|
|
| Für Elise in Different Tastes - Maan Hamadeh |
|
Want to Know what CCDS has
been doing...Check it Out!
|
Proletarian Novels in the 21st Century: They Also Make Excellent Gifts for the Season
|
The new annual edition of our journal of discussion and analysis is now out. More than 170 pages, it includes dozens of articles on structural racism, fighting austerity, and 21st century socialism Click the title to buy it directly.
|
by Paul Krehbiel
Autumn Leaf Press, $25.64
 |
| Shades of Justice Video: Bringing Down a President, Ending a War |
|
By Giuseppe Fiori
Verso, 30 pages
|
|
|
|
An Invitation to CCDSers
and Friends...
 Trump Surges at
'Dark' Convention,
Get Ready for Battle
We're the Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism...
Do you have friends who should see this? Pass it on...
Do you have a blog of your own? Others you love to read every day? Well, this is a place where you can share access to them with the rest of your comrades. Just pick your greatest hits for the week and send them to us at [email protected]!
Most of all, it's important that you support a raise for low-wage workers, oppose militarized police and the ongoing 'long wars,' engage in 2016 races now, oppose austerity, support the 'Moral Mondays' in North Carolina and other states, the fight for the Green New Deal, a just immigration policy and the Congressional Progressive Caucus' 'Back to Work Budget'! We're doing more than ever, and have big plans. So pay your dues, make a donation and become a sustainer. Do it Now! Check the link at the bottom...
|
|
By Jason Easley
PoliticusUSA
July 21, 2016 - Thanks to the early leaking of Trump's speech transcript, it was easy for fact checkers to pre-debunk Donald Trump's acceptance speech lies.
Donald Told No Less Than 21 Fact Checked Proven Lies During His Acceptance Speech
Thanks to the early leaking of Trump's speech transcript, it was easy for fact checkers to pre-debunk Donald Trump's acceptance speech lies.
The full list of fact checked Trump lies can be found here. Below are few of Trump's biggest lies in Cleveland:
Trump Lie: President Obama has doubled our national debt to more than $19 trillion, and growing.
Fact : "The total federal debt is at $19 trillion. But most of it was amassed before Obama took office." [PolitiFact, 7/19/16]
Trump Lie: In 2009, pre-Hillary, ISIS was not even on the map. Libya was cooperating. Egypt was peaceful. Iraq was seeing a reduction in violence. Iran was being choked by sanctions. Syria was under control.
Fact : "The roots of ISIS trace back to 2004, when Bush was president and before Clinton was Obama's secretary of state." [PolitiFact, 7/20/16]
Trump Lie: My opponent has called for a radical 550% increase in Syrian refugees on top of existing massive refugee flows coming into our country under President Obama. She proposes this despite the fact that there's no way to screen these refugees in order to find out who they are or where they come from.
Fact : PolitiFact rated Donald Trump's claim that there was "no system to vet" refugees "False." [PolitiFact, 6/13/16]
Trump Lie: Of all my travels in this country, nothing has affected me more deeply than the time I have spent with the mothers and fathers who have lost their children to violence spilling across our border.
Fact: Washington Post Fact Checker: "Data on immigrants and crime are incomplete, but a range of studies show there is no evidence immigrants commit more crimes than native-born Americans." [Washington Post, 7/8/15]
Trump Lie: While Hillary Clinton plans a massive tax increase, I have proposed the largest tax reduction of any candidate who has declared for the presidential race this year - Democrat or Republican. Middle-income Americans will experience profound relief, and taxes will be simplified for everyone.
Fact: Moody's Analytics report: Donald Trump's tax plan would mostly benefit those at the very top of the income distribution, and job losses resulting from his economic policies would most affect lower- and middle-income households. [Moody's Analytics report, 6
/20/16]
Trump Lie: When the FBI Director says that the Secretary of State was "extremely careless" and "negligent," in handling our classified secrets, I also know that these terms are minor compared to what she actually did.
They were just used to save her from facing justice for her terrible crimes.
In fact, her single greatest accomplishment may be committing such an egregious crime and getting away with it - especially when others have paid so dearly.
Fact: FBI Director Comey: "There's all kinds of folks watching this at home or being told, 'well, lots of other cases are being prosecuted and she wasn't.' I want them to know that's not true!" [FBI Director James Comey Testimony , 7/7/16]
Trump gave a speech of lies based on Republican conspiracies, conservative media tall tales, and Fox News. Trump played to the angry and frightened base of the Republican Party. His lies are only convincing to those who want to be fooled.
Republicans used their convention to begin their campaign to undermine Hillary Clinton's potential presidency. Trump represents the ugliness of the right. Donald Trump has conned the right by telling them what they want to hear.
Facts have no place in the current Republican Party, and GOP voters have rewarded Trump's superior disregard for truth with the party's presidential nomination. ...Click title for more
|
Get out of your bubble, people!
By Alexandra Rosenmann
AlterNet
July 21, 2016 - Despite his "sh*t show" of a campaign, no one can doubt Trump's momentum; especially not liberal filmmaker Michael Moore, who, for months, has urged mainstream media not to underestimate Donald Trump.
Though he may get no pleasure from being right, Moore told Business Insider in December 2015 that "Donald Trump is absolutely going to be the Republican candidate for president of the United States."
And last night, returning to "Real Time With Bill Maher," Moore made another terrifying prediction.
"I'm sorry to be the buzzkill... but I think Trump is gonna win," Moore told host Bill Maher. According to the filmmaker, here's why:
1. The Rust Belt/Brexit Strategy
"Mitt Romney lost by 64 electoral votes. The total votes of [Michigan, Ohio, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania ]... 64," Moore told Maher. "All he has to do is win those four states."
ADVERTISING
2. The Trump Family
Trump's main surrogates-his own family-have become Republican National Convention superstars, and their testimonials really cause voters to consider, "well if he raised them, he can't be so bad, right?" Moore points out that the family members are not really looking like the "hostages" liberal voters might have thought they would. In fact, "between [Melania] and the children, none of them have offerered any of the sort of anecdotes that you would expect," Moore pointed out.
3. Make America Great Again? How About Just Reality Television
Moore believes Trump doesn't even want to be in the White House; that he'll give it to Mike Pence and his children after buying an estate in Fairfax. "The thing that we're describing... 'Make America Great Again'... He's gonna turn his presidency into a reality show; a literal reality show. But if I say that, millions are gonna go, 'F*ck yea,'" Moore said....Click title for more
|
By Richard Steigmann-Gall
Associate Professor of History,
Kent State University
This post is hosted on the Huffington Post's Contributor platform. Contributors control their own work and post freely to our site. If you need to flag this entry as abusive, send us an email.
July 18, 2016 - In ways that immediately brought to mind dangerous parallels with the yellow Star of David patch worn by Jews during the Third Reich, Donald Trump in November suggested that Syrian refugees, posing as allegedly dangerous Fifth Columnists, should wear badges on account of their Muslim faith so that they could not infiltrate American society and carry out plots against the nation.
When asked by a reporter whether he thought the comparison with Nazi Germany was a fair one, Trump responded "you tell me."
So shocking have been these and similar statements that not just liberal voices and outlets, but even conservative ones, began to speculate whether Trump is, in fact, a capital-F fascist. This proposition had circulated on leftist websites and blogs for months, fed by outrage at Trump's positions (usually stated unabashedly and flippantly) regarding immigration, foreign policy or torture. At the end of November, this proposition started to enter the mainstream, with CNN.com's article openly considering the question, interviewing published scholars of historical fascism to ask for their expert opinions. Dozens of other mainstream outlets then began to run their own "Is Trump a Fascist?" pieces as well.
It is perhaps a reflection of their hesitance to validate the abundant overuse of the "F-word" in American public discourse that published scholars of historical fascism have shied away from concluding that Trump is a fascist. Steve Ross of the University of Southern California, while conceding that Trump's anti-immigrant xenophobia is "very dangerous," would not go so far as to say it is "fascist." Stanley Payne, long given to a meticulous, phenomenological definition of fascism, argued that in no way could Trump be considered one. British scholars like Roger Griffin have weighed in on this question as well, coming to similar conclusions.
Arguably the leading American scholar of fascism, Columbia University's Robert Paxton, similarly denied that Trump is a fascist, but conceded that he can "understand why some people might be inclined to point out similarities between Trump and fascist leaders," adding: "He's good at making astonishing speeches that make people sit up and take notice. So there's some of that manipulation of public emotions that is visible with Trump." One sees a pattern in the analysis, in which one or two aspects of Trump that are worrisome are conceded to "look fascist," but that other aspects of Trump's personality or platform means the bill does not fit.
Whether the comparison hinges on issues of style or substance, the question of whether Trump is actually fascist or "merely" xenophobic, demagogic and populist has so much traction for American audiences because Fascism remains embedded in our history and collective memory, perceived to be the greatest historical enemy of the "American Way." Fascism is the ultimate violation of American values, so evil that we were willing to ally ourselves with the Soviet Union in the 1940s in order to destroy it. Since then, the "F-word" has been used as a term of abuse, a kind of grammatical mud slung at one's ideological opponent, much more than as a dispassionately applied category of analysis. But that both sides of the political aisle in American politics are now using it to describe a politician, has given us an opening to revisit the question. Aside from the political usefulness of using the word to discredit a figure whom the left detests and the right fears, does Trump actually hold up to the label of "Fascist"? Is the comparison between Trump and historical fascists at all useful? And, perhaps most importantly: aside from using "fascist" as a descriptive moniker applied to one man, what does the question tell us about the state of American politics and the American electorate?
Many scholars have insisted that a person or a politics cannot be fascist unless it holds up against a check-list of "fascist minima," attributes that are almost always about externals. Whether it is goose-stepping, salutes, shirts of the same color, parades, armbands, or other eye-catching props, an American public raised on cable TV documentaries regards fascism as something that must be obvious to identify visually. And occasionally fringe groups come along, most notoriously the American Nazi Party, to serve up the demand for a visually identifiable fascism. Most of the internet commentariat or scholars who have been interviewed about Trump's fascist bona fides have avoided discounting the question on the grounds of style - though oddly, given how much he decries the search for externals in his own scholarly work, Paxton has recently emerged as something of an exception. So far most observers have looked to essential questions of substance; the "platform" that Trump seems to uphold, and that his public seems to clamor for. How fascist is this platform?
In spite of his recent insistence that he'd need to see "identically colored shirts" to take the question of Trump seriously, Robert Paxton has been one of the most persuasive advocates for taking a deeper view. Weary of the "bestiary" approach of describing fascism by its appearances, in his magnum opus from 2004 The Anatomy of Fascism, Paxton seeks instead to explain how fascism understood itself; the social traction of fascism as a political movement; and what kinds of political and economic conditions were necessary for it to grow and eventually succeed. Rather than presenting a series of unalterable criteria that read like a check-list, Paxton shows how fascism develops in context, embodying and taking advantage of a series of "mobilizing passions" to build and maintain a following. The leading of these passions include:...Click title for more
|
By Marilyn Katz
In These Times
July 14, 2016 - For those still wondering why Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders are so popular, one needs look no further than Chicago's West Side, where, as the Chicago Tribune reported recently, the last American-made Oreo rolled off the production line, as the cookie and 600 good-paying jobs left for their new home in Salinas, Mexico.
It's not simply the fact that 600 workers, most of whom were African American or Latino, lost their jobs and their ability to support their families and pay their rent, mortgages and taxes. It's also that the organizations these workers had put their faith in-the company, the union, their government-did nothing to prevent their catastrophe.
I first wrote for In These Times about the impending exodus in July 2015, after the corporate board of Mondolez International (the food conglomerate based in Illinois that has Nabisco in its portfolio) approved CEO Irene Rosenfeld's plan to relocate the plant to Mexico, for cost savings, and rewarded her by raising her total compensation from $14 million to $21 million a year.
I had just read and written about Chicago philanthropist Julius Rosenwald who, when the company he founded-Sears-teetered on bankruptcy, used more than $20 million of his own money to save it and the thousands of jobs it supplied. A far cry, I thought, from the venality of current corporate leadership, more interested in squeezing another bit of profit than the well-being of its workers.
Activist that I am, I made calls and wrote that story in hopes that someone-the aldermen, the mayor, the union, our congressional delegation-would at least cry foul or take some action to counter a move that, like so many others, has deprived Americans of income, jobs and hope.
I called the union. Silence. I shared the article with every public official I know. Silence. Tragically, of all the nation's would-be political leaders, it was only Trump who took up the Oreo issue, and then, only to fuel his cruel brand of xenophobia and racism.
In contrast, within a few days, more than 200,000 people had reposted and shared the article, and some even signed a pledge on Change.Org to boycott Oreos. The leaders of the union, our city and our nation may not have been incensed, but others were.
Of course it wasn't simply Oreos about which people were upset. The iconic nature of Oreos-their totally American origins, their presence in every home, the nostalgia-provided a graspable symbol of and resistance to the outsourcing of jobs. Grasping or protesting the off-shoring of farm equipment, computer chips or washing machines may be hard, but cookies we can do.
According to the Economic Policy Institute, the United States lost 5 million manufacturing jobs between 2000 and 2014. Closer to home, the Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning reported that between 2003 and 2013, manufacturing jobs in Chicago's suburbs fell by 18 percent to 292,000, while such positions in Chicago fell 33 percent to 64,439....Click title for more
|
|
By Harry Targ
Diary of a Heartland Radical
The presidential candidacy of Donald Trump has mobilized rightwing populists, economic nationalists, racists, anti-Muslims and anti-Semites, sectors of the marginalized and growing precariat, and some Republicans. His stock in trade has been a continuous communication by brief soundbites and tweets lies and innuendos, egregious insults, personal attacks, and slanders.
These have exceeded much of the history of political discourse in the United States (with the possible exception of the anti-Communist ravings of the 1950s and the virulently hostile campaigns in the days of Thomas Jefferson, Alexander Hamilton, and Aaron Burr).
It is clear to most well-meaning political activists of the center and the left, that a Trump presidency would cause untold pain and suffering to an already aggrieved population of people of color, workers, women, gays and lesbians, and advocates for the environment. However, Donald Trump, for a year now, has been a candidate who is largely a creation of the mainstream media.
Day after day mainstream media reported on the candidate's every word, his seeming popularity, and his "presumptiveness" as the Republican nominee of his party. CBS executive Leslie Moonves said about the Trump candidacy: "It may not be good for America, but it's damn good for CBS" (Campbell Brown, "Why I Blame TV for Trump," Politico Magazine, May/June 2016). The Trump candidacy has been worth millions more dollars in corporate profit for a news industry that has experienced declining viewership and readership in recent years.
Once Trump secured almost enough delegates to be nominated the Republican candidate, the media, including liberal and left voices, launched a non-stop effort to discredit his background, his assertions, and his broad array of rightwing supporters. And since candidate Trump continuously articulates his bizarre views he has become the gift that never stops giving. The frame has shifted from Trump the curiosity to Trump the monster. Both tropes, it is hoped, will increase the viewership and advertising as 24/7 coverage shifts to the general election.
The narrow media frame on the Trump phenomenon and his daily statements lead to a portrait of an electoral contest with his Democratic Party opponent that prioritizes personalities and sound bites and not ideas, issues, worldviews, or ideologies. The media frame reaffirms the typical American personality "binary," that is if not Trump then the presumptive Democratic Party nominee, Hillary Clinton. Although the differences between the two candidates matter, fundamental questions of policy and purpose which should be part of political discourse are frozen out of the political process. The central issue of the election has become Donald Trump.
The Trump candidacy has poisoned and distorted the real political contest of ideas undergirding the issues of the twenty first century. Black Lives Matter, the Occupy, the Fight for 15, Moral Mondays, and the climate change movements are all about the fundamental structural impediments to any semblance of a humane society. Many of the issues articulated by these campaigns have been reflected in Bernie Sanders' presidential campaign. But because of the Trump media frame and the political binary these vital issues do not get discussed.
Fundamentally, because Trump represents the worst aspects of United States history and politics, political conversations center on him. They do not address the connections between capitalism and poverty, inequality, racism, sexism, homophobia, war, and terrorism. And the mainstream media prefers that such discussions not take place either. In addition, since the Democratic candidate is part of the problem, not the solution, the Trump conundrum limits necessary political discourse.
So progressives have a problem. A Trump victory in November will have enormous negative consequences for the vast majority of the most marginalized sectors of American society, some of whom struggled for almost 100 years to achieve some modicum of social and economic justice. And a Clinton victory ensures the continuation of the institutions that have promoted the global capitalist agenda that has been in place for the last forty years: monopolization and financialization of the global economy and the use of "humanitarian" military interventions to implement the neoliberal order.
Perhaps for the coming period the prioritization of the progressive political agenda should include in this order: say "no" to Trump; say "no" to the revitalization of neoliberal globalization in a Hillary Clinton Administration; and finally say "no" to the American political binary that institutionalizes just two choices, forestalling discussions of fundamental change in the United States.
...Click title for more
|
Israel-Palestine: A Way to End the Occupation
A Palestinian protests as he sits in the scoop of an Israeli excavator near Ramallah [Reuters] A Palestinian protests as he sits in the scoop of an Israeli excavator near Ramallah [Reuters]
Palestinians retain several diplomatic nuclear options' they could deploy if all hope for a solution fades.
By Mark LeVine
Professor of Middle Eastern History
at University of California.
Al-Jazeera
"A settlement, negotiated between the parties, will result in the emergence of an independent, democratic, and viable Palestinian state living side by side in peace and security with Israel and its other neighbours. The settlement will ... end the occupation that began in 1967."
This statement was not made by Cornel West as part of his laudable but ill-fated attempt to get the Democratic Party Platform Committee merely to say the word "occupation". Rather, it was one of the first communiques of the Quartet, in April 2003, echoing US President George W Bush's October 2001 declaration that creating a viable Palestinian state had long been part of the United States' "vision for the Middle East".
Israel approves spending millions in West Bank settlement security
Thirteen years later, the occupation continues, and seemingly nothing Palestinians can do - from official protests to well-coordinated civil resistance, to random stabbings - will change that fact.
Miracle worker
Bernie Sanders was hailed as a miracle worker merely for declaring that Palestinians have the same rights as other human beings. The likely next president, who wants to take America's relationship with Israel to "the next level", clearly does not share that view.
Or rather, Hillary Clinton feels they have the same rights as Hondurans and all the other peoples suffering under the corrupt and brutal client regimes she has supported as senator, secretary of state, and through the Clinton Foundation.
As for progressive stalwart Elizabeth Warren, putative frontrunner for vice president, she is being celebrated as a "surprising pro-Israel hawk" by Alan Dershowitz, who should know.
The departure of the predictably pro-Israel UK from the European Union could, in theory, strengthen the Union's inclination to act as a counterbalance to US support for Israel.
The much-awaited report of the Quartet, which is expected to place significant responsibility on Israel for the lack of negotiating progress, still holds to the fiction that "only direct negotiations" between the all-powerful occupier and the ever more occupied population will lead to a viable resolution to the conflict.
Even The New York Times has acceded to the normalisation of the occupation, recently putting the word in "scare quotes" to reflect the fait accompli.
Changes on the horizon?
The departure of the predictably pro-Israel UK from the European Union could, in theory, strengthen the Union's inclination to act as a counterbalance to US support for Israel. More likely, the need to staunch a haemorrhage of members will drain most of its energy.
Of the remaining major donors to Palestine, hardly a single country can be expected to lift a finger other than to write a cheque.
Even Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan appears to have abandoned Palestinians as part of his official rapprochement with Israel.
President of the Palestinian Authority Mahmoud Abbas [EPA]
Indeed, it is hard to think of a time when Palestinians had a weaker hand to play diplomatically or strategically.
The growing support within international civil society and the spread of BDS - the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement - globally, the upgrading of Palestine's status to a "non-member observer state" at the United Nations and joining of the International Criminal Court, have done nothing to change the calculus or behaviour of Israel's leadership, which now brazenly cuts off water to the West Bank without a care in the world.
Nuclear options and new identities
Israel might be the region's only country with nuclear weapons, but observers have long believed that Palestinians retain several diplomatic "nuclear options" they could deploy if all hope for a solution fades. Joining the ICC was one, but it has so far produced no hint of an investigation of Israel....Click title for more
|
By Lucy Komisar
The Komisar Scoop via Portside
July 14, 2016 - Arthur Miller's brilliant parable of the Sen. Joseph McCarthy attack on American liberties, allowed by the U.S. Congress till it became too obscene for even cowardly politicians to stomach, is brilliantly staged by Ivo Van Hove, a Dutchman who understands and communicates Miller's political message (see also his "A View From the Bridge") in a theatrical manner that makes politics into art.
A crucible is a pot in which metals or other substances are heated to a very high temperature or melted. Miller's story is about events that took place in Salem, Massachusetts in 1692. But it's really about the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC), America's thought police of the early 50s, which burned through American rights and professed values.
Using a metaphor of real events some 260 years earlier, it tells of accusations without evidence that were used to damn the innocent. They occurred during the Salem witch trials in the Massachusetts Bay Colony, 1692-93.
Young girls are dancing in the forest. When they come out, Betty Parris (Elizabeth Teeter), daughter of the preacher Samuel Parris (Jason Butler Harner), faints. The others are hysterical. The dress, by the way, is modern.
Wealthy citizen Thomas Putnam (Tomas Jay Ryan) declares that a hurtful spirit is laying hands on these children. His wife Ann (Tina Benko) claims she is a victim, that seven of her newborn babies died. Relevant later, Putnam also has a land dispute with Giles Corey (Jim Norton), another townsman. In these things, there are always background interests.
Parris will invite Rev. John Hale, an expert in witchcraft, to investigate. But John Proctor (the excellent Ben Whishaw), a farmer and Quaker, refuses to accept the notion of witchcraft. He says Parris should have consulted with the townspeople before taking that step.
The back story is that one of the young girls, Abigail (Saoirse Rona), is a troublemaker and a seducer. She had an affair with John and was fired by his wife Elizabeth (a fine Sophie Okonedo), who discovered it. Abigail is the vengeful lover scorned.
Meanwhile, Rev. Parris is complaining that he hasn't gotten the firewood promised by the congregation for his service. As a graduate of Harvard, he is not paid enough! To locate Parris even more inside the amoral corporate sensibility, this is a fellow who measures his worth by money.
Many of the characters have axes to grind, (appropriate metaphor for the times.) Proctor, our hero, declares, "Is it the Devil's fault that a man cannot say you good morning without you clap him for defamation?"
As the investigation proceeds, Abigail claims that Tituba (Jenny Jules), a Barbadian slave, forced her to drink blood. Tituba ripostes that Abigail asked her to call up a curse. When Parris threatens Tituba with death for turning her witchcraft on the girls, she "confesses" that they have all been bewitched by the devil. And she points to the deviltry of two townswomen who Hale promptly arrests. Organized hysteria based on the girls' charges escalates till close to 40 people are arrested for witchcraft.
lie of course, as Abigail had admitted to John. And then Elizabeth is accused. John is afraid to expose Abigail for fear his adultery will be revealed. Mary, the Proctors' maid, tells John the girls are lying, then accused of witchcraft herself, recants. The town is ruled by fear.
Corey's wife is arrested because he had reported that she read strange books. (In the 1600s? Transpose that to 1950s leftist texts that challenged ruling orthodoxy or power.) By then, 91 are accused. Then more than 100. Their lands are taken, some imprisoned, some executed. When John is called to testify against others to save himself, he refuses to name names. "Naming names" before HUAC meant naming people who had attended leftist meetings. The courageous refused; the cowardly did as ordered.
We see tortured figures, red on darkened faces and backs, movements that are terrific, furious.
Of course, this is a stunning morality play, of some people with ulterior motives, of others stupidly superstitious, and of victims unable to organize against the predators. Later, the charges would be acknowledged as lies, and Parris would be removed as Salem's preacher. As McCarthy would finally be censured by the Senate.
It's the best play of the season.
"The Crucible." [1] Written by Arthur Miller, directed by Ivo Van Hove. Walter Kerr Theatre, 219 West 48th Street, New York City. (877) 250-2929. Opened March 31, 2016; closes July 17, 2016.
[Lucy Komisar's beat is the secret underbelly of the global financial system - offshore bank and corporate secrecy - and its links to corporate crime; tax evasion by the corporations and the very rich; empowerment of dictators and oligarchs; bribery and corruption; drug and arms trafficking; and terrorism. Her articles on the subject since 1997 have appeared in publications as diverse as The Nation magazine and the Wall Street Journal. She is also a theater critic and member of The Drama Desk, the organization of New York theater critics, writers and editors. Her particular interest is the political aspects of theater.]
|
 A new book puts recent bombings in a larger context.
By Bill Fletcher Jr.
AlterNet
July 16, 2016 - I was in the middle of reading Meredith Tax's exceptional book, A Road Unforeseen: Women Fight the Islamic State (Bellevue Literary Press, 2016), when the Istanbul terrorist bombing took place. As is so typical of the U.S. media, the level of analysis was superficial. We were given the horrific details but beyond that there was little background as to what might have unfolded on that terrible day. Some mention was made of the Kurds and then Daesh (the so-called Islamic State). The most recent report I have seen is that the suicide bombers may have been Chechens.
Yet it was Tax's book that actually put the bombings in a much larger context, one that looks at the historic oppression of the Kurdish people, the role of the current administration in Turkey in covertly encouraging-if not supporting-Daesh, and the struggle over the future of the Middle East. What makes this work unique is the manner in which it looks at these issues from the standpoint of women. Tax examines the struggles in that region through central attention to the link between national oppression, patriarchy and evolving global capitalism, and in this context, illuminates the complexities of the moment.
Tax has been an outspoken leftist in critiquing the manner in which many on the left have either fallen prey to knee-jerk anti-imperialism, i.e., if the United States is involved in a situation a) it must be the central player; and b) anyone opposing it must be a positive force, or post-modern visions of the world that permit cultural relativism particularly when it comes to women. For Tax, both of these approaches-which are often linked-are disastrous not only for women but for progressive forces. In that sense, A Road Unforeseen represents an effort to challenge, if not put to bed, a decrepit paradigm that is leading progressive forces into an ideological and political cul de sac.
Though Tax starts by introducing the reader to the struggles in northern Syria led by the Kurdish Democratic Union Party (PYD) against Daesh, she quickly turns her attention to providing the reader with background on the regional Kurdish struggle. The Kurds, a predominantly Muslim population found in Iran, Iraq, Syria and Turkey, are frequently described as the world's largest nation without a state. Irrespective of whether that is factually accurate, what is clear is that the Kurds have faced ethnic/national oppression at the hands of each of the states in which they find themselves. Though the Kurdish struggle in Turkey is perhaps the most known, Kurdish emancipatory movements have emerged in other locales, generally crushed by the dominant regime.
What brought the current incarnation of the Kurdish movement to Tax's attention was the unique role women were playing in the struggle in northern Syria in the region known as "Rojava." Bits and pieces of this story made their way into leftist and mainstream media over the last few years as military units of Kurdish women (and their allies) engaged the Daesh, regularly defeating the latter. This stood in contrast to the near total collapse of the Iraqi military in the face of the Daesh offensive next door. Thus, the question that emerged was, who was behind these units and what was this struggle really about?
Tax gives the reader a look at the 20th-century struggle of the Kurds for freedom, a struggle that found the Kurds frequently played off by either one imperial power against another, or on a regional basis, one nation against another. U.S. readers may be most familiar with the situation that unfolded in Iraq when, in the 1991 war, President George H. W. Bush called upon the Kurds-in northern Iraq-and the Shiites-in southern Iraq-to revolt against Saddam Hussein, only to abandon them when the goals of the U.S.-led coalition were satisfied. The Kurds (and Shiites) suffered terribly, some of which was eased through the introduction of the no-fly zone, prohibiting Hussein's planes and helicopters from attacking those regions....Click title for more
|
|
Keep up with the new battlegrounds with a Red Resolution...
Become a member today!
Why I Joined CCDS
By Paul Krehbiel
I joined the Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism because:
1. I wanted to be a part of an organization that was bigger than myself. I had been involved in many progressive, labor, anti-war, anti-racist and left campaigns but I felt a need to work together with other like-minded people to multiply my efforts.
2. I wanted to be a part of an organization that I agree with and feel at home within. There are many organizations on the left, and many do good work. But I felt at home in CCDS because it is an organization that is guided by principles and analysis that I agree with. CCDS is guided by Marxism but is not dogmatic, and is open to and supportive of the ideas of many other thinkers, and the actions of a wide array of social justice activists.
3. I wanted to be a part of an organization that is thoughtful, and encourages deep probing and questioning, and lively but friendly debate and discussion.
4. I wanted to be a part of an organization where members are rooted in mass movements and constituencies, and are really rooted among and with the American people and their organizations.
5. I wanted to be a part of an organization that gives special attention to the most exploited and oppressed, African Americans and other people of color, women and others who suffer discrimination. I want to be a part of an organization that is multi-racial, and reflects the diversity of the people of our country, knowing that it is right and makes us stronger.
6. I wanted to be a part of an organization that gives special attention to the working -class, especially the labor movement and all working people.
7. I wanted to be a part of an organization that believes in coalitions, knowing that the left and people's movements are stronger when we work together in alliances, and is actively working to bring these alliances into being.
8. I wanted to be a part of an organization that believes in democracy, and uses deeply democratic practices, inclusiveness and transparency in all areas of its work.
9. I wanted to be a part of an organization that knows how to link reform and revolution, that understands how to fight for immediate popular reforms today in a way that lays the groundwork for achieving something better, ultimately a socialist society.
10. I wanted to be a part of an organization that believes in international solidarity, especially with working people and the oppressed all over the world, and those who have freed themselves from the domination of oppressors, both foreign and domestic.
11. I wanted to be a part of an organization that has a general path forward and is creative. It's important to have a plan to achieve a better society, and also to recognize that it is a work in progress. CCDS encourages creativity, and testing different ideas and approaches as necessary steps to progress along the road to real freedom.
12. I wanted to be a part of an organization that is made up of a lot of nice people, people who have mutual respect for each other, help each other, and become good friends with each other. CCS respects the individual, and the collective. It's a lot easier and more enjoyable to work in that kind of organization.
That's CCDS. Join me and many others. Join CCDS today.
Being a socialist by your self is no fun and doesn't help much. Join CCDS today--$36 regular, $48 household and $18 youth.
Better yet, beome a sustainer at $20 per month, and we'll send you a copy of Jack O'Dell's new book, 'Climbing Jacobs Ladder,' drawing on the lessons of the movement in the South in the 1950s and 1960s.
Solidarity, Carl Davidson, CCDS
|
|
|
