#france is like known for being an EXTREMELY racist country but no one said anything when they had concerts there

[likedbyuarmyhope]

why do ppl only express disappointment that bts r “supporting problematic countries” when the country in question is in the middle east

[botslayer]

Fantasy and Scifi “Racism,” an opinion piece:

This whole thing is gonna be a slurry of politics, hot takes, nerd shit, some pictures to make it not a snooze fest on the eyes, and me asking the lot of ya to consider both sides of an argument. If you have a problem with any of that, please leave. All that said, let's get on with it: Let’s take three gentlemen for an example. One is from Poland. One is from Angola, one is from South Korea. What does that tell us about them? We can infer averages. For example, The average Polish man’s height is about five feet, ten and a half inches, so the Polish gentleman’s height might be in that ballpark. A very well known Korean dish is Kimchi, so it is moderately safe to assume the Korean man has, at some point, eaten it. Two of Angola’s largest provinces happen to be “Moxico” and “Cuandocubango” and one of it’s most populated is called “Huambo” So it would be a moderately safe bet to assume the man from Angola is from one of those areas. Their countries/continents of origin don’t directly tell us much though. Hell, we could be dealing with a Polish little person, a Korean who has bafflingly never had kimchi and an Angolan from Lunda Sul. We also don’t know about their outlooks, their lives, mental conditions they might have. Hell, we may not know what race these guys are. There’s a slim chance the Angolan Gentleman is Chinese (1.4% of the country’s population) Or that the Polish guy is ethnically German. We just don’t know. What we do know for a fact is that they’re all human men. They have (most likely) similar psychology, anatomy, dietary need to not starve to death or dehydrate, etc. And that’s about it. Now let’s take a sample from three fictional species off the top of my head: Starting with a Furon from Destroy all humans.

Now, Furons are pretty much universally shorter and physically weaker than humans, so it is safe to assume our single Furon has these qualities. He's also likely a psychic as that's a common attribute of his people. Also common would be the perception of humans as cattle, his possession of advanced force field technology is also pretty much a guarantee. Outliers exist and all that but something worth mentioning: This Furon is a Furon. In other news: The sky is blue, yeah? The problem is though: The Furons are very much not humans. And there aren't too many "races" in that equation, either. Just the populace of the Furon Homeworld. It's also worth noting that we don't actually know what Furons eat, their water intake any of that. We know only so many details but with just those, it's obvious that Furons and humans are too damn different. For species two, let's look at Mind Flayers from DnD.

Mind Flayers, otherwise known as "Illithids," are generally humanoid creatures born through a process known as "Ceramorphosis." See, Illithids are anatomically asexual, as in, they self inseminate and produce eggs from their mouths. They put the eggs in with an entity called "The Elder brain" which is a conglomerate of other Illithid brains, the tadpoles eat one another or get eaten by the brain for about ten years before being selected and implanted into a sentient creature (Humans, elves, etc) From there, the tadpole eats the brain of that creature, replacing it with its own and slowly altering their anatomy until you get a malevolent microcthulhu with potent psychic powers and the need to eat one entire human-level brain every month. Mindflayers start their lives as parasites that literally consume your entire sense of self and mutate you into an unrecognizable husk with a cephalopod for a face. And they have the gall to consider humans lesser? How bloody dare... an entirely separate species of sentient creatures come to that conclusion. For our last example, let's talk about a species from a setting best described as Technomystical: The Skakdi from Bionicle.

For those who don't know what that species is, The Piraka from the 2006 toyline are all examples of Skakdi. Now, Skakdi look, and they are, absolutely brutal. For example, the species was beset by an army of large and lethal creatures called "Zyglak" after becoming what they are today, the lot of them being mutants. The Zyglak were completely wiped out. Skakdi are savage in the best of ways. They aren't just beasts, they're berserkers with the powers of the elements, however, it does require two of them to activate such powers. Thing is though, they're all like that. The entire species has been mutated from what it once was into a legion that knows little else other than slaughter and subjugation of others... Generally speaking, at least. The problem with all three of these species, or "Races" (As I do NOT prefer to call it), and in fact most species from almost all settings is that they're a monolith. Illithids, for example, generally all follow the same societal structure, living in large groups wherever they can under the "guidance" (as in "Hivemind link") of elder brains, some strike out on their own, but for the most part, they live under elder brains, no matter where in the world they are. There aren't competing Illithid Nations or sub-species with things that makes them distinctly Korean or Aztec inspired unless the DM adds those things. And even then, when settings do that, say, Warhammer, there are some groups that are a national proxy (The Empire is Germany, Bretonnia is France, etc) and then some proxies are just an entire species. (See the Lizard Men, who went from Native American-coded to Aztec over the course of some years.) Adding to these things is a slight elephant in the room. Alignment systems. See, humans in games like DnD can be anything from neutral evil to chaotic good, true neutral to lawful evil, etc. But then some species are stuck as inherently good or evil or inherently lawful or chaotic. The problem with saying that about a sentient species is that it smacks a bit of actual, real racism/racist ideas. The idea that this group of beings that just lives differently to the rest of us is inherently almost anything is clearly bad, right? Well... Maybe if we didn't do that IRL, that would feel more genuine. The hell am I on about?

We, as humans, understand that other species of everything from primates to insects are naturally more aggressive, more gentle, more poisonous, more endowed with certain senses, etc. All except for other groups of humans. Because save for pigments of skin, general height, and elements of culture, pretty much all human groups are the same.  That said: Point me to the the race of humans more naturally endowed with psychic powers. Or the human race that can only go on by implanting itself in other humans and slowly making people lose their minds until only they take over said body. 

I can show you examples of animals doing the whole “Eating you from the inside out” thing. But not humans. Hell, even cannibals have to get a cut off of ya first. But that’s just how beings like Mind Flayers operate. I can show you examples of more aggressive insectoid life vs ones that just want to be left alone. Generally speaking, a wasp is more aggressive than a ladybug. But that’s because they evolved differently to one another. Like Mind Flayers have from elves. Or like Furons have from Blisk. Or like The Skakdi had from Matoran, even before being mutants. Does that make them (wasps) “Evil” though? Well... No. The problem is that wasps took on the various scary attributes they did because that was the hand nature played for them. A wasp does not choose to start life by eating it’s way out of a living tarantula and then spending the rest of it angrily defending whatever it considers to be it’s “territory” only to lay another one of its kind into another tarantula, that’s just what the little bastards do without thinking because that’s how they adapted to the world. I would say though that Furons are evil. They view an entire species they consider intelligent (Even “Loosely”) as cattle to harvest DNA from and otherwise use as playthings, killing them en masse just for shits and giggles. Mindflayers, I would say much the same of unless they willingly find violent/genuinely harmful examples of intelligent life that will do the world no good and then eat only them. But no, these freaks bred an entire species of creatures to have massive brains and be super passive just to make eating their brains easier. That’s pretty damn evil.

(Pictured above, an Oortling from Forgotten Realms 2e) Creatures like the Krill from Seth Macfarlane’s “The Orville” believe all other sentient species are lesser than them. The galaxy is for them and them alone to conquer and do with as they please. Such is the Will of their god Avis. They started stabbing a human head live in front of other Krill in an episode as part of their religious practices. But then the species has some nuance. This fundamentalism and extremism is how they cope with being so damn small in the face of an uncaring, unfeeling void. So are the Krill evil? No. They’re afraid. 

Coming back to the Skakdi, They started out as relatively peaceful until a creature from the Makuta species showed up and mutated the lot of them into the magabadasses they are now. All of them now have, fighting skill equal to, if not greater than most Toa, and even elemental powers. But they aren’t all evil. They’re just aggressive, angry, and furthermore, also probably hurting. A peaceful existence was just taken from these poor bastards, all they know now is conflict with one another. So are the Skakdi evil? No. Some of them might be but it ain’t because they’re Skakdi. 

See, Skakdi and Krill are important things to remember here because they, while still being monolithic as cultures, have a little more depth than just the myriad ways in which they’re evil bastards.  But Mind Flayers? Not really. Not unless the DM adds that. Furons? I mean... Sometimes they become friends or mate with humans but not usually. And what of the big old elephant in the room? The Orcs of D&D? Orcs as a species were recently described as only having limited capacities for things like empathy... If raised outside the violent and chaotic madness that is living with other orcs.

This is the thing that sparked this post, so I will now, at the near end, address it specifically: People find the wording here to be reminiscent of things actual racist propaganda and ideas perpetuated about pretty much specifically black people as I understand it. Which, I genuinely wouldn’t know. I never really grew up around that stuff and I do my best to avoid racists/racism in my day-to-day. But to me? This just makes a depressing kind of sense. The species that evolved/was made or whatever to be this big, hulking set of warrior badasses. has a limited ability to understand what it is to be the other guy. Seems legit. Especially when you remember that even if Orcs are just another group of primates, they aren’t human and would likely have psychological differences to humans. 

This is a baby chimpanzee. Look at it. It’s cute. You want one, don’t you? Well... That’s not advised, honestly. Chimps can be fucking monsters. Don’t know what I mean? A. I’m surprised. B. Just google “Chimpanzee attacks” if you have the stomach for it. Not all Chimps will do it, but chimps can and do, do it. Some Chimps hunt monkeys for food in their territory. It’s royally fucked up, but its a thing they do. And you know how different human DNA is to theirs? About 1%. I personally don’t see anything wrong with saying “An entire species is evil” in any setting other than that being shallow as fuck. I also personally don’t see anything wrong with suggesting that a species has limited empathy because honestly...? Just look at nature and even humans. Fantasy and Scifi often entertain the idea of “What if we are not the only living things smart/naturally equipped enough to build a society?”  But the sad reality is if we weren’t? Most other species wouldn’t act a damn thing like humans, most other species probably wouldn’t give a shit about us, and a large number, even if they can and do act like us in some ways, will not in all ways.  So, to bring this ramble to something resembling a conclusive point: Fantasy/Scifi “Racism” (As in just being prejudiced, although it should just be Xenophobia, IMO) is way more understandable and even more easily believable than the real thing because we stopped talking humans the second we brought in the crazy dudes with octopus heads. Or who are just naturally, by virtue of their species (not “race”) psychic. And even if it was just between groups that didn’t exist, nature proves that it would most definitely happen.  But those are just my thoughts, anybody wanna weigh in? I’m all ears. 

[girlactionfigure]

Trump Gets it Right about Antisemitism (Updated)

Note: since this post was written, the order was issued, and it was not precisely what was expected. Nevertheless, I think the post is still interesting, if not relevant to the same degree. See the update at the end for a full explanation.

***

President Trump is expected to issue an executive order that Jews should be treated as a “nationality*” as well as a religious group. This means that Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which bans the use of federal funds for programs or activities that discriminate on the basis of “race, color, or national origin,” will now apply to antisemitism. And an administration official has said that the government would use the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism, which the State Department adopted in 2016, as a working definition of antisemitism (a previous working definition in use from 2010 is similar in relevant respects).

This is a big deal, because the extreme anti-Zionism (misoziony) that characterizes the discourse on many Western colleges and universities clearly falls under the IHRA definition, which specifically mentions

Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor.

Applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation.

Using the symbols and images associated with classic antisemitism (e.g., claims of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel) to characterize Israel or Israelis.

Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis…

which are all the bread and butter of Students for Justice in Palestine, as well as countless other anti-Israel organizations. Of course, antisemitism in the form of assaults, discrimination, and other more subtle forms of harassment in the guise of “free expression” – incidentally, things that would never be tolerated if their object were other minorities – also will be able to trigger a shutoff of federal funds.

Naturally, the usual suspects are outraged. Some of the outrage comes from those who would be outraged if Trump were to issue an order recognizing motherhood and apple pie, because he is Trump. Halie Soifer of the Jewish Democratic Council of America accused Trump of “hypocrisy,” blamed him for “emboldening white nationalism, perpetuating anti-Semitic conspiracy theories, and repeating stereotypes that have led to violence targeting Jews.” Even if these accusations were true (I am convinced that they are not), they are irrelevant to the reasonableness of this executive order.

But there are more substantive objections. They either deny that Jews are a nationality, or they object to the IHRA definition, usually saying it limits free speech by conflating “legitimate” anti-Zionism with antisemitism. Let’s take the issue of nationality first.

One group that objects to the idea that Jews are a people or a nationality, of course, is the PLO and the Palestinian Authority, who have always insisted that “Jewish” refers only to a religion, not a nation. They have therefore refused to accept the “two states for two peoples” formula or to recognize that Israel is the state of the Jewish people. This is one of the main reasons that the Palestinians have never accepted any of the generous offers of statehood proffered to them. Interestingly, there is also a strong current of “nationhood denial” among liberal American Jews. Some seem to think that attributing nationhood to the Jewish people would mean that they would somehow be “less American.” But of course nobody believes that granting this status to Italian-Americans would make them less American, or that Title VI doesn’t apply to discrimination against them.

This prejudice in the diaspora against the idea of Jewish nationhood goes back to the late 18th and early 19th century when Jews were first beginning to acquire rights in newly-enlightened Europe. The spectre of their “dual loyalty” to their country of residence and to the Jewish nation quickly arose. In 1789, the French Count of Clermont-Tonnerre, in a speech about the treatment of minorities in the new Republic, said “[w]e must refuse everything to the Jews as a nation, and accord everything to the Jews as individuals.” Let them have their religion and their quaint customs, but their national loyalty can only be to France.

Many Jews were happy to agree. In Germany, the newly-created Reform Movement adopted the idea of being “Germans of the Mosaic Persuasion,” nationally identical to their neighbors of the Lutheran persuasion. In America, the 1885 Pittsburgh Platform of the American Reform Movement included this unequivocal statement: “[w]e consider ourselves no longer a nation, but a religious community, and therefore expect neither a return to Palestine, nor a sacrificial worship under the sons of Aaron, nor the restoration of any of the laws concerning the Jewish state.” By 1999, their platform refers to the Jews as “a people.” But many liberal Jews, uncomfortable about the possibility (and often the actuality) of accusations of dual loyalty, take pains to insist that they do not see themselves as anything other than Americans (or Canadians, or Britons). Their Jewishness is only a matter of religion, ethnicity, or some cultural artifacts.

They have a right to say that if they wish, and to distance themselves from the Jewish nation, but they do not have the right to say that there is no Jewish nation. The Jewish people, in fact, are the paradigm case of a nation: if you want to know what the characteristics of a nation are, look at the Jews. The Jewish people have

A common geographical origin and a connection to their aboriginal home.

A shared genetic heritage.

A unique ancestral language.

A unique religion.

A shared culture.

A shared historical experience.

Self-identification as a nation.

It’s ironic that the Palestinian Arabs, who have multiple origins, a relatively short period of shared history, no unique language or religion, a culture based entirely on opposition to the Jews, and who have only self-identified as a nation since the mid-1960s, have the chutzpah to deny nationhood to the Jewish people!

What about the argument that the IHRA definition conflates antisemitism with anti-Zionism and thus limits speech that is critical of Israel? Despite what some say, it is actually quite easy to distinguish between legitimate criticism of Israel and antisemitism. The criteria were provided by Natan Sharansky, who called it the “3D Test of Antisemitism.” I’ll quote him:

The first “D” is the test of demonization. When the Jewish state is being demonized; when Israel’s actions are blown out of all sensible proportion; when comparisons are made between Israelis and Nazis and between Palestinian refugee camps and Auschwitz – this is anti- Semitism, not legitimate criticism of Israel.

The second “D” is the test of double standards. When criticism of Israel is applied selectively; when Israel is singled out by the United Nations for human rights abuses while the behavior of known and major abusers, such as China, Iran, Cuba, and Syria, is ignored; when Israel’s Magen David Adom, alone among the world’s ambulance services, is denied admission to the International Red Cross – this is anti-Semitism.

The third “D” is the test of delegitimization: when Israel’s fundamental right to exist is denied – alone among all peoples in the world – this too is anti-Semitism.

I call irrational, extreme hatred of Israel misoziony. Misoziony is a form of antisemitism, the traditional Jew-hatred raised to a higher level of abstraction. And there is no better test for misoziony than Sharansky’s 3D criteria, which are implicit in the IHRA working definition of antisemitism. There is no reason to oppose the IHRA definition, except to enable antisemites to disguise their poison as legitimate political speech.

The growing phenomenon of antisemitism in Western universities – where it usually takes the form of misoziony – has given rise to a great deal of consternation and hand-wringing on the part of university administrators, who have in general done nothing practical to reduce it. Yet again, Donald Trump has come along and cut what appeared to be a Gordian Knot, just as he did when he finally fulfilled the promise of the US Congress to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of the Jewish state.

And just as they did last May, Jewish progressives displayed their remarkable ability to cut off their own noses to spite their faces.

Update [12 Dec]:

This post was written on Wednesday morning in Israel, after news reports indicated that President Trump was going to issue an order that, among other things, would treat Jewishness as a “nationality” as well as a religious group.

It was thought that this would broaden the applicability of Title VI to prohibit discrimination against Jews, as Jews.

Apparently the reports were wrong. The final version of the order says nothing about treating Jews as a nationality, and reemphasizes that Title VI applies only to discrimination on the basis of “Race, color, or national origin.” It does note – something that the Justice Department already recognized back in 2010 – that belonging to a “group sharing religious practices” does not disqualify someone from being protected against discrimination on the basis of the initial three criteria.

This means that the applicability of Title VI has not been broadened.

However, as Prof. Avi Bell has noted (correspondence), the incorporation of the IHRA working definition of antisemitism into the order is important. The examples in the IHRA definition, in which Sharansky’s 3D criteria are implicit, clearly show what kind of “criticism of Israel” constitutes antisemitism. Therefore a university (e.g.) will not be able to excuse its inaction on complaints of antisemitism by groups like SJP on the grounds that they are “just” engaging in “criticism of Israel.”

The official text of the order can be found here.

______________________________________ * It should be understood that “nationality” is used in the older and broader sense of belonging to a people, or nation, and not in the narrow modern sense of citizenship in a country.

Abu Yehuda

[roxannepolice]

Dark side of the simulacra

Simulacra and precession of simulacra are one of the concepts explaining postmodernity, one created by Jean Baudrillard. I’m about to elaborate on what he understands by these terms, but for the less engaged among you, here’s the shortest definition ever:

Death Star is a simulacrum and StarKiller Base is a preceeding simulacrum. Or so they are in the eyes of general audience.

Ok, now for more elaboration. Simulacrum is basically a symbol which lost the connection with its meaning, destroying the meaning itself in the process. It’s in contrast to representation (which equates a meaning with a symbol), as simulation negates the symbol as value. Simulation encapsulates the meaning and the symbol and devours them both, transforming them into the simulacrum. A good comparison provided by Baudrillard is that of what simulation is commonly understood as and what are the result of its abuse. When you simulate a sickness (which is more than just pretending to be sick, to simulate you’ll force yourself to vomit, artificially heighten you temperature, etc.) you make people question if there even is anything like a sickness – because  if all the signs can be faked, then how can it be diagnosed? 

Baudrillard opens his dissertation by recalling a story about a country of cartographers – their great ambition was to create a map of their country which would be as accurate as possible. And so they would make it more and more accurate until finally they created a 1 to 1 map, basically a huge coloured blanket which covered their entire country. And if that sounds like apparent creative process behind The Force Awakens – then yeah, it should. I’ll say more, it’s the next generation of that cartographer country taking a satellite photo of that 1 to 1 map and covering that map with their satellite map.

Because Baudrillard presents four stages of relationship between a meaning a simulacrum:

a meaning, an idea (say, and idea of destruction, aggression)

an idea receives a tangible body (nuclear weapons. I mean the real ones.)

tangible reality receives abstract symbols, which don’t lose touch with the meaning – that’s the level of representation (Death Star. it’s overblown, it’s fictional but it represents a fear of a weapon capable of destroying entire planet, a fear very real during the cold war)

abstract symbols give birth to new abstract symbols, which may make an impression of being more real than the actual idea (StarKiller. Death Star only BIGGERRRRRRR, so more EVIL than the Death Star) – and this is also the point at which that symbol of a symbol may destroy its own meaning, become the exact opposite of itself (obviously both Death Star and SKB are negative symbols of aggression and how many people here on the hellsite met with very real aggression over a very not real StarKiller?)

Now, to the average viewer, that’s how TFA came to be. Take A New Hope and repeat it. Maybe make everything more – make Rey more abandoned than Luke, BB-8 cuter than R2-D2, StarKiller bigger than Death Star, Hux more skinny than Tarkin, First Order more nazi than Empire, Resistance more heroic than Rebels and Kylo Ren more evil than Darth Vader, underlined by giving him an even more evil looking lightsaber. Oh, and give Luke a more Jesus like hair than Obi-Wan had.

To fake. To dream. Perchance to watch The Last Jedi and throw a tantrum because what the hell is this?

Yes, TLJ destroyed every illusion that the sequels will be simply an originals’ simulacrum. Resident Vader didn’t get redeemed when he killed the resident Palpatine, Luke didn’t happily jump back into action like Obi-Wan, a heroic Rouge One like disobedience got people pointlessly killed,  apparent neutral good Lando was a actually a selfish junk and celibate-to-be orphan looking for her parents actually knew all along her parents were dead garbage and, wait, wants a D? An evil D at that? PREPOSTEROUS, that’s against everything Star Wars is.

Well, thank the force we got such reactions. Because it shows the symbol needs to be reattached to its meaning before it gets devoured by simulation, which is exactly what I believe the sequels are here to do. Now, as I confess I didn’t recognize in 2015 but the fine people on this site have shown me, there were obvious clues this was not going to go the way we think already in TFA, but, well, they require a moment’s thought. On the most obvious symbolic level – the StarKiller didn’t simply get blown up like Death Star only once the shell fell off, a sun was reborn. Anyway, enjoy.

Devil wears Boss or how to make nazis even more nazi

Trigger warning: I go unpleasant places in this paragraph relating to WW II and nazism, up to the point of actually quoting nazi agenda, but if you want to reattach a meaning with a simulacrum sometimes you have to go to unpleasant places. That being said, if it is upsetting to you, please stop here.

Arite, how many people here have been called literal nazi supporters for rooting for Kylo Ben’s redemption?

How many for rejoicing over Darth Anakin’s redemption?

Yeah. First Order is even more nazi than the Empire. Their weapon is more destructive, Hux is more Hitler, cinematography is more Riefenstahl, oh, and look, the protagonists are a woman and a POC, in case there was any question of power imbalance represented. Well, clearly, First Order are literal neo nazis, right?

Hold your horses. LITERAL definition of neonazism from online Collins dictionary: a modern extreme right-wing political movement and ideology based on a resurgence of support for Nazi ideological principles. Ok... So, Nazism? Nazi Party, byname of National Socialist German Workers’ Party, German Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (NSDAP), political party of the mass movement known as National Socialism. Under the leadership of Adolf Hitler, the party came to power in Germany in 1933 and governed by totalitarian methods until 1945. I can’t see anything literal here to be applied to the GFFA, especially if Star Wars happen a long time ago. Mean question, but how many woken tumblrers knew there’s “socialist” in NSDAP?

I could rest my case here. But of course, what we do mean by “literal” Nazism is racism, anti-Semitism, homophobia, cult of a leader, cult of power, belief in god given superiority... And to be fair, oversticking to historical circumstances may be just as harmful as overabstracting the subject, as I’m about to point out. But there’s still nothing “literal” in a sequel to kids’ movie.

That’s simulation at its finest. Symbols, appearances of imperialist ideologies have become completely detached from how they actually functioned historically – and themselves became a reason to send racist anons over a space opera. Now, I have a misfortune of living in a country where far right is doing well right now and if you think those guys are listening to Wagner, you’re badly mistaken. Of course, they won’t call themselves neonazis, because Nazism is a thing exclusive to Germans and European Union is heir apparent to Third Reich. And abortion is a nazi practice. And Hitler was a vegetarian, so vegetarians are evil. That’s what they actually say you know. But hatred towards people of other ethnicities and religions? Yes, very much there. Including suggestions of “final solutions”, albeit mostly in online discussions. Oh, and guess what, they can watch Star Wars and understand that they are supposed to be FO. Conclusion? Hollywood-jewish agenda. Believe me, showing the FO members die in agony won’t make actual neonazis rethink their ways. They’re romantic heroes on a quest against a globalist empire, strike them down and they’ll become more powerful.

The First Order aren’t literal neonazis. They are neo-frequent-villains-in-video-games-nazis. I would actually argue that the parallel to Nazism in Star Wars only became clear when we saw how Palpatine came to power – in thunderous applause of democratic rules, just like Hitler and it should above all warn us of the pitfalls awaiting a system as good as democracy. Making Rae Sloane, a co-creator of the first order a bisexual WOC was a conscious step at detaching FO from what the nazi party historically was. The original imperials are closer to a more abstract totalitarian system and imperial ideology, thus being more of a critique of generally understood western world in the 70s, finding its peak in Vietnam War. Interestingly, one of the movies which inspired Lucas while making ANH was Pontecorvo’s The Battle of Algiers, where “the Empire” would be... France. Somehow I don’t see Renperor being compared to de Gaulle.

Ah, but that’s not so simple. If we want to dig deeper, beyond the level of tangible history and into the world of ideas, then FO is indeed symbolic of Nazism understood as aggression, thoughtless hatred, war, will to destroy all opposition, army as a totalitarian subsystem, suspension of human rights, antiparliamentarism. That’s nothing good and historical circumstances have nothing to do with it. And Disney-LF brings this point home. Depiction of violence in the sequels is much more realistic than in the originals. 

Mind probe, in the originals shown as an evil looking syringe and Vader with Leia behind closed doors (no screams, next time we see her she’s fine), in the sequels is shown as a psychological violation of the worst kind

Death Star shot Alderaan we knew nothing about into smithereens and it was soooo coool and all we saw was Leia’s horror and Obi-Wan’s impression in the force – StarKiller was a slow scene with evil red rays and horror of people on Couruscant, planet we knew well, as they were about to be burned to death 

Vader was force choking anonymous imperials to death like nothing short of a comic relief, Kylo choking Hux not to death is unpleasant to watch even if you remember it was Armitage who rooted for using the SKB

Originals’ stormtroopers were faceless cannon fodder, sequels’ have Finn’s face and history of brainwashing. 

So, in this sense, FO are indeed metaphorical (because still not literal) neonazis in a very realistic war circumastances of blood, suffering and subjugation. And I have no doubt that as a collective there’s nothing good in store for them in this trilogy.

But.

Allow me to quote the “best” expert on Nazism there’s ever been (yes, I’m using Hitler’s quote in tumblr post, I can’t believe it, Star Wars what are you making me do, don’t worry, I’m reaching the end of the political dissertation):

It is part of a great leader’s genius to make even widely separated adversaries appear as if they belonged to but one category, because among weakly and undecided characters the recognition of various enemies all too easily marks the beginning of doubt of one’s own rightness.

Talk about expertise in mass psychology. Take a breath, we’re about to return to the GFFA, but so many people use the nazi argument I feel they need contact with LITERAL nazis.

Consciousness of this technique of manipulating the masses is basically why I believe we’re about to get extremist Resistance and differentiated FO. Because right now we have no doubt of the former’s rightness and no recognition of variety in the latter (except for maybe stormtroopers). Additionally, we have coded them as good and bad guys before TFA’s opening crawl even appeared, courtesy of precession of simulacra, promos and how the good guys and the bad guys looked like in the originals. Sustaining this belief is a LITERAL totalitarian technique. And I believe Disney-LF is already making ground for a massive change, both with big game changers like Galen Erso and Finn, but also on a more everyday level in Solo, with actually surprisingly human imperial official coming up with Han’s surname.

FO are the bad guys because they use offensive violence and have no respect for human rights, not use offensive violence because they are the bad guys. And violence used by the Resistance doesn’t become good because good guys use it – they are the good guys because, so far, they’ve only used it defensively and avoided collateral damage. And when the agenda stops being rebuild the republic and becomes burn the first order down – we have reasons to believe it can change. Dehumanisation of the enemy is the first step to lose your own humanity. No extremists attack not believing it was the only way to achieve a noble higher goal.

To cut the long story short, villainy needs to be reattached to offensive violence and not Hugo Boss uniforms. And at this point, I’m afraid it can only be done by making it equally terrifying when dressed in cool leather jackets.

[zeroboats]

Zero Boats #16: Communists, Terrorists, Pirates, Votes.

There are weeks that go by with a certain rhythm, even in the strangest of situations. This always makes me think of the biography of Victor Serge, how he worries about raising funds to publish pamphlets or has to move house, even while all around him is guns and Stalinist show trials. And then there are days that seem to collect all the strands together and the it turns out that the threads were really fuses.

The past week has seen a culmination in various ways: the Mediterranea rescue mission, on its third expedition into the sea, finally carried out a rescue operation bringing fifty people to Lampedusa. Predictably, the crew – including Luca Casarini, a well-known figure from the Genoa protests twenty years ago – are being investigated for aiding human trafficking and the ship has been seized by the police. This was entirely predictable because the Italian state has been experimenting with judicial methods of criminalising the rescue missions since 2017, and criminalising boat-drivers goes much further back still. This took a significant dictatorial turn around the Diciotti case in August 2018, when (under the populist-racist coalition government) an Italian Coast Guard ship was stalled at port and the rescued migrants refused from landing for nearly 3 weeks.

With perfect timing, the events of the Mediterranea landing – which was pushing to the surface a problem which the coalition government was trying to silence, that is, the humanitarian disaster in Libya, Italy's colonialist role, and the potential for this situation to split the Five Star Movement, thus weakening the ruling coalition itself – was then shoved aside in the media by an outlandish act of terrorism. A black bus driver kidnapped a school bus and locked the children inside, threatening them with a knife. When stopped, he threatened to set fire to the bus with the kids inside. Once they were all out, he did indeed torch the bus, and was then arrested. He said that he was acting in protest against the deaths at sea and that the blocking of the Mediterranea ship was the final straw.  His parents are from Senegal but he was born in France, and after marrying an Italian received Italian citizenship and has spent most of his life here in Italy.

It is extremely difficult not to believe that the kidnapping of the bus was organised in some way – directly or indirectly, through provocation or instigation – by either the Italian secret services, Fascist groups or, as has been a constant of Italian post-war history, a combination of the two. Not only is the timing too perfect, effectively giving the right-wing press a story to distract from the Mediterranea ship, but the act itself makes no sense. The bus driver has never had any political involvement nor indeed does he seem to have ever even discussed politics; his action did not involve any demands nor did those kidnapped have any connection to the political target. Despite having a knife and a concealed gun (not an easy thing to come by...), he committed no physical violence. It certainly does not entirely make sense as a conspiracy either however: till now, the narrative has been of do-gooders/bleeding heart liberals (“buonisti”) perhaps unwittingly allowing terrorists into Italy and wittingly collaborating with human traffickers for financial gain. At the more extreme wings of Italian right-wing thought, the anti-racists are in league with a Jewish conspiracy for financial gain and the substitution of the white race. Yet in none of the right-wing modern myths is the “buonista” also a terrorist. So let us leave it as this: either this was a left-wing protest gone very wrong, or a right-wing conspiracy gone very wrong. Time will tell...

The same pattern quickly developed when the Mediterranea ship, was finally let go a few days ago, albeit with the captain and Casarini under investigation for aiding human trafficking. The release of the boat could have been a real win for the left, a front-page moment as the case to seize the ship crumbled for lack of evidence (or, more precisely, the evidence already all have been collected). But this headline moment was removed by a still more stunning episode: pirates. A rubber boat of African migrants was picked up by a Libyan merchant vessel near the Libyan coast. According to the ship's captain, the rescued migrants violently threatened the crew and even threatened to damage the ship itself if they were brought back to Libya. Instead, the captain changed route, and took them to Malta. This news of the hijacking was immediately tweeted out by Salvini, saving his party the embarrassment of conceding that the autonomists' ship was being allowed to take to the seas once more.

Again, it's really very difficult to know what's true and what's not anymore. This would be the first instance of a hijacking of this kind by rescued migrants, as far as I am aware. Is this a 21st century Amistad, the passengers rebelling against the crew, refusing to be returned to the war and slavery of the Libyan inferno? As with the terrorist bus driver, it's difficult to believe. Perhaps these are new forms of resistance emerging in a situation of desperation, on land and sea. But again things might not be as they seem. Perhaps the piracy claim is simply a plot to smear the migrants themselves, introduced solely to distract from the release of the Mediterranea. Or, to provide a conspiratorial argument that includes no one on land, Fascist, communist or otherwise: perhaps this was the way the captain could ease the shipping company out of having to reply to an insurance claim for delayed freight. Again, time will tell. The EU Elections and the Migrant Question

This might all seem far from the concerns of many of my friends in the UK, dominated by the battle over Brexit. But in truth it is very close to home in many ways. Firstly, the criminalisation of the NGOs is part of Fortress Europe, part of the offensive against freedom of movement and the state's attempt to regain the control of movement. This is not only important as one of the supposed motivations for a left-wing critique of the EU but – far more vitally – is part and parcel of the rightward reaction to the attack-on-two-fronts of 2015 (Middle Eastern migrants pushing from the East, African migrants from the South). The break in the UK Conservative party was exacerbated and brought to the fore by this international right-wing reaction.

Secondly, the attitude of the current populist Italian government has taken this criminalisation and turned it into a hostility to Europe itself. Even if not in relation to the Dublin Accord (where such hostility would be rationally channeled) the 'migrant question' , much like the 'Jewish question' a hundred years ago, is being instrumentalised as a method for mediating intra-European imbalances of capitalist development.

Finally, these actions come in the build up to the European elections. This is something entirely obvious to anyone on the European continent and entirely mysterious to most people in the UK (even with the Brexit date now being pushed to the limit of the elections). The Mediterranea ship is a political project, backed by party politicians of the left. The criminalisation of Luca Casarini – formerly a part of the extra-parliamentary left and till recently a regional organiser for Sinistra Italiana, as well as a candidate with the Tsipras list in 2014 – is not separable from this context.

The Coming Crises?

On a formal level, little has changed within the Italian economic or political situation over the last two years. In terms of immigration policy, the previous government arguably introduced policies that are worse than anything brought in by the current one (the severe reduction in appeal times for asylum cases, the elimination of second appeals, the funding of the Libyan coast guard). They finally brought in the landmark 'Five Star Movement' policy of a citizen's income, which really translates as an expanded income support with the possibility of becoming a form of workfare – and doing nothing to confront the mass problem of irregular, uncontracted work. The Italian economy officially went into recession, while the European Commission battled to get the government to cut spending. The spending added in for the citizen's income meant that the budget went over the limit required by the EU in relation to the bailing out in 2008 (the pay back of which has been postponed time and again). Economic sabre-rattling with the EU continued with the Italian government signing up to a new investment deal with the Chinese Republic, without EU support. There have also been spats with the French state, no doubt partly due to Italy's chosen side in the Libyan civil war (Serraj) now being isolated in Tripoli while Haftar, backed by the French and Egyptian states, has conquered most of the country.

As the European elections near, the left is in complete disarray, presenting 5 or 6 separate lists in Italy alone. But the truth is that the right is little better: despite claims that the rise of right-wing populists could spell the end of Europe, none of these right-wing parties is standing on a sovreignist, anti-EU ticket. Just as the liberals have given in and backed the racist borders, so too the right has had to back down and recognise that power in Europe needs to be won within Europe. The one state which hasn't recognised this is of course the UK and the lack of its MEPs will in the end mean a boost to the European centre-right – although splits on the far-right (not especially more organised than the far-left) mean that they're unlikely to form a dominant coalition anyway. The following month will no doubt see important developments as the European elections near.

[citizentruth-blog]

With Allies Like Trump, Who Needs Enemies? - PEER NEWS

New Post has been published on https://citizentruth.org/with-allies-like-trump-who-needs-enemies/

With Allies Like Trump, Who Needs Enemies?

Well, that didn’t exactly go according to plan.

The 44th G7 Summit, held in Charlevoix, Quebec, Canada this past weekend, was, by most accounts, an unmitigated disaster, and one person was at the center of the unrest. I think you know who I’m talking about. That Angela Merkel. Can’t go anywhere without causing a ruckus.

In addition to wanting to look tough for Kim Jong-un, Donald Trump also probably picked a fight with Justin Trudeau because he’s more handsome and people generally like him more. (Photo Credit: White House/Twitter)

But seriously, if the title didn’t already give it away, it was Donald Trump. With the signing of a communiqué by the leaders representing the G7 member countries — one committed to investing in growth “that works for everyone,” preparing for the jobs of the future, advancing gender equality and women’s empowerment, building a more peaceful and secure world, and working together on climate change, oceans, and clean energy—it appeared there was at least nominal progress and that Trump and the United States were willing to engage in good faith with the rest of the signatories.

Shortly after leaving a summit early to which he had already arrived late, however, Trump (or a surrogate tweeting on his behalf) backtracked on his accession to the communiqué, and in response to the host country’s prime minister Justin Trudeau’s speech addressing Trump directly on the subject of tariffs and indicating Canada would be retaliating so as not to be “pushed around,” he called Trudeau “dishonest and weak,” casting doubt on the productiveness of the whole shebang.

It was perhaps a fitting end to a summit in which Trump suggested Russia be reinstated as part of a Group of 8 — you know, despite its evident interference in American politics and that whole annexation of Crimea thing — characterized the U.S. once more as being taken advantage of economically, and refused to attend portions of the program devoted to climate change.

In fact, Trump’s belligerent positions were enough that French Foreign Minister Bruno Le Maire went as far as to refer to the proceedings as the “G6+1 Summit,” underscoring the United States’ isolation from the other countries represented, and a photo of Ms. Merkel staring down at a seated Pres. Trump went viral as an all-too-perfect summation of how the affair went down. Trump, arms folded, looks like the petulant child to the rest of the adults in the room. Japanese PM Shinzō Abe is also featured prominently, with his arms likewise folded and standing, though with an expression that seems to indicate disapproval or utter boredom. Or maybe he was just wondering when the food was going to arrive. If you ask me, the only good type of meeting is one that involves food.

But I digress. In all, the sense many got of the G7 Summit, especially in the wake of Donald Trump’s 180 as he took off for Singapore in preparation of a summit with North Korean leader Kim Jong-un, was one of disarray, and the war of words between Justin Trudeau and Trump further clouded the future of NAFTA negotiations, already decidedly murky amid the latter’s rhetoric on trade deficits between the parties involved and his insistence on a border wall fully furnished by Mexico. If anything, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, and the UK seem that much more committed to cooperating in spite of America’s actions and without its help than with it. Ahem, let it not be said that Trump isn’t a uniter.

What is so remarkable about how the events of this past weekend unfolded—and when I say “remarkable,” I mean like a horror film which you can’t help but watch despite your urge to look or even run away—is the type of discord Trump and his tantrums encouraged. The other members of the G7 are our presumed allies. In theory, we should be working together on matters that affect the whole, such as climate change, combatting extremism/terrorism, jobs, trade, and women’s rights.

Instead, Trump is content to downplay the effects of climate change and prop up the scandalous Scott Pruitt, play to the racists and xenophobes among his base, tout job numbers that are largely beyond his control, invite trade wars, and deny his own scandals involving sexual encounters or harassment of women. If there’s something to be said positively about his withdrawing from the communiqué, it’s that it’s probably more honest regarding his true feelings on the topics within. Simply put, Trump doesn’t play well with others.

The other element that is remarkable and, at this point, not entirely surprising, is how Trump administration officials have characterized Justin Trudeau in the wake of Trudeau’s decision to levy tariffs back on the United States. Larry Kudlow, director of the U.S. National Economic Council, characterized Trudeau’s comments as a “betrayal” and expressed the belief that the Canadian prime minister “stabbed us in the back.” Peter Navarro, the White House director of trade policy, echoed this sentiment of back-stabbing and suggested there’s a “special place in Hell” for Trudeau.

Again, Trudeau and Canada are our presumptive allies. These kinds of words are usually reserved for staunch enemies like Osama bin Laden and ISIS/ISIL, not our neighbors to the north, and were made on top of Trump’s recent historical gaffe uttered in a May phone call with Trudeau, in which Trump invoked Canada’s burning down the White House during the War of 1812. Which is great, except for the fact it was Britain who set fire to the White House, not Canada. For all Trump knows, it could’ve been Frederick Douglass who started that famed fire. A great student of history, our president, is not.

Numerous critics of Trump’s antics at the G7 Summit and his subsequent comments calling out Trudeau have suggested that this public show of defiance was intended as a show of strength designed to make the president look tough before his historic meeting with Kim Jong-un. As these same critics would aver, however, insulting the leader of a G7 ally for following through with retaliatory tariffs the country announced it would affect even before the summit began achieves the opposite. It makes Trump look petty, and it makes the United States of America look unreliable.

Already, Trump has pulled us out of the Paris climate agreement—which is voluntary and non-binding anyway—and the Iran nuclear agreement, so why would Kim Jong-un or anyone else have reason to believe that Trump’s motives are pure and that the U.S. honors its promises? Unless Trump thinks he can outfox the North Korean leader as a self-professed master negotiator—and let’s be honest—do you really trust him in that capacity either? It’s been over a year in Pres. Trump’s tenure thus far, and I’ve yet to see this great deal-making ability in action—I don’t know about you.

At this writing, American audiences are still having their first reactions to news of the signing of an agreement between the United States and North Korea following their leaders’ summit in Singapore. Based on the available text of the agreement, it outlines commitments to establishing new relations between the two nations, building a “lasting and stable peace regime” on the Korean peninsula, working toward denuclearization of the peninsula, and repatriation of POW/MIA remains. One hopes or even prays for the best.

If we’re being cynical — perhaps real — about the situation, though, we have to wonder what the intentions are behind the parties involved and how liable they are to keep their word. In North Korea, there is no news about the summit or any subsequent accords. As with the 2018 Winter Olympics, there is a blackout on imagery from the Trump-Kim meeting.

For Donald Trump and the U.S., meanwhile, the Devil is in the details regarding this agreement, and there are very few specifics about how denuclearization will be approached and how North Korea will be held accountable. At a press conference following the summit, Trump stated his confidence that Kim and North Korea will abide by the agreement’s terms based on a personal favorable assessment of the North Korean leader. But North Korea has reneged on provisions of previous agreements, and there is still much room for concern over its human rights record and its overall treatment of its citizens.

Plus, knowing Trump’s self-interest, he’s probably welcoming a thawing of relations between the two nations as a conduit to building properties under the Trump name in North Korea. For the concessions made to North Korea in that the United States vows to end its “war games” — its military exercises in conjunction with South Korea — little is known about what assurances we’ve gotten back in return. There’s every possibility that the lion’s share of the benefits would be ones that only those individuals bearing our leader’s last name would be able to enjoy. Ah, but no—it’s all about peace on Earth and goodwill to humankind. Right, right—my mistake.

Some critics, undoubtedly skeptics in their own right, have wondered aloud why Donald Trump would wish to try to negotiate with a dictator like Kim Jong-un and thereby give him legitimacy. There are two rebuttals to this line of thinking. The first and more obvious one is that dictators are, like, Trump’s favorite kind of person, and, as we fear, what the man aims to become.

For example, we’ve long been aware of Trump’s admiration for/refusal to criticize Vladimir Putin. Trump has also invited Rodrigo Duterte, a fellow misogynist and strongman whose war on drugs in the Philippines has claimed thousands of lives, to the White House. He’s given “high marks” to and praised Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Turkey’s despotic president notorious for cracking down on journalists like a true authoritarian. Xi Jinping of China. Abdel Fattah el-Sisi of Egypt. If there’s a head of state making an enemy of a free press and readily engaging in human rights abuses, you can be sure Trump is a fan. Of Kim, Trump reportedly called him “honorable,” smart, and someone who “loves his people.” Oh, potentially over 100,000 North Koreans are in prisons over political matters because he loves them so much? I thought if you loved someone or something, you should set them free? No?

Perhaps less obvious but no less germane to this discussion is the idea that America hasn’t really been shy in its embrace of other dictators and human rights abusers over time. Just reviewing more recent history, Barack Obama, for one, paid homage to the Saudis after the passage of then-king Abdullah bin Abdulaziz al Saud, noted autocrat and alleged murderer and torturer. Back in 2009, Hillary Clinton remarked that she considered Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak, a dictatorial leader deposed amid the tumult of the so-called Arab Spring in 2011, and his wife, “friends.” So long as there is a means to benefit materially from our relationships with undemocratic heads of state, U.S. leaders are liable to pursue those connections, and while it can’t be assumed necessarily that Trump is playing nice to potentially enrich himself down the road, it sure shouldn’t be ruled out just the same.

Whatever the play is in North Korea, that Trump would appear so chummy with Kim and feud with Justin Trudeau is astonishing, even noting Trump’s desire to look like a tough maverick. I mean, who picks a fight with Canada? If this were hockey, one might be able to understand, but Trump’s finger-pointing is better suited to a South Park plot line than actual diplomatic strategy. To put it another way, when even members of the GOP are admonishing Trump for lashing out at Trudeau, you know it’s got to be a bad decision. No wonder Robert De Niro felt compelled to apologize to the Canadian PM on Americans’ behalf.

The general mood worldwide is one of cautious hope for something good to come out of the historic summit between Donald Trump and Kim Jong-un, perhaps notably from China, Japan, and, of course, South Korea, lands with a vested interest in denuclearization of and peace on the Korean peninsula, if for no other reason than geographic proximity. It’s the kind of optimism you would want to see in this context. Not merely to be a wet blanket, however, but there’s a still long way to go and much work to do. After all, Trump is not a man known for his patience or his spirit of collegiality, and it’s much too early to consider North Korea an ally given its track record. Then again, with allies like Trump, who needs enemies?

G7 Nations Vow to Slash Trade Barrier but Angry Trump Tweets Say Otherwise

[vdbstore-blog]

New Post has been published on Vintage Designer Handbags Online | Vintage Preowned Chanel Luxury Designer Brands Bags & Accessories

New Post has been published on http://vintagedesignerhandbagsonline.com/aduts-triumph-the-australian-refugee-taking-on-the-fashion-world-fashion/

Adut's triumph: the Australian refugee taking on the fashion world | Fashion

Adut Akech was packing her bags when we spoke on Friday. She’d finished high school just the day before, and that night the 17-year-old from Adelaide would be flying to France to take part in the Saint Laurent show, which marked the start of this year’s Paris fashion week.

On Wednesday morning shots of her marching down the runway flew across fashionistas’ social media accounts; wearing a dramatic black-and-white top, short shorts and furry boots, hers was the final outfit in the much-applauded show. Akech has arrived.

It’s a remarkable moment for any teenager – and even more so for the model now known by the moniker Adut, who was born in war-torn South Sudan and spent her early years in the Kakuma refugee camp in Kenya before arriving in Australia as a seven-year-old.

On the phone, she sounds giddy with her newfound freedom, admitting it hasn’t quite sunken yet in that she has finished high school and is about to become a full-time model.

In fact, she’s something of a Saint Laurent veteran. She made her international catwalk debut last September and has walked exclusively for the fashion house for the last two seasons. This year she’ll be doing the full schedule – and if Tuesday night’s show is anything to go by, she’ll be busy.

It’s a strong start for Akech, who has been photographed for ID magazine, 10 magazine and Vogue Australia in the past year. She’s also featured in the much anticipated all-black Pirelli calendar for 2018, shot by Tim Walker, styled by the incoming Vogue UK editor Edward Enniful, and starring Naomi Campbell, Diddy and Whoopi Goldberg.

South Sudanese Australian model Adut Akech has featured on covers for L’Officiel Singapore and Black magazine

Although the lineup is dazzling, the person Akech was most excited to meet was the actor Lupita Ngong’o, one of her role models, alongside Campbell and Alek Wek. It sounds as though Ngong’o may take her under her wing. “She told me to get in touch with her when I go down to New York, so I’m gonna do that,” says Akech, excitement creeping into her voice. “She said if I ever need any help or I need anything when I get to New York, just to get in touch with her.”

And so this year, after the whirl of Paris fashion week, she won’t head home to Australia. “I’ll probably come back in the next two months to visit my family but yeah, I might be in Paris for a couple of weeks and then probably head down to New York,” she says.

For a 17-year-old, Akech is well and truly a seasoned traveller. She doesn’t remember Sudan or the refugee camp but does recall the family settling in Nairobi before being transferred to Australia. She desperately wanted to attend the local school but it was too expensive for her single mother. “There were times when I’d walk to my cousin’s school to take her lunch there and I would just be at the gate, looking at all the kids playing in the playground and it kind of made me sad. I wished that was me.”

‘You are starting to see dark-skinned girls and Asian girls [in fashion], so that really makes me happy’: Akech walks for Saint Laurent. Photograph: Estrop/Getty Images

School was what she was most excited about when the family found out they would be moving to Australia. “The free education and having the choice to actually go to school,” she said. “Back then I didn’t have a choice.”

The family left Kenya with nothing more than a few clothes, and it was an exciting but nerve-wracking time for the six-year-old Akech. She was curious about who she would meet. “Back in Kenya, it was rare to see any white people, and I was like, ‘Wow what is it going to be like, being in this country?’ I’d heard that there were a lot of white people but we weren’t used to seeing white people so that was one of the things that was always on my mind.”

She hesitates when I ask if landing in Adelaide was a culture shock. “It was different, it was something different,” she says cautiously, “but I was really looking forward to everything.”

They settled into the community quickly, and for the most part, the family felt welcome. “Everybody has [discrimination], when you go to school and stuff, because you don’t know how to speak English that well. I had a few kids laugh at me but it’s like, we all didn’t really know how to speak English so that’s why we went to an English school.”

Akech wanted to fit in as quickly as possible: “I just worked hard, I was like, I’m going to do the work that I get given and graduate from English school, so I can actually go to a normal school like a normal person.”

But her world hasn’t been completely untainted by racism. Earlier this year Akech was picked to take part in the David Jones spring/summer campaign, and as the face of the retailer’s beauty book. It’s a significant milestone in a model’s career and her wide, smiling face is featured on billboards across Australia’s capital cities.

But a Gold Coast woman took exception to her casting, complaining via David Jones’ Facebook account that the model didn’t represent “the general population of Australia”.

Elizabeth Ballard wrote: “How on earth am I expected to relate to this cover? I can’t wear any of her make-up, I don’t know ANYONE who looks like her … she could have been used on the back page … You people have really missed the mark here, and I’m pissed off and sick of big companys [sic] going for the minority feel good. Please think about your shoppers next time.”

David Jones came under fire when one of their social media moderators responded to the comment with: “We are so sorry you feel this way. We have passed your feedback on to our Marketing Department for their information and consideration,” before the post was deleted.

I am a refugee, that’s who I am, I’m not ashamed of it, and I shouldn’t be mad about it

Adut Akech

Akech didn’t say much at the time. That was deliberate. “I really took the time to think about it – am I going to overreact, or am I just not going to let this thing get to me? I chose not to let it get to me because that was the first time I had a stupid racist comment made about me.”

She was celebrating the fact that she had made the cover, and didn’t want anything to distract from that. “My thing wasn’t so much about the lady’s comment because everyone is entitled to their opinion – she’s not happy about it, it is what it is, it’s her opinion, there’s nothing she can do about it. It was more about the David Jones response.

“But I thought about it in the end, I’m like, I’m pretty sure David Jones choosing me was not a mistake, and just because one person felt the need to apologise and this is probably all interpreted in the way that it did get interpreted, that’s probably not the way it was meant to be.”

Despite all the negativity that occurred over this, I’m extremely proud of my latest @davidjonesstore beauty book cover campaign. Not only am I proud of being the first black model to be on the beauty catalogue cover, but it also makes me proud to be representing not all black but other women of colour all around Australia. I’m happy that David Jones were open minded to using a totally different face for their latest campaigns, thank you for this opportunity to represent. It makes happy to see how diverse the modelling industry is becoming in Australia. It’s good to be seeing a lot more different faces other than the typical “white” models, being used for campaigns, beauty advertisements, commercials etc. For those ignorant people who don’t like seeing change, well ya’ll better start getting used to it because there’s going to be a lot more of this to come. To all my south Sudanese, African, Asian, Hispanic sisters this one is for ya’ll. 🇸🇸❤️✊🏽✊🏽✊🏽 #proudmoment #blackmagic #morediveristy

A post shared by Adut Akech Bior (@adutakechofficial) on Aug 26, 2017 at 1:54am PDT

The Australian model Duckie Thot, also a rising star, has spoken out about the lack of diversity in the Australian fashion industry. Adut agrees, but thinks things are getting better. “There’s always room for improvement. I feel like they could do better [and] use a range of different girls. You are starting to see dark-skinned girls and Asian girls and things like that, so that really makes me happy.”

Akech has big ambitions for her modelling career – “I would love to get Victoria’s Secret” – but is also thinking about her life after fashion. She wants to study business and entrepreneurship, and hopes to set up a foundation to help with poverty and homelessness. She recalls a stay in Sydney, just before she returned to Adelaide, when she cooked up her remaining food and distributed it to the homeless people she saw camped out across the city.

Akech says she feels connected to the homeless community because of her own background. “My family didn’t have all these luxurious foods and all these nice things, so I did kind of see what it was like.”

When she appeared in October on a Channel Seven TV interview about the Adelaide fashion festival, billed as a refugee, there were complaints that she was being pigeonholed and unfairly treated.

But Akech wasn’t fazed: “A lot of people were like, ‘Why are you guys classifying her as a refugee, she’s Australian?’ … I am a refugee, that’s who I am, I’m not ashamed of it, and I shouldn’t be mad about it,” she says. “Yes, I am an Australian citizen, I am a South Sudanese Australian, but I’m still a refugee.”

Source link

[beingmad2017-blog]

Undertaking as War - The Racial Politics of Football

New Post has been published on https://beingmad.org/undertaking-as-war-the-racial-politics-of-football/

Undertaking as War - The Racial Politics of Football

Advent

The 2006 Football Global Cup offers a properly timed opportunity to take into account the wider social and political war of Game in popular and football specifically, with particular reference to the racial size to carrying opposition. Now of the path, Dr. Frances Cress-Welsing in her masses acclaimed book, ‘The Isis Papers’ (1991), furnished an in-depth mental evaluation of the racial/sexual symbolism of an expansion of sports activities. Further, Abdullah Nazir Uhuru in his exquisite ebook ‘Killing “Me” $oftly’ (2005), gives an insightful evaluation of Soccer, drawing upon Cress-Welsing’s paintings. The purpose of this essay is to assemble upon those works and additionally to assist Africans to remember that, life is politics and the whole lot in lifestyles is political, consequently Game has a politicized and racialized measurement to it, similar to all special kinds of people interest.

We’re at War

If considered from the narrow-angle promulgated by ‘the West’, Battle involves military Conflict among nations. However, a extra holistic definition of Warfare might be:

“any sustained aggressive movement via using one identifiable organization, be it national, racial, ethnic, non-secular, socio-monetary and many others. against any other In addition identifiable group wherein the purpose is to reason full-size harm – be it bodily, mental, emotional or non-secular – to the other corporation over a sustained term.” (Furnish 2006)

Consistent with this definition; Caucasians had been waging a racial Battle in opposition to Africans for over three thousand years (and we need to now not forget about their cousins the Arabs). This Warfare manifests itself in distinct methods, as an instance the bodily Warfare is not certainly restricted to overt physical violence but additionally includes acts designed to immediately assault the bodily health of Africans e.G. the usage of drug remedies banned from use in ‘the West’ in Afrika, the complete HIV/AIDS state of affairs and the deliberate and concerted tries to lessen Afrikan fertility worldwide, of which it paperwork a component, being examples of European aggression.

One of the maximum vital techniques in War is what’s described as ‘Psych Ops’ or mental Operations. It’s been well installation that propaganda is crucial in War, even within the route of overt military Warfare, and the introduction and dissemination of propaganda is a crucial aspect of mental operations. The cause of mental operations is to weaken or break the enemy’s will to combat and face up to, or crucially – specifically with respect to Africans – convince the enemy that during reality there can be no Conflict taking region and that his/her dreams and aspirations coincide with and are in concord with that of the propagandist.

Endeavor as Warfare

sports

Endeavor is used as an expression of country wide delight and prowess on an ongoing basis, But mainly at instances of collective countrywide anxiety. In this context group sports activities become more essential than individual sports from a nationalistic attitude, specifically whilst the team is representing the kingdom in the choice to a membership. From a racial angle; individual sporting encounters can have extremely good mental significance, particularly once they take vicinity in tremendously combative sports activities e.G. Boxing.

all through the so-referred to as ‘Cold Warfare’ the Olympic medal table changed into a supply of fierce opposition a number of the u.S. and the Soviet Union (White Russian Empire) and the GDR (German Democratic Republic). This desperate choice to pinnacle the medal desk became the catalyst for the proliferation of the use of overall performance improving pills via every America (the use of a ‘unfastened marketplace’ capitalist approach) and the Jap bloc worldwide locations (the use of a kingdom controlled technique).

international locations have even lengthy beyond to Battle over the outcome of sporting contests. I take delivery of as actual with it modified into the result of a Worldwide Cup qualifier within the 1970’s that prompted a navy Struggle among Honduras and Ecuador.

Whilst you add the detail of ‘race’ the intellectual concoction becomes effective. We want to take into account that within the War between International Europe and Worldwide Afrika Caucasians are protecting and promoting an intellectual position which says:

‘We’re the most developed and human of all peoples/races. It is our future to rule the Earth and the whole thing above and underneath it. We’re able to do whatever that is required to keep our dominant hegemonic role, together with acts of genocide. Afrikans are inside the role they occupy (economically, educationally, militarily, healthwise and many others.) because of their inferiority (genetic and cultural) and the advantages of Eu intervention in Afrika (notwithstanding any beyond wrongdoings) have outweighed any detriment prompted.’

Now, the Afrikan function is generally pressured and at the identical time as it wants to be constructed around the placement that:

‘Europeans have tested themselves completely ruthless, untrustworthy, imperialistic, racist and purpose upon worldwide domination. Thinking about the fact that they may now not and cannot take shipping of the equitable sharing of the Earth’s sources in keeping with the population sizes and needs of different agencies of humans on the planet they ought to be confronted and defeated via the usage of us. Information has taught us that we can not rely on every other business enterprise of human beings to go back to our aid.’

It is in fact extra frequently based absolutely on the notion that:

‘We’re every person and via our suffering, We’re hoping to reveal everyone the that means of proper humanity. We need to forgive Europeans for his or her beyond errors and need to now not affront them with the resource of looking for redress/reparations for past wrongs. We’re hoping that through the years Europeans will be given us as their equals and on every occasion and anyplace we stay as a minority amongst them our precedence want to be to mix and benefit beauty from Whites.’

This latter Afrikan function is a recipe for degradation, defeat, and removal and is based upon Afrikan xenophilia (at one and the equal time our exceptional energy and weakness) and the inferiority complex that maximum Africans now possess.

Activity

these very certainly one of a type mental positions decide the collective or dominant, comparative; European and Afrikan responses to all aspects of human beings interest, which incorporates Activity. While Europeans have evolved a whole lexicon of phrases and phrases which convey collectively the psychology of Battle/killing/violence and Sport e.G. ‘killer intuition’, ‘end them off’, ‘hammer blow’, ‘sucker punch’, ‘kill off the competition/Game’ to explain activities, even in non-violent sports, Africans do not anything more than mimic this aggressive approach to Sport having no indigenous cultural reservoir of such intense carrying hostility to faucet into. One of the most well-known quotes in British Recreation came from Bill Shankly, a former supervisor of Liverpool USC football club. even as asked approximately the significance of Soccer, Shankley said, “It isn’t a matter number of existence and loss of life. It’s miles more crucial than that.”

For Europeans, It is and generally has been extra than only an Activity. It is Battle on a pitch, song, court docket, or on something playing location the sport is contested.

The importance of Football

Affiliation Soccer is the most famous Game in the International. It’s far performed in each united states of America inside the International and nearly each u. S . A . in the international has a rustic wide team. Given this example; USC football generates a massive amount of home and international media coverage and success becomes the deliver of a fantastic deal of national pride. It changed into even reported that a ceasefire changed into referred to as to the civil War within the Ivory Coast inside the path of that u. S .’s participation in the 2006 Worldwide Cup. institution sports are seen to represent a state’s lifestyle and character a long way greater than man or woman Sport and therefore because the most famous Recreation inside the global the way a countrywide institution plays Soccer is obtainable as telling the viewer masses about who and what that u. S . A . is like, their strengths and virtues, weaknesses and vices.

therefore, even as watching USC football ; even the alert amateur will observe that Afrikan businesses – as well as person Africans playing for majority Caucasian international locations and golf equipment – are characterized Steady with enduring poor Caucasian racial stereotypes i.E. bodily sturdy, fast, athletic, naïve, exuberant, brutal, whilst lack in tactical focus, finesse and wondering talents. It is provided as brains vs brawn whilst Eu confronts Afrikan.

The media talk around Tiger Woods epitomizes this profound bad racial stereotyping of Africans. Tiger Woods’ potential to pressure a golfing ball prolonged distances has continuously been ascribed to his explosive attributes stemming from his Afrikan genetic ancestry inherited from his father. Alternatively, his mental strength, capacity to focus and carry out underneath pressure is certainly as continuously attributed to his Oriental genetic ancestry inherited from his Thai mother. That is no matter the truth that his father has performed the crucial role in developing his golfing know-how and is on the document as stating that he used the mental techniques he found as a soldier inside the US navy to help growth his son’s mental energy.

at the same time as Portugal achieved Angola inside the 2006 global Cup, exquisite play changed into made from the truth that Portugal ruled Angola till 1975, However, this become not provided in a bad slight from either perspective and the commentators had been brief to note how that they’d decided corporations of supporters from each USA who mingled together and stated that their nations had been ‘brothers’. Of route, you may constantly find out slave minded Africans in case you try to it just shows you the way the thoughts can come to rationalize an abusive courting. This inferiority complicated, it really is One of the actual factors retarding the improvement of Afrikan USC football is manifested inside the range of immoderate profile continental Afrikan footballers – specially megastar gamers – sporting ghastly chemically straightened and/or dyed hair.

The Ivory Coast crew at the 2006 Worldwide Cup have become an amazing example with their superstar striker Didier Drogba parading his greasy, chemically straightened hairdo along side a few another teammate, seemingly the usage of a top notch components, whose hair became truely stiff and dry and a 3rd teammate whose hair, worn in china bumps, became dyed an unusual colour of grey and red. The unhappy preference to achieve European hair texture and the desire for and attainment of Ecu women as achievement symbols by means of Afrikan footballers are really manifestations of the deep-seated self-loathing that forestalls Afrikan groups from searching the pinnacle Caucasian international locations squarely in the attention and actually believing that they may win constantly. How will you triumph over the ones whom you consider to be your superiors and whose approval you desperately crave? Absolutely in spite of his Europeanised hairdo and thoughts; Drogba has been the purpose of fierce grievance in England for his intense – despite the fact that now not particular – diving and feigning of harm.

There are in fact three key figuring out criteria for success in the Soccer Global Cup. these are:

1. Wealth of the country,

2. lengthy footballing lifestyle,

3. population length.

To achieve success, countries almost continually need to meet as a minimum of those standards. In truth, those are key elements for maximum global institution sports activities and for international locations mountaineering the Olympic medal desk.

Ethnic cleansing in motion – The Britain and Netherlands Soccer groups In my first books ‘Niggers, Negroes, Black humans and Afrikaans’ (2003) and ‘Blue Skies for Africans’ (2005) I furnished an in-intensity assessment of the method of cultural and organic assimilation taking area in the Uk, Brazil, Australia and unique places across the arena. I set out six steps to Whiteness, which can be in brief summarized as:

Diploma 1 – Preliminary touch

Stage 2 – First a trickle than a flood

Stage 3 – The Dam breaks – The coffee colored dream

Degree 4 – The Silent elimination Starts of evolved – Upward thrust of the Close to Whites

Diploma five – Decline of Blended Race people, loss of life of Africans

Level 6 – dying of Combined Race humans and Absorption of Close to Whites

As advised above, this procedure, on the one hand, includes organic assimilation thru miscegenation and however cultural assimilation thru social psychological methods and strategies main to dramatic changes in the social values of the goal institution.

Sport shows each the biological and cultural transformation of the intention organization (in this situation us) in addition to reinforcing the triumphing racial hierarchy. maximum of you may be familiar with the well-worn adage:

if you’re White That is right,

if you’re Yellow you are mellow,

if you’re Brown stick spherical,

if you’re a Black step lower back.

And all the structures, structures, and techniques of the social, political, monetary, educational, nonsecular and so forth. establishments of Caucasians are designed to boost and maintain this racial hierarchy. Usc football isn’t any exception and gives very clean, tangible examples for Africans who’ve awoken from our collective cultural coma.