indonesia on the Edge of Chaos,

Richard Lloyd Parry

An Empire of the East : Travels in Indonesia, Norman Lewis

Race, Islam and Power: Ethnic and Religious Violence in Post-Suharto Indonesia, Andreas Harsono

September 29 2025 Epicurean Delights at Dollhouse Park: Culinary Arts As a Practice of Joy and a Pursuit of Beauty

     Herein I offer entrance into my private world of epicurean delights here at my cottage, Dollhouse Park.

      Someone has asked me to share my recipes, and like a genie of the lamp I hear and manifest the truths of our wishes.

      Recipes are wonderful things, prescriptive and descriptive stories which anchor us in history, across vast gulfs of time and space within the lives of other people and other versions of ourselves, and most usefully across cultures. As such they can provide insight into other ways of being human different from our own, one of the most interesting riddles of culture being the idea of Good To Eat.

      Like travel, reading the national literatures of peoples beyond our own, and learning languages, culinary arts allow us a chance to perform otherness, interrogate belonging, test normalities, and escape the legacies of our history.   

      I have used cooking as a coping strategy for trauma and a reset activity to sandbox personal time from work since my years at university and throughout my fourfold career teaching English and Forensics and coaching the debate team at Sonoma Valley High School, as a teacher and business owner of Lale’s Kung Fu Academy of Sonoma which was how I put myself through university entirely with my own money, as a private counselor mainly with angry boys, and as a maker of mischief for tyrants and ally in global democracy and liberation struggle.

      There is nothing like chopping things up, setting fire to them, and eating them to restore one’s serenity in a world of madness and horrors, especially when one works in a museum of private holocausts.

     The culinary arts as I practice them are about control of inchoate and incomprehensible forces of passion which are vast and unstoppable as the tides, forces which include systems of oppression and imposed conditions of struggle including truths written in our flesh and not of our own making, which we must wrestle with not to conquer, when they are unimaginably more ancient and powerful than ourselves, but like Jacob wrestling the angel to remain unconquered by, and as with all things not by sealing ourselves off from our monstrosity and the flaws of our humanity but by embracing them and dancing with our demons, for such are sacred wounds which open us to the pain of others.

     As the Roman playwright Terence wrote; “I am human; nothing human is alien to me”, and in the original Latin; “Homo sum: humani nil a me alienum puto.”

     So for cooking as a restorative art of finding balance; joy and beauty to answer the flaws of our humanity, the brokenness of the world, the terror of our nothingness, and to claw back something of our humanity from the darkness.

     Culinary arts are a practice of joy and a pursuit of Beauty; herein I mean Beauty as Keats defined it; “What the imagination seizes as beauty must be truth, whether it existed before or not”, and Joy as in Whitman’s Poem of Joys; “O to have my life henceforth a poem of new joys!

To dance, clap hands, exult, shout, skip, leap, roll on, float on,

To be a sailor of the world, bound for all ports,

A ship itself, (see indeed these sails I spread to the sun and air,)

A swift and swelling ship, full of rich words—full of joys.”

    Or as I recall these final lines having been paraphrased somewhere; ““Henceforth I will go celebrate anything I see or am,

and deny nothing!.”

      What is the purpose of joy, that we should have adapted to possess such a thing? What evolutionary value does it confer, and how can it help us to survive?

     As T.S. Eliot writes in The Wasteland; “These fragments I have shored against my ruins.” Or in the words of Rebecca Solnit; “When you face a politics that aspires to make you fearful, alienated and isolated, joy is a fine initial act of insurrection.”

     My art of cooking unfolds from my history as part of my identity and a prochronism or history expressed in form shaped by the nested set of puzzle boxes of stories I bear; the first of which is the influence of my mother who taught me to cook as I grew up. Primarily this was the French influenced Viennese and Hapsburg court cuisine with which she grew up, like the family German which was Schönbrunner Deutsch mixed with the Viennese dialect of Bavarian, Wienerisch. Mom adored Hungarian spices and her dishes leaned heavily in this direction, possibly an artifact from my parents actions in the 1956 Hungarian Revolution, during which she seized a border checkpoint with her beloved Belgian Grip sword as they smuggled out dissidents to the West; by my twenties she also cooked Greek cuisine, an influence from her folk dancing enthusiasm and Sunday afternoons spent at Papa’s Taverna in Petaluma, where some of the finest Greek musicians played when in the Bay Area and a whole community danced and ate exquisite food.

      Thus for my family history as an origin story of my cooking hobby embedded in its ancestral deep time; my other culinary enthusiasms were artifacts of chosen family and a boundless curiosity for what lies beyond the boundaries of the known, in the empty spaces on our maps of becoming human marked Here Be Dragons.

      I am become a Tower of Babel, layers of arcologies of human being, meaning, and value gathered from the many places I have traveled and lives I have inhabited; an Atlas of Human Possibillities.

      It was my great good fortune to be situated ideally in time and place as a university student at San Francisco and then UC Berkeley while living and working in Sonoma in the 1980s during the Culinary Revolution, near the James Beard house and a fifteen minute drive from the Culinary Institute of America in Napa. Sonoma was home to iconic businesses like the Sonoma Cheese Company, the Sonoma Bakery, and the Sonoma-Williams flagship store, as well as thirty five wineries and a few four star Michelin Guide restaurants. For many years I made a weekend treat of eating at Chez Panisse in Berkeley, where Alice Waters revolutionized French cuisine and from whom I learned much.

      By the time I embarked on a summer tour of the Mediterranean in 1982 to learn to cook I was a serious hobbyist of the art. My itinerary included France,  Italy, Spain, Greece, and finally Lebanon, French-Arabian Riviera of the Levant though it now seems antique to think of it that way, where I was trapped for some time by the Israeli Siege of Beirut and set on my life path with the Oath of the Resistance given to me by Jean Genet.

      In my Pinterest board entitled Epicurean Delights I have gathered over two thousand recipes for your delectation; but here I wish to share some simple daily standby dishes anyone can make without anything unusual required, quickly. These are my staple dishes. In so doing I have also provided my usual daily routine when at home; Morning Plate, Breakfast or Lunch, and Dinner.

     One consequence of living alone in the wild by hunting all over the world is that I prefer not to eat fellow sentient beings unless I must, so these recipes skew vegetarian; you are warned.

     Herein I wish to explicitly state my own personal idea of Good To Eat, in accord with the principle of Virginia Woolf that “If you cannot tell the truth about yourself, you cannot tell it about others”, an idea shaped by my travels and a history of living both as a Buddhist monk of the Kagyu Vajrayana order in Kathmandu Nepal and as a scholar of Islam and Sufi poetry of the Naqshbandi order of Sufism in Srinagar Kashmir, and in formal study of Zen Buddhism for ten years from the age of nine.

      Don’t eat sentient beings. It’s evil. But there is an exception; do whatever you must to survive.

      So while I don’t eat according to the Eight Precepts as written by Nagarjuna in his Treatise on the Ten Bodhisattva Grounds, I do follow a modified and conditional version of the first one when I can; to abstain from killing living beings like ourselves. This means that I eat fish, chicken, eggs, and dairy, which many vegetarians do not, and while I only eat what is halal that leaves many things which I by preference do not though by necessity may, including beef or the carcass of any being which like ourselves loves, fears, and dreams.

     Bon appetit.

Epicurean Delights, my Pinterest board of over two thousand recipes; I make one unique meal every day, when I can, and this is my recipe file for ideas which I personalize.

https://pin.it/3USMxztdh

   

Morning Snack Plate; the toast is Multigrain Harvest Bread from Safeway with Costco’s Mixed Nut Butter, Gala or Cosmo apple, and Mandarin orange, and from our garden when in season, a plum, apricot, cherries, and blackberries. This I serve after coffee in bed, usually San Francisco Bay Coffee Rainforest Blend from Costco, snacks to be carried off to our respective offices til we can escape for either breakfast or lunch.

                                           Breakfast Menu

     Berryful Breakfast of Quaker Simply Granola with Saigon cinnamon, strawberries, blackberries, blueberries, and when in season our raspberries and cherries on the side. Our usual breakfast, served around ten after the morning snack plate which I always serve first thing after coffee in bed.

      Normally we eat either breakfast or lunch; the latter can be any time from noon to four, depending when we can get free. Dolly’s work as a Director of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company in Regulatory Affairs doing the bureaucratic judo and negotiating the legal systems of over fifty different nations often ties her up in zoom meetings and projects unpredictably and in variable time zones, so our meals are an open time frame as I imagine they are for many of us who work virtually and multinationally. 

     Around ten thirty I bring Dolly her favorite morning tea, Stash Lemon Ginger into which I slice up a half inch of fresh ginger root and slice of fresh lemon, which I call Atomic Blonde Tea.

     If she has not surfaced for breakfast by then, I often eat a Safeway Jalapeno Bagel with cream cheese, jalapeno slices, and Mrs Dash Southwest Chipotle Spices, and if its after noon and we’re going into lunch time I keep cups of Chobani yogurt for a snack.

      On weekends when we have free time we usually make a Sunday Brunch omelette of Rainbow Swiss chard, a favorite garden delight of ours, spinach greens, wild foraged mushrooms of strangeness, red bell pepper, broccoli, a bit of red onion, with sprinkled oregano, exquisite Dubliner cheese or the nutty Asiago and served with Parmesan on top, and like a garnish asparagus seasonally but cooked separately and served draped over the top of the omelette crosswise. Served with seasonal berries, sometimes with sauteed cubed red potatoes, multigrain bread with a medley of preserves, and as with lunches or all afternoon meals water infused with cucumber.

     This one is an omelette with Swiss chard, mushrooms, shallots, broccoli, tomato and Dubliner cheese, served with walnut cranberry bread, infused cucumber water, and Harney & Sons hot cinnamon sunset tea.

       The side of potatoes from our garden, really strange purple fleshed and red with creamy flesh, cilantro seeds, red bell pepper and mild green chilies, to pair with omelettes.

                                    Lunch Menu

     Herein are two standard lunches I make on a weekly basis; Hummus and Crudites and Black Bean Chipotle Burger, and two spell-offs now and then, Soup Theresa and Bean & Cheese Burrito.

       Falafel and hummus with pine nuts and Mrs Dash Southwest Chipotle spice which has no salt, a bit of zaatar with its signature sumac which is de rigeur for a hummus and falafel dish, topped with pine nuts, and crudites; carrots, tomatoes, cucumber, celery, broccoli, cauliflower, Brussels sprouts, bell pepper, and sweet potato or pita chips, with feta cheese and Kalamata olives.

     Black Bean Chipotle Burger, bean, corn, tomato, onion, with smoky chipotle pepper made into patty, on 24 grain bread, with mixed greens, tomato, red onion slice, cheddar cheese, Stubbs barbecue sauce, mustard, ketchup, sweet relish, served with kosher pickle spear, and on this day with pampelmousse on the side.

    Soup Theresa, which we always make together ahead of use; kidney and garbanzo beans, potatoes, carrots, broccoli, brussels sprouts, cauliflower, parsnip, onion, minced garlic, green beans, corn kernels, black peppercorns, two cans crushed tomatoes and one tiny tomato paste to thicken, Italian herbs.

       Bean & Cheese Burrito with Spanish rice, corn, and black beans, avocado, Chobani Greek plain yogurt, Safeway Signature Southwest Salsa, Herdez taqueria avocado cilantro sauce, Mrs Dash southwest chipotle spice.

                                   Dinner Menu

    Among my weekly rotation are Spaghetti, Stir Fry, Smoked Oyster Pizza, and Salad Theresa. 

     Spaghetti with Classico Spicy Basil sauce, sauteed zucchini, crookneck squash, red bell pepper, Mayan sweet onion, minced garlic, wild mushrooms of strangeness, roasted carmelized garlic heads and roasted eggplant slices, kalamata olives, artichoke hearts, Parmesan cheese, Italian herbs. Sometimes I make New Orleans Cajun Style Duck Confit Sausage as a side.

     Stir Fry; tofu stir fried in a touch of Szechuan sauce with the Three Noble Veggies Brussels sprouts, broccoli, and cauliflower, bell pepper, bok choi, celery, carrot, and zucchini over jasmine or basmati rice with sides of vegetable spring rolls, coconut breaded shrimp, and crunchy spiced dried shitake mushrooms. Sauces are Thai sweet chili for the spring rolls, Ponzu for the rice, and for the main dish a choice of Bangkok peanut sauce and Panda’s kung pao.

      Smoked Oyster Pizza; unique and special to my pizza are the smoked oysters. Often I use leftover pasta sauce for the base, layered with ricotta. Dolly requires the broccoli-cauliflower-Brussels sprouts trinity of veggies for this, also used as steamed veggies for potatoes, in stir fry, with hummus as crudites, or baked on salmon. Marinated artichokes hearts. kalamata olives, roast garlic cloves, red bell pepper, wild mushrooms of strangeness, and a light touch of basil pesto.  

     Salad Theresa; Dolly’s dinner salad requires a triple layer base of spicy kale, crunchy Romaine, and other lettuces like lollo rosso, feta and herbed focaccia croutons, black pepper, Caesar dressing, parmesan cheese, veggie baco bits, mixed nuts, shredded roast chicken, and a handful of fresh berries on top.

     My After Midnight snack; fire roasted veggies with foccacia croutons and feta cheese, spices, artichoke hearts and kalamata olives, sometimes over pasta twists with kidney beans, basil pesto, pine nuts, and sun dried tomato when it’s a dinner meal.

September 28 2025 Restoring the Balance: Palestine, Israel, and the Anniversary of the Second Intifada

     On September 28 2000 the Second or Al-Aqsa Intifada began in the wake of the Israeli withdrawal from its occupation of Lebanon and the failure of the Camp David peace process, when Ariel Sharon and hundreds of Israeli riot police temporarily seized the al-Aqsa Mosque, provoking a riot by the people defending the third most sacred of Islam’s historic sites, a skirmish of rubber bullets and tear gas against sticks and stones.

     Conflict has been ongoing ever since.

      Today we have a line in the sand dividing peoples on the basis of blood, faith, and soil as with any fascist tyranny, and weaponizing economic disparity to enslave the powerless and the dispossessed. But this master race-slave race dichotomy is beginning to break down, for there are recurrent massive protest movements on both sides of the Iron Wall, as the people of Palestine and Israel awaken to a common enemy and begin to unite to restore the balance.

     Bashir Abu-Manneh recounts the events of the Second Intifada in Jacobin; “Cutting Palestinians out of Tel Aviv involved intensifying domination, with more settlements, more parcellation and expropriation of Palestinian land, and more control over key aspects of Palestinian life: travel, security, and economic life. As Israel freed itself from reliance on Palestinian labor, Palestinians become ever more controlled and dependent upon Israel.

     The visible physical sign of this new occupation regime was an illegal 700 km segregation wall built on occupied land in order to protect illegal settlers and settlements, alongside endless checkpoints and roadblocks cutting Palestinians off from Israel and from one another. The political sign was a newly formed local Palestinian entity called the Palestinian Authority (PA), whose core function was to serve Israeli security needs.

     This separation with domination has been a total disaster for the Palestinians, who became invisible to ordinary Israelis. Being dominated but not exploited meant that occupied Palestinians became a superfluous population — a burden without leverage over their dominators, who were needed for nothing.

     It is this single fact that explains why Israel could now kill Palestinians in high numbers. Exclusion gave Israel’s army a free hand to deal with a now dispensable Palestinian population — especially when they protested against their conditions of mass confinement.

     The new wave of killing began with Israel’s extremely violent response to the outbreak of the Second Intifada. Ariel Sharon’s highly publicized and provocative September 2000 visit to Haram al-Sharif, accompanied by thousands of troops and riot police, triggered nonviolent demonstrations. Israel responded by unleashing a war on the occupied population.

     In the first few days of the intifada, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) fired over a million bullets into the crowds, according to data supplied to the head of Israel’s military intelligence, Amos Malka. As the journalist Ben Caspit reported, a member of the IDF’s Central Command responded to this figure by suggesting that the operation should be called “a bullet for every child.”

     For the sociologist of Israeli militarism Uri Ben-Eliezer, violent repression on such a massive scale suggests that there was a pre-existing army plan. The IDF sought to trigger a violent confrontation with protesters and push Palestinians to abandon the tactics of mass nonviolence that defined the first weeks of revolt: “It was the IDF that transformed the Al-Aqsa Intifada into a war.” The occupied were now a military target.

     As part of the “new war” approach, and with the goal of reinstating ethno-national boundaries and “putting the Palestinians in their place,” the IDF began to attack Palestinian society in general, including its economy, infrastructures, daily routines, security, liberties, and freedom of movement.

     This approach succeeded in militarizing the intifada and demobilizing widespread nonviolent mass protests.”

     On the other side of the Iron Wall, the Black Flags of anarchy fly over an Israel in tumult and social chaos. The nation forged by a military which accidently spawned a government has lost its hegemony of force and control over its citizens, and can no longer exert subjugation and enslavement over a people faced not simply with joblessness and poverty amid grotesque government corruption, but existential threats of mass hunger and a resurgent pandemic as well. And they are resisting the death sentence handed to them by a plutocratic and oligarchic state.

    Like his ally Trump, Netanyahu used his position and authority to dismantle the institutions of government which might help people survive the pandemic, education, healthcare, welfare, and using privatization transferred public wealth to his sycophants and co-conspirators; but Netanyahu had twenty years to do it in.

     As Etan Nechin writes in Jacobin; “The protests haven’t given rise to ideological debates, such as the viability of Zionism, the occupation, resources, and wealth, which in Israel has been centralized to a few families. They’re fueled by anxiety about the future, rage at the government for mismanaging the coronavirus response, and at the brazen corruption festering at all levels of public life. If protests in the past were about coexistence, these are about mere existence.”

     “While the international focus has been on the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, the debate on one or two states, Israelis are fighting over what kind of country they want Israel to be.

     What the protests have unearthed is the divide in Israeli society. One side remains loyal to the ideal of preserving and strengthening what remains of those institutions that, faulty as they are, are based on the concept of equality for all citizens. The other side sees those institutions as obstacles to maintaining the kind of nationalistic and aggressive state posture that can defy the international community.

     In a month, Israelis will be celebrating the Jewish New Year, a time of beginnings. With the pandemic, the start of school is still undecided, and without a plan to get the economy back on track, unemployment may rise. In the end, people are going out to demonstrate because they lack something — food, shelter, security, health — and this is what will determine their continued appetite to protest.”

     These narratives reveal the conditions in which the current waves of protests in both Palestine and Israel have gathered momentum like a storm; how then shall we as allies of universal human rights and guarantors of global democracy build solidarity for a united resistance to fascisms of blood, faith, and soil?

    Here I turn to the wisdom of Marc Lamont Hill in his famous address to the United Nations; “Regarding the question of Palestine, beyond words, we must ask the question: what does justice require? To truly engage in acts of solidarity, we must make our words flesh. Our solidarity must be more than a noun. Our solidarity must become a verb.

     As a black American, my understanding of action, and solidarity action, is rooted in our own tradition of struggle. As black Americans resisted slavery, as well as Jim Crow laws that transformed us from a slave state to an apartheid state, we did so through multiple tactics and strategies. It is this array of tactics that I appeal to as I advocate for concrete action from all of us in this room.

     Solidarity from the international community demands that we embrace boycott, divestment, and sanctions as a critical means by which to hold Israel accountable for its treatment of Palestinian people. This movement, which emerged out of the overwhelming majority of Palestinian civil society, offers a nonviolent means by which to demand a return to the pre-1967 borders, full rights for Palestinians citizens, and the right of return as dictated by international law.

     Solidarity demands that we no longer allow politicians or political parties to remain silent on the question of Palestine. We can no longer, in particular, allow the political left to remain radical or even progressive on every issue — from the environment to war to the economy — except for Palestine.

     Contrary to Western mythology, black resistance to American apartheid did not come purely through Gandhian nonviolence. Rather, slave revolts and self-defense and tactics otherwise divergent from Dr King or Mahatma Gandhi were equally important to preserving safety and attaining freedom. If we’re to operate in true solidarity with the Palestinian people, we must allow the same range of opportunity and political possibility. If we are standing in solidarity with the Palestinian people, we must recognize the right of an occupied people to defend itself.

     We must prioritize peace. But we must not romanticize or fetishize it. We must advocate and promote nonviolence at every opportunity, but we cannot endorse a narrow politics of respectability that shames Palestinians for resisting, for refusing to do nothing in the face of state violence and ethnic cleansing.

     What I’m challenging us to do, in the spirit of solidarity, is not to embrace optimism but to embrace radical hope. Radical hope is a belief that despite the odds, despite the considerable measures against justice and peace, despite the legacy of hatred and imperialism and white supremacy and patriarchy and homophobia, despite these systems of power that have normalized settler colonialism, despite these structures, we can still win. We can still prevail.

     One motivation for my hope in the liberation and ultimate self-determination of the Palestinian people comes in August of 2014. Black Americans were in Ferguson, Missouri, in the Midwest of the United States, protesting the death of a young man named Michael Brown, an unarmed African-American male who had been killed by a law enforcement agent. And as we protested, I saw two things that provided hope for the Palestinian struggle.

     One was that for the first time in my entire life of activism, I saw a sea of Palestinian people. I saw a sea of Palestinian flags in the crowd saying that we must form a solidarity project. We must struggle together in order to resist, because state violence in the United States and state violence in Brazil and state violence in Syria and state violence in Egypt and state violence in South Africa and state violence in Palestine are all of the same sort. And we finally understood that we must work together and not turn on each other, but instead turn to each other.

     And later that night when the police began to tear gas us, Mariam Barghouti tweeted us from Ramallah. She, along with other Palestinian youth activists, told us that the tear gas that we were experiencing was only temporary. They gave us tips for how to wash our eyes out. They told us how to make gas masks out of T-shirts. They gave us permission to think and dream beyond our local conditions by giving us a transnational or a global solidarity project.

     And from those tweets and social media messages, we began then to organize together. We brought a delegation of black activists to Palestine, and we saw the connections between the police in New York City who are being trained by Israeli soldiers and the type of policing we were experiencing in New York City. We began to see relationships of resistance, and we began to build and struggle and organize together. That spirit of solidarity, a solidarity that is bound up not just in ideology but in action, is the way out.

     So as we stand here on the seventieth anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the tragic commemoration of the Nakba, we have an opportunity to not just offer solidarity in words but to commit to political action, grassroots action, local action, and international action that will give us what justice requires — and that is a free Palestine from the river to the sea. Thank you for your time.”

     How does such a thing arise, this glorious Resistance, and become part of a national identity and a history which possesses us like the hungry ghosts of our sacred dead and as our stories written in our flesh as DNA?

      How does the Wagnerian Ring of fear, power, and force seek to consume our capacity to love and dehumanize us, and how can it be Resisted as solidarity in liberation struggle and overcome by the redemptive power of love?

     In answer here follow my journals from the Third Intifada, which in many ways beyond its beginning with an Israeli raid and act of provocation on the worshippers at al Aqsa is a continuation of the Second, and ongoing still as a context of the Gaza War..

 May 10 2024 Anniversary of the Third Intifada of 2021, Now Ongoing In the Tenth Theatre of World War Three Which Contains and Supersedes the Gaza War

       Both visitors to the Holy Land seeking signs of the Invisible manifest in its Disneyland of conflicted faiths and those trapped within its nightmare of walls, checkpoints, razor wire, pervasive surveillance, universalized violence, identitarian politics, and the tyranny and terror of one of our world’s most horrific regimes of force and control are here become the ghosts of the Holocaust; Israel echoes with the silent screams of stolen voices and the devouring shadows of a history weaponized in service to power as narratives of victimization and security as power, a strategy designed to first break our solidarity with division and fascisms of blood, faith, and soil as falsification and then dehumanize and subjugate us as masters and slaves and as genocide and ethnic cleansing.

     Israel as a dream of refuge and of universal brotherhood and love has been betrayed and subverted by Israel as a xenophobic theocracy, military empire, and slave camp; here Auschwitz has been institutionalized on a national scale, its former prisoners now its guards.

     Why would anyone choose to recreate a hell they had escaped from, even as its masters rather than its slaves?

     I understand all too well the seduction of power as security in a world of hostile and chaotic forces, and how overwhelming and generalized fear can be shaped by authority to centralize power by offering us loaned power over Others as figures of existential threats; to be the arbiter of virtue through force and control. But security is an illusion, the state as embodied violence obeys Newton’s Third Law of Motion and creates its own Resistance, and our common pain unites us in ways which transcend the Wagnerian Ring of fear, power, and force, which only love can free us from.

     Love as solidarity in action can redeem the flaws of our humanity and the brokenness of the world, Tikkun Olam in Hebrew, and liberate us to live as guarantors of each other’s humanity.

      As I wrote on the first anniversary of the Third Intifada on this night two years ago; This must be the most written about, studied, debated, experimented with and fought over issue in global politics since the Second World War of which it is a result, this nation wherein one people are divided by history as Israelis and Palestinians, and a measure of our humanity, as the classic example of the double minority; what do you do with one city and one nation claimed by two historical communities, as a basis of identity as faith and nationality and the consequences and praxis of identity politics as violence?

     Here a nation and a people are riven by dissociative identity disorder, conflicted and locked in titanic struggle as with the fragmentation of identity, memory, and consciousness of multiple personalities, madness on a national and civilizational scale born of the legacies of history and life disruptive events, epigenetic trauma, grief, terror, guilt, and despair.

     In the duality of Israel and Palestine are made plain the origins of evil as violence and tyranny in the recursive and interdependent Wagnerian Ring of fear, power, and force, as overwhelming and generalized fear and existential threats are weaponized in service to power by authority, which forms carceral states of force and control as unequal power and embodied violence, through elite hierarchies and divisions of belonging and otherness and fascisms of blood, faith, and soil.

     Here fascism as a systemic evil operates as possession and theft of the soul. What can we do about it?  As Lenin asked in his essay of 1902; “What is to be done?” How free ourselves of the systemic forces of our subjugation to authority, elites, and those who would enslave us?

    We must first recognize and be cautious of those who claim to speak for us and act in our name, for this is a primary strategy of fascism. To free ourselves of the lies and illusions, falsification and rewritten histories, conspiracy theories and alternate realities through which we become dehumanized, we must be truthtellers engaged in the pursuit of truth as a sacred calling, and perform the Four Primary Duties of a Citizen; Question Authority, Expose Authority, Mock Authority, and Challenge Authority.

    We must second seize our self-ownership and autonomy in refusal to submit to authority, for the great secret of power is that it is empty and hollow, and is delegitimized through refusal to trust and believe authority, and of force that it is brittle and finds its limit at the point of disobedience. Simple acts, but also inherent powers of human being which cannot be taken from us; for who refuses to submit is free, and becomes Unconquerable.

     Always there remains the struggle between the masks that others make for us, and those we make for ourselves. This is the first revolution in which we all must fight; the struggle for self-ownership and for freedom of identity.

     There is no just authority.

      Tonight I sit at home among the vast darkness of my hills, a night which follows days of rain and filled with the songs of frogs and birds, a serenity disturbed only by the chiaroscuro of my memories of this night one year ago, in the defense of al Aqsa. Like flashes of lightning, the hand of the past can bring the Chaos and reach out to seize and shake us, destabilizing us and our constructions of normality with unpredictable and sudden disruptive events unmoored from their anchorages in time.

      But Chaos is also a measure of the adaptive range of a system, which brings both the terror of our nothingness and the joy of total freedom in our reimagination and transformative rebirth of ourselves and our limitless possibilities of becoming human.

      Guillermo del Toro, in his magnificent epic of migration and racial equality Carnival Row, has a scene in which two young successors to leadership of traditionally rival factions find themselves in love and in need of allies in a subplot which reimages Romeo and Juliet; the rebellious hellion Jonah Breakspear asks his Machiavellian lover Sophie Longerbane, “Who is chaos good for?” To which she replies, “Chaos is good for us. Chaos is the great hope of the powerless.”

     One may think of Bringing the Chaos in terms of the redemptive power of love, of solidarity, of our duty of care for others, of seizures of power as the restoration of balance, of Resistance and revolutionary struggle as placing our lives in the balance with those of the powerless and the dispossessed, the silenced and the erased, and as tikkun olam or healing the brokenness of the world.

     In Jerusalem and al Quds, we are betrayed by the normality of submission to authority and the divisions of unequal power, dehumanized by those who commit atrocities in our name, and made complicit in crimes against humanity through narratives of victimization which as Voltaire teaches us permit anything.

     Gott mitt uns; it is an ancient terror. And this we must resist.

     Old myths, and old grievances, woven into the fabric of our psyche and our civilization. And like all history, memory, and authorized identity, mimetic forces from whose legacies we must emerge.

     In this moment I turn once again to the brilliant diagnosis of the illness of power as captured identity as written by Alon Ben-Meirin in Huffpost, though his prescription of a two state system is debatable and for myself must be superseded in time with a secular state with one law for all and no official divisions of tribe, language, or faith, in an article entitled In The Grip Of Powerful Illusions; “The deadlock in the Israeli-Palestinian peace process appears to be illogical and unsettling as a majority of Israelis and Palestinians realize that coexistence, whether under conditions of enmity or friendship, is a fact that neither side can change short of a catastrophe.

     The deadlock in the Israeli-Palestinian peace process appears to be illogical and unsettling as a majority of Israelis and Palestinians realize that coexistence, whether under conditions of enmity or friendship, is a fact that neither side can change short of a catastrophe. Both sides understand that the general parameters of a sustainable peace agreement must rest on a two-state solution based on the 1967 borders with some land swaps. However, both sides choose to revel in illusions and live in defiance of time and circumstances. They seem to prefer continuing violent clashes and bloodshed over peaceful coexistence, while blaming each other for the unending destructive path that tragically both have chosen to travel.

     There are fundamental imperatives, coupled with long-term mutual security measures, which represent what was on the negotiating table in 2000 at Camp David and in 2010/2011 and 2013/2014 under the Obama administration’s auspices in Jerusalem and Ramallah. Each round, with various degrees of progress, aimed at finalizing an agreement and yet ultimately failed to do so. The question is: why?

     Biased and selective perceptions, reinforced by historical experiences, religion, and incompatible ideologies, have locked both sides into immobile positions. The factors that maintain and enhance these patterns include emotions such as fear, distrust, and insecurity. The psychological outcome is mutual denial of the narrative of the other and mutual delegitimization.

     Put together, the operative result is stagnation and polarization. What is therefore needed is a consensus-oriented dialogue at the leadership level by both officials and non-officials, and people-to-people interactions, to resolve the issue of perception – a tall order given the current environment that buttresses rather than ameliorates prejudiced perceptions.

     There are certain psychological concepts which are relevant to understanding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict; the concept of illusion is an essential one. In The Future of an Illusion, Freud offers the following definition: “…we call a belief an illusion when a wish-fulfillment is a prominent factor in its motivation, and in doing so we disregard its relations to reality, just as the illusion itself sets no store by verification.”

     What is characteristic of illusions is that: 1) they are derived from deep human wishes, and 2) the belief is held (or would be held) in the absence of any compelling evidence, or good rational grounds, on its behalf.

     It is impossible to deny that both Israelis and Palestinians are in the grip of very powerful illusions which only serve to prolong the conflict and prevent any mutual understanding. In particular, the belief shared by many Israelis that they have a biblical right to the land (including Judea and Samaria) and that God gave it to the Jews in perpetuity is undoubtedly an illusion of yesterday.

     This belief is not affirmed because there is real evidence that God deemed it to be (although two Jewish kingdoms did exist–the first in the tenth century BCE and the second beginning in 539 BCE–on the same land), but because it satisfies a deep-seated psychological need for a God-given Jewish homeland.

     The belief that by expanding the settlements Israel will augment its national security and maintain its hold on the entire land is an illusion of tomorrow, which generally ignores the presence of Muslims in the same land for more than 1,300 years.

     It is important to note how these illusions sustain and reinforce one another, and constitute a psychological barrier which is much more impervious to critical reflection. Israel’s illusions have served to create the logic for occupation.

     The Palestinians, for their part, are not without their own illusions. They also believe that God has reserved the land for them, and appeal to the fact that they had inhabited the land for centuries. From their perspective, the presence of the al-Aqsa Mosque, which was built in 705 AD in Jerusalem, attests to their historical and religious affinity to the Holy City.

     They also cling to the idea that they will someday return to the land of their forbearers, as they have and continue to insist on the right of return of the Palestinian refugees, even though this has become a virtual impossibility.

     The Palestinians hold fast to their illusions of yesterday and tomorrow just as blindly and desperately as the Israelis, which leads to resistance to and fear of change. As such, unless both sides change course and accept each other’s affinity to the same land, specifically because it is religiously-based, the situation is bound to lead to a catastrophe.

      This has contributed to making the Israeli-Palestinian conflict both chronic and intractable, as the various illusions are continuously and consciously nurtured by daily hostile and often violent encounters between the two sides.

     In seeking to bridge concepts that could link between the domains of psychology and politics in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, it could be proposed that a collective mutual resistance to change (both conscious and deliberate, and inner unconscious) protects a vulnerable identity.

     Compared, for example, to the stable and mature political identities of the American, British, and French nations, the political identities of both the Israeli and Palestinian peoples are, in a way, in their adolescence.

     Identities in this setting are more vulnerable, and the protagonists are naturally more defensive and resistant to change. By its very nature, the players must find it difficult (if not impossible) to articulate this publicly, as to do so is to admit to this vulnerability.

     The concept of psychological resistance to change may well affect the political setting in general and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in particular; it is closely connected to perceptions at many levels and provides protection for vulnerable identity formation.

     It is this mindset, strengthened by historical experiences, which transcends the more than seven decades since the Israeli-Palestinian conflict began. Individuals and groups, Israelis and Palestinians alike, have and continue to interpret the nature of the discord between them as “you versus me” in a prejudiced and selective way.

     In turn, this has stifled any new information and enabled the continuing resistance to change, which could shed new light on the nature and substance of the conflict and help advance the peace process.

     The concept of unconscious resistance to change in this setting links well to the view of perceptions driving the polarization in the conflict. Historical experience, which formulates perceptions, serves among other things to enhance the sense of identity of “who we really are,” a formative collective assumption that sits at the bedrock of both key players and drives functional and dysfunctional behavior.

     In principle, such a mindset prevents either side from entertaining new ideas that might lead to compromises for a peaceful solution. The paradox here is that majorities on both sides do want and seek peace, knowing full well that this would require significant concessions, but are unable to reconcile the required concessions with imbedded perceptions that have precluded these compromises as a result of resistance to and fear of change.

     Therefore, any framework for peace must include provisions that would dramatically increase the odds in favor of a solution. First, both sides need to commit to reaching an agreement based on a two-state solution out of the conviction that change, which translates to coexistence, is inevitable. Therefore, they ought to adjust to each other’s requirements, which of necessity requires them to make significant concessions.

     Second, to facilitate that, they must undertake reconciliatory people-to-people social, economic, cultural, and security interactions to mitigate their resistance to change, which must begin, at a minimum, one year before the negotiations commence to create the psychological and political atmosphere to cultivate the trust necessary for substantive and successful peace negotiations.

     The resumption of peace talks will go nowhere unless Israelis and Palestinians change their prejudiced perception and resistance to and fear of change, and finally come to the realization that their fate is intertwined and neither can live in peace and security without the other.

     I feel compelled to conclude my last article for the year with a dire warning that both Israelis and Palestinians alike will do well to ponder upon as they approach the end of the seventh decade of their tragic conflict.

     Every Israeli extremist and Palestinian militant, those who want it all must stop and think where Israel and the Palestinians will be in ten years if the current situation persists?

     Your illusions of today will not become a reality of tomorrow, and what tomorrow will bring is nothing but more pain, tears, and agony.

     Your conflict is evolving ever faster into a religious war. A Muslim-Jewish Armageddon is in the making that will set the whole region on unfathomable fire.

     If you are true believers, dare not defy God’s will, for he has thrust you together to put you to the test–you must either live in peace and harmony, or you will be condemned to oblivion and despair.

     You possess the power to choose your own destiny. Will it be self-destruction or will it be the fulfilment of a glorious dream?

     Rise up and pass a legacy of hope to every Israeli and Palestinian child, for they have the God-given right to grow up and prosper and none should die for your illusions in vain.”

     As I wrote in my post of November 9 2023, A Mirror of Our Darkness: Kristallnact; Israel is commemorating this tragedy which opened a door to an even greater tragedy in the Holocaust by doing exactly the same thing to the Palestinians, one people divided by history and faith weaponized in service to power. And this too will open doors to greater state terror and tyranny, unless both peoples can unite against authorities who commit atrocities in their name as a strategy of subjugation and liberate each other from those who would enslave them.

     If you think of nations as children who are survivors of abuse, much becomes clear; for once they have seized power they are far more likely to become abusers themselves. This is how fear works, why it is the true basis of exchange, why politics is the Art of Fear, and why states are embodied violence. Both Israelis and Palestinians have been savaged by existential threats long before they began savaging, brutalizing, and dehumanizing each other.

     That predatory regimes on both sides have used division and identity politics to centralize power and legitimize authoritarian dominion is a predictable phase of liberation struggle, especially of anti-colonial revolution.

      The trick of becoming human, friends, is to embrace ones own darkness in struggle as well as one’s enemies, and emerge from the legacies of our history which shadow us like an invisible crocodile tail.

      There is a line spoken by the villain in the series The Magicians, a survivor of childhood abuse and tyrant known as The Beast for his horrific crimes, once the powerless and terrified boy Martin Chatwin and now a monstrous god; “You know, when I was a boy, a man who was meant to care for me bent me over his desk and had me over and over every time I was alone with him. It helps me understand a truth. You’re powerful or you’re weak. “

      Here is the original lie of the tyrant and the fascist in the apologetics, self-justification, and psychopathy of power; the lie that only power has meaning and is real, that there is no good or evil. How we use power is of equal importance as who holds it. Fear and force are a primary means of human exchange, but not the only means; love, membership, and belonging are as important.

      It’s a line which captures perfectly the inherent contradictions of the  Wagnerian Ring of fear, power, and force as an origin of evil; for the use of social force is subversive of its own values. Yet the imposed conditions of revolutionary struggle often require violence, and until the gods of law and order have been cast down from their thrones I must agree with the famous dictum of Sartre in his 1948 play Dirty Hands, quoted by Frantz Fanon in his 1960 speech Why We Use Violence, and made immortal by Malcolm X; “by any means necessary.”

     As written by Walter Rodney in The Groundings with my Brothers; “We were told that violence in itself is evil, and that, whatever the cause, it is unjustified morally. By what standard of morality can the violence used by a slave to break his chains be considered the same as the violence of a slave master? By what standards can we equate the violence of blacks who have been oppressed, suppressed, depressed and repressed for four centuries with the violence of white fascists. Violence aimed at the recovery of human dignity and at equality cannot be judged by the same yardstick as violence aimed at maintenance of discrimination and oppression.”

     And here is the passage he references from Leon Trotsky in Their Morals and Ours: The Class Foundations of Moral Practice; “A slave-owner who through cunning and violence shackles a slave in chains, and a slave who through cunning or violence breaks the chains – let not the contemptible eunuchs tell us that they are equals before a court of morality!”

     Yet in reflection I think of those great figures who have been both heroes of liberation and villains of tyranny; my teenage role model Napoleon, Washington who is central to our family history and coined the motto on our coat of arms in the passcode during the Battle of Trenton, Victory or Death, when the whole Revolution was wagered on a forlorn hope, of the tragic drama of fallen heroes like Robert Mugabe, the monstrous tyrants Stalin and Mao, the list is a near endless litany of woes and failures of vision wherein Brave New Worlds became hells and carceral states. In evidence I offer the American and Napoleonic Revolutions become Empires, the Soviet Union, the Chinese Communist Party, India where the glory of liberation come hand in hand with the tragedy of Partition and is now under the boot of Hindu Nationalism, nearly all anticolonial revolutions which with the first period of liberty as new nations became dreadful tyrannies, and above all the state of Israel, a dream of refuge forged in the terror of the Holocaust whose victims learned the wrong lessons from the Nazis and assumed their role in the Occupation of Palestine. The dangers of Idealism are very real; but so are the dangers of submission to authority and the complicity of silence in the face of evil.

     I am a hunter of fascists, and mine is a hunter’s morality. For me there is a simple test for the use of force; who holds power?

     A great many wise people have written beautifully of the horrors of fascisms of blood, faith, and soil and of hierarchies of elite belonging and exclusionary otherness, as does Paul Oestreicher in the article which follows; herein I wish only to signpost that the forces which lie both within us and without as social conditions and epigenetic trauma, of atavisms of barbarism and systems of oppression, are universal to human beings as imposed conditions of struggle and operate continually even when obscured from view, beyond the horror and abjection of points of fracture of the human soul like those of Kristallnacht and the ethnic cleansing of Gaza.

     I write to you as one who has lived by the battle cry of Never Again! for over forty years now, and it is of deep and vital importance to apply this principle of action not only in Resistance to fascism as an intrusive enemy of all that is human in us, but also to ourselves and our own use of violence and social force toward others.

    In the end, all that matters is what we do with our fear, and how we use our power.

     No matter where you begin with divisions and hierarchies of elite belonging and exclusionary otherness, you always end up at the gates of Auschwitz.

    As Nietzsche teaches us in Beyond Good and Evil; “Those who hunt monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you.”

     In the dark mirror of Gaza, with its monstrous reflections of Kristallnacht and of Auschwitz, do you like what you see, O Israel?

     As I wrote in my post of May 10 2021, The Defense of al Aqsa: Liberty versus Tyranny in Jerusalem;  We may have witnessed the advent of a Third Intifada this night, in the Defense of al Aqsa and the street fighting in Gaza which followed, ignited by the perfidy and imperial conquest of a xenophobic and fascist state of Israel which regards no one but their own tribe and faith as truly human, and which has perpetrated an unprovoked and deadly attack as an act of state terror and a crime against humanity on the peaceful worshippers at one of the most sacred mosques in the Islamic world, a demonstration of power and dominion which follows weeks of provocations, assaults, and acts of propagandistic dehumanization against the people of Palestine.

      Like the Second or al Aqsa Intifada which lasted four years from 28 September 2000 to 8 February 2005, unresolved issues of an Occupation now in its fifty fourth year since the June 7 1967 Conquest of Old Jerusalem by Israel, which the State of Israel celebrated according to the Hebrew calendar as Jerusalem Day today by attacking al Aqsa, and a Catastrophe ongoing now for seventy three years since Nakba Day May 15 1948, have coalesced around the symbolic value of al Aqsa, which has a contested dual identity as the Temple Mount in Judaism.

     Chances of de-escalation and averting a war depend now not on local factors but on the response of the international community, for history has here become a trap which collapses to ensnare us in its jaws, and outside forces must liberate us from the failures of our system’s internal contradictions.

     Will America disavow and renounce its colony of Israel, Queen of her imperial policy in the Middle East and control of the strategic resource of oil? Can international unity and the pressure of Boycott, Divestiture, and Sanction free us from the tyranny and terror of an Apartheid regime as it did in South Africa?

     Or is war the only reckoning humankind can offer, or will accept?

     As written by Ishaan Tharoor in The Washington Post; “On Monday night, militants in the Gaza Strip and the Israeli military exchanged rocket fire and airstrikes amid a deadly escalation of violence. Hamas and Islamic Jihad, armed groups based in blockaded Gaza, launched a barrage of rockets that landed near Jerusalem and in parts of southern Israel, injuring at least one person. Israeli airstrikes in retaliation killed at least 20 people in Gaza, according to Gaza’s Health Ministry, including nine children.

     Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said the “terrorist groups” in Gaza had “crossed a red line” with their rocket attacks. But the latest explosion of hostilities has a long tail, following numerous aggressive actions by both Israeli security forces and far-right Jewish supremacist groups in Jerusalem. Two weeks ago, bands of Jewish extremists, including some settlers from the West Bank, marched through Palestinian-populated areas of the holy city, chanting “Death to Arabs,” attacking bystanders and damaging Palestinian property and homes. Israeli attempts to evict a number of Palestinian families in the East Jerusalem neighborhood of Sheikh Jarrah — a microcosm of what Palestinians view as part of a long history of dispossession and erasure at the hands of the Israeli state — had stirred Palestinian solidarity protests in various parts of the occupied territories and Israel proper.

     It also raised tensions ahead of the commemoration of Jerusalem Day on Monday, an official Israeli holiday celebrating the capture of the city during the 1967 Arab-Israeli War. A planned annual march by far-right ultranationalist Israelis was called off after authorities rerouted its path at the last minute.    Large numbers still made their way to the Western Wall and sang an extremist vengeance song against Palestinians.

     “The Hamas rocket attacks, which included the first strikes against Jerusalem in several years, came after running clashes among Israeli police, Palestinian protesters and far-right Jewish Israelis around the Old City,” my colleagues reported. “Among the hundreds injured were seven who were hospitalized in serious condition, according to the Palestinian Red Crescent. Video footage circulated on social media of Israeli police officers brutally beating a detained Palestinian man.”

      How can America support the state of Israel in tyranny and terror, conquest and plunder? It’s a question asked in tones of outrage, sorrow, and bafflement since the advent of the Nakba on May 15 1948, the Day of Catastrophe which began the Occupation of Palestine and the systematic enslavement and genocide of its people in the wake of the Israeli conquest of Jerusalem. How is this legitimized?

      A friend has recently reframed this question for me; “I loved and embraced the Jewish tradition, joining a synagogue and working alongside its Rabbi. When I witness the treatment of Palestinians by the Jewish government of Israel, I am overwhelmed by feelings of confusion and anger. Unable to reconcile this immorality, I question the very foundation of my faith. Where is the good and moral uprising of international Jewish voices condemning the government’s path? I’ve lost faith in being Jewish.”

     What is clear to me is that this crisis of faith is also an existential crisis of identity, a situation of utmost gravity and danger which also holds the potential for reimagination and transformative rebirth, a personal echo of a parallel civilizational crisis from which humankind and the global community of nations must find a way to emerge and free ourselves of the legacies of our history. Here is my reply:

     The state of Israel is not identical with the Jewish faith, though the fascist-imperialist faction which Netanyahu represents would like everyone to think so. 

    A nation based on the assignment of its citizens to a tribal identity, the sectarian weaponization of faith in service to power and an authorized national identity, a military society with universal compulsory service and a pervasive fetishization of myths of martial valor and its symbols including guns, and a reconstructed Hebrew language of national unity has used identity politics to subjugate its citizens to the centralized power of tyranny; Israel is a fascist state of blood, faith, and soil no less than that of the Nazis.

     Add to this toxic mix a kleptocratic regime which has propagandized narratives of historical victimization to legitimize massive theft and imperial conquest of other people’s nations and one thing is clear; Israel has learned the wrong lessons from the Nazis.

     You may know from my many references to the incident in my writing that I am an antifascist, sworn to the Oath of the Resistance by Jean Genet in 1982 in Beirut, during our fight against the Israeli invasion and siege. In the 39 years after, I have been a hunter of Nazis and a revolutionary of democracy engaged in struggle for the liberation of humankind against tyranny and authoritarian regimes of force and control.

      A Palestinian homeland, and justice for its people, has been among my goals since that summer so long ago. Like the goal of liberation of Ireland from British colonial rule, it remains to be achieved. In question is the idea of freedom and citizenship as the sovereignty and independence of peoples from foreign colonialism and authoritarian tyranny, and the primacy of a nonsectarian state free from divisions and hierarchies of faith, for who stands between each of us and the Infinite serves neither.

     I also support the idea of an Israeli homeland, and see no reason these two states, Palestine and Israeli, should be mutually exclusive or antagonistic. Some Israelis who would disagree with me on the question of Palestine and militarism in imperial conquest and regional dominion have been allies in the cause of hunting Nazis and fascists generally throughout the world, but are blind to their own complicity in this evil due to seeing themselves as victims rather than perpetrators of crimes against humanity. This is about fear, and the destructive cycle of abuse and violence.

     When faith is appropriated by authority for legitimation in identity politics, identity itself becomes confused and ambiguous. To become free, we must seize ownership of ourselves as self-created and autonomous beings.

     This is why the primary duties of a citizen are to question authority, expose authority, mock authority, and challenge authority.

     Always there remains the struggle between the masks others make for us and those we make for ourselves; this is the first revolution in which we all must fight.

     I think of the problem of human evil and its cycle of fear, power, and force in the case of states which become the tyrannies they fought to liberate themselves from, and this is true of anticolonial revolutionary states generally because of the historical legacies of victimization, in this way; victims often become abusers because their identity is organized around power as the only means of escape in a world wherein no one can be trusted.

     When trust has been abrogated and proven empty and without meaning, when the capacity to bond with and feel the pain of others in empathy has been broken and one is without pity or remorse, when fear is overwhelming and generalized and has been shaped by authority to the service of power, victims learn that only power has meaning and is real. We must not allow our abusers to become our teachers.

     While every such issue has its own unique origins and history, the problem itself is universal, and relates to what one fears, and how that fear is shaped by authority as identity. From our perspective as Americans interpreting events in the classic problem of the double minority typified by Israel and Palestine, how we perceive issues has much to do with how they are framed by our informing and motivating sources.

      In the end we are defined by what we do with our fear, and how we use our power.

      The first question to ask of any story, and the most important, is simple; whose story is this?

      We are lost in a Wilderness of Mirrors, of lies and illusions, falsifications of ourselves, distorted images and reflections, echoes and authorized identities which disfigure, disempower, and steal our souls.

      How shall we answer those who would enslave us? Our authenticity and autonomy is realized through seizure of power, and the reimagination and transformation of ourselves and humankind as a free society of equals.

      We Americans tend to see things in terms of white hats and black hats, as in the Western films which serve as origin myths and archetypes of our national character. Once victim status has been conferred, such groups and persons become white hats and good guys, incapable of evil and diametrically opposed to whomever must then be black hats. It’s a terrible way of choosing national policy.

     Sadly, we humans can be good and evil at once, the flaws of our humanity echo and reflect the brokenness of the world. It is a truth proven once again tonight in al Quds or Jerusalem depending on to whom one is speaking and in what language, as Gaza burns from the onslaught of an Israeli Defense Forces run amok much the same as the night almost four decades ago in Beirut when they tried to burn Genet and I alive in our café, as a dozen human beings from whom everything but hope has been stolen swear vows to each other to hold a position covering the escape of the women and children trapped by the Israeli attack until all are safe, in a final defense not of al Aqsa Mosque, magnificent and beautiful and filled with significance, monument to the human impulse to reach beyond ourselves and to the limitless possibilities of becoming human, a stage fit for the glorious deaths of heroes, but of the disembodied screams of strangers among the nameless warrens of a derelict antiquity.

     Against the chasms of emptiness and nihilistic barbarism of a world of darkness and fire, of fear and force, I have only words to offer, and I write to you what I have said to my comrades who have chosen to stand with me; I’ve lost count of Last Stands, but I’ve risked everything against impossible odds and survived more times than I can remember, and all that matters is that we abandon neither ourselves nor one another, that we refuse to submit, for this is the moment of our freedom, and it can never be taken from us.

      From this night, Palestine is free, for we can be killed, but we cannot be conquered.

May 11 2024, Anniversary of the Third Intifada of 2021, Part Two

      As I reflect on the events of the Third Intifada as I lived them, it occurs to me that among the things which are important here is the process of storytelling as self-reflective memory, history, and identity; for when we tell the story of a thing history looks back on itself, and through its author and readers becomes embodied and self aware. There is no telling nor hearing of stories without participation and interpretation; they bear liminal force as a principle of change.

    Here I write in the special form of social media, wherein all truths are relative, ephemeral, impermanent; but also extend infinitely in all directions free of the limits of form and of time as artifacts of consciousness and abstract information by which the real organizes itself, and collide with other truths in a Brownian motion which transforms them and ourselves as informing, motivating, and shaping sources. We have forged a network of ideas which is a mirror of the network of ourselves.

     How if this social construction of identity through narrative is both metaphorical or poetic truth and an instrument with which we may seize control of our own evolution?

      Jung reimagined the Platonic Ideal as the Collective Unconscious, and referenced its previous forms as the Logos in the Biblical Book of John the Evangelist, Ibn Arabi’s alam al-mythal, Coleridge’s Primary Imagination, and the Bardo in Hindu and Buddhist philosophy. But in the context of the usefulness of stories in the creation of ourselves, it is not the function of dreams and poetic vision as a gate of the soul to the Infinite, as rapture, exaltation, and transcendence, of which I speak now, but of the power of reimagination and transformation in healing the brokenness of the world.

     Such a unitary field of human being, meaning, and value which co-evolves with us as its individual expressions and manifestations, this sea of consciousness which connects us below the surface of our awareness and beyond the limits of our individuality, and in which we participate as its creators in recursive process, is a primary ground of struggle.

     As we learn from John Cage in music, Harold Pinter in theatre, and Piet Mondrian in art, it is the blank spaces which define and order meaning; and in history it is the silenced and erased voices to which we must listen most carefully, for here the emptiness speaks to us of secret power and of the key functions and relationships which authority must conceal to maintain its hegemony over us.

     Always pay attention to the man behind the curtain. For if we are to free ourselves of those who would enslave us and steal our souls through falsification, lies and illusions, rewritten histories, and captured narratives, we must perform the Four Primary Duties of a Citizen; Question Authority, Expose Authority, Mock Authority, and Challenge Authority, and live, write, speak, teach, and organize as what Foucault called truthtellers in the sacred calling to pursue the truth.

     Thus may we enact solidarity and place our lives in the balance with those whom Frantz Fanon called The Wretched of the Earth; the powerless and the dispossessed, the silenced and the erased.

     Such is my hope that love as solidarity may redeem the flaws of our humanity and that its praxis as liberation struggle may bring healing to the brokenness of the world, and that through poetic vision as reimagination and transformation of human being, meaning, and value and the limitless possibilities of becoming human we may dream a better future than we have the past.

      As I wrote in my post of October 5 2021, Seizure of Power, Self-Creation and Self-Ownership, Authenticity and Autonomy, Self Representation as Construction of Identity, and Ourselves as Living Memoirs: the Case of Social Media; Something crucial we ignore about social media; though its pitched as connectedness, its primary function is to construct identity through ordering and prioritizing our experience in time. Our social media publications are a form of memoir, and this is a ground of struggle between the stories we tell about ourselves, to ourselves and to others, and those which others tell about us.

     As with the public negotiations of national identity and conflicted histories in the competing narratives of the 1619 Project and the Mayflower origin story, and of the authorized identities of Israelis and Palestinians, the first question we must ask of our stories is simple and direct; whose story is this?

    This is the great test of disambiguation between falsification and authenticity, and between autonomy and subjugation; not whether a statement is a lie or an objective and testable truth, though this is also important, but whose truth is it?

     As I wrote in my post of June 22 2021, Our History Swallows Us Like An Infinite Moebius Loop and We Become Prisoners of Its Gordian Knot: the Case of Critical Race Theory; History becomes a Wilderness of Mirrors; of lies and illusions, distorted and captured images endlessly reflected which violate our uniqueness, falsify us, limit and entrap us in authorized identities and narratives which serve the interests of elite power and not our own.

     Our histories and memories are the anchorages of our identity and the wellspring of our becoming, networks of connectedness which sustain our harmony and wholeness; but such nets can ensnare us as well, and become atavisms we drag behind us like an invisible reptilian tail.

     Our history swallows us like an infinite Moebius Loop, and we become prisoners of its Gordian Knot; the case of Critical Race Theory repression illumines the vicious cycle of fear, power, and force as racism and fascist tyranny overlap and intermingle hideously, consuming our most vulnerable population as sacrifices on the altar of wealth and power. 

     As I wrote in my post of December 5 2020, Whose Story Is This?; We are the stories we tell about ourselves, to ourselves and one another. So it becomes important to ask of our stories and representations, whose story is this?

     I call this the Narrative Theory of Identity, and my intention is that it serves as a lever for changing the balance of power in the world. Our idea of self derives from the persona, the ancient Greek theatrical mask through which characters speak, and the possibilities of becoming human are a function of the struggle between authorized identities and the self- ownership of autonomous individuals.

     We have one problem in common as we grow up and create ourselves; each of us must reinvent how to be human. Our informing, motivating, and shaping forces, modeled and communicated to us by others, are necessary to our processes of growth and individuation, but also integral to the dialectics of self and others.

     The struggle between the masks that others make for us and those we make for ourselves is the first revolution in which we all must fight.  

     The Atlantic questions yesterday’s Facebook Down event;

     “Caroline Mimbs Nyce: What does today’s outage say about the state of Facebook, the company? About the fragility of our social web?

     Adrienne LaFrance: The web isn’t just fragile; it’s wholly ephemeral. We get a false sense of permanence from these tech giants with their walled-garden platforms. But the truth is that nothing lasts online, and it’s all decaying all the time. Still, an outage this severe is almost unheard-of.

     Caroline: What are the typical consequences of an outage like this?

     Adrienne: The ripple effects can be profound. A massive, if temporary, shift in the attention of billions of people has cultural consequences—like people taking note of their own reflexive habits, their relationships to these sites.”

    In this reflectivity of our stories and ourselves we see metaphors of change, reimagination, and transformation; like the Hobgoblin’s Broken Mirror, our memories and dreams, ephemeral and protean, fragments of truths and illusions, Defining Moments and Baudrillard’s simulacra, each a Rashomon Gate Event of relative truths.

     Of our histories I have written; there are those which must be kept and remembered, and those we must escape, and if we are very lucky they are not always the same.

     As written by Helena de Bresis, author of Artful Truths: The Philosophy of Memoir, in Aeon; “I wrote a memoir recently, and sometimes I ask myself why on earth I did. It was difficult and time-consuming, it involved some rather unpleasant self-examination, and it raised suspicions of self-involvement, exhibitionism and insufferable earnestness that I’d so far mainly avoided in life. If I publish it, I risk being accused by friends of betrayal, by readers of lying, and by critics of any number of literary flaws. Since selling a memoir is hard, all of that would represent things going well. When I complain to my sister about this, she suggests that ‘maybe’ I should have – ‘I don’t know’ – considered these points two years ago, before embarking on this thing that she would ‘never, like, ever do’.

     When asked why they bother, memoirists offer a range of reasons. Saint Teresa did it for the glory of God; Jean-Jacques Rousseau to express his inner self; Vladimir Nabokov to recreate his vanished childhood; Frederick Douglass to advance the cause of abolition. But maybe the deepest reason for writing a memoir, intertwined with all the rest, is the desire to find meaning in one’s past experience. Whatever else they’re up to, memoirists are in the business of locating some form or order in their personal history: setting it down as an intelligible shape, not a hot mess. Finding this form is both a necessary part of memoir and one of its key rewards. That was what I was after, anyway. Life moves so fast. Stuff had gone down. I wanted to slow the passage of events, grasp what the past had meant, before picking up the pace once again.

     You can search for form in life through philosophy, science, religion and any kind of art. The memoirist’s distinctive move is to do it via autobiographical narrative: the construction of an organised sequence of personally experienced events, along with an implied evaluative response to them. Life stories have three things going for them when it comes to making experience intelligible. They’re selective, highlighting particular agents, settings and episodes out of the mass of material that life provides. They’re also unifying, drawing connections between their disparate parts and situating them in context. And they’re isomorphic: they share deep structural and thematic features with other stories, which we use as a shortcut when interpreting them. Psychologists report that most autobiographical narratives follow the classical story arc: steady state, complication, rising action, crisis, resolution, then coda. And they involve quests, comings-of-age, fatal errors, comeuppances and returns recognisable from myths, parables and fairy tales. Most, though maybe not all, humans tell such life stories. Memoirists recount them at length, in writing, with literary ambitions. We’re trying to do it, but make it art.

     What are memoirists doing exactly, when we claim to ‘find’ this form and meaning in our past experience? Are we genuinely discovering it back there or just making it up? For the past century or so, the wind has been behind the latter interpretation. Many take the existentialist line that seeing your life in narrative terms is a form of mauvaise foi, or bad faith. We urgently want there to be order and meaning in the world, independently of us. But there isn’t, and our attempts to impose coherence and significance where none exist are self-deceiving and absurd. Roquentin, the protagonist of Jean-Paul Sartre’s novel Nausea (1938), describes the ‘disgust’ and ‘nausea’ produced by our meaningless universe, alongside its ineffective narrative remedy:

     This is what fools people: a man is always a teller of tales, he lives surrounded by his stories and the stories of others, he sees everything that happens to him through them; and he tries to live his own life as if he were telling a story.

     What exactly is wrong with construing your past as a story? In his memoir The Words (1963), Sartre suggests that storytelling distorts our understanding of life, by confusing it with literature. We can tell autobiographical narratives if we like but, if so, we should be clear about what we’re doing: producing fiction. This take suggests that memoir, which calls itself nonfiction, is a fundamentally suspect enterprise.

     A similar critique of narrative emerged in the philosophy of history in the 1970s. In his book Metahistory (1973), Hayden White argued that historical writing is a constructive process, in which the historian selects a subset of past events, imaginatively fills in the gaps, and orders the lot into a unified story. These historical stories, like the life stories of individuals, take conventional literary forms – tragedy, romance, comedy and satire – and employ poetic devices, including metaphor, synecdoche and irony. All of this is a creative act on the part of the historian, an imposition on the historical record. As a result, different historians can and do provide different narrative interpretations of the same events, none of which can be said to uniquely fit the facts. White concludes that historical writing, despite its scientific pretensions, reduces to fiction.

     The philosopher Noël Carroll offered two main lines of response to White that transfer nicely to memoir. The first points to a set of faulty inferences in the argument. White assumes that each of the following features of an interpretation transforms it into fiction: inventiveness, selectivity, multiplicity, conventionality and literary quality. But a quick run-through shows that each can be present without an immediate diagnosis of fictionalising. Photos are invented rather than found, but that doesn’t make them inaccurate representations of the past. My telling you only some things about my spring break doesn’t mean that what I do tell you is made up. The availability of multiple good stories about the Loretta Lynn fan convention doesn’t demonstrate that one or all of them are fiction: each can just highlight a distinct aspect of the same complex course of events. And your description of what you’ve been up to recently might be Homeric, but some weekends genuinely are epic, and nonfigurative, nonliterary language might not be enough to capture the truth about them.

     Carroll’s second reply to White questions the assertion that the world isn’t story-shaped. Humans act for reasons, and those actions have consequences, including the imprint of certain patterns on the world. We can describe all this in terms of atoms moving in the void, sure. But there’s an equally legitimate form of explanation that appeals to the values and goals driving the action, and therefore to the purpose and significance that human life genuinely contains. A story that offers such an explanation is picking up on real aspects of the world, not confabulating. Similarly, since humans think and act symbolically, narratives that incorporate metaphor and myth can serve to reflect, rather than distort, reality.

     That said, there’s some truth in the claim that narrative is created, not found. Successful nonfictional storytellers both discover and construct. They do the difficult work of pruning and unifying experience into a shape they and others can understand. As the writer Lorrie Moore puts it: ‘Life is a cornfield, but literature is that shot of whiskey that’s been distilled down.’ And when nonfictional storytellers succeed, the shape they create tracks genuine features in the life described.

     To defend nonfictional narrative isn’t, of course, to defend all particular life stories. At one early point in writing my memoir, I announced: ‘OMG, I think my life tracks the history of Western philosophy!’ ‘That’s wonderful!’ my long-suffering sister replied, but the angle of her eyebrow effectively consigned that one to the trash. There are also some general narrative conventions we’re better off without. No literary memoirist would be caught dead these days writing a traditional autobiography: a strictly chronological tracing of events, from infancy on, in a tone of untroubled authority. The contemporary memoir zooms in on a specific period or theme, and moves back and forth in time. Modern memoirists tend to be less certain than autobiographers, more alert to the seductions of narrative closure. As a result, their books are more complex, searching, and truer to life.

     But we can welcome these salutary effects of 20th-century narrative scepticism while keeping the baby in the bath. Old-fashioned storytelling has real virtues when making sense of the world. (I once lunched with a literary magazine editor after he’d gone through the latest set of submissions. ‘Oh god,’ he exclaimed, like a frustrated police chief, ‘just tell me what happened in order!’) Those virtues are so great that even narrative sceptics make use of them. Joan Didion ends her essay ‘The White Album’ (1968-78) with an admission of defeat: ‘Writing has not yet helped me to see what [experience] means.’ But sometimes the pattern just is chaos, and Didion’s use of personal narrative in this essay deftly captures that truth about 1960s California.

     Cynics about narrative often give off an air of expecting more from stories than memoirists themselves do. No memoir can reveal an underlying grand narrative in the universe as a whole, or give its writer anything more than a partial and provisional grip on their personal past. But it can sometimes provide that grip, which is no small thing. When I look at my own memoir, I can clearly see its fictive qualities. The stage is set, the action rises, the protagonist falls apart, then lurches out of the abyss. There’s a coda, written in a tone of battered hope. Sartre would give it one star on Goodreads. That would be mean (I gave his five!), but I’m not too troubled by it. The book reads to me like my life, a life that makes better sense to me now that I’ve written it down.”

     As I wrote in my post of May 11 2021, Tangled in the Nets of History: Day Two of the Third Intifada; Here follows the Witness of History given by myself as Zafir abd ul Muntaqim, Servant of the Avenger, regarding the Defense of al Aqsa and the advent of the Third Intifada.

    Before all else must be the true names of things; I have many, for countless roles which I perform in many languages, times, and places as a maker of mischief, a bringer of Chaos, a truthteller and a witness of history, but the name I awaken to here in al Quds in the wake of a night of terror has nuances I shall describe for you; Zafir which means Victorious, one of many variants I have used of the name of the great rebel Victor Frankenstein and also referential to Invictus in the poem by William Ernest Henley, part of my identity since the day I began high school and recited it before the student assembly to set the terms of struggle between us, and to the primary human act of self-creation in refusal to submit to authority; Muntaqim which defines me as an avenger of wrongs in reference to the mission statement given me by the Matadors in Sao Paulo the summer before high school when they rescued me from execution by police death squad and welcomed me into their fearsome brotherhood with the words; “You are one of us; come with us. We can’t save everyone, but we can avenge,” and as this is a Name of the Infinite as Retribution and cannot be used without the preface servant of or abd ul, I become now Zafir abd ul Muntaqim, for the part we must play defines our identity as a persona, and through this mask I must here speak.

     This morning I reflect on the words written in my journal the night before, awakening not to the miasma of smoke and death but to incense and songs of mourning, resistance, and strangely joyful thankfulness for the mercy and compassion of the Infinite; someone is playing love songs in all of this, duets of Lebanese divas Nancy Ajram with Cheb Khaled and Marita Nader with Mario Karam resounding through the twisted alleyways below my window, and I marvel at the resilience of the human spirit.

    I have no idea where I am or how I got here; a situation with which I am far too familiar and absurdly happy to find myself in, for I have fallen down the rabbit hole once more.

     I begin to explore my new world. No smells of coffee greet me; the sun is up and the Ramadan fast has begun. Light pours through the open wooden latticework of an arched window into a room of stone with few but very fine furnishings; some old tribal pillows, framed calligraphy, a prayer rug oriented to Mecca, a magnificent pierced silver lantern, the blanket I was sleeping on; I am possibly no longer in the squalid tenements of Sheikh Jarrah.

     My comrades have brought me to a place of refuge and safety; I must have lost consciousness in the course of rescuing the families trapped by the Israeli assault on al Aqsa and the confused street fighting which followed as they hunted fleeing women and children through the labyrinth of darkness that is Jerusalem.

     For such it is under the iron hammer of tyranny and state terror, a nightmare of walls and concentration camps, razor wire and the brutal arrogance of power, though some of us may seek the City of Light which it has consumed  and hidden behind its mask, a city of fables and dreams which I call al Quds.

     Someone has left a silver bowl of water for ritual ablutions before morning prayers and exquisite formal white robes to replace my tattered khakis, along with a Palestinian keffiyah and a Bisht or cloak worn by dignitaries such as royalty or holy men, an honor I do not merit but cannot refuse; it is probably a cherished family heirloom.

     While washing and changing I read the tale of the night’s events in the superficial marks on my flesh; I have been shot, bayoneted, blown up, and set on fire yet again, all without any injuries of consequence. I wonder what stories my comrades have told of these events.

      What is it with the Israel Defense Forces and setting people on fire? It’s like they have a standing order; if it runs, shoot it, if it stands its ground, set it on fire.

     Fragments of memories surface during this assessment; a long abdominal surface cut from barely evading a disembowling thrust, bruises, cuts, and a bit of shrapnel along the arm and shoulder from a grenade that dropped a wall on me from the far side and a piece that came through the crumbling mortar, a fist sized bruise of backface deformation, the mark of a well placed chest shot from a rifle stopped by a flak jacket I had seized from the first soldier who tried to kill me. And at some point I had been on fire, with nothing burned other than the left side of my clothes from being too close to something that was firebombed; though I recall only thunder, light, and a flash of heat.

     My old clothes, however, looked like they had been savaged by wild dogs and then thrown in a bonfire, and I had undoubtedly looked to be in worse shape than I was to whomever carried me here. I begin to wonder whether the robes I now wear were intended for my burial. But no, that’s three white shrouds, tied head and foot; so I was deemed to be alive.

     Now properly clean and dressed, I say the morning prayers, and then recite three times the Request for Forgiveness from the Holy Quran, sūrat l-baqarah The Cow verse 2:286, thus following the translation of Yusuf Ali, Peace Be Upon Him; “O Lord! Lay not on us a burden greater than we have strength to bear. Blot out our sins, and grant us forgiveness. Have mercy on us. You are our Protector; help us against those who stand against faith.”

     This seems reflexive though this is a dua or personal recitation and not part of the five daily prayers; I get the feeling that I often need forgiveness.

      In the serenity which follows, I submerge myself in the role into which I have been cast in the game which is about to unfold.

     I have many names in many languages, but my name in this place and time is Zafir abd ul Muntaqim; it is a name to conjure with, for I have used it in other struggles of liberation and reckoning, across decades and throughout the world in places where I may be remembered, as have others before me and as will others after I am gone.

     I came to Jerusalem for the liminal time of five days between two anniversaries of tragedy, an Occupation now in its fifty fourth year since the June 7 1967 Conquest of Old Jerusalem, which the State of Israel celebrated according to the Hebrew calendar as Jerusalem Day yesterday on May 10 by attacking al Aqsa, the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood, and the Palestinian community, and a Catastrophe ongoing now for seventy three years since Nakba Day May 15 1948.

    Last night I attended a protest in defense of al Aqsa Mosque that was met with the iron fist of tyranny and state terror as Israel attacked the families at worship in the mosque, a protest that may become a revolution. If America and the world can intercede to stay the Israeli hand of fear and force, we may yet avoid that fate, but in the meanwhile I have decided to record this in my journal as Day Two of the Third Intifada.

      In this moment we are to be tested, we humans; are we no longer moved by mercy or compassion, have we lost the quality of our humanity in the modern pathology of our disconnectedness and become brute things, mere atavisms of instinct, brother to the ox? Have we no horizons beyond self interest and the vortex of wickedness which is greed and dominion? Are we no longer owners of ourselves, but images captured and distorted by authority, falsifications, lies and illusions by which those who would enslave us have stolen our souls?

    I have chosen the name of abd ul Muntaqim in this arena of the struggle, a name which means Servant of The Avenger as an aspect of the Infinite or Bringer of Retribution, but my struggle is against no people but an unjust system which dehumanizes and enslaves both the peoples of Israel and of Palestine.

     Such is my hope for and faith in the limitless possibilities of becoming human; but in the streets below fighters are gathering, and I hear a dozen languages in their conversations, varieties of Arabic but also Farsi and Turkish. Within days we will be joined not only by local factions including Hamas, Fatah,

and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, but also by Hezbollah and governments throughout the world.

     When the fight began at al Aqsa and in all the screaming and running away I moved against the tide and toward the sounds of violence, a man said to me “What are you doing? The Israelis will kill you to get to them”, pointing at the women and children. To this I replied; “And die on the steps of God’s house, defending his people? I’ll take it.” This was being portrayed in discussion beneath my window as a call for fedayeen, and by morning had already reached beyond Palestine.

     In attacking al Aqsa, Netanyahu and his cabal have exposed the monster behind the Israeli mask of virtue conferred by its historical legacies of victimhood, and triggered the one issue capable of unifying the Islamic world and of destabilizing the Arab-American Alliance whose member nations only recently recognized the legitimacy of the state of Israel.

     This city seethes with resentment and ancient vendettas, and the attack on al Aqsa has provided a focus. Janus like, Jerusalem and al Quds are a dual identity which traps alien paradigms into the same physical spaces in a titanic struggle of dominion, victim and abuser confused in one ambiguous and discontiguous flesh like a Frankenstein’s monster of unnaturally joined parts, a struggle from which I hope will emerge something new.

     Is war the only reckoning humankind can offer, or will accept? I pray that we are better than this, that hope and love can triumph over fear and hate, and we will choose to be bearers of life and not of death.

     Thus I am praying when my host finds me, and the curtain begins to rise on our performance. We are about to challenge a world order of amoral nihilism and the psychopathy of power in which only force and power are real and have meaning, in which hierarchies of elite wealth, power, and privilege enforce systems of oppression which divide, falsify, commodify, and dehumanize us, wherein fear and belonging are the sole means of exchange and arbiters of power, and in which authorized identities of exclusionary otherness and divisions of faith and race, nationality and historical narratives of victimization, have been weaponized in the service of our subjugation and in repression of our solidarity and unity of purpose in liberation and revolutionary struggle.

     To restore to us our possibilities of human being, meaning, and value we must free ourselves from our histories, for we are tangled in its nets.

     A Quixotic quest, but not one without hope; not if the world stands with us.

      It is time to bring the chaos; to make mischief and let the games of reimagination and transformation begin.

   May 12 2021, Day Three of the Third Intifada: Israel Launches its Final Solution in a General Campaign Against the People of Palestine

      As Hamas defends the people of Palestine in an exchange of rocket fire with Israel, Israel launches a general campaign of state terror in its Final Solution to the Palestinian Problem, unleashing the deniable assets of militarized hate groups with which it provoked this conflict in coordination with military conquest. This is a program of ethnic cleansing which echoes that of the Nakba, the 1948 expulsion and genocide of the Palestinians.

      Fire, explosions, screams; the night is filled with the horror of erasure and annihilation, mass murder and the wailing of the families of the dead. Here is a hellscape out of Dante but for one thing; the victims are innocents, caught in the jaws of a fascist tyranny which denies their humanity.

     And in America, President Joe Biden responds to the news of Israeli Blitzkrieg and Kristallnacht against Palestine, in which hundreds of civilian noncombatants are now dead including children, with the words; “Israel has the right to defend itself.”

     Tell that to the dead children, America. Their blood is on your hands.

     And the judgement of history will hold you responsible.

     What of the right of Palestine to defend itself from Israeli terror and war?  

     There is no right of defense against a people you are Occupying.

     Why does America subsidize a fascist tyranny of blood, faith, and soil in the state of Israel? This is about wealth and power, and oil as a strategic resource which confers it.

     If the nations who own the oil unite in solidarity with the people of Palestine against the Israeli conquest and Occupation, America will have no choice but to disavow and abandon our colony and proxy state.

     If we can expose the monster behind the Israeli mask of virtue conferred by its historical legacies of victimization, and hold America and its other sponsors and partner states complicit in its crimes against humanity as a rogue state, the community of nations will abandon their policies of collaboration.

     Let us dream a new world, wherein all humankind are equal and the guarantee of universal human rights is real and not an illusion of lies which serve power.

     In America we need only ask, do we really hold that all human beings are created equal, and endowed with equal and inalienable rights? If we answer yes, then we must repudiate and renounce the state of Israel, until it can be reimagined and transformed as a free society of equals.

     We must pursue a policy of exposure of the state of Israel’s crimes against humanity, and unite as an international community in the Boycott, Divestiture, and Sanction of Israel and in political action in our respective nations.

     And it is crucial to do so in partnership with the citizens of Israel who welcome their Palestinian brothers and sisters in a free society of equals, wherein divisions of faith, blood, language, and history are without meaning under the law.

     We must forge a new Israel free of tyrannies of force and control and fascisms of blood, faith, and soil, free of its toxic military culture and carceral state, for along with the Palestinians who are enslaved under its Apartheid regime, its own citizens are also slaves of an unjust and unequal system.

     Let us liberate Palestine and Israel, and let us liberate America from her complicity in evil.

May 14 2021 Day Five of the Third Intifada: A Reckoning Begins

     The tide has begun to turn in Palestine and Israel; exposure of the state of Israel’s crimes against humanity, Apartheid regime of conquest and enslavement, and fascisms of blood, faith, and soil have become illuminated by our heroic journalists in the sacred calling to pursue the truth, like the flaws in an ancient clay jar set afire as veins of sins and historical inequalities and injustices by a lamp set within.

    The world begins to see the truth of its condition beyond the lies and illusions of its surfaces, as the tyranny and state terror beyond a meticulously constructed false history is revealed.

     And now we must choose. Who shall we become, we humans? Do we hold all human beings equal, without regard to our differences, or will identitarian divisions of faith, race, and historical nationality mean that we are not our brother’s keepers? Will we surrender our liberty to those who would enslave us and who weaponize identity in service to power, to elite hegemonies of wealth and privilege, and to hierarchies of belonging and exclusionary otherness in our subjugation to fascist tyrannies of force and control and of blood, faith, and soil.

     This is the choice before us, as an international community of nations and of peoples; liberty or tyranny? If Netanyahu’s tactics of using deniable assets of armed racists in coordination with state forces to terrorize civilians in the brutal repression of dissent seems familiar, it is because Trump used this same ruse against the Black Lives Matter protests and in the infamous January 6 Insurrection; they both learned from the same master, Adolf Hitler.

     Always pay attention to the man behind the curtain.

     In the words to Congress of the great and visionary Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez; “I can’t help but wonder if the reason we don’t do that, if we’re scared to stand up to the incarceration of children in Palestine is because maybe it’ll force us to confront the incarceration of children here on our border.If by standing up to the injustices there, it will prompt us to stand up to the injustices here.

     We have a responsibility and if we have historically said and committed to a role as an honest broker, then we must fulfill that role. That means we have to be honest with ourselves, with what our aid supports. We have to be honest and ask ourselves questions like why we are using our veto power and the UN security council in preventing statements from being released about concerns for this violence alike.

     The president and many other figures this week stated that Israel has a right to self-defense. And this is a sentiment that is echoed across this body. But do Palestinians have a right to survive? Do we believe that? And if so, we have a responsibility to that as well.”

May 19 2021 Day Ten of the Third Intifada: What Is At Stake In the Question of Palestine and Israel?

     The Third Intifada has served an instrumental purpose in exposing the crimes against humanity and brutal police state of Israel’s fascist kleptocracy before the court of the world, and focusing international attention on an injustice ongoing now for over seventy years. It has become part of the question of the Restoration of democracy in America and of who we wish to become as a global humankind; what does this mean for America and for the world? What is at stake in the question of Palestine and Israel? What is our duty of care for others?

     To such questions I speak as a witness of history, as an American and antifascist who believes in our founding principles of democracy; liberty, equality, truth, and justice, even when we do not always live up to our ideals, as a scholar of the alam al mythal and of human being, meaning, and value and the origins of evil in the brokenness of the world and the flaws of our humanity.

     I was present at the Defense of al Aqsa and the rescue of the innocents trapped when the Israeli military attacked a nonviolent protest and families at prayer with deadly force and then hunted fleeing and defenseless women and children through the streets of the Old City and Sheikh Jarrah; Israel then launched a general campaign of genocide and terror in Gaza and the West Bank including East Jerusalem.

     Weeks of attacks, provocations, and mob violence by Israeli deniable assets preceded this; if it sounds familiar its because it is the same tactic used by Trump to disrupt and discredit the Black Lives Matter protests; armed racist militias unleashed in a campaign of state terror, arson, violence, and looting followed by troops to “restore order”. Trump and Netanyahu learned this from the same master, Adolf Hitler. 

     Israel has learned the wrong lessons from the Nazis, and Palestine and Israel must be liberated together from subjugation by America’s colony and proxy state.

     This is simple, America, and it’s always the same damned thing; the people next door are different, look or pray or speak differently, and so must be evil and the cause of all our problems, plus one of my uncles dreamed they put a curse on my goat, so let’s murder them all in their sleep. This equation of fear and force works the same no matter what ethnicities are involved, and the politics of the situation are irrelevant to the human cost.

     To the objection that America has no colonies I replied; Do we bear no responsibility for how our enormous military and financial support of Israel is used? What would you imagine its true purpose to be, if not to secure the strategic resource of oil by which America enforces its hegemony of global wealth, power, and privilege?

     There are calls for solidarity with Israel, and to this I say; I stand with the people of Israel and Palestine united in universal human rights against the tyranny and terror of the state of Israel’s fascist and sectarian apartheid regime.

    Attempts have been made to defame Palestinians and Muslims with inflammatory and disingenuous claims of moral transgression, both to claim moral equivalence of abuser and victim and to isolate them from the support of the international community, and to this I say; Wedge issues can be used by authority to serve power. Issues of the sovereignty and independence of peoples from colonialism and state terror, in this case determined by sectarian division and narratives of historical victimization which confer virtue and legitimize regimes, are not controlled by other factors but are primary to national identity. If you think about it, this is something both conservatives and revolutionaries can agree on. Being a victim means a nation is more likely, not less, to also be an abuser; this is how power, fear, and force work, how the Ring of Power hollow outs and replaces meaning and value when trust is betrayed. The term for this is internalized oppression, and in nations it is a consequence of colonialism.

     To the claim that Palestinians or any Islamic peoples do not care about America, so why should America care about them, I reply; Only with American support and Boycott, Divestiture, and Sanction from the international community can we hope to win liberty and a free society of equals for the people of Palestine and Israel. We care deeply for the beacon of Liberty and guarantor of universal human rights and democracy which America represents; our survival depends on it.

     If we are demonized, silenced, and erased by the tyranny and state terror of Israel’s fascist regime, we become nothing, and so does America; for an America which abandons humankind to the dehumanization of predator regimes also abandons its ideals and values. We must unite in solidarity as fellow human beings, or become a world in which some of us are not legally as human as others. Divisions of exclusionary otherness are weaponized by authority in service to power and hierarchies of belonging; coupled with force and control this is fascist tyranny.

      America, you do not need to judge who gets the white hat, Muslim or Jew; nor who is to be pronounced good on the basis of historical injustices and inequalities; no one wins a contest of victimhood. You need only choose this; do you hold that all human beings are created equal, or are some of us better than others by reason of birth? We fought two wars against the British Empire, over forty years, to win the principle of equality under the law; the people of Palestine and all humankind ask only the same.

     We Americans have a historic role as guarantors of democracy and universal human rights; I say only that it must be applied equally, as all human souls are equal.

May 29 2021 Palestine and Israel: State of the Peace

     A fragile peace holds for now in the volatile, chaotic, and rapidly changing relationships between Palestine and Israel, and between these partners in the imaginations of America and the international community. It is an uneasy dance of identity, memory, and history performed to the lyrical songs of narratives of victimization, songs which seduce and shape us to the service of power and authority.

     Before the stage of the world and the witness of history, we can see here in real time the processes and consequences of divisions of exclusionary otherness and hierarchies of elite hegemonies of wealth, power, and privilege as primary informing, motivating, and shaping forces of human being, meaning, and value.

     For those of us who participated on May 10 not in the defense of al Aqsa, a thing of grandeur fit for the death of heroes, but in defense of the families at prayer which Israel attacked and the unarmed women and children hunted through the maze of a derelict antiquity, disembodied screams in a land of fear and darkness, the Third Intifada was born on that night as a hope beyond the brokenness of the world and the flaws of our humanity for reimagination, transformation, the redemptive power of love to heal the divisions of exclusionary otherness and the pathology of our disconnectedness, and the limitless possibilities of becoming human.

     What is the state of the peace? How we answer this question hinges on implicit value judgements and becomes a Rashomon Gate of relative truths, and a measure of our character. In this as in many things, I recall Monet’s description of the meaning of his art as a form of metaphysics and investigation into the soul of humankind; “Man has two eyes through which he sees the world; one looks outward, but the other looks inward, and it is the juxtaposition of these two images which creates the world we see.”

      So our question becomes, what does this look like from the perspectives of its partners, Palestine, Israel, and America?

     America vacillates with Joe Biden on the cusp of a vast and horrific realization; that we have for over seventy years been the sponsors of tyranny and state terror, and responsibility for the endless litany of woes which have shaped the peoples of Palestine are shared by all of us and by our proxy state of Israel. It parallels our national reckoning with the legacies of slavery and our systemic racial inequalities and injustices which awaken with the Black Lives Matter protests, like our reckoning with Patriarchy and sexual terror in the #metoo movement, and with the consequence of capitalism for our extinction in the Green New Deal and the global ecological movement led by the visionary Greta Thunberg.

      An awakening and tidal change whose full consequences and potential for the reimagination and transformation of humankind are incalculable, our political, ecological-material, sexual, and racial social justice movements represent a total civilizational shift and a revolution in universal human rights which will one day utterly change and renew our ideas of human being, meaning, and value.

    Francis Fukuyama was wrong when he predicted that we live at the end of history; we live at the beginning of a new history. But he was exactly right when he diagnosed its principles of operation in The End of History and the Last Man; “It was the slave’s continuing desire for recognition that was the motor which propelled history forward, not the idle complacency and unchanging self-identity of the master.”

     I hope we are at the beginnings of becoming human. I fear that our historical legacies may become traps, falsifications, assimilative and colonizing narratives wherein tyrannies of authorized identities may steal our souls. This is the problem of the Hobgoblin’s broken mirror in Anderson’s The Snow Queen; we are lost in a world of distorted images, captured echoes, and illusions. This, too, we must resist. 

     Israel is caught in the jaws of its history, held captive by Netanyahu’s regime of kleptocratic fascisms of blood, faith, and soil, but also a victim which has become a dark mirror of her abuser. Israel has learned the wrong lessons from the Nazis; fear, power, and force are not the only things which have meaning, nor do we live in a world wherein love is without redemptive power.

     In his massive campaign of ethnic cleansing and repression of dissent, and in his diplomacy of terror and negotiations by missile fire, Netanyahu plays to his own alt-right constituents as their figurehead. But he may have miscalculated international reactions; he has been provoked into exposing the true nature of the Occupation, and the White Hat conferred by narratives of historical victimization is slipping.

     The Third Intifada has accomplished its goals of changing the narrative, fracturing American support for Israeli militarism and advancing support for Boycott, Divestiture, and Sanction, moving a decades old issue to center stage, and timed to the vote on the massive arms deal now in Congress. At least, those were my goals in the wake of our defense of the people of Palestine at al Aqsa.

      Others among the defenders of Palestine have their own plans and objectives; certainly Hamas emerged as the clear victor of the struggle, having seized authority from the Fatah government of Palestine through active defense of its people, and rendering the elections Abbas refuses to call irrelevant. Hamas has delegitimized the Palestinian Authority, and stained its partnership with the Israeli government as collaboration, while the Third Intifada, waged by Hamas but also dozens of other factions, special forces from a number of allied governments, and madmen like myself, has called into question the idea of the Two State Solution.

     Of Hamas and of all revolutionaries I say this; Any who stand between the tyranny and state terror of conquest, enslavement, and death, and the lives of innocents are heroes and champions of our humanity. The particulars are irrelevant.

     Are we not our brother’s keepers?

     There is a path forward beyond the dichotomous paradigm of a dual identity; abandon the Two State Solution and reimagine and transform Israel and Palestine as a united nation under secular law and designed to safeguard equality and universal human rights.

     America’s enormous financial and military sponsorship of the state of Israel provides a very big lever with which to change the balance of power. I advocate BDS when it means peace and demilitarization; we must fund and shape ourselves to constructive and not destructive ends, to love rather than hate and to hope rather than fear.

      Build democracy in Israel and we also build justice and equality for its minorities, exactly as in America. I believe we must liberate the peoples of Israel from a fascist regime of blood, faith, and soil, for the beneficiaries of state terror and tyranny are also subjugated by it. This is the great internal contradiction of authoritarian power as fascism; it is a system which dehumanizes and instrumentalizes even those in whose name it perpetrates its crimes against humanity as a strategy of authorization and the manufacture of consent, and why it must inevitably consume itself.

     As Israel prepares its Final Solution to the problem of Palestine, America does nothing. Nothing to stop crimes against humanity, and everything to provide the criminals with arms and other support. We bear responsibility for these crimes with our proxies in Israel.

     The people who lived near the Nazi death camps claimed they knew nothing of the Holocaust, nothing about the vast rain of human ash which blanketed their towns and stained them with its silent crimes. But we know. How shall we answer, when we knew and did nothing?

          References on the 2021 conflict which began at al Aqsa

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/may/11/what-has-caused-jerusalem-worst-violence-in-years-israel-palestine

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/palestinians-hurt-jerusalem-holy-site-clash_n_60991581e4b05bee44cc9bb4

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/may/11/the-guardian-view-on-jerusalem-and-gaza-old-struggles-bring-fresh-violence

Arabic

28 سبتمبر 2024  إعادة التوازن: فلسطين وإسرائيل وذكرى الانتفاضة الثانية

     في 28 سبتمبر 2000 بدأت الانتفاضة الثانية أو انتفاضة الأقصى في أعقاب الانسحاب الإسرائيلي من احتلالها للبنان وفشل عملية كامب ديفيد للسلام ، عندما استولى آرييل شارون ومئات من شرطة مكافحة الشغب الإسرائيلية مؤقتًا على المسجد الأقصى. مما أثار أعمال شغب من قبل الناس الذين يدافعون عن ثالث أقدس مواقع الإسلام التاريخية ، مناوشة بالرصاص المطاطي والغاز المسيل للدموع ضد العصي والحجارة.

     الصراع مستمر منذ ذلك الحين.

      اليوم لدينا خط في الرمال يقسم الشعوب على أساس الدم والإيمان والتراب كما هو الحال مع أي طغيان فاشي ، ونستخدم الفوارق الاقتصادية كسلاح لاستعباد الضعفاء والمحرومين. لكن هذا الانقسام الرئيسي بين العرق والعبيد بدأ في الانهيار ، لأن هناك حركات احتجاجية ضخمة على جانبي الجدار الحديدي ، حيث يستيقظ شعب فلسطين وإسرائيل على عدو مشترك ويبدأ في الاتحاد لاستعادة التوازن.

     بشير أبو منه يروي أحداث الانتفاضة الثانية في يعقوبين. “إن إخراج الفلسطينيين من تل أبيب ينطوي على تكثيف الهيمنة ، مع المزيد من المستوطنات ، والمزيد من قطع الأراضي الفلسطينية ومصادرتها ، والمزيد من السيطرة على جوانب رئيسية من الحياة الفلسطينية: السفر والأمن والحياة الاقتصادية. عندما حررت إسرائيل نفسها من الاعتماد على العمالة الفلسطينية ، أصبح الفلسطينيون أكثر سيطرة واعتمادًا على إسرائيل.

     كانت العلامة المادية المرئية لنظام الاحتلال الجديد هذا عبارة عن جدار عازل غير قانوني بطول 700 كيلومتر تم بناؤه على الأراضي المحتلة من أجل حماية المستوطنين والمستوطنات غير القانونية ، إلى جانب نقاط التفتيش التي لا نهاية لها وحواجز الطرق التي تقطع الفلسطينيين عن إسرائيل وعن بعضهم البعض. كانت العلامة السياسية عبارة عن كيان فلسطيني محلي تم تشكيله حديثًا يسمى السلطة الفلسطينية ، وتتمثل مهمته الأساسية في خدمة الاحتياجات الأمنية الإسرائيلية.

     كان هذا الانفصال عن الهيمنة كارثة كاملة للفلسطينيين ، الذين أصبحوا غير مرئيين للإسرائيليين العاديين. كونهم خاضعين للهيمنة ولكن لم يتم استغلالهم يعني أن الفلسطينيين المحتلين أصبحوا شعبًا لا لزوم له – عبئًا بدون نفوذ على المسيطرين عليهم ، الذين كانوا في حاجة إليها من أجل لا شيء.

     هذه الحقيقة الوحيدة التي تفسر لماذا يمكن لإسرائيل الآن قتل الفلسطينيين بأعداد كبيرة. منح الإقصاء الجيش الإسرائيلي حرية التعامل مع السكان الفلسطينيين الذين يمكن الاستغناء عنهم الآن – خاصةً عندما احتجوا على ظروف احتجازهم الجماعي.

     بدأت موجة القتل الجديدة برد إسرائيل العنيف للغاية على اندلاع الانتفاضة الثانية. أثارت زيارة أرييل شارون الاستفزازية والتي حظيت بتغطية إعلامية كبيرة إلى الحرم الشريف في سبتمبر 2000 ، برفقة الآلاف من الجنود وشرطة مكافحة الشغب ، مظاهرات سلمية. وردت إسرائيل بشن حرب على السكان المحتلين.

     في الأيام القليلة الأولى من الانتفاضة ، أطلق الجيش الإسرائيلي أكثر من مليون رصاصة على الحشود ، وفقًا للبيانات التي تم توفيرها لرئيس المخابرات العسكرية الإسرائيلية ، عاموس مالكا. كما أفاد الصحفي بن كاسبيت ، رد عضو في القيادة المركزية للجيش الإسرائيلي على هذا الرقم باقتراح أن تسمى العملية “رصاصة لكل طفل”.

     بالنسبة لعالم اجتماع العسكرة الإسرائيلية ، أوري بن اليعازر ، فإن القمع العنيف على هذا النطاق الهائل يشير إلى وجود خطة عسكرية سابقة. سعى الجيش الإسرائيلي إلى إطلاق مواجهة عنيفة مع المتظاهرين ودفع الفلسطينيين إلى التخلي عن تكتيكات اللاعنف الجماعي التي حددت الأسابيع الأولى من الثورة: “كان الجيش الإسرائيلي هو الذي حوّل انتفاضة الأقصى إلى حرب”. أصبح المحتلون الآن هدفًا عسكريًا.

     كجزء من نهج “الحرب الجديدة” ، وبهدف إعادة الحدود العرقية القومية و “وضع الفلسطينيين في مكانهم” ، بدأ الجيش الإسرائيلي بمهاجمة المجتمع الفلسطيني بشكل عام ، بما في ذلك اقتصاده ، والبنى التحتية ، والروتين اليومي والأمن. والحريات وحرية الحركة.

     نجح هذا النهج في عسكرة الانتفاضة وتسريح الاحتجاجات الجماهيرية غير العنيفة الواسعة الانتشار “.

     على الجانب الآخر من الجدار الحديدي ، تحلق أعلام الفوضى السوداء فوق إسرائيل في حالة اضطراب وفوضى اجتماعية. لقد فقدت الأمة التي شكلها جيش أوجد حكومة عن طريق الخطأ هيمنتها بالقوة والسيطرة على مواطنيها ، ولم يعد بإمكانها ممارسة القهر والاستعباد على شعب يواجه ليس فقط البطالة والفقر وسط الفساد الحكومي البشع ، ولكن التهديدات الوجودية الجوع الجماعي وانتشار الوباء أيضًا. وهم يقاومون حكم الإعدام الذي أصدرته لهم دولة الأثرياء والأوليغارشية.

    مثل حليفه ترامب ، استخدم نتنياهو منصبه وسلطته لتفكيك مؤسسات الحكومة التي قد تساعد الناس على النجاة من الوباء ، والتعليم ، والرعاية الصحية ، والرفاهية ، واستخدام الخصخصة التي نقلت الثروة العامة إلى المتملقين والمتآمرين معه ؛ لكن نتنياهو كان لديه عشرين عاما ليفعل ذلك فيها .

     كما يكتب إيتان نيشين في Jacobin ؛ “لم تؤد الاحتجاجات إلى إثارة نقاشات أيديولوجية ، مثل جدوى الصهيونية والاحتلال والموارد والثروة ، والتي تركزت في إسرائيل على عدد قليل من العائلات. يغذيهم القلق بشأن المستقبل ، والغضب من الحكومة لسوء إدارة الاستجابة لفيروس كورونا ، والفساد الفاضح المتفاقم على جميع مستويات الحياة العامة. إذا كانت الاحتجاجات في الماضي تدور حول التعايش ، فهذه كانت تدور حول مجرد وجود “.

     في حين أن التركيز الدولي كان على الصراع الإسرائيلي الفلسطيني ، والجدل حول دولة أو دولتين ، فإن الإسرائيليين يتقاتلون على أي نوع من الدولة يريدون أن تكون إسرائيل.

     ما كشفته الاحتجاجات هو الانقسام في المجتمع الإسرائيلي. يظل أحد الأطراف مخلصًا للمثل الأعلى المتمثل في الحفاظ على ما تبقى من تلك المؤسسات وتعزيزها ، والتي ، على الرغم من عيوبها ، تقوم على مفهوم المساواة لجميع المواطنين. ويرى الطرف الآخر أن هذه المؤسسات تشكل عقبات أمام الحفاظ على هذا النوع من الموقف القومي العدواني للدولة الذي يمكن أن يتحدى المجتمع الدولي.

     في غضون شهر ، سيحتفل الإسرائيليون بالعام اليهودي الجديد ، وهو وقت البدايات. مع تفشي الوباء ، لم يحسم بعد بدء الدراسة ، وبدون خطة لإعادة الاقتصاد إلى مساره الصحيح ، قد ترتفع معدلات البطالة. في النهاية ، يخرج الناس للتظاهر لأنهم يفتقرون إلى شيء ما – الطعام والمأوى والأمن والصحة – وهذا ما سيحدد شهيتهم المستمرة للاحتجاج “.

     تكشف هذه الروايات عن الظروف التي اكتسبت فيها موجات الاحتجاجات الحالية في كل من فلسطين وإسرائيل زخمًا مثل عاصفة. كيف إذن علينا كحلفاء لحقوق الإنسان العالمية وضامنين للديمقراطية العالمية أن نبني التضامن من أجل مقاومة موحدة لفاشيات الدم والإيمان والتربة؟

    أنتقل هنا إلى حكمة مارك لامونت هيل في خطابه الشهير أمام الأمم المتحدة ؛ فيما يتعلق بقضية فلسطين ، فيما وراء الكلام ، يجب أن نطرح السؤال: ماذا تتطلب العدالة؟ للانخراط حقًا في أعمال التضامن ، يجب أن نجعل كلماتنا جسدًا. يجب أن يكون تضامننا أكثر من مجرد اسم. يجب أن يصبح تضامننا فعل.

     كأميركي أسود ، فإن فهمي للعمل والعمل التضامني متجذر في تقاليدنا الخاصة بالنضال. كما قاوم الأمريكيون السود العبودية ، وكذلك قوانين جيم كرو التي حولتنا من دولة عبودية إلى دولة فصل عنصري ، فعلنا ذلك من خلال تكتيكات واستراتيجيات متعددة. إن هذه المجموعة من التكتيكات هي التي أناشدها وأنا أدعو إلى اتخاذ إجراءات ملموسة من جانبنا جميعًا في هذه القاعة.

     يتطلب التضامن من المجتمع الدولي أن نتبنى المقاطعة وسحب الاستثمارات وفرض العقوبات كوسيلة حاسمة يمكن من خلالها تحميل إسرائيل المسؤولية عن معاملتها للشعب الفلسطيني. تقدم هذه الحركة ، التي انبثقت عن الغالبية العظمى من المجتمع المدني الفلسطيني ، وسائل غير عنيفة للمطالبة بالعودة إلى حدود ما قبل عام 1967 ، وحقوق كاملة للمواطنين الفلسطينيين ، وحق العودة كما يمليه القانون الدولي.

     يتطلب التضامن ألا نسمح بعد الآن للسياسيين أو الأحزاب السياسية بالتزام الصمت بشأن قضية فلسطين. لم يعد بإمكاننا ، على وجه الخصوص ، السماح لليسار السياسي بالبقاء راديكاليًا أو حتى تقدميًا في كل قضية – من البيئة إلى الحرب إلى الاقتصاد – باستثناء فلسطين.

     على عكس الأساطير الغربية ، لم تأت مقاومة السود للفصل العنصري الأمريكي من خلال اللاعنف الغاندي. بدلاً من ذلك ، كانت ثورات العبيد والدفاع عن النفس والتكتيكات المتباينة بخلاف الدكتور كينج أو المهاتما غاندي مهمة بنفس القدر للحفاظ على السلامة وتحقيق الحرية. إذا أردنا أن نعمل في تضامن حقيقي مع الشعب الفلسطيني ، يجب أن نسمح بنفس النطاق من الفرص والإمكانيات السياسية. إذا وقفنا متضامنين مع الشعب الفلسطيني ، يجب أن نعترف بحق الشعب المحتل في الدفاع عن نفسه.

     يجب أن نعطي الأولوية للسلام. لكن يجب علينا ألا نجعلها رومانسية أو صنمها. يجب أن ندافع عن اللاعنف ونعززه في كل فرصة ، لكن لا يمكننا أن نؤيد سياسة ضيقة من الاحترام تلحق العار بالفلسطينيين لمقاومتهم ورفضهم عدم فعل أي شيء في مواجهة عنف الدولة والتطهير العرقي.

     ما أتحدانا أن نفعله ، بروح التضامن ، ليس احتضان التفاؤل ولكن احتضان الأمل الجذري. الأمل الراديكالي هو اعتقاد أنه على الرغم من الصعاب ، وعلى الرغم من الإجراءات الكبيرة ضد العدالة والسلام ، وعلى الرغم من إرث الكراهية والإمبريالية وتفوق البيض والسلطة الأبوية ورهاب المثلية ، على الرغم من أنظمة السلطة هذه التي قامت بتطبيع الاستعمار الاستيطاني ، على الرغم من هذه الهياكل ، لا يزال بإمكانه الفوز. لا يزال بإمكاننا أن نسود.

     أحد دوافع أملي في التحرير وتقرير المصير النهائي للشعب الفلسطيني يأتي في أغسطس 2014. كان الأمريكيون السود في فيرجسون ، ميسوري ، في الغرب الأوسط للولايات المتحدة ، يحتجون على وفاة شاب يدعى مايكل براون ، رجل أمريكي من أصل أفريقي غير مسلح

قتل من قبل وكيل إنفاذ القانون. وبينما كنا نحتج ، رأيت شيئين يوفران الأمل في النضال الفلسطيني.

     إحداها أنه لأول مرة في حياتي كلها من النشاط ، رأيت بحرًا من الشعب الفلسطيني. رأيت بحرًا من الأعلام الفلسطينية وسط الحشد يقول إننا يجب أن نشكل مشروعًا تضامنيًا. يجب أن نكافح معًا من أجل المقاومة ، لأن عنف الدولة في الولايات المتحدة وعنف الدولة في البرازيل وعنف الدولة في سوريا وعنف الدولة في مصر وعنف الدولة في جنوب إفريقيا وعنف الدولة في فلسطين كلها من نفس النوع. وفهمنا أخيرًا أنه يجب علينا العمل معًا وعدم تشغيل بعضنا البعض ، ولكن بدلاً من ذلك نلجأ إلى بعضنا البعض.

     وفي وقت لاحق من تلك الليلة عندما بدأت الشرطة في إطلاق الغاز علينا ، غردتنا مريم البرغوثي من رام الله. أخبرتنا هي ونشطاء شباب فلسطينيون آخرون أن الغاز المسيل للدموع الذي نشهده كان مؤقتًا فقط. أعطونا نصائح حول كيفية غسل أعيننا. أخبرونا كيف نصنع أقنعة الغاز من القمصان. لقد منحونا الإذن بالتفكير والحلم بما يتجاوز ظروفنا المحلية من خلال منحنا مشروع تضامن عبر وطني أو عالمي.

     ومن تلك التغريدات ورسائل وسائل التواصل الاجتماعي ، بدأنا بعد ذلك في التنظيم معًا. أحضرنا وفداً من النشطاء السود إلى فلسطين ، ورأينا الصلات بين الشرطة في مدينة نيويورك الذين يتم تدريبهم من قبل الجنود الإسرائيليين ونوع الشرطة التي كنا نشهدها في مدينة نيويورك. بدأنا نرى علاقات مقاومة ، وبدأنا في البناء والنضال والتنظيم معًا. روح التضامن تلك ، التضامن المرتبط ليس فقط بالأيديولوجيا ولكن في العمل ، هو المخرج.

     لذا بينما نقف هنا في الذكرى السبعين للإعلان العالمي لحقوق الإنسان والذكرى المأساوية للنكبة ، لدينا فرصة ليس فقط للتضامن بالكلمات ولكن للالتزام بالعمل السياسي والعمل الشعبي والعمل المحلي والدولي. عمل يمنحنا ما تتطلبه العدالة – وهي فلسطين حرة من النهر إلى البحر. شكرا لوقتك.”

10 مايو 2024 ذكرى الانتفاضة الثالثة لعام 2021، الجارية الآن في المسرح العاشر للحرب العالمية الثالثة التي تحتوي وتحل محل حرب غزة

        يسعى كل من زوار الأرض المقدسة إلى ظهور علامات غير مرئية في ديزني لاند التي تضم أديانًا متضاربة وأولئك المحاصرين داخل كابوس الجدران ونقاط التفتيش والأسلاك الشائكة والمراقبة المنتشرة والعنف العالمي وسياسات الهوية والطغيان والإرهاب في أحد بلداننا. إن أفظع أنظمة القوة والسيطرة في العالم أصبحت هنا أشباح الهولوكوست؛ تردد صدى إسرائيل مع الصرخات الصامتة للأصوات المسروقة والظلال المفترسة لتاريخ تم تسليحه في خدمة السلطة كسرديات عن الإيذاء والأمن كقوة، وهي استراتيجية مصممة أولاً لكسر تضامننا مع الانقسام وفاشية الدم والعقيدة والتربة كما التزوير ومن ثم تجريدنا من إنسانيتنا وإخضاعنا كأسياد وعبيد وإبادة جماعية وتطهير عرقي.

      لقد تعرضت إسرائيل، باعتبارها حلم اللجوء والأخوة والمحبة العالمية، للخيانة والتخريب من قبل إسرائيل باعتبارها دولة دينية كارهة للأجانب، وإمبراطورية عسكرية، ومعسكرًا للعبيد؛ وهنا تم إضفاء الطابع المؤسسي على أوشفيتز على نطاق وطني، وأصبح سجناؤه السابقون الآن حراسه.

      لماذا يختار أي شخص إعادة خلق الجحيم الذي هرب منه، حتى لو كان أسياده وليس عبيده؟

      إنني أفهم جيدًا إغراء القوة كأمن في عالم مليء بالقوى المعادية والفوضوية، وكيف يمكن تشكيل الخوف الساحق والمعمم من خلال السلطة لمركزية السلطة من خلال منحنا سلطة معارة على الآخرين كرموز للتهديدات الوجودية؛ ليكون حكم الفضيلة من خلال القوة والسيطرة. لكن الأمن وهم، والدولة كعنف متجسد تطيع قانون نيوتن الثالث للحركة وتخلق مقاومتها الخاصة، وألمنا المشترك يوحدنا بطرق تتجاوز حلقة فاغنر من الخوف والقوة والقوة، والتي لا يمكن أن يحررنا إلا الحب. من.

      الحب كتضامن في العمل يمكن أن يخلص عيوب إنسانيتنا وانكسارات العالم، تيكون أولام بالعبرية، ويحررنا لنعيش كضامنين لإنسانية بعضنا البعض.

       وكما كتبت في الذكرى الأولى للانتفاضة الثالثة في مثل هذه الليلة قبل عامين؛ يجب أن تكون هذه هي القضية الأكثر كتابةً ودراسةً ومناقشةً وتجريبًا وخوضًا حولها في السياسة العالمية منذ الحرب العالمية الثانية التي كانت نتيجة لها، هذه الأمة التي يقسم فيها التاريخ شعبًا واحدًا إلى إسرائيليين وفلسطينيين، ومقياسًا إنسانيتنا، كمثال كلاسيكي للأقلية المزدوجة؛ ماذا تفعل بمدينة واحدة وأمة واحدة يطالب بها مجتمعان تاريخيان، كأساس للهوية كإيمان وجنسية وعواقب وممارسة سياسات الهوية كعنف؟

      هنا أمة وشعب يمزقهما اضطراب الهوية الانفصامية، متضاربان ومنغلقان في صراع هائل كما هو الحال مع تجزئة الهوية والذاكرة والوعي لشخصيات متعددة، والجنون على المستوى الوطني والحضاري المولود من تراث التاريخ ومعطل الحياة الأحداث، والصدمة اللاجينية، والحزن، والرعب، والشعور بالذنب، واليأس.

      في ازدواجية إسرائيل وفلسطين، تتضح أصول الشر كالعنف والطغيان في حلقة فاغنري المتكررة والمترابطة من الخوف والقوة والقوة، حيث يتم استخدام الخوف الساحق والمعمم والتهديدات الوجودية كسلاح في خدمة السلطة عن طريق السلطة. والتي تشكل حالات القوة والسيطرة الجسيمية كقوة غير متكافئة وعنف متجسد، من خلال التسلسلات الهرمية النخبوية وتقسيمات الانتماء والغيرية وفاشية الدم والإيمان والتربة.

      هنا الفاشية كشر نظامي تعمل كحيازة وسرقة للروح. مالذي يمكننا فعله حيال هذا؟ وكما سأل لينين في مقالته عام 1902؛ “ما الذي يجب عمله؟” كيف نحرر أنفسنا من القوى النظامية لخضوعنا للسلطة والنخب وأولئك الذين يريدون استعبادنا؟

     يجب علينا أولاً أن ندرك ونحذر من أولئك الذين يدعون أنهم يتحدثون باسمنا ويتصرفون باسمنا، فهذه هي الإستراتيجية الأساسية للفاشية. لتحرير أنفسنا من الأكاذيب والأوهام، والتزييف وإعادة كتابة التاريخ، ونظريات المؤامرة والحقائق البديلة التي من خلالها نصبح مجردين من إنسانيتنا، يجب أن نكون رواة للحقيقة ونشارك في السعي وراء الحقيقة باعتبارها دعوة مقدسة، ونؤدي الواجبات الأساسية الأربعة للمواطن؛ سلطة السؤال، وسلطة الكشف، وسلطة المحاكاة، وسلطة التحدي.

     يجب علينا ثانيًا أن نستغل ملكيتنا الذاتية واستقلالنا في رفض الخضوع للسلطة، لأن السر الأعظم للسلطة هو أنها فارغة وجوفاء، ويتم فقدان شرعيتها من خلال رفض الثقة في السلطة والتصديق بها، والقوة هي هشة وهشة. ويجد حدوده عند نقطة العصيان. أفعال بسيطة، ولكنها أيضًا قوى متأصلة في الإنسان لا يمكن أن تؤخذ منا؛ لأن من يرفض الخضوع فهو حر، ولا يُقهر.

      دائمًا يبقى الصراع بين الأقنعة التي يصنعها الآخرون لنا، وتلك التي نصنعها لأنفسنا. هذه هي الثورة الأولى التي نحن جميعا فيها

جب أن يقاتل؛ النضال من أجل الملكية الذاتية وحرية الهوية.

      لا توجد سلطة عادلة.

       الليلة أجلس في منزلي وسط الظلام الدامس لتلالي، ليلة تتبع أيامًا من المطر ومليئة بأغاني الضفادع والطيور، هدوء لا يزعجه إلا ضوء الضوء في ذكرياتي عن هذه الليلة قبل عام، في الدفاع. الأقصى. مثل ومضات البرق، يمكن ليد الماضي أن تجلب الفوضى وتمتد لتسيطر علينا وتهزنا، وزعزعة استقرارنا واستقرارنا وبنياتنا الطبيعية من خلال أحداث مدمرة مفاجئة وغير متوقعة غير مربوطة بمرتكزاتها في الوقت المناسب.

       لكن الفوضى هي أيضًا مقياس للمدى التكيفي للنظام، الذي يجلب كلاً من الرعب من عدمنا ومتعة الحرية الكاملة في إعادة تصورنا وإعادة ميلادنا التحويلي لأنفسنا وإمكانياتنا اللامحدودة في أن نصبح بشرًا.

       لدى غييرمو ديل تورو، في ملحمته الرائعة عن الهجرة والمساواة العرقية كرنفال رو، مشهد يجد فيه شابان خلفاء لقيادة الفصائل المتنافسة تقليديًا نفسيهما في حالة حب وبحاجة إلى حلفاء في حبكة فرعية تعيد تصوير روميو وجولييت؛ يسأل الجحيم المتمرد جونا بريكسبير عشيقته المكيافيلية صوفي لونجيربان: “لمن تصلح الفوضى؟” فأجابت: “الفوضى جيدة لنا. الفوضى هي الأمل العظيم للضعفاء.”

      قد يفكر المرء في جلب الفوضى من حيث القوة الخلاصية للحب، والتضامن، وواجبنا في رعاية الآخرين، والاستيلاء على السلطة كاستعادة للتوازن، والمقاومة والنضال الثوري كوضع حياتنا في التوازن مع أولئك الذين لا حول لهم ولا قوة والمحرومين، والمُسكتين والممحيين، وtikkun olam أو شفاء انكسار العالم.

      في القدس والقدس، نتعرض للخيانة بسبب طبيعة الخضوع للسلطة والانقسامات غير المتكافئة للسلطة، ويتم تجريدنا من إنسانيتنا من قبل أولئك الذين يرتكبون الفظائع باسمنا، ويصبحون متواطئين في جرائم ضد الإنسانية من خلال روايات الإيذاء التي يسمح بها كما يعلمنا فولتير. أي شئ.

      حصلت على قفاز غيرنا. إنه إرهاب قديم. وهذا يجب أن نقاومه.

      الأساطير القديمة، والمظالم القديمة، منسوجة في نسيج نفسيتنا وحضارتنا. ومثل كل التاريخ والذاكرة والهوية المعتمدة، تحاكي القوى التي يجب أن نخرج من تراثها.

      في هذه اللحظة، أعود مرة أخرى إلى التشخيص الرائع لمرض السلطة باعتبارها هوية مستولى عليها، كما كتب ألون بن ميرين في هافبوست، على الرغم من أن وصفه لنظام الدولتين مثير للنقاش، وبالنسبة لي يجب استبداله بمرور الوقت بنظام علماني. دولة بقانون واحد للجميع وبدون تقسيمات رسمية للقبيلة أو اللغة أو العقيدة، في مقال بعنوان “في قبضة الأوهام القوية”؛ “يبدو أن الطريق المسدود الذي وصلت إليه عملية السلام الإسرائيلية الفلسطينية غير منطقي ومثير للقلق، حيث أن غالبية الإسرائيليين والفلسطينيين يدركون أن التعايش، سواء في ظل ظروف العداء أو الصداقة، هو حقيقة لا يمكن لأي من الطرفين تغييرها إلا بحدوث كارثة.

      يبدو أن الطريق المسدود الذي وصلت إليه عملية السلام الإسرائيلية الفلسطينية غير منطقي ومثير للقلق، حيث أن أغلبية من الإسرائيليين والفلسطينيين يدركون أن التعايش، سواء في ظل ظروف من العداء أو الصداقة، يشكل حقيقة لا يستطيع أي من الطرفين أن يغيرها إلا بالكارثة. ويدرك الجانبان أن المعايير العامة لاتفاق سلام مستدام يجب أن ترتكز على حل الدولتين على أساس حدود 1967 مع بعض تبادل الأراضي. لكن كلا الطرفين اختار الاستمتاع بالأوهام والعيش في تحدي الزمن والظروف. ويبدو أنهما يفضلان استمرار الاشتباكات العنيفة وإراقة الدماء على التعايش السلمي، في حين يلقي كل منهما اللوم على الآخر في المسار المدمر الذي لا ينتهي والذي اختار كل منهما أن يسلكه بشكل مأساوي.

      هناك ضرورات أساسية، مقرونة بتدابير أمنية متبادلة طويلة الأمد، تمثل ما كان على طاولة المفاوضات في عام 2000 في كامب ديفيد وفي 2010/2011 و2013/2014 تحت رعاية إدارة أوباما في القدس ورام الله. وكانت كل جولة، بدرجات متفاوتة من التقدم، تهدف إلى وضع اللمسات النهائية على الاتفاق، لكنها فشلت في نهاية المطاف في القيام بذلك. السؤال هو: لماذا؟

      وكانت التصورات المتحيزة والانتقائية، والتي عززتها التجارب التاريخية، والدين، والإيديولوجيات غير المتوافقة، سبباً في حبس كلا الجانبين في مواقف جامدة. وتشمل العوامل التي تحافظ على هذه الأنماط وتعززها المشاعر مثل الخوف وعدم الثقة وانعدام الأمن. والنتيجة النفسية هي الإنكار المتبادل لسردية الآخر ونزع الشرعية المتبادلة.

      والنتيجة العملية مجتمعة هي الركود والاستقطاب. ولذلك فإن ما نحتاج إليه هو حوار موجه نحو الإجماع على مستوى القيادة بين المسؤولين وغير المسؤولين، والتفاعلات بين الناس، لحل مسألة التصور – وهي مهمة صعبة نظراً للبيئة الحالية التي تدعم التحيز بدلاً من تحسينه. التصورات.

      هناك بعض المفاهيم النفسية ذات الصلة بفهم العلاقة الإسرائيلية الفلسطينية

فلكت؛ مفهوم الوهم هو مفهوم أساسي. في كتابه مستقبل الوهم، يقدم فرويد التعريف التالي: “… نحن نسمي الاعتقاد وهمًا عندما يكون تحقيق الرغبة عاملاً بارزًا في دوافعه، وبذلك نتجاهل علاقاته بالواقع، تمامًا كما الوهم في حد ذاته لا يشكل أي أهمية للتحقق.”

      ما يميز الأوهام هو: 1) أنها مستمدة من رغبات إنسانية عميقة، و2) الاعتقاد قائم (أو سيتم الاعتقاد به) في غياب أي دليل مقنع، أو أسس عقلانية جيدة، لصالحه.

      من المستحيل إنكار أن كلا من الإسرائيليين والفلسطينيين يقعون في قبضة أوهام قوية للغاية لا تؤدي إلا إلى إطالة أمد الصراع ومنع أي تفاهم متبادل. وعلى وجه الخصوص، فإن الاعتقاد الذي يتقاسمه العديد من الإسرائيليين بأن لديهم حق كتابي في الأرض (بما في ذلك يهودا والسامرة)، وأن الله أعطاها لليهود إلى الأبد، هو بلا شك وهم من وهم الأمس.

      لم يتم تأكيد هذا الاعتقاد لأن هناك دليل حقيقي على أن الله اعتبره كذلك (على الرغم من وجود مملكتين يهوديتين – الأولى في القرن العاشر قبل الميلاد والثانية في بداية عام 539 قبل الميلاد – على نفس الأرض)، ولكن لأنه يرضي حاجة نفسية عميقة الجذور لوطن يهودي وهبه الله.

      والاعتقاد بأن إسرائيل من خلال توسيع المستوطنات سوف تعزز أمنها القومي وتحافظ على قبضتها على الأرض بالكامل هو وهم الغد، وهو وهم يتجاهل عموماً وجود المسلمين في نفس الأرض لأكثر من 1300 عام.

      من المهم أن نلاحظ كيف تدعم هذه الأوهام وتعزز بعضها البعض، وتشكل حاجزًا نفسيًا أكثر مناعة للتفكير النقدي. لقد ساهمت أوهام إسرائيل في خلق منطق الاحتلال.

      الفلسطينيون، من جانبهم، لا يخلو من أوهامهم. كما يعتقدون أن الله قد حفظ لهم الأرض، ويحتجون بحقيقة أنهم سكنوا الأرض لعدة قرون. ومن وجهة نظرهم فإن وجود المسجد الأقصى الذي بني عام 705م في القدس يشهد على ارتباطهم التاريخي والديني بالمدينة المقدسة.

      كما أنهم يتمسكون بفكرة أنهم سيعودون يوماً ما إلى أرض أسلافهم، كما فعلوا وما زالوا يصرون على حق العودة للاجئين الفلسطينيين، على الرغم من أن ذلك أصبح مستحيلاً فعلياً.

      يتمسك الفلسطينيون بأوهام الأمس والغد بشكل أعمى ويائس مثل الإسرائيليين، الأمر الذي يؤدي إلى مقاومة التغيير والخوف منه. وعلى هذا النحو، ما لم يغير الجانبان مسارهما ويقبلا انتماء كل منهما إلى نفس الأرض، خاصة لأنها قائمة على أساس ديني، فمن المحتم أن يؤدي الوضع إلى كارثة.

       وقد ساهم ذلك في جعل الصراع الإسرائيلي الفلسطيني مزمناً وعصياً على الحل، حيث تتغذى الأوهام المختلفة بشكل مستمر وواعي من خلال المواجهات العدائية اليومية والعنيفة في كثير من الأحيان بين الجانبين.

      في السعي إلى سد المفاهيم التي يمكن أن تربط بين مجالات علم النفس والسياسة في الصراع الإسرائيلي الفلسطيني، يمكن اقتراح أن المقاومة الجماعية المتبادلة للتغيير (سواء الواعي أو المتعمد، أو اللاوعي الداخلي) تحمي الهوية الضعيفة.

      فمقارنة، على سبيل المثال، بالهويات السياسية المستقرة والناضجة للدول الأمريكية والبريطانية والفرنسية، فإن الهويات السياسية لكل من الشعبين الإسرائيلي والفلسطيني، بطريقة ما، في مرحلة المراهقة.

      تكون الهويات في هذا السياق أكثر عرضة للخطر، والأبطال بطبيعة الحال أكثر دفاعية ومقاومة للتغيير. بحكم طبيعتها، يجب على اللاعبين أن يجدوا صعوبة (إن لم يكن من المستحيل) في التعبير عن ذلك علنًا، لأن القيام بذلك يعني الاعتراف بهذه الثغرة الأمنية.

      إن مفهوم المقاومة النفسية للتغيير قد يؤثر على الوضع السياسي بشكل عام وعلى الصراع الإسرائيلي الفلسطيني بشكل خاص. فهو يرتبط ارتباطًا وثيقًا بالتصورات على العديد من المستويات ويوفر الحماية لتكوين الهوية الضعيفة.

      وهذه العقلية، التي تعززها التجارب التاريخية، هي التي تتجاوز أكثر من سبعة عقود منذ بدأ الصراع الإسرائيلي الفلسطيني. وما زال الأفراد والجماعات، الإسرائيليون والفلسطينيون على حد سواء، يفسرون طبيعة الخلاف بينهم على أنه “أنت ضدي” بطريقة متحيزة وانتقائية.

      وهذا بدوره أدى إلى خنق أي معلومات جديدة ومكن من استمرار مقاومة التغيير، الأمر الذي يمكن أن يلقي ضوءا جديدا على طبيعة وجوهر الصراع ويساعد في دفع عملية السلام.

      يرتبط مفهوم المقاومة اللاواعية للتغيير في هذا الإطار جيدًا بوجهة نظر التصورات التي تحرك الاستقطاب في الصراع. إن الخبرة التاريخية، التي تصوغ التصورات، تعمل من بين أمور أخرى على تعزيز الإحساس بالهوية “من نحن حقًا”، وهو افتراض جماعي تكويني يقع في حجر الأساس لكل من اللاعبين الرئيسيين ويحرك السلوك الوظيفي والمختل.

ومن حيث المبدأ، فإن مثل هذه العقلية تمنع أياً من الطرفين من طرح أفكار جديدة قد تؤدي إلى تنازلات من أجل التوصل إلى حل سلمي. والمفارقة هنا هي أن الأغلبية على كلا الجانبين تريد السلام وتسعى إليه، وهي تعلم جيداً أن ذلك يتطلب تنازلات كبيرة، لكنها غير قادرة على التوفيق بين التنازلات المطلوبة والتصورات المتأصلة التي حالت دون هذه التنازلات نتيجة المقاومة والخوف من ذلك. يتغير.

      ولذلك، فإن أي إطار للسلام يجب أن يتضمن بنوداً من شأنها أن تزيد بشكل كبير من احتمالات التوصل إلى حل. أولاً، يتعين على الجانبين الالتزام بالتوصل إلى اتفاق على أساس حل الدولتين انطلاقاً من الاقتناع بأن التغيير، الذي يترجم إلى التعايش، أمر لا مفر منه. ولذلك، يتعين عليهم أن يتكيفوا مع متطلبات بعضهم البعض، الأمر الذي يتطلب منهم بالضرورة تقديم تنازلات كبيرة.

      ثانياً، لتسهيل ذلك، يجب عليهم إجراء تفاعلات تصالحية اجتماعية واقتصادية وثقافية وأمنية بين الناس للتخفيف من مقاومتهم للتغيير، والتي يجب أن تبدأ، على الأقل، قبل عام واحد من بدء المفاوضات لخلق الحالة النفسية والاجتماعية. مناخ سياسي لبناء الثقة اللازمة لمفاوضات سلام موضوعية وناجحة.

      إن استئناف محادثات السلام لن يؤدي إلى أي نتيجة ما لم يغير الإسرائيليون والفلسطينيون تصوراتهم المتحيزة ومقاومتهم للتغيير وخوفهم منه، ثم يدركون أخيراً أن مصيرهم متشابك ولا يستطيع أي منهما أن يعيش في سلام وأمن دون الآخر.

      أشعر بأنني مضطر إلى اختتام مقالتي الأخيرة لهذا العام بتحذير شديد من أنه من الأفضل للإسرائيليين والفلسطينيين على حد سواء أن يفكروا فيه مع اقترابهم من نهاية العقد السابع من صراعهم المأساوي.

      يجب على كل متطرف إسرائيلي ومتشدد فلسطيني، أولئك الذين يريدون كل ذلك، أن يتوقفوا ويفكروا أين ستكون إسرائيل والفلسطينيون بعد عشر سنوات إذا استمر الوضع الحالي؟

      أوهامك اليوم لن تصبح حقيقة غدًا، وما سيأتي به الغد ليس سوى المزيد من الألم والدموع والعذاب.

      صراعكم يتطور بشكل أسرع من أي وقت مضى إلى حرب دينية. إن هرمجدون بين المسلمين واليهود يجري الإعداد له الآن، وهو ما من شأنه أن يشعل المنطقة بأكملها على نار لا يمكن تصورها.

      إذا كنتم مؤمنين حقيقيين، فلا تجرؤوا على تحدي مشيئة الله، لأنه جمعكم معًا ليضعكم في الاختبار – يجب عليكم إما أن تعيشوا في سلام ووئام، أو سيحكم عليكم بالنسيان واليأس.

      لديك القدرة على اختيار مصيرك. هل سيكون تدميرًا ذاتيًا أم سيكون تحقيقًا لحلم مجيد؟

      انهضوا ومرروا إرثًا من الأمل لكل طفل إسرائيلي وفلسطيني، لأن لديهم الحق الذي منحه الله لهم في أن يكبروا ويزدهروا ولا ينبغي لأحد أن يموت من أجل أوهامكم عبثًا”.

      كما كتبت في رسالتي بتاريخ 9 نوفمبر 2023، مرآة ظلامنا: كريستالناكت؛ إن إسرائيل تحيي ذكرى هذه المأساة التي فتحت الباب أمام مأساة أكبر في المحرقة من خلال فعل الشيء نفسه بالضبط مع الفلسطينيين، شعب واحد منقسم بسبب التاريخ والدين الذي تم استخدامه كسلاح في خدمة السلطة. وهذا أيضاً سيفتح الأبواب أمام المزيد من إرهاب الدولة وطغيانها، ما لم يتمكن الشعبان من الاتحاد ضد السلطات التي ترتكب الفظائع باسمهما كإستراتيجية لإخضاع وتحرير بعضهما البعض من أولئك الذين يستعبدونهما.

      إذا كنت تفكر في الأمم باعتبارها أطفالًا ناجين من سوء المعاملة، يصبح الكثير واضحًا؛ لأنه بمجرد استيلائهم على السلطة، فمن المرجح أن يصبحوا هم أنفسهم مسيئين. هذه هي الطريقة التي يعمل بها الخوف، ولماذا هو الأساس الحقيقي للتبادل، ولماذا السياسة هي فن الخوف، ولماذا تتجسد الدول في العنف. لقد تعرض كل من الإسرائيليين والفلسطينيين للتهديدات الوجودية بوحشية قبل وقت طويل من بدء ممارسة الوحشية والوحشية وتجريد بعضهم البعض من إنسانيتهم.

      إن استخدام الأنظمة المفترسة على كلا الجانبين لسياسات الانقسام والهوية لمركزية السلطة وإضفاء الشرعية على الهيمنة الاستبدادية هي مرحلة يمكن التنبؤ بها من النضال من أجل التحرير، وخاصة الثورة المناهضة للاستعمار.

       إن الحيلة في أن نصبح بشرًا، وأصدقاء، هي أن نحتضن ظلامنا في النضال وكذلك أعداءنا، ونخرج من تراث تاريخنا الذي يظللنا مثل ذيل تمساح غير مرئي.

       هناك سطر يتحدث به الشرير في مسلسل The Magicians، وهو أحد الناجين من إساءة معاملة الأطفال والطاغية المعروف باسم The Beast لجرائمه المروعة، وكان في السابق الصبي الضعيف والمرعوب مارتن شاتوين والآن إله وحشي؛ “كما تعلم، عندما كنت صبيًا، كان الرجل الذي كان من المفترض أن يعتني بي، يثنيني على مكتبه ويحتضنني مرارًا وتكرارًا في كل مرة كنت وحدي معه. إنه يساعدني على فهم الحقيقة. أنت قوي أو أنت ضعيف. “

       وهنا تكمن الكذبة الأصلية للطاغية والفاشي في الدفاعيات وتبرير الذات وسيكوباتية السلطة؛ الكذبة القائلة بأن القوة وحدها هي التي لها معنى وهي حقيقية، وأنه لا يوجد خير أو شر. إن كيفية استخدامنا للسلطة لا تقل أهمية عن من يملكها. الخوف والقوة هما الوسيلة الأساسية للتبادل البشري، ولكن

ليست الوسيلة الوحيدة؛ الحب والعضوية والانتماء لا تقل أهمية.

       إنه خط يجسد بشكل مثالي التناقضات المتأصلة في حلقة فاغنر من الخوف والقوة والقوة كأصل للشر؛ لأن استخدام القوة الاجتماعية هو أمر تخريبي لقيمه الخاصة. ومع ذلك، فإن الظروف المفروضة للنضال الثوري غالبا ما تتطلب العنف، وإلى أن يتم إسقاط آلهة القانون والنظام من عروشهم، يجب أن أتفق مع القول المأثور الشهير لسارتر في مسرحيته “الأيدي القذرة” عام 1948، والتي اقتبسها فرانتز فانون في خطابه عام 1960. لماذا نستخدم العنف، والذي جعله خالدًا مالكولم إكس؛ “بأي وسيلة ضرورية.”

      كما كتب والتر رودني في The Groundings with my Brothers؛ “لقد قيل لنا أن العنف في حد ذاته شر، وأنه، مهما كان سببه، فهو غير مبرر أخلاقيا. بأي معيار أخلاقي يمكن اعتبار العنف الذي يستخدمه العبد لكسر أغلاله مثل عنف سيد العبد؟ بأي معايير يمكننا أن نساوي عنف السود الذين تعرضوا للاضطهاد والقمع والاكتئاب لمدة أربعة قرون مع عنف الفاشيين البيض. ولا يمكن الحكم على العنف الذي يهدف إلى استعادة الكرامة الإنسانية والمساواة بنفس مقياس العنف الذي يهدف إلى الحفاظ على التمييز والقمع.

      وهذا هو المقطع الذي يشير إليه من ليون تروتسكي في كتابه “أخلاقهم وأخلاقنا: الأسس الطبقية للممارسة الأخلاقية”؛ “مالك العبيد الذي من خلال المكر والعنف يقيد عبدًا مقيدًا بالسلاسل، والعبد الذي يكسر القيود من خلال المكر أو العنف – لا تدع الخصيان المحتقرين يخبروننا أنهم متساوون أمام محكمة الأخلاق!”

      ومع ذلك، أفكر في تلك الشخصيات العظيمة التي كانت أبطال التحرير وأشرار الطغيان؛ قدوتي المراهقة نابليون، واشنطن، الذي يعد محوريًا في تاريخ عائلتنا وصاغ الشعار على شعار النبالة الخاص بنا في رمز المرور خلال معركة ترينتون، النصر أو الموت، عندما كانت الثورة بأكملها تراهن على أمل بائس، من المأساوية دراما الأبطال الذين سقطوا مثل روبرت موغابي، والطغاة المتوحشين ستالين وماو، والقائمة عبارة عن سلسلة لا نهاية لها تقريبًا من الويلات وإخفاقات الرؤية حيث تحولت عوالم جديدة شجاعة إلى جحيم وحالات جنونية. في الدليل الذي أقدمه، أصبحت الثورات الأمريكية والنابليونية إمبراطوريات، والاتحاد السوفييتي، والحزب الشيوعي الصيني، والهند حيث يأتي مجد التحرير جنبًا إلى جنب مع مأساة التقسيم، وهي الآن تحت حذاء القومية الهندوسية، وجميع الثورات المناهضة للاستعمار تقريبًا. والتي أصبحت، مع الفترة الأولى من الحرية كأمم جديدة، أنظمة استبدادية مروعة، وقبل كل شيء دولة إسرائيل، حلم اللجوء الذي نشأ في إرهاب المحرقة التي تعلم ضحاياها الدروس الخاطئة من النازيين وتولوا دورهم في احتلال إسرائيل. فلسطين. إن مخاطر المثالية حقيقية للغاية؛ ولكن كذلك مخاطر الخضوع للسلطة والتواطؤ في الصمت في وجه الشر.

      أنا صياد الفاشيين، وأخلاقي هي أخلاق الصياد. بالنسبة لي هناك اختبار بسيط لاستخدام القوة؛ من يملك السلطة؟

      لقد كتب عدد كبير من الحكماء بشكل جميل عن أهوال فاشية الدم والإيمان والتربة والتسلسلات الهرمية للانتماء النخبوي والاختلاف الإقصائي، كما يفعل بول أوستريشر في المقالة التالية؛ أود هنا فقط أن أشير إلى أن القوى التي تكمن في داخلنا وخارجها، مثل الظروف الاجتماعية والصدمات اللاجينية، والحركات الرجعية للهمجية وأنظمة القمع، هي قوى عالمية بالنسبة للبشر كشروط مفروضة للنضال وتعمل باستمرار حتى عندما تكون محجوبة عن الأنظار. أبعد من الرعب والإذلال الناتج عن نقاط الانكسار في الروح الإنسانية مثل تلك التي حدثت في ليلة الكريستال والتطهير العرقي في غزة.

      أكتب إليك كشخص عاش صرخة معركة “لن يحدث مرة أخرى أبدًا”! منذ أكثر من أربعين عامًا، ومن الأهمية العميقة والحيوية تطبيق مبدأ العمل هذا ليس فقط في مقاومة الفاشية كعدو متطفل على كل ما هو إنساني فينا، ولكن أيضًا على أنفسنا واستخدامنا للعنف والوسائل الاجتماعية. القوة تجاه الآخرين.

     في النهاية، كل ما يهم هو ما نفعله بمخاوفنا، وكيف نستخدم قوتنا.

      بغض النظر عن المكان الذي تبدأ فيه بالانقسامات والتسلسلات الهرمية للانتماء النخبوي والاختلاف الاستبعادي، فإنك دائمًا ينتهي بك الأمر عند أبواب أوشفيتز.

     كما يعلمنا نيتشه في كتابه ما وراء الخير والشر؛ “أولئك الذين يصطادون الوحوش يجب أن ينتبهوا لئلا يصبح وحشًا. وإذا حدقت طويلا في الهاوية، فإن الهاوية ستحدق فيك أيضا.”

      في مرآة غزة المظلمة، بانعكاساتها الوحشية على ليلة الكريستال وأوشفيتز، هل يعجبك ما تراه يا إسرائيل؟

      وكما كتبت في رسالتي بتاريخ 10 مايو 2021، الدفاع عن الأقصى: الحرية مقابل الاستبداد في القدس؛ ربما شهدنا قدوم الانتفاضة الثالثة هذه الليلة، دفاعًا عن الأقصى ومعارك الشوارع في غزة التي أعقبت ذلك، والتي أشعلها الغدر والغزو الإمبراطوري لدولة إسرائيل الفاشية والكارهة للأجانب والتي لا تنظر إلا إلى أحد.

قبيلتهم ودينهم كإنسان حقيقي، والذي ارتكب هجومًا مميتًا غير مبرر كعمل من أعمال إرهاب الدولة وجريمة ضد الإنسانية على المصلين المسالمين في أحد أكثر المساجد قدسية في العالم الإسلامي، وهو استعراض للقوة والقوة. الهيمنة التي تأتي بعد أسابيع من الاستفزازات والاعتداءات وأعمال الدعاية التجريدية من الإنسانية ضد شعب فلسطين.

       مثل انتفاضة الأقصى الثانية التي استمرت أربع سنوات من 28 سبتمبر 2000 إلى 8 فبراير 2005، فإن القضايا التي لم يتم حلها للاحتلال هي الآن في عامها الرابع والخمسين منذ احتلال إسرائيل للقدس القديمة في 7 يونيو 1967، والذي احتفلت به دولة إسرائيل وفقًا لـ إلى التقويم العبري باعتباره يوم القدس اليوم من خلال مهاجمة الأقصى، والكارثة المستمرة الآن منذ ثلاثة وسبعين عامًا منذ يوم النكبة في 15 مايو 1948، تضافرت حول القيمة الرمزية للأقصى، الذي له هوية مزدوجة متنازع عليها مثل جبل الهيكل في القدس. اليهودية.

      إن فرص التهدئة وتجنب الحرب لا تعتمد الآن على العوامل المحلية، بل على استجابة المجتمع الدولي، لأن التاريخ هنا أصبح فخًا ينهار ليوقعنا في شركه، ويجب على القوى الخارجية أن تحررنا من إخفاقات الغرب. التناقضات الداخلية لنظامنا.

      فهل ستتنصل أمريكا وتتخلى عن مستعمرتها إسرائيل، ملكة سياستها الإمبراطورية في الشرق الأوسط وسيطرتها على المورد الاستراتيجي للنفط؟ هل يمكن للوحدة الدولية وضغوط المقاطعة وسحب الاستثمارات وفرض العقوبات أن تحررنا من طغيان وإرهاب نظام الفصل العنصري كما حدث في جنوب أفريقيا؟

      أم أن الحرب هي الحساب الوحيد الذي يمكن للبشرية تقديمه أو قبوله؟

      كما كتب إيشان ثارور في صحيفة واشنطن بوست؛ ليلة الإثنين، تبادل المسلحون في قطاع غزة والجيش الإسرائيلي إطلاق الصواريخ والغارات الجوية وسط تصعيد مميت للعنف. أطلقت حماس والجهاد الإسلامي، الجماعتان المسلحتان المتمركزتان في غزة المحاصرة، وابلًا من الصواريخ التي سقطت بالقرب من القدس وفي أجزاء من جنوب إسرائيل، مما أدى إلى إصابة شخص واحد على الأقل. وأدت الغارات الجوية الإسرائيلية ردا على ذلك إلى مقتل ما لا يقل عن 20 شخصا في غزة، وفقا لوزارة الصحة في غزة، من بينهم تسعة أطفال.

      وقال رئيس الوزراء الإسرائيلي بنيامين نتنياهو إن “الجماعات الإرهابية” في غزة “تجاوزت الخط الأحمر” بهجماتها الصاروخية. لكن الانفجار الأخير للأعمال العدائية له ذيل طويل، في أعقاب العديد من الأعمال العدوانية التي قامت بها قوات الأمن الإسرائيلية والجماعات اليهودية اليمينية المتطرفة في القدس. قبل أسبوعين، قامت مجموعات من المتطرفين اليهود، بما في ذلك بعض المستوطنين من الضفة الغربية، بمسيرة عبر المناطق المأهولة بالسكان الفلسطينيين في المدينة المقدسة، وهم يهتفون “الموت للعرب”، وهاجموا المارة وألحقوا أضرارًا بالممتلكات والمنازل الفلسطينية. أثارت المحاولات الإسرائيلية لطرد عدد من العائلات الفلسطينية في حي الشيخ جراح بالقدس الشرقية – وهو نموذج مصغر لما يعتبره الفلسطينيون جزءًا من تاريخ طويل من السلب والمحو على يد الدولة الإسرائيلية – احتجاجات التضامن الفلسطيني في أجزاء مختلفة للأراضي المحتلة وإسرائيل.

      كما أثارت التوترات قبيل إحياء يوم القدس يوم الاثنين، وهو يوم عطلة إسرائيلية رسمي يحتفل بالاستيلاء على المدينة خلال الحرب العربية الإسرائيلية عام 1967. تم إلغاء مسيرة سنوية كان من المقرر أن يقوم بها إسرائيليون من اليمين المتطرف بعد أن غيرت السلطات مسارها في اللحظة الأخيرة. ولا تزال أعداد كبيرة تشق طريقها إلى حائط المبكى وتغني أغنية انتقامية متطرفة ضد الفلسطينيين.

      أفاد زملائي أن “هجمات حماس الصاروخية، والتي تضمنت الضربات الأولى ضد القدس منذ عدة سنوات، جاءت بعد اشتباكات بين الشرطة الإسرائيلية والمتظاهرين الفلسطينيين والإسرائيليين اليهود اليمينيين المتطرفين حول المدينة القديمة”. ومن بين مئات الجرحى سبعة نقلوا إلى المستشفى في حالة خطيرة، بحسب الهلال الأحمر الفلسطيني. وتم تداول مقطع فيديو على وسائل التواصل الاجتماعي يظهر ضباط شرطة إسرائيليين يضربون بوحشية رجلاً فلسطينيًا معتقلًا.

       فكيف يمكن لأمريكا أن تدعم دولة إسرائيل في الطغيان والإرهاب والغزو والنهب؟ إنه سؤال يُطرح بلهجة الغضب والأسى والحيرة منذ حلول النكبة في 15 مايو/أيار 1948، يوم النكبة التي بدأ فيها احتلال فلسطين والاستعباد الممنهج والإبادة الجماعية لشعبها في أعقاب الغزو الإسرائيلي. القدس. كيف يتم إضفاء الشرعية على هذا؟

       لقد أعاد أحد الأصدقاء صياغة هذا السؤال لي مؤخرًا؛ “لقد أحببت التقليد اليهودي واعتنقته، وانضممت إلى كنيس يهودي وعملت جنبًا إلى جنب مع حاخامه. عندما أشاهد معاملة الحكومة اليهودية في إسرائيل للفلسطينيين، تغمرني مشاعر الارتباك والغضب. ولأنني غير قادر على التوفيق بين هذا الفجور، فإنني أشكك في أساس إيماني. أين الانتفاضة الطيبة والأخلاقية للأصوات اليهودية العالمية المنددة بمسار الحكومة؟ لقد فقدت الثقة في كوني يهودية”.

      ما هو واضح بالنسبة لي هو أن أزمة الإيمان هذه هي أيضًا أزمة هوية وجودية

ن الوضع في غاية الخطورة والخطر والذي يحمل أيضًا إمكانية إعادة التصور والولادة التحويلية، وهو صدى شخصي لأزمة حضارية موازية يجب على البشرية والمجتمع العالمي للأمم أن يجدوا منها طريقة للخروج وتحرير أنفسنا من تراث الحضارة الإنسانية. تاريخنا. وهنا ردي:

      دولة إسرائيل ليست متطابقة مع الديانة اليهودية، على الرغم من أن الفصيل الإمبريالي الفاشي الذي يمثله نتنياهو يرغب في أن يعتقد الجميع ذلك.

     أمة تقوم على تخصيص مواطنيها لهوية قبلية، والتسليح الطائفي للعقيدة في خدمة السلطة والهوية الوطنية المصرح بها، ومجتمع عسكري مع خدمة إلزامية عالمية، وصنم منتشر لأساطير الشجاعة العسكرية ورموزها بما في ذلك البنادق. واستخدمت لغة الوحدة الوطنية العبرية المعاد بناؤها سياسات الهوية لإخضاع مواطنيها لسلطة الاستبداد المركزية؛ إسرائيل دولة فاشية من الدم والإيمان والأرض لا تقل عن دولة النازيين.

      أضف إلى هذا المزيج السام النظام الكليبتوقراطي الذي روج لسرديات الإيذاء التاريخي لإضفاء الشرعية على السرقة الجماعية والغزو الإمبراطوري لشعوب أخرى، وهناك شيء واحد واضح؛ لقد تعلمت إسرائيل الدروس الخاطئة من النازيين.

      ربما تعلمون من إشاراتي العديدة إلى الحادثة في كتاباتي أنني مناهض للفاشية، وقد أقسمت قسم المقاومة على يد جان جينيه عام 1982 في بيروت، أثناء معركتنا ضد الغزو والحصار الإسرائيلي. وفي الأعوام التسع والثلاثين التي تلت ذلك، كنت صائدًا للنازيين وثوريًا للديمقراطية منخرطًا في النضال من أجل تحرير البشرية ضد الطغيان والأنظمة الاستبدادية التي تعتمد على القوة والسيطرة.

       لقد كان الوطن الفلسطيني، والعدالة لشعبه، من بين أهدافي منذ ذلك الصيف منذ فترة طويلة. ومثله كمثل هدف تحرير أيرلندا من الحكم الاستعماري البريطاني، فلا يزال يتعين تحقيقه. موضع التساؤل هو فكرة الحرية والمواطنة باعتبارها سيادة واستقلال الشعوب عن الاستعمار الأجنبي والطغيان الاستبدادي، وأولوية دولة غير طائفية خالية من الانقسامات والتسلسلات الهرمية للإيمان، لأن من يقف بين كل واحد منا وبين اللانهائي لا يخدم أيًا منهما. .

      كما أنني أؤيد فكرة إقامة وطن إسرائيلي، ولا أرى أي سبب يجعل هاتين الدولتين، فلسطين وإسرائيل، متنافيتين أو متعارضتين. بعض الإسرائيليين الذين يختلفون معي حول قضية فلسطين والنزعة العسكرية في الغزو الإمبراطوري والسيطرة الإقليمية كانوا حلفاء في قضية مطاردة النازيين والفاشيين عمومًا في جميع أنحاء العالم، لكنهم غافلون عن تواطؤهم في هذا الشر بسبب رؤيتهم لأنفسهم. كضحايا وليس كمرتكبي جرائم ضد الإنسانية. يتعلق الأمر بالخوف والدورة المدمرة للإساءة والعنف.

      عندما تستولي السلطة على الإيمان لإضفاء الشرعية على سياسات الهوية، تصبح الهوية نفسها مشوشة وغامضة. لكي نصبح أحرارًا، يجب علينا أن نمتلك ملكية أنفسنا ككائنات مخلوقة ذاتيًا ومستقلة.

      ولهذا السبب فإن الواجبات الأساسية للمواطن هي مساءلة السلطة، وكشف السلطة، والسخرية من السلطة، وتحدي السلطة.

      دائمًا يبقى الصراع بين الأقنعة التي يصنعها الآخرون لنا وتلك التي نصنعها لأنفسنا؛ هذه هي الثورة الأولى التي يجب علينا جميعا أن نقاتل فيها.

      أفكر في مشكلة الشر البشري ودورة الخوف والقوة والقوة في حالة الدول التي أصبحت أنظمة استبدادية قاتلت من أجل تحرير نفسها منها، وهذا ينطبق على الدول الثورية المناهضة للاستعمار بشكل عام بسبب الموروثات التاريخية من الإيذاء. ، في هذا الطريق؛ غالبًا ما يصبح الضحايا مسيئين لأن هويتهم منظمة حول السلطة باعتبارها الوسيلة الوحيدة للهروب في عالم لا يمكن الوثوق فيه بأحد.

      عندما يتم إلغاء الثقة وإثبات أنها فارغة وبلا معنى، عندما تنكسر القدرة على الارتباط بالآخرين والشعور بألمهم في التعاطف، ويصبح المرء بلا شفقة أو ندم، عندما يكون الخوف طاغيًا ومعممًا وتشكله السلطة على التعامل مع الآخرين. وفي خدمة السلطة، يتعلم الضحايا أن القوة وحدها هي التي لها معنى وهي حقيقية. يجب ألا نسمح للمسيئين أن يصبحوا معلمينا.

      وفي حين أن كل قضية من هذا القبيل لها أصولها وتاريخها الفريد، فإن المشكلة في حد ذاتها عالمية، وتتعلق بما يخشاه المرء، وكيف يتشكل هذا الخوف من خلال السلطة كهوية. من وجهة نظرنا كأميركيين يفسرون الأحداث في المشكلة الكلاسيكية المتمثلة في الأقلية المزدوجة التي تمثلها إسرائيل وفلسطين، فإن كيفية إدراكنا للقضايا لها علاقة كبيرة بكيفية تأطيرها من خلال مصادرنا الإعلامية والمحفزة.

       في النهاية، يتم تعريفنا بما نفعله بخوفنا، وكيف نستخدم قوتنا.

       السؤال الأول الذي يجب طرحه في أي قصة، والأهم، هو سؤال بسيط؛ من هذه القصة؟

       نحن ضائعون في برية المرايا، من الأكاذيب والأوهام، وتزييف أنفسنا، والصور والانعكاسات المشوهة، والأصداء والهويات المرخصة التي تشوه وتشوه.

مكين، وسرقة أرواحنا.

       فكيف نجيب أولئك الذين يستعبدوننا؟ يتم تحقيق أصالتنا واستقلالنا من خلال الاستيلاء على السلطة، وإعادة تصور وتحويل أنفسنا والبشرية كمجتمع حر متساوين.

       نحن الأمريكيون نميل إلى رؤية الأشياء من منظور القبعات البيضاء والقبعات السوداء، كما هو الحال في الأفلام الغربية التي تعتبر بمثابة أساطير أصلية ونماذج أولية لشخصيتنا الوطنية. بمجرد منح مكانة الضحية، تصبح هذه المجموعات والأشخاص من القبعات البيضاء والأخيار، غير قادرين على الشر ومعارضين تمامًا لأي شخص يجب أن يكون من القبعات السوداء. إنها طريقة فظيعة لاختيار السياسة الوطنية.

      للأسف، نحن البشر يمكن أن نكون خيرًا وأشرارًا في الوقت نفسه، فعيوب إنسانيتنا تتردد وتعكس انكسار العالم. إنها حقيقة تم إثباتها مرة أخرى الليلة في القدس أو القدس اعتمادًا على من يتحدث وبأي لغة، بينما تحترق غزة من هجوم قوات الدفاع الإسرائيلية المسعورة تمامًا كما حدث في الليلة التي مضت قبل أربعة عقود تقريبًا في بيروت. عندما حاولوا حرقي أنا وجينيه أحياء في المقهى الخاص بنا، كعشرات البشر الذين سُرق منهم كل شيء ما عدا الأمل، أقسموا لبعضهم البعض أن يتخذوا موقعًا يغطي هروب النساء والأطفال المحاصرين بالهجوم الإسرائيلي حتى النهاية. نحن آمنون، في دفاع أخير ليس عن المسجد الأقصى، رائع وجميل ومليء بالأهمية، نصب تذكاري للدافع البشري للوصول إلى ما هو أبعد من أنفسنا والإمكانيات اللامحدودة لأن نصبح بشرًا، مرحلة مناسبة للموت المجيد للأبطال، ولكن من صرخات الغرباء بلا جسد بين المحاربين المجهولين في العصور القديمة المهجورة.

      في مواجهة هوة الفراغ والهمجية العدمية في عالم من الظلام والنار، من الخوف والقوة، ليس لدي سوى الكلمات لأقدمها، وأنا أكتب إليكم ما قلته لرفاقي الذين اختاروا الوقوف معي؛ لقد فقدت عدد مرات الوقوف الأخيرة، لكنني خاطرت بكل شيء ضد احتمالات مستحيلة ونجوت مرات أكثر مما أستطيع أن أتذكر، وكل ما يهم هو أننا لا نتخلى عن أنفسنا ولا عن بعضنا البعض، وأن نرفض الاستسلام، لأن هذا هو لحظة حريتنا، ولا يمكن أن تؤخذ منا أبدا.

       من هذه الليلة تتحرر فلسطين، يمكن أن نقتل ولكن لا يمكن أن نفتح.

الثاني

     بينما أفكر في أحداث الانتفاضة الثالثة العام الماضي كما عشتها ، يخطر ببالي أن من بين الأشياء المهمة هنا عملية سرد القصص كذاكرة ذاتية التأمل ، وتاريخ ، وهوية. لأنه عندما نحكي قصة شيء ما ، فإن التاريخ ينظر إلى نفسه مرة أخرى ، ومن خلال مؤلفه وقراءه يصبح متجسدًا ومدركًا لذاته. ليس هناك رواية ولا سماع للقصص بدون مشاركة وتفسير. إنهم يتحملون القوة الحدية كمبدأ للتغيير.

    أكتب هنا في شكل خاص من وسائل التواصل الاجتماعي ، حيث تكون جميع الحقائق نسبية وعابرة وغير دائمة ؛ بل يمتد أيضًا إلى ما لا نهاية في جميع الاتجاهات الخالية من حدود الشكل والوقت كأدوات للوعي والمعلومات المجردة التي من خلالها ينظم الواقعي نفسه ، ويصطدم بالحقائق الأخرى في حركة براونية تحوّلها نحن وأنفسنا كمعلمين ومحفزين و مصادر التشكيل. لقد أنشأنا شبكة من الأفكار التي هي مرآة لشبكة أنفسنا.

     كيف إذا كان هذا البناء الاجتماعي للهوية من خلال السرد حقيقة مجازية أو شعرية وأداة يمكننا من خلالها السيطرة على تطورنا؟

      أعاد يونغ تصور المثل الأفلاطوني باعتباره اللاوعي الجماعي ، وأشار إلى أشكاله السابقة على أنها الشعارات الموجودة في الكتاب التوراتي ليوحنا الإنجيلي ، وعلم الميثال لابن عربي ، وتصور كوليردج الأساسي ، وباردو في الفلسفة الهندوسية والبوذية. لكن في سياق فائدة القصص في خلق أنفسنا ، فإن وظيفة الأحلام والرؤية الشعرية ليست بوابة الروح إلى اللانهائي ، مثل نشوة الطرب ، والتمجيد ، والتعالي ، التي أتحدث عنها الآن ، ولكن لقوة إعادة التخيل والتحول في شفاء كسر العالم.

     مثل هذا المجال الوحدوي للإنسان والمعنى والقيمة التي تتطور معنا باعتبارها تعبيرات ومظاهر فردية ، بحر الوعي هذا الذي يربطنا تحت سطح وعينا والذي نشارك فيه كمبدعين في عملية تكرارية ، هو أساس النضال.

     كما نتعلم من جون كيج في الموسيقى ، وهارولد بينتر في المسرح ، وبيت موندريان في الفن ، فإن المساحات الفارغة هي التي تحدد المعنى وترتبها ؛ وفي التاريخ ، يجب أن نستمع إلى الأصوات التي تم إسكاتها ومحوها بعناية ، لأن الفراغ هنا يتحدث إلينا عن القوة السرية والوظائف والعلاقات الرئيسية التي يجب أن تخفيها السلطة للحفاظ على هيمنتها علينا.

     انتبه دائمًا للرجل خلف الستارة. لأنه إذا أردنا أن نحرر أنفسنا من أولئك الذين يستعبدوننا ويسرقون أرواحنا من خلال التزييف والأكاذيب والأوهام وإعادة كتابة التواريخ والروايات التي تم التقاطها ، فيجب علينا أداء الواجبات الأساسية الأربعة للمواطن ؛ سلطة السؤال ، وفضح السلطة ، والسلطة الوهمية ، وسلطة التحدي ، والعيش والكتابة والتحدث والتدريس والتنظيم كما أطلق عليها فوكو صانعي الحقيقة في الدعوة المقدسة لمتابعة الحقيقة.

     وهكذا يمكننا أن نتضامن ونضع حياتنا في الميزان مع أولئك الذين أسماهم فرانتس فانون “معذبو الأرض” ؛ الضعيف والمحروم ، الصامت والمحو.

     هذا هو أملي في أن الحب كتضامن قد يصلح عيوب إنسانيتنا وأن التطبيق العملي له كنضال من أجل التحرر قد يجلب الشفاء إلى انكسار العالم ، وذلك من خلال الرؤية الشعرية كإعادة تخيل وتحويل للإنسان والمعنى والقيمة و الاحتمالات اللامحدودة في أن نصبح بشر قد نحلم بمستقبل أفضل مما كان لدينا في الماضي.

11 مايو 2021 متشابك في شبكات التاريخ: اليوم الثاني من الانتفاضة الثالثة

قبل كل شيء يجب أن تكون الأسماء الحقيقية للأشياء ؛ لدي العديد من الأدوار التي لا حصر لها والتي أؤديها في العديد من اللغات والأماكن كصانع للفوضى ، وجالب للفوضى ، وصاحب الحقيقة وشاهد على التاريخ ، لكن الاسم الذي أيقظته هنا في القدس في أعقاب ليلة الإرهاب له فروق دقيقة سأصفها لك ؛ Zafir الذي يعني فيكتوريوس ، أحد المتغيرات العديدة التي استخدمتها لاسم المتمرد العظيم فيكتور فرانكشتاين وأيضًا مرجعيًا إلى Invictus في قصيدة ويليام إرنست هينلي ، وهي جزء من هويتي منذ اليوم الذي بدأت فيه المدرسة الثانوية وتلاوتها قبل تجمع الطلاب لتحديد شروط الصراع بيننا ، والفعل الإنساني الأساسي لخلق الذات في رفض الخضوع للسلطة ؛ منتقم الذي يعرّفني بأنني منتقم للخطأ في إشارة إلى بيان المهمة الذي أعطاني إياه الماتادور في ساو باولو في الصيف قبل المدرسة الثانوية عندما أنقذوني من الإعدام على يد الشرطة ورحبوا بي في مجتمعهم بالكلمات ؛ “لا يمكننا إنقاذ الجميع ، لكن يمكننا الانتقام” ، وبما أن هذا اسم اللانهائي كعقاب ولا يمكن استخدامه بدون مقدمة خادم أو عبد المجيد ، فقد أصبحت الآن ظافر عبد المنتقم ، من جانبنا يجب أن يلعب يحدد هويتنا.

     فيما يلي شاهد التاريخ الذي قدمه ظافر منتقم بشأن الدفاع عن الأقصى وظهور الانتفاضة الثالثة:

     هذا الصباح أتأمل في الكلمات التي كتبت في يومياتي الليلة السابقة ، مستيقظًا ليس على مستنقع الدخان والموت بل على البخور وأغاني الحداد والمقاومة والشكر الغريب المبتهج لرحمة اللامتناهي وحنانه ؛ كل هذا يعزف اغاني حب ، ديو للمغنيات اللبنانية نانسي عجرم مع الشاب خالد وماريتا نادر مع ماريو كرم في الأزقة الملتوية أسفل نافذتي ، وأتعجب من صمود الروح الإنسانية.

    ليس لدي أي فكرة عن مكاني أو كيف وصلت إلى هنا ؛ وضع أكون مألوفًا جدًا به وسعداء بشكل سخيف أن أجد نفسي فيه ، لأنني سقطت في حفرة الأرانب مرة أخرى.

     بدأت في استكشاف عالمي الجديد. لا روائح القهوة ترحب بي. أشرقت الشمس وبدأ صيام رمضان. يتدفق الضوء من خلال التشبيك الخشبي المفتوح لنافذة مقوسة إلى غرفة من الحجر بها عدد قليل من المفروشات الجيدة ولكن جيدة جدًا ؛ بعض الوسائد القبلية القديمة ، خط مؤطر ، سجادة صلاة موجهة إلى مكة ، فانوس فضي رائع مثقوب ، البطانية التي كنت أنام عليها ؛ ربما لم أعد في مساكن الشيخ جراح المزرية.

     لقد أوصلني رفاقي إلى ملجأ وآمن ؛ لا بد أنني فقدت وعيي أثناء عملية إنقاذ العائلات المحاصرة بالهجوم الإسرائيلي على الأقصى والقتال المرتبك الذي تلا ذلك أثناء مطاردة النساء والأطفال الهاربين عبر متاهة الظلام التي هي القدس.

     فهي تحت المطرقة الحديدية للاستبداد وإرهاب الدولة ، كابوس الجدران ومعسكرات الاعتقال والأسلاك الشائكة والغطرسة الوحشية للسلطة ، رغم أن البعض منا قد يبحث عن مدينة النور التي استهلكتها وأخفتها وراء قناعها. مدينة الخرافات والأحلام التي أسميها القدس.

     لقد ترك شخص ما وعاءً فضيًا من الماء للوضوء قبل صلاة الفجر ، وأردية بيضاء رسمية رائعة لتحل محل الكوفية الممزقة ، جنبًا إلى جنب مع كوفية فلسطينية وبشت أو عباءة يرتديها كبار الشخصيات مثل الملوك أو الرجال المقدسين ، وهذا شرف لا أفعله. الجدارة ولكن لا يمكن أن ترفض ؛ من المحتمل أنه إرث عائلي عزيز.

     أثناء الاغتسال والتغيير ، قرأت حكاية أحداث الليل في العلامات السطحية على جسدي ؛ لقد تم إطلاق النار عليّ ، ورمي بالحراب ، والتفجير ، وإشعال النيران مرة أخرى ، وكل ذلك دون أي إصابات.

      ما مصير جيش الدفاع الإسرائيلي وإضرام النار في الناس؟ يبدو الأمر كما لو كان لديهم أمر دائم. إذا ركض ، أطلق عليه النار ، وإذا وقفت على الأرض ، أشعل النار فيه.

     تظهر أجزاء من الذكريات خلال هذا التقييم ؛ سطح بطني طويل مقطوع بالكاد من التملص من قوة الدفع ، والكدمات ، والجروح ، وقليل من الشظايا على طول الذراع والكتف من قنبلة يدوية أسقطت جدارًا من الجانب البعيد وقطعة مرت عبر الهاون المتهالك ، كدمة بحجم قبضة اليد من تشوه في الظهر ، وهي علامة على لقطة صدر في وضع جيد من بندقية أوقفتها سترة واقية من الرصاص. وفي وقت ما كنت مشتعلًا ، ولم يحترق شيء سوى الجانب الأيسر من ملابسي من كونه قريبًا جدًا من شيء تم إلقاء قنابل حارقة عليه ؛ على الرغم من أنني أتذكر فقط الرعد والضوء وميض الحرارة.

     ومع ذلك ، بدت ملابسي القديمة وكأنها تعرضت للوحشية من قبل الكلاب البرية ثم ألقيت في النار ، وكنت بلا شك في حالة أسوأ مما كنت عليه لمن كان يحملني إلى هنا. بدأت أتساءل عما إذا كان الجلباب الذي أرتديه الآن مخصصًا لدفني. لكن لا ، هذه ثلاثة أكفان بيضاء ، رأسها وقدمها مقيدتان ؛ لذلك اعتبرت على قيد الحياة.

     الآن أنا نظيف ومرتدي بشكل صحيح ، أقول صلاة الصبح ، ثم أقرأ ثلاث مرات طلب الاستغفار من القرآن الكريم ، سورة البقرة البقرة الآية 2: 286 ، وبالتالي اتباع ترجمة يوسف علي عليه السلام ؛ “يا إلهي! لا تضع على عاتقنا عبئًا أعظم مما لدينا قوة نتحمله. امسح خطايانا وامنحنا الغفران. ارحمنا. أنت حامينا. ساعدونا ضد أولئك الذين يقفون ضد الإيمان “.

     يبدو هذا انعكاسيًا على الرغم من أن هذا دعاء أو تلاوة شخصية وليس جزءًا من الصلوات الخمس اليومية ؛ لدي شعور بأنني غالبًا ما أحتاج إلى التسامح.

      في الهدوء الذي يلي ذلك ، أغوص في الدور الذي ألقيت فيه في اللعبة التي على وشك أن تتكشف.

     لدي العديد من الأسماء في العديد من اللغات ، لكن اسمي في هذا المكان والزمان هو ظافر منتقم. إنه اسم يستحضره ، لأنني استخدمته في أماكن أخرى قد أتذكرها.

     لقد أتيت إلى القدس لمدة خمسة أيام بين ذكرى سنوية للمأساة ، احتلال الآن في عامه الرابع والخمسين منذ احتلال القدس القديمة في 7 يونيو 1967 ، والذي احتفلت به دولة إسرائيل وفقًا للتقويم العبري بيوم القدس أمس. في 10 مايو بمهاجمة الأقصى وحي الشيخ جراح وص

المجتمع الفلسطيني ، وكارثة مستمرة الآن منذ ثلاثة وسبعين عامًا منذ يوم النكبة في 15 مايو 1948.

    شاركت الليلة الماضية في مظاهرة دفاعا عن المسجد الأقصى قوبلت بقبضة حديدية للاستبداد وإرهاب الدولة ، وهي احتجاج قد يتحول إلى ثورة. إذا استطاعت أمريكا والعالم أن يتوسطوا لإبقاء يد إسرائيل الخائفة والقوة ، فربما نتجنب هذا المصير ، لكنني قررت في الوقت نفسه تسجيل ذلك في مجلتي على أنه اليوم الثاني من الانتفاضة الثالثة.

      في هذه اللحظة علينا أن نختبر ، نحن البشر. ألم نعد نتحرك بالرحمة أو الرحمة ، هل فقدنا صفة إنسانيتنا في علم الأمراض الحديث لانفصالنا وأصبحنا أشياء قاسية ، مجرد نزعة غريزية ، أخ للثور؟ أليس لدينا آفاق تتجاوز المصلحة الذاتية ودوامة الشر الذي هو الجشع والسيطرة؟ هل لم نعد أصحاب أنفسنا ، بل صور تم التقاطها وتشويهها بالسلطة والتزييف والأكاذيب والأوهام التي بها سرق من استعبدنا أرواحنا؟

    لقد اخترت اسم منتقم في ساحة النضال هذه ، وهو اسم يعني المنتقم أو جالب القصاص ، لكن كفاحي ليس ضد أي شعب سوى نظام جائر يجرد من إنسانيته ويستعبد كلا من شعب إسرائيل وفلسطين.

     هذا هو أملي وإيماني بالإمكانيات اللامحدودة لأصبح إنسانًا ؛ لكن في الشوارع أسفل المقاتلين يتجمعون ، وأسمع عشرات اللغات في محادثاتهم ، أنواع مختلفة من العربية ولكن أيضًا الفارسية والتركية. في غضون أيام ، ستنضم إلينا ليس فقط الفصائل المحلية بما في ذلك حماس وفتح والجهاد الإسلامي الفلسطيني ، ولكن أيضًا حزب الله والحكومات في جميع أنحاء العالم. بمهاجمة الأقصى كشف نتنياهو وعصابته الوحش وراء القناع الإسرائيلي للفضيلة التي تجلت في إرثها التاريخي من الضحية ، وأثار القضية الوحيدة القادرة على توحيد العالم الإسلامي وزعزعة استقرار التحالف العربي الأمريكي الذي تضم دوله الأعضاء فقط. اعترف مؤخرا بشرعية دولة إسرائيل.

     هذه المدينة مليئة بالاستياء والثأر القديم ، وكان الهجوم على الأقصى محط تركيز. يانوس مثل ، القدس والقدس هي هوية مزدوجة تحبس النماذج الفضائية في نفس المساحات المادية في صراع عملاق للسيطرة ، والضحية والمسيء مرتبكون في جسد واحد غامض وغير مترابط مثل وحش فرانكشتاين المكون من أجزاء مرتبطة بشكل غير طبيعي ، وهو صراع من خلاله آمل أن يظهر شيء جديد.

     هل الحرب هي الحساب الوحيد الذي يمكن للبشرية أن تقدمه أم ستقبله؟ أدعو الله أن نكون أفضل من هذا ، وأن ينتصر الأمل والحب على الخوف والكراهية ، وسنختار أن نكون حاملين للحياة لا للموت.

     وهكذا أصلي عندما يجدني مضيفي ، ويبدأ الستار في الارتفاع على أدائنا. نحن على وشك تحدي نظام عالمي من العدمية اللاأخلاقية حيث القوة والسلطة فقط هي الحقيقية ولها معنى ، حيث الثروة والتسلسل الهرمي لامتياز النخبة والانتماء هي الوسيلة الوحيدة للتبادل والتحكم في السلطة ، والتي فيها الهويات المصرح بها لـ تم تسليح الآخر الإقصائي وانقسامات الإيمان والعرق والجنسية والروايات التاريخية عن الضحية ، في خدمة إخضاعنا وقمع تضامننا ووحدة الهدف في التحرير والنضال الثوري.

     لاستعادة إمكانياتنا للإنسان والمعنى والقيمة علينا أن نحرر أنفسنا من تاريخنا ، لأننا متشابكون في شباكه.

     بحث خيالي ، لكن ليس بلا أمل ؛ ليس إذا كان العالم يقف معنا.

      حان الوقت لجلب الفوضى. لإحداث الأذى وترك ألعاب إعادة التخيل والتحول تبدأ.

https://jacobinmag.com/2020/08/israel-protests-netanyahu

https://jacobinmag.com/2020/09/second-infifada-palestine-israel-occupation

https://jacobinmag.com/2018/12/marc-lamont-hill-united-nations-palestine-speech-transcript

https://jacobinmag.com/2020/09/israel-palestine-gaza-oslo-accords

https://jacobinmag.com/2020/07/israel-palestine-annexation-west-bank-trump-netanyahu

https://jacobinmag.com/2020/04/hundred-years-war-on-palestine-review-khalidi

https://jacobinmag.com/2020/08/israeli-defense-forces-palestine-netanyahu

https://jacobinmag.com/2019/04/netanyahu-election-annexation-west-bank-occupation

https://jacobinmag.com/2017/05/israel-palestine-democracy-apartheid-discrimination-settler-colonialism

     When Tel Aviv has not a stone left standing upon a stone, there will be balance for Rafah. This I mourn, for there are no good or bad guys here, no team to heckle or cheer; only a people divided by history and dehumanized by violence, in a holy land become an atrocity exhibit and museum of private holocausts.

     I for one do not want systems of balance, stability, order; for these things serve power and are words for death. I want a dynamically unstable system of life, growth, and rebirth, and the reimagination and transformation of systems of unequal power. Give me a humankind that seeks greater possibilities of becoming human, wherein we exalt one another, embrace and celebrate each other’s uniqueness, and act as guarantors of each other’s universal human rights, not a cult of death.

     Yes, the IDF assassinated someone whom I loved in Rafah, but there is nothing special in this. Merely a sacred wound I bear which opens me to the pain of others on both sides of this war.

     There are no Israelis, no Palestinians; only people like ourselves, and the choices they make about how to be human together.

June 21 2024 We Balance the Terror of Our Nothingness With the Joy of Total Freedom, the Flaws of Our Humanity With the Redemptive Power of Love, and the Brokenness of the World With Our Absurd Hope For the Limitless Possibilities of Becoming Human: On Sartre’s Birthday, And A Eulogy

September 28 2025 Anniversary of the First International and the Birth of the Labor Movement

     We celebrate today the birth of the labor movement and the anniversary of the September 28 1864 founding of the First International. The principles of labor organization which it forged have become foundational for any revolutionary struggle; class solidarity and international unity of action foremost among them.

     In this time of Nazi revivalism and nationalist identity politics which has recaptured Hungary, Italy, and Austria, with significant threats to democracy in Germany, France, The Netherlands (not the one with Beetlejuice), Belgium, Sweden, the Czech Republic, Spain, and Portugal and well as in America where democracy has fallen and been captured by Trump’s kleptocracy of theocratic patriarchal sexual terror and white supremacist terror, the idea of Internationalism and the solidarity of a United Humankind offers an alternative vision of humankind and civilization.

     For those of us with a multigenerational heritage of labor unionism, this is a special day of family remembrance of the great sacrifices with which our more fair and equal partnerships in society were won, and of re-evaluations of what remains to be achieved and forging strategies and plans of action for the struggles ahead.

     In this great project of the transformation of humankind and the systems and structures of our social, political, and economic relations, I invite you all to share; let us seize our power to shape ourselves and our own destiny from those who would enslave us.

     Writing in Socialist Worker, Elizabeth Schulte describes the purpose and significance of the First International; “Karl Marx made sure there was no confusion on where he thought socialists should want their story to go. When he drafted the rules for the International Workingman’s Association in 1864, he started with the statement: “That the emancipation of the working classes must be conquered by the working classes themselves.”

     No other class could do the work of liberating the working class, only the working class itself, Marx believed. This stood in sharp distinction to other ideas about achieving full human liberation and equality at the time.”

     “By studying the historical development of capitalism and its inner workings, Marx identified the potential revolutionary role of the working class in winning a socialist society.

     By the nature of workers’ role under capitalism — forced to sell their labor power in workplaces where they neither own nor control the means of production — workers came into conflict with the existing system and the bosses who own and control these workplaces.

     The Socialist Party leader Eugene Debs explained this relationship in a 1905 speech, focusing in on a famous member of the ruling class, industrialist Andrew Carnegie; “The capitalists own the tools they do not use, and the workers use the tools they do not own. The capitalists, who own the tools that the working class use, appropriate to themselves what the working class produce, and this accounts for the fact that a few capitalists become fabulously rich while the toiling millions remain in poverty, ignorance and dependence…

     Andrew Carnegie, who owns these tools, has absolutely nothing to do with the production of steel…His mills at Pittsburgh, Duquesne and Homestead, where these tools are located, are thronged with thousands of toolless wage workers, who work day and night, in winter’s cold and summer’s heat, who endure all the privations and make all the sacrifices of health and limb and life, producing thousands upon thousands of tons of steel, yet not having an interest, even the slightest, in the product.

     Carnegie, who owns the tools, appropriates the product, and the workers, in exchange for their labor power, receive a wage that serves to keep them in producing order; and the more industrious they are, and the more they produce, the worse off they are; for when they have produced more than Carnegie can get rid of in the markets, the tool houses are shut down and the workers are locked out in the cold.

     This is a beautiful arrangement for Mr. Carnegie; he does not want a change…and he is doing what he can to induce you to think that this ideal relation ought to be maintained forever.”

     As Debs pointed out, this conflict between those who work and those who rule isn’t always obvious. In fact, capitalism does its best to obscure it. But nonetheless, these contradictions are ever present.”

     “On any average day, workers feel powerless in their workplaces. It can seem like the last place where they could have their voices heard — and for good reason. In most workplaces, you check your opinions and your rights at the door in exchange for employment, and you are forced to bend to the rules laid out by your employer.

     It hardly feels like a place, as Marx argued, where workers have the most power. This is why — though there has been an increase in strikes, including the explosive teachers’ strikes of last spring and this fall — the workplace is still not the epicenter of most working-class struggle today.

     Plus, it’s important to point out that workers have been involved in struggles that aren’t at their workplaces — such as the Women’s Marches, the #MeToo movement, protests against the Trump administration’s family detention policies and more.

     These are important points of struggle where class issues are fought out. But it’s the potential power that workers have at work which Marx believed made them the prime force for change.

     In ways that are unlike any other group in society, workers are brought together by capitalism into a common situation and usually a common location — and by being subject to a common discipline, they have an interest in taking action collectively. This is why Marx said capitalism created its own “gravedigger.”

     Of course, many factors keep the underlying contradictions from turning into outright revolt. They often are specifically designed to keep workers’ eyes trained on one another rather than the bosses — such as competition for jobs or sexism and racism.

     But when workplace struggles do break out, not only are the contradictions laid bare, but so is workers’ potential power as workers. Strikes can play the role of demonstrating to workers their collective power to shut down a workplace, and even a city and more.

     The more the struggle is able to challenge the status quo, the more questions come up about who should be making the decisions about our everyday lives — inside and outside the workplace.

     During the Seattle General Strike of 1919, which was inspired by the Russian Revolution, workers demonstrated a high level of organization — both so they could have the strongest impact on the bosses and to make sure that their families received the food and milk they needed, and much more.

     The General Strike Committee became the real government of the city, as First World War veterans replaced the police, and radical literature was passed from hand to hand to provide the news that the bosses’ newspapers refused to report.

     In the process of this kind of struggle, one that grows beyond individual workplaces and begins to challenge the existing governments and social structures, history shows that workers see that they have to reorganize society if they are going to win against those who would like to keep the status quo.

     Marx learned this through the experience of the Paris Commune of 1871. He concluded that while many democratic changes could happen quite quickly, a complete transformation of society is necessary if workers’ power is going to prevail.”

       As Marcello Musto writes in Jacobin; “After its first meeting, on September 28, 1864, the International Workingmen’s Association (better known as the “First International”) quickly aroused passions all over Europe. It made class solidarity a shared ideal and inspired large numbers of women and men to struggle against exploitation. Thanks to its activity, workers were able to gain a clearer understanding of the mechanisms of the capitalist mode of production, to become more aware of their own strength, and to develop new, more advanced forms of struggle for their rights.

     In the beginning, the International was an organization containing various political traditions, the majority of which were reformist rather than revolutionary. Originally, the central driving force was British trade unionism, the leaders of which were mainly interested in economic questions. They fought to improve the workers’ conditions, but without calling capitalism into question. Hence, they conceived of the International primarily as an instrument to prevent the import of workers from abroad in the event of strikes.

     The second most important group were the mutualists, long dominant in France. In keeping with the theories of Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, they opposed any working-class involvement in politics and the strike as a weapon of struggle.

     Then there were the Communists who opposed the very system of capitalist production and argued for the necessity of overthrowing it. At its founding, the ranks of the International also included a number of workers inspired by utopian theories and exiles having vaguely democratic ideas and cross-class conception who considered the International as an instrument for the issuing of general appeals for the liberation of oppressed peoples.

     It was Karl Marx who gave a clear purpose to the International and who achieved a non-exclusionary, yet firmly working-class-based political program that won it mass support. Rejecting sectarianism, he worked to bring the International’s various strands together. Marx was the political soul of its General Council (the body that worked out a unifying synthesis of the various tendencies and issued guidelines for the organization as a whole). He drafted all its main resolutions and prepared almost all its congress reports.

     But the International was, of course, much more than Marx, brilliant a leader as he was. It was not, as has often been written, the “creation of Marx.” Rather it was a vast social and political movement for the emancipation of the working classes. The International was made possible first of all by the labor movement’s struggles in the 1860s. One of its basic rules — and the fundamental distinction from previous labor organizations — was that “the emancipation of the working classes must be conquered by the working classes themselves.”

     “The late 1860s and early 1870s were a period rife with social conflicts in Europe. Many workers who took part in protest actions decided to make contact with the International, whose reputation quickly spread widely. From 1866 on, strikes intensified in many countries and formed the core of a new and important wave of mobilizations. The International was essential in struggles that were won by workers in France, Belgium, and Switzerland. The scenario was the same in many of these conflicts: workers in other countries raised funds in support of the strikers and agreed not to accept work that would have turned them into industrial mercenaries. As a result, the bosses were forced to compromise on many of the strikers’ demands. These advances were supported by the diffusion of newspapers that either sympathized with the ideas of the International or were veritable organs of the General Council. Both contributed to the development of class consciousness and to the rapid circulation of news concerning the activity of the International.

     Across Europe, the association developed an efficient organizational structure and increased the number of its members (150,000 at the peak moment). For all the difficulties bound up with a diversity of nationalities, languages, and political cultures, the International managed to achieve unity and coordination across a wide range of organizations and spontaneous struggles. Its greatest merit was to demonstrate the crucial importance of class solidarity and international cooperation.

     The International was the locus of some of the most famous debates of the labor movement, such as that between communism and anarchy. The congresses of the International were also where, for the first time, a major transnational organization came to decisions about crucial issues, which had been discussed before its foundation, that subsequently became strategic points in the political programs of socialist movements across the world. Among these were the indispensable function of trade unions, the socialization of land and means of production, the importance of participating in elections and doing this through independent parties of the working class, women’s emancipation, and the conception of war as an inevitable product of the capitalist system.”

     “The 156th anniversary of the First International takes place in a very different context. An abyss separates the hopes of those times from the mistrust so characteristic of our own, the anti-systemic spirit and solidarity of the age of the International from the ideological subordination and individualism of a world reshaped by neoliberal competition and privatization.

     The world of labor has suffered an epochal defeat, and the Left is still in the midst of deep crisis. After decades of neoliberal policies, we’ve returned to an exploitative system, similar to that of the nineteenth century. Labor market “reforms” — a term now shed of its original progressive mean­ing — have introduced more and more “flexibility” with each passing year, creating deeper inequalities. Other major political and economic shifts have succeeded one another, after the collapse of the Soviet bloc. Among them, there have been the social changes generated by globaliza­tion, the ecological disasters produced by the present mode of production, the growing gulf between the wealthy exploitative few and the huge impoverished majority, one of the biggest economic crises of capitalism (the one erupted in 2008) in history, the blustery winds of war, racism and chauvinism, and, most recently, the COVID-19 pandemic.

     In a context such as this, class solidarity is all the more indispensable. It was Marx himself who emphasized that the confrontation between workers — including between local and migrant workers (who are moreover discriminated) — is an essential element of the domination of the ruling classes. New ways of organizing social conflict, political parties, and trade unions must certainly be invented, as we cannot reproduce schemes used 150 years ago. But the old lesson of the International that workers are defeated if they do not organize a common front of the exploited is still valid. Without that, our only horizon is a war between the poor and unbridled competition between individuals.

     The barbarism of today’s world order imposes upon the contemporary workers’ movement the urgent need to reorganize itself on the basis of two key characteristics of the International: the multiplicity of its structure and radicalism in objectives. The aims of the organization founded in London in 1864 are today more timely than ever. To rise to the challenges of the present, however, the new International cannot evade the twin requirements of pluralism and anticapitalism”.

     What did Marx intend when he handed humankind the Promethean Fire of liberation and revolutionary struggle that was the International?

      Here is my reply in a celebration of his birthday and of the Communist Manifesto in my post of  May 5 2022, Let us Dream a New Post-Capitalist Society: Karl Marx, on his birthday; Karl Marx transformed the history and evolution of humankind with a unique primary insight, simple to tell though it has many layers; we humans are self created beings, whose souls are artifacts of our civilization as historical and social constructions, interdependent with those of others, and if we change how we relate to each other as systems, narratives of identity, informing, motivating, and shaping forces, if we change the nature of our relationships, we also change the nature of humankind.

     Are we not made of the stories we tell about ourselves, to ourselves and to each other?

      Always there remains the struggle between the masks that others make for us, and those we make for ourselves.

     This is the first revolution in which we all must fight; the struggle for self-ownership. 

     “The bourgeoisie has left remaining no other nexus between man and man than naked self- interest, than callous ‘cash payment’. It has drowned the most heavenly ecstasies of religious fervour, of chivalrous enthusiasm, of philistine sentimentalism, in the icy water of egotistical calculation.” So wrote Marx and Engels in The Communist Manifesto, which remains the most impactful revisioning of human relations, being, meaning, and values in the history of civilization.

     Celebrate with me today the birthday of Karl Marx, who shaped from the Humanist tradition of the Enlightenment a toolkit for the realization of our potential humanity, of the limitless possibilities of becoming human, and of the liberation of humankind from systems of unequal power, from elite hegemonies of wealth, power, and privilege, from divisions and hierarchies of belonging and exclusionary otherness, from fascisms of blood, faith, and soil, and from the tyranny and carceral states of those who would enslave us.

    An enduring legacy of Karl Marx is his instrumentalization of Socratic method via Hegel as a tool of understanding unequal power as dialectical process, which can be generally applied in human sciences. This he demonstrated at length in the example of economics because he wanted to place it on a footing as science, much as Freud insisted on defining his new psychology as medical science to confer authority on it.

     Marx helped me process two defining moments of my life, traumas which were transformational both to my identity and to my understanding of the human condition.

     I first read his works as a teenager in the wake of a trip to Brazil the  summer between eighth grade and high school in 1974, training with a friend as a sabre fencer for the Pan American Games, during which I became aware of the horrific gulf between social classes and races in the wealth disparity between my aristocratic hosts and the vast Black slums beyond their walls. At fourteen I had read Plato and Nietzsche, but never seen poverty or racism, though the brutal tyranny of a city under siege by its police had been enacted before me years earlier in the spectacle of Bloody Thursday, May 15 1969, in Berkeley at People’s Park. This was the Defining Moment of my Awakening to the brokenness of the world and the lies and illusions of the gilded cage of my privilege.

    My response to this first reading, like my second and third part of a round of reading through the entire Great Books of the Western World series and the guidebooks by Mortimer J. Adler which collect his famous course at the University of Chicago, was that Marx had reimagined sin as the profit motive in a myth of Exile and Return, in an allegorical fable in which the new Adamic Man free of the profit motive would be restored to an Edenic state, being immediately captivated by the multitudes of Biblical symbolism which permeates Das Capital.

     My second reading of Marx was eight years later as a university student after a culinary tour of the Mediterranean ended with the 1982 Israeli invasion of Lebanon and Siege of Beirut, and my exposure to the brutalities of war and Imperialist-Colonialist conquest as a nation fell to ruins around me, a civilization shattered by Occupation and savage tyranny. This was the Defining Moment of my calling, in which I was sworn to the Oath of the Resistance by Jean Genet.

     During this second engagement with Marx, I laughed all the way through it; the first time I didn’t understand the literary references well enough to get the jokes. This time I saw his delightfully wicked Swiftian satire, and realized his true achievement; like Nicholaus of Cusa and Kurt Godel, and with prefigural echoes of Kafka and Samuel Beckett, Marx demonstrates the limits of reason in an Absurd universe. This interpretation owes something to my changing understanding of the world; after Beirut all was illusion and the lies of those who would dehumanize and enslave us.

     The third time I read Marx was over a decade after my baptism by fire in Beirut, and during a sabbatical from my Great Trek after the revolution in Nepal,  the resistance to the Indian conquest of Kashmir, and the Siege of Sarajevo, this time as a counselor seeking to better understand and help my clients. I remain as I was then, a scholar of the intersection of literature, psychology, history, and philosophy, whose primary field is the origin of human evil and its consequences as violence, tyranny, systems of oppression, and fascisms of blood, faith, and soil, though of course I have been greatly changed by my life experience, and my understanding of human being, meaning, and value has changed with me.

     My third reading of Marx coincides with my Defining Moment of understanding the Wagnerian ring of fear, power, and force from which evil, violence, and fascist tyranny arise, a Ring of Power which requires the renunciation of love to wield, and a pathology which can be healed by the redemptive power of love. Love is a madness, but like hope it is one which may grant us power, resilience, and the ability to adapt and survive. Here Marx helps us to understand the dynamics of unequal power as a system of oppression, a model which can be applied generally to issues including those of gender, race, and class.

     We often have difficulty envisioning a therapeutic model of finding balance and harmony in society rather than a coercive one; we may align ourselves on the side of freedom against tyranny and the force and control of the carceral state, but how can we abolish the police and throw open the gates of the prisons, abolish borders and the counterinsurgency model of policing which enforces white supremacist and patriarchal terror and elite hegemonies of wealth, power, and privilege, renounce the social use of force and abandon violence and war, cast down law and order from their thrones and forge a civilization of liberty and chaos in its place?

     Let me provide you with an example of what that might look like. On my return from adventures abroad, I took a job as a counselor in a program called Vision Quest run through a Native American tribe for court mandated youth, under the flags of the 9th and 10th Cavalry Buffalo Soldiers with the Army’s permission, and with gorgeous Union Army blues parade uniforms glittering with gold buttons in which one may feel like a prince. 

     As described to me, I would lead a group of boys through the program from a three month boot camp in Arizona near the historic Fort, then ride horses to Denver and Philadelphia, sleeping in a tipi as one of several such teams while they learned riding and parade horse drill, and finish the program on a tall ship in the Florida Keys teaching them to sail. They would earn their GED high school equivalency certificate, and graduates would have served their sentences and be provided with jobs and transitional supervised community based housing. There was no lockdown; just men learning to live together without violence.

     This sounded like a grand adventure, and for most of my life if you told me something was going to be an adventure, or as Obi-Wan says in the first Star Wars film “some damn fool idealistic crusade”, I’d likely do it. It’s the part they leave out of the pitch you need to worry about with this kind of quasi-official military outfit; what no one told me was that the clients were mainly violent felons with four or five year sentences that would eventually land them in adult prisons if they washed out, with issues like psychotic rage and often highly trained and indoctrinated gang soldiers, cult zealots, and fanatics of political terror as well. It turned out to be both much tougher and much more interesting than I thought it was going to be, and became my entry point into working as a counselor.

     They were some of the toughest and most unreachable boys in our nation, mainly Black and from the vast ghettos of New York, Chicago, and Philadelphia, with issues of abuse, abandonment, and addiction as consequences of structural and systemic inequalities and injustices, internalized oppression, and the legacy of slavery. And they were boys our nation had thrown away.

     This is what is wrong inherently with prisons as a cure for systemic inequalities; not only does prison cause more harm rather than heal it, we are throwing our children away.

      We had a three percent recidivism rate from that program; 97% of our clients had no further contact with the law after completion. This amazing success with teenagers our society had pronounced violent and unreformable criminals began with an awareness that perpetrators are also victims, and was won by providing a constructive way for them to earn honor and membership; so far like many other programs based on military models of identity construction.

     But it was the horses, wild mustangs given to each new client as their own personal mount who had to break and learn to ride them, that allowed them to forge the ability to bond with others, because you can trust a horse and it will never betray you. Teambuilding exercises did the rest, as in the military but without the purpose of violence.

     So it was, with The Communist Manifesto in my saddlebag and dreaming with serenity between a seventeen year old former gang enforcer and cult extremist of Louis Farrakhan’s racial separatist theocratic-fascist Nation of Islam who had been shot six times in six different gunfights with rival gangs and whose joy was to recite poetry from my copy of Rumi, and on the other side a fifteen year old former Jamaican Posse drug lord from Philadelphia who had two million dollars in cash in his pockets when his reign of terror, which included skinning alive people who owed him money and ordering his recruits to set a member of their families on fire as a loyalty test, ended in betrayal and arrest and who had discovered a genius for choreography in adapting reggae to parade drill, that I had a primary insight and realization of the nature of violence as a disease of power, of addiction to power and of unequal power, which operates multigenerationally as epigenetic trauma and historical legacies of slavery and racism, and often a result of secret power.

     Dehumanization is the end result of commodification; Jean Genet famously called the quest for wealth and power necrophilia  in his May Day speech to the Black Panthers for this reason. William S. Burroughs coined the term The Algebra of Need as a metaphor of Capitalism; Malcolm X references Burroughs’ metaphor of capitalism as possession when he speaks of heroin addiction as a white man who must be exorcised and cast out of one’s body. And with his invention of the philosophy of Existentialism, Jean Paul Sartre explored the implications of Marx’s primary insights as both Existentialist philosophy and a Humanist psychology of the consequences of unequal power relations and the mechanical failures of our civilization’s internal contradictions as alienation, falsification, commodification, internalized oppression, and the disfigurement and theft of the soul by hierarchies of elite wealth, power, and privilege and the hegemonic forces of those who would enslave us. 

     As a systemic and pervasive means of transforming persons into things, capitalism is an enabler which acts as a force multiplier for a host of evils, inequalities of racism and patriarchy, caste and class, theocracy and authorized national identities, and other divisions of exclusionary otherness, touching every aspect of our lives including our identity and social relations and confronting individuals with enormous and weaponized forces with which we must wrestle.

     And our best response to these threats is solidarity in refusal to submit or be isolated by our modern pathology of disconnectedness, divided by otherness and identitarian categories of exclusion and privilege and by fascisms of blood, faith, and soil, and subjugated by authorized identities and through abjection and despair by the weaponization of overwhelming and generalized fear in service to power; to unite as a band of brothers, sisters, and others and to shelter and protect our humanity and viability through and with others as a United Humankind.

      In our revolutionary struggle for our souls, for autonomy and self ownership, for liberty and our uniqueness as self created beings, and for the liberation of humankind, we are each other’s best resource of action.

     We are not designed to survive alone, and it can be difficult to get people in crisis to reach out for help, and for our institutions of caregiving to find where help is needed before things spiral downwards into violence, nor can violence be cured with violence or state repression. But this is the great mission of our humanity; to unite across the boundaries of our differences in revolutionary  struggle to become better.

     Let us defy the malign forces that would divide and enslave us and consume our souls. So I say with Karl Marx, the great visionary of liberty and the limitless possibilities of becoming human; People of the world, unite; we have nothing to lose but our chains.

The Emancipation of Labor: A History of the First International, Henryk Katz

             Unions and How To Build Them, a reading list

Fight Like Hell: The Untold History of American Labor, Kim Kelly

There Is Power in a Union: The Epic Story of Labor in America,

Philip Dray

A Collective Bargain: Unions, Organizing, and the Fight for Democracy,

Jane F. McAlevey

Secrets of a Successful Organizer, Alexandra Bradbury, Mark Brenner, Jane Slaughter

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/29926394-secrets-of-a-successful-organizer

Rules for Radicals: A Pragmatic Primer for Realistic Radicals, Saul D. Alinsky

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/102748.Rules_for_Radicals?ref=rae_3

Class Struggle Unionism, Joe Burns

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/60417739-class-struggle-unionism

                      Karl Marx, a reading list

The Communist Manifesto: A Graphic Novel, by Martin Rowson (Adaptor), Karl Marx, Friedrich Engel

The Communist Manifesto: with an introduction by Yanis Varoufakis

by Friedrich Engels, Karl Marx, David Aaronovitch (Introduction)

The Relevance of the Communist Manifesto, by Slavoj Žižek

Karl Marx, by Francis Wheen

A Companion To Marx’s Capital: The Complete Edition, by David Harvey

Karl Marx’s Theory of History: A Defence, by G.A. Cohen

Karl Marx and World Literature, by S.S. Prawer

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/9751747-karl-marx-and-world-literature

Why Marx Was Right, by Terry Eagleton

The Socialist Manifesto: The Case for Radical Politics in an Era of Extreme Inequality, by Bhaskar Sunkara

Capital in the Twenty-First Century, Thomas Piketty

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/18736925-capital-in-the-twenty-first-century

Capital and Ideology, Thomas Piketty

September 27 2025 A Martyr of Liberty and AntiColonial Struggle: In Memorium of Hassan Nasrallah, on the Anniversary of His Assassination

     In a war crime designed to sabotage the peace process and drive both Lebanon and her ally Iran onto a war footing, the loathsome Israeli settler regime of Netanyahu assassinated the co-founder and leader of Hezbollah in Lebanon, hero and now martyr of liberty and anti-colonial liberation struggle Hassan Nasrallah.

      Hezbollah has elements of theocratic-sectarian and ethnic identity politics with which no friend of democracy should be comfortable, especially in light of their relationship with Iran and arguably part of the Iranian Dominion which includes control of Lebanon, Iraq, Yemen, and until we liberated it last December Syria; but Hezbollah is also the most viable, stable, and possibly the longest running stateless and transnational anarchist collective and Autonomous Zone in modern history, which serves many of the social welfare, healthcare, education, and hunger relief functions of a government which in Lebanon has been hollowed out and rendered powerless due to the history of Israeli Occupation and the imposed conditions of struggle, and the revolutionary vanguard of a new kind of human society free from carceral states of force and control, and forged in glorious and heroic struggle against imperial conquest and dominion as the mirror of light to Israel’s darkness.

     All of this is largely due to the genius and vision of one man, Hassan Nasrallah, who stood with us in Beirut 1982, and it will survive him as an ideal beyond national identity, unbounded and shining with Solidarity so long as humankind remembers.

      My own idea of Living Autonomous Zones comprised not of free territories which must be barricaded and defended but of free people as a distributed commune invisible to police and other state forces of repression owes something to my relationship with Hassan Nasrallah and others who built Hezbollah as a stateless collective in a space where no viable and functioning state provided services for the people nor represented them; with noting to belong to, and only the Occupation by Israel and its collaborators as an imposed ground of struggle.

      Hezbollah and her leaders including Hassan Nasrallah and many others assassinated by Israel in the recent mass terror against the peoples of Palestine and Lebanon, like those of so many other Resistance networks of alliance, were born and forged with me in the 1982 invasion of Lebanon and the Siege of Beirut and in forty three years of liberation struggle since.

     Hasan Nasrallah in person had the gift of sympatico; he was kind, funny, and ferocious only when his people were threatened.

     Any who stand with me and place their lives in the balance with those of the powerless and the dispossessed, the silenced and the erased, all whom Frantz Fanon called The Wretched of the Earth are my brothers, and shall remain so til the end of time.

      Regardless of our differences, and bearing in mind the dangers of ideological fracture to liberation struggle and of fascist divisions of blood, faith, and soil and hierarchies of belonging and otherness which benefit only those who would enslave us, for our diversity is our strength.

      And diverse we are, all who love liberty both throughout the world and history and in Lebanon and Palestine, both living in the shadows of Israeli terror and imperial conquest and dominion purchased with American tax dollars; I am an American Revolutionary and a direct patrilineal descendent of a veteran of the revolution that founded our nation, committed to the principles of our founding documents and the idea of the state as embodied liberty and equality, as opposed to the state as embodied violence, derived from the philosophy of the Enlightenment, mainly from Locke, Montesquieu, Voltaire, and Rousseau, and committed also to the idea of The Rights of Man and to the mission of Napoleon to set all human beings free, everywhere. I am also profoundly influenced by the Soviet advisors and comrades who taught me the art of revolution, and my ideological home in Lebanon and Palestine was always with the Marxist secularists of the PFLP founded by George Habash and the democracy activists such as those with whom I opened the Gates of Damascus rather than the sectarian opponents Hamas or Hezbollah, which embody the historic Sunni-Shia division as well as represent influences of the Gulf States opposition to the ruling Arab-American Alliance and the Iranian Dominion respectively; but all this and much more stood with us against Israeli conquest and dominion in 1982 Beirut and remain so still, Ansar Allah in Yemen notable among them, and they ever were and always shall be my brothers.

     Hassan Nasrallah was among them, and a beloved comrade. Gone now as a we all must one day be, our lives like the dragons teeth sown in the earth by the Phoenician prince Cadmus, from which multitudes arise.  

      We will fight on for forty years more, or forty thousand.

     That tyrants and states of terror like Netanyahu and Israel can kill us is without meaning; that we can Resist and refuse to submit to our dehumanization and our enslavement means everything.

     And our victory is inevitable if we disobey and disbelieve authority, if we run amok and be ungovernable, if we make mischief for tyrants and those who would enslave us whenever opportunity arises, if, as the Oath of the Resistance goes, we surrender not and abandon not our fellows.

     For we are many, we are watching, and we are the future.

      As written on MSN’s website in an article entitled Thousands in Beirut mark first anniversary of Nasrallah’s killing; “A year after the assassination of Hezbollah’s long-time leader Hassan Nasrallah, thousands of the Iran-backed militia’s supporters flooded the streets of Beirut on Saturday to commemorate the anniversary.

     Men, women and children draped in black marched through the Lebanese capital toward Nasrallah’s burial site, carrying portraits of the slain leader and chanting pledges of loyalty to his successor, Naim Qassem.

     “We came here to tell everyone in Lebanon that Hezbollah is still strong,” said Fatima, whose husband was killed in war with Israel last September.

     At exactly 6 pm (1500 GMT), Hezbollah called on followers across Lebanon and abroad to stop their cars and observe a minute of silence in Nasrallah’s memory.

     Nasrallah was killed on September 27, 2024 in a massive Israeli airstrike on Beirut’s southern suburbs. Days later, his designated successor, Hashem Safieddine, was also assassinated in a similar attack.

     Among the crowd at Saturday’s rally were survivors of last year’s pager explosions, which injured scores of Hezbollah members. Israeli media has reported that Israel orchestrated the operation.

     Mohammed, who lost both his eyes, told dpa the group is still steadfast despite the setbacks.

     “We lost our eyes, but our allegiance remains with the resistance and its leadership,” he said.

     Tehran signals support

     The event drew regional dignitaries, including Ali Larijani, secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, underscoring Tehran’s continuing support for Hezbollah.

     Hezbollah’s opponents argue the movement has been weakened militarily and politically since Nasrallah’s killing, eroding its long-standing dominance over Lebanon’s fractured political landscape.

     “No one will ever disarm us — even in their dreams,” declared Nasrallah’s son, Jawad.

    Calls for unity

     Lebanese President Joseph Aoun marked the anniversary with a statement urging Lebanese unity under “one state, one army, and one sovereignty.”

     Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri, a Hezbollah ally, called civil peace “the best weapon against the ultimate evil, Israel.”

     Rallies also unfolded in towns across eastern and southern Lebanon, but the largest gathering remained in Beirut’s southern suburbs, the heartland of Hezbollah’s support.”

      What happens next? As written in Ahram, in an article entitled Hezbollah supporters honor Nasrallah, vow to resist Israeli pressure to disarm; “Thousands of Hezbollah supporters gathered Saturday at the tomb of the group’s former chief, Hassan Nasrallah, to mark the first anniversary of Israel’s assassination of their longtime leader, vowing to defy mounting US-backed pressure on the movement to hand over its weapons.

     Waving the group’s yellow banner as well as Lebanese, Palestinian and Iranian flags, Hezbollah supporters gathered at the leader’s mausoleum, near Beirut airport, while partisan and religious songs blared from loudspeakers, an AFP journalist reported.

     The charismatic leader, a major figure in the wider region, was killed in a massive Israeli air strike on the southern suburbs of Beirut on September 27, 2024.

     In October 2023, as Israel waged its war on Gaza, Hezbollah started a campain of solidairy against Israel. In September 2024, Israel escalated tensions into an all out war with the systematic targeting of Hezbollah leadership claiming the lives of the group’s leader Hassan Nasrallah and his chosen successor Hashem Safieddine among numerous others. 

     A US-brokered ceasefire between Hezbollah and Israel was announced in late November 2024 after more than a year of fighting.

     While both sides formally agreed to halt hostilities, Israel has continued its air raids across southern Lebanon and Beirut, killing at least 83 people, a third of them women and children, and maintaining its occupation of five sites in the south.

     Lebanon’s army says Israel has violated the deal over 4,500 times.

     In the face of heavy US pressure and fears of expanded Israeli strikes, the Lebanese government is seeking to disarm Hezbollah.

     Foreign Minister Youssef Raggi has said the army will complete the disarmament of the group in the south border area with Israel within three months.

     For many of the supporters gathered for the anniversary, that should not be allowed to happen.

     Wisam Hodroj, a 51-year-old working in Iraq, arrived early at the commemorations, where the new leader Naim Qassem was due to speak in the presence of Iranian security chief Ali Larijani.

     He said: “What has happened since the last war has only increased our enthusiasm and strength. Today, we have a new cause — we will not compromise on our weapons, and we will not hand them over.”

     Nearby, Ali Jaafar, a 21-year-old university student, told AFP: “Handing over the weapons is the dream of the enemies, the internal and external ones — but it will remain just a dream.”

     Hezbollah was the only major armed group allowed to keep its weapons following Lebanon’s civil war, because it was fighting continued Israeli occupation of the south.”

     Who was Hassam Nasrallah, and what does his assassination mean?

      As written by Jason Burke in The Guardian, in an article entitled Hassan Nasrallah: Hezbollah’s leader inspired adulation and bitter enmity – they will find him very hard to replace; “The killing of Hassan Nasrallah, the veteran leader of Hezbollah, on Friday marks a turning point in the conflict in the Middle East. Both Nasrallah and the organisation he led were hardened by successive decades of conflict within Lebanon, against Israel and, latterly, in Syria. Both were powerful political and social forces with very significant regional and local influence.

     Through more than three decades in charge of Hezbollah, Nasrallah built up a fervent personal following, steering the Shia Muslim movement through a number of transitions, balancing the demands of its military role with those of its expansive social welfare systems, building a political wing and negotiating the various crises that broke across the region. He earned adulation from supporters and bitter personal enmity from foes.

     Nasrallah was born in about 1960, the son of a Shia vegetable seller in a poor, mixed neighbourhood of Beirut. Despite their growing numbers, Lebanon’s Shia people had long been marginalised politically and economically. Nasrallah was inspired by the new Islamist ideologies spreading across the Middle East and by a moderate Iranian-born cleric, Musa al-Sadr, who sought to mobilise Lebanon’s Shia to win greater representation and more resources. He joined Amal, a Shia militia formed shortly before the brutal civil war that broke out in Lebanon in 1975.

         Four years later, the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini seized power following the Iranian revolution. This seismic event sent a wave of energy coursing through Shia communities everywhere in the Middle East. Nasrallah had became close to Khomeini when studying in a seminary in Najaf, the Iraqi holy city, where the radical cleric had been exiled. In about 1981, like many other young recruits, Nasrallah left Amal to seek more radical alternatives.

     When Israel sent an army into Lebanon in 1982 in response to cross-border attacks by Palestinian militants, a coalition of Islamist groups was formed with Iranian sponsorship and direction. Nasrallah was an enthusiastic early recruit. Under the name “Islamic Jihad”, this coalition went on to launch massive suicide bombings against the invaders and then against US and French peacekeepers, killing hundreds. Three years later, the coalition had been melded by Iran into an organisation called Hezbollah, the party of God. In 1985, Hezbollah published its main manifesto, lambasting the US, the USSR and calling for the destruction of Israel.

     A qualified Islamic scholar, effective public speaker and competent organiser, Nasrallah gained leadership experience during the long battle against Israeli troops and their local auxiliaries in the south of Lebanon. In 1992, he was chosen as the movement’s new secretary-general after Israel assassinated his predecessor, Abbas al-Musawi. Months later, Iran used Hezbollah networks and operatives to execute a massive bombing of the Israeli embassy in Argentina, killing 29.

     In 2000, Israel’s humiliating and chaotic withdrawal from Lebanon’s south brought Hezbollah and Nasrallah acclaim in the Middle East and broader Islamic world, despite historic sectarian animosity between majority Sunnis Muslims and the minority Shia. The victory came at personal cost to Nasrallah: a son was killed in a clash with Israeli troops.

     Six years later, Nasrallah led Hezbollah into a new confrontation with Israel, when he ordered an attack across the contested border that killed eight Israeli soldiers and captured two. This war was less conclusive, and Nasrallah turned his attention to a more political strategy, emphasising his movement’s Lebanese nationalist credentials and building a portfolio of businesses, many illicit. Any residual project of creating a Khomeini-style Islamic regime had long been shelved. Imposition of conservative codes in the swaths of Lebanon controlled by Hezbollah was, on the whole, lax.

     Reconciling this new role with the demands of Iran, Hezbollah’s principal sponsor, was a complex task and Nasrallah only reluctantly agreed in 2013 to send thousands of his fighters into Syria at Tehran’s behest to bolster the regime of Bashar al-Assad. This helped tip the balance in the brutal civil war in the neighbouring country, but hurt Hezbollah at home. So too did Nasrallah’s fierce resistance to political reform in Lebanon.

     There is no evidence that Nasrallah knew what Hamas had planned for 7 October, but he reacted to the bloody raids on Israel with what must have seemed fine judgment. Hezbollah did not launch a major offensive but began firing some of its vast stocks of rockets and missiles into Israel in a bid to maintain its “resistance” credentials. Nasrallah probably believed the conflict would be short and he could avoid further escalation. On both counts, he was fatally wrong.

     The consequences of the killing of Nasrallah are hard to gauge. Pessimists will predict massive escalation, as Iran seeks to reassert its power and avenge the death of a leader who was one of its most important overseas assets. Optimists may argue that it has effectively removed a key player from the conflict, deterring Tehran and opening a way to some kind of diminution of, if not an end to, hostilities.

     Finding any replacement will be very difficult for Hezbollah and Iran. Even without the elimination of key lieutenants by Israel over recent months, there is no one in the movement who has anywhere near Nasrallah’s regional stature, experience or influence. It is now clear that Israel is capable of gathering critical, timely intelligence from the very heart of Hezbollah, and of acting on it effectively. The life expectancy of any new secretary-general is likely to be extremely short.”

     As written by Peter Beaumont in The Guardian, in an article entitled Hassan Nasrallah: the man who has led Hezbollah to the brink of war with Israel; “Twenty-four years ago, on 26 May 2000, Hezbollah’s general secretary, Hassan Nasrallah, arrived in the small Lebanese town of Bint Jbeil a few kilometres from the Israeli border.

     The day before, Israel had withdrawn its forces from southern Lebanon after a years-long occupation in which it was harried by Hezbollah and other groups. Thousands of supporters gathered there under Hezbollah’s yellow banners.

     The cleric, then 39 and wearing his familiar black turban and a brown robe, gave one of the most famous speeches of his career.

     Addressing the Arab world and the “oppressed people of Palestine”, Nasrallah claimed that Israel was “weak as spider’s web” despite its nuclear weapons. The themes in his speech that day would come to define Nasrallah’s worldview in the decades that followed, fusing notions of Shia theology and liberation rhetoric, and founded on the belief that authentic resistance can overcome a far superior military force.

    Since then Hezbollah has been transformed, both as a fighting force and in its relationship with the fragile Lebanese state, becoming a political and social powerhouse. But while Nasrallah’s rhetoric may have remained unchanged, his appreciation of the fragility of power, even for the world’s most powerfully armed non-state actor, has mutated and he has led Hezbollah to the brink of its potentially most serious conflict. It has sent rockets and drones into Israel, as Israel hits Lebanon and Hezbollah targets with airstrikes.

     When Nasrallah makes a speech these days, it is not before the huge crowds that once greeted him, arriving in buses from Lebanon’s Shia heartlands. At carefully choreographed events, including memorial services for fallen Hezbollah commanders, Nasrallah appears not in person, but on a television screen. At one such event earlier this year, Hezbollah MPs in attendance explained to the Guardian, as they declined to comment, that Nasrallah’s words were not to be interpreted by them. For everyone else, however, Nasrallah’s long and often repetitive speeches have become the subject of endless exegesis in the past eight months of war in the Middle East.

     While often painted as Iranian proxies, Nasrallah and Hezbollah are more than that. They are important regional players in their own right, despite the deep connection to Tehran.

     And as Israel and Hezbollah have drawn ever closer to all-out conflict, two questions have collided: what does Nasrallah want, and how far is he in control of any outcome?

     Nasrallah’s policy in the first weeks of the cross-border clashes that began on 8 October, a day after Hamas’s surprise attack on southern Israel, was ostensibly designed to relieve pressure on the Palestinian armed group in Gaza, a strategy that appears to have been more significant on the diplomatic than on the military front.

     By explicitly making any demand to stop firing on Israel’s north contingent on an end to Israeli hostilities in Gaza, Nasrallah has woven in outstanding territorial issues on the Lebanese border including over the Israeli-occupied Shebaa farms, which Syria also claims, while framing the fighting in terms of a wider rejection of US-led policies in the Middle East.

     The reality on the ground has created a far more complicated picture.

     In casting aside the status quo between Israel and Hezbollah that held since the end of the month-long second Lebanon war in 2006 that brought huge destruction to Lebanon, Nasrallah has rolled a dice. It belies the deliberate ambiguity of his statements, which hover between threats to Israeli cities and the insistence that his group does not want all-out war.

     “To some extent, what Hezbollah has been doing,” Heiko Wimmen, the director of the International Crisis Group’s Iraq, Syria, Lebanon project, told the New Arab in the first weeks of the war, “is to underline that they are ready to pay a price.

     “But are they ready to pay the ultimate price? Nobody knows that because this is part of the constructive ambiguity mentioned by Nasrallah.”

     In the subsequent months the escalating dynamics of the war have stretched the considerations that saw Nasrallah enter the conflict, to breaking point. A “managed conflict” has become increasingly unmanageable as Israel has targeted senior Hezbollah officials and Hezbollah has fired on Israeli military and civilian targets, and more recently threatened Haifa and other cities.

     “It’s important to understand Hezbollah’s worldview,” said Sanam Vakil, the director of the Middle East and north Africa programme at Chatham House. “What many actors like this are good at is understanding adversaries through quiet repeated and deliberate observation … strategic patience is part of their outlook: knowing that adversaries have different pressures in democratic societies.”

     Nasrallah has cited US opinion polling on Israel’s war in Gaza as evidence of the success of his broader strategy. “I think it is also key to understand that while Nasrallah’s leadership is very personal, the effectiveness of the organisation is that it’s not run as a personal fiefdom,” Vakil said, suggesting it would survive his removal.

     She also expressed doubt that assumptions prior to the current conflict about Nasrallah and Hezbollah’s appetite for conflict held true as the war has reduced the room for both sides to exit an escalation. “We are making a lot of guesses and assumptions, but we’re not accessing the inner network to understand the decision-making processes.”

     Nasrallah’s ideological origins

     What is clearer is how Nasrallah’s worldview has been shaped by his personal history. A teenager amid the sectarian violence of the Lebanese civil war, he briefly joined the Shia Amal militia at 15 before going to study at a seminary in Najaf, Iraq from where he was expelled with other Lebanese students by Saddam Hussein in 1978.

     Under the influence of his mentor, the prominent cleric and co-founder of Hezbollah Abbas al-Musawi, who he first met in Iraq, he joined Hezbollah in 1982 after Israel’s invasion of Lebanon, when the group split away from Amal. When Israel assassinated Musawi in 1992, he replaced him as Hezbollah’s general secretary.

     In an interview in 2006 with Robin Wright of the Washington Post, Nasrallah described how his beliefs had been forged as he and his peers watched “what happened in Palestine, in the West Bank, in the Gaza Strip, in the Golan, in Sinai”, teaching them that “we cannot rely on the Arab League states, nor on the United Nations … The only way that we have is to take up arms and fight the occupation forces.”

     What is often unspoken is that Nasrallah’s ideological and much reiterated attachment to “resistance” requires conflict with Israel – or the threat of it – to give it meaning and to justify Hezbollah’s existence and the power it has accumulated in Lebanon. Conventional wisdom has suggested that Nasrallah would be constrained by Lebanon’s dire economic circumstances to resist behaviour that could invite full-scale war and undermine its own support. But in recent months Hezbollah – like Israel – has shifted its understanding of where that threshold is.

     In an essay for the Atlantic Council earlier this month, David Daoud and Ahmad Sharawi described the dynamic. “The group believes this threshold is not fixed. Instead, it rises as Israeli operations in Gaza deepen, which prompts Hezbollah to act while Israel’s attention and resources are concentrated elsewhere,” they wrote. “But when these Israeli operations create growing US dissatisfaction which uniquely restrains Israel … Hezbollah feels it has more freedom of action, and thus increases the depth and lethality of its attacks.”

     All of which suggests that space on either side to reverse out of the crisis is diminishing.”

     What does this mean? As written by Patrick Wintour in The Guardian, in an article entitled The killing of Hassan Nasrallah leaves Iran with a fateful choice and the US humiliated; “When Antony Blinken, the US secretary of state, told reporters in New York on Friday that the coming days will determine the future path of the Middle East, he could not have been more prescient, even if at the time he was hoping that Hezbollah and Israel could be persuaded to step back from the brink.

     Now, with the Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah confirmed killed, the region, after 11 months, has finally stepped over the brink and into a place it has truly never been before.

     All eyes will turn to the response by Tehran. It faces the fateful choice it has always sought to avoid and one its new reformist leadership in particular did not wish to make.

     If it simply angrily condemns Israel for the destruction of the centrepiece of the axis of resistance that it has laboriously built up over so many years, or calls on others to take unspecified action, Iran’s credibility is in jeopardy.

     But pragmatism may lead Iran to advise Hezbollah to absorb the losses and accept a ceasefire that does not also bring about a ceasefire in Gaza, Hezbollah’s stated objective.

     If on the other hand Iran instead launches a direct military reprisal against Israel, it has to be meaningful. It knows it will be going into battle against a military that has proved the deadly value of its vastly superior technological and intelligence capabilities. Israel’s intelligence has clearly penetrated deep inside Hezbollah and may have done the same in Tehran.

     For the new president, Masoud Pezeshkian, elected on a ticket of lifting economic sanctions partly by building better relations with the west, Nasrallah’s death could not come at a worse time.

     His foreign minister, Sayeed Abbas Araghchi, had just spent a full week in New York on the sidelines of the UN general assembly, meeting European politicians such as Germany’s foreign minister, Annalena Baerbock and the British foreign secretary, David Lammy, in an attempt to persuade them to reopen talks to restore the nuclear deal that was sealed in 2015 – and Donald Trump tore up in 2018.

     Rafael Grossi, the head of the UN nuclear inspectorate, had been impressed by what he heard from the meetings, saying: “I think this is the moment when it is possible to do something about the nuclear issue. The advantage of Mr Araghchi is that he knows everything about this process so he allows it to move faster”. Nasrallah’s killing makes it that much harder for the reformists to persuade the Iranian military that an olive branch still makes any sense.

    Pezeshkian had already been complaining that he had received little in return for listening to western-inspired pleas not to seek immediate revenge for the killing of Ismail Haniyeh, the Hamas leader assassinated by Israel in Tehran.

     Pezeshkian said he had been promised that a Gaza ceasefire deal that would see the release of hostages and Palestinian political prisoners was only a week or two away. The deal never materialised because, in Iran’s eyes, the US refused to put the pressure required on Benjamin Netanyahu to accept the ceasefire terms.

     Let down once, Pezeshkian is hardly inclined to believe US vows that it had no prior knowledge of the plan to kill Nasrallah – and, anyway, Netanyahu might have sanctioned his death from a hotel bedroom in New York, but it was US-supplied bombs that exploded in Beirut.

      In what is likely to be a holding statement, Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, called on Muslims on Saturday “to stand by the people of Lebanon and the proud Hezbollah with whatever means they have and assist them in confronting the … wicked regime [of Israel]”.

     For Washington, this is a diplomatic humiliation and a display of its inability, or refusal, to control its troublesome ally.

     Netanyahu hopes to have played American diplomats for fools in New York. The US state department insists it had a clear understanding on the basis of conversations with Ron Dermer, Israel’s strategic affairs minister, and Netanyahu that Israel would accept a 21-day ceasefire, and yet as soon as the plan was announced, Netanyahu reneged on the deal.

     In some ways, it is the culmination of nearly 12 months of an American strategy that now lies in ruins. Time after time since the 7 October attacks by Hamas, the US has asked Israel to adopt a different strategy over the delivery of food into Gaza, protection zones, a ground offensive in Rafah, the terms of a ceasefire and, above all, over avoiding conflict escalation.

     Each time, Netanyahu acknowledged the US position, sidestepped a clear response and then ultimately ignored Washington. Each time, the US – vexed and frustrated – has expressed misgivings about Netanyahu’s strategy, but each time it has continued to pass the ammunition.

     With a presidential election near and Netanyahu enjoying a surge in domestic popularity – as well as few Arab states shedding tears about Nasrallah’s demise – the US appears to have few options available. Netanyahu insists he is winning and on course for total victory.

     At the moment, unless Iran proves to be more decisive than it has been so far, it is Netanyahu the great survivor who is in the driving seat.”

     Of my origins in the Siege of Beirut I have written in my post of In my post of July 31 2020, A Useful Past: What is Antifa? I wrote;  I offer you the Oath of the Resistance as it was given to me in Beirut in 1982 by Jean Genet; here is the story of how it happened, and of my true origin.

     During the summer before my senior year of university in San Francisco, I had set out on a culinary Grand Tour of the Mediterranean, learning to cook the food I loved, and was in Beirut when Israel invaded Lebanon and trapped me in a city under siege. Feral bands of soldiers were roaming the streets like packs of savage dogs, committing atrocities; one such unit of the Israeli Defense Forces set some children on fire, laughing and making bets on how far they could run screaming before they fell into pools of blackened ruin and their screams became silent. I found myself fighting them; others joined me, and more joined us as we joined those fighting already. From that day forward I was part of the defense of Beirut against the siege.

     A fabulous café that had the best strawberry crepes in the world lay on the far side of a sniper alley, which my friends and I made an extreme sport of dashing across to reach breakfast while the occasional bullet impacted the wall behind us. One day we arrived in our usual high spirits when an elegant gentleman sat at my table, and speaking in French began a conversation with, “I’m told you do this every day, race against death for breakfast.”

     To which I replied, “Moments stolen from death belong to us, and set us free. It’s a poor man who has no pleasures worth dying for.”

    He smiled and said, “I agree”, and so began our conversations at breakfast in the last days before his capture, unforgettable days for this is where he set me on my life’s path of struggle for liberty against tyranny and autocracies of state force and control, for equality against racist violence and injustice, and against the fascism which combines both state tyranny and racist terror.

     He introduced himself as a former Legionnaire by the name of Jean, was mischievous, wise, immensely learned in classical scholarship and possibly had once been educated as a priest, and filled with wild stories about the luminaries of modern European culture. I was stunned when I discovered days later that my strange new friend was one of the greatest literary figures of the century. I had quoted The Thief’s Journal in refutation of something he said, which he found hilarious, while we were discussing Maurice Blanchot’s interpretation of Nietzsche’s Thus Spake Zarathustra as compared to that of Jung, a conversation which remained unfinished as he couldn’t stop laughing. Eventually he sputtered, “I myself am Jean Genet.” To me he remains a Trickster figure and part of my historical identity and personal mythology.

     There came a day when the barricades were overrun and our neighborhood along with it, one of our last days together. With the streets suddenly filled with Israeli soldiers running amok in a sack of murder, arson, and other vileness of terror and inhumanity, our building set on fire by soldiers who were calling for people to come out and surrender and were stealing the children of those who did to use as hostages and human shields, and the discovery of our only weapon being the bottle of champagne we had just finished with our strawberry crepes, I asked my breakfast companion if he had any ideas. To this he replied with an apologetic shrug and another question, “Fix bayonets?”

     We laughed, and he elaborated; “When all hope is lost, we are free to do impossible things, glorious things.” This advice I find necessary to recall from time to time, and which I recommend to you all.

     Then he asked, “Will you surrender?’

     To which I replied, “No.”

    “Nor I,” he said, standing. “As I share with you now, pass to others at need; this is an oath I devised in 1940 from the one I took as a Legionnaire, for the resistance to the Nazi occupation. It may be the finest thing I ever stole.”

     And so I offer to all of you the Oath of the Resistance as it was given to me by the great Jean Genet in a burning house, in a lost cause, in a time of force and darkness, in a last stand and an act of defiance beyond hope of victory or survival; “We swear our loyalty to each other, who answer tyranny with Liberty and fascism with Equality. We shall resist and yield not, and abandon not our fellows.”

     To fascism and the idea that some of us are better than others by condition of our birth there can be but one reply; Never Again.

     We escaped capture that day because we were led through the checkpoints of the encirclement by an unlikely ally, a figure who materialized out of the background at the far end of the alley and walked over to us grinning. This was the sniper whom my friends and I had been playing our games with for two weeks, who had been utterly invisible and had outwitted every attempt to track, trap, ambush, or identify him, and who had in fact besieged the city from within. 

     He held out his hand to me and I shook it as he said, “Well played, sir. I’ve tried to kill you every day for fourteen days now, but the Israelis being inside the city changes everything. We have a common enemy, but they don’t know that, so I’m in a position to help you though I can’t fight them alone. Maybe we could help each other. Want a partner?”

     So began a great adventure and friendship, which I share with you now in the context of the nature of antifascist resistance because it illustrates something which can never be forgotten by anyone who does this kind of work; human beings are not monsters, are deserving of human doubt, and are never beyond redemption.

     The struggle between good and evil in the human heart often pivots and balances on the differences between the purpose of the use of force; to punish transgression when inflicted by authority as an act of subjugation and repression against the powerless, or to seize power and to protect the powerless as a duty of care.

     Be very sure you know which cause your actions serve.

     Finally, I cannot now imagine Beirut under the Israeli rain of death and terror without remembering the cataclysm of the port explosion years ago. As I wrote in my post of August 4 2024, Madness Death Illumination Transcendence: A Song of Beirut;  O my brothers and sisters, our universe is not always rational or meaningful from our perspective; it is chaotic, absurd, and often hostile. We need meaning and value, but all we have is the meaning and value which we create and impose on our nothingness. The Infinite mocks us, but also beckons and challenges us to become better.

     As I wrote on this day five years ago in my post of August 4 2020; A horror beyond imagining has transpired in Beirut, which lies in ruins. Civilization dispersed throughout the Mediterranean from here thousands of years ago, uniting Europe, Asia, and Africa in a community of humankind which resonates through our consciousness today.

    We seek meaning in the catastrophes and life disruptive events which flesh is heir to, yet as in the disaster in Beirut such causes are often beyond our understanding.

     Herein I refer now to Sura 18 of the Holy Quran, called The Cave, verses 60-82, an allegory wherein Khidr, the Islamic Trickster figure who is an immortal and is symbolized as green as an embodiment of the Garden of Paradise, who acts as a guide of the soul through the puzzles of the labyrinth of life which leads toward it, and who speaks to us through dreams, visions, and signs.

     I consider it a narrative form of Godel’s Theorem; a proof of the necessity of faith and of the existence of the Infinite, of the limits of human knowledge and the Absurdity of the human condition. Such an interpretation aligns with that of   the great scholar and translator Abdullah Yusuf Ali.

     As with the foundational thought experiment of one of Plato’s contemporaries, the Spear of Archytas, which defines the horizon of the known as it is thrown and marks a boundary in landing, which we repeat endlessly in scientific revolutions, the unknown remains as vast as before, conserving ignorance. This is the first principle of epistemology; the Conservation of Ignorance.

     The canonical story recapitulates themes of the Sacrifice of Ibrahim which I would say forms the basis of Islamic faith, and in the streets of Beirut long ago I saw it unfold once again.

    In this story the Green Man instructs Moses by doing three things which are criminal and nonsensical, things which can be understood only through the foreknowledge of prophecy which is not ours. As with justice, foresight does not belong to man, for the universe is nondeterministic, limitless, and our possible futures are always in play.

    The relevant passage is this;  فَأَرَدْنَا أَن يُبْدِلَهُمَا رَبُّهُمَا خَيْرًا مِّنْهُ زَكَاةً وَأَقْرَبَ رُحْمًا, or “So we intended that their Lord should substitute for them a better son than him in purity and nearer to mercy,” a classic changeling substitution. It also represents a point of bifurcation on which possible futures turn.

     I have hope for the future of humankind because of what I witnessed when this primary story was played out before me forty years ago, and because of it I have never despaired.

     Such a gate stands or once stood in Beirut, like Rashomon Gate or a gate to the Infinite and to limitless possibilities of human becoming. It may now be dust and memories, or like Schrodinger’s Cat both exist and not exist at once; this I cannot answer for you.

      But I can speak as the witness of history that something remarkable happened there in its shadow, which like Khidr exchanging the young man for another to prevent a greater evil from occurring in the future, a time travel paradox if ever there was one, struck me with the force of revelation.

     It was an insignificant thing in the scope of the Siege of Beirut, one atrocity among many which was averted by the innate goodness of a single man whose name remains unknown, a tragic hero whom I will never forget, an unwilling conscript in the service of his government like so many others, who said no to authority and to the seduction of evil. The existence of humankind pivots on the balance of such individuals, and they are very few.

    This Israeli soldier refused to commit violations and depravities upon the person of a Palestinian girl, about twelve years old, who had been captured for this purpose by the lieutenant of his platoon, a common Israel Defense Forces loyalty test and initiation. He blushed at the first demand of his officer to the tauntings of his fellows, there in the street before the Gate of Decision we must all face, then became angry in refusal when he realized it was not a joke, that the Occupation was about terror and plunder and not as he had been told. His commanding officer murdered him where he stood with a single shot to the head as the girl escaped.

     I have returned to this spot throughout my life to touch the stones stained with his blood, for I am reminded that we are not beyond redemption, and that so long as we resist unjust authority we are free, and there is hope.

      A Map of My Beirut, what remains of it and the ghosts of what it was

https://maps.app.goo.gl/DK5WSVe3V47jXogW7

Here a great nothingness has swallowed the voices of the past

Yet they live within us, songs of ourselves and the limitless possibilities of becoming human

 How can we answer the terror of our nothingness

The flaws of our humanity

And the brokenness of the world?

Here among the ruins of a lost grandeur

Fallen empires and the ghosts and legacies of

Beautiful and terrible histories

I wail in grief, I roar defiance, I demand justice

But my words are devoured by silences

I swear vengeance for a lost history and a ruined city

Without an enemy to bring a reckoning to

For this hammer blow of fate was the act of no saboteur

But only a consequence of our common greed and responsibility shifting

And the labyrinthine bureaucracy that misfiled records

Of a derelict ship full of fertilizer quietly degrading in harbor for years

How many such forgotten existential threats

Now lie waiting to seize and shake us?

Here was once a gate to the Infinite and a shrine of the Impossible

In bloodstains which offered hope and redemption

Where now not a stone stands upon a stone

And the light of Beirut become

Vast and fathomless chasms of darkness

Arabic

خارطة بيروت بلدي وما تبقى منها وأشباح ما كانت عليه

هنا ابتلع العدم العظيم أصوات الماضي

ومع ذلك ، فهم يعيشون في داخلنا ، أغاني من أنفسنا وإمكانيات لا حدود لها في أن نصبح بشرًا

  كيف يمكننا الرد على رعب العدم لدينا

عيوب إنسانيتنا

وانكسار الدنيا؟

هنا بين أنقاض العظمة المفقودة الإمبراطوريات الساقطة وأشباح وموروثات

تواريخ جميلة ورهيبة

أبوح حزنًا ، وأصرخ متحديًا ، وأطالب بالعدالة

لكن الصمت يلتهم كلامي

أقسم بالانتقام لتاريخ ضائع ومدينة مدمرة

بدون عدو لجلب الحساب إليه

لأن ضربة القدر هذه كانت فعلاً غير مخرب

ولكن فقط نتيجة لتغير جشعنا المشترك ومسؤوليتنا

والبيروقراطية المتاهة التي أخطأت في ضبط السجلات

من سفينة مهجورة مليئة بالأسمدة تتحلل بهدوء في الميناء لسنوات

كم عدد هذه التهديدات الوجودية المنسية

الآن تكمن في انتظار الاستيلاء علينا وهزنا؟

هنا كانت ذات مرة بوابة إلى اللانهائي وضريح المستحيل

في بقع الدماء التي أعطت الأمل والفداء

حيث لا يوجد الآن حجر يقف على حجر

ويصبح نور بيروت

منوعات الظلام الشاسعة التي لا يسبر غورها

Voice of Hezbollah: The Statements of Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, Hassan Nasrallah, Nicholas Blanford (Introduction)

Warriors of God: Inside Hezbollah’s Thirty-Year Struggle Against Israel, Nicholas Blanford

 The Great War for Civilisation: The Conquest of the Middle East,

Robert Fisk

Night of Power: The Betrayal of the Middle East, Robert Fisk

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/97950967-night-of-power

Thousands in Beirut mark first anniversary of Nasrallah’s killing

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/thousands-in-beirut-mark-first-anniversary-of-nasrallahs-killing/ar-AA1Nqg77?ocid=BingNewsSerp

Hezbollah supporters honor Nasrallah, vow to resist Israeli pressure to disarm

https://english.ahram.org.eg/NewsContent/2/8/553899/World/Region/Hezbollah-supporters-honor-Nasrallah,-vow-to-resis.aspx

The killing of Hassan Nasrallah leaves Iran with a fateful choice and the US humiliated

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/sep/28/hassan-nasrallah-hezbollah-iran-lebanon-israel-us-analysis

Hassan Nasrallah: Hezbollah’s leader inspired adulation and bitter enmity – they will find him very hard to replace

Hassan Nasrallah: the man who has led Hezbollah to the brink of war with Israel

Who was Hassan Nasrallah, the longtime leader of Hezbollah assassinated by Israel?

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/who-was-hassan-nasrallah-the-longtime-leader-of-hezbollah-assassinated-by-israel

Iran vows vengeance after assassination of Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/sep/28/israel-says-it-has-killed-hezbollah-leader-hassan-nasrallah

Khidr in Sufi Poetry: A Selection, by Paul Smith

Where the Two Seas Meet: Al-Khidr and Moses—The Qur’anic Story of al-Khidr and Moses in Sufi Commentaries as a Model for Spiritual Guidance, by Hugh Talat Halman

            Lebanon, a reading list

Beirut, Samir Kassir, Robert Fisk (Foreword

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/7966167-beirut?ref=nav_sb_ss_1_12

Pity the Nation: The Abduction of Lebanon, Robert Fisk

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/99826.Pity_the_Nation

Lebanon: A History, 600 – 2011, William W. Harris

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/13687123-lebanon?ref=nav_sb_ss_1_50

Lebanon: A Country in Fragments, Andrew Arsan

Memory for Forgetfulness: August Beirut 1982, Mahmoud Darwish

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/142583.Memory_for_Forgetfulness?ref=n

 Concerto al-Quds, Adonis, Khaled Mattawa (Translation)

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/34746502-concerto-al-quds?ref=nav_sb_ss_1_21

                           Lebanese and Middle Eastern Cuisine, a reading list

(if you wonder why I put Lebanon on my summer culinary tour in 1982 along with France, Italy, Spain, Morocco, and Greece)

Saha: A Chef’s Journey Through Lebanon and Syria, Greg Malouf, Lucy Malouf, Anthony Bourdain (Foreword)

New Feast: Modern Middle Eastern Vegetarian, Greg Malouf, Lucy Malouf

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/21544616-new-feast

Artichoke to Za’atar: Modern Middle Eastern Food, Greg Malouf, Lucy Malouf

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2342942.Artichoke_to_Za_atar

SUQAR: Desserts & Sweets from the Modern Middle East, Greg Malouf, Lucy Malouf

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/39089180-suqar

The Arab Table: Recipes and Culinary Traditions, May Bsisu

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/795383.The_Arab_Table?ref=nav_sb_ss_1_45

Spice: Flavors of the Eastern Mediterranean, Ana Sortun

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/868129.Spice?ref=nav_sb_ss_1_13

The Lebanese Cookbook, Salma Hage

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/42283401-the-lebanese-cookbook?ref=nav_sb_ss_1_32

Classic Lebanese Cuisine: 170 Fresh And Healthy Mediterranean Favorites,

Kamal Al-Faqih

The New Book of Middle Eastern Food, Claudia Roden

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/394182.The_New_Book_of_Middle_Eastern_Food?ref=nav_sb_ss_1_35

Arabesque: A Taste of Morocco, Turkey, and Lebanon, Claudia Roden

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/452254.Arabesque

Tamarind & Saffron: Favourite Recipes from the Middle East, Claudia Roden

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/726162.Tamarind_Saffron

Bayrut: The Cookbook: Recipes from the Heart of a Lebanese City Kitchen,

Hisham Assaad

Rose Water and Orange Blossoms: Fresh & Classic Recipes from my Lebanese Kitchen, by Maureen Abood

Lebanese Cuisine: The Authentic Cookbook, by Samira Kazan

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/58886110-lebanese-cuisine?ref=nav_sb_ss_1_56

Abla’s Lebanese Kitchen, Abla Amad

Maydan: Recipes from Lebanon and Beyond, Rose Previte

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/148023065-maydan?ref=nav_sb_ss_1_6

Zaitoun: Recipes from the Palestinian Kitchen, Yasmin Khan

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/40180121-zaitoun?ref=nav_sb_ss_1_8

Falastin: A Cookbook, Sami Tamimi, Tara Wigley

Lebanese Cuisine: More Than 250 Authentic Recipes From The Most Elegant Middle Eastern Cuisine, Anissa Helou

Feast: Food of the Islamic World, Anissa Helou

Levant, Anissa Helou

Jerusalem: A Cookbook, Yotam Ottolenghi, Sami Tamimi

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/13536517-jerusalem

Olives, Lemons & Za’atar: The Best Middle Eastern Home Cooking, Rawia Bishara, Jumana Bishara

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/18174720-olives-lemons-za-atar?ref=nav_sb_ss_1_26

The Spice Merchant’s Daughter: Recipes and Simple Spice Blends for the American Kitchen, Christina Arokiasamy

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2564637-the-spice-merchant-s-daughter?ref=nav_sb_ss_1_28

Mezze: Small plates to share, Ghillie Basan

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/26250137-mezze

The Lebanese Cookbook: Exploring the Food of Lebanon, Syria and Jordan,

Ghillie Basan

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/51113212-the-lebanese-cookbook

The Middle Eastern Kitchen, Ghillie Basan

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2407507.The_Middle_Eastern_Kitchen

Arabic

27 سبتمبر 2025 شهيد الحرية والنضال ضد الاستعمار: في ذكرى

في جريمة حرب مصممة لتخريب عملية السلام ودفع لبنان وحليفتها إيران إلى حالة حرب، اغتال نظام نتنياهو الاستيطاني الإسرائيلي البغيض مؤسس وزعيم حزب الله في لبنان، البطل والشهيد الآن من أجل الحرية والنضال ضد الاستعمار حسن نصر الله.

إن حزب الله لديه عناصر من سياسات الهوية الطائفية والعرقية التي لا ينبغي لأي صديق للديمقراطية أن يشعر بالارتياح معها، خاصة في ضوء علاقته بإيران وربما جزء من الهيمنة الإيرانية التي تشمل السيطرة على لبنان وسوريا والعراق واليمن؛ ولكن حزب الله هو أيضاً الجماعة الأناركية عديمة الجنسية العابرة للحدود الوطنية الأكثر قابلية للحياة، والأكثر استقراراً، وربما الأطول عمراً في التاريخ الحديث، والتي تخدم العديد من وظائف الرعاية الاجتماعية، والرعاية الصحية، والتعليم، وتخفيف الجوع التي تقوم بها حكومة تم تفريغها في لبنان وإضعافها بسبب تاريخ الاحتلال والظروف المفروضة للنضال، والطليعة الثورية لنوع جديد من المجتمع البشري الخالي من دول القوة والسيطرة، والذي تم تشكيله في نضال مجيد وبطولي ضد الغزو والهيمنة الإمبريالية كمرآة للنور لظلام إسرائيل.

كل هذا يرجع إلى حد كبير إلى عبقرية ورؤية رجل واحد، حسن نصر الله، وسوف يبقى بعده كمثال أعلى يتجاوز الهوية الوطنية، بلا حدود ومشرق بالتضامن طالما أن البشرية تتذكر.

إن حزب الله وقادته بمن فيهم حسن نصر الله والعديد من الآخرين الذين اغتالتهم إسرائيل في الإرهاب الجماعي الأخير ضد شعبي فلسطين ولبنان، مثلهم كمثل العديد من شبكات المقاومة الأخرى، وُلدوا وتشكلوا معي في غزو لبنان عام 1982 وحصار بيروت وفي اثنين وأربعين عامًا من النضال من أجل التحرير منذ ذلك الحين.

سنواصل القتال لمدة أربعين عامًا أخرى، أو أربعين ألفًا.

إن قدرة الطغاة ودول الإرهاب مثل نتنياهو وإسرائيل على قتلنا أمر لا معنى له؛ إن قدرتنا على المقاومة ورفض الخضوع لنزع إنسانيتنا واستعبادنا يعني كل شيء.

إن انتصارنا حتمي إذا عصينا السلطة وكفرنا بها، وإذا انطلقنا في فوضى وأصبحنا غير قابلين للحكم، وإذا ألحقنا الأذى بالطغاة وأولئك الذين يريدون استعبادنا كلما سنحت الفرصة، وإذا لم نستسلم ولم نتخلى عن رفاقنا كما يقول قسم المقاومة.

لأننا كثيرون، ونحن نراقب، ونحن المستقبل.

Hebrew

27 בספטמבר 2024 קדוש מעונה של חירות ומאבק אנטי-קולוניאלי: לזכר

 בפשע מלחמה שנועד לחבל בתהליך השלום ולהעלות גם את לבנון וגם את בעלת בריתה איראן לבסיס מלחמה, משטר המתנחלים הישראלי המתועב של נתניהו התנקש בחייו של מייסד ומנהיג חיזבאללה בלבנון, גיבור וכיום מעונה של חירות ואנטי-קולוניאלי. מאבק השחרור חסן נסראללה.

 לחיזבאללה יש אלמנטים של פוליטיקת זהות תיאוקרטית-כתתית ואתנית שאף ידיד דמוקרטי לא צריך להרגיש איתם בנוח, במיוחד לאור יחסיו עם איראן וללא ספק חלק מהדומיניון האיראני הכולל שליטה בלבנון, סוריה, עיראק ותימן; אבל חיזבאללה הוא גם הקולקטיב והאזור האוטונומי האנרכיסטי חסר האזרחות והטרנס-לאומי הכי קיימא, היציב ואולי הכי ארוך בהיסטוריה המודרנית, המשרת רבים מתפקידי הרווחה, הבריאות, החינוך וההקלה ברעב של ממשלה שבלבנון יש נחלל והפך חסר אונים בשל ההיסטוריה של הכיבוש ותנאי המאבק שנכפו, והחלוץ המהפכני של סוג חדש של חברה אנושית משוחררת ממצבים קרסראליים של כוח ושליטה, ומחושלת במאבק מפואר והירואי נגד כיבוש אימפריאלי. שלטון כראי האור לחושך ישראל.

 כל זה נובע במידה רבה מהגאונות והחזון של אדם אחד, חסן נסראללה, והוא ישרוד אותו כאידיאל מעבר לזהות הלאומית, בלתי מוגבל וזוהר עם סולידריות כל עוד האנושות זוכרת.

 חיזבאללה ומנהיגיה, כולל חסן נסראללה ורבים אחרים שנרצחו על ידי ישראל בטרור ההמוני האחרון נגד עמי פלסטין ולבנון, כמו אלה של כל כך הרבה רשתות התנגדות אחרות של ברית, נולדו ונרקמו איתי בפלישה ללבנון ב-1982. המצור על ביירות ובארבעים ושתיים שנות מאבק לשחרור מאז.

 נילחם עוד ארבעים שנה, או ארבעים אלף.

 זה שרודנים ומדינות טרור כמו נתניהו וישראל יכולים להרוג אותנו חסר משמעות; שנוכל להתנגד ולסרב להיכנע לדה-הומניזציה שלנו והשעבוד שלנו אומר הכל.

 והניצחון שלנו הוא בלתי נמנע אם אנו לא מצייתים ולא מאמינים לסמכות, אם אנו משתוללים ונהיה בלתי ניתנים לשליטה, אם אנו עושים רע לרודנים ולמי שישעבדו אותנו בכל פעם שתצוץ הזדמנות, אם, כפי שאומרת שבועת ההתנגדות, לא נכנע. ולא לנטוש את חברינו.

 כי אנחנו רבים, אנחנו צופים, ואנחנו העתיד.

     September 26 2025, Anniversary of the Umbrella Revolution: Tyranny and Resistance in Hong Kong

      We celebrate this weekend eleven years of Resistance in Hong Kong to the Occupation by the Chinese Communist Party, the loss of liberty and the equality of all human souls, especially the rights of voting for their own leaders and those of a free press and free speech, and the theft by Chinese Communist Party imperial conquest and dominion in collaboration with the British state of what should have become an independent and sovereign nation and a free society of equals.

     Hong Kong may yet achieve the dream of democracy, for though she is Occupied she is unbroken and unbowed. Who resists and refuses to submit becomes Unconquered, and is free; and as such is also a bearer of the Promethean Fire of Liberty and able to set others free as Living Autonomous Zones.

     What must be done, as Lenin asked in the essay that ignited the Russian Revolution? First America and the free world must recognize the independence and sovereignty of Hong Kong; second we and our allies must enact a total Boycott, Divestiture, and Sanction of all trade and manufacture with mainland China until the forces of Occupation withdraw.

     Shall we be collaborators and profiteers of slave labor, or shall we stand in solidarity to cast down from their thrones all those who would enslave us?

     In the lyrics of the Chinese national anthem, “Arise, ye who refuse to be slaves.”

     As written by Helen Davidson in The Guardian, in an article entitled ‘I was so naive’: 10 years after Umbrella protests, Hongkongers remember China’s crackdown: Anniversary of pro-democracy demonstration takes place in city where protest has been largely criminalised and activists silenced; “A decade ago today Hong Kong’s Central district filled with protesters, angry at Chinese government plans to renege on a promise of a fully democratic vote. What became known as Occupy Central, or the Umbrella protests, paralysed the city’s financial centre and galvanised a generation of young people.

     Today Hong Kong’s streets are quiet. Protest has been largely criminalised, and many of the leaders of the Umbrella movement have been exiled, jailed or otherwise silenced.

     Looking back, Wendy* remembers the feeling of that first day of Occupy. She was 25 and believed in Hong Kong’s Basic Law, and its promise to deliver universal suffrage to the people now that the territory had been returned from British to Chinese control. But instead, China’s government announced that in elections people would only be able to choose from a few candidates handpicked by a mostly pro-Beijing committee.

     “It seemed that the government wanted to break their promise,” Wendy tells the Guardian from Hong Kong. “So I went out.”

     Protest action against Beijing’s plan had long been in the works. Three activists known as the Occupy Trio – academics Benny Tai and Chan Kin-man, and reverend Chu Yiu-ming – had for months been training a few thousand people in non-violent resistance to occupy Hong Kong’s finance district as a last resort if demands weren’t met. But student protests earlier that week had escalated to the storming of a public square, and the Occupy start date was brought forward. Thousands more joined.

     It was 28 September. Wendy thought it would be peaceful, but stayed clear of the frontlines just in case. Then at 5:58pm, police fired teargas into the peaceful crowd.

     “I smelled some strange scents and my eyes got uncomfortable,” Wendy says. “I looked up to the bridge over me, seeing a group of police holding shields and stepping forward to the protesters. The scene was frightening. I just kept asking in my mind ‘Why do they treat us in that way?’.”

     Emily Lau, a veteran pro-democracy advocate and then a sitting legislator, had gone to speak to police earlier that day about bringing in some equipment for the Occupy Trio. Instead, they arrested her. By the time she was released later that night “the whole world had changed”.

     Lau and a colleague took a taxi from the police station to the top of a hill overlooking Central.

     “When we looked down, we were shocked because the roads were blocked and there were people just everywhere occupying Connaught Road,” she says.

     ‘The first step in a bigger war’

     The police force’s decision to use teargas on day one against a peaceful crowd had just brought more people to the streets. Soon a vast self-sufficient tent city took over the Admiralty district. Other camps formed in Mong Kok and Causeway Bay. Volunteer groups took care of provisions, sanitation, and tutoring of students, while calling for Beijing to reverse its plans and for Hong Kong’s chief executive, CY Leung, to step down.

     Tony*, then a “regular office worker”, joined the camp in his lunch breaks and evenings. He describes what he saw as “astonishing”.

     “It was a completely new Hong Kong, a beautiful Hong Kong that I had never seen before. We saw Hong Kong people were really passionate about democracy, about their future and having a say in how the city is run.”

     Thomas*, a Hong Kong writer now based in London, says a lot of people got engaged in the movement for the first time because of how government and authorities had responded to their concerns.

     “There wasn’t any attempt [by Beijing] to just sort of say: I understand this isn’t quite what you want, but this is the best we can get … It was literally: thank us and love us for it, aren’t we wonderful,” he says.

     But as Occupy stretched on, the public’s tolerance waned and divisions deepened among protesters. The government remained unmoved, and police became more aggressive. Court injunctions ordered sections of the camps to clear, and Joshua Wong, a leader of the student protesters, ended his hunger strike. Numbers dwindled as the Trio urged people to leave, but the more radical student groups were determined to stay.

     “T[he trio] didn’t think the whole thing should drag on for so long,” says Lau. “I supported ending it because it doesn’t mean ending the whole thing. You just go home and prepare to fight another day.”

     It ended on 15 December after 79 days, without having achieved its stated aims and with deep fissures between pro-democracy factions, but still with a sense of hope.

     “There was a big banner that said ‘We will be back’,” recalls Tony. “People were hugging each other and saying farewells. There was a sense that the battle hadn’t succeeded but it might be the first step in a bigger war.”

     In an editorial one year later, the South China Morning Post said the outcome of the Occupy protests “proved that Beijing will not yield to confrontational tactics”. Protest leaders from both the older and student cohorts, including Tai, Chan and Wong, were eventually convicted and jailed.

     But, Lau says, “the protests had woken up the young people”. New political parties and activist groups emerged. In June 2019, millions took to the streets again in massive pro-democracy protests. Participants used tactics and strategies fine-tuned during Occupy.

     But there was less of the hope and fight of 2014. Instead, the 2019 protests felt like a defiant “last cry of an animal that was dying”, says Thomas. Again Beijing did not yield, launching a crackdown that shocked even the most pessimistic observers.

     “The atmosphere and political reality today are totally different [to 2014],” says Willy Lam, a senior non-resident fellow and China specialist at the Jamestown Foundation in Washington.

     Wendy looks back at how she felt in 2014 and laughs a little.

     “I thought 2014 was shit at that time, but compared to 2019 it was just a piece of cake,” she says. “I was so naive, believing the government would be sensible, respect people’s voice, and abide by the promise in the Basic Law. But now I can say I was totally wrong.”

     Tony, now a lawyer based in the UK, says the Occupy protests left an important legacy, strengthening Hongkongers self-identity and their aspirations for democracy, human rights, and rule of law.

     “Now I see that as part of the diaspora … and I hope people in the free world don’t forget Hong Kong. There is still something to be fought for.”

     As written in the Hong Kong Free Press, in an article entitled 10 years on, where are the leaders of Hong Kong’s Umbrella Movement now? ; “Saturday marks the 10th anniversary of the start of Hong Kong’s Umbrella Movement, which saw protesters occupy major thoroughfares in key districts to call for the right to elect their own leader.

     The 79-day civil disobedience campaign was launched in response to a ruling from Beijing that would allow Hongkongers to vote for their chief executive, but only from among candidates vetted by the central government.

     The occupation of major roads was largely peaceful and leaders of the movement received relatively light sentences for the 2014 offences. Their political demands were not met. Huge protests which swept the city almost five years later, resulting in widespread damage and mass arrests and injuries, resulted in more than 10,000 arrests and saw hundreds sent to jail.

     In 2020 a Beijing-imposed national security law came into force, prescribing penalties of up to life imprisonment and effectively ending public displays of dissent.

     The movement began on September 28, 2014, when police fired tear gas at protesters who had gathered on Harcourt Road in Admiralty. It was the first time the chemical agent had been used on Hongkongers since the leftist riots in 1967. By the next day, protesters had occupied sites in Admiralty, Causeway Bay and Mong Kok, where they would stay for weeks. The Umbrella Movement ended that December, after public transport companies affected by road closures obtained injunctions.

     A number of protest leaders emerged during the civil disobedience campaign, some becoming household names in the city and beyond. Of the 12 activists charged in two high-profile trials in the years after the movement, two have spent the past few years in detention.

     Others have left Hong Kong for places such as Taiwan and the US, and some appear to have withdrawn from politics entirely.

     HKFP looks at the their involvement in one of Hong Kong’s biggest pro-democracy movements, where they are today, and their thoughts on how the city has changed.

     Joshua Wong

     Joshua Wong, in secondary school at the time and a leader of student group Scholarism, led a class boycott in the lead-up to the protests. He was arrested on September 24, 2014, after he and others stormed Civic Square outside the government headquarters.

     Conviction and sentence: Wong was in July 2016 found guilty of taking part in an unlawful assembly at Civic Square and handed an 80-hour community service order. He was found not guilty of inciting others to take part in an unlawful assembly. The government then challenged the sentence in the Court of Appeal, with a Department of Justice (DOJ) representative arguing for the immediate imprisonment of the activists. The DOJ won and Wong was handed a six-month jail term in August 2017, but it was quashed in February 2018, when the Court of Final Appeal reinstated the original non-custodial sentences.

     Where is he now? Wong has been detained since November 2020, when he was denied bail ahead of sentencing for a 2019 protest charge. In March 2021, he was charged with conspiring to commit subversion under the national security law imposed by Beijing in June 2020. He has since served prison terms for other protest-related offences, and is awaiting sentencing after pleading guilty to the subversion charge as part of the city’s largest national security case.

     Nathan Law

     A university student in 2014, Nathan Law was also a member of the Hong Kong Federation of Students. He was arrested over the storming of Civic Square.

     Conviction and sentence: Law was in 2016 found guilty of inciting others to take part in an unlawful assembly over events at Civic Square and handed a 120-hour community service order. Following a government appeal, he was given an eight-month jail term, though that was quashed by the Court of Final Appeal.

     Where is he now? Law announced in July 2020, days after Beijing imposed its national security law, that he had moved to the UK. Last year, the city’s national security police issued arrest warrants for Law and 12 other overseas pro-democracy figures for alleged violations of the security legislation, placing bounties of HK$1 million on each of their heads. He continues to be involved in activism, though in August the Hong Kong Democracy Council (HKDC) – a Washington DC-based advocacy group which he co-founded – cut ties with Law. Media outlets reported that the development was related to allegations of sexual harassment made against Law, which he has denied.

     Alex Chow

     Alex Chow was a University of Hong Kong student and secretary-general of the Hong Kong Federation of Students during the Umbrella Movement, and like Wong and Law was arrested over the Civic Square storming. He told HKFP he spent the early weeks of the protests sleeping outside the Legislative Council and meeting pro-democracy lawmakers, activists and other civil society groups.

     Conviction and sentence: Chow was found guilty of taking part in an unlawful assembly and given a three-week jail term suspended for one year. Upon a government appeal, the Court of Appeal handed him a seven-month jail term, which was later overturned by the city’s top court, ruling that the original suspended term was sufficient.

    Where is he now? The 34-year-old lives in the US, where he researches Hong Kong’s civil society for a doctorate degree in geography, and sits on the board of the Hong Kong Democracy Council.

     Chow told HKFP earlier this month it was “devastating” that there had been no large-scale protests in Hong Kong since national security laws came into effect. In 2014, there remained room to debate the possibility of democratic reform under Hong Kong’s governing One Country, Two Systems framework. Now, Chow said, that room had disappeared.

     Chow added that he had no plans to return to the city as he did not think it would be safe for him to do so.

     Benny Tai

     Benny Tai, then a law professor at the University of Hong Kong, headed the Occupy Central With Love and Peace campaign, which advocated non-violent civil disobedience. A well-known pro-democracy activist, he was one of the most recognisable faces of the 79-day movement.

     Conviction and sentence: Tai was charged with conspiring to commit public nuisance, “incitement to commit public nuisance” and “incitement to incite public nuisance,” and tried alongside eight others – known as the Occupy Nine – over their roles in the Umbrella Movement. In April 2019, Tai was found guilty of the first two charges and sentenced to one year and four months in jail.

     Where is he now? Tai was among 47 pro-democracy figures charged with conspiring to commit subversion in the city’s largest national security case. He has been detained since being taken into police custody on February 28, 2021, ahead of a marathon bail hearing in early March that year. He pleaded guilty to the charge, and was described by prosecutors as the “mastermind” of the conspiracy to subvert state power. Like all the 45 convicted in the case, Tai faces up to life imprisonment.

     Chan Kin-man

     Chan Kin-man, then a sociology professor at the Chinese University of Hong Kong, led the Occupy Central campaign with Tai and Chu Yiu-ming.

     Conviction and sentence: Chan faced the same three charges as Tai, and was also convicted of the first two, receiving a 16-month jail term. The only one of the campaign’s three leaders to personally testify during the trial, Chan said in court that the Occupy trio had lost control of the movement after it escalated into a full-blown street occupation.

     Where is he now? Chan moved to Taiwan in 2021 to take up a visiting professor position at the National Chengchi University in Taipei, where he taught courses on social movements and China. Last month, he said in a Facebook post that his stint had ended, and that he was joining the sociology department of Academia Sinica, a research school in Taipei.

     Chu Yiu-ming

     Chu Yiu-ming was a pastor with a long history of working with the underprivileged in society. A veteran activist, he helped pro-democracy supporters in China flee amid Beijing’s crackdown in 1989, as part of Operation Yellowbird.

     Conviction and sentence: Chu faced the same three charges as Tai and Chan, but was found guilty only of conspiracy to commit public nuisance. The pastor, who was 75 at the time, was handed a 16-month jail term suspended for two years. The judge said he was impressed by Chu’s commitment to social justice, adding that he opted for leniency due to his age, health and contributions to society that spanned three decades.

     Where is he now? The reverend left Hong Kong for Taiwan in December 2020, according to media reports. Earlier this month, Chu and Chan hosted a sharing and book signing in Taipei for a collection of essays they contributed to. The book was published in August to mark 10 years since the movement.

     Raphael Wong

     Activist Raphael Wong was a vice-chairperson of pro-democracy party the League of Social Democrats (LSD) during the Umbrella Movement. During his trial, he was said to have called on protesters to block roads near the government headquarters on the first day of the protests.

     Conviction and sentence: Wong was found guilty of incitement to commit public nuisance and incitement to incite public nuisance. He was the only one of the Occupy Nine to have a criminal record, having been jailed for protest-related offences before, but the judge said he would not impose a heavier sentence on account of that. Wong was jailed for eight months.

     Where is he now? Wong is still in Hong Kong and still a member of the LSD, continuing to take part in small scale protests staged by the group. In May, he and other LSD activists were arrested outside the court building where the verdict in the 47 democrats case was being handed down. They were released without charge.

     Wong told HKFP in September that he could never have imagined the political developments seen in Hong Kong in recent years – that the protests and unrest in 2019 would happen the way they did, or that such demonstrations would essentially be made illegal. Looking back at the Umbrella Movement, Wong said it had been neither a success nor a failure, but “had its own significance.”

     Shiu Ka-chun

     Shiu Ka-chun was a social work lecturer at the Hong Kong Baptist University during the Umbrella Movement. According to the judgement in the Occupy Nine case, he was among the activists to call on protesters to occupy roads near the government headquarters on the first day of the Umbrella Movement.

     Conviction and sentence: Shiu was found guilty of inciting others to commit public nuisance and “incitement to incite public nuisance.” He was jailed for eight months.

     Where is he now? Shiu was elected as a lawmaker as a representative of the social welfare sector in 2016. He later founded a prisoners’ rights support group focused on helping those jailed over the protests in 2019, but which shut down in the wake of Beijing’s national security law. Shiu is still in Hong Kong and continues to support prisoners’ rights. He declined to comment on the Umbrella Movement.

     Tommy Cheung Sau-yin

     When the 2014 protests began, Tommy Cheung Sau-yin was a student at the Chinese University of Hong Kong, where he was president of the student union. He was also one of the leaders of the Hong Kong Federation of Students.

     Conviction and sentence: Cheung was found guilty of “incitement to commit public nuisance” and “incitement to incite public nuisance,” and was jailed for eight months.

     Where is he now? The former student activist was elected as a district councillor in Yuen Long in 2019 but resigned in October 2021. Last year, journalists reported that Cheung had written an article in a patriotic publication, which said he was affiliated with the Basic Law Student Centre, under pro-Beijing company the Hong Kong Basic Law Foundation.

     Cheung has also made headlines due to racking up debt and was declared bankrupt by the High Court in July.

     Eason Chung

     Eason Chung was a student at the Chinese University of Hong Kong during the Umbrella Movement. He was also a member of the Hong Kong Federation of Students.

     Conviction and sentence: Chung was found guilty of “incitement to commit public nuisance” and “incitement to incite public nuisance.” He was jailed for eight months but sentence was suspended for two years, with the judge citing his motivation behind the offence, his age and “lack of experience in life.”

     Where is he now? Chung moved to Taiwan in 2021, and to the UK in 2022, according to an essay he wrote for Taiwan media outlet The Reporter. Since March, the former student activist has been sharing his writing on social media under the handle “Yiuwa.is.writing,” where he explores topics such as travel and books.

     Lee Wing-tat

     A former Democratic Party lawmaker, Lee Wing-tat was a research officer during the Umbrella Movement.

    Conviction and sentence: Lee was found guilty of “incitement to commit public nuisance” and jailed for eight months. The judge noted that Lee had served Hong Kong through “various public offices he held for over 30 years.”

     Where is he now? Lee moved to the UK in 2021, according to Points Media, a UK-based news outlet covering Hong Kong. Having retired some years ago, he supports advocacy campaigns founded by Hongkongers in the UK, including one that called on people to vote for politicians who supported Hong Kong’s pro-democracy cause during the recent UK general election. In mid-September, Lee attended a birthday gathering of Hong Kong’s last British governor Chris Patten, which was organised by NGO Hong Kong Watch.

     Tanya Chan

     Tanya Chan was a lawmaker with the Civic Party when the Umbrella Movement began. She is also a barrister.

     Conviction and sentence: Chan was found guilty of “incitement to commit public nuisance” and “incitement to incite public nuisance.” Her sentencing came about a month after the other eight in the Occupy Nine trial because she had to undergo surgery to remove a brain tumour. The judge handed Chan an eight-month jail term, suspended for two years in light of her health condition.

      Where is she now? Chan announced in September 2020 that she would withdraw from politics and quit the Civic Party. Media outlets reported that she moved to Taiwan in 2021 and has taken up cooking as a hobby. Last April, a restaurant in Taipei announced that she was doing a one-day shift as a guest chef.”

     As I wrote in my post of July 1 2024, This July, the 27th Anniversary of the Abandonment of Hong Kong to China and of Democracy to Tyranny; We mourn and organize resistance for the liberation of Hong Kong as a sovereign and independent nation from the imperial conquest and dominion of the loathsome Chinese Communist Party, throughout this July the twenty seventh anniversary of the abandonment of Hong Kong by Britain to a carceral state of force and control which was never a legitimate successor to the China with whom the original lease of 1898 was made, and the iconic fall of democracy to tyranny and state terror which it signifies.

    On the first of July last year the despicable tyrant and criminal of violations of human rights Xi Jinping walked the streets of Hong Kong, an ambush predator wearing the face of a man which cannot conceal his intent to conquer and enslave the world, beginning with Hong Kong as a launching pad for the conquest of the Pacific Rim.

    Why had he come to hold a triumphal march in imitation of Hitler in his 1940 visit to Paris; to terrify the people into submission, to claim it personally as a conqueror and imperial occupied territory, to reinforce an illusory legitimacy when all China has is fear and force? All of these things, and one thing more; this is also a marketing stunt aimed at the one partner in tyranny which can bring his regime down and liberate the peoples of both Hong Kong and China, the international business community. Send us your manufacturing jobs, he offers; we have slaves.

   If we do not free Hong Kong from his talons, we will be fighting for our survival in the streets of San Francisco, San Diego, and Seattle, in Singapore, Kuala Lumpur, Jakarta, Manila, Kolkata, Bangkok, in Sydney and Melbourne, Tokyo and Yokohama, any city which is home to a community of Overseas Chinese, which the government of the Chinese Communist Party considers their own citizens, whether or not they consent to be governed by Beijing. The CCP is uninterested in consent; for a vision of the world they would bequeath to humankind, we need only look at the vast prison and slave labor camp of Xinjiang. Or to the regimes of their partners and allies, such as Pol Pot, North Korea, and the ruling junta of Myanmar.

     When our tiny community of Sonoma was sent a wave of Cambodian refugees in the 1980’s, my mother who like myself taught English at the high school was assigned to acculturate them. When the whole group vanished for weeks during an election, returning only after a scouting pair had determined it was safe, she asked where they all went. “To the hills” he was informed. “New President, soldiers come now.”

     “That can’t happen here,” she said.

     “That’s what we thought, before Pol Pot” was the reply. It’s what Hong Kong thought before the Great Abandonment and Occupation, and what we all thought about America, before Trump.

    Let us stand in solidarity with the people of Hong Kong and of China in the cause of Liberty and a free society of equals.

     When will the free nations of the world recognize the independence and sovereignty of Hong Kong and take action shoulder to shoulder with its people to throw off the tyranny of the Chinese Communist Party?

    The Black Flag flies from the barricades in Hong Kong, and its primary meaning has not changed since its use by the First International and the veterans of the Paris Commune; freedom versus tyranny, the abolition of state terror, surveillance, and control, resistance to nationalisms of blood, faith, and soil, and abandonment of the social use of force.

     With this bold signal the people declare: we shall be ruled by ourselves and no other.

     Shall we be collaborators and profiteers of slave labor, or shall we stand in solidarity to cast down from their thrones all those who would enslave us?

     In the lyrics of the Chinese national anthem, “Arise, ye who refuse to be slaves.”

     As I wrote in my post of February 15 2022, Monsters, Freaks, Transgression of the Forbidden, the Sacred Wildness of Nature and the Wildness of Ourselves: On Chaos as Love and Desire;  Watching the sunrise overlooking Hong Kong from Lion Rock, seized many times in recent years by democracy protesters and revolutionaries in the struggle for liberation and independence from China, in the wake of the last celebrations of Chinese New Year and several nearly sleepless nights of making mischief for tyrants under cover of the festival, my thoughts turn to the nature of freedom and the freedom of nature, of ourselves as wild and glorious things, of love and desire as anarchic forces of liberation, of transgression of the boundaries of the Forbidden and the violation of norms as seizures of power from the tyranny of other people’s ideas of virtue and the refusal to submit to authority.

     Freedom, and all that comes with it; above all freedom as the wildness of nature and the wildness of ourselves, as defiance of authorized identities and fascisms of blood, faith, and soil, of love and desire as liberating forces of Chaos, and all of this as sacred acts of reimagination and transformation of ourselves and the possibilities of human being, meaning, and value.

     And of our myriad possible futures, sorting themselves out in our daily lives like a hurricane governed by the flight of a hummingbird; tyranny or liberty, extinction or survival.

     Order and its forms as authority, power, capital, and hegemonic elites of patriarchy and racism, class and caste, which arise from the Wagnerian Ring of fear, power, and force, which appropriates and subjugates us through falsification, commodification, and dehumanization and weaponizes hierarchies of otherness and belonging and fascisms of blood, faith, and soil, and creates states as embodied violence, tyrannies of force and control, carceral states of police and military terror, and dominions of imperial conquest and colonial assimilation and exploitation; all of these systems and structures are born in fear, overwhelming and generalized fear weaponized in service to power and submission to authority, have a key weakness without which they cannot arise and perpetuate unequal power, for this requires the renunciation of love.

    Chaos has as its champion the totalizing and uncontrollable divine madness of love, which leaps across all boundaries to unite us in solidarity of action against those who would enslave us.

    Love exalts us beyond the limits of ourselves and the flags of our skin, disrupts authorized identities and narratives as imposed conditions of struggle,  seizes power as ownership of ourselves, and reveals the embodied truth of others.

     Once we have a definition of democracy as a free society of equals and a praxis of love, there are some principles which can be derived as an art of revolution and seizures of power.

     Order appropriates; Chaos autonomizes.

     Order is unequal power and systemic violence; Chaos is liberty, equality, interdependence, and harmony.

     Order subjugates through division and hierarchy; Chaos liberates through equality and solidarity.

      Authority falsifies; speaking truth to power or parrhesia as Foucault called  truth telling and performing the witness of history confers authenticity to us in the sacred calling to pursue the truth, and delegitimizes tyrants.

      Always pay attention to the man behind the curtain. As Dorothy says to Oz, he’s just an old humbug.

      The four primary Duties of a Citizen are Question Authority, Expose Authority, Mock Authority, and Challenge Authority.

     There is no just Authority.       

      Law serves power and authority; transgression and refusal to submit confer freedom and self-ownership as primary acts of becoming human and Unconquered.

      Always go through the Forbidden Door. As Max Stirner wrote; “Freedom cannot be granted; it must be seized.”

     Such is my art of revolution and democracy as love; there remains poetic vision and the reimagination and transformation of ourselves and our limitless possibilities of becoming human, and love and desire as unconquerable informing, motivating, and shaping forces and innate human realms of being and  powers which cannot be taken from us as truths immanent in nature and written in our flesh, anarchic and ungovernable as the tides, and it is love and desire as forms of wildness and embodied truth which offer us a definition of freedom as the wildness of nature and the wildness of ourselves.

     As I wrote in my post of February 12 2022, Genocide Games: the Case of Hong Kong;  I do not like thee, Xi Jinping; and unlike Dr Fell in the beloved poem of 1680 by Tom Brown, I both know and can tell why as a truthteller and witness of history; state terror and tyranny, carceral states of force and thought control, disappearance and torture by police, universal surveillance, and the falsification of propaganda and alternate histories, imperial conquest and colonial exploitation, slave labor and genocidal ethnic cleansing, and fascisms of blood, ideology as a faith, and soil; of all this I accuse Xi Jinping and the Chinese Communist Party.

    These things I am able to say because of the freedom of access to information which I enjoy as an American citizen, because the transparency of the state in America and the legal protection and heroic stature in our society of whistleblowers and truthtellers is a firewall against secret power, and because the sacred calling to pursue the truth as both a right of citizens and a universal human right are among those parallel and interdependent sets of rights of which the common defense is the primary purpose of the state.

     So are legitimacy, trust, and representation conferred to any state which is a guarantor of the rights of its citizens; the corollary of this is that any state whose primary purpose is not to guarantee the rights of individuals has no such legitimacy.

     We must be a democracy and a free society of equals, or the slaves of tyrants.

     And this we must resist.

      Why we fight: the stakes of the Hong Kong liberation struggle can be seen in the corpses of political prisoners which toured the world as the CCP’s threat of terror and atrocities to silence global dissent.

     They are coming for us and for all democracy protestors with teams of assassins throughout the world, and we must come for them first and bring regime change to the Chinese Communist Party.

     As written by Helen Davidson in The Guardian, in an article entitled Hong Kong: Stand News journalists given jail terms for ‘sedition’; “The former editor-in-chief of Hong Kong’s Stand News has been sentenced to jail on sedition charges for the publication of news reports and other articles that prosecutors said tried to promote “illegal ideologies”.

    Chung Pui-kuen, 55, the former editor-in-chief and the former acting editor-in-chief Patrick Lam, 36, were found guilty of conspiring to publish seditious materials in late August after almost a year of delays. The parent company of the now-defunct Stand News, Best Pencil Ltd, was also convicted.

     The pair have been on bail since the conviction but both spent almost a year in jail since they were arrested.

     On Thursday, the district court sentenced Chung to 21 months in prison, meaning he will have to serve another 10 months. Lam was released after the judge said he had factored in his poor health and other mitigating factors, including his short time in the role overseeing the outlet. Lam’s defence team had told the court earlier that a deteriorating kidney condition meant “any mistakes or delay in treatment could endanger his life”, according to the Hong Kong Free Press.

     The judge, who was more than two hours late to proceedings, ordered Lam to be released immediately.

     Chung and Lam were first arrested on 29 December 2021 after police raided the outlet’s newsroom. In October 2022, they pleaded not guilty. Chung chose to testify in court and spent 36 of the trial’s 57 days in the witness box and defended Stand News and its commitment to press freedom.

      “The media should not self-censor but report,” Chung said. “Freedom of speech should not be restricted on the grounds of eradicating dangerous ideas, but rather it should be used to eradicate dangerous ideas.”

     However, the court had found 11 articles – mostly opinion pieces – published by Stand News to be seditious. The 11 were drawn from 17 that prosecutors had said sought to promote “illegal ideologies” and to incite hatred against the governments in Hong Kong and China and the 2020 national security law. The judge found Chung responsible for publishing 10 of the offending pieces, and Lam one.

     The Stand News case has been seen as a bellwether for Hong Kong’s diminishing media freedoms, and the increasing risk for journalists continuing to operate in the city. The sentencing comes a week after revelations that dozens of journalists had been harassed in a “systemic and organised attack” that included death threats and threatening letters sent to their employers, families, and landlords.

     Stand News was raided six months after authorities raided and shut down the pro-democracy tabloid Apple Daily, and arrested its founder, the media mogul and activist Jimmy Lai, as well as several executives and editors including his son. In the wake of the raids on Stand News, which also targeted the home of its news editor, Ronson Chan, the outlet removed its content from online and shut down.

     The raid on Stand News prompted the independent outlet Citizen News to announce within days that it would cease operations, citing the increasingly risky media environment.

     Launched in 2014, Stand News had been a significant source of news about the 2019 pro-democracy protests and the harsh crackdown by authorities, and was seen by Hongkongers as one of the city’s most credible outlets, according to surveys. Its reporters had been on the frontline of reporting protests including those that turned violent.

     Its then-reporter Gwyneth Ho livestreamed her reporting from Yuen Long station as gangs attacked protesters and commuters and then the reporter herself. In 2020 Ho announced herself as a candidate for Hong Kong’s legislative elections but was later disqualified. In 2021 she was jailed for taking part in an “unofficial assembly” at a Tiananmen Square massacre vigil, and this year was convicted as one of the “Hong Kong 47” for running unofficial pre-election primaries in 2020.

     A profile of Ho as an election candidate was among the 11 articles deemed seditious by the court. Others included a feature on student protests, three commentaries by the self-exiled former legislator and pro-democracy campaigner Nathan Law, and four others by veteran journalist and journalism teacher Allan Au. Au’s subjects included a piece on “new words in 2020” relating to the national security crackdown, and criticisms of the national security law and a related trial. Another article by Au accusing authorities of using the sedition law – under which the Stand News editors were convicted – as “lawfare”.

     The sedition law dates back to the British colonial era and had been little used until authorities began charging pro-democracy figures with its crimes after the 2019 protests. It was repealed in March after Hong Kong introduced its own domestic national security law.”

‘I was so naive’: 10 years after Umbrella protests, Hongkongers remember China’s crackdown

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/sep/28/i-was-so-naive-10-years-after-umbrella-protests-hongkongers-remember-chinas-crackdown?CMP=share_btn_url

HK’s 2014 Umbrella Movement, 10 years on: where are the leaders now?

HK 10th Umbrella Movement anniversary sees police deployed, barricades

Hong Kong: Stand News journalists given jail terms for ‘sedition’

Hong Kong journalists harassed in ‘systemic and organised attack’ | Hong Kong

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#inbox/CllgCHrkVwcDTVHvcBnRLPqQcJDcdQGcLhfgFXvlPQVwWtqsKmQrKNcrDzkfBPGggQqnDwBzdjB

Conviction of Hong Kong activist Jimmy Lai ‘unjust’, says Chris Patten

https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/aug/12/conviction-of-hong-kong-activist-jimmy-lai-unjust-says-chris-patten?CMP=share_btn_url

Chinese

2025 年 9 月 28 日雨傘革命週年紀念:香港的暴政與抵抗

 今天,我們慶祝香港抵抗中國共產黨佔領十年,慶祝所有人類靈魂失去自由和平等,特別是選舉自己領導人的權利以及新聞自由和言論自由的權利,中國共產黨與英國合作進行帝國征服和統治,竊取了本應成為獨立主權國家和平等自由社會的東西。

 香港或許仍能實現民主夢想,因為儘管她已被佔領,但她仍堅不可摧、不屈服。誰反抗、拒絕屈服,就變成不被征服的人,誰就自由了;因此,他也是普羅米修斯自由之火的持有者,能夠作為活的自治區讓其他人獲得自由。

 正如列寧在引發俄國革命的文章中所問的那樣,必須做什麼?首先美國和自由世界必須承認香港的獨立和主權;其次,我們和我們的盟友必須對與中國大陸的所有貿易和製造業實施全面抵制、剝離和製裁,直到佔領軍撤離。

 我們應該成為奴隸勞動的合作者和奸商,還是應該團結一致,將所有那些奴役我們的人從他們的寶座上推翻?

 中國國歌的歌詞是:“不願為奴的人起來吧。”

2024 年 7 月 1 日 香港回歸中國、民主淪為暴政 27 週年

     今年七月是英國將香港拋棄為監獄狀態二十六週年,我們哀悼並組織抵抗活動,爭取將香港作為一個主權和獨立國家從可惡的中國共產黨的帝國征服和統治下解放出來。 武力和控制從來都不是1898年最初簽訂租約的中國的合法繼承者,而且它所象徵的民主制度標誌性地淪為暴政和國家恐怖。

     去年7月1日,卑鄙的暴君、侵犯人權的罪犯習近平走在香港街頭,他是一個伏擊的掠奪者,臉上掩飾不住他征服和奴役世界的意圖,首先是香港 金剛作為征服環太平洋的跳板。

     1940年他訪問巴黎時為何要效仿希特勒來舉行凱旋遊行? 恐嚇人民屈服,親自宣稱自己是征服者和帝國占領的領土,在中國祇有恐懼和武力的情況下強化虛幻的合法性? 所有這些事情,還有一件事; 這也是一種營銷噱頭,針對的是暴政中的一個夥伴,可以推翻他的政權並解放香港和中國人民以及國際商界。 他提出,請將您的製造業工作崗位發送給我們; 我們有奴隸。

    如果我們不把香港從他的魔爪下解放出來,我們將在舊金山、聖地亞哥、西雅圖、新加坡、吉隆坡、雅加達、馬尼拉、加爾各答、曼谷、悉尼和墨爾本的街頭為生存而戰, 東京和橫濱,任何一個擁有海外華人社區的城市,中國共產黨政府都將其視為自己的公民,無論他們是否同意接受北京的統治。 中共對同意不感興趣; 我們只需看看新疆巨大的監獄和勞改營,就能看到他們留給人類的世界願景。

     讓我們與香港和中國人民團結一致,爭取自由和平等的自由社會。

      世界自由國家何時才能承認香港的獨立和主權,並與香港人民並肩行動,推翻中共的暴政?

     黑旗從香港的路障中飄揚,自第一國際和巴黎公社老兵使用以來,它的主要含義一直沒有改變; 自由對抗暴政,廢除國家恐怖、監視和控制,抵制血腥、信仰和土地的民族主義,以及放棄社會使用武力。

      人們用這個大膽的信號宣告:我們將不受任何人統治。

      我們應該成為奴隸勞動的合作者和奸商,還是應該團結一致,將所有那些奴役我們的人從他們的寶座上推翻?

      中國國歌的歌詞是:“不願為奴的人起來吧。”

      正如我在 2022 年 2 月 15 日的文章《怪物、怪胎、違禁、自然的神聖野性和我們自己的野性:論作為愛與慾望的混沌》中所寫的那樣; 近年來,在中國新年的最後一次慶祝活動和幾個近乎不眠之夜的惡作劇之後,民主抗議者和革命者在爭取從中國解放和獨立的鬥爭中多次佔領獅子山,俯瞰香港的日出 對於在節日掩護下的暴君,我的思想轉向自由的本質和自然的自由,我們自己是狂野而光榮的事物,愛和慾望是無政府主義的解放力量,是對禁忌和世界界限的侵犯。 違反規範是從他人的美德觀念的暴政和拒絕服從權威中奪取權力。

      自由,以及隨之而來的一切; 首先,自由是自然的野性和我們自己的野性,是對血統、信仰和土壤的授權身份和法西斯主義的蔑視,是愛和慾望的解放混沌力量,而所有這一切都是重新想像和轉變的神聖行為 我們自己以及人類的可能性、意義和價值。

      以及我們無數可能的未來,它們在我們的日常生活中自行整理,就像蜂鳥飛行控制的颶風一樣; 暴政或自由,滅絕或生存。

      秩序及其形式,如父權制和種族主義、階級和種姓的權威、權力、資本和霸權精英,它們產生於瓦格納式的恐懼、權力和武力之環,它通過偽造、商品化和非人化和非人化來侵占和征服我們。 將差異性和歸屬感的等級制度以及血統、信仰和土壤的法西斯主義武器化,並創建國家作為嵌入

令人厭惡的暴力、武力和控制的暴政、警察和軍事恐怖的監禁國家、帝國征服和殖民同化和剝削的統治; 所有這些系統和結構都誕生於恐懼之中,壓倒性和普遍性的恐懼被武器化,以服務於權力和服從權威,它們都有一個關鍵的弱點,沒有這個弱點,它們就無法產生並維持不平等的權力,因為這需要放棄愛。

     混沌以愛的全面且無法控制的神聖瘋狂作為它的捍衛者,它跨越了所有界限,將我們團結起來,採取團結一致的行動,反對那些奴役我們的人。

     愛使我們超越自我和皮膚的界限,打破作為強加的鬥爭條件的授權身份和敘述,奪取權力作為我們自己的所有權,並揭示他人的具體真相。

      一旦我們將民主定義為平等的自由社會和愛的實踐,就可以衍生出一些原則作為革命和奪取權力的藝術。

      訂單適當; 混沌自治。

      秩序是不平等的權力和系統性的暴力; 混沌就是自由、平等、相互依存、和諧。

      秩序通過劃分和等級制來征服; 混亂通過平等和團結來解放。

       權威造假; 福柯所謂的“講真話”和“歷史見證”向權力說真話或直言,賦予我們追求真理、剝奪暴君合法性的神聖使命的真實性。

       時刻關注幕後的人。 正如多蘿西對奧茲所說,他只是一個老騙子。

       公民的四個主要職責是質疑權威、揭露權威、模擬權威和挑戰權威。

      不存在公正的權威。

       法律服務於權力和權威; 越界和拒絕屈服賦予自由和自我所有權,作為成為人類和不被征服的主要行為。

       永遠要經過禁門。 正如馬克斯·施蒂納所寫; “自由不能被授予; 必須抓住它。”

      這就是我的革命和民主的藝術——愛; 仍然存在著詩意的願景、對我們自己的重新想像和轉變,以及我們成為人類的無限可能性,而愛和慾望是不可征服的信息、激勵和塑造力量,以及人類固有的存在領域和力量,它們不能作為內在的真理從我們手中奪走。 愛和慾望是野性的形式,是真理的體現,它為我們提供了自由的定義,即自然的野性和我們自己的野性。

      正如我在 2022 年 2 月 12 日的文章《種族滅絕遊戲:香港案例》中所寫。 我不喜歡你,習近平; 與湯姆·布朗 (Tom Brown) 1680 年受人喜愛的詩中的菲爾博士 (Dr Fell) 不同,作為一個說真話的人和歷史的見證者,我既知道也能說出原因; 國家恐怖和暴政、武力和思想控制的監獄國家、警察的失踪和酷刑、普遍監視、偽造宣傳和虛構歷史、帝國征服和殖民剝削、奴役和種族滅絕種族清洗、血腥法西斯主義、意識形態 作為信仰,作為土壤; 這一切我都指責習近平和中國共產黨。

     我之所以能夠說出這些話,是因為我作為一名美國公民享有獲取信息的自由,因為美國國家的透明度以及舉報人和說真話者在我們社會中的法律保護和英雄地位是防止秘密的防火牆 權力,因為追求真理的神聖使命既是公民的權利,又是普遍的人權,屬於平行且相互依存的一系列權利,而共同捍衛這些權利是國家的首要目的。

      任何作為其公民權利保障者的國家都被賦予合法性、信任和代表權。 由此推論,任何主要目的不是保障個人權利的國家都不具有這種合法性。

      我們必須是平等的民主和自由社會,否則就是暴君的奴隸。

      我們必須抵制這一點。

Here follow some of my essays on the subject of the Fall of Hong Kong:

July 2 2019 Riots on Anniversary of the Fall of Hong Kong to the Chinese Communists

     As over half a million citizens of Hong Kong flooded the streets Monday on the anniversary of the sale of their nation by Britain to the Chinese Communist Party, and to the cruelty and brutal terror with which the Communist forces of occupation have met demands for democracy and independence, including the horrific organ harvesting of political prisoners, Trump shook hands on a trade deal with the tyrant of Beijing and signaled clearly that in the fight for freedom and the Rights of Man the people of Hong Kong are on their own.

     Trump’s policy of appeasement to tyranny cannot succeed in the long run, any more than it did to safeguard Europe from Hitler. Of course, his is not the cause of freedom.

      The figment of China as a Great Lie of the Chinese Communist Party, claiming both legitimacy and domination over its historical peoples and territories as a fictive illusion, including what they call Overseas Chinese, which means all persons of Chinese ancestry everywhere, a fascist regime of blood and soil no different from that of the Axis powers,  this nightmare of an evil and predatory China, the dark mirror of  bright Hong Kong as a shining beacon of hope, must not be allowed to consume the world.

     We must liberate and defend the freedom of Hong Kong, and deny the Communists their first victory in the conquest of the Pacific and its sovereign nations. For Hong Kong is the gateway to the civilizations of the Pacific Rim, the Philippine Islands (I know our leaders have had their differences, but my uncle is a Bataan Death March survivor and I would honor his service by standing with you in defence of freedom) and then Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia, Australia, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, until we are fighting in the streets of San Francisco. We must stop the conquest in Hong Kong, where the people are in revolt for independence, and while our allies yet stand.

     Liberate Hong Kong, and the conquest of the Pacific by the Chinese Communist Party vanishes from our future history like the distorted images in  funhouse mirrors.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/hong-kong-protests-china-handover-anniversary_n_5d19c09ae4b03d61163e199a

August 19 2019, Weekend Eleven of Hong Kong’s Democracy Revolution: a Quarter of the City Defy the Imperial Conquest of Beijing

      In a stunning display of fearlessness and solidarity, a quarter of the people of Hong Kong, one million seven hundred thousand of its citizens, defy the communists and the brutal totalitarian police state of Beijing to march for democracy, freedom, and the universal rights to which every human being is entitled.

    The revolution against communism and the struggle to liberate Hong Kong from the unjust and imperialist rule of the mainland government and the torture, surveillance, and xenophobic racist ethnic cleansing which the Chinese Communist Party and its tyranny of faceless bureaucrats represents is now too large to crush through its usual means of abductions, secret trials, re-education camps, and the use of criminal gangs as enforcers.

     A quarter of the population cannot be murdered and terrorized in secret, without the true nature of the Communist Party being revealed; a vast system of slave labor for the benefit of a plutocratic elite no different from the aristocratic mandarinate the communists themselves rebelled against a hundred years ago.

     The true origin of the Chinese Communist Party which now exists is the Loyalty Purge and Massacre of the Jiangxi Soviet of 1930-31, in which Mao killed three out of four of the communists, some one hundred thousand people, all who were not personally loyal to him, and seized absolute control.

     Then of course there was World War Two, during which the CCP used the Japanese army as a proxy force against their own pro-democracy enemies and fellow Chinese, and against bastions of freedom protected by foreigners such as Hong Kong.

     After 90 years of tyranny, the people of China are fighting back; it’s time for the free nations of the world to help them liberate themselves, and to recognize the independence of Hong Kong.

October 1 2019 China’s Bloody Day: the liberation of Hong Kong has its first martyr in Tsang Chi-kin

      On the 70th anniversary of the Chinese Communist Party’s seizure of power, the forces of state terror were once again loosed upon its citizens in a brutal repression of mass democracy protests, resulting in the police shooting of a teenager, Tsang Chi-kin.

      History will remember him as the first martyr of the liberation of Hong Kong from the imperialism and tyranny of communism.  From this day forward the first of October will be known as China’s Bloody Day.

     The CCP is following the playbook of their former proxy forces against democracy and human rights, which they used to defeat the democratic government of China and successor state to that of the visionary Sun Yat-sen, the Kuomintang under Chiang Kai-shek which escaped to Taiwan, and to isolate Chinese democracy from support by driving out the British and other foreign guarantors of liberty and the rights of man; that proxy and plan being the Imperial Japanese conquest of Asia and the Pacific.

     After Hong Kong, Singapore and control of the South China Sea will be the next front, and then Malaysia, Brunei, and Indonesia, where they will enact a campaign of de-Islamification and ethnic cleansing of non-Chinese populations as being tested now in Xinjiang. They already control a third of India, waging a long Maoist revolution whose goal is dominion of the subcontinent; if you don’t think they can do it, just look at Nepal. 

     Any government which has gamed this out to its logical conclusion about fifty years from now should be terrified; the CCP has long insisted that all Overseas Chinese, persons of Chinese ancestry everywhere, are subject to their military draft, and in matters of law the CCP has first claim on them over any other government. When the communists have the power to annex and occupy any city with a Chinatown, they will do exactly that.

     The liberation of Hong Kong will guarantee freedom and universal human rights not only for itself, but for the whole world as a balance point of history. We must help Hong Kong win free of communist imperialism, and reverse the tides of time which are driving forward the Chinese Communist Party’s conquest of the world

October 6 2019 Vendetta lives: Hong Kong Defies the Occupation

     In a bold and united rebuke of the authoritarian imperialism of the Chinese Communist Party, the people of Hong Kong defy the mask ban wearing a new symbol of their revolution, the mask of the figure of the rebel Vendetta from the great film. It is a provocative image for the freedom fighters of Hong Kong, with a long history of use by the Anonymous network in combating tyranny and state control and surveillance.

     The next step will or may be to break that power through direct attack of the control systems employed by the government in Beijing to dehumanize and subjugate their peoples, including massive and pervasive face recognition and the social credit system. If Hong Kong can defeat the means of control being tested against the Uighur minority of Xinjiang and stop the campaign of ethnic cleansing, they may liberate China as well as themselves and stop the communist party’s conquest of the Pacific and South Asia and their dominion over the world.

      And the free nations of the world can help by recognition of the sovereignty of Hong Kong and safeguarding her independence from the force and influence of the CCP.

     I am one man, of limited understanding, though I have worn many masks in many places, and not all of my causes have been lost; through all my forlorn hopes and a lifetime of last stands I yet remain to defy and defend.

    Of our many possible futures I can only say this; all is not yet lost, nor is anything past redemption when the will to resist and to become can be found.

      So I leave you with the words of Alan Moore from V for Vendetta; “Since mankind’s dawn, a handful of oppressors have accepted the responsibility over our lives that we should have accepted for ourselves. By doing so, they took our power. By doing nothing, we gave it away. We’ve seen where their way leads, through camps and wars, towards the slaughterhouse.”

https://www.straitstimes.com/asia/east-asia/hong-kong-protesters-take-to-the-streets-to-defy-mask-ban-and-clash-with-police-later

https://www.straitstimes.com/asia/east-asia/hong-kong-protesters-embrace-v-for-vendetta-guy-fawkes-masks

     December 16 2019 Hong Kong’s democracy revolution: a Children’s Crusade

     Hear the voices and testimony of the innocent in Hong Kong’s struggle for independence; a Children’s Crusade which opposes evil with a fearless and united voice declaiming; No!

     This is the crucible in which nations are born; in the dreams of liberty of its children and of those with nothing left to lose, willing to risk their lives to reach for a better future. Hong Kong is discovering its identity as a nation and a people under the occupation of a Chinese Communist Party no less terrible than that of Imperial Japan from December 25 1941 until liberation on August 30 1945.

      In many ways the methods of state terror and control are parallel between Fascist Japan and Communist China and suggestive of a master-disciple relationship as with serial killers. For example, the Japanese Imperial Army had mobile processing factories whereby Chinese persons killed in the conquest were cannibalized, which accounts for the speed with which the Imperial Army could move without outrunning its supply lines, a terror operation which became the model for the Chinese Communist Party, which used Imperial Japan as a tool for ridding themselves of the British and pro-democracy Chinese Nationalists, in the use of organ harvesting of democracy activists which they employ today.

     As with the cannibalism of their former secret partners against democracy, the horrific terror and refined social control of the Chinese Communist Party, whether directed against the economic prize of Hong Kong or ethnic minorities such as those in Tibet and Xinjiang, methods of repression, force, and intimidation fail to convince, and in fact recruit membership for the resistance. China should have learned this from the Rape of Nanking; far from being brutalized into passivity, survivors of terror will gladly die if in doing so they can claim vengeance on an enemy.

     And the family and friends of every person in Hong Kong whom the Communists in Beijing abduct and imprison, shoot or beat to death in the streets, torture, and assassinate, will awaken to a new day with solidarity in the common cause of liberty and a vast network of alliances forged by the inhumanity of a violent and evil authoritarian enemy.

     In the long run, resistance and revolution always win because tyranny creates its own counterforce and downfall.

     As Verna Yu writes in The Guardian; “Officials said as of 5 December, of the 5,980 people arrested since the movement started in June, 2,383 or 40% were students and 367 of them have been charged. Among them, 939 were under 18, with the youngest being only 11, and 106 have been charged. Suspects have been arrested for a range of offences including rioting, unlawful assembly, assaulting police officers and possessing offensive weapons.”

       How wonderful that someone somewhere has an education system teaching its next generation of leaders how to question and challenge unjust authority.

      “James, 13, and Roderick, 16, from elite schools and middle-class families, are among the youngest people to have been charged over the protests. They were arrested in a protest shortly after others had thrown molotov cocktails – a scene that would be defined as a “riot” under Hong Kong law.”

     “They said an incident on 21 July when thugs indiscriminately attacked passengers at the out-of-town metro station while police were nowhere to be seen had led to a breakdown of their trust in the authorities. After that, they went to the frontline of the protests, braving teargas and confrontations with police.”

     “The teenagers said the police’s escalating use of force – including more than 16,000 canisters of teargas, water cannon, 10,000 rubber bullets and live rounds – and the authorities’ refusal to investigate police’s abuse of power were what prompted them to take part in the increasingly violent protests. They see protesters’ attacks on riot police as justified because they can no longer trust the police to deliver justice.

     “We don’t attack unless we’re attacked,” James, a 13 year old  said. “We can’t just stand there and not do a thing.”

     “Both boys carried wills when they went out to protest. “I was always scared – whether I would get shot, get arrested or even lose my life. But if we don’t come out because we’re afraid, there would be even fewer people out there,” James said.

     “I really want to give all I have to Hong Kong,” the 13-year-old said, his eyes welling up in tears. “When you pursue freedom, sacrifices are unavoidable. “We are halfway into the gate of hell. We’ve put our future and career on a line, but it is worth it.”

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/dec/15/children-of-the-revolution-the-hong-kong-youths-ready-to-sacrifice-everything

https://time.com/5689617/hong-kong-protest-china-national-day-october-1/

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/sep/30/the-guardian-view-on-the-peoples-republic-of-china-at-70-whose-history

January 8 2020 Let Anarchy Reign: Waves of liberation actions hammer the communist occupation of Hong Kong: massive freedom protests on Christmas and New Year’s Days

     Sustained and relentless waves of liberation actions continue to hammer the Communist occupation of Hong Kong with massive protests on Christmas and New Year’s Day.

     When will the free nations of the world recognize the independence and sovereignty of Hong Kong and take action shoulder to shoulder with its people to throw off the tyranny of the Chinese Communist Party?

    The Black Flag flies from the barricades in Hong Kong, and its primary meaning has not changed since its use by the First International and the veterans of the Paris Commune; freedom versus tyranny, the abolition of state terror, surveillance, and control, resistance to nationalisms of blood, faith, and soil, and abandonment of the social use of force.

     With this bold signal the people declare: we shall be ruled by none.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jan/01/new-years-day-rally-hong-kong?CMP=share_btn_link

January 18 2020 Hong Kong’s often imprisoned democracy activist Joshua Wong speaks

     How we must cherish and defend the principle of free speech, without which there is no liberty.

     In Hong Kong under the heel of the Chinese Communist Party’s occupation of state terror and control, as in so many tyrannies throughout our world, thought crimes are punished more severely than any other, for no tyranny can abide defiance. Xi Jinping, tyrant of Beijing, can permit challenge to his authority no more than any other, for truth is not on his side nor can his regime long survive where it flourishes.

      Tyranny may have horrific instruments of terror and repression at its command; in China today this includes the abduction of its critics and dissenters, the harvesting of their organs and immurement in concentration camps, torture and genocide and universal constant surveillance, but such force is brittle and hollow. It may be shattered and proven meaningless by anyone willing to defy it regardless of the costs.

     And so heroes like Joshua Wong are vital rallying points and examples, for he has called out the emperor who has no clothes, withstood his punishments and returned unconquered to fight again. The fact that China dared not torture or kill him while in prison is a sign that the occupation is weakening; only two years ago the Chinese Communist Party paraded before the world the carcasses of its victims on a world tour of the Real Bodies Exhibition, which you can read further about here: 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5602971/Real-Bodies-Exhibition-cadavers-come-Chinese-political-prisoners.html

      We have come far from this provocation and arrogance by the government of Beijing, from this brazen display of power intended to dehumanize and humiliate its political opponents and openly threaten America and Europe into submission as it seeks a stranglehold on the Pacific Rim and South Asia.

     And for the recessive tide of its cruelty and barbarism before the eyes of the world we offer thanks and celebrate the courageous and unconquerable people of Hong Kong, and champions of liberty like Joshua Wong.

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2020/jan/18/unfree-speech-joshua-wong-extract

May 23 2020 We Must Bring the Fight for the Liberation of Hong Kong to the Streets of Beijing

      Now is the moment to seize the initiative, when the naked greed and brutal tyranny of the Chinese Communist Party is revealed before the world, while the legitimacy of Xi Jinping’s regime of xenophobic ethnic cleansing and bureaucratic culture of silence has been discredited by loosing the Doom of Man Pandemic on us all to destabilize our global economic and political structures and systems and to prepare the way for the CCP’s conquest and dominion of the world, while their true intentions and plans toward us all lay revealed in the state terror and control of minorities in Xinjiang and their disregard of law in Hong Kong.

     How may we help the people of Hong Kong resist occupation and brutal repression? We must fight the occupation of Hong Kong on three fronts:

     On the diplomatic front by recognizing the independence and sovereignty of Hong Kong and aiding its people to fully seize control of their own destiny through the establishment of a democracy wherein the autonomy of individuals and the sacrosanct status of universal human rights is paramount.

     On the economic front through a policy of isolation of the Chinese Communist Party to include Boycott, Divestiture, and Sanction of all trade and manufacture with mainland China, and the suspension of all debt, until the CCP recognizes the independence and sovereignty of Hong Kong and other occupied foreign nations and subject peoples and withdraws all official and military presence from these and from the archipelago of artificial islands they have constructed as military bases in the South China Sea which threaten free shipping and their neighboring states.

     On the third front of any revolutionary struggle, that of direct action which is internal to and wholly owned by the people themselves and their legitimate representatives, as distinct from the actions of free sister governments as guarantors of universal human rights, we must act in solidarity as a united front of humankind and do everything in our power to help them secure their freedom and put into their hands the resources necessary to liberate themselves.

    Let all those who love liberty join together to resist tyranny wherever it may arise to enslave us through state force and control.

     We must bring the fight for the Liberation of Hong Kong to the streets of Beijing.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2020/jul/01/hong-kong-protests-china-security-law-carrie-lam

October 5 2020 Occupation and Exile: Hong Kong

     As the iron talons of the Chinese Communist Party close upon their prize conquest of Hong Kong, eager to batten onto the legacy of wealth and influence generations of freedom has built, they begin to kill the thing they most desire, hammering dissent and a free market of ideas which they cannot swallow and survive with brutal repression, revealed before the world as a tyranny of state terror and thought control; for this is a golden egg which cannot be extracted from its goose without destroying it.

     The unrivaled trading and financial power of Hong Kong emerges from its innovation and traditions of open intellectual research and debate; democracy and universal human rights, among them being the sacrosanct nature of pursuit of the truth and of scientific and academic discovery. Send forces of occupation and political control to repress freedom of thought and the self-ownership of autonomous individuals, and the state annihilates the conditions which made their conquest valuable. Let them continue, and that conquest will utterly transform its conqueror with its alien Enlightenment values and ideals. Such is the dilemma which now confronts the CCP; the one which confronts the world is that we must intervene to liberate Hong Kong now while our options still include those other than war.

     Xi Jinping’s Communist government, which squats upon mainland China like a miasma of contagion and darkness, as xenophobic as any fascist military dictatorship, as authoritarian as any feudal monarchy of the divine right of kings, and eyeing its neighbors hungrily as an imperial power with designs upon the liberty of any Chinese person anywhere and on the cities which they inhabit as future conquests, remains a threat not only to Hong Kong, but to all humankind.

     As I wrote in my post of February 3; “In this the Chinese Communist Party follows the First Rule of Tyranny; When the state’s absolute monopoly on power is in doubt, kill everyone not personally loyal to you. This aphorism, not included in the public version of the Red Book, was put into practice by Mao when he seized totalitarian control of the CCP during the Jiangxi Soviet Massacre in 1935 by killing three out of four of its members, the true origin of the Chinese Communist Party as it exists today as a structure of state terror and thought control.”

     What then can we do? First America and the free world must recognize the independence and sovereignty of Hong Kong; second we and our allies must enact a total Boycott, Divestiture, and Sanction of all trade and manufacture with mainland China.

     Shall we be collaborators and profiteers of slave labor, or shall we stand in solidarity to cast down from their thrones all those who would enslave us?

     In the lyrics of the Chinese national anthem, “Arise, ye who refuse to be slaves.”

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/sep/29/dispirited-but-defiant-hong-kongs-spirit-of-resistance-endures

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/oct/01/beijing-hong-kong-democracy-exile-china-national-security-law

https://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2020/sep/30/resist-until-the-end-on-the-ground-with-apple-daily-hong-kongs-pro-democracy-newspaper-video

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/01/letters-to-hong-kong-the-final-victory-will-belong-to-us

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/sep/28/who-runs-hong-kong-party-faithful-shipped-in-to-carry-out-beijing-will-security-law

July 1 2021 Anniversary of the Fall of Hong Kong

      As the Chinese Communist Party celebrates one hundred year anniversary of in founding in Shanghai in 1921 with military displays and belligerent threats to her neighbors, Hong Kong mourns the twenty fourth anniversary of her abandonment by Britain to China and the second anniversary of its democracy movement born of Xi Jinping’s rapacious and brutal conquest and repression of liberty.

     I swear this now before the world and on the stage of history; I will never abandon the people of Hong Kong, nor of China. If this sounds personal, its because it is.

     I am a bicultural person in my origins, raised from the age of nine to that of nineteen in part within traditional Chinese culture, and these were the first people whom I recognized as my extended family, though as languages are a hobby of mine and I have lived as a member of many different cultures in the years since my sense of continuity through others has broadened to include all humankind on principle. Yet I feel a kinship with Chinese peoples as a legacy of my childhood, and I owe them for their laughter and inclusion when I was young and needed a space of belonging, and I will restore that balance as I am able.

     The Black Flag still flies from the barricades in Hong Kong where we raised it on New Year’s Day in 2020, and its primary meaning has not changed since its use by the First International and the veterans of the Paris Commune; freedom versus tyranny, the abolition of state terror, surveillance, and control, and resistance to fascisms of blood, faith, and soil,

     With this bold signal the people declare: We have no masters; we shall be ruled by none.

     As written in the Washington Post by David Crawshaw, Alicia Chen and Claire Parker; “China warns enemies of ‘heads bashed bloody’ on Chinese Communist Party’s centenary.

     Xi Jinping has changed his tone. China’s leader, just weeks after urging his nationalistic “wolf warrior” diplomats to play nice, hit out Thursday at unspecified “foreign forces” and said any external attempts to subjugate the country would result in “heads bashed bloody against a Great Wall of steel.”

     In a speech to thousands of people in Beijing to mark 100 years since the Chinese Communist Party’s founding, Xi hailed the “great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation” under the party’s guidance. He declared that the party had achieved its centenary goal of building a moderately prosperous society and solved the problem of absolute poverty, adding that nothing could divide the party and the nation.

     The speech comes as Xi’s China finds itself locked in an intensifying rivalry with the United States and facing pushback against its assertive actions in the region and beyond. In a blunt message to Taiwan and its allies, Xi underscored China’s commitment to one day bring the island under Beijing’s control and vowed “resolute action” against any efforts toward what he called “Taiwan independence.”

     At the same time, Beijing has faced escalating criticism over its human rights abuses, especially against Uyghur Muslims in its far-western Xinjiang region, and its dismantling of freedoms in Hong Kong.

     Hong Kong also marked two anniversaries this week. Thursday was the 24th anniversary of the handover of Hong Kong from British to Chinese rule. But the occasion, normally a day of protest, was conspicuously muted. A year ago on Wednesday, China passed a sweeping national security law that gave Beijing the legal ammunition to effectively criminalize dissent in the territory. Pro-democracy activist Joshua Wong, who is now in jail, described it at the time as “the end of Hong Kong that the world knew before.”

     In the year since, its critics have seen their fears materialize as China used the threat of punishment under the law to further cement its grip on the territory.

     Since Xi took over the CCP’s top job in 2012, he has repeatedly meddled with Hong Kong’s special status. After opposition to an extradition bill birthed a major protest movement in the territory in 2019, Chinese and Hong Kong authorities argued the national security law was necessary to return “stability.”

     If quashing protests was the goal, it has largely succeeded. Under the new rules, a maximum life sentence can be handed out to anyone found guilty of “separatism,” “subversion,” “terrorism” or “collusion with foreign forces.” Acts previously protected as free speech could now fall under these categories. And the legislation has allowed Chinese authorities to increase their control over Hong Kong institutions and law enforcement.

     More than 100 people have been arrested under the law over the past year. Some were detained for helping to facilitate a primary vote in July 2020 to pick pro-democracy candidates to run in elections scheduled for September. The elections were ultimately postponed, and many of the pro-democracy candidates were barred from running. Journalists and publishers, meanwhile, have found themselves and their work under threat. Under pressure, the pro-democracy newspaper Apple Daily shut down operations last week.

     “From politics to culture, education to media, the law has infected every part of Hong Kong society and fomented a climate of fear that forces residents to think twice about what they say, what they tweet and how they live their lives,” Yamini Mishra, Amnesty International’s Asia-Pacific Regional Director, said in a press release this week.

     The draconian rules have fueled an exodus of Hong Kong people to Britain, Canada, Taiwan and elsewhere. For those who remain, Beijing is using the law to rewrite history and push for a new generation of obedient subjects.

     A Pew Research Center survey published this week revealed overwhelmingly unfavorable opinions of China among developed countries. But Xi, 68, indicated he would not be swayed.

     “The Chinese people have never bullied, oppressed, or enslaved the people of other countries,” he said. “At the same time, the Chinese people will never allow any foreign forces to bully, oppress or enslave us. Anyone who dares try to do that will have their heads bashed bloody against a Great Wall of steel forged by over 1.4 billion Chinese people.”

     “Heads bashed bloody” became a trending topic on the social media platform Weibo on Thursday, with more than 900 million views.

     Thursday’s celebration at Tiananmen Square, which included a military flyover, 100-gun salute and patriotic songs, capped weeks of pageantry and nationalistic displays in the lead-up to the ruling party’s 100th anniversary.

     The Communist Party was founded in Shanghai in 1921. It won victory in the Chinese Civil War in 1949 — ousting the nationalist Kuomintang, which fled to Taiwan — and has ruled the country ever since, often with an iron fist.

     In the speech, Xi reiterated that it was the party’s “historic mission” to bring Taiwan under Beijing’s control. China has sharply ramped up military incursions into Taiwanese airspace in recent months, leading some analysts to warn of the potential for military conflict, perhaps even a Chinese invasion of the democratic island. Along with Beijing’s territorial claims in the South China Sea, the Taiwan dispute is a major flash point in the region.

     Xi, who has eliminated limits on his time in office, has presided over steady economic growth and a rise in living standards since he took power. But his tenure has been marked by the rollout of a vast surveillance state in which citizens are tracked closely by the government and dissent is crushed.

     The country’s economy — the world’s second-largest — has rebounded quickly from the coronavirus outbreak, with the World Bank forecasting growth of 8.5 percent this year. But China also faces many challenges, not least the demographic dual hit of a low birthrate and an aging population.

     China’s diplomats have been increasingly aggressive in pushing back at Western criticism, often via social media platforms that Beijing blocks its citizens from using. But this forceful “wolf warrior” approach — named after a patriotic Chinese action film franchise — has rankled outsiders and has been cited as a key factor in Beijing’s diminished global image.

September 25 2025 Banned Book Week: Fighting Theocratic Fascist Terror and Tyranny In America

      In a free society of equals, only we ourselves have the right to choose who we will become, and no one may authorize or limit our possible identities, for this is falsification, enslavement, and theft of the soul.

     When subversive organizations of white supremacist terror, patriarchal theocratic sexual terror, and tyranny as the centralization of power to a carceral state of force and control with all its attendant evils and paraphernalia of thought control, surveillance, and repression of dissent infiltrate our institutions to enact book bans and other censorship, let us expose and challenge them for what they are; attempts to pervert education from the teaching of questioning to produce citizens who are co owners of the state and guarantors of each others rights into obedience to authority.

     And remember children; they only ban books that can give you the power to see through the lies of those who would enslave us, and to free yourself from systems of oppression, elite hegemonies of wealth, power, and privilege, and fascisms of blood, faith, and soil. 

     For an example of how theocratic and fascist organizations pursue the subversion of democracy through book bans as part of a broad assault on our liberties and freedoms, we may look to the odious Moms For Liberty.

      As written by Mark Romano in MSN, in an article entitled 10 Examples of How Moms for Liberty are the Real Threats to our Freedoms; “Moms for Liberty has positioned itself as a champion for parental rights and freedom in education, but their actions often tell a different story. This group, while claiming to advocate for liberty, promotes policies that restrict personal choice and challenge diverse perspectives in schools. Many parents and educators question how a movement that rallies against certain books and ideas can truly call itself a defender of freedom.

     With chapters across 45 states, Moms for Liberty has gained visibility in education politics. Their push for influence in school districts raises concerns about the limits they want to place on curriculum and expression. This blog post explores ten notable examples that highlight how their agenda can contradict the very values of liberty and freedom they purport to support.

As this discussion unfolds, it becomes clear that the issues at stake go beyond educational choices. They touch upon broader themes of inclusivity, freedom of speech, and the diverse fabric of American society.

    Defining ‘Liberty’ and ‘Freedom’

     Liberty and freedom are often used interchangeably, but they have distinct meanings.

     Liberty refers to the protection of individual rights and the absence of oppression. It’s about having the legal and social space to make choices.

     Freedom, on the other hand, can mean the power to act, speak, or think without hindrance. It’s more about the ability to pursue personal desires.

     In a democratic society, both are essential for human dignity.

     Moms for Liberty positions itself as a champion of parents’ rights. Yet, their actions often contradict their claims about supporting true liberty and freedom for all.

     By limiting access to certain books or topics in schools, they restrict the freedom of students to learn and explore. This creates a tension between their stated goals and the actual impact of their actions.

     Understanding these terms helps clarify the debate around organizations like Moms for Liberty. It shows how their belief system can shape policies that may not align with broader definitions of liberty and freedom.

     Educational Censorship

Educational censorship is a growing concern as different groups push to control what students learn. This movement often focuses on banning books and shaping classroom discussions, which can limit students’ exposure to diverse ideas.

     Banning Books

     Banning books has become a notable strategy. Groups like Moms for Liberty often target specific titles that address topics like race, gender, and sexuality. They argue that these subjects are inappropriate for students.

     Many schools have faced pressure to remove certain books from libraries and reading lists. This action creates gaps in education. Students miss out on important discussions about society and history. For instance, classics that tackle civil rights issues may get pulled. This not only limits freedom of choice but also diminishes critical thinking skills in young readers.

     Controlling Classroom Content

     Controlling classroom content is another tactic used by Moms for Liberty. They advocate for removing lessons that introduce concepts related to social justice and identity. Their focus is often on ensuring that political views align with specific ideologies.

     Teachers may find themselves restricted in how they address topics in class. This can lead to a watered-down curriculum that avoids important issues. For example, discussions about historical injustices might get minimized or skipped altogether. When educators cannot discuss various perspectives, students lose the chance to develop a well-rounded understanding of the world around them.

     Opposition to Inclusive Policies

Moms for Liberty often challenges inclusive policies, focusing on LGBTQ+ rights and racial equity. Their stance leads to heated debates within communities, limiting the support for diversity in schools.

     Resistance to LGBTQ+ Rights in Schools

Moms for Liberty has actively opposed policies that support LGBTQ+ students. This includes pushing back against discussions about gender identity and sexual orientation in classrooms.

     They argue that these topics should not be part of school curriculums. Their campaigns often focus on banning certain books or materials that include LGBTQ+ narratives.

     Many school board meetings see strong vocal opposition from Moms for Liberty members. Their influence raises concerns about students feeling safe and represented, as they push for a more traditional approach to education.

     Challenging Racial Equity Initiatives

Moms for Liberty also opposes racial equity initiatives in schools. They argue that these programs create division.

     Members often claim that teaching about systemic racism is anti-American or promotes “critical race theory,” even when such teachings are not part of the curriculum.

     This opposition can lead to the rejection of programs aimed at promoting diversity and inclusion. They seek to eliminate discussions that highlight historical injustices, which can prevent students from understanding different perspectives.

     This resistance can limit resources meant to support marginalized students, impacting overall school culture.

     Parental Rights Overreach

     Moms for Liberty often advocates for parental rights in ways that some see as overstepping boundaries. This can affect health and safety measures in schools and infringe upon the choices of other families. The implications of these actions are significant and raise questions about individual freedoms.

     Health and Safety Measures

     In their push for parental control, Moms for Liberty has challenged essential health and safety protocols in schools. One notable example is their opposition to mask mandates during health crises. They argue that parents should decide whether their children wear masks, but this stance can compromise the safety of the entire student body.

     Additionally, this group has pushed back against vaccination requirements. By questioning established health guidelines, they risk creating environments where preventable diseases could spread. Their actions often ignore the broader public health implications, focusing solely on individual parental choice.

     Infringing on Other Parents’ Choices

     Moms for Liberty’s focus on parental rights can inadvertently affect other families’ rights. For instance, when advocating for book bans in schools, they impose their values on all students. This limits access to diverse perspectives and important topics, which can help shape young minds.

     Moreover, their initiatives can place undue pressure on educators. Teachers may feel forced to avoid certain subjects to comply with parental demands, impacting the quality of education. In this way, the push for expanded parental rights can lead to a narrowing of educational content, which can harm all students.

     Interference with Curriculum Development

Moms for Liberty often challenges curriculum decisions in schools. Their actions raise concerns about how their involvement affects educational choices.

     Critique of Curriculum Experts

     Moms for Liberty has taken steps to question the expertise of curriculum designers. They believe that parents should have a strong say in what children learn. This point of view often leads to dismissing input from educational professionals.

     For example, when schools adopt certain materials, these parents might push back, labeling them as inappropriate. This can create tension between educators and parents.

     The result? Educators may feel pressured to alter lesson plans to appease concerned parents. This interferes with the educational process.

     Limiting Teacher Autonomy

     Teacher autonomy can take a hit when groups like Moms for Liberty get involved. Teachers typically select materials and methods to suit their students’ needs. When parental groups pressure schools, it can limit educators’ choices.

     For instance, teachers may shy away from diverse perspectives in literature or science due to fear of backlash. Instead of encouraging open discussions, they might stick to safer, less controversial topics.

     This restricts students’ learning experiences. A narrow focus on certain viewpoints can limit critical thinking and understanding. It affects the overall educational environment, making it harder for students to explore complex issues.

     Advocacy Against Evidence-Based Education

     Moms for Liberty actively challenges the principles of evidence-based education. Their actions raise concerns about the reliance on established research and factual history in schools. Here’s a closer look at two significant aspects of this advocacy.

     Rejecting Scientific Consensus

     Moms for Liberty has been known to oppose scientific findings, especially those related to health and education. They tend to favor personal beliefs over the conclusions supported by experts.

     For example, this group often questions the importance of mental health initiatives that rely on data-driven approaches. They argue against programs that highlight the impact of social and emotional learning, dismissing them as unnecessary. This kind of rejection can limit students’ understanding of crucial topics like mental health and wellness.

     Promotion of Historical Misrepresentations

     The group also promotes selective versions of history that misrepresent facts. In efforts to influence school curriculums, Moms for Liberty pushes for bans on teaching slavery and civil rights topics. They believe these subjects create discomfort for students and parents alike.

     This advocacy can lead to an incomplete education. Omitting such key historical events prevents students from understanding the complexities of race and society. Instead, students may be presented with a sanitized view of history that ignores significant struggles and achievements.

     Political Maneuvering

     Moms for Liberty actively engages in political strategies to influence local education. They focus on targeting school boards and use emotional tactics to push policy changes.

     Electioneering School Board Campaigns

     Moms for Liberty aims to place their candidates on school boards across the country. They have launched campaigns to support candidates who align with their conservative values.

     Their strategy involves grassroots efforts in communities, mobilizing parents and like-minded individuals. They organize events to drive voter turnout and raise awareness about school issues. This focus on local elections has made them a notable player in education politics.

     With over 275 chapters in 45 states, they work to ensure representation that echoes their vision. This approach creates a network that can effectively challenge opposing views.

     Policy-Making Through Fear

     Another tactic employed by Moms for Liberty is using fear to influence policy decisions. They often highlight issues such as critical race theory and gender identity in schools. These topics can evoke strong emotions among parents.

     Moms for Liberty calls for book bans and strict policies regarding curriculum content. By framing these actions as necessary for children’s safety, they gain support from concerned parents. This fear-based strategy is effective in achieving their goals.

     Their messaging resonates with many who feel anxious about modern education. By capitalizing on these fears, they seek to reshape public education to fit their ideals.

     Undermining Professional Educators

Moms for Liberty has been criticized for actions that challenge the authority and expertise of teachers. This approach can create a hostile environment for educators and diminish the quality of education students receive.

     Dismissal of Teacher Expertise

     Moms for Liberty often questions the qualifications and methods of professional educators. They argue that teachers are not to be trusted with sensitive topics, claiming these professionals push certain ideologies.

     Teachers spend years studying and training to understand how to educate their students effectively. By undermining this expertise, the group can create a divide between parents and educators. This can lead to conflicts at school board meetings and an atmosphere of suspicion.

     Such actions might result in teachers feeling unappreciated and undervalued. When teachers worry about their job security or reputation, it can lead to less effective teaching practices.

     Encouraging Distrust in Educators

     Moms for Liberty advocates for transparency in schools. While this sounds good, it often breeds distrust among parents towards educators.

     By promoting ideas that teachers are responsible for indoctrinating students, they create fear and concern among parents. This makes parents more likely to challenge teachers’ decisions or methods without a clear understanding.

     Such distrust can harm the classroom environment. Educators might feel the need to look over their shoulders, impacting their teaching style. Instead of focusing on learning, teachers may spend time justifying their choices to parents and school boards.

     This breakdown in trust not only affects teachers but can also create a negative atmosphere for students trying to learn.

     Stifling Student Expression

     Moms for Liberty has faced criticism for actions that seem to limit student expression in schools. This includes restricting student speech and discouraging critical thinking. These actions raise concerns about how students engage with different ideas and perspectives.

     Limiting Student’s Speech and Clubs

     Moms for Liberty has been linked to efforts that restrict student speech. This includes challenges to student-organized clubs that promote diversity and inclusion.

     For example, some schools have seen pushback against clubs that focus on LGBTQ+ issues. Members of these clubs often face strong opposition, limiting their ability to create a supportive environment.

     Parents have voiced concerns about these clubs, saying they conflict with their values. Consequently, school administrators sometimes feel pressured to remove or limit these clubs.

     This creates an environment where students may feel unsafe expressing their identities and beliefs. Many students cherish these clubs as their safe spaces to discuss important topics.

     Discouraging Critical Thinking

     Another concern is the trend of discouraging critical thinking in classrooms. Moms for Liberty promotes a certain viewpoint on various issues, often pushing back against curricula that include diverse perspectives.

     For instance, they have challenged books and educational materials that present different historical viewpoints or explore complex social issues.

     This can lead to a narrow understanding of important topics for students. It limits their ability to engage in discussions and form their own opinions.

     When students are not exposed to a wide range of ideas, they miss out on essential skills needed for critical thinking. Encouraging curiosity and questioning is crucial for their development.

     Promotion of Homogeneous Ideology

     Moms for Liberty’s actions often reflect a consistent pattern of promoting a narrow set of beliefs. This approach can lead to a lack of diverse educational experiences for students. Here are two key areas where this ideology is evident.

     Advocating for ‘One-Sided’ Learning

      Moms for Liberty pushes for educational policies that favor specific viewpoints. This often means supporting curricula that highlight conservative perspectives while sidelining alternative ideas. For example, they have opposed lessons that include topics like critical race theory and sexual orientation.

     This focus can create a limited view of history and social issues. When students only learn about one perspective, they might struggle to understand broader societal dynamics. Effective education thrives on presenting a variety of viewpoints.

     Opposing Diverse Perspectives

    The organization frequently challenges programs that aim to include diverse voices. They argue that introducing concepts related to race, gender, and LGBTQ+ identities threatens traditional values. For instance, Moms for Liberty has taken steps to block LGBTQ+ protections in schools, claiming these measures infringe on free speech.

     Such actions can lead to an environment where students feel excluded or marginalized. By opposing a rich tapestry of perspectives, they limit students’ ability to engage with the world around them. This stance raises concerns about inclusivity and understanding in educational settings.”

     As I wrote in my post of September 8 2024, International Literacy Day: What is a Library For?; In our current moment of book burnings and bans, rewritten histories and authorized identities, silencing and erasure of the witness of history and the repression of dissent, thought control and the electoral infiltration, subversion, and capture of public institutions crucial to the mission of democracy and the manufacture of an informed electorate able to question authority as co-owners of the state, our interdependent public schools and libraries have become a frontline in the struggle between tyranny and liberty.

     What is a library for?

     Libraries share with public schools the purpose of creating citizens, of education in its original Greek meaning to bring out the truth of ourselves, together with two other primary and crucial functions in a democracy; to provide free access to learning as both rights of information and a free press, which also parallel equality as annihilation of class and access to opportunity as a seizure of power, and to provide inclusive and diverse representations of self as revolutionary struggle against authorized identities, divisions and hierarchies of elite belonging and exclusionary otherness, and fascisms of race, gender, faith, and nationality.

     At the heart of this process of identity construction lies the curation of reading lists and a personal library which represents and defines us in ways we have chosen for ourselves.

     Are we not the stories we tell about ourselves, to ourselves and to others?

      Memory, history, identity; the selves we choose among the limitless possibilities of becoming human. Here is a central problem of both libraries and the construction of ourselves as assemblages of stories; how shall we taxonomize, structure, and assign relative value to the texts we gather, in our personae and in our libraries as memory palaces? And in a realm of ideas and their consequences which is chaotic, shifting, ephemeral, impermanent, and full of dyadic opposites, relative truths, mutual interdependence and change?

     Before all else, who decides? Public libraries and schools confront us with all of the issues about how to be human together which create, inform, motivate, and shape human societies, and democracies most especially as negotiated meaning and value.

     This is why the curation of personal libraries and unauthorized reading lists  are revolutionary acts, and a praxis of the values of democracy.

     As I wrote in my post of December 14 2021, Subversion of Democracy: Case of the Texas Book Ban; Remaining on the Texas Public School Required Reading List:

Lynchings and Other Family Gatherings: the Joy of Community

Keep Your Pimp Hand Strong: Negotiating Gender Roles

Only Our Kind Are Truly Human: Why Values and Morals Only Apply To Us

     Texas bans books from public schools and libraries in subversion of democracy and our values of freedom and equality of all humankind in an attempt to enforce imperiled hegemonies of elite wealth, power, and privilege historically and systemically constructed along divisions of race and gender and fascisms of blood, faith, and soil.

     The multifront assault on freedom of information and expression is about patriarchal sexual terror and white supremacist terror under the fig leaves of Gideonite fundamentalist Christian Identity sectarianism and jingoistic nationalism, as it has always been.

     The last time the state had the right to control its slave populations through access to learning civilization collapsed and was lost for a thousand years while the Church burned books which threated elite power, and we must be vigilant lest we give those who would enslave us the right and power to do so yet again, and cast the world into a Dark Age from which we may never recover.

    As written by Ryan Cooper in The Week, in an article entitled The forgotten history of Republican book banning; “A conservative stock character is making a comeback: the book banner. For the past few years, Republicans have pretended they’re defending free speech and free inquiry in schools against censorious liberals with their safe spaces and trigger warnings. In reality, conservatives have a mile-long history of trying to suppress the teaching of books they find uncomfortable.

     That record has resurfaced in the Virginia gubernatorial race, where Republican candidate Glenn Youngkin recently ran an ad in which a woman named Laura Murphy complained about not being able to dictate what was taught at her local high school. Murphy describes the issue as explicit material being shown to children without parental sign-off, but there’s much more to the story than the ad let on: Back in 2013, Murphy told The Washington Post that her son Blake (now an associate general counsel for the National Republican Congressional Committee) had night terrors after being required to read Toni Morrison’s book Pulitzer Prize-winning classic Beloved.

     Murphy isn’t the only Republican with this censorious impulse. The American Library Association maintains an incomplete list of attempted book-banning events in recent history, and in the large majority of cases for which a motivation is explained, it is conservative: Right-wing parents in Columbus, Ohio, tried to ban Catcher in the Rye in schools in 1963 because it was “anti-white.” Other parents challenged The Grapes of Wrath in Greenville, South Carolina, in 1991 because it invoked God and Jesus in a “vain and profane manner.” Slaughterhouse-Five was suppressed in Oakland County, Michigan, in 1972, in a case in which a circuit judge called the book “depraved, immoral, psychotic, vulgar, and anti-Christian.” Those are just three of dozens of examples.

     Now, liberals have done the same thing on occasion, typically targeting books which contain racial slurs, like The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn. But the bulk of book banning incidents — parents complaining about sexual content, violence, skepticism of Christianity, cursing, or the history of racism and slavery — are straight out of the Moral Majority politics of the 1980s and 1990s. That habit seemed to vanish for awhile when Republicans nominated a thrice-divorced, credibly accused rapist for president. Now it’s coming back.

     In recent months, Republican legislatures have passed de facto prohibitions of teaching the history of racism across the country. As a result, a Tennessee teacher was fired for assigning Ta-Nehisi Coates, while a Texas school board recently apologized for instructing teachers to present “opposing” views on the Holocaust while trying to obey a Republican law on curriculum content. Don’t let the brief reprieve fool you: They were always like this.”

    As written by Amy Brady in Lithub, The History (and Present) of Banning Books in America: On the Ongoing Fight Against the Censorship of Ideas; “Like small pox and vinyl records, book banning is something many Americans like to think of as history. But according to the American Booksellers for Free Expression (ABFE), the practice persists. ABFE, which from its headquarters in White Plains fights book banning across the country, keeps a list of books challenged each year by American public libraries and schools. In 2016, that list includes Khaled Hosseini’s The Kite Runner, Toni Morrison’s Beloved, and Emily M. Danworth’s The Miseducation of Cameron Post. Most of the titles are by LGBTQ authors and authors of color who write about life beyond white, straight, middle-class America.

     One way ABFE fights book banning is to partner with other organizations in the publishing industry (including their parent organization, the American Booksellers Association) to host Banned Books Week, a seven-day celebration that takes place in bookstores and libraries all over the United States. This year, the event runs from September 25th to October 1st with a focus on “diversity,” a factor behind many book challenges. “There were over 300 book challenges in 2015,” said Chris Finan, Director of ABFE, in an interview. “And themes of race, ethnicity, and sexual preference have been a large part of why those books got challenged.”

     On its website, ABFE acknowledges that diversity is difficult to define. One definition that has informed their thinking comes from the ALA’s Office for Intellectual Freedom: Diversity includes “non-white main and/or secondary characters; LGBT main and/or secondary characters; disabled main and/or secondary characters; issues about race or racism; LGBT issues; issues about religion, which encompass in this situation the Holocaust and terrorism; issues about disability and/or mental illness; non-Western settings, in which the West is North America and Europe.”

      Historically, other reasons for banning books include: sexual imagery, violence, and any content considered obscene. Indeed, arguments over obscenity—how its defined and how that definition relates to the First Amendment—have been at the heart of banned-book controversies throughout the 20th and 21st centuries.

     Many historians point to Harriet Beecher Stowe’s Uncle Tom’s Cabin as the first book in the United States to experience a ban on a national scale. The Confederacy barred the book from stores not only for its pro-abolitionist agenda, but because it aroused heated debates about slavery (some historians argue that the book catalyzed the Civil War).

     A decade after the war, a carping moralist government official named Anthony Comstock convinced the United States Congress to pass a law prohibiting the mailing of “pornographic” materials. His definition of the term was murky at best. Anatomy textbooks, doctors’ pamphlets about reproduction, anything by Oscar Wilde, and even The Canterbury Tales were deemed too sexy to send through the mail.

     These bans, or “comstockery,” as the practice became known, continued into the new century. But by the 1920s, shifts in politics and social mores led booksellers to see themselves as advocates for people’s right to read whatever they wanted. Then, in 1933, an influential court case—The United States v. One Book Called Ulysses—helped usher in a new era of legal interpretation of the First Amendment.

     In that court case, Judge John M. Woolsey overturned a federal ban of James Joyce’s Ulysses—the ban had been in effect since 1922, and court transcripts reveal that the judge who banned the book also remarked that it was “the work of a disordered mind.” Woolsey, who admitted to not liking the novel, found legal cause to challenge the previous judge’s definition of pornography—and by extension, his definition of art. He ultimately ruled that the depiction of sex, even if unpleasant, should be allowed in serious literature. His final edict is at once hilarious and evident of a mind capable of separating legal philosophy from personal preference: “[W]hilst in many places the effect of Ulysses on the reader undoubtedly is somewhat emetic, nowhere does it tend to be an aphrodisiac.”

     The case set an important precedent. However, Comstock Law remained on the books until 1957, when the Supreme Court tried Roth vs. The United States. The plaintiff was Samuel Roth, a writer and bookseller convicted for mailing pornographic magazines to subscribers. His trial forced the American legal system to once again reconsider its definition of obscenity. The Court’s final decision was bad for Roth: his conviction was upheld, and he remained in prison until 1961. But it was great for lovers of books: the definition was narrowed to apply to only that which is “utterly without redeeming social importance.” That narrowing made room for books depicting sex and violence. Even Judge Woolsey had found Ulysses to have social importance.

     In the decades that followed, public officials would continue to challenge the Court’s 1957 definition of obscenity, including Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart, whose personal definition famously began and ended with the declaration “I know it when I see it.” But in general, the 1960s and 70s witnessed a simultaneous drop in instances of book bans and rise in more explicit art. Artists and authors felt freer than ever to experiment. Consumers were more willing than ever to un-clutch their pearls and engage with racy material. Sex was mainstream in the novels of John Updike and Erica Jong. Then America elected Ronald Reagan.

     “Reagan didn’t run on a campaign of anti-pornography,” Finan clarifies. “But he nevertheless ran an election that depowered those who fought for First Amendment freedoms. [His] election encouraged challenges by people who were unhappy with books in schools and libraries that were increasingly realistic in their depiction of life.” The number of challenges to books made by school boards and libraries rose dramatically: “Suddenly we were facing 700-800 challenges a year,” says Finan. In 1982, the ALA responded to this renewed culture of censorship with Banned Books Week. “The point of the event was to get people to understand that these books weren’t pornographic or excessively violent, but simply depicting the real world…and that many were classics of American literature,” Finan says. “Banned Books Week was the first real [American] celebration of the freedom to read.”

     In those early days, Banned Books Week consisted almost entirely of libraries and bookstores hanging posters and displaying banned books. “Those displays were enormously effective communication tools,” says Finan, “because people would wander over and find out that the books they love had been challenged. Suddenly they understood that censorship isn’t just about fringe literature.” Today, those displays remain a centerpiece of Banned Books Week, but partnering sponsors are also seeking to involve readers in other ways. The Washington, DC Public Library, for example, hosts a city-wide scavenger hunt of banned books that began on September 1st and will continue until the end of the month. The books, which have been wrapped in black paper printed with words like “SMUT” or “FILTHY,” have been hidden on shelves in libraries and bookstores all over DC.

     The Comic Book Legal Defense Fund (CBLDF), another sponsor of Banned Books Week, has published a handbook that lists which comic books have been censored and outlines what readers can do to fight censorship. “Since 2011, at least one graphic novel has been included on ALA’s annual list of the ten most frequently challenged books,” said Betsy Gomez, Editorial Director of CBLDF, in an interview. “In 2015, CBLDF fought more than 24 attempts to ban books, including the comics Drama, This One Summer, The Sandman, Fun Home, Persepolis, Palomar. So far, in 2016, CBLDF has defended a dozen books.” The handbook includes programming ideas for educators and libraries to engage their communities in discussions about banned books throughout the year.

     Organizations with no official connection to Banned Books Week are also getting involved. Wordier Than Thou, an open mic storytelling group in Pinellas Park, Florida, began presenting last year an annual burlesque show inspired by selected banned books. “[The show] definitely gets people talking about literature,” wrote Tiffany Razzano, founder of Wordier Than Thou, in an email. “[Last year], throughout the night people would come up to me and tell me about their favorite banned book.” The show, which features area burlesque favorite Mayven Missbehavin’, makes thematic sense: “It’s supposedly offensive material [interpreted by] scantily clad women performing classic burlesque stripteases,” she writes. For the sake of surprise, Razzano wouldn’t disclose which books would be featured this year. But last year’s performance included Gone with the Wind, 1984, and The Scarlet Letter.

     It’s rare today for a book banning case to make it to the federal courts, but many challenges to books are still taking place on the state and local levels. At the time of this writing, ABFE has joined a protest against the Chesterfield County Public Schools in Virginia, which seeks to remove Rainbow Rowell’s Eleanor & Park and other titles from students’ voluntary summer reading lists. The proposed removal is “particularly outrageous,” says Finan, because the books aren’t a part of the school’s required curriculum.

     If school administrators are attempting to limit even elective reading, what does the future hold for students who want access to all books, classic and contemporary—books that might broaden their understanding of the world? “The problem of book banning hasn’t gone away, and it probably won’t,” Finan laments. “There are always going to be struggles over the proper limits to free speech.”

      As I wrote in my post of October 4 2021 What is the True Purpose of Public Education in a Democracy?

   In The Addams Family Goes to School, wherein the truant officer is dispatched to bring Pugsley and Wednesday, aged 6 and 8 who have never been to school, our introduction to this family of glorious misfits, monsters, and forgotten gods, we are presented with a morality play of revolutionary struggle and a recurring theme of the series in which individuals and society are locked in a titanic battle for ownership of identity, with the stakes being autonomy or theft of the soul.

     What is the true purpose of public education?

     School is the forge of normality, authorized identities of sex and gender, the tyranny of other people’s ideas of virtue, the institutionalization of nationalist values and narratives of exclusivity, valorization of competition, violence, militarism, and the apologetics of capitalist elitism as meritocracy, and of hierarchies of membership and exclusionary otherness and divisions of race. Here we sort future masters from those who will serve them.

     Public education is also our one chance to reimagine and transform our civilization through its members, to produce citizens of a free society of equals who can fulfill the four primary duties of a citizen; Question Authority, Expose Authority, Mock Authority, and Challenge Authority.

     Tyranny cannot withstand exposure, truthtelling, and the witness of history.

     Can democracy function as diversity and inclusion, or does throwing all the children in a pen together to sort themselves out always result in assimilation and hierarchies of exclusionary division or making everyone the same?

     The politization of public education has become national news recently with violent and disruptive confrontations during school board meetings, but this is nothing new. Education is a ground of struggle; who is chosen to succeed and take their place among our elite and who will clean their houses, serve their food, produce the goods and material basis of their survival. At stake here is nothing less than the definition of our humanity, of freedom and equality, of who will manage systems, process symbols, ideas, and information, create and have the power to change civilization, and who will service them.

     Every aspect of education as a social system, textbooks and the canon of literature, how history is taught, tests and success filters for access to power and wealth, class stratification or mobility, patriarchy, racial divisions, language, all of it is volatile and of crucial importance to the project of democracy.

     As written by Sherman Dorn in The Washington Post; “Chaos and violence seem to be the themes of the first month of school. To many observers, these may appear to be exceptional, unprecedented times. But there’s a long history of public schools serving as ideological and physical battlegrounds, particularly when it comes to conflicts over citizenship and civil rights.

     The violent response this fall by some Americans to public health measures and teaching our history of racism is an echo of violent responses in the past to efforts to broaden the reach and mission of schools. And this history also shows that how government reacts is not foreordained, and that the choice of responses will play a major role in determining the long-term consequences of this violence.

     In the 1830s and 1840s, industrialization in Massachusetts triggered civil disorder, including the Boston riots between Protestants and immigrant Catholics. State Secretary of Education Horace Mann thought he had a solution to this strife, arguing for educating all children together in what he called common schools designed to foster a background that all children would share.

     But this concept proved fractious from the start.

     No sooner did common schools emerge than violence engulfed them. In 1844, Catholic families in Philadelphia sought representation in the schools. Yet many White Protestants saw Catholic immigrants as a threat to a burgeoning national identity, and nowhere was that assault clearer than in their supposed attempts to take over the public schools. So nativists spread false rumors that Catholic immigrants were pushing local public schools to remove Bibles.

     These rumors, fear and anger spread and neighbors took to the streets. Multi-day riots in May and July resulted in the burning of multiple Catholic churches and the deaths of more than two dozen people.

     Violence at and around schools became even more widespread after the Civil War. As newly elected Black politicians joined with community members to create a system of public schooling in the South, they fused schooling and citizenship. All the Reconstruction-era state constitutions that Congress approved had education embedded as a right. The appearance of public schools for Black children and the promise of access to all aspects of society enraged some White Southerners who feared the erosion of a social order that gave them privilege and power. Those fears translated to direct attacks.

     Because of the central role of public education in the new definition of American citizenship, Southern racists targeted schools as part of an explicit counterrevolution to undermine Reconstruction and civil rights. The Ku Klux Klan regularly attacked schools, and being a teacher in a Black community was one of the most vulnerable occupations throughout the late 19th century.

     For a brief period in the early 20th century, school violence dissipated, but for the worst of reasons. Across the South, White elites imposed systems of disfranchisement and segregation; systematically and structurally disadvantaged, Black schools became less of a visible threat to White supremacy and reigning power arrangements.

     But schooling became the center of widespread community conflict and violence again in the early 1940s. When two Jehovah’s Witness children, Lillian and William Gobitas, refused to stand for the Pledge of Allegiance in their Minersville, Pa., public school classroom, they were expelled. Their case wound through the federal courts, finally reaching the Supreme Court, which decided in favor of the school district.

     In the wake of that decision, Jehovah’s Witnesses were assaulted in communities across the country, often with members of the American Legion as leading local vigilantes. Coming to the schools with a mob mentality, Legionnaires and others identified the pledge in public schools as fundamental to American identity and those who refused to say it as national threats. In wartime, the mobs — and many other Americans — viewed dissent as suspicious and unpatriotic.

     From Litchfield, Ill., to Kennebunk, Maine, entire towns were wracked by anti-Witness mobs. Children who refused to say the pledge for any number of reasons faced expulsion and threats of incarceration, as did their parents for encouraging juvenile delinquency.

     In part shamed by the violence following their earlier decision, the majority of the court reversed itself three years later. As Justice Robert Jackson explained in his majority decision, “If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion or force citizens to confess by word or act their faith therein.”

     Despite this shift and the protection of students’ right to dissent, public schools remained figurative and literal battlegrounds in the fight over American identity and rights.

     In the fall of 1957, White mobs in Little Rock, Ark., turned out in protest of the nine Black students desegregating Central High School. As Melba Pattillo Beals described in her memoir, on the first day of school her classmate Elizabeth Eckford was sandwiched between Arkansas National Guard members refusing to let her enter the school and “a huge crowd of white people screeching at her back … [having] closed in like diving vultures … [who] shouted, stomped, and whistled as though her awful predicament were a triumph for them.” The mobs dispersed only after President Dwight D. Eisenhower sent the 101st Airborne to enforce federal court orders to desegregate.

     In Nashville the same month, a violent opponent of desegregation bombed Hattie Cotton Elementary School. No one was hurt in the late-night bombing, but as historian Sonya Ramsey explained, the single Black student in the school stopped attending.

     In the 1970s, White mobs attacked buses carrying Black students as they arrived at South Boston High School.

     Across American history, schools have been vulnerable to periodic violence that surrounds debates about citizenship and equal rights in education, including the role of schools in fostering shared childhood experiences, in building citizenship and equal education regardless of race, and in allowing principled dissent from rituals.

     The strife this year fits into that broader pattern. To the parents and politicians angry or confused about critical race theory, like the parents and politicians angry or confused about mask mandates and health policies, the public schools are a key front in a battle for their rights and standing as citizens.

     Debate over the role and purposes of public schools is a healthy sign of a functioning democracy. But violence around schooling is fundamentally at odds with the give-and-take of democratic decision-making. And it demands a strong response from authorities.

     In 1943, the Supreme Court reversed the decision that had triggered mob violence against Jehovah’s Witnesses. In 1957, Eisenhower responded to the resistance to desegregation in Arkansas by dispatching federal troops.

     Yet when the government has failed to confront violence, the consequences have been severe. In 1833, abolitionist Prudence Crandall opened her Canterbury, Conn., boarding school to Sarah Harris and other Black girls and women. Public officials responded by making it illegal for her to admit students from out of state without town permission, prosecuted her and stood by while a mob destroyed much of her school in 1834. Crandall moved to Illinois the next year, costing Connecticut a dedicated educational leader and beginning two centuries of a long troubled history of school segregation in New England.

     The history of education teaches us that violence surrounding democratic schooling is part of a recurring pattern and that we have a choice to passively accept or assertively confront violent impulses.”

     As I wrote in my post of March 22 2020, The Subversion of our Education System and Democracy; The suspension of our national standardized testing has revealed a failure of our education system; the commodification and privatization of learning and the modeling of our schools on factory production has produced a generation of Americans who can follow orders, perform routine tasks, and parrot facts, but whose abilities to create, invent, reason, and analyze and interpret facts have been crippled. This is intentional.

    Educatus, the Greek word origin of education, means to bring out rather than to stuff facts in. It is an idea bound together with that of citizens as co-owners of their own government in a democracy, and equally responsible for one another and for the stewardship of its four pillars of freedom, equality, truth, and justice.

     Our civilization is founded and premised on its ability to question itself; this capacity for adaptation and transformation sets democracy apart from the tyrannies of priest-kings which had come before. From our origin in the Forum of Athens, the dialectics of Socratic method has been the forge of our identity as an anti-hierarchical culture, a free society of equals in which the greatest duty of a citizen is to question, expose, mock, and challenge authority, to incite, provoke, and disturb, and we must return this process to its central role in education if liberty is to survive and flourish in this age of state terror and control.

     We have permitted the subversion of our education system and democracy by those who would enslave us. And we must take it back.

     As I wrote in my post of July 8 2021, Truth, Lies, and History as a Ground of Struggle; the Case of Critical Race Theory Repression;  We are confronted today with the realization of a nightmare and prophetic vision written by George Orwell in 1984, the classic novel of unequal power and the authoritarian nature of government which rendered in the chiaroscuro of a newsreel depicting the liberation of concentration camps a fictional interrogation of totalitarianism as a companion volume to Hannah Arendt’s nonfictional The Origins of Totalitarianism.

    The remnants of the Fourth Reich and the organizations of white supremacist treason and terror within our government who remain loyal to Trump’s vision of a white ethnostate want the government to control what is taught as history in our schools, which would be the death knell of freedom and equality in America, and are enacting a furious assault on our values and on public education as a guarantor of an informed electorate in order to render meaningless the idea of citizenship, the co-ownership of the state by its members, in parallel with vote suppression legislation.

     As I wrote in my post of June 22 2021, Our History Swallows Us Like An Infinite Moebius Loop and We Become Prisoners of Its Gordian Knot: the Case of Kurdistan; History becomes a wilderness of mirrors; of lies and illusions, distorted and captured images endlessly reflected which violate our uniqueness, falsify us, limit and entrap us in authorized identities and narratives which serve the interests of elite power and not our own.

     Our histories and memories are the anchorages of our identity and the wellspring of our becoming, networks of connectedness which sustain our harmony and wholeness; but such nets can ensnare us as well, and become atavisms we drag behind us like an invisible reptilian tail.

     Our history swallows us like an infinite Moebius Loop, and we become prisoners of its Gordian Knot; the case of Critical Race Theory repression illumines the vicious cycle of fear, power, and force as racism and fascist tyranny overlap and intermingle hideously, consuming its most vulnerable population as sacrifices on the altar of wealth and power.

     As I wrote in my post of December 5 2020, Whose Story Is This?;  We are the stories we tell about ourselves, to ourselves and one another. So it becomes important to ask of our stories and representations, whose story is this?

     I call this the Narrative Theory of Identity, and my intention is that it serves as a lever for changing the balance of power in the world. Our idea of self derives from the persona, the ancient Greek theatrical mask through which characters speak, and the possibilities of becoming human are a function of the struggle between authorized identities and the self- ownership of autonomous individuals.

     We have one problem in common as we grow up and create ourselves; each of us must reinvent how to be human. Our informing, motivating, and shaping forces, modeled and communicated to us by others, are necessary to our processes of growth and individuation, but also integral to the dialectics of self and others.

     The struggle between the masks that others make for us and those we make for ourselves is the first revolution in which we all must fight.

     As I wrote in my post of June 19 2020, Liberation, Memory, History, and Human Being: a Narrative Theory of Identity; On this Juneteenth we celebrate the final Emancipation of the Black peoples of America from slavery, and also the Liberation of Humankind from all forms of ownership by others. The first kind of freedom was won in the Civil War and is particular to our unique history; the second kind of freedom is universal and is yet to the achieved.

     There has been much insightful and relevant discussion of our history of slavery and racial inequality and violence during the Black Lives Matter protests in the weeks before this holiday, of the silencing and erasure of people of color from our historical memory and of the divisions of exclusionary otherness and defense of unequal power in our society through state control of our identity and relations with others at every level of human interaction.

     Beyond the state terror of racist police violence, this is the primary means of repression and power asymmetry perpetrated against us by the ruling class; not the secret prisons and assassinations, not the racist death squads or the dehumanization and commodification of the working class by the cabal of plutocratic capitalists, Gideonite fundamentalist patriarchs, and white supremacist terrorists who together comprise the fascist Republican conspiracy of atavistic barbarism, but their theft of the possibilities of human meaning and being through control of our educational system and rewritten history.

     Why are we taught to revere Independence Day on the Fourth of July, but not Emancipation Day on June 19?

     Much of our history has been stolen from us. Its time to take it back.

     Why is this of vital importance? How is our liberty determined by our history and the quality of our humanity by our memory?

     Whose stories shall we teach to future generations? Will it be songs of resistance and survival, of the unconquered freedom and glory of our humanity and the triumph of our seizures of power over who we are and may become? Or will it be elegies of our dehumanization and enslavement, or submission to tyrannical authorities and fascisms of blood, faith, and soil?

     America is a free society of equals, wherein no one is better than any other by reason of birth or condition, in which we are co-owners of our government. This new American humanity was intended to be a society of autonomous individuals, in which we are free from the ideas of other people and from the force and control of the state.

     Free to dream new possibilities of becoming human, to create ourselves as we choose with a free will and conscience in which no government stands between us and the limits of our imagination, and in which relations between persons are unmediated by the state so long as none are harmed and no other boundaries are authorized by law; a society which renounces the social use of force in the performance of our identities and in which we send no armies to enforce virtue.

     We must seize our stories as informing and motivating sources through which we shape ourselves, authorize identities, and create Others for whom we are negative spaces and through whom we define ourselves.

     Always there remains the creative dynamism and revolutionary struggle between the masks that others make for us and those we make for ourselves. This is the first revolution in which we all must fight; the struggle to create ourselves.

     Which future will we choose, America? Resistance or submission?

     Whose story is this? This question must be the beginning of a new pedagogy of education in history, and remain central to the project of its study. True education in the discipline of history asks Socratic questions and teaches methods of research, analysis, interpretation, and the publishing and presentation of insights and discoveries; education in general teaches us to interrogate and test claims of truth.

      Trump has proclaimed the triumph of propaganda in authorizing an official state version of historical truth, whose purpose is to institutionalize the Mayflower Puritan/Pilgrim mythos as a competing narrative of national origins to the 1619 hypothesis. This seems to me an excellent idea, if we ignore the authorization of identity and government disinformation facets and instead make this interrogation of competing narratives itself the heart of our national story and curriculum.

     Myths of colonialism, fictive inventions of national origin, and the roots of fascisms of blood, faith, and soil in our triumphalist narratives of Pilgrim and Puritan founders of America. Though the Mayflower Compact was signed November 21, celebrations of the 400th anniversary of the voyage began last week with its departure for America, which are being promoted by our government as a reply to the 1619 Project. This I cannot abide, so say I in paraphrase of the hero in the film Inglorious Basterds; can you abide it?

     As we learn from John Cage in music, Harold Pinter in theatre, and Piet Mondrian in art, it is the blank spaces which define and order meaning; and in history it is the silenced and erased voices to which we must listen most carefully, for here the emptiness speaks to us of secret power and of the key functions and relationships which authority must conceal to maintain its hegemony over us.

     Always pay attention to the man behind the curtain.

     We must ask ourselves as we raise our children to become citizens and as we ourselves continue to learn throughout our lives, Whose story is this?

Fahrenheit 451 1966 Trailer | Oskar Werner

US public schools banned 10,000 books in most recent academic year

Survey by PEN America suggests bans nearly tripled nationwide from previous year’s figure

 Banned Books in US Tripled to at Least 10,000 Last Year Under GOP State Laws: Iowa and Florida alone banned around 8,000 titles in libraries and public schools during the 2023-2024 school year.

https://truthout.org/articles/banned-books-in-us-tripled-to-at-least-10000-last-year-under-gop-state-laws/?utm_source=Truthout&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=097274f518-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2024_09_23_08_53&utm_content=httpstruthoutorgarticlesbannedbooksinustripledtoatleast10000lastyearundergopstatelaws&utm_term=0_bbb541a1db-097274f518-%5BLIST_EMAIL_ID%5D&fbclid=IwY2xjawFhYthleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHdqUXns3rON6nCriu3WFQ7MCX_oSU3HJBp9WwV3yNhB8Lr3i04EcAgHW6Q_aem_ALXcd0UhQm-NSIOJ8nJR0w

‘Knowledge is power’: new app helps US teens read books banned in school

Digital Public Public Library fights back against rightwing censorship with resource that works through geo-targeting

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/aug/18/us-teens-banned-books-schools

Appeals court tells Texas it cannot ban books because it dislikes ideas within

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/article/2024/jun/09/texas-books-butt-fart-appeals-court

Major publishers sue Florida over ‘unconstitutional’ school book ban

Hundreds of titles from Judy Blume to Mark Twain purged from school libraries following rightwing challenges

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/article/2024/aug/30/florida-school-book-ban-publishers-lawsuit

The US librarian who sued book ban harassers: ‘I decided to fight back

https://www.theguardian.com/books/article/2024/jun/02/librarian-book-ban-interview

Scholastic reverses decision to separate books on race, gender and sexuality

After backlash, company will no longer separate catalog at school fairs, which allowed districts to opt out of diverse books

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2023/oct/25/scholastic-book-fair-reverse-race-gender-sexuality

‘Reading is resistance’: students and parents take on DeSantis’s book bans

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/sep/23/florida-desantis-book-ban-school-student-parent

Book bans use ‘parental rights’ as cover to attack civil liberties, Democrat warns: Florida congressman Maxwell Frost, who introduced Fight Banned Books Act, says bans are ‘baseless attack on our civil rights’

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/dec/21/book-bans-democrat-warning-maxwell-frost

Republicans will do anything to ban books, even saying they cause porn addiction

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/dec/09/republican-book-bans-censorship-free-speech

10 Examples of How Moms for Liberty are the Real Threats to our Freedoms

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opinion/10-examples-of-how-moms-for-liberty-are-the-real-threats-to-our-freedoms/ar-AA1pLFcO?ocid=BingNewsSerp

October 4 2021 What is the True Purpose of Public Education in a Democracy?

Violence Over Schools Is Nothing New In America/ Thew Washington Post

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2021/09/29/violence-over-schools-is-nothing-new-america/

September 1 2024 Becoming Human Through Literature: Jay’s Revised Modern Canon of Literature, a Resource For Back To School

September 8 2024 International Literacy Day: What is a Library For?

August 12 2024 A Sacred Calling to Pursue the Truth: the Case of Salman Rushdie, Champion of Our Liberty In Writing As A Sacred Calling to Pursue the Truth

The Origins of Totalitarianism, Hanna Arendt

The Ministry of Truth: The Biography of George Orwell’s 1984, Dorian Lynskey

                Libraries and Books, a reading list

Fahrenheit 451 60th Anniversary Edition, by Ray Bradbury

The Poem That Changed America: “Howl” Fifty Years Later, Jason Shinder ed

Burning the Books: A History of the Deliberate Destruction of Knowledge,

by Richard Ovenden

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/51342996-burning-the-books

Library: An Unquiet History, Matthew Battles

A History of Reading, Alberto Manguel

The Library at Night, Alberto Manguel

Books as History: The Importance of Books Beyond Their Texts, David Pearson

A Splendor of Letters: The Permanence of Books in an Impermanent World,

Nicholas A. Basbanes

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/12181.A_Splendor_of_Letters

Every Book Its Reader: The Power of the Printed Word to Stir the World,

Nicholas A. Basbanes

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/12180.Every_Book_Its_Reader

The Library: An Illustrated History, Stuart A.P. Murray, Nicholas A. Basbanes

 (Foreword) Donald G. Davis (Introduction)

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/54156965-the-library

On Paper: The Everything of Its Two-Thousand-Year History, Nicholas A. Basbanes

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/17262099-on-paper

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑

Design a site like this with WordPress.com
Get started