#fight for anti colonial revolution | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

aronarchy · 3 months

Text

A copy of the reading list, if you dislike clicking on Google docs links:

The Popular University of the Palestinian Youth Movement Presents Our History of Popular Resistance: Palestine Reading List

As Palestinians, we are bearers of a rich and beautiful history. Our history is not defined by Zionism, but by our people’s steadfast popular resistance to Zionist colonization and imperialism. For over 75 years, our people have faced Zionist ethnic cleansing and for over 75 years we have risen in struggle against it. Even prior to the 1948 Nakba, Palestinians consistently rose up against British imperialism and the Zionist movement, as exemplified in the 1936-9 Arab Revolt. Our history and struggle, therefore, cannot be defined by victimhood. Instead, they are defined by a relentless persistence toward liberation, even under the most brutal colonial conditions.

Today is no exception. In a moment when the word is rising up for Palestinian freedom, we must emphasize that popular uprisings across Palestine are deeply and firmly rooted in our history. For this reason, our recommended reading list offers historical context on Palestine through the prism of popular resistance, which continues to be our main resource in the fight for land, return, and liberation. We include sources in English and Arabic on popular resistance ranging from political histories, interviews, memoirs, poetry, films, and primary documents. By popular resistance we refer to all forms of resistance taken up by Palestinians: in the form of economic resistance, women’s organizations, unions and labor organizing, and military/armed resistance.

As the Popular University, a committee of the Palestinian Youth Movement, we believe that education must be wielded in service of struggle. Our viewpoint finds inspiration and guidance from the Popular University in Palestine, of which the martyred Basel al-Araj was a part. In our meeting with an educator in this project, Khaled Odeitallah, he emphasized how the political role of pedagogical strategies inspired the objective and vision of the Popular University. He asked: “What is the political role that knowledge production must play?” From this perspective we seek to motivate, engage and facilitate a robust engagement on the history and present of our struggle. Study and struggle are intimately tied to one another. We do not learn and produce knowledge on Palestinian history for academic or careerist pursuits; we produce knowledge in service of our political struggle for Palestinian liberation.

We encourage you to use this reading list to educate yourself on the history of Palestine beyond the objective facts of colonial domination. This is a political responsibility for anyone concerned with Palestine’s liberation. Through engagement with our history of resistance, we may join the struggle armed with knowledge and a continued commitment not to our suffering, but to our collective strength.

Note: We included a number of texts in Arabic that offer analysis and context for this battle that is rarely offered in the English media outlets. Even if you do not read Arabic, we recommend copy pasting the texts in Arabic into Google Translate or another translation service. The translation, while imperfect, will provide you with an overall sense of the arguments and main points being made.

Introductory and Archival Materials

Decolonize Palestine

(مكتبة سبيل (الصفحة العربية

Sabil Library (English Site)

Learn the Revolution

باب الواد - الجامعة الشعبية

Revolution and Rebellion under the British Occupation:

The Revolution of 1936-1939 in Palestine: Background, Details, and Analysis, Ghassan Kanafani

(ثورة 1936- 1939: خلفيات وتفاصيل وتحليل.“ غسان كنفاني (1972”

Memories of Revolt: The 1936-1939 Rebellion and the Palestinian National Past, Ted Swedenburg (1995)

أبو جلدة والعرميط Abu Jilda & Al ‘Armit

“Abu Jilda, Anti-Imperial Hero: Banditry and Popular Rebellion in Palestine,” Alex Winder (2015)

“A century of Palestinian resistance: the legacy of Izz ad-Din al-Qassam,” The East is a Podcast (2021)

Palestine: A Modern History, Abdul-Wahhab Kayyali (1978)

Palestinian Resistance 1948 - 1993

Palestinian history doesn’t start with the Nakba by PYM (May, 2023)

Armed Struggle and the Search for a State: The Palestinian National Movement, 1948 - 1993, Yezid Sayigh (1997)

(معنى النكبة“ قنسطنطين زريق (1948”

Palestinians: From Peasants to Revolutionaries, Rosemary Sayegh (1979)

(2006) “من التحرير إلى الدولة: تاريخ الحركة الوطنية الفلسطينية، 1948-1988” هيلغا بوبغارتن

Green March Black September: The Story of the Palestinian Arabs, John Cooley (1973)

“Interview with Fr. Shehadeh Shehadeh on the First Land Day Protest,” Sharif Hamadeh (2005)

Gender in Crisis: Women and the Palestinian Resistance Movement, Julie Peteet (1991)

“What the Uprising Means,” Salim Tamari (1988)

“The Stone and the Pen: Palestinian Education During the 1987 Intifada,” Yamila Hussein (2005)

Popular Resistance in Palestine: A History of Hope and Empowerment, Mazin Qumsiyeh (2011)

(وقع الانتفاضات الشعبية الديمقراطية - تاريخ المنظمة و الحر كات“ جميل هلال (2011”

“Fighting on Two Fronts: Conversations with Palestinian Women” Soraya Antonius (1979)

“100 Years of Palestinian Popular Resistance” by Nasreen Abd Elal (May, 2023)

Contemporary Palestinian Resistance

Zionism in crisis: Palestinian resistance forges a new horizon (April, 2023)

“The Palestinians’ inalienable right to resist,” Louis Allday (2021)

“No Choice but to Break Free: An Interview with Ahmed Abu Artema,” Ahmed Abu Artema and Lara Sheehi (2019)

Interview with Ahmad Saadat, Leading from Prison, Ending Negotiations, and Rebuilding the Resistance (2013)

“Palestinian Resistance and Sheikh Jarrah,” Devyn Springer, Mohammed el-Kurd, and Abu Shuwarib, Groundings Podcast (2021)

Notes from the Great March of Return w/ Tareq Loubani, The East is a Podcast (2022)

(هبّة باب العامود: نصر جديد وتحدٍّ جديد 2“ خالد عودة الله (2021”

(حراك «طالعات» الفلسطيني: لا وجود لوطن حرّ إلّا بنساء حرّة“ حلا مرشود (2019”

Operation Sword Edge [2018] - Sayaret Matkal’s Covert Operation, Silah Report (2021)

Battle of Shujaiya - The 51 Day War: Ruin and Resistance in Gaza

The Evolution of the Palestinian Resistance and Its New Strategy (October, 2022)

On the Joint Operations Room

Palestinian Institutions and Political Parties

PLO: History of a Revolution - Six-part documentary series about history of the Palestinian Liberation Organization (2009)

The PLO: The Struggle Within, Alain Gresh (1985)

“The Joy of Flying 1967-73” in The Palestinian Liberation Organization: People, Power, and Politics, Helena Cobban (1984)

“The Palestinian National Covenant,” published in Basic Political Documents of the Armed Palestinian Resistance Movement, Leila Kadi (ed.) (1969)

“PLO Institutions: The Challenge Ahead,” Jamil Hilal (1993)

“A New Hamas Through Its New Documents,” Khaled Hroub (2006)

Worker Mobilization, Labor Movements, and Economic Resistance

“When pickles become a weapon: Economy of the first Intifada,” Palestinian Journeys

(أداء المؤسسات الاقتصادية في المناطق المحتلة قبل الانتفاضة وخلالها“ عادل سمارة (1990”

“Developing a Palestinian Resistance Economy through Agricultural Labor,” Rayya El-Zein (2017)

Resistance in Zionist Prisons

(2021) كلام الأسرى.. عيون الكلام

Video: Steadfastness and Resistance — the Palestinian prisoner’s movement and the case of Ahmad Sa’adat

“One Man as a Whole Generation: The Unfinished War of Zakaria Zubeidi,” Ramzy Baroud (2021)

“Liberating a Palestinian Novel from Israeli Prison,” Danya Al-Saleh and Samar Al-Saleh (2023)

“The Prisoner Walid Daqqah: a stubborn conscience that cannot be seared,” Wisam Rafeedie (2023)

“Freedom or Martyrdom: Walid Daqqah’s fate is in our hands,” PYM (2023)

“Resistance and Revolutionary Will: Soha Bechara and Nawal Baidoun’s Testimonies of Khiam Prison,” Mary Turfah (2023)

Role of Palestinian Women in the Resistance

Interview with Samira Salah (2013)

Behind the intifada: Labor and Women’s Movements in the Occupied Territories, Joost R. Hiltermann (1991)

Palestinian Women and the Intifada, Rana Khoury (1995)

“The Palestinian women’s autonomous movement: Emergency, dynamics and challenges,” Rabab Abdulhadi (1998)

“Women of the Intifada: gender, class and national liberation,” Nahla Abdo (1991)

Women, War, and Peace: Reflections from the Intifada, Nahla Abdo (2002)

Palestinian Women’s Activism, Islah Jad (2018)

Memoirs and Personal Profiles

“Committed to Liberation: Remembering Soha Bechara’s Clandestine Mission” (includes chapter 7 of Resistance: My Life for Lebanon by Soha Bechara)

My People Shall Live, Leila Khaled (1971)

Liberation, Wonder, and the “Magic of the World”: Basel al-Araj’s I Have Found My Answers, Hazem Jamjoum (2021)

(وجدت أجوبتي: هكذا تكلم الشهيد باسل الأعرج“ باسل الأعرج (2018”

(مذكرات نجاتي صدقي“ ،تقديم وإعداد حنّا أبو حنّا، (2001”

“I Went to Defend Jerusalem in Cordoba: Memoirs of a Palestinian Communist in the Spanish International Brigades,” Najati Sidqqi (2015)

“Two Portraits in Resistance - Abu ‘Umar and Mahjub ‘Umar,” Jehan Helou and Elias Khoury (2012)

My Life in the PLO: The Inside Story of the Palestinian Struggle, Shafiq al-Hout and Jean Said Makdisi (2019)

Lightning through the Clouds: ‘Izz al-Din al-Qassam and the Making of the Modern Middle East, Mark Sanagan (2020)

جيفارا غزة - القصة الكاملة لبطل فلسطيني حارب الاحتلال ببسالة

جيفارا غزة - وثائقي الميادين

Historical fiction, literature, and poetry

The Trinity of Fundamentals, Wisam Rafeedie

“Live Like a Porcupine, Fight Like a Flea,” A Translation of an Article by Basel Al-Araj

“Here We Will Stay,” Tawfiq Zayyad (1966)

Poetry of Resistance in Occupied Palestine, translated by Sulafa Hijjawi (Baghdad, Ministry of Culture and Guidance, 1968)

Returning to Haifa, Ghassan Kanafani (1969)

الأدب الفلسطيني المقاوم تحت الإحتلال 1948ـ1968“ ,غسان كنفاني”

“Resist, My People, Resist Them,” Dareen Tatour (2015)

(نظرية اللعبة“ خالد عودة الله (2018”

Rifqa, Mohammed El-Kurd (2021)

“A Place Without a Door” and “Uncle Give me a Cigarette”—Two Essays by Palestinian Political Prisoner, Walid Daqqah (2023)

On Zionist Literature, Ghassan Kanafani (1967 original, 2022 English translation)

Films

Fedayin: Georges Abdallah’s Fight (2021)

Naila and the Uprising (2017)

Off Frame AKA Revolution Until Victory (2015)

When I Saw You, Lamma Shoftak (2012)

Slingshot Hip Hop (2008)

Leila Khaled: Hijacker (2005)

Jenin Jenin (2002)

Naji al Ali An Artist With a Vision (1999)

Tell Your Tale Little Bird (1993)

Everything and Nothing (1991)

They Do Not Exist (1974)

Palestine Books Library

To search for the book you’d like:

#repost of someone else’s content #Palestinian Youth Movement #Palestine

348 notes · View notes

ottogatto · 9 months

Text

I would like to submit two ideas because I think I'm poking something but not going in fully, so I would very much like your opinions and additions about it (of course, as long as they remain in good faith *side eyes possible antis viewing my post*).

Marauders and surface-level rebellion

I've finally put to words something that really bothered me with the Marauders, though I don't know the name for it.

It started when I read a reblog that said:

I remember Brennan saying “laws are just structured threats made by the ruling socioeconomic class” during an episode of D20 and we truly just had to stan immediately

This is something dear privileged white woman Rowling didn't realize/understand well, since she held a high socioeconomical status even during her """poverty""" stage. It's known that, despite seeming to be defending ideas of fighting against fascism and "pureblood" supremacy in favor of acceptance of the other, her books reek of colonialism/imperalism. The story of the Marauders, a gang of privileged boys like her, is an in-world replica of that problem where Rowling betrays yet again her actual mindset.

The Marauders adopt the "bad boys who break rules" to get style, while completely losing/staining the moral sense in it.

Let's take piracy.

Some people pirate stuff because they consider that the stuff they'd like to get comes from unethical companies that abuse their employees or use modern slavery, or people who spread harm against certain minorities (like Rowling against trans people and thus the LGBT+ community), so while they may want to access the content, they don't want to give them money and might even encourage pirating their stuff to make them lose money.

Some pirate stuff because otherwise it's lost due to unfortunate "terms of use" -- see video games companies like Ubisoft (deletes gaming account after a while), Nintendo (does not bring back old games), etc.

Others pirate stuff because they just don't have the money but they still want to try the stuff that might make them happy and forget that they're poor -- reasoning that the company isn't losing any money anyway, or not much, since they wouldn't have been able to pay for it in any case.

Others pirate stuff because they consider the price ridiculously high or they consider it shouldn't be something to pay for at all. (Like education stuff -- isn't education supposed to be free for all, so that it can actually uphold everyone's fundamental and unconditional ( = not conditioned by wealth...) right to have an education? Oh and before anyone asks: I've DEFINITELY bought the ~15 expensive books that's roughly worth 500€ in total and that my uni asked I buy to study and get my degree...)

Rowling's Marauders is a group that would pirate stuff just because they'd think it would give them an edge, because they'd think it would make them cool to be seen as "talented" hackers who "defy" companies. Companies... that their own friends and families would own, and as such, would find that kind of behavior funny and entertaining (while they would trash other people around for considering it).

Another example. In society, in history, it's been proven time and again that breaking rules -- going against the law -- is an eventuality that's important for everyone to consider, if they want to defend their rights. Anti-racism, feminism, LGBT Pride, etc, advanced because people broke rules. In USA states where abortion is currently being banned, women and minors (+ their close ones) must now consider breaking the rules to get an abortion. (Privileged people don't give a fuck about those people, and if they suddenly decide that (moral) rules don't apply to them and they will get an abortion, they will just take a plane ticket to a country where abortion is legal, fiddling with legal stuff if necessary thanks to the lawyers their fortunes can afford and the lobbies that they're instituting.)

Revolutions happened because people broke rules too. I particularly like the 1793 Constitution in France Because it asserts that the people have the right to break rules and riot if the power in place threatens their fundamental rights:

Article 35. - Quand le gouvernement viole les droits du peuple, l'insurrection est, pour le peuple et pour chaque portion du peuple, le plus sacré des droits et le plus indispensable des devoirs. Article 35. - When the government violates the people's rights, insurrection is, for the people and for each portion of the people, the most sacred of rights and the most essential of duties.

(Of course the power in place would state and enforce and make use of propaganda to say that it's completely illegal and illegetimate and that those who riot for legitimate rights are terrorists!)

Breaking rules is at the core of anti-fascism, anti-dictatorship, anti-totalitarianism. Breaking rules is essential when those rules are abusive. Too often, those who put those rules in place really are only setting their rules of the game to establish their power over the others. Or as the reblog says: "laws are just structured threats made by the ruling socioeconomic class".

Rowling's Marauders break rules because they are the socioeconomical class in power. As such, no one can do anything about it, no one will really tell them down for it. They get excused and justified and romanticized by their peers, just like billionaires & politicians are excused by their peers and notably mainstream media (which is owned... by other billionaires). They break rules -- not because they think it's necessary and the morally right thing to do despite the dangers it puts them in -- but because it makes them feel powerful, important, invincible, which for them is very fun. As Snape says: James and his cronies broke rules because they thought themselves above them:

“Your father didn’t set much store by rules either,” Snape went on, pressing his advantage, his thin face full of malice. “Rules were for lesser mortals, not Quidditch Cup-winners. [...]”

They break rules because they're allowed to.

Which is why, in reality, the Marauders aren't really breaking rules or defying anything or opposing an actual big threat. They're a bunch of jocks who are having fun in the playground that's been attributed to them thanks to their status and family heritage (others wouldn't get the same indulgence because they don't get that privilege).

They break rules because they want to look cool, to be the "bad boys". The message has been compleyely botched. Especially with Lily actually finding this hot.

Because Rowling finds this hot:

[...] I shook hands with a woman who leaned forward and whispered conspiratorially, 'Sirius Black is sexy, right?' And yes, of course she was right, as the Immeritus club know. The best-looking, most rebellious, most dangerous of the four marauders... and to answer one burning question on the discussion boards, his eyes are grey.

(Anyone has an eyes washing station?)

Another quote:

"Sirius was too busy being a big rebel to get married."

(Nevermind the eyes washing, anyone's got some bleach instead?)

Stanning James Potter for being the leader of a gang that prides itself on breaking rules and always getting away with it -- it feels like stanning Elon Musk for being "innovative" and "a daring entrepreneur" despite being a manchild who exploits workers and modern-world slavery to play with his billions while always getting away with it.

They're not being "rebels" -- they're being bullies and flexing the fact they can get away with it thanks to abundance of privilege. Those are the tastes of a posh British white woman. She wanted the facade -- not the substance (that is, if she ever understood it).

You might say that they did oppose a big threat, the Death Eaters, but again, it's botched because:

they target a lonely, unpopular boy who's best friends with a Muggleborn Gryffindor, rather than baby Death Eaters like Mulciber, Lucius, Rosier, Avery, Regulus, etc.

The leader sexually harasses the Muggleborn Gryffindor because he's sexually jealous of the unpopular boy who dared not take the insult about his chosen House and shut up. Lily is treated as an object, they don't listen to her, and they barely speak about her later. (Lots to say to show that, which I won't do here because this is not the main subject.)

When the Marauders do join the Order, they do it... because they primarily want to adopt a rock-n-roll style and play the "bad boys" again. Or at least that's the message that's given to the reader:

They seemed to be in their late teens. The one who had been driving had long black hair; his insolent good looks reminded Fisher unpleasantly of his daughter's guitar-playing, layabout boyfriend. The second boy also had black hair, though his was short and stuck up in all directions; he wore glasses and a broad grin. Both were dressed in T-shirts emblazoned with a large golden bird; the emblem, no doubt, of some deafening, tuneless rock band.

(God, the Prequel is so cringy.)

They don't choose Dumbledore as the Secret Keeper, they don't tell him they changed to Pettigrew -- even though he literally was their war leader -- James uses the Cape to fuck around even though he was supposed to be hiding with Lily and then Harry (until Dumbledore takes the Cape from him)... and eventually, their group exploded, with James killed off, Sirius thrown to Azkaban, Peter (the traitor) hiding as a rat and Lupin going off to find jobs to survive.

Why did that happen? Because they thought of playing their part in the Order like going on a teenage adventure rather than engaging in a resistance organization. It was, first and foremost, about playing "the bad boys" and having fun.

(Harry half-inherits this. While he doesn't break rules just to look cool, and actually has several moments where he does break rules because it's the right thing to do -- like under Umbridge or, of course, when Voldemort takes power -- he does often get pampered when he breaks them in his earlier years. By Dumbledore, but also McGonagall, however much Rowling tries to sell her as a "strict but fair" teacher. Or by Slughorn, now that I think about it. That's something that enraged Snape, as it brought up memories of Harry's father -- Snape's own bully -- getting the same treatment.)

It's not a coincidence that Rowling not only failed to properly convey through the Marauders the true value of breaking rules, but also lusted over them for adopting that "bad boys" trope. It speaks to her own privilege -- she who never had to put herself in danger and go against the law in a risky attempt to protect herself or other less privileged people.

(Here's a useful read to expand on those worldbuilding issues.)

2. Dark Magic, obscurantism and conservatism

For context: Opinion: The Dark Magic/Light Magic Dichotomy is Nonsense (by pet_genius).

The idea of "Dark Magic" as something that's repeatedly told to be "evil" magic and where you cross the line of the forbidden, while hardly putting in question that notion that was (for some reason) enforced by wizard society, is another blatant example of Rowling betraying her mindset of privileged British white woman.

Rowling couldn't put herself in the minds of a society of "outcasts (witches & wizards) deeply enough to consider they would not see any magic as "Dark" at all (being a ""Muggle"" concept), or that Dark magic is only magic that requires something unvaluable to be traded off -- like one's soul or health or life or sanity. Instead, she has Dark Magic defined as "evil" magic, even though her own books show that you can do evil stuff with normal magic, and that you can do morally good stuff with Dark magic. This thing happened because Rowling could not think past her own little world and instead she poured a conservatist mentality (+ typical "Muggle", anti-witch prejudice) into the HP (wizard society) worldbuilding without considering that there could, in fact, be fundamental differences between the two worlds that include thinking of magic differently. (This has a lot to do with Rowling's wizard world being a pro-imperalism fest.)

"Dark Magic" feels like a lazy, badly-executed plot device to tell the reader who's a good guy and who is not. Because of course, that's how things work in real-life, huh… (Did she ever hear of "don't tell, show"?) It's used as an excuse to define who's evil (teen Severus) or not (James), who's worthy or not -- not how their magic was used. Which is a BIG problem:

“I’m just trying to show you they’re not as wonderful as everyone seems to think they are.” The intensity of his gaze made her blush. “They don’t use Dark Magic, though.” / “Scourgify!” Pink soap bubbles streamed from Snape’s mouth at once; the froth was covering his lips, making him gag, choking him —

Even worse, Rowling doesn't follow her own in-world moral framework. Dark magic is acceptable for some people (Rowling's partial self-inserts: Dumbledore, Harry, Hermione to Marietta...) but not for those that Rowling hates (Snape, who ironically represents the closest thing to rebelling by unapologetically obsessing over the Dark Arts). Again, this is at best unadressed in-world hypocrisy, at worst an expression of in-world and out-universe privilege (I get to do this and stay a good guy, but you don't).

There could have easily been rightful criticism of whatever could be defined as "Dark Magic". What if Dark magic was just something defined as "Dark" usually because the power in place doesn't want the people to touch it? Is abortion or contraception or a sex-altering or a goverment-threatening spell, Dark Magic? Is foreign or ethnicity-specific or female-centered or queer-centered magic, "Dark"? How about showing why (Muggle-raised but also neurodivergent) Severus thought Dark magic was so great, showing his point of view, while also establishing where the true limits are? If Lily can't be the one who sees past the "fear-mongering anti-intellectualism/propaganda", how about Harry being the one who does, thanks to him relating to Snape on a personal level? How about making Hermione go from someone who condems Dark Magic, to someone who entirely changes her point of view and understands that this is all bullshit -- effectively showing the dangers of only following what the books say, without putting them into question or thinking by yourself? How about a nuanced view of Dark magic as something that requires a significant sacrifice, which is conceivable for something they see as equally or even more important [Lily's life for Harry; Snape's soul integrity for Dumbledore]? How about making the Death Eaters, people who deviate that legitimate interest, rather than just evil guys who thrive in Dark magic for its supposed added evilness? How about showing that Dark magic was just a notion invented by Muggles to throw "witches" (real or not) to the burning stakes -- later taken by the witches and wizards in power to define, in the magical community, what was okay or definitely forbidden because it's the trademark of those who represent a threat to the magical community (understand: people who riot or strike or protest against the ruling socioeconomical class' politics)?

But there was none of that.

"Dark" magic in HP merely seems to be a weird concept that at best accidentally takes the form of an in-world obscurantism, at worst is just the trademark of someone who cannot imagine a "hunted, ostracized" community with a different culture and mindset than her own. Aggravating is the fact that she used "Dark magic" as a plot device to magically cast some people as good and others as never bad – again, probably reflecting her own questionable mentality.

The fact Rowlnig invented the notion of Dark Magic and had her world consider it seriously as an evil thing instead of being open-minded seems to be less telling of her wishes to show a wizard society that can be as prejudiced as the muggle one, and more of her own bizarre world where you must be evil if you are knowledgeable in or interested in certain "taboo" things (RIP neurodivergents).

Rowling glorifies the Trio and the Marauders for breaking rules. Yet when it comes to actually breaking expectations and norms, notably in the wizarding society -- like the use of another magical species as slaves, or the blatant anti-Muggle prejudice held by everyone including "good guys" (or anti-centaur while we're at it), or stupid anti-knowledge prejudice like "Dark magic is evil" -- there is none of that. At best, it's surface-level opposition that comes out as white savior syndrome. At worst, the protagonists make it their noble code to enforce those norms, and "sinful" characters (Snape, for one) are punished for not conforming. Too often, those sinful characters are punished by the "good guys" with the very thing that they apparently oppose so fervently.

Without ever adressing the fact that those characters were ("morally") allowed to do that because it was just, in the end, a matter of who gets the privilege to do that, and who does not.

There.

Do you have anything to say to develop on those ideas? I feel like I'm reaching my knowledge limit and I'd like to see if those ideas can be expanded.

#pro snape #severus snape #harry potter #dark magic #sectumsempra #anti marauders #anti jkr #fuck jkr #classism #imperalism #colonialism #hp #hp books #hp prequel #obscurantism #bad boys #piracy #virtue signaling

254 notes · View notes

alicearmageddon · 7 months

Text

USEFUL ANARCHIST AND LEFTIST SITES ON THE WEB

1: The Anarchist Faq: this attempts to answer any questions one might have about anarchism. (the anarchist library, which this faq is on, is also an absolutley excellent rescource and maybe the biggest collection of anarchist theory on the web)

2: the tv tropes page for anarchism (yes, im serious). this manages to be a suprisingly well done and easy to read explanation of what anarchism is, what its about, and the different types of anarchists idealogies.

3: Anarchopedia. like wikipedia, but specifically for anarchism

more resources below the cut! and feel free to add more in reblogs.

4: the iww. the iww isnt anarchist, but im putting it here as its a member-led, grassroots union for all workers of the world.

iww.org

5: Zoe Baker has a PHD in anarchist history and is one of the few well researched and well read left politcs channels on youtube

youtube.com/@anarchopac

6: Organize magazine is a good source of anarchist news in the UK

organisemagazine.org.uk

7: Freedom News is another great source of anarchist news in the UK

freedomnews.org.uk

8: Mutual Aid Hub (afaik this is US only)

mutualaidhub.org

9:Black Rose Federation (also US only)

blackrosefed.org

10: symbiosis revolution (US only)

symbiosis-revolution.org

11: Marxists Internet Archive. while this site isnt really anarchist, it is leftist and has some anarchist texts. i also think marxism is worth learning about even as an anarchist whos views do not align with Marx.

Marxists.org

12: Neighborhood Anarchists. Neighborhood Anarchists is a direct action anarchist group based in Springfield and Eugene Oregon.

neighborhoodanarchists.org

13: Anarchist News. This is a site that provides news that is relevant to or about anarchism

Anarchistnews.org

14: A-Infos. This is a multi-lingual news service by, for, and about anarchists.

https://www.ainfos.ca/en/

15: CrimeThInk. This is an international network of aspiring revolutionaries all over the world.

crimethinc.com

16: It's Going Down. This is a digital community center for anarchist, anti-fascist, autonomous anti-capitalist and anti-colonial movements across so-called North America.

itsgoingdown.org

17: Libcom. This is is a resource for everyone fighting to improve their lives, communities and working conditions.

libcom.org

18: Unicorn Riot. This is a decentralized, educational non-profit media organization.

unicornriot.ninja

19: Submedia. Submedia is an anarchist digital media collective that produces videos and podcasts

sub.media

20: Zine Library. This is a compilation of anarchist zines and booklets, imposed for easy printing, as well as a few posters. (zines can be downloaded by pressing code > download zip)

github.com/rechelon/zine_library

#anarchism #anarchy #anarchist #leftist #leftism #capitalism #socialism #communism

181 notes · View notes

opencommunion · 3 months

Text

"By confining political detainees in detention camps for prolonged periods of time, preventing them from seeing lawyers and family members and denying them access to legal recourse, administrative detention is designed to coerce detainees into submission. During this period, detainees undergo an arduous course of torture and humiliation. Still, for many, neither during the period of initial detention nor after the laying of charges do women political detainees accept their detention silently or acquiesce to their oppressors. Agency and resistance to the state and its prison institution continues.

Resistance, struggle, and fighting against oppression do not stop at the doors of prisons or detention camps. The commitment to freedom, the love for the homeland, and the determination to struggle against oppression – elements which make up the agency of women fighters and drive them to resist – continue to be the driving forces for their survival in prisons or detention camps. Essential to all political resisters, both male and female, is the affirmation of their identity, namely, their insistence on being defined as political prisoners or detainees and not as terrorists. Against the silences, which characterize much of the Western academic and feminist perceptions of women political detainees, most political detainees are never silent recipients of oppression, regardless of the place or space they find themselves in."

Nahla Abdo, Captive Revolution: Palestinian Women's Anti-Colonial Struggle Within the Israeli Prison System

#resistance #palestine #library

79 notes · View notes

jewishbarbies · 4 months

Note

Hi, I hope this isn't rude, but could you please breakdown your thoughts on the whole 'people saying celebrities are terrible because they are zionist, or similar things' thing? Because I've seen it a lot.

this is a little long just because I wanted to be thorough in explaining the reasoning and thought processes here so sorry if you weren’t up for that.

well, just based on historical fact, claiming jews are not indigenous to the levant is asinine and antisemitic. so when people are upset someone is a zionist, they’re upset they believe in jewish indigeneity. that, and they grossly misunderstand zionism and its many forms. they hear zionist and immediately jump to “this person hates palestinians, wants them all dead, and bootlicks for the Israeli government” and that’s where 99% of problems lie when discussing it. because that’s not what it means. the root belief of zionism is that jews have the right to self determination in the land they’re indigenous to, not that no one else can too. there’s no tenant of zionism that states you HAVE to wipe everyone else in the region out in order to self determine there.

now, there’s political and Christian zionism which are both corrupt and bigoted versions of zionism (most jews agree with this, from what I can tell). it’s christian and political zionism that’s used in the way leftists think ALL zionism is. christians use their zionism to be Islamophobic and continue voting for republicans because they fetishize jews and the modern state of Israel. politicians use their zionism to beguile american christian voters and further sow seeds of hate in their base. both these camps use jews as scapegoats for their hatred and lust for power, and progressives have fallen for it hook line and sinker because terrorist organizations like hamas know they can work both sides with this and some misinformation disguised as colorful infographics on social media.

just like the russian bots that have been spewing disinformation to rally support for putin and hate for ukraine, terrorists use leftists’ fundamental misunderstanding of zionism, judaism, and their internal bias toward jews to gain support for hamas, claiming hamas is simply fighting back against israel. but they use language leftists have become obsessed with to do it - like colonialism, for example. they know leftists give a strong response to that language and are prone to fall victim to propaganda, and they’ve used it to their advantage for decades. palestinians haven’t had an election since 2007. would freedom fighters do that? no. freedom fighters value - you guessed it - freedom.

my thoughts are that leftists fall victim to disinformation like “zionism = colonialism because jews are all white Europeans” because they refuse to vet their sources and responsibly engage with the things happening in the world. they would much rather scream at and boycott and ostracize a minority community than do the work because screaming is easier and more people hear it. being mad about zionism for these people has become a social competition to see who can seem the most progressive, and it’s only shown their bare asses. they’re refusing to listen to the 70% of palestinians who want a peaceful resolution with Israel, the people of gaza who marched during oppression chanting anti hamas chants, and refuse to acknowledge what happened on Oct 7th because all of it would make supporting hamas the wrong thing to do. they’re too deep in it now. they can’t admit they’ve been fucking up. they can’t admit that they wanted revolution in their own country so bad that they yelled over and trampled the people they claimed to be trying to help, and they can’t admit they’ve fallen for propaganda because they’ve convinced themselves they’re immune. they believe they’d punch nazis and hide jews and they’re soooo progressive there’s no way they’d fall for obvious lies. but they have. and they will continue to do so until it’s their lives being played with by privileged assholes in another country with racial biases.

unless someone who identifies as zionist is actually calling for the death and/or relocation of palestinians in the region, then no, they’re not terrible. it’s truly that simple.

#Asks #anonymoose #antisemitism

43 notes · View notes

arkipelagic · 5 months

Text

A 5.9 × 4.4-inch photograph of Papa Isio from the Harry H. Bandholtz Papers, Bentley Historical Library, University of Michigan. He is framed by two followers in a Bacolod prison, circa 1907.

Papa Isio was born as Dionisio Magbuelas on March 20, 1846 and was an anti-colonial rebel and babaylan (i.e. Visayan shaman) during the Negros Revolution who, in response to land loss, lead a group of other babaylans in the cause for nationalistic agrarian reform. At one point in time Papa Isio fled the Spanish authorities during which, according to Modesto P. Sa-onoy, he may have joined Dios Buhawi, a fellow Negrense and babaylan leader who once waged a politico-religious revolt against the Spanish in the late nineteenth century. Papa Isio’s own nom de guerre was an appropriation of the Santo Papa’s title and a repudiation of his and the Church’s authority.

Papa Isio was eventually cornered not by the Spanish but by American forces. He surrendered to Lieutenant J.S. Mohler on August 6, 1907 and died in Manila’s Old Bilibid Prison sometime in 1911, before which he may be regarded as the last revolutionary standing “who was consistent in his fight against the Spaniards and the Americans.”

Since his death, Papa Isio has been commemorated with a statue in Cauayan, Negros Occidental and was featured in the artwork “The Spiritual Landscape of Papa Isio” by Riel Hilario.

#visayas #philippines #negros revolution #philippine revolution #colonization #spanish colonization #american colonization #papa isio #shamanism #christianity #x

51 notes · View notes

keshetchai · 5 months

Note

Thank you for your deconstruction of that post about Jewish ethnicity and your detailed explanation of why it was a terrible take! I saw that post earlier and it got my hackles up but I didn't even know where to start when they're starting from such a flawed understanding of Jewish identity and ethnicity in general.

Yeah idk the most generous conclusions I have were those last two points — the argument either starts from assuming ethnonationalists have always been the ones defining ethnicity/they are the main arbiters of defining it (which I just reject categorically), or they have misunderstood or don't actually know what ethnicity means (outside of understanding ethnonationalism is bad).

And I never want to come out the gate with like "I think you just don't know what that word means," because that feels extremely condescending and combative. At the same time we're clearly facing some kind of vast language gap if the concept of "Jews are an ethnic group" is considered absurd or laughable. So working backwards those are my guesses for how someone got themselves to that conclusion which bizarrely had a lot of reblogs and i didn't look at the notes but like.

Please tell me I wasn't the only one baffled by this?? Anti-/non-zionist Jewish movements have typically still explicitly emphasized ethnicity, like...sometimes even moreso because "shared cultural identity here-ness" HAS to care more about group belonging in culture rather than in place or nation.

Either way: We can just reject ethnonationalism without erasing the concept of people having ethnicities! That's totally an option. Israel and Palestine both have histories of nationalist movements AND both can and should reject ethnonationalism because the levant itself is a place full of a variety of ethnicities. No matter what the future of the levant and any states within it look, ethnonationalism should be rejected.

Like yeah I can fully climb on board the whole "the modern nation state itself is bad, borders are violence enacted upon people, nation-states foment nationalism, colonialism, and so on, let's move forwards towards stateless society." Ethnonationalism is bad.

But simultaneously I live in like...a reality where something has to float us all until we can get there and I don't believe in a leftist rapture of "bloody revolution will overthrow all of current society."

spoilers: ethnic self-determination and governance doesn't mean you can avoid ethnonationalism strains cropping up!

Also just because this has been getting to me recently, here's a big tangent not part of the OP but something else I've been seeing: Indigeneity to a place doesn't actually elevate you to this morally pure and uncorrupt self, and it doesn't mean you're going to be a better society than anyone else trying to govern there or avoid ethnonationalism or nationalism.

That's...I mean that's not how it fucking works. I keep seeing like "these Israelis are destroying olive trees, an indigenous people wouldn't do that!" And it's like...such a kindergarten way of treating the status of being "native" as morally and ethically untainted by bad ideologies. To me it absolutely reeks of "noble savage" fantasies wherein like: nobleness of character, innocent benevolence to foreigners, and perfect stewardship of land is somehow the hallmarks of "true" Indigeneity.

I regret to inform everyone but if you only ever get the highlights reel history of Spanish colonialism in Mexico: the Spaniards were able to conquer Mexico the way they did for a variety of reasons (smallpox devastating the native populace is one of them), but one of those big key ways is the fact that various native groups hated the aztec triumvirate (the Mexica) so much that they actively helped the Spanish overthrow them.

The Spanish didn't conquer the Aztecs by themselves. The Spanish had maybe an army of 3,100 or so. The Aztecs had a fighting force of 200,000+, not including other allied forces. The spanish were able to conquer the Aztec empire because a whole lot of other indigenous forces were assisting them.

Being indigenous to somewhere absolutely doesn't mean you won't burn or destroy farms, or murder your also indigenous neighbors, or commit terrible atrocities, or even become an imperial force who enslaves people or enforces a caste system or anything else. It's not a guarantee that your society won't be shitty somehow. The Aztecs were comprised of native people, and they still cracked open rib cages of other human beings to extract their hearts in ritual sacrifice so like. It's not a strong argument to say "they definitely aren't from here because they destroy tree groves or murder Innocents."

If you wanna talk about settlers being settlers there's other ways to do it.

38 notes · View notes

hussyknee · 6 months

Text

Not so friendly reminder that Tankies are people who deny not only the genocides of Russia but also Vietnam and China (including the Uyghurs), and are apologists for the North Korean regime. They push Russian propaganda of "colour revolutions" every time a Global South country rises up against a totalitarian government because they believe totalitarianism is merely anti-communist agenda; deriding, dismissing and dehumanizing the liberation movements of our countries that come at great human cost. They're not anti-imperialists or anti-colonial; their chief issue with the imperial core is that it's not their ideology seated at the heart of it. They only care about Global South lives when it serves their ideology, and have no genuine concern or curiosity about the ground realities or agency of the communities impacted by imperialism and colonialism.

I also want you to understand that every major power player involved in this conflict is a genocidal fascist. Hamas, Hezbollah and Houthis that are fighting Israel are funded by the theocratic Iranian regime headed by Ebrahim Raisi (begging you to remember the hundreds of Iranian girls and women killed for protesting it). Iran is also an ally of the notorious Bashar Al-Assad's regime in Syria, responsible for the genocide and displacement of millions of his own people while actively funding the Islamic State he wages war against. Both Assad and Raisi are allies of Putin, who is currently trying to colonize and genocide Ukraine and is terrorising Poland, Hungary, Georgia, Estonia, Latvia etc. However, Iran and Putin (half-heartedly) are also allies of the Armenians who are being genocided by Azerbaijan. Azerbaijan is supported by the US, but also Erdogan in Turkey, infamous dictator that hates the European Union and is a close pal of Putin. Meanwhile the US's best friends in the Middle East is Israel, which hates Arabs, and Saudi Arabia, who doesn't recognise Israel as a country but is hated by most of the MENA and is currently in a Cold War with Iran.

*yanks y'all by the shirt and shouts in your face* THERE ARE NO GOOD GUYS HERE, DO YOU UNDERSTAND?? ONLY INNOCENT CIVILIANS CAUGHT IN A SPIDER WEB OF GREEDY, DESPOTIC, GENOCIDAL, FASCIST CUNTS. THERE IS NO POINT TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHICH ONE IS THE BIGGEST THREAT TO GLOBAL DEMOCRACY BECAUSE ALL THE FALL OF ONE DOES IS CREATE A POWER VACCUUM THAT WILL IMMEDIATELY BE FILLED BY THE NEXT BULLY.

These governments can only be toppled from within by their own people once external threats like war with their neighbours are eased, because militaries with nothing to fight are economic black holes that try to eat itself, and it's this economic stress that act as catalysts for coalition building and civilian revolt. Military losses weaken imperialists' coercive power and legitimacy over their own people, so the best thing you can do to help them agitate for change is preventing imperialist expansions from claiming any more victims.

#TL;DR: if the US divests from Israel #withdraws entirely from Iraq and Syria and actually commits to helping Ukraine beat back Putin #it would break Israel's continuing destabilising of the Middle East #and consequent lessening of external threat might lessen some of these states' chokeholds over their own people.#Sadly‚ it's also why the US refuses to do so. Ukraine means little to the US #while the MENA keeps the US's arms and oil industries in business.#If Putin invades Ukraine and the US is tied up fighting seven different countries in the Middle East alongside Israel #he's going to try and encroach into Poland #and then we're on the brink of nuclear war.#Althoug actually we might not have to wait that long #considering the US is already aiming nuclear missiles at Iran for being mean to Israel #and also attacking the US's bases in Iraq and Syria in retaliation for Gaza.#tankies #war in ukraine #ukrainian genocide #palestinian genocide #armenian genocide #western leftists #geo-politics #decolonisation #colonization #imperialism #middle east #global south #totalitarianism #western propaganda #western imperialism #genocide denial #liberation #knee of huss

43 notes · View notes

padawan-historian · 6 months

Text

To better upRoot our miseducation about settler-colonialism, antisemitism, islamophobia, apartheid, and the growing military industrial complex, here are a few urgent and timely reading recommendations from your friendly neighborhood historian (books with ** are my padawan picks)

Books on Muslim Identities & Solidarities:

Islamophobia and the Politics of Empire: Twenty Years After 9/11 | Deepa Kumar **

The New Crusades: Islamophobia and the Global War on Muslims | Khaled A. Beydoun

Tolerance and Risk: How U.S. Liberalism Racializes Muslims | Mitra Rastegar **

The Muslims Are Coming: Islamophobia, Extremism, and the Domestic War on Terror | Arun Kundnani **

Things You May Find Hidden in My Ear: Poems from Gaza | Mosab Abu Toha **

The Way to the Spring: Life and Death in Palestine | Ben Ehrenreich

Erasing Palestine: Free Speech and Palestinian Freedom | Rebecca Gould **

Books on Jewish Identities & Religious Imperialism:

Holocaust to Resistance, My Journey | Suzanne Berliner Weiss **

A Land with a People: Palestinians and Jews Confront Zionism

Ten Myths about Israel | Ilan Pappe **

Voices from the Warsaw Ghetto: Writing Our History

Whatever Happened to Antisemitism?: Redefinition and the Myth of the 'Collective Jew' | Antony Lerman **

Books on the Histories & Afterlives of Palestine:

The Palestinians | Rosemary Sayigh

The Balfour Declaration: Empire, the Mandate and Resistance in Palestine | Bernard Regan **

The Hundred Years' War on Palestine: A History of Settler Colonialism and Resistance, 1917-2017 | Rashid Khalidi **

The Great War and the Remaking of Palestine | Salim Tamari

The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine | Ilan Pappe **

Stone Men: The Palestinians Who Built Israel | Andrew Ross **

Gaza Under Hamas: From Islamic Democracy to Islamist Governance | Bjorn Brenner

The Biggest Prison on Earth: A History of the Occupied Territories | Ilan Pappe

The Battle for Justice in Palestine | Ali Abunimah

In Search of the River Jordan: A Story of Palestine, Israel and the Struggle for Water | James Fergusson **

Books on Queer Liberation & Apartheid:

Queer Palestine and the Empire of Critique | Sa'ed Atshan **

We Have Always Been Here: A Queer Muslim Memoir | Samra Habib **

Terrorist Assemblages: Homonationalism in Queer Times | Jasbir K. Puar

Exile and Pride: Disability, Queerness, and Liberation | Eli Clare

Books for Young Readers & Growing Families on Palestine, Apartheid, and Racism:

Young Palestinians Speak: Living Under Occupation **

You Are The Color **

The 1619 Project: Born on the Water **

A Little Piece of Ground

Wishing Upon the Same Stars **

The Shepherd's Granddaughter **

They Called Me a Lioness: A Palestinian Girl's Fight for Freedom **

A Long Way Gone: Memoirs of a Boy Soldier **

We Are Displaced: My Journey and Stories from Refugee Girls Around the World **

Books for upRooting Political & Academic Imperialism

Except for Palestine: The Limits of Progressive Politics | Marc Lamont Hill + Mitchell Plitnick **

Tolerance Is a Wasteland: Palestine and the Culture of Denial | Saree Makdisi

The Palestine Laboratory: How Israel Exports the Technology of Occupation Around the World | Antony Loewenstein **

We Are Not One: A History of America's Fight Over Israel | Eric Alterman **

Beyond Occupation: Apartheid, Colonialism and International Law in the Occupied Palestinian Territories | Virginia Tilley

Set the World on Fire: Black Nationalist Women and the Global Struggle for Freedom | Keisha Blain

Beyond Walls and Cages: Prisons, Borders, and Global Crisis | Matt Mitchelson

Books for Decolonized Scholarship & Community Building:

The Wretched of the Earth | Franz Fanon **

Necropolitics | Achille Mbembe **

Freedom Is a Constant Struggle: Ferguson, Palestine, and the Foundations of a Movement | Angela Davis **

Captive Revolution: Palestinian Women's Anti-Colonial Struggle within the Israeli Prison System | Nahla Abdo **

Europe's Fault Lines: Racism and the Rise of the Right | Elizabeth Fekete

The New Age of Empire: How Racism and Colonialism Still Rule the World | Kehinde Andrews **

The Republic Shall Be Kept Clean: How Settler Colonial Violence Shaped Antileft Repression | Tariq D. Khan

Decolonial Marxism: Essays from the Pan-African Revolution | Walter Rodney

You can explore more decolonized book recs + history reads over on Neighborhood Historian or access deeper history lessons (and support these public resources + works) through my Patreon.

#books to read #solidarity with palestine against apartheid #black solidarity with palestine #free palestine #free us all #padawan historian #decolonize your bookshelf #the fire is here #our history is your history #book recommendations #resources for you #antiracist resources

40 notes · View notes

canmom · 6 months

Text

re the shit happening in palestine

nobody knows what will happen i guess, but like. what's most likely? my doomscrolling brain can produce possibilities from 'genocide to rival the worst of the 20th century' through 'syria-style proxy war' all the way up to 'first act of wwiii', and I keep waiting for the other shoe to drop of the start of the ground invasion that would presumably make the sickening carnage of the last couple weeks look like nothing. meanwhile the countries around Israel are flinging a handful of rockets at US and Israeli military bases.

so like Israel's got to know that if it sends its whole army into Gaza, then Hezbollah etc. will attack and things will get much worse for them, so at some point they have to back down right? they're already having to play desperate PR damage control after they blew up that hospital, and even the U.S. is starting to say out of the corner of its mouth 'hey that's a bit much there buddy, go easy on the civilian slaughter'. on the other hand Israel seems to be pushing even fashier to enforce a pro-war sentiment internally - locking up any Arab citizen who says something anti-war, banning news orgs like Al Jazeera who don't toe the line, etc. like is it just going to fall back to the status quo plus several thousand bodies, or are we too far from that equilibrium at this point?

and as for Hamas and its allies - obviously they would have known that if they carried out a massive, bloody attack on Israel, the Israelis would go completely berserk and launch an even larger reprisal on the population of Gaza. ergo, they had to have believed that whatever they would achieve through such an attack might be 'worth that price', and have some sense of how things might go next - and they're still fighting, shooting rockets etc., but what's their current objective, just to survive as an organisation until other countries get pulled in against Israel?

really what i want to have some reason to believe is that there might be any remotely plausible way this can still work out to a 'better' state of affairs (no ethnic cleansing, no megadeaths - but also no more ghettoes, and somehow, end-of-apartheid-style negotiations to abolish the current Israeli state so that Palestinians can return home with equal legal rights etc.).

i see people talking like here is how the Palestinians will still win, that this is the first act in the overthrowing of Israel, even defining various neighbouring Islamic states as 'the resistance', because you need a team to cheer for I guess, enemy-of-my-enemy logic. but what seems more likely to come from that kind of escalation would just be a massive war which, if recent wars are anything to go by, will kill a lot of people and push every state/group involved to greater levels of internal repression, but eventually peter out without any sort of clear outcome. so... is Israel somehow much more fragile than it used to be? is there reason to think the US would cut it off?

anyway. for some historical comparisons - the Haitian Revolution took a little over 12 years (1791-1804) between the initial slave revolt and establishing an independent country (which promptly got squashed with debt and trade sanctions by the bitter European powers). in South Africa, the ANC turned to insurgency in the wake of the Sharpeville Massacre of 1960, and about 31 years later negotiations began for the end of apartheid (during the collapse of the USSR, which shifted the priorities of the US etc. who had been backing the apartheid gov). the Algerian War of Independence lasted about seven years (1954-1962). if this anti-colonial war is going to follow a similar trajectory... well, it depends when you start counting I guess, but probably it would take a decade or more to approach any sort of 'resolution' you could name.

the status quo obviously couldn't last indefinitely, you can't just keep a population in a massive prison and gradually bleed them out and not expect them to fight back, but in terms of ways this could fall down, there are some obviously very bad outcomes (nakba 2, surviving palestinians in Gaza exiled to e.g. egypt) that could establish a new equilibrium (apartheid state annexes the whole region after sufficiently depopulating it to establish a majority). that's not implausible, it's basically what happened in the U.S.A., Canada and Australia - the settler population now outnumbers the indigenous ones by orders of magnitude, and maintains a complicated legal regime to control the surviving population (reservations etc.). that's presumbly the outcome the present state of Israel 'wants' to achieve, gradually enough that it doesn't look too bad on TV. however, it's not there yet - in the combined territory of Israel and Palestine, there's presently roughly equal numbers of people defined by the census to be Jewish vs Palestinian.

conversely... the state of Israel's constantly broadcast fears about a combined 'one state solution' resulting in the Jewish population being treated the way the Israeli state currently treats the Palestinians (ethnic cleansing, massacres etc.), and the great-replacement birthrate bullshit, are surely completely overblown (notably the much smaller white population in South Africa was not banished at the end of apartheid), but what happens rather depends exactly how the state of Israel might collapse and who would hold power afterwards. and... in South Africa, the apartheid government in the last few apartheid years started to realise it had lost the game, and was making some paltry concessions - which the Israeli gov. is not doing at all, seeming to prefer to rush headlong into an 'us or them' war of annihilation, confident the U.S. will let it do whatever reckless shit it wants?

all in all it's a horrifying mess and I find it hard to feel any sort of hope that it won't just get worse in one of a dozen different ways. would love to be convinced otherwise. i always assume things will go in the bleakest way possible, which is not a very reliable mindset.

#amateur geopolitics analysis hour

23 notes · View notes

horizonsstandstill · 2 months

Text

I'm also against using "rest in power" or other Black terminology for white people.

For several reasons, such as;

- It's easy to provoke disenfranchised Black people into starting divisive arguments because they want their oppression to be heard, and psyops take advantage of that,

- Terms Black people coined are always taken out of context and this harms their ability to fight against oppression when they are using them,

- The use of more revolutionary and provocative terms will give the agents of imperialism a hard time to shame the people into silence or denounce them as racists,

- Our terminology should include horizons, visions and goals that will encourage our people and make the enemies shake.

Therefore I suggest using terms such as;

- May your sacrifice be a milestone in a society we will build on the ashes of imperialism,

- Rest knowing that the empire will crumble with your spark,

- We will remember your heroic act as a catalyst for the destruction of our oppressors,

- You will never be forgotten unlike the colonial order we will dismantle.

See if the psyops could argue with these. And whenever people use divisive arguments, don't argue. Ask them questions on the issues such as what they think of cops, military industrial complex, prison and slavery system, indigenous rights and who are their favourite Black thinkers. If they can't provide satisfactory answers, don't engage them. They deserve cancelling over speaking about things they don't understand.

Black people in the imperial core can be the victims of the imperialism as well as the perpetrators of it. It depends on how disenfranchised they are and how much they are willing to suck up to the white supremacist order in order to be able to oppress other people. Everyone can serve as an agent of imperialism regardless of race, class, gender, disability or any other axis of oppression. That is not even limited to imperial core. That's why it's up to the oppressed to think about who are benefiting their actions.

It's important that the electronics we use to do our "activism" come at the price of the suffering of Congolese people. Possibly Bolivian people too. Also the sufferings of the workers that are exploited in the Far Eastern countries. We all could suffer from imperialism while using the materials extracted through the imperial order of suffering. That doesn't make any of us less oppressed. It gives us a duty to try to end all kinds of oppression and dismantle the imperialist system altogether.

As a side note, discriminating against people while advocating against other types of discrimination makes a person a disgusting hypocrite.

If your communism ends when you think you can't consume products from underdeveloped countries cheaply, you're a scum.

If your anarchism ends when you think it's not okay for people to gather and build structures out of their own volition for only themselves after the revolution, you're a scum.

If your feminism finds it convenient to stereotype men of other races and caricaturise them as monsters, you are the monster.

If your veganism doesn't recognise the situations of indigenous people and disabled people, sufferings of agriculture workers and environmental degradation that vegan products cause, it means you're not against cruelty to all living beings. You're just a self righteous idiot.

If your anti violence is only for those who resist against the legal order that oppresses themselves, you are amongst the perpetrators of said oppression, deserving of violent resistance against yourself.

If your queer rights activism ends at the people who are acceptable queers in your worldview, you're a bootlicker of the patriarchy. Those boots are coming for you next.

If your disability advocacy is not inclusive of recreational use of substances -legal or illegal-, you're just another selfish person being loud.

These are just examples. They can be multiplied into several cases.

Being against one type of bigotry doesn't excuse other types of bigotry. People can make these mistakes for a lot of reasons, but once it's explained to them if they continue their bigotry, they should be cancelled altogether. We should not engage them at all, and a blocklist is in order. No need to waste our time in good faith because of bad faith actors.

Say, "Okay, bigot/bootlicker/racist so on..." to call them out. Then blocked. If they learn, they have to learn it the hard way.

#racism #aaron bushnell #colonialism #Palestine #resistance #imperialism

9 notes · View notes

workingclasshistory · 1 year

Photo

On this day, 20 January 1973, Amilcar Cabral, one of Africa's foremost anti-colonial leaders, was assassinated, about eight months before he could see his homelands of Cape Verde and Guinea Bissau gain independence from Portugal. While an agronomy student in Lisbon, Portugal, he founded student movements dedicated to opposing the ruling dictatorship of Portugal and promoting the cause of independence for the Portuguese colonies in Africa. When he came back to Africa, Cabral led the anti-colonial movement of Guinea-Bissau and Cape Verde Islands and the ensuing war of independence in Guinea-Bissau. From 1963 to his assassination in 1973, Cabral led the PAIGC's guerrilla movement (in Portuguese Guinea) against the Portuguese government, which evolved into one of the most successful wars of independence in modern African history. After setting training camps, he taught his troops to teach local crop growers better farming techniques, so that they could increase productivity and be able to feed their own family and tribe, as well as the Revolutionary soldiers. He was deeply influenced by Marxism, and adapted it to Guinea Bissau's social and economic realities, and became an inspiration to revolutionary socialists and national independence movements worldwide. The fight against colonialism in Portugal's colonies eventually led to revolution in Portugal and the downfall of the decades-long dictatorship. Learn more about the revolution in our podcast episodes 41-42: https://workingclasshistory.com/podcast/e41-42-the-portuguese-revolution https://www.facebook.com/workingclasshistory/photos/a.296224173896073/2190430584475413/?type=3

136 notes · View notes

kewpiiie · 1 month

Text

I think the thing that is so wild to me is how intertwined black liberation has been to Palestine for DECADES and if y’all had been actively reading the resources we were constantly talking about back in 2020, you’d know that. Sometimes I feel like people who call their activism “intersectional” mean they care about the current trending leftist movement they are told to care about. If your activism is really intersectional then you know BLM didn’t start in 2020 and that Palestine didn’t start being colonized in October. These are issues that have been written about in detail for decades, please stop waiting for activism to reach social media, please start reading academic papers and get involved with your local activist groups, go to protest, organize in your communities.

Too much activism has been reduced down to watching TikTok and video essays, and while I’m not against using social media platforms for political organization and awareness, in fact I think it VITAL, but this is the privilege we are talking about. If you didn’t have to know about how rampant police brutality is in the black community until it was filmed and put on social media, you are privileged, if you have been able to be unaware of the treatment of Arabs has been, because trust me Israel and America has more history than just with Palestine, than you are privileged.

“The revolution will not be televised” has transformed into “the revolution will not be noticed until it is trending” but even then when it done trending, you go back to ignoring it. BLM and ACAB has been reduced to a Twitter bio label, while my life is even more in danger than before because y’all stayed silent when abolish the police turned into defund the police turned into fund the police, and now we gotta deal with Cop City and Palestine protesters facing the same violence as BLM protesters years ago.

I know I’m not saying anything new but when ever this conversation comes up it’s always about “white liberals” and that’s it own thing, but I’m talking about self proclaimed socialists, anarchist, communist, and any otherwise anti-capitalist leftist, who does the same thing but has distanced their self, from reading and participating in the actions that the label implies. You can not be anti-capitalist and be ignorant to Sudan and Congo until it’s trending. I understand that there is no perfect way to be anti-capitalist, especially in America, but the left has got to get better.

I’m tired of fighting unseen fights until it becomes a trending topic too late only for the fire to die out once some other tragedy trends catch the current leftist attention. Your activism shouldn’t be distractible. I’m begging y’all to not stop talking about genocide, racism, colonialism, police brutality, capitalism, and any and all forms of oppression. ESPECIALLY when it’s not trending.

#palestine #blm #black liberation #congo genocide #sudan genocide #anarchism #socialism #communism #anti capitalism #intersectional social justice #ACAB #police brutality #anti facist

7 notes · View notes

fatehbaz · 1 year

Text

Many of my Okinawan relatives, including one great-uncle, came to the United States via Revolutionary Mexico. Morisei Yamashiro became a farmworker and labor organizer in the fields of Southern California’s Imperial Valley. There, Okinawan, Japanese, Chinese, Black, Filipino, South Asian, Indigenous, poor white, and Mexican workers labored [...]. According to his son, Morisei could speak several languages including English, Spanish, Japanese, and Okinawan dialects [...]. Before the internment of Japanese and Okinawan Americans, there were early FBI raids on the communities. Labor organizers were among the first to be targeted. [...]

This story was provocative for several reasons. I knew of the world of the Revolutionary Atlantic and the radical currents which produced what Julius C. Scott calls the “common wind” of abolition. I first wondered if there might be a story to tell about the Revolutionary Pacific and the influence of the Mexican Revolution upon it. [...] [T]he story invited me to think anew about internationalism, which I understand as a recognition of the ways that people have been unevenly waylaid by the global capitalist system and developed forms of revolutionary solidarity to confront it.

---

To consider these provocations, I examined the reflections of another Okinawan migrant, Paul Shinsei Kōchi, who had traveled a similar path [...]. Kōchi’s memoir Imin no Aiwa (An Immigrant’s Sorrowful Tale) [...] describes how he found internationalism in Revolutionary Mexico. It details his escape from Okinawa and from the surveillance and repression of imperialist Japan; his solidarity with Indigenous Kanaka Maoli in Hawai‘i, with Tongva people in California, and with Yaqui in northern Mexico as well as with Indian, Chinese, and other Asian immigrants and with Mexican peasants in the revolution; and his subsequent position of internationalism.

“Paul Kōchi’s story demonstrates how the uprooted, dispossessed, and despised of the world came to know each other in shadows, in the tangled spaces of expulsion, extraction, transportation, debt, exploitation, and destruction: the garroting circuits of modern capital. Whether crammed in tight ship quarters; knocking together over the rails; [...] in the relentless tempo of industrial agriculture; inhaling the dank air of mine shafts; [...] coughing, fighting, singing, snoring, and sighing through thin walls, or corralled [...] in jails and prisons, the contradictions of modern capital were shared in its intimate spaces. Within such sites, people discovered that the circuits of revolution, like the countervailing circuits of capital, were realizable in motion, often through unplanned assemblages. Roaring at their backs were the revolutionary currents of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, currents that howled from the metropolitan hearts of empire and wailed across the peripheries of the global world system. Standing before them, in the middle of its own revolution, was Mexico. From the vantage point of these struggles, the new century did not simply portend the inevitability of urban revolts and insurgencies at the point of production, but an epoch of peasant wars, rural uprisings, anti-colonial movements, and, of course, the Mexican Revolution. Mexico, as both a real country and an imagined space of revolution, would become a crucible of internationalism [...].” (51–52) [...]

---

From farm worker strikes at the U.S.-Mexico border; art collectives in Chicago, Harlem, and Mexico City; and a prison “university” in Leavenworth Federal Penitentiary, [...] the Mexican Revolution staged a significant set of convergences within which internationalism was “made.” [...]

“The Internationale” (1888) [...]. Famously, Frantz Fanon took the second line of the song, “Arise ye wretched of the earth,” to title his indictment of colonialism in and beyond French Algeria, Wretched of the Earth. [...] [U]nless a radical tradition was “able to constantly keep alive that challenging, questioning and probing of the real scene around it,” it would only ever be [...] a snare of revolutionary nostalgia where hope is trapped and strangled, rather than a living, breathing tradition that might allow us to survive (Healey and Isserman 1993, 13–14). This is perhaps the central lesson [...], to think of internationalism not simply as scripture imposed from above, but as the messy work of collectively making and remaking the world in which we live.

---

Text by: Christina Heatherton. “How a Family Story Reframed My Understanding of Internationalism and Revolutionary Solidarity.” UC Press Blog. 3 April 2023.

#abolition #caribbean

50 notes · View notes

the-crow-binary · 7 months

Note

not going to address the first half of your response to the q about the French revolution because it isn't as alarming, but holy shit the stuff you said about slavery and the supposed "black people are oppressed" and "anti white" narrative of nocturne and the facts you give to support this are blatantly incorrect. Think about it; slavery being opposed within France and its population in the 18th century but not in the colonies is not proof of anti-racism, it's proof of it. Whether they wanted to speak on it or take action or not, the French did very much benefit from the labor and produce of their slaves in the Americas- the wealthy more than the average citizen, but the benefits were felt by all to some extent. Of course the French revolution made Haiti's moves to indepence stronger, that's what happens when a colonizing country is going through upheaval- people are more able to act against it. The fact that there were black authors and participants in the French revolution does not change the fact that it was fundamentally about the wellbeing of the people of France, and that all tangible commitments to releasing its colonies and the people they held there were given up quite quickly. Also that society of friends of the blacks? Had less than 200 people. Not a great indicator of France not being racist!

Also, like, sometimes fictional characters are upset about things. That's not necessarily a political statement.

Here's something about the society of friends of the blacks: Yes there was less than 200 people in it. But in the people that were there, there was very important figures, such as La Fayette, Mirabeau, abbott Henri Grégoire, and others. Enough to make a difference and be heard (they sometimes received help from people outside of their association). And you did not need to be part of it to fight against slavery/for black people's rights. (even if we had to wait until 1848 before the definitive abolition of slavery, its thanks to the society of friends of black people, for example, that the free black people were given civil rights in 1792). Even with not much people in it, it was still a pretty big deal.

Yes the French Revolution "was fundamentally about the wellbeing of the people of France" (and I'm not saying racism didn't exist at all outside of the colonies, but that it was way more prominent there), but it's still a fact that slavery was also fought against during it (even before and after), and that rights were given to black people thanks to it (because one thing led to another, then another, then another... slavery was not the main focus for most people, but the Revolution affected way more than what was intended and inspired many) As you said, the wealthy is the one who benefited from slavery most, compared to the rest even if "to some extent" it affected everyone (1 out of 8 french people benefited from it, to give you an idea). Doesn't make the french any less against it or any more racist. Not every french person actively fought against it, yes. But, just like if you use (so "benefit from") Amazon and don't go protest against it, it doesn't mean you are totally on board with exploiting employees (and the logic can apply to many companies and even countries to this day). So one can only speculate on how far racism went in XVIII France among the people, but imo, it's pretty telling that we gave black people rights and abolished slavery so close to the French Revolution (not that some people weren't already fighting for it before that).

So worst I did was say "only" the colonies were pro-slavery in my previous post and not give lots of details in order to make the post shorter. (i am actually fact-checking myself regularly using multiple sources, because I don't want to misinform anyone, but there's always a risk I might be wrong. i really don't like politics. also the show just angers me for lots of reasons that are not necessarily connected to The French).

But in the end, its all the same: Nocturne messed up.

Nocturne CHOSE to tackle slavery and racism. It CHOSE to make things happen during the French Revolution. It CHOSE to be political. None of it came from the games, it could have never been there if they just did not take those decisions. That's why, for this particular show, I have to highly disagree with your "sometimes fictional characters are upset about things. It doesn't make it a political statement" because Nocturne literally is all about politics.

The choice of making every noble a vampire, to make Annette a black ex-slave that freed herself, to make Maria a revolutionary leader, to throw "liberty equality fraternity/brotherhood" around from time to time (Maria literally shouted "vive la revolution!" in episode ONE), every single choice they made, every single thing they added or changed from the games is rooted in politics. Annette's teacher,is very politically involved, and her views are presented as the truth and never questioned. I don't have a problem with a character being so casually racist towards white people/anti-french, especially considering said character's background. But I do have a problem when that character doesn't get called out for it or shown being in the wrong. I'm sorry, but when you make a character who isn't a villain, say shit, and don't follow up with something that indicates that it's shit, or give her consequences for saying shit, yes, I will assume you think this shit is valid. (at this point I would've taken just Annette doing a grimace as a sign that she disapproves, but no, she seems okay with insulting the french. waw, okay, why were you ready to lead them then? Connasse.) Annette literally calls Maria and Richter "children" and act like an ass because she thinks she is so superior because she suffered MORE so she knows MORE and the show portray it as her being right (everyone is so nice to her all the time and don't even say anything when she is mean to them). It doesn't even bother to pretend she only said the things she said or acted the way she acted because of trauma and anger, no, its just the way she is, because its the truth, because white people can't suffer, because they don't know shit (she fought her own revolution then went to France to fight THEIR revolution while the French don't do shit, she is that superior)

I don't criticize showing that black people were indeed oppressed and literal slaves at the time. I criticize the form. I criticize that they can't elevate Annette or the black people without bringing others down. And thats a problem, EVEN without taking real events into account. It's just a shitty way to write a character (from a minority or not) in every single media. It's hard for me to explain it, but there's a difference between writing a character being a "victim", and writing a character being a "poor little victim". One gives way more dignity to the character and is way more respectful to the people it represents than the other. Annette is on the "poor little victim" side even with this #girlboss façade of hers.

There is something called "the death of the author" (it's a french essay, hehe). To put it simply, it's the idea that the author write something, and the reader create the meaning. What the author intended to tell does not matter more than what the reader understands/interpret, and the author's own life should not be use to judge of it's creation's meaning(s). It's the thing with art, you know? Different people can have different interpretations. For Nocturne, it doesn't matter if it wasn't their intention to talk about politics (how could it not have been when it's literally so obvious, I have no idea). Because I, as a viewer, noticed a pattern, noticed elements, and understood messages that are indeed, very political. It doesn't make me any more right than one who does not and just enjoy the show for it's story and characters without thinking much deeper than that, but it doesn't make me any more wrong either. It's not like I don't have any reason either, I can clearly explain why I think the way I do, the elements are right there, I didn't create them.

#honestly never thought I'd ever have to talk about french politics on this blog. what does Nocturne does to a mf.#castlevania nocturne #anti netflixvania #sorry to the Annette fans

16 notes · View notes