#need all the possible content i can get to fully capitalize on the agenda

[omegalerc]

watch sharl's 23 winter training video again when he was doing rock climbing indoor the camera just focus on his hip and secret place for seconds 😗really enjoy the video hope u 2

okkkk and when i come back and start posting about how pregnant and breedable he looks in it u have nobody to blame but urself!!

[mightydragoon]

Darth Vader A+ Parenting.

While Darth Vader in canon ain’t exactly the nicest fellow, this is a Vader or Anakin who has no qualms getting what he wants and using any methods to do so. 

Or otherwise known as Darth Vader A+ Parenting. 

1.  to gain a son Russy

After falling into a trap laid by the Empire and being captured by two Inquisitors, Luke Skywalker wakes up in an unfamiliar room with an unfamiliar man watching over him.

https://archiveofourown.org/works/25019218/chapters/60586045

2. No Time Like The Present PinkEasterEggs

In a Galaxy where Princess Leia Organa and Luke Vader have always known they were twins, a deadly discovery by their biggest enemy throws their entire lives upside down. Yet again.

Now on the run from the Empire, the Skywalker twins find it their mission to bring peace back to the Galaxy once more. And with Darth Vader on their trail, that mission is far more complicated than they originally believed.

https://archiveofourown.org/works/24754825/chapters/59851300

(Note* Part  3 of the  Back To The Future series. Can be read as standalone) 

  3.  The Heir - SpellCleaver

Darth Vader just killed his master and learned a galaxy-changing truth: the child Palpatine adopted, the Imperial prince and heir, is actually Vader’s son, raised by Palpatine to torment him.

Meanwhile, Luke Palpatine just woke up from severe injuries he sustained in a Rebel attack to a galaxy where his father is dead, he is the Emperor, and the figure from all his childhood nightmares is acting suspiciously nice.

They figure it out from there.

https://archiveofourown.org/works/24024442/chapters/57801529

4. Eclipse - SpellCleaver

Luke and Leia, the twin children of Darth Vader and heirs to the Emperor himself, defect. When they do, it's naturally a dream come true for the Rebellion and the mother they never knew, one that's been a long time in the making.

But they have to get to that point first.

Or: Darth Vader unwittingly sends his children down the merry path of treason... and the ugly, painful fallout.

(Note* Obviously) 

https://archiveofourown.org/works/18221840/chapters/43109123

5. Walking the Line Between - aradian_nights

After an emotional confrontation on Bespin, Luke Organa has been captured, and his newfound twin Leia Skywalker will not stop until she has rescued him. Even if that means murdering their own father.

( How the Other Half Lives  -   aradian_nights) 

(Note* the entire series is this but more in particular the recent additions, I’ve already discussed this story multiple times before so you know the drill )

6.  The kidnappings of a Sith Lord - maedre13

How a certain Sith Lord may or may not kidnap his rebel son. One-shots. Strongly inspired by sparklight´s “Where Our Intrepid Hero Doesn´t Get Away”.

https://archiveofourown.org/works/10606992/chapters/23453241

(Note* not all these chapters are Vader at his worst but he isn’t exactly a top notch parent in them either) 

7. How to Save the World from its Heroes - stardustgirl

Being the Avatar’s—and Fire Lord’s—non-bending heir isn’t what Luke signed up for. He also didn’t sign up for an Agni Kai he can’t possibly win, or for getting dragged into a search for someone who can kill his own dad. Then again, someone has to bring the world back into balance, and if his dad won’t, then Luke might as well give it his best shot. After all, how much worse can things get?

https://archiveofourown.org/works/24948487/chapters/60386875

(Note* Only started and already you can see Vader A+ Parenting in all its glory) 

8. your heart is full of stars and your hands full of shattered glass -victoriousscarf

Nineteen years ago, Vader took his children off Mustafar, and Palpatine raised them to be Sith, the perfect weapons he had been looking for.

Except the very eve of his greatest victory, the fully functional Death Star, Luke Skywalker defects to the floundering but growing Rebel Alliance. His sister follows because someone needs to watch out for that fool.

https://archiveofourown.org/works/13242183/chapters/30290415

9.  Love of a daughter. - youngjusticewriter

"and yet, so far at least we have yet to figure out what you gain from this." It's a question as well as statement. A chance to explain, to come clean on why she - a unknown Sith- had assassinated they're precious, beloved Chancellor (what fools). But how could you come clean when there is so much blood on her hands? Never-mind the sins and blood on Vader and Luke's when her family had been alive.

When she answers it's not because she's announcing her transgressions in hope that her heavy, dirty soul might be saved. One couldn't repent when they didn't feel guilt in their sin.

"For the love of a daughter." Leia pauses and looks back at Anakin and thinks: I did this to avenge you. After thinking that Leia says one more thing - the last thing actually because she nothing else to say after this.

"And you should have been more careful electing your Chancellor. You never know who is Sith." This has double meaning but she's the only person who knows it.

And she's fine with that (no, she isn't).

Leia wonders if her younger self and Luke will ever become the monsters like her Luke had been and the monster she is.

https://archiveofourown.org/works/10924239/chapters/24297558

10.  Literal Hell - TreeOfTime

Luke Lars is content as a Moisture Farmer with his father and mother... until two people come to find what was lost to them...

Then all hell broke lose

https://archiveofourown.org/works/22579066/chapters/53957833

(Note* oh dear lord Vader A+ Parenting in its full glory, a Sith Leia for flavour and a non force sensitive Luke. ) 

11.  Dynasty - Valerie_Vancollie: Co-authored by Rebecca Thomson aka Zekkers.

Hit in the leg by a stormtrooper's blaster bolt, Luke falls in the Death Star hanger bay and is unable to escape on the Falcon along with Han and Leia. During the subsequent interrogation, his true heritage is revealed and Vader instantly takes him to Coruscant, determined to reclaim the son the Jedi stole from him. But the glory of the Imperial capital belies its true nature, where politics and power are everything and anything is fair game in the never ending game to reach the top. Not lying, not betrayal, assassination, sabotage, blackmail, nor seduction. As he commences his Sith training, Luke must also learn the rules and etiquette of the Imperial Court if he is to survive as most of his enemies fight their battles with words and political maneuverings rather than military force. Yet, even as he struggles to gain his place within the Empire, Luke learns that his best friend has joined the Alliance...

https://archiveofourown.org/works/13111908/chapters/29997507

12. Fractured twists - Annessarose

Timelines are fickle things.

Every line is balanced precariously on the precipice. One shift, one twitch of a finger, one step in the wrong direction, and entire stories change. Lives flicker out, galaxies rise and fall, but the Force is always a constant.

Each moment is carefully balanced. We know how the Siege of Mandalore happened - how the former Jedi padawan Ahsoka Tano led her men into victory. How she defeated Maul in single combat and earned the loyalty of Lady Bo-Katan Kyrze. How she rode her ship too late to meet with Anakin Skywalker, and how the galaxy fell and burned under the hand of the Sith.

This is the way it could have gone if Obi-Wan had followed Ahsoka to Mandalore.

https://archiveofourown.org/works/24158608

13. Runaway- Valerie_Vancollie

Co-authored by Rebecca Thomson aka Zekkers & a contest winner.

What if Luke had runaway from Tatooine and joined the Imperial Academy?

https://archiveofourown.org/works/12976095

14. A Mother's Decision - Valerie_Vancollie

What if Padmé had brought Luke to Vader when Luke was only nine months old?

https://archiveofourown.org/works/12915687

15. Descent into Darkness - Valerie_Vancollie

What if instead of waiting for Luke to come to him on Endor, Vader had gone for Luke and the others, capturing them while with the Ewoks?

https://archiveofourown.org/works/12908223

16. Avenge and Conquer - arikylo

The Alliance has fallen into a very well laid trap and now Luke has no choice but to hand himself over to Vader. But what does the father have in store for the son? Can Luke handle the torture and the ruthless tactics of the Empire or will he be forced to surrender and embrace the dark side?

The struggle between the light and the dark is strenuous, relationships crumble and all is looking bleak for the Alliance.

Dark!AU set after ESB.

https://archiveofourown.org/works/3058115/chapters/6639581

17. The Terrorist - Seasider

High above Bespin in Cloud City, Vader chooses not reveal his identity and instead uses deceit to trick Luke into surrendering. The Dark Lord has a lot on his agenda, so he entrusts the breaking of his son to an Imperial interrogator, unaware that the man has an agenda of his own: revenge.

https://archiveofourown.org/works/24810643/chapters/60006952

(Note* Dead Dove do not eat. Contains some reall fucked up shit) 

18. Consequences - treenahasthaal

An intense burst of light and a vicious blow to his left shoulder sent him spinning violently backward and he fell...

What if Luke hadn't made it off the Death Star immediately following Kenobi's death?

https://archiveofourown.org/works/809144/chapters/1527145

(Note* It’s also a boba fett/ luke) 

19. Instinct - treenahasthaal

There was something about the blond boy in the crowd of detainees that caught Commander Yarryn's attention. Something that pulled at his gut and told him there was more about this captive than met the eye. It was his duty to find out what it was the boy was hiding - and find it he would, for Yarryn was very good at his job.

12 weeks after the destruction of the Death Star.

https://archiveofourown.org/works/2185854/chapters/4785594

( Part 1 of the Invictus series) 

20. Child of Mine - Oneshotshipper

AU. Darth Vader discovers Leia at a young age. Barely managing to escape her father's clutches the first time, young Leia goes into hiding and becomes the Empire's most-wanted fugitive. If the second time comes, fate will not be as kind. Meanwhile, Darth Vader would tear apart the galaxy itself to possess and keep his child. The Dark Side seems to inevitably be the fate of the Skywalkers.

21. To Catch a Daughter, One must... - ftbprotocol

A variety of AU one-shots where in canon Leia stayed a secret, but in these stories did not. Because there needs to be more Leia and Vader fic!

https://archiveofourown.org/works/12173637/chapters/27632673

22.  Daughter Over The Son - Keetajet

Work is inspired by ftbprotocol's work "To Catch a Daughter, One must..."

The moment where Darth Vader did not save his son. Instead, he will have his daughter.

Leia's future went downhill the moment she felt her brother die on the second Death Star, leading to their capture on Endor. Only she, Han, and Chewie survived the failed ground assault and they were restrained and being held at gun point.

She has a bad feeling about this.

https://archiveofourown.org/works/25354183/chapters/61476130

23. Before the Emperor - SilverDaye

Luke is defeated and captured at Cloud City by Vader. He is then dragged before the Emperor. However Palpatine is dead. Luke's father is alive. And someone else holds the reigns to Vader and the Empire.

https://archiveofourown.org/works/15950198/chapters/37196351

Tags- to help search for more

Darth Vader's A+ parenting

Dark Anakin Skywalker

Sith Luke Skywalker

Imperial Luke Skywalker

Luke Skywalker & Darth Vader

Leia Organa & Darth Vader

Bad Parent Darth Vader

[flyandfamousblackgirls]

RASHIDA RENEÉ WANTS YOU TO KNOW YOUR HISTORY by  Alexis Rene Moten (Culture Jock)

Let’s start this article with a quiz: Name a Black model from the 1990’s that isn’t Naomi Campbell or Tyra Banks?

Stumped? It’s safe to say that if the question were asked to name a White model that wasn’t Kate Moss or Cyndi Crawford, best case scenario you would’ve excelled with a list to provide. Maybe something like: Linda Evangelista, Claudia Schiffer, Christy Turlington, Shalom Harlow, Carla Bruni, Heidi Klum..you get my point.

At times, Pop Culture can be a fair-weather friend. Monday’s It-girl becomes Friday’s nobody and by Sunday there’s a new hot thing in town to get all the girls in a fuss. But as nostalgia-trends rises as capitalism’s newest enterprise, endorsed largely by social media app, Instagram, history is being retold by the agenda of it’s curator. The selective hearing of  Instagram accounts like @90scelebvibes (391K followers) and @90sanxiety (793K followers) present a facade that the past was rather beige, leaving largely out the credit due to the Black and people of color creatives that developed and inspired the trends imitated today.

Bay area based, Fashion archivist Rashida Reneé, takes on self-love to a familial level celebrating her love and the appreciation of Black designers, models and other fashion industry influencers that otherwise go forgotten in our modern culture. In fashion, as in anything else, things old become anew. However, Reneé takes on the responsibility as a trend gatekeeper, providing evidence of what fashion used to be and recognizing the faces we longed forgotten.  

Q: Name a Black model from the 1990’s that isn’t Naomi Campbell or Tyra Banks?

A: Beverly Peele,  Gail O’Neill, Iman, Kara, Young, Karen Alexander,  Louise Vyent, Roshumba, Veronica Webb, etc.

Culture Jock: What is a typical day for the most hated hoe in the city?

RR: (laughs) It’s weird, I kind of like to keep it to myself. Keep track of what I like and my thoughts. I don’t know. I'm very low-key person in real life, but when I do leave the house (pauses) I do, I promise! I just like my personal time, but when it’s time to be out I am present, as much as possible. I do what I do becauseII like giving information to people and give them links and information just so they know.

CJ: What brought you into fashion archiving?

RR: My whole archiving process was originally for myself and filling in spots of information where there it was empty of black people. Of course, there is street fashion, but in terms of online fashion, sites like Manrepeller, you didn’t see a lot of black girls doing it and the people doing it I thought were lame. Finding other black people who weren’t anti-black in those kind of spaces. I felt a lot of people were trying to make us to assimilate. Everyone was kind of like doing the same things and it was like, ‘Naomi Campbell!’ But if it were any other dark girl it didn’t matter. So, I started my own blog and then I had to stop myself from posting Naomi Campbell’s photos too. I would do one picture of Naomi Campbell a day and try to really give props to other black woman involved and black people in general. When I was younger I was familiar with the other models not just Naomi Campbell, my mom was really in it with Naomi. She worked in a beauty salon, which had magazines of all the models. Like, black hair magazines, they always listed the models so, no matter what you knew who they were. Whoever it was in the 90s, ‘this is who that is and this who that is.’ You’d see the oldest Destiny Child’s video shoots in black hair magazines. I just haven’t seen other people doing that. There are other girls now that focus more on Hip Hop in 90s and 2000s. Livejournal, fashion spot, Tumblr, people didn’t go out of their way to scan the black models or even try to name them. It’s funny, people online, they don’t even try to hide their biases. No one was really fashion blogging the way I like or how I see .

CJ:In your piece for Office Magazine you mention, from Patrick Kelley to today’s influence of Dapper Dan, American culture from its roots drips of Black influence and culture. Why do you think Black culture is so immutable and where do you see the ownership of our creations.

RR: People I mean know, it’s just like, it’s weird and odd to even talk about. Not just people referencing me or copying, I feel like I am being gaslit all the time or being told that. People love stealing from black people. People love stealing from black people. People love stealing from black people and lying about it. People hate black people but they think we are cool. I can’t even (pauses)yeah it’s very weird. The twitter thing is weird (sighs).

CJ: It is weird.

RR: (sighs) It’s not really helping them. It’s boring to live with no personality. To see someone interesting and steal from them to bolster themselves. [On social media] we have the means to share with each other, like, moments that are of shared experiences of oppression and that is even imitated. I don’t know why the copy of things are okay. It is such a multi-layered thing. Or the way the Stans talk like mainly the Black queer and Black trans talk and how all of that is now being used by everyone. Ariana Grande, ya know, icons talk like girls on the ballrooms did back in 2006. Parodying things. It helps them develop their own brand, I don’t understand their fascination with us anyway. I’m into my own shit and own culture. I like the way black people express themselves and other people use us and what we do to talk to each other or communicate and then take that to feel cool. I’ve always been,like, ‘why would someone want to be like this?’ or pretend. I don’t get it. People run out of content. I know people used to make fun of me and the things I used to be and ironically they are into it now. People need to find their own hobbies. They are bored.

CJ: The internet is complex. It’s a parody of itself.

RR: Knowing your history is important. You need to know where you came from to know where you are going. When it comes to fashion archives the question is, ‘what is it that you are looking for or trying to highlight?’ My concern is that fashion archiving is feeding into nostalgic trends, where it’s easier to mimic what was done before rather then create new moments. Do you share the same sentiments?

CJ: What is it about fashion that excites you?

RR: It’s so fun and so funny. The dolls are taking over. That’s how most things go, the things that happened come back with a hyper focus. It really is going full out now. It’s interesting to see how people are dressing now. [Fashion] is always reflective of the political climate. Think about the 80s everyone is dressing like a dickhead. Then when people got sick of dressing like a dickhead, minimalism comes in. We cycle through trends so fast, today. I remember a girl wearing a hair clips and no one was into it. Then the next week everyone was wearing them, then I see Cyndi Lauper in an interview wearing hair clips. She’s like 50-something and she’s wearing hair clips made out of Swarovski crystals. It’s so interesting. It’s funny how it happens. Now everyone is into fashion.

CJ: Who are your biggest fashion influences ?

RR: My biggest influences are Naomi Campbell and my mom. Girls I follow on the internet. My mom is from San Francisco lives her own life and is very eclectic. I get a lot from her and different taste. Foxy Brown is also very inspiring, I reference her a lot I think about her and Steven Miesel. Steven knows how to do everything. Steven can do everything. Everyone knows I am a crazy Beyoncé fan. But, I have different girls for different moods. My main inspo is Naomi and Foxy Brown. I really gravitated to Foxy because she was more into Prada and Chloe when Stella McCartney was there. Because of Foxy I love Chloe. She was very cool. Naomi is, you just aspire to that level of greatness. There is no one else. Even in her flaws she handles them so well. I can’t imagine someone else with that kind of rap sheet to not get fully canceled. I judge people by how they react to criticism. She handles it really well. I find that really inspiring.

CJ: What film or television do you think has the best fashion catalog? If you could what character's closet would you love to raid?

RR: I am so frazzled. There’s so much stuff I like. I write things down specifically, because I can never remember. I watched The Nanny last year with Fran Drescher, when I was really depressed and was like, ‘Wow this is inspiring.’ Brenda Cooper, her mind. Everyone had a look in. Pose, is another one. Everything has intentions from the main characters to the background characters. I really like the first season of costume design. It’s commitment to that era. Someone is always dressed like, Karen White or Jodi Whitley. Elektra is very dynasty, that high lady energy. I love that about the show. I love Glow, the costume designer, Beth Morgan. I love when people do era shows, specifically the 80s and they don’t try to soften it, especially in makeup or hair. They aren’t scared to embrace the ugliness, I love that. That’s what good costume design is about. High fashion is easy, but what really gets me is watching old movies and looking at the clothes.  

CJ: We are moving into a new decade of 2020. I have a feeling it may be the year of 2020 vision and final clarity. What are your aspirations for this new era and what do you hope to see from the world?

RR: I feel like the children are our future. That’s what I’m looking at, to see what the kids are into. People are more focused into what they look like and I remember if someone dressed a little bit out of fashion it was a huge deal and get talked about. But now they are embracing their weirdness and experimenting. Do you watch that Tik Tok stuff? I just want a regular life. Happy, healthy, all my kids are happy and healthy. When I move to [Los Angeles] and get hotter, hotter and I want to  become, what is that called, a wellness person? I want a Goop moment, but with Solange aesthetics. Maybe make a propaganda film to get people to stop wearing wigs.

[armeniaitn]

Opening of regional communications will help overcome Armenia’s 30-year blockade – PM

New Post has been published on https://armenia.in-the.news/politics/opening-of-regional-communications-will-help-overcome-armenias-30-year-blockade-pm-78895-20-09-2021/

Opening of regional communications will help overcome Armenia’s 30-year blockade – PM

The opening of regional communications should finally give Armenia an opportunity to overcome the 30-year blockade, Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan said at the opening ceremony of the Armenian Business Forum in Yerevan.

According to him, it will lead to a “significant change in the investment climate in Armenia, and transformation in Armenia’s economic structure, so that the country and the state becomes more resilient and competitive’’

Nikol Pashinyan noted that there has been much talk about the political agenda of regional developments.

“We greatly appreciate the support from our strategic ally, the Russian Federation, in moving forward that agenda, delimitation and demarcation of borders and restoration of the peace process. I have to emphasize that we realize and record that the constructive position of Russia, which we can see today, is extremely important for solving these issues’,” the Prime Minister said.

[embedded content]

In terms of shaping the future of Armenia, Nikol Pashinyan referred to the projects that the Government has already launched. “We consider the reforms in the field of education to be extremely important for solving our problems, one of the key goals of which should be the quality and access to education. In this regard, the Government of the Republic of Armenia has undertaken a program to build or renovate 300 schools in the next 5 years. About 500 kindergartens or preschools will be built and renovated, with the aim of making education more accessible to all children in Armenia, giving them the opportunity for further professional and higher education so that they can find job in highest-paying market segments,” he said.

“Infrastructure development is extremely important for us. In this regard, we plan to start or complete the construction of 15 reservoirs in the next 5 years. We have to repair or overhaul at least 500 kilometers of roads each year, and we do this calculation excluding the implementation of the North-South program, subvention programs. We are already going to launch the construction of the Sisian-Agarak section of the North-South highway, and all this is a state, public investment program worth several billions, for the implementation of which we need the support of our businessmen, including the Association of Armenian Businessmen. Because our evaluations show that the construction capacity in Armenia is not enough for implementing this ambitious project put forward by the Government’’, the PM said, voicing hope that the launch of the state programs will receive a respond among the members of the Association of Armenian Businessmen, who, inspired by such scale and volume of state investments, will also support the Government with private investments, so that we can get a synergy effect as a result.

‘’We are discussing the state budget for 2022. The share, size and volume of capital expenditures will be unprecedented for the history of our Republic. But traditionally we have a problem, and it exists throughout our 30-year history. We traditionally have the problem of underperformance of capital expenditures, which is connected with the problem I mentioned, because the construction companies operating in Armenia are not able to fully implement the programs offered by the state in terms of their capacities, time and quality. And saluting the Armenian Business Forum, I especially want to praise the mood in which it started, and the mood is more than work-oriented,” said Nikol Pashinyan, adding that the Government’s goal is to transform the formulation “post-war recovery process” into the start of an era of peaceful development for the Republic of Armenia and the region.

“In order to reach this goal, we need the support of all those present here, we need the support of our Diaspora businessmen, the support of our international partners and allies. And I think that this respectable event today is a possible start to turn this mood into a practical reality”, Prime Minister Pashinyan concluded.

The main goals of the forum are to restart Armenia’s investment and economic potential through investment flows, to establish closer economic cooperation with businessmen from different countries, first of all Russia, to promote youth entrepreneurship, as well as to establish a new level of dialogue and unification of the Armenian business community all over the world. The number of participants of the forum reaches 500.

Read original article here.

[libertariantaoist]

Three intelligence agencies – the CIA, the FBI, and the NSA  –  have issued  their much-touted report  on alleged Russian intervention in the presidential election, and after reading  it one question remains: Where’s the evidence?

We are told from the outset that the actual evidence that the Russians hacked  the DNC and John Podesta’s emails as part of a wide-ranging campaign to put  Donald Trump in the White House cannot be revealed: “source and methods” must  be kept secret. This in spite of DNI director James Clapper’s pledge that he  would declassify as much of the evidence as possible in the interests of transparency:  but then again, Clapper is an admitted  liar.

One interesting note is that the key conclusion – that Vladimir Putin personally  ordered a Russian campaign to “denigrate” poor little Hillary Clinton and elect  Trump – is endorsed with “high confidence” by the CIA and the FBI, but only  with “moderate confidence” by the National Security Agency. The NSA dissent  is significant because if there is any hard evidence behind these assertions,  it is surely the NSA – with its ability to intercept communications of Russian  officials – that would secure it.

Hiding behind the old “sources and methods” pretext, we are then treated by  our spooks to a compilation of arbitrary assertions interspersed with complaints  about the supposedly key role played by RT, formerly Russia Today, a news organization  run by the Russia government which very few people in this country even know  about, never mind listen to. Both RT and Putin, we are told, said mean things  about the US, Hillary Clinton, and “the liberal-democratic order.” Will the  republic survive?

And while we are told that the insidious Russian campaign to elect Trump was  a “covert” operation, much of the report cites Putin’s alleged public  support for the GOP nominee, although the authors don’t bother quoting the Russian  leader’s words verbatim. While it’s true that Putin welcomed Trump’s statements  that “it would be nice if we got along with Russia,” one wonders what other  response from the Kremlin would be remotely possible.

The report avers that Moscow “saw the election  of President-elect Trump as a way to achieve an international counterterrorism  coalition against the Islamic State” – a goal that conflicts with the CIA’s  canoodling  with Islamist “rebels” in Syria affiliated with al-Qaeda,  but certainly one that is perfectly understandable. (Again, this is just an  assertion: no source is cited.)

The report claims that “Pro-Kremlin bloggers  had prepared a Twitter campaign, #DemocracyRIP, on election night in anticipation  of Secretary Clinton’s victory, judging from their social media activity.” Really?  In reality, the hashtag #DemocracyRIP was used by anti-Trump  activists on Twitter to protest the election results: and they’re still using it.  The hashtag was also used earlier by supporters of Jeremy Corbyn to protest what  they viewed as undemocratic  methods utilized by the Labor Party leadership to thwart Corbyn. Twitter’s search  function reveals no such election night campaign in support of Trump.

So what’s the purpose of this mountain of bullshit  being passed off as “intelligence”? What do the authors hope to accomplish,  aside from the obvious, i.e. undermining Trump’s presidency? There’s a hint  of what is coming in the following:

“By their nature, Russian influence campaigns are multifaceted and designed  to be deniable because they use a mix of agents of influence, cutouts, front  organizations, and false-flag operations.”

The paranoid style in American politics – a phrase often deployed against anyone  who challenges the conventional wisdom – is now the dominant trope emanating  from both the mandarins of liberalism and their newfound neoconservative allies.  It is as if we have been transported back in time to the 1950s, when anti-communist  hysteria led to a wave of political repression exemplified by J. Edgar Hoover’s  FBI and its infiltration of both the antiwar and civil rights movements. What  is being prepared is a new version of the apparatus of repression, where Congress  (and the media) investigates “Russian subversion.” Are you an “agent of influence”?  Is this web site or organization a “cutout” or a “front organization” for the  Kremlin?

We’ve already seen this with the Washington Post’s elevation of the  PropOrNot web site as an authority whose pronouncements about who is a “Russian  agent” we are supposed to take seriously.  Indeed, the CIA-FBI-NSA report reads like a rewritten version of PropOrNot’s  output: the same grand assertions, the same accusations offered without evidence,  the same McCarthyite methodology utilized in an effort to smear anyone and everyone  who questions the Washington Establishment’s unremitting hostility to Russia.  As long as the principals of PropOrNot choose to hide behind the veil of anonymity,  it is reasonable to assume that they had at least a hand in the CIA-FBI-NSA  report: the methodology and even in some instances the phraseology is nearly  identical.

The report claims that RT and the Sputnik web site “began openly supporting  Trump’s candidacy.” This is untrue: if you bother to look at RT’s YouTube channel,  for example, it’s clear that if they were supporting anyone it was Bernie Sanders.  And a  simple search of RT’s news stories shows that the station regularly echoed  charges of racism  directed at  Trump by his opponents. With “support” like that, Trump doesn’t need opponents.

When we get into “Annex A” of the report we  fall down the rabbit hole and enter Never-Never Land. My favorite bullet point  is this assertion:

“In an effort to highlight the alleged ‘lack of democracy’ in the United  States, RT broadcast, hosted, and advertised third-party candidate debates and  ran reporting supportive of the political agenda of these candidates. The RT  hosts asserted that the US two-party system does not represent the views of  at least one-third of the population and is a ‘sham.’”

Aside from the absurdity of claiming the coverage  of third party candidates is somehow inherently subversive, one has to wonder  if PBS – which not only broadcast the third  party debate but also conducted its own third  party “conversation” – was part of this sinister Putinite plot. What about  CNN’s “town hall” broadcasts featuring both Gary Johnson and Jill  Stein? The falling prestige of both “major” political parties and the growing  number of those who identify as independents is a widely noted trend: is this,  too, due to the Kremlin’s manipulations? The whole argument is ridiculous on  its face, and a mark of the rank amateurism of our “intelligence” analysts –  who don’t seem all that intelligent, if you ask me.

As I’ve  said from the beginning, this entire effort is designed with one goal in  mind: to undercut Trump’s presidency. Some ancillary goals are to  1) sabotage  any effort to reach an accord with Russia, 2) launch a political witch hunt  against anyone who dissents from the anti-Russian propaganda campaign, and 3)  shore up the rapidly disappearing Democratic party, which not only lost the  presidential election but has been practically eliminated from contention on  the local level except in heavily “blue” states like California and New York.

For all the hysterics about “Russian interference,” for which there is not  one lick of hard evidence, this phony report is solid proof of interference  in our domestic politics from a far more dangerous source: the CIA and other  elements of the “intelligence community.” Let us recall that the New York  Times once reported  that John F. Kennedy threatened to “splinter the CIA into a thousand pieces  and scatter it to the winds.” Unfortunately, a “lone gunman” assassinated him  before he could do so and so this was never accomplished. One can only hope  that President Trump will recognize the dire threat coming from Langley and  take up where Kennedy left off.

Update: The latest chapter in the CIA smear campaign against Trump is  covered here,  wherein the salacious details are fully described so I won’t bother going into  them. Of course it had to come down to sex: that’s how these people operate.  But aside from the sexual preoccupation, what’s astonishing about this story  is that the “intelligence community” brought it to the attention of the top  congressional leadership, via  Senator John McCain. A story that had been shopped around to the media by  GOP anti-Trump operative Rick  Wilson, and pointedly rejected for publication, got the respectful attention  of our spooks.

Of course it did.

And of course CNN and BuzzFeed went ahead and published it: we don’t trust  them anyway, so why bother to  verify? That’s what the “fake news” business is all about.

The “story” is already falling apart, but that doesn’t matter to the Smear  Brigade. The point is to generate headlines, in the not-so-unlikely hope that  that’s all people read, in order to create a general impression. Truth? Who  cares?

This episode underscores what I’ve been saying  in this space all along:  the “intelligence community” is out to destroy the President-elect. Why? Because  their regime-change agenda is doomed as long as he’s in the Oval Office. Billions  of dollars are at stake, as are jobs, reputations, and a gravy train that runs  from Washington to the capitals of Europe, Asia, and beyond. The Empire isn’t  going to allow itself to be dismantled. Not without a fight.

And we are seeing that fight play out right now.

[gabbykaufman]

A year in the life of Donald Trump, and the country

(Photo: Mark Wilson/Getty Images)

When Donald Trump became the president-elect one year ago, his elated supporters and his crestfallen detractors had two very different ideas of the president he would become.

Those aboard the Trump Train had elected a president who declared, “I alone can fix it,” and they took him at his word.

He would provide “great health care at a fraction of the cost.” He would be “the greatest jobs president that God ever created,” by bringing back dying industries like coal mining and manufacturing. He would “rebuild” the U.S. military and “take care” of veterans. His “big, beautiful” wall along the border would halt illegal immigration, and Syrian refugees would no longer be allowed to enter the country.

Those who had opposed Trump the candidate were horrified at the prospect of him taking office. To them, Trump had campaigned on a dystopian vision of America, and his promises — to crack down on immigration, reverse Obama-era policies and pursue an isolated “America First” agenda — were more like threats. They predicted the possibility of nuclear war, a prospect Trump has done little to ward off by provoking the volatile leader of North Korea.

Of the two opposing visions of Trump’s presidency, neither has been fully borne out by events. It was probably unrealistic to expect him to repeal and replace Obamacare on “Day One” of his administration, but we’re now up to Day 291 and counting. His promise to push for a constitutional amendment setting term limits for members of Congress seems to have fallen through the cracks, along with getting rid of gun-free zones near schools. Tax cuts and infrastructure spending, signature initiatives during the campaign, are, respectively, a work in progress and a can in the process of being kicked down the road.

Nevertheless, Trump has been busy in the White House, when he’s not golfing. Here’s a partial list of his accomplishments and disappointments:

President Donald Trump applauds new Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch during a public swearing-in ceremony for Gorsuch in the Rose Garden of the White House in Washington, Monday, April 10, 2017. (Photo: Evan Vucci/AP)

Judicial appointments One of the Trump administration’s earliest concrete victories, and one the White House still cites as proof of his effectiveness, was the confirmation of Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court. When Justice Antonin Scalia died in February 2016, Senate Republicans refused to even hold a hearing for President Obama’s nominee, Merrick Garland. During the campaign, Trump released a list of potential nominees, promising conservatives he would replace Scalia with someone from the pool. Within weeks of his inauguration, he picked Gorsuch, who was confirmed in April.

In addition to the Supreme Court, Trump has stacked the federal benches with his picks. Last week, after four confirmations, Trump thanked Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell for helping to confirm federal judges “at a record clip,” which he said amounted to the courts “rapidly changing for the better!”

Failure to repeal and replace Obamacare One of Trump’s signature campaign promises was quality health care for every citizen at a reduced cost. This, he claimed repeatedly, would be accomplished by repealing and replacing the Affordable Care Act, Obama’s signature healthcare legislation. Although Trump and many congressional Republicans campaigned at least in part on a repeal-and-replace platform, the effort has been shelved after a series of defeats.

A House bill was pulled by Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wisc., in March because it lacked support. In May, the House passed a bill, and Trump hosted a premature celebration in the White House Rose Garden. However, the Senate rejected it and opted to write their own version instead. In July, Republican Sens. Susan Collins, John McCain, and Lisa Murkowski sank the latest effort, and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said it was “time to move on” to other parts of the GOP agenda. Sens. Lindsey Graham and Bill Cassidy, sensing one last opportunity, introduced their repeal bill in September, but a vote was never held after it failed to garner the necessary support.

Former FBI Director James Comey is sworn in during a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing on Capitol Hill, Thursday, June 8, 2017, in Washington. (Photo: Alex Brandon, Pool/AP)

Comey’s firing and Mueller’s appointment In May, Trump abruptly fired FBI Director James Comey, who had become a bogeyman for the Democrats for his public updates on the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server during her tenure as secretary of state.

Trump originally cited a Justice Department memo criticizing Comey’s handling of the investigation as the reason for his dismissal, but he later admitted he had already decided to fire Comey and hinted in an interview with NBC News “this Russia thing with Trump and Russia” influenced his decision.

Meanwhile, Comey had been keeping notes of his interactions with the president, including one conversation where Trump allegedly said, “I need loyalty, I expect loyalty.” More damningly, Comey contended Trump asked him to ease off former national security adviser Mike Flynn. After his dismissal, Comey testified he gave the memos to a friend to leak to reporters, in hope that it would trigger the appointment of a special counsel. Shortly after Comey was fired and the New York Times published the contents of the memos, Robert Mueller was tapped to lead the investigation into Russian interference in the presidential election.

Mueller has brought federal charges against Paul Manafort, a former Trump campaign chairman, and Rick Gates, Manafort’s deputy and business partner. A former campaign foreign policy aide, George Papadopoulos, has already pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI about his contacts with Russia.

Continued pressure on ISIS and bombing of Syria Trump vowed to “bomb the s*** out of” ISIS during the campaign, and he has made gains in taking down the terrorist organization. In October, U.S.-backed forces declared the end of “major military operations” in the retaking of Raqqa, Syria, the putative capital of the “Islamic state” declared by ISIS.

Trump said capturing Raqqa meant “the end of the ISIS caliphate is in sight,” and claimed credit for the victory. However, former Secretary of Defense Ash Carter denied the Trump administration had radically changed the U.S. military’s tactics in fighting ISIS. He said the capture of Raqqa was the result of a plan that “was laid out two years ago, and has been executed pretty much in the manner and the schedule that was foreseen then.”

In a departure from Obama-era policy, however, Trump authorized a missile strike on a Syrian airbase, in retaliation for a chemical weapons attack that killed at least 80 and produced horrifying footage of civilians struggling to breathe and move and foaming at the mouth. The action against the air base from where the attack was launched constituted an escalation of American involvement, as no direct military action had been taken against the Syrian government until then.

(Photos: Getty Images)

West Wing and Cabinet exits The team around Trump in the White House today is markedly different than the one with which he began his term in January. National Security Adviser Mike Flynn resigned after just three weeks, following reports that he had discussed U.S. sanctions with the Russian ambassador and lied about those interactions to the vice president. Other high-profile White House exits included the departures of deputy chief of staff Katie Walsh, communications director Mike Dubke, press secretary Sean Spicer, assistant press secretary Michael Short, chief of staff Reince Priebus, communications director Anthony Scaramucci, chief strategist Steve Bannon, and deputy assistant to the president Sebastian Gorka. Health and Human Services secretary Tom Price resigned under fire after reporting by Politico revealed he had spent over $1 million in taxpayer money on chartered planes.

EPA turmoil Trump appointees have dramatically overhauled and shrunk several Cabinet agencies. Scott Pruitt, in his former job as attorney general of Oklahoma, had sued the Environmental Protection Agency 13 times before he was tapped to lead it. He has attempted to transform the EPA by scaling back its regulatory footprint and shutting out environmental groups from policy-making in favor of industry executives and lobbyists. A report on his daily schedule by the New York Times found Pruitt “has held back-to-back meetings, briefing sessions and speaking engagements almost daily with top corporate executives and lobbyists from all the major economic sectors that he regulates — and almost no meetings with environmental groups or consumer or public health advocates.”

Pulling out of Paris climate agreement and Trans-Pacific Partnership As a candidate, Trump denounced the previous administration’s approach to international affairs as weak and promised to make better “deals” for the country. He put his money where his mouth is on two: the Paris climate accord and the Trans-Pacific Partnership.

Days after inauguration, Trump signed an executive order to withdraw the U.S. from TPP, a trade deal negotiated under Obama. Technically, though, the agreement hadn’t yet taken effect and still had to be approved by congress.

Trump also pulled the U.S. out of the Paris climate agreement, a 2015 deal that established voluntarily goals for countries to curb harmful emissions. When Trump announced the U.S.’s withdrawal, Nicaragua and Syria were the only countries in the world not part of the agreement. Both have since signed on, leaving the United States the only non-member.

Tangles with courts The Trump agenda has been largely stalled in Congress, with no health care, infrastructure, or tax reform bills passed, and he has turned to executive action to realize some of his other priorities.

Most notably, Trump has attempted to implement three versions of his travel ban, which barred Syrian refugees and citizens from several majority Muslim countries from entering the U.S. After a court ruling struck down the first iteration, Trump signed what he called a “watered down, politically correct version” that would last 90 days. After that second version expired, another guidance was set to take its place that would have banned travelers from Syria, Libya, Iran, Yemen, Chad, Somalia, North Korea and Venezuela. A federal district court judge in Hawaii largely stayed the order, leaving in place the restrictions on travel from North Korea and Venezuela.

Trump announced on Twitter that the U.S. military would not accommodate transgender soldiers, but a federal judge ruled the current policy should stand. The Trump administration position, the judge said, signaled the “disapproval of transgender people generally,” adding that banning and discharging transgender troops would be have more of a negative effect on the military than allowing them to serve.

Stock market rally and falling unemployment Trump ran in part on his business acumen and his understanding of the financial world, and indeed the stock market has risen and the unemployment rate has fallen since he took office.

The 20 percent rally in the S&P 500 and the 30 percent rise in the Dow have sent markets to record highs, and the president plainly said recently “the reason [the U.S.] stock market has been so successful is because of me.”

Similarly, unemployment is down to 4.1 percent, although Trump previously preached skepticism of jobs numbers — before they could be credited to him.

Escalation in tensions with North Korea Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un have repeatedly provoked each other, with the latter ordering numerous missile tests, including some that have flown over Japan. They’ve traded verbal insults too: Trump branded Kim “Little Rocket Man,” and Kim lobbed back with the archaic slur “dotard.” Moreover, Trump has undermined Secretary of State Rex Tillerson’s diplomatic efforts toward North Korea, tweeting that Tillerson is “wasting his time trying to negotiate” with Kim. One day before the anniversary of his election, Trump was in South Korea, warning Pyongyang that aggression toward the South would be a “fatal miscalculation,” while putting in a plug for the golf course at his New Jersey resort.

[96thdayofrage]

Reflections on South Africa: Whose Capital, Whose State?

The polity, the state and the economy of South Africa are the captives of global empire. Two decades after the fall of apartheid, it's a new day.

Main argument summarized

President Jacob Zuma narrowly survived the recent (9 August 2017) parliamentary secret ballot on no confidence in him. 177 MPs voted for the motion, 198 against and 9 abstained. Clearly, many African National Congress (ANC) MPs had voted for the motion and against their president. It was a close call. Had the motion been carried, the President and his cabinet would have had to resign immediately. [1]

In this piece I take a longer term perspective. Briefly stated, my view is that it is not in the parliament or even in the ANC where the real problem (or its solution) lies. In other words, even if President Zuma were to leave (and replaced by, say, Cyril Ramaphosa), the country is nowhere near getting out of its political crisis. Why not? It is because the problem lies, essentially, in the captured polity of the South African state and economy. This has deep historical and systemic roots, and it is an attempt to analyze these that I write this piece.

Whose capital?

Some questions remain perennial. As long as capitalism remains the dominant system of production, one question on which we need clarity is the ownership of capital. The ownership of capital can change from time to time -- for instance from private hands to state control. But there are certain aspects of ownership that will remain substantially the same. Even if the state takes over capital, the question still remains: whose state is it?

The two questions -- whose capital and whose state? -- cannot be dismissed away during the long course of struggle against capitalism and imperialism.

Dialogue with Joe Slovoe and Ruth First

During our days in Dar es Salaam in the 1970s the question of who owns capital in South Africa had become a major issue of contention between our party in Uganda (at that time still clandestine, and led by the late Dani Nabudere) and the South African Communist Party (SACP). We had debates with, among others, Joe Slovoe and Ruth First. For a time, Ruth was based in Dar es Salaam on secondment from the University of Durham. She had assisted me to run a course called “East African Society and Environment” (EASE), a mandatory course for all those studying the Social Sciences. We discussed a wide range of issues with Ruth and Joe whenever Joe happened to pass through Dar. Joe maintained that the capital in South Africa was South African, owned by global capitalists but only temporarily. Once apartheid was defeated, this capital would be nationalized. We agreed that the capital should be nationalized, but contended that this was not such an easy matter as Joe seemed to suggest.

Let me elaborate.

Continuing dominance of imperial capital in South Africa’s economy

At the time of our conversation with Joe and Ruth, we argued that the so-called “South African” capital was not owned by the Boers, except a few minor banks, among them, or example, the First National Bank (FNB) Trust Bank, Sanlam, and Volkskas) -- and agricultural lands. The “South African” capital was owned by global corporations. Anglo-American, for example, was precisely that – owned largely by the British and the Americans. The Standard Bank of South Africa was owned by the British. And so on with respect to other banks, mining companies, large estates, and insurance and shipping companies, etc.

We argued that the ANC (and other parties) would have to fight against Boer nationalism first. To nationalise banks and assets owned by imperial corporate capital, like the Standard Bank of South Africa, you’d have to fight yet another war against imperialism. It would not be so simple an exercise as it might appear. Ruth slowly came closer to our position; Joe was adamant that once the state was captured by the people of South Africa, one of the first things the government would do was to take over the control of capital on the way to building socialism.

Let us, therefore, look at the record so far.

South Africa’s first “independence” from Britain was by the Boers in May 1910. The second “independence” came in April 1994, in which the empire colluded with the ANC: it more or less told the Boers that their era was over, and they must make peace with the Africans. In other words, the empire simply betrayed their erstwhile allies in South Africa, and turned from the Boers to Africans.

As of today, just as the Boers had failed to take over imperial capital, the post-apartheid regime has also, 23 years down the road, failed to take over imperial capital in South Africa.

To be sure, the government inaugurated the Black Economic Empowerment (BEE) program, and up to a point the imperialist capital played ball by offering shareholding (and even selling off minor assets) to Africans, including, for example, Cyril Ramaphosa. But the BEE is nowhere near creating “national” capital. In fact, according to my analysis, there is really very little “national capital” in South Africa. The South African struggle to nationalise the economy has substantially failed. In fact, the “independent” ANC government has not even been able to fulfil its promise to people to restore their lands, let alone banks. (In neighboring Zimbabwe, Robert Mugabe was at least able to transfer land to the people -- notwithstanding the shortcomings).

South Africa’s first macroeconomic plan, 1994 - the Reconstruction and Development Program (RDP) -- looked promising. But it had no clout, no backup by the state. Why not? Look back to what happened immediately after independence. The people were politically demobilized. I travelled around South Africa several times during those early years, and I could see that the people who had given their lives to the cause were getting disillusioned. The South African state was firmly in control of the empire -- it was a neocolonial state -- and the first thing it did was to demobilize the masses.

The RDP was replaced with the Growth, Employment and Redistribution (GEAR) strategy in 1996. GEAR was replaced in 2005 by the Accelerated and Shared Growth Initiative for South Africa (ASGISA). After Thabo Mbeki, Zuma replaced ASGISA with New Growth Path (NGP). Except for RDP (which lasted only two years) all other macroeconomic plans were fully in alignment with the empire’s neoliberal agenda.

That’s where we stand as of today -- like it or not.

The hullabaloo over nationalization

On March 30, 2017, President Zuma sacked Pravin Gordhan as finance minister, replacing him with Malusi Gigaba, who appointed Chris Malikane as his adviser. Malikane has come out strongly in favor of nationalization. In an “opinion piece” that he had written before his appointment, he had said that the government should nationalize the country’s national resources. In the hoo-ha that accompanied his appointment, and as the word spread around of his views creating near panic even within the ANC, the minister distanced himself from Malikane, and went on to assure foreign corporations that there was no intent to nationalize their assets.

And this is the point of this essay. Twenty-three years down the road to South Africa’s independence from the Boers, the government dare not touch imperial capital. It was not surprising that in the aftermath of the public expression of Malikane’s views, South Africa’s credit rating fell to “sub-investment” grade; and the value of its national debt was downgraded to two levels below “junk.” The empire was fuming against the government for their lack of loyalty. Had the empire not helped to liberate the people from the Boers? So, of course, it is not surprising that Minister Gigaba rushed to imperial capitals to assure them “please don’t panic, you are welcome to invest in our natural resources. Please come.”

And this is where the problem lies in South Africa.

Let me now come to the second part of my interrogation.

Whose state?

The captured polity of the South African state

As we noted earlier, the nitty-gritty of the problem lies neither in the parliament, nor even in President Zuma as head of the ANC. Let me repeat: “… even if President Zuma were to leave (and replaced by say Cyril Ramaphosa), the country is nowhere near getting out of its economic and therefore political crisis. The problem lies, essentially, in the captured polity of the South African state and economy.”

Earlier, we also saw how RDP morphed into GEAR, GEAR into ASGISA, and ASGISA into NGP. Except for RDP (which was killed in its infancy), all other macroeconomic plans were fully in alignment with the empire’s neoliberal agenda. South Africa had abandoned its liberation project in favor of a neoliberal project, and had evolved into its second phase (the first was under the Boers) as a neocolonial state.

Kwame Nkrumah revisited

It is important to understand the phenomenon of neocolonialism, because unless we do so it is not possible to properly analyze the so-called “post-colonial” state in Africa. “Post-colonial” is a temporal concept, a time-based notion that has been used for political ends not only by politicians but also by the academia and the media. Many of them argue that “post” means the end of the empire: Africa is now “independent”; gone are the days of colonialism and imperialism. This is palpably untrue. Our understanding is that independence is an important achievement, but it manifests itself only at the political level and that, too, only partially. The economy is still not liberated from the control of the empire, and so even its politics are compromised. Amongst all African leaders, the person who best understood and defined neocolonialism was Kwame Nkrumah.[2]

Here I describe five principal features of neocolonialism.

A neocolonial state does not negate the rule of the international financial oligarchy.

However, and this is important, the neocolonial state is at a heightened level of contradiction between imperialism and the people.

The empire, though it may still control the economy, has no direct political control. It operates in a different political context; it has to use local agents, and this makes it more cumbersome for it than during direct political rule.

Political independence, even if partial, is an important stage in the fight against imperialism. The common people are brought into the democratic process directly. Political parties are formed to vie for power and they have to reach out to the people for votes. Elections are regularly manipulated by political leaders and the empire. Nonetheless, people continue to demand “free and fair” elections.

Above all, political independence exposes the internal class contradictions -- class oppression and class struggle -- more clearly. The danger is that these are then seen as the “principal” contradictions which the empire continues to exploit and use for their own ends.

More than a quarter century since political independence, South Africa is still a neocolonial state. Its economy is still, for all intents and purposes, under the control of the empire. South Africa has not liberated itself fully.

So the struggle continues.

A luta continua

The next phase of the battle for liberation has to be fought at three levels: the ideological; the state and economy; and the global. All three are interconnected and contested terrains. Also, at all the three levels the battles are concrete expressions of the history and contemporary circumstances of South Africa. This said, it is also important to learn from other experiences -- especially from countries in the global south that are fighting against capitalism and imperialism. It is risky to generalize, for the battles at all levels are complex; so in this essay we can only talk in general terms. The actual strategy and tactics can only be worked out by people in South Africa in their ever changing circumstances.

At the ideological level

The ideological battle is on a “mixed terrain” in the sense that every major combatant will have its own ideology, and this will be contested by others – and, to make matters worse, even within its own terrain. Within the capitalist camp, for example, the ideological battles on economic theory are fought -- in the main -- between the orthodox neoclassical diehards represented by the World Bank and the IMF, and the heterodox neo-Keynesian social-democratic reformists.[3] These ideologies have their representatives in South Africa at various levels -- in the state, among the academia, in the media, in political parties, and even amongst the trade unions.

Besides the intrusion of imperialist ideologies within the ranks of the working classes and the petty bourgeoisie, there are other forces also at play at the grassroots level which is fragmented along ethnic, religious, regional, gender and other factions. The debates between and within each faction can get extremely complex, and largely beyond the reach of ordinary people. Earlier, we discussed how this has happened in the discourse amongst the left triggered by the sacking of Gordhan as finance minister and his replacement with Gigaba who appointed Malikane as his adviser. We referred to how Malikane’s views on nationalization came under fire from a section of the left led by SACP’s Jeremy Cronin. Malikane was then deftly defended by Oupa Lehulere.[4]

These are important debates, but in my view, the polemical style is distractive and potentially divisive. Some of us from Uganda had a similar debate in the 1970s, the scars of which lasted for quite a while. Importantly, what emerged from our debate was the central question of who is the principal enemy of the people of Uganda. Looking back to the 1970s and our own experience in Uganda I would say that the empire (the USA, the European Union and Japan) is the principal enemy. We do have many divisions and contradictions amongst the people, but following Mao, we argued that these contradictions are “secondary” to the “primary” contradiction with the empire.

Following this, the view of the leaders of the government of the Uganda National Liberation Front (UNLF) was that we must resolve the internal secondary contradictions amongst the people in order to face the principal enemy on a united front. The UNLF government lasted only one year and was ousted in May 1980 by a military coup. From then on -- now 37 years -- Uganda is torn apart by the secondary contradictions, and the empire is laughing all the way to loot Uganda’s resources at the cost of the millions who live in poverty and despair.

My analysis above leads me to conclude that this is true also of the South African situation. For over a quarter century the people are paying the price of ideological cleavages among the left -- including between and within the political parties and the trade unions. Clearly, there is no vanguard party or leadership in South Africa to unite the people on a single trajectory of the “second” liberation from the ideological stranglehold of the “development” paradigm of the neoliberal agenda.

In follows that the South African political leadership at all levels (state, parliament, political parties, the trade unions, the media and the academia) need to set aside their contradictions, and bring all democratic forces together to unite against a single enemy, just as they had done during the first phase of the struggle against the Boers. This is much more challenging, but the absence of a vanguard party makes the challenge even more daunting.

At the level of the state and the economy

Given that the South African state and economy is “captured” by the empire, it is important to identify the comprador elements within the state and the economy that service imperialist interests, and to assess the degree of their control over policy. My guess is that these number no more than a couple of thousand individuals.

We noted earlier that at independence the empire had thrown baits to a tiny minority of African entrepreneurs, followed by the government’s BEE (Black Economic Empowerment) project. This has not changed the fact that the economy is still in the hands of imperial capital. Even the Old Mutual, to take one example, that was initially created out of workers’ savings was “demutualised” after independence, following which it migrated to the UK and became a part of imperial capital. Indeed, most of the large properties in Johannesburg and other large cities, banks, insurance and shipping companies, export and import companies, mining and large estates are still owned by global finance capital.

Instead of analyzing these in concrete detail, the left in South Africa are engaged in what I consider to be a futile debate on whether the state is captured by “monopoly,” “white,” “largely white,” “overwhelmingly white,” “majority white,” or the “established monopoly capital.” This is a futile debate unleashed by Cronin’s attack on Malikane. (Malikane, after all, was only expressing his personal opinion). Of course, I don’t think Malikane’s prescription of nationalizing South Africa’s resources can be officially implemented without provoking a major counter-attack by imperial capital, as indicated by the reaction of the global financial credit and investment markets. Malikane is correct that the resources should be owned by South Africa, but for that to happen there is need for a concrete strategy -- a phased strategy with sophisticated tactics - to lead the masses. The GEAR, ASGISA, and now NGP are all neocolonial macroeconomic blueprints, not plans for the liberation of the nation.

And this leads us to the third level -- the global. Political independence, despite its shortcomings, has opened the space for South Africa’s leadership to interact with forces outside the control of the empire.

At the global level

This is a vast subject that needs an entirely separate treatment. However, some salient issues might be upfronted here for further discussion.

It should be clear to any objective observer of the global geopolitical scene that there is a fundamental shift in global economics and power politics.

To start with, the west is in the middle of a deep crisis, worse than the crisis of the 1930s. This crisis cannot be explained by the mainstream economistic concept of “cyclical” ups and downs of the economy. The crisis is structural and systemic. In the United States the so-called “deep state” is fighting hard to hold on to its turf under attack by President Trump. The Republicans and the Democrats are in a state of siege and, together, are fighting Trump with the help of “the Establishment” that includes the media.

Europe is fragmenting, starting with Brexit. And there are other proto-nationalist movements in the rest of Europe that have challenged the legitimacy of the undemocratic institutions located in Brussels. The only thing that holds the West together is the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). But in order for NATO to survive, the West needs to “invent” enemies - North Korea, Iran, Yemen, Russia, China and others. With American and NATO military encirclement of the whole world, the Western governments make their peoples feel as if it is them in the west that are beleaguered! It is simply incredulous.

There used to be a group called G7 (consisting of the USA, UK, Germany, France, Italy, Japan, and Canada) with the ostensible purpose of stabilizing the global system. At one point it invited Russia to make it G8. But this did not work out. G7 is now replaced by G20 -- a concoction of the West in recognition of the fact that it must adjust itself to a new reality -- that of Russia and the emerging countries of the global South. Germany holds the G20 presidency for 2017. The ostensible objective of G20 is to support private investment, sustainable infrastructure, and employment in African countries, as well as contribute to the AU Agenda 2063 -- called the “Compact with Africa” which Germany spearheads. Its real purpose is to recover the economic and political ground that Europe and America have lost in Africa.[5]

China is steadily taking over the command of the global economy. Its "Yī Dài Yī Lù” (“One Belt, One Road”) project is a daring and ambitious project with two “roads”- the land-based "New Silk Road", and the Maritime Silk Road. The routes will cover vast areas of Central and West Europe, as well as Asia and Africa, opening doors for China’s trade and investments. China has adopted capitalism, but has adapted it to its own needs and circumstances learning from over 3,000 years of history and the Maoist revolution. China has advised African countries to choose their own path to development. China now favors a free movement of goods and capital, but is very protective of its own industries and technology (in which it is fast catching up with the West), and careful about free movement of services. China talks about “economic globalization”, not “neoliberal globalization”. At the 2017 Davos conference, President Xi Jinping delivered a well thought-through, clever speech, basically saying that China is not ready to take up world leadership, but it may be forced to do so because it was clear that the United States and Europe do not have the material and moral capacity to lead anymore.[6]

I can go on and on. South Africa (and the rest of Africa) have benefitted from having China (and Russia) to counter 500 years of western hegemony. South Africa should learn from China whilst, also, maintaining a strong negotiating position with China, especially on investments. South Africa is the only African member of G20, but is acting in a servile manner in relation to its dominance by the West. China, too, is a member, but it knows its limitations and is ploughing its own furrow independent of the G20.

Concluding thoughts

Let me summarise and gather the main points of my thoughts.

South Africa is still a neocolony – now in its second phase. South Africa's first independence struggle was waged by the Boers. The first neocolonial state lasted from 1910 to 1994.

South Africa is now in the midst of the second phase of liberation – this time from imperialism. Political independence from the Boers was an important stage in the fight against imperialism. The common people are brought into the democratic process directly. Political independence, whilst partial, has heighted the level of contradiction between imperialism and the people. Political parties are formed to vie for power and they have to reach out to the people for votes. Elections are regularly manipulated by political leaders and the empire. Nonetheless, people continue to demand "free and fair" elections. That’s good.

Who owns capital in South Africa? It is still primarily in the control of imperialist global corporations. The BEE (Black Economic Empowerment) project has failed to create (and cannot create) “national” capital. Thus, imperialism is still the principal enemy of the people. The empire, though it may still control the economy, has no direct political control, and has to use local agents in state and economy. These are “compradors” -- about 2,000 in all.[7] Through them the empire is exploiting labor and the natural resources of the land.

Immediately after independence from the Boers in 1994 the masses were politically demobilized; their remobilization has only just begun. I would put the date to Julius Malema’s rise to express the frustrations of the youth and the masses.[8]

The ruling political elite lack ideological clarity; they are still under the ideological stranglehold of the neoliberal paradigm of “development”. This is chocking the economy and the people.

However, there are positive developments at the level of global geopolitics. The west is in deep economic, political, and moral crisis. The rise of China and Russia has opened space for South Africa (as also for other countries of the global south). The G20 is part of the imperialist agenda. South Africa, as its only African member, should put forward the demands of the people of Africa, and not be subservient to the west.

There is obviously no vanguard party or leadership, and this enables the current political elite to “play politics” with secondary contradictions amongst the people. The absence of a vanguard party makes the challenge of uniting the nation to fight against imperialism in this second phase daunting. I fear it is going to be long, long, struggle without a vanguard party.

@ Yash Tandon