Category Archives: Government Oppression

Mulondwe Muzungu says the PF governments oppression, cruelty, brutality, tribal hate and political violence have the potential to escalate into genocide.

The PF has destroyed our cherished national unity, leaving Zambia polarised by their divide and rule schemes and the naked tribal hate. With the foregoing abominations in Zambia, citizens are fed-up and desire a regime change sooner than later, says Muzungu.

Theres no doubt that Edgar Lungu and his PF are relying heavily on divide and rule strategy, and the tribal card to perpetuate their stay in government.

We have all been witnesses to how they have viciously canvassed on tribal and regional lines.

And they dont seem to care the long term consequences of their political game.

But as Dr Kenneth Kaunda warned against a spate of hate based on tribe, province, race, colour and religion in 1967 The people we have taught to hate others, may successively be taught to hate us next time. So that even from a personal and rather selfish angle this way of electioneering must be condemned as completely unZambian unless, of course, we do not mean it when we speak of One Zambia One Nation. Let it be remembered that it would be madness to expect to harvest groundnuts where in fact we had planted castor oil.

Today, our country is witnessing schemes that eat at the core of our unity as Edgar attempts to rewrite our democratic values and entrench himself in power, even at the expense of mutilating the Constitution.

Indeed, the PF is unashamedly destroying our cherished national unity, leaving Zambia polarised by their divide and rule schemes and the naked tribal hate.

But as we have stated before, there are no corrupt and tyrannical politicians whose ending has not been disastrous. And Edgar will be no exception. His ending will be bad.

In this we are in no way cursing him or wishing him bad things. Its simply an honest assessment of things and a matter of drawing the right conclusions.

Every corrupt and tyrannical politician thinks he is different and what happened to other corrupt and tyrannical politicians before him wont happen to him. But the ending has been invariably the same. Look at Idi Amin, Mobutu, Bokassa, Blaise Compaore, Eduardo Dos Santos, Mugabe! The list is endless. And what is special about Edgar?

Read more:

'PF's divide and rule schemes' The Mast Online - themastonline.com

By Opinion Feb 7, 2021

Share this article:

Alie Kompane

The past few weeks have been disastrous for the state of Israel and its proxies across the world.

The popular and largest human rights organisation in Israel BTselem, published a detailed report which concluded that Israel is in fact an apartheid regime, echoing the sentiments of many international organisations over the years. In their words: The Israeli regime does not have to declare itself an apartheid regime to be defined as such, nor is it relevant that representatives of the state broadly proclaim it a democracy. What defines apartheid is not statements but practice.

The news quickly made headlines in international publications and news networks like CNN, The Guardian, The New Yorker, NBC and other internationally acclaimed publications. This created a PR nightmare for the Israeli propaganda machine, given that over the years they have pressured news outlets, although unsuccessfully, to be cautious when reporting its atrocities and apartheid practices against Palestinians. This is indeed a watershed moment in the discourse about the Palestinian struggle for self-determination and history will record it as such.

One would not like to dwell too much as to why Israel qualifies as an apartheid state but rather, on the many voices that have been highlighting this fact for years and decades now, but it would do justice to this discussion if one does.

Apartheid was a legalised government policy of segregation instituted in South Africa in 1948, incidentally, the same year that the modern state of Israel was established in Palestine. These set of racist, oppressive, and inhumane policies were carried out by colonisers pre-1948.Its only through the election of the National Party government by a minority population that such laws were systematically applied.

There are several critical academic studies that have been conducted over the years on the academic and legal characterisation of Israels practices of apartheid by renowned academics and institutions. One that really captures the gist of the BTselem report is the Human Sciences Research Council (HSRC) of South Africa report.

In 2008, they convened a team of international lawyers from Palestine, Israel, South Africa, and Europe to examine whether the international legal prohibitions of colonialism and apartheid had been breached by Israel in the Palestinian territories. Subsequently, the report that was compiled reached the conclusion that there exists in the occupied Palestinian territory an institutionalised and oppressive system of Israeli domination and oppression over Palestinians as a group; that is, a system of apartheid.

Richard Falk, a world-renowned American professor of international law at Princeton University, who was the United Nations Special Rapporteur on human rights in the occupied Palestinian territories (2008-14) argues that International law has detached apartheid from its South African origins; its now a stand-alone crime against humanity[LS1] . This means that apartheid as a system of racial segregation and dominion is not unique to South Africa but can be applied elsewhere.

During his six years investigating Israeli human rights violations on behalf of the UN, Professor Falk and his team concluded in a report that that the allegation of apartheid as applied to the Palestinian people by the Israeli regime is well founded.

We argue that there is a moral case that qualifies Israel as an apartheid state, especially as black South Africans who hold to some extent, moral authority on the question. Anti-Palestinian sentiments are institutionalised in Israel, condemning Palestinians to second class citizens, and systematically executing the expulsion of Palestinians from their homeland. South Africans who fought against apartheid and many others who paid the ultimate price for freedom in South Africa, agree with us.

South Africas former president Kgalema Motlanthe argues that the Israeli version of apartheid is far worse than what was experienced in South Africa. While Archbishop Desmond Tutu, the face of the non-violent anti-apartheid movement and Nobel Peace laureate, agrees that the treatment of Palestinians by the Israeli regime is familiar to that of South Africans during apartheid. There are several leaders of the anti-apartheid struggle who identify with this moral contention: Letlapa Mphahlele of the PAC, Motsoko Pheko of AZAPO, Joe Slovo of the SACP, Winnie Mandela of the ANC and many others have shared the same sentiment on Israeli apartheid.

What many Israeli supporters get wrong is the constant and relentless bit by bit comparison of apartheid South Africa, deliberately degenerating a complex institutionalised system of racial discrimination to simple logic. For instance, the South African apartheid regime had many black people in their militarised police force as well as in their oppressive legal systems. We had magistrates and prosecutors who worked effectively for the apartheid regime.

This does not mean apartheid was not alive and well, simply because black people could not go to the same beach as white people is not the crux of apartheid but the moral of it. Same as there are different roads for Jews and Palestinians, the Israeli regime has Palestinians in their employ. It does not at any point, invalidate the system of apartheid the regime practices.

There is a legal, academic, moral and political case that qualifies Israel as an apartheid regime on many fronts. It does not have to mirror apartheid South Africa, it is the application of a system of racial segregation and domination by one group over the other as defined by the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court as inhumane acts committed under a regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups in this case the Israeli regime over Palestinians.

BTselems executive director, Hagai El-Ad says that we have a moral obligation to say it, whether we think its effective or not, to call Israel what it is, an apartheid regime. We are not oblivious to the facts and argue that correctly characterising Israel as an apartheid state, which it is, will go a long way in galvanising international support for the Palestinian cause as it did for us. Just like Mama Winnie Mandela said, Apartheid Israel can be defeated, just as apartheid South Africa was defeated.

* Alie Komape is an activist with #Africa4Palestine, the largest Palestine human rights organisation in the continent.

** The views expressed here are not necessarily those of Independent Media.

Read more:

Why it's right to call Israel an 'apartheid state' By Opinion - Independent Online

Switzerland could follow in the footsteps of France, Belgium, the Netherlands and Bulgaria by banning women from wearing the burka or niqab in public spaces. On March 7, the people will vote on a popular initiative that aims to enshrine a ban on hiding ones face in public in the constitution.

Journalist based in Bern. I am particularly interested in topics about society, politics and social media. Previously I worked in regional media, for the newspaper Journal du Jura and Radio Jura bernois.

More about the author| French Department

The Egerkingen Committee launched the initiative in 2016. Made up of numerous members of the right-wing Swiss Peoples Party, the committee was the same that instigated the initiative to ban minarets, accepted by the Swiss in 2009.

Opposed to the text, the government has developed a counterproposal which has also been supported by parliament. It proposes to create a law that would oblige individuals to show their faces during identity checks carried out by authorities.

Peoples Party parliamentarian and member of the initiative committee Jean-Luc Addor argues the ban promotes equality between men and women and will help fight against radicalisation of Islam.

SWI swissinfo.ch: Given we are all walking around wearing masks to protect against Covid-19, isnt the arrival of an initiative to ban hiding ones face now untimely?

Jean-Luc Addor: One would think so, but this is not the case. Walking around the streets, its easy to see the difference between a woman who wears the burka [a full veil which covers the whole body and hides the eyes behind a cotton mesh] or the niqab, and a person wearing a protective mask. Its obvious the text is not targeting masks. The initiative allows for a certain number of exceptions, including the possibility of waiving the ban for health reasons. The pandemic shows that adequate exceptions were thought about by the initiators.

According to government estimates, the number of women who wear the burka in Switzerland is between 95 and 130. Is it really necessary to institute a ban for such a small number of people?

I would be curious to know on what basis the government is making these estimations. Of course, its rare to meet women who wear the burka in Switzerland, except in certain tourist spots. However, we do see women wearing the niqab [full veil which covers everything except the eyes], even in the small Valais town of Sion.

In recent years we have witnessed a form of radicalisation of the ostentatious character of Islam in the public space. This trend has manifested in an increase in the number of women who go out wearing the hijab [covering the hair, neck and sometimes the shoulders] and in the most radical cases wearing a niqab. France, a country which belongs to the same civilisation as us, has practically lost control of the situation. We dont want to get to that.

In Ticino, where a ban has been in place since 2016, there have only been around 30 interventions. Isnt that a weak record?

Its like if I told you: In the end, there are only a few assassinations. What is the point of maintaining the infringement in the criminal code? Thankfully, there are only a few cases!

The example of Ticino shows that banning hiding ones face is useful, because there have been interventions. It also proves that it can be applied without creating particular problems, especially with foreign countries, as (the opposition) have tried to make us believe.

The opponents of the initiative fear that the text will have a counterproductive effect: that women who are obliged to wear the burka would be forced to retreat from public view. Isnt that a risk?

Their position amounts to legitimising the number of cases of women and girls who are forced to dress in a certain way. The burka is a symbol of oppression and alienation of women. We refuse to be complicit in female oppression. We want to promote the dignity and equality of women. Proof is that even on the left, prominent personalities support the initiative. They have understood that it is not credible to invoke principles only to forget them under the pretext that the initiative comes from the ranks of the conservative right.

The Peoples Party is not known for fighting for equality. In this case, isnt this engagement opportunistic?

This initiative is not only a Peoples Party initiative, it is also supported by a large cross-section of people, including from the left. It is true that the Peoples Party is not always at the forefront when it comes to equality. The party is nonetheless committed to a more fundamental fight: we defend the notion of female dignity. There is a slight difference.

The indirect counterproposal put forward by the government aims to ensure that a person shows their face for identification purposes. Isnt it an acceptable compromise?

The governments indirect counterproposal is a smokescreen. It is trying to take a tiny step to make us believe the problem has been resolved. The initiative has a much larger field of application. Parliament wanted to add elements to the text which touch upon integration and equality between men and women, but in fact the counterproposal avoids the issue. The initiative takes the problem head on and offers a way to deal with it. This way exists already, and we can evaluate it. It is the system established in Ticino.

Read more from the original source:

'The burka initiative defends the dignity of women' - swissinfo.ch

Fred Korematsu at his home in San Leandro, Calif. Wednesday, Aug.14,1996. Korematsu will travel to Harbor Beach, Mich. for the Aug. 16, 1996 celebration of the 1944 Supreme Court case Korematsu v. United States in which the court upheld the ultimate internment of Japanese Americans in detention camps. (AP Photo/Robin Weiner)(Photo: Robin Weiner, ASSOCIATED PRESS)

During World War II, a 23-year-old Japanese-American named Fred Korematsu valiantly fought the U.S. governments efforts to put him in an incarceration camp. His epic legal battles provide both inspiration and insight as America grapples with the ongoing fallout from Donald Trumps shameful Muslim ban.

When I think about my personal heroes, one of the people high on the list is Fred T. Korematsu, whose birthday this weekend was marked by events held in his honor around the country.

Like a lot of people, I first learned about the civil rights activist in a high school civics class. But for me, and countless others, he is so much more than just some name in a history book. More than a century after his birth and 15 years past his death, he remains an inspiration. And a guide.

Rana Elmir(Photo: Rana Elmir)

His legacy could not be more timely. The similarities between his lawsuit involving the incarceration of Japanese Americans during world War II and the legal battles fought over Donald Trumps Muslim ban are chilling.

President Joe Biden may have put an end to the ban last week, but, as was the case with Mr. Korematsu, we cannot fully address the wrongs done by that ban and the harm it continues to cause until we have justice.

Born in the United States to Japanese immigrants, Mr. Korematsu, at the age of 23, provided all of us a shining example of conviction and courage in the face of racist-fueled oppression by the U.S. government during World War II.

In what is now clearly recognized as an unconscionable violation of their constitutional rights, 120,000 people of Japanese descent two-thirds of them American citizens were sent to incarceration camps scattered across the western United States as the result of an executive order issued by President Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1942. The immense financial loss and human suffering that followed were justified by claims of national security.

Instead of quietly acquiescing to the assault on his constitutional rights and humanity, Mr. Korematsu who had previously tried to enlist in the U.S. military to fight for his country, but was rejected because of his race refused to abide by the governments order, resulting in his arrest and conviction. With the ACLU of Northern California standing by his side, he appealed in a landmark case that went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. Central to the case was the claim that Mr. Korematsu and other Japanese Americans were being singled out because of their race, not any legitimate national security purpose.

In a 6-3 decision, the high court ruled against Mr. Korematsu. That 1944 decision still stands today. But Mr. Korematsu did not stop pursuing justice, even though it took decades.

In 1983, using previously suppressed government documents proving the FBI and other U.S. intelligence agencies had no evidence of Japanese Americans posing a security threat, Mr. Korematsu and a team of lawyers working pro bono returned to federal court, seeking to have his conviction overturned.

In what has been described as a pivotal moment in U.S. civil rights history, Mr. Korematsu stood in front of a federal judge and said:

"According to the Supreme Court decision regarding my case, being an American citizen was not enough. They say you have to look like one, otherwise they say you cant tell a difference between a loyal and a disloyal American. I thought that this decision was wrong and I still feel that way. As long as my record stands in federal court, any American citizen can be held in prison or concentration camps without a trial or a hearing. That is if they look like the enemy of our country. Therefore, I would like to see the government admit that they were wrong and do something about it so this will never happen again to any American citizen of any race, creed or color."

His conviction was overturned. Yethis heroics did not end there. In the aftermath of 9/11, Mr. Korematsu repeatedly warned that the extreme national security measures being imposed were dangerously similar to the injustices he and others were forced to endure five decades earlier.

I cant express how important his words were. As a Muslim who immigrated to the country from Lebanon as a child with my family, his courage gave me and many others great comfort. At a time when the U.S. government painted targets on the backs of every Muslim, Mr. Korematsu was there reminding America that, if we are going to live up to our ideals and abide by the Constitution, none of us should have to live in fear because of the color of our skin or the religion we practice, or the country we hail from.

In 2017, I once again found solace in Mr. Korematsus words as I began to receive panicked calls from people stranded all around the globe, caught in the chaotic aftermath of Donald Trumps Muslim ban, one of the first actions he took as president. And I thought of his words again last week when President Joe Biden rescinded the shameful Muslim ban as one of his first actions.

To be clear, rescinding the Muslim Ban, and calling it a moral abomination, is but the first step in our road to redemption. We must also provide immediate and complete justice to those who were banned individuals like Anwar, who won the American immigration lottery, sold practically everything he owned, borrowed money from friends and family to make the long journey from Yemen to Djibouti, because Yemen no longer has an American embassy, only to be turned away and left in debt because of the Muslim ban.

It is critical that the administration make Anwar and so many others like him whole.

Those who had their once-in-a-lifetime immigration lottery win taken away because of discrimination must have their visas restored. We must waive fees for those who were denied and have to reapply. We must expedite the processing of their visas, and we must do this now.

The chants of let them in that reverberated through every major airport in the U.S. that fateful day in 2017 were a promise to the world. It is critical that we keep this promise to not only those who want to make America home tomorrow, but to those who were turned away many yesterdays ago.

And once weve made them whole, we owe them, and ourselves, the truth.

After WWII, survivors, historiansand activists used the Freedom of Information Act and archival records to paint the horrific picture of Japanese incarceration we see now its human tragedy, and the lies the government told to justify its actions. It is these inescapable truths that finally allowed survivors and their loved ones to achieve the redress they deserve, while also holding the government to account for the monstrous violations of peoples rights.

As Mr. Korematsu and so many survivors have taught us: If we are going to learn from our history, and not be doomed to forever repeatit, it is vital that we be able to see our history clearly and completely, without obstruction.

Thats why, as part of our challenge to that Muslim ban in federal court, we along with the Arab American Civil Rights League have been trying for more than three years to obtain a memo from a Rudy Giuliani-led commission formed to create a legal rationale for the Muslim ban.

We believe the Giuliani memo will show, despite the Trump administrations feeble claims to the contrary, the Muslim ban, like Japanese incarceration before it, had nothing to do with national security and everything to do with stoking fear, hatred and xenophobia in a dangerously cynical attempt to score political points.

It is our hope that, with Mr. Trump now gone from the White House, President Biden will allow that memo and related documents to see the light of day.

Like Fred Korematsu, I am a fervent advocate of truth and reconciliation. But for there to be any hope of reconciliation, we first must have the truth. All of it. That means, as a country, taking a hard look at the damage we caused in peoples lives, atoning for our grave mistakes and finally disclosing the lies we told ourselves to justify them.

For Anwar. For Mr. Korematsu. For all of us.

Rana Elmir is acting executive director of the ACLU of Michigan.

Read or Share this story: https://www.freep.com/story/opinion/contributors/2021/02/01/japanese-incarceration-camps-wwii-trumps-muslim-ban/4317163001/

More:

What Japanese incarceration camps in WWII and Trump's Muslim ban have in common | Opinion - Detroit Free Press

Judas and the Black Messiah, directed by Shaka King and written by King and Will Berson, follows William ONeals (Lakeith Stanfield) attempts to infiltrate the Illinois chapter of the Black Panther Party and help the FBI to take down its chairman, Fred Hampton (Daniel Kaluuya). King extensively covers every possible dynamic in the relationship between ONeal and Hampton and the rest of the people rallying around them. And in addition to drawing parallels between the plight of African Americans then and now, the movie also sends a powerful, universal message about how we shouldnt side with oppressors even if its for our survival because the damage that does is irreparable.

At the time of writing this review for Judas and the Black Messiah, Indias farmers are hosting one of the biggest protests of all-time against the Narendra Modi governments 2020 Agricultural Acts. The farmers have been harassed in every possible way for dissenting. Their protest has been infiltrated by the ruling partys goons and maligned by the Godi media (Nickname for Indias lapdog journalists). The farmers attempts at reaching the protest sites have been thwarted by diverting entire trains and the Indian police have planted barricades around said protest sites which are laced with nails and iron rods. And almost anyone who is trying to highlight it is being arrested. Why am I saying this? Because I am sure every mainstream film critic is going to draw parallels with the Black Lives Matter movement. But not many are going to talk about its slighter international relevance.

Judas and the Black Messiah is directed by Shaka King. It is written by King and Will Berson and is based on the story by Berson, King, Kenny Lucas, and Keith Lucas. It is produced by Ryan Coogler, Charles D. King, and Shaka. The music is by Craig Harris and Mark Isham, the cinematography is Sean Bobbitt, editing by Kristan Sprague, casting by Alexa L. Fogel, production design by Sam Lisenco, art direction by Jeremy Woolsey, set decoration by Rebecca Brown, costume design by Charlese Antoinette Jones, and hair and makeup by Sian Richards and Rebecca Woodforks teams. It features Daniel Kaluuya, Lakeith Stanfield, Jesse Plemons, Dominique Fishback, Lil Rel Howery, Martin Sheen, Ashton Sanders, Algee Smith, Darrell Britt-Gibson, and Dominique Thorne. The story revolves around the Illinois chapter of the Black Panther Party and how FBI informant William ONeal (Stanfield) betrayed its iconic chairman, Fred Hampton (Kaluuya).

I wont be going too much into the plot because it has been extensively recorded and talked about in documentaries and in this film. And I want you to experience it firsthand. Instead, I will be talking about what it made me feel. Our point-of-view character is William ONeal whose sense of self-preservation is so high that he will rather side with the Feds than support his own community to fight systemic racism and oppression. In real life, I see this happening on a daily basis. The level of fear that has been created by the Narendra Modi government and the law enforcement agencies doing its bidding that people have chosen to either shut up or silently do what theyre being told to do or openly and vocally supporting them. And thats empowering these fascist forces that theyre being able to get away with almost anything.

The tragic thing about oppression is that its being done by people on people hailing from the same goddamn country. India received freedom in 1947. 1947! And people are still oppressed. Why? Because the government and government agencies always have and always will hate dissent. They want people to stay oppressed so that they can make money by making everyone else work their guts out. So, if you think that siding with the system will help you get out of its cycle, youre wrong. Youve to hold those who have promised to keep the system democratic accountable for their actions. For that, you have to speak up. If you dont, youre doing some irreparable damage that will take years, decades, maybe centuries to fix. Thats what ONeal and Hamptons journeys show. When fascist forces are at play, you have to look above your own self-interest and work for the people so that they can have a free future.

A recurring problem that I have seen in movies based on true events such as this is that they dont have flair. It often feels like theyve taken pages from the events Wikipedia page, plopped the camera on the set, and has recorded some footage. Thats when you start feeling you couldve just read about all this instead of watching it. Shaka King probably knows about that and goes all out to make it an immersive audio-visual experience. Because its important that the imagery and the sounds stay with the audience so that they can take those themes back home and start to implement them into their lives. For example, the I am a revolutionary scene is burned into my brain, and although its a slogan that was used for an African-American fight, I felt it stir something in me and motivated me to do my bit in the revolution happening in my country.

Apart from being a political thriller, the movie functions as a detective/spy movie as well. But most importantly, it is a well-choreographed action film as well. You probably might be thinking that how does that help in any way? Well, a good action movie has the ability to address the magnanimity and weight of the plot. If theres a palpable sense of tension during a shooting scene, you empathise with the heroes and thereby root for their movement in a way that extensive dialogue scenes probably wont be able to do. And King employs this method along with the beautifully shot and framed dialogue scenes. What I mean to say is that his dialogue-heavy scenes are as tense and electrifying as his action sequences. So, theres a one-two-punch thing going on to embed the importance and depth of the story, which is something that I hope other directors start to do as well if they want to be as good as Shaka.

I dont think it will be an understatement to say that this is one of the best performances that Lakeith Stanfield has delivered in his career and the man has a laundry list of brilliant performances. There is so much going on with William that he externalises and internalises very methodically. William is always toeing the line between being too assertive and being too passive. If he is too assertive, the Black Panthers are going to catch him and the FBI is going to fry him. If he is too passive, the FBI is going to find out that hes sitting it out, theyll let the Black Panthers know, and he will be punished for being a snitch. And this conflict is eroding away at his soul and Lakeith captures that so perfectly. The final scene between him and Daniel is way too painful to watch!

I also dont think it will be an understatement to say that this is one of Daniel Kaluuyas best performances, right? How does this man deliver every time? Because hes awesome that why. I think that its very tough to portray determination and conviction to a political cause unless you feel it deep within you. I mean, that could be just me but feigning allegiance to something political must be difficult. And I think that Daniel isnt feigning it here. Every word, every flicker on his face, his physicality is coming from somewhere deep within his gut. Thats why it pierces through the wall between the reel and the real and hits you. Fred Hamptons lines are definitely powerful. But I dont think reciting them wouldve had the same effect. Its very apparent that he went deep into his psyche to give such an honest and heartfelt portrayal (Which is undoubtedly aided by Fishback) of an iconic leader.

The rest of the cast deserves a shoutout as well. They did exceptionally well although this is clearly a Lakeith Stanfield and Daniel Kaluuya movie.

I cant emphasise the importance of Judas and the Black Messiah in the current political climate enough. This is essential viewing for all! Yes, you can appreciate it as a well-crafted movie by Shaka King with two of the best performances of all time by Lakeith Stanfield and Daniel Kaluuya, and call it a day. But you have to dig deeper into the core themes of the film, engage with the commentary on display, and think about your place in the revolutionary movements that are definitely happening in your country (I say definitely because every country is fighting for change. If you dont see it, that doesnt mean it isnt happening). And always remember that when you have to pick sides during this ideological and humanitarian crisis, be the Messiah and not Judas.

SEE ALSO: Sundance Night Of The Kings Review - A Beautifully Created Ode To The Magic Of Storytelling

Cover image courtesy: Sundance Film Festival 2021

The rest is here:

Sundance 'Judas And The Black Messiah' Review: A Relevant Film About The Oppressed Fighting The Oppressor - Mashable India

I begin by asking a simple question, why cant we get Black history education right? The desire to write and learn Black history has been a priority by Black communities for over a century. In the late 1800s and early 1900s, Black educators including Edward A. Johnson, Booker T. Washington, Lelia Amos Pendleton, Carter G. Woodson, and Merl Eppse wrote Black history textbooks, teacher guides, and other resources to correct white authors omissions and misrepresentations.

Black history education became more mainstream during the 1960s as Black children, parents, teachers, and community members protested for more Black history courses. These acts of agency led to more Black history courses and a handful of states creating legislation mandating Black history in public schools.

Despite its storied past, Black history education continues to have severe problems in the way it is conceived and taught. As prominent educator Gloria Ladson-Billings wrote in her 2003 Critical Race Theory: Perspectives on the Social Studies, when schoolchildren learn Black history, they learn that Black people are relatively insignificant to the growth and development of our democracy and our nation, and they represent a drain on the resources and values.

The first time many schoolchildren learn about Black people is through enslavement and other oppression-centered narratives. Black people are taught as passive people and disconnected from their liberation. The prevailing narrative emphasizes white saviors and the federal government as Black peoples primary liberators. When Black liberation is taught, liberation is limited to nonviolence, and historical narratives that state otherwise are vilified and compared to white supremacy. The stale K-12 Black history instruction rarely builds on itself; instead, the same context and content are regurgitated throughout students educational careers.

We cant get Black history education right because we teach about Black history instead of through Black history. Teaching about Black history has meant that schools teach from how white people imagine Black histories. Teaching through Black history should mean listening, writing, and teaching narratives from the actual historical experiences and voices of Black people.

These historical perspectives differ significantly. For instance, teaching Brown v. Board of Education through Black voices would acknowledge that many Black communities were not in favor of integrating schools, just equity in school funding. Black schools were culturally confirming, relevant, and sustaining. Integration meant transferring Black students to predominately white schools where instructional practices were culturally insensitive and racist. Black schools were closed, and many Black teachers and administrators lost their jobs. Teaching through Black history about the Brown ruling provides a critical assessment of the policy and not the federal governments moral prerogative of racial progress.

We can teach through Black history by adopting what I call Black historical consciousness. Black historical consciousness is a set of principles to understand, develop, and teach Black histories that recognize Black peoples full humanity and emphasize pedagogical practices that reimagine the legitimacy, selection, and interpretation of historical sources. This consciousness should be adopted for creating and sustaining Black history programs.

Black historical consciousness consists of six principles and ample examples, some of which may require further research even for history teachers:

1. Dont ignore systemic power, oppression, and racism. We cannot teach about Black history without exploring how these forces have influenced Black life in America. Examples include the institution of slavery, the nadir of race relations, the wealth gap and housing patterns, the war on drugs, and mass incarceration.

2. Acknowledge Black agency. Black people have always acted independently, made their own decisions based on their interests, and fought back against oppression. Just because oppression has influenced Black life histories does not mean that oppression defines Black history. Examples include African resistance to slavery, Black abolitionists, the two Great Migrations, the NAACP and the courts, and the Black Power movement.

3. Study the similarities and differences of Black histories and cultures across Africa and the African Diaspora worldwide. Black history should begin with the study of ancient Africa and move to define Blackness worldwide. Examples include African origins of humanity, the Haitian Revolution, the Caribbean Black Power movement, and African civilization, kingdoms, and dynasties.

4. Focus on Black joy through liberation and radical projects that defied oppressive structures throughout history. Highlight histories about Black culture that are not focused on hardship but sustain Black peoples spirits. Examples include Black family dynamics, music, dance, cultural expressions, sports, holidays and traditions, and the Black Arts Movement.

5. Explore the multiple identities that can inform and intersect with Blackness. Examples include the Combahee River Collective, Black political thought, Black nationalism, and the experiences of Black Indigenous people, Black women, and Black LGBTQ+ communities.

6. Recognize that all Black histories are contentious. These histories are twofold. First, Black people are not a monolithic group and have had various and sometimes competing ideas on how to solve social issues. Examples include Black Marxism, the reparations movement, Pan-Africanist movements, and the Garvey movement. Second, like all histories, Black histories are not always positive and include unfavorable and problematic moments and narratives. Examples include recolonizing Africa, homophobia, and sexism during the civil rights movement.

If we continue to teach about Black history and not through it, we will perpetuate instructional practices that (intentionally or not) dehumanize Black people, emphasize white supremacy and anti-Blackness, and psychologically harm schoolchildren, especially Black children.

The reason why we cannot get Black history right is that we refuse to seriously listen to, understand, and interpret Black historical voices. We fail to listen to Black teachers and educators who have been telling us how to teach Black history for more than a century. We cling to historical fantasies and not historical truths from multiple perspectives.

Until we believe Black people are historical vessels, we will continue to suffer from anti-Blackness and an inequitable society that continue to relegate Black histories to the margins. The unbalanced Black histories we continue to propagate as history paint Black people as a problem in society and not a solution. Black historical consciousness holds the hope to transform history education and, in turn, society.

The rest is here:

Black History Is About More Than Oppression (Opinion) - Education Week

Russian opposition activist Alexei Navalny was today sentenced to two years, eight months in a prison colony for violating the probation terms of a suspended sentence on a 2014 conviction, which he claims was politically motivated.

This comes on the heels of a second weekend of unauthorised protests in which thousands of Russians took to the streets in support of Navalny.

This is an important moment for Russia. Now that Navalny faces a lengthy prison term, he could become a potent symbol of a lawless regime that is afraid of its people and further energise the opposition.

To counter this, the Kremlin will seek to paint Navalny as a dangerous symbol of Western meddling in Russian politics.

The success of these competing messages will play a critical role in determining whether the opposition will be able to maintain its momentum moving forward.

For many years, Russia has been an unusual place for opposition politics. Despite dominating the messaging on traditional TV and (most) print media, the Kremlin has allowed a degree of free speech online. Navalny has taken advantage of this freedom, exposing high-level corruption first as a blogger and now as head of Russias leading anti-corruption organisation.

He and his team have produced voluminous reports and slickly produced viral videos detailing corruption at the highest levels of Russian politics. These videos have generated millions of clicks.

But last year it appeared this uneasy truce between the Kremlin and its online opponents was breaking down. Putins approval ratings fell to historic lows amid a stagnating economy and the governments dysfunctional response to COVID.

In response, the Kremlin launched a large, stage-managed constitutional reform process aimed at projecting the image of strongman governance as the only way to avoid growing threats from a hostile Europe and United States.

In addition, the Kremlin has ramped up its targeting of government critics and human rights groups by pushing its claims they are foreign agents and restricting their operations. Navalny and his Anti-Corruption Foundation have also faced growing harassment.

Read more: Navalny returns to Russia and brings anti-Putin politics with him

Then, in August, Navalny was poisoned while visiting regional Russia to promote his smart voting system, which helps Russians vote tactically for opposition candidates, depriving the ruling United Russia party of votes and weakening its monopoly on power.

Perhaps anticipating his arrest after returning from Russia from his convalescence in Germany, Navalny personally appeared on YouTube describing a highly detailed report of a US$1.3 billion dollar palace allegedly built for Putin on the Black Sea.

This video has now been viewed more than 100 million times and has transformed the palaces 700-euro toilet brushes four times the average monthly pension in Russia into a symbol of the protests.

With Navalny now facing a lengthy prison time, two competing narratives are likely to emerge.

The government will seek to downplay his symbolic importance. For his part, Putin still refuses to call Navalny by name and has recently referred to him as the Berlin patient.

And to the extent the official state media do mention Navalny, the Kremlin has increasingly tried to characterise him as a Western agent intent on weakening Russia and unleashing revolutionary chaos.

Read more: Putin for life? Many Russians may desire leadership change, but don't see a viable alternative

This image of Navalny fits with the Kremlins overall narrative that Russia is under threat from a hostile West seeking to undermine its stable development. This message has ironically been strengthened by European Union and US threats to impose additional sanctions on Russia for jailing Navalny.

The long-term success of this narrative in Russia, however, remains unclear. In contrast with Europe and the US, where Navalny is rapidly assuming the unambiguous status of oppressed Russian dissident, Russians have mixed views on Navalny. Many are uncertain whether they would vote for him if he could run for president. Others worry about his nationalist background.

But the protests suggest Navalny could come to symbolise something far more problematic for the Kremlin.

His jailing could galvanise Russians who want a form of politics no longer characterised by post-imperial nostalgia and a paranoid, siege mentality that constantly fears Western interference. Instead, they want to live in a country focused on building better schools, infrastructure and health care.

The protests show this narrative is particularly popular among young people, who ignore state media and instead get their news from social media posts that combine dark humour with criticism of the regime.

Some of these videos have sampled songs by activist musicians, such as IC3Peaks Death No More, which mixes hard-core electronica and images of the singers pouring kerosene on themselves in front of government buildings and eating raw meat outside Vladimir Lenins tomb.

Further, the recent protests show this narrative is also gaining traction in regional cities in Siberia and the Far East, which have suffered from the Putin regimes centralisation of power and money in Moscow over the last 20 years.

Finally, this narrative is popular among women. Navalnys organisation is cultivating a new generation of female leaders and supporters, many of whom want to break away from the macho, strongman politics of the Putin era.

As Navalny (and many of his team) sit in jail, he is a reminder of the hypocrisy of many of the Russian political elite, who claim to be protecting Russian sovereignty, but own vast amounts of property in Europe.

Read more: Alexei Navalny has long been a fierce critic of the Kremlin. If he was poisoned, why now? And what does it mean?

If the Kremlin successfully paints Navalny as a foreign agent who will only bring instability to Russia, the jailed activist may retreat from public view. If he does, the opposition will once again fail to place serious political pressure on the Kremlin.

But if Navalny comes to symbolise unjust oppression in the face of an increasingly corrupt, unaccountable and incompetent political elite, popular pressure will only increase on the Russian government.

It could take years for this narrative to gather steam. But if it does, Navalny will likely be correct when he stated in a recent court hearing,

right now brute force is on the states side, but that will not last forever.

Read the original post:

By jailing Alexei Navalny, the Kremlin may turn him into an even more potent opposition symbol - The Conversation AU

In the 1870s, the colonizing American government rounded up Indians and put them in boarding schools and forced them to learn English. The American government knew one thing: If you take away a persons language, you take away their culture and their soul. Its the first and most important step of colonization and a necessary type of violent oppression. If you want to subdue people and landscapes and cultures, you must first describe and define them in the words of the oppressor and colonizer and teach them to use those words.

Environmentalists are losing the water wars because they have had their language stolen they are taught to use the language of their oppressor, and they often repeat that story, and thereby oppression, constantly in their communications.

My first exposure to this problem was more than a decade ago when I was in a meeting with the head of a government organization that wanted (and actually still wants) to build a dam on the Cache la Poudre River in northern Colorado. I was complaining that the river was already being drained by dams and diversions, and he replied to me and said that what was actually happening was that senior water-rights holders had swept the river.

My jaw dropped.

They werent farmers or cities, which are actual people who are harming the river they were senior water-rights holders. They werent draining the river. They had swept it, as if the complete draining and destruction of the river made it cleaner.

And finally, it wasnt even a river. It was just water.

Over the years I collected these words, metaphors and euphemisms because theyre repeated by the water agencies and establishment I call them water buffaloes and often by the environmental groups that work hand-in-hand with them. Here are just ten examples of a whole institutionalized and legalized system of linguistic and cultural oppression describing river destruction:

If you are a professional environmentalist and trained in water law or hydrology, youre taught this language in college and law school. At work, you repeat it day after day in meetings, phone calls and emails. The water buffaloes like this because you use their language, and they invite you to their meetings and give you a seat at the table. At best, the language sanitizes the destruction of living rivers and entire nonhuman life forms. At worst, the language solidifies the systemic, institutionalized oppression of living rivers and the people who protect them, thereby stealing your culture and your values.

When Aldo Leopold paddled through the 2-million-acre wetland of the Colorado River Delta in 1922, he said the river was everywhere and nowhere and described it as a milk and honey wilderness full of hundreds of lagoons containing deer, quail, raccoon, bobcat, jaguar and vast flocks of waterfowl. Now the Colorado River Delta is almost 100 percent drained, and the small effort to restore it is often described with bland scientific terminology. The tiny amount of water that the United States and Mexico are allowing to be pumped into the restoration zones is measured in acre-feet.

Language is a tool of political manipulation when you use and repeat your opponents language, you solidify their status and your own oppression.

Consider this mumbo-jumbo that you hear when talking to water agencies: When a water right is in priority, you perfect it by sweeping the river so that excess supplies are held in storage for consumptive use.

What really happened? They dammed, drained and destroyed a river, which is a living, breathing life force the veins of the planet providing survival to a vast array of nonhuman creatures that have entire cultures and languages of their own.

If they steal your language, they steal your soul. Dont let them.

Gary Wockner

Gary Wockner, PhD, is a scientist and conservationist based in Colorado. Follow him on Twitter, @GaryWockner. Learn more at savethecolorado.org

More here:

OPINION: The Words That Kill Rivers - Pagosa Daily Post

Hitting out at Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan, Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) on Sunday announced that it will drag the Prime Minister's government to court over "targeted" demolition drive against its party leaders. A press conference by PML-N leaders Khawaja Saad Rafique, Sardar Ayaz Sadiq, and Ataullah Tarar in Lahore on Sunday protestedthe Punjab government's recent actions, in particular, therazing of the Khokhar brothers' residence by the Lahore Development Authority over what the government has characterized as "illegal occupation of government land".

READ |Osama Bin Laden Supported & Used To Finance Nawaz Sharif: Ex-Pakistan Envoy & Minister

While stating that the "lists were being prepared" and the government was "targeting" the party's leaders in particular and adding their names to those that must be probed for corruption, PML-N's Khawaja Saad Rafique said that this idea of corruption will no longer sell. "Whoever commits acts of oppression will meet a befitting fate," he added. Alleging that Imran Khan-led government wishes to eradicate all its opponents, he said that PML-N members have vowed that they will "never be eliminated".

READ |'Devoid Of Humanity': Maryam Nawaz Attacks Imran Khan For Calling Hazaras 'blackmailers'

Rafique said that with by-polls around the corner, the government is "trying to scare the Opposition" and strong action must be taken against the District Superintendent of Police under whose watch the operation took place. He also gave the example of the office of an "approved scheme" in Sialkot that was demolished to scare the Opposition.

Former speaker of the National Assembly, Sardar Ayaz Sadiq,said that Transparency International, to whom the prime minister would often refer to when speaking of his political opponents, has now found Pakistan to be suffering from the "worst corruption" in the current government's tenure. Meanwhile, Ataullah Tarar, for his part, announced that the party will approach the court against the government's actions.

READ |'You'll Be Surprised': Maryam Nawaz Claims Imran Khan Govt 'begging' Opposition For Talks

Earlier on January 26, Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) Vice-President Maryam Nawaz claimed that the Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khans government is begging its opposition for a dialogue. However, Nawaz said that the opposition has decided not to indulge in any talks with the Khan-led government and even labelled them incompetent.

While attending a joint meeting of the partys parliamentary groups in the National Assembly and Senate on Tuesday, PML-N vice president reportedly said that the opposition would submit its resignations from the assemblies at an appropriate time and with a consensus within the 10-party Pakistan Democratic Movement (PDM).

READ |'Pakistan A Country, Not A Phone That You'll Reboot It': Imran Khan Slammed Over Blackout

(With ANI inputs)

View original post here:

PML-N threatens to drag PM Imran Khans govt to court over targeted demolition drive - Republic World

Steve Brawner| Fort Smith Times Record

How should schools teach about history? And who should decide? The answer to the second question helps determine the answer to the first.

Arkansas state legislators are confronted with both with two bills by Rep. Mark Lowery (R-Maumelle).

House Bill 1218 would prohibit public school districts and state-supported colleges and universities from teaching material that:

Promotes overthrowing the government

Promotes division between, resentment of, or social justice for a race, gender, political affiliation, social class or particular class of people

Advocates the isolation of a group of students based on ethnicity, race, religion, gender or social class

Violates federal civil rights laws

Negatively targets specific nationalities or countries

Schools that violate these terms could lose 10% of state foundation funding.

The bill wouldnt prohibit discussing controversial aspects of history and wouldnt outlaw discussing the Holocaust,genocide,historical oppression of people based on ethnicity, race or class,or African-American history. It also wouldnt prohibit students from participating in voluntary activities.

Lowery is also sponsoring House Bill 1231, which would prohibit the use of public school funds to teach the 1619 Project, which is a curriculum developed by the New York Times that teaches that 1619, when slaves were first brought here, is Americas true founding date rather than the signing of the Declaration of Independence in 1776.

The 1619 Project elicits strong reactions from people. Supporters say it explains slaverys importance as an economic and political institution. Opponents say it inaccurately devalues the nations more noble, high-minded principles.

The bills have not yet been heard in committee.

Heres the thing about laws: They ultimately put the lawyers in charge, which makes everyone hesitant to do anything and turns us all into i-dotters and t-crossers. School districts would have to decide what promotes division and then theyd have to be really careful about teaching anything. If they cant negatively target a nationality or country, then what could they say about Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union, Chinaor Iran?

The second half of the bill tries to foresee its own potential problems by listing what schools can teach, but then it becomes self-contradictory. Schools could teach about oppression based on race but couldnt promote social justice for a race? Thats a minefield. It lists exceptions to its own prohibitions, but what does it leave out unless controversial aspects of history covers everything? Ultimately, lawyers would decide.

The 1874 Arkansas Constitution makes the state ultimately responsible for maintaining a general, suitable and efficient system of free public schools, even as schools were locally run back then. In recent years, the courts have interpreted the phrase to give the state an increasing role in public education, particularly regarding funding. Meanwhile, historical events have moved power from the schoolhouse to capitols, and not always for bad reasons. If President Eisenhower had to send troops to Little Rock in 1957 to end school segregation and protect those students from the mob, so be it.

But turning schools into arms of the state and federal governments also has a downside in a diverse, divided country. There are real differences between red states and blue states, and there are differences between parts of Arkansas. Mountain View is different from Malvern, which is different from Helena-West Helena. 48 languages are spoken in the homes of students in the Springdale School District, the states largest with large populations of Hispanic and Marshallese students.

The truth is the truth, but certain approaches to history will work better in one school than they will in another. People who live in different places and have different experiences will see history differently. Communities will have different expectations. Whats divisive in one district, or classroom, would be merely controversial in another.

Force can resolve differences, and sometimes thats necessary, as it was in 1957. But we should be hesitant to use force, which is what a law is. We can also try persuasion. The other choice is accepting that differences will occur, often even celebrating that fact, and trusting schools and teachers to make these decisions.

So we return to our first two questions. How should schools teach about history? And who should decide? Well see what answers come from the Capitol in the coming days.

Steve Brawner is a syndicated columnist in Arkansas. Email him at brawnersteve@mac.com. Follow him on Twitter at @stevebrawner.

Go here to read the rest:

How should history be taught, and who should decide? - Times Record