Anniversary of start of WWII…

75 years ago: Nazi invasion of Poland begins WWII

On September 1, 1939, the world was plunged once more into imperialist barbarism, just 21 years after the end of the First World War, when Nazi Germany invaded Poland, and Britain and France declared war on the Third Reich two days later.

Citing “Polish aggression” near the town of Gleiwitz on the Silesian border, which had been staged by the SS, killing concentration camp prisoners dressed in German military uniforms, Hitler ordered a general advance of German troops across the entire border with Poland.

These Clowns Are Dragging Us Into War

In 8 weeks, on October 26, there are – supposed to be – parliamentary elections in Ukraine. What’s that going to look like? Who’s going to vote? In the presidential elections a few months ago, most of east Ukraine did not vote. How many different ways are there to define democracy and still remain credible?

In an interview today on Russian Channel 1, Vladimir Putin commented on the upcoming elections: “All the participants in the electoral race will want to show how cool they are; Everyone will want to show they are strongmen or strongwomen, and as the political struggle sharpens it is hard to expect anyone to seek a peaceful resolution and not a military one.” That would seem to be an accurate prediction.

The EU yesterday (in yet another definition of democracy) picked its new president. They chose Polish PM Donald Tusk, which may seem a bit strange since Tusk doesn’t speak a word of either English or French, and he comes from a nation that is not even in the Eurozone, yet he will now now get to chair meetings that concern the euro. But Tusk is a hawk on Russia, and therefore suspiciously convenient to the inner core of Washington and Brussels’ control apparatus. He’s said more bad and ugly things about Russia and Putin than just about anyone recently, and that’s saying something.

Ukraine: International Brigades Being Reborn

In modern Ukraine, as the democratic government has been overthrown by Fascists backed by Wall Street and London, and the people in the East have risen up in resistance, International Brigades have been formed once again.

Military veterans from France and Germany have already gone to Ukraine, to stand with the people in Donbass region. As the fascist Junta in Kiev reigns death and destruction on the people in East, people from far off lands are joining with them to fight against Wall Street backed fascism.

While the Soviet Union may be gone, and the Spanish Republic was eventually defeated, and history has marched onward, the spirit of internationalism and anti-fascism has not died.

While the west has demonized and slandered the people of East and Southern Ukraine for daring to resist the fascists, millions around the world support their revolt.

International solidarity against fascism and repression has not died, and the same internationalist spirit of resistance is alive today. As Wall Street and London unleash fascist terror on the world, in places like Ukraine and Syria, the response of the people is still a loud, unforgiving chant of “YOU SHALL NOT PASS!”

Have a Comment? Contact us!

Posted in default | Comments Off

The case for reparations, Parts I and II…Ta-Nehisi Coates

How Racism Invented Race in America

Other books confirmed Drake’s basic insight to me—Allison Blakely’s Blacks in the Dutch World, Nell Irvin Painter’s The History of White People. If you can get your hands on it I also would recommend The Image of the Black in Western Art, which is both expensive and priceless. It’s fascinating to see how black people were viewed before we decided that African ancestry made you, by God or science, property. For a energetic rebuttal (which I find ultimately unconvincing) see Winthrop Jordan’s White Over Black.

The import of this all came home for me many years later in Barbara and Karen Fields’s Racecraft. The book is a collection of essay, and is sometimes hard to follow, but its basic insight is brilliant. Basically, Americans talk about “race” but not “racism,” and in doing that they turn a series of “actions” into a “state.” This is basically true of all our conversations of this sort, left and right. You can see this in all our terminology—racial justice, racial quotas, racial discrimination, etc. But this language is ahistorical, and it obscures the current conflict. Affirmative action, for instance, is not intended to remedy plunder (action) but to aid “women and people of color” (state) or produce “diversity” (another state). And the benefits of affirmative action are not people who have been plundered, but “the black race.”

But American notions of race are the product of racism, not the other way around. We know this because we can see the formation of “race” in American law and policy, and also see how formations differ across time and space. So what is “black” in the United States is not “black” in Brazil. More significantly the relevance and import of “blackness” is not constant across American history. Edmund Morgan’s American Slavery, American Freedom helped me a lot on this. At the start of the book the English are allying with the rebellious Cimarrons against the hated and demonic Spanish. By the end of the book the great-grandchildren of the English are convinced that blacks are a singular blight upon the Earth. The change is not mysterious. Morgan traces the nexus of law, policy, and financial interest to show how current notions of “blackness” and “whiteness” were formed.

It is important to remember that American racism is a thing that was done, and a world where American racism is beaten back is not a world of “racial diversity” but a world without such terminology. Perhaps we can never actually get to that world. Perhaps we are just too far gone. But we should never forget that this world was “made.” Whiteness and blackness are not a fact of providence, but of policy—of slave codes, black codes, Jim Crow, redlining, GI Bills, housing covenants, New Deals, and mass incarcerations.

Slavery Made America

Before I took the dive into the Civil War, I understood the enslavement as a moral catastrophe. I also had some vague sense that that enslavement had helped shepherd America into being. Finally I knew that the Civil War was somehow related to slavery. All three of these notions ultimately had to be revised. That enslavement in America was somehow more than a moral problem became apparent while reading the grandfather of all Civil War histories, James McPherson’s Battle Cry of Freedom. Battle Cry is ostensibly a history of The Late Unpleasantness, but it is also an expression of the centrality of enslavement in American history.

The first 200 pages or so show that the War was about not only the perpetuation of “African slavery,” but its expansion. McPherson quotes directly from the mouths of secessionists who have no problem laying out bondage as their primary casus belli. McPherson shows the essential place enslavement held in the economy of the South and in America at large. Thus the conflagration that follows does not appear out of thin air. Thus when McPherson begins detailing double-timing and flanking maneuvers you have some sense that you are doing something more than watching people play out a violent football game.

Conservatively speaking, 600,000 soldiers lost their lives in the Civil War, two percent of the American population at the time. Twenty percent of all Southern white men of military age died in the War. Until Vietnam, more people had died in the Civil War than all other American wars combined. An interest which compelled that amount of death and suffering must be something more than vague disagreement over a “way of life.”

 

Have a Comment? Contact us!

Posted in default | Comments Off

the “Russian invasion”…

Obama’s “Catastrophic Defeat” in Ukraine

Ukraine’s troubles began when the US State Department toppled the elected president in February and replaced him with a compliant stooge who agreed to follow Washington’s directives. The new “junta” government quickly launched a full-blown war against Russian-speaking Ukrainians in the east which split the civilian population and drove the country to ruin. The plan “pacify” the East was concocted in Washington, not Kiev and certainly not Moscow.

Moscow has repeatedly called for an end to the violence and a resumption of negotiations, but each request has been rebuffed by Obama’s puppet in Kiev leading to another round of hostilities. Washington doesn’t want peace. Washington wants the same solution it imposed on Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and Syria, that is, a chaotic failed state where ethnic and sectarian animosities are kept at a boiling point so forward-operating bases can be established without resistance, so resources can be extracted at will, and so a formally-independent nation can be reduced to a “permanent state of colonial dependency.” (Chomsky) That’s the basic gameplan wherever Washington goes. The same rule applies to Ukraine. The only choice the people have is to arm themselves and fight back. Which is what they’ve done.

Donetsk and Lugansk have formed militias and taken the war to the enemy. They’ve engaged Obama’s proxy-army on the battlefield and pounded it into mincemeat. That’s why Obama deployed his propagandists to lie about the fictitious “Russian invasion”. The administration needs a diversion because the Novorussia forces (aka-the “pro Russia separatists”) are kicking the holy crap out of Obama’s legions. That’s why Washington and Kiev are in full panic-mode, because none of this was supposed to happen. Obama figured the army would put down the insurrection, crush the resistance, and move him one step closer to his goal of establishing NATO bases and missile defense systems on Russia’s western flank.

Ukraine Humanitarian Aid Flounders

While NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen, a rabid Russophobe, suggested that “a Russian incursion” had occurred “through a gap in a barbed wire fence that demarcates the border.” Seriously – 23 APC’s ‘through a gap in a barbed wire fence’? The Russian Defense ministry has denied the claim as ‘fantasy’ and ‘fabrications’ and that “such statements should not be subject for a serious discussion by top officials of any country.”

The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) has further testified that no Russian ammunition or military has crossed the border at the two most populated checkpoints. It is not as if the Kiev and US governments have not, in the past, provided speculative assertions of wrongdoing on the part of the ‘rebels,’ this latest narrative is more transparent than their other constructed fiction.

It is no more possible to imagine that a column of 23 Russian tanks had moved quietly across the border (through a gap of barbed wire) and into Ukraine without any detection and been so devastatingly annihilated as described without any photos of the wreckage, satellite images or other evidence on display than it would be if President Obama had missed the opportunity to provide irrefutable evidence of a Russian ‘invasion’ of Ukraine on primetime tv. Is it reasonable to believe that the movement of that large a force of APC’s would not have immediately brought down the full wrath of the US military and NATO in an immediate apocalyptic armed response? And yet all the major players remain strangely silent, not one word of outrage and no presidential announcement to the nation that Russia had invaded Ukraine.

August 29th 15:35 UTC/ZULU Ukrainian SITREP

The US: Poor Uncle Sam is really looking pathetic, foolish and confused. The very best the USA can do is to accuse Russia of invading the Ukraine and only threaten more sanctions as Obama has already admitted that the US has no military option in the Ukraine. To measure the degree of disarray amongst the US Neocons I will just quote from an article written recently by Herbert E. Meyer, former Special Assistant to the Director of Central Intelligence and Vice Chairman of the CIA’s National Intelligence Council during the Reagan Administration, for American Thinker and modestly entitled “How to Solve the Putin Problem”….

Where do we go from here?

It’ hard to tell. I think that Oleg Tsarev is right when he says that as soon as the Ukie regime begins collapsing the West will suddenly ask for negotiations. Zakharchenko in his crucial press conference has clearly indicated that options such as federalization or decentralization are off the table and that nothing short of full independence will do. Maybe. Maybe not. There are plenty of historical examples which show that separatist movements eventually settled for less, often wisely so. But in this case, we are dealing with several intertwined problems:

a) Geographical: the Ukraine is an artificial country
b) Political: internally the regime in Kiev is Nazi
c) Geo-strategic: externally the regime in Kiev is a russophobic US puppet
d) Economic: the Ukraine is economically dead

All these factors clearly point to the same conclusion: the Ukraine needs to be broken-up. This might happen catastrophically – the East going to Novorussia, the South to Kolomoiski, the Center to Poroshenko and the West breaking off completely. There are some signs that this is already gradually happening. Furthermore, this is all made worse by the undeniable fact that the Ukraine is already a failed state and that a seizable minority of the Ukrainian population if formed of truly rabid nationalists. So right now things don’t look too good for any negotiated solution. Novorussia probably has the potential to rebuild and to become a more or less livable, stable place: most of its industry is in ruins, but it’s “human capital”, it’s people, are very bright and hard working and its political leaders clearly capable people. But short of some kind of miracle, the rest of the Ukraine is probably going to slouch to towards the kind of mess the USA is so good at leaving behind in places like Libya or Iraq. Maybe not, maybe the Europeans will finally grow a spine and tell the US to stay out and then try to solve this ugly mess with Russia. I am not holding my breath, not as long as the current AngloZionist nomenklatura is in power in the EU.

Have a Comment? Contact us!

Posted in default | Comments Off

“My favorite part is when the bodies hit the ground.”

There Are No Angels — What The New York Times Won’t Tell You

“He began producing rap songs with friends … He collaborated on songs that included lyrics such as, “My favorite part is when the bodies hit the ground.”

I’m black, but my closest friends in high school were all white. All but two of them drank. All but one listened to rap music, everything from the vulgar to the high-minded. Most of my friends smoked weed. A few of them sold it. At senior prom, two of my friends offered me ecstasy. Our freshman year, we had a day of mourning to reflect on the death of our hockey team’s goalie, who’d overdosed on prescription meds. But if any of my white high school friends got shot, none of this would matter to The New York Times.

“Brown was not the best student.”

During college, I dated a beautiful, intelligent, funny girl. She was a pastor’s daughter from northern New Hampshire. She was blond with light eyes, a winning smile, great grades and a good head on her shoulders. She played sports, volunteered in church, and brightened the lives of the people around her. We broke up because her parents and grandmother completely objected to her dating a black man. But then she moved down south and had a baby with a black man. She was no angel. She drank, listened to vulgar rap — I taught her most of the words to Too $hort’s “Freaky Tales”. She is the proud mother of one of the absolute most beautiful little girls I have ever laid eyes upon. If she were shot dead in her tracks today, The New York Times wouldn’t write about her taste in music, or her drinking. None of that would matter.

Have a Comment? Contact us!

Posted in default | Comments Off

escaping the dollar…


Have a Comment? Contact us!

Posted in default | Comments Off