Category Archives: Government Oppression

Javed came into the limelight in 2019 a time when the Government of India had unilaterally abolished the special status of Kashmir and there was a widespread crackdown on free speech in the Himalayan region. His debut album Little Kid, Big Dreams, was an instant hit, but back home things were getting worse. After releasing his album in New Delhi, Javed came home and saw people restricted in their houses.

There wasnt much to do during the curfew days. So, I used to go near The Jhelum River for leisure, where I found other rap artists looking for a platform to exhibit their talent, he said. There, they came together to form a hip-hop community called "Kashur Nizam (Kashmiri Culture)."

Comparing their motivation to Rage Against the Machine, whose unapologetic rock targets everything from Americancorporations and warmongeringto racial discrimination and police brutality. Like them, Javed says, Kashmiri hip-hop also refuses to shy away from reality.

We (rappers) are not political people. We just rap about what we see and observe," he explains. "And if our circumstances led us to rap about the atrocities that are happening around us, it is not our fault. It is conscious music.

Hip-hop first made its way to Kashmir in early 2000s when the valley was introduced to rappers likeEminem, 50 Cent and Tupac. The lyrical themes of oppression, poverty and racism resonated with young people, who saw mirrors of theirown experiences.

Thirteen years since Illahi's popularity threw a light on Kashmiri hip-hop, the scene is small but passionate. There are aroundrappers in Kashmir today spitting about politics, human rights violation, militarisation and speaking truth to power. In doing so, they are inspiring generations to come.

Among the crowd to watch Javed are two young boys from downtown Srinagar nodding their heads to beats.Arsalan (18) and Dawood (19) have been friends since childhood, and listening to hip-hop for eight years now. For them, Kashmiri hip-hopreflects what young people like them go through in their day-to-day lives.

Its like someone is singing our story, they say. We live in the most volatile area in the city, and we have seen so much turmoil right from our childhood. This music gives us a chance to listen to our own feelings.

Follow Junaid on Twitter.

Enjoyed this article? Follow Huck onTwitter and Instagram.

Originally posted here:

Underground cyphers are helping young Kashmiris reclaim their ... - Huck Magazine

In a startling address at a Conservative conference held in Westminster on Monday, a Tory MP drew criticism for invoking a term linked to an antisemitic conspiracy theory, according to The National.

Miriam Cates, representing the constituency of Peniston and Stocksbridge, made alarming claims about the perils of "cultural Marxism," linking it to the alleged destruction of children's well-being, including self-harm, suicide and an alarming rise in anxiety levels.

"Cultural Marxism" is a far-right conspiracy theory that arose in the past century, which accuses left-wing and liberal people of revolutionizing society for the worse with their views. This theory purports that Marxist scholars devised a clandestine agenda of progressive politics aimed at undermining Western democracies. Over time, the theory gained antisemitic tones as many who believe in it believe it to be a Jewish plot.

The Board of Deputies of British Jews expressed condemnation towards Home Secretary Suella Braverman in 2019 for her use of the term "cultural Marxism." The organization, representing the British Jewish community, denounced her remarks due to the term's association with antisemitic conspiracy theories.

Moreover, the term has previously surfaced in the self-proclaimed manifesto of Anders Breivik, a far-right terrorist from Norway. Breivik killed 77 people in Norway's worst peacetime atrocity in July 2011. He killed eight with a car bomb in Oslo and then gunned down 69, most of them teenagers, at a Labour Party youth camp.

Cates, delivering one of the opening speeches at the National Conservatism Conference, emphasized that a sense of optimism and prospects for the future play a vital role in motivating young people to start families.

"That hope is sadly diminishing in so many of our young people today because liberal individualism has proven to be completely powerless to resist the cultural Marxism that is systematically destroying our children's souls," she said.

"When culture, schools and universities openly teach that our country is racist, our heroes are villians, humanity is killing the Earth, you are what your desire, diversity is theology, boundaries are tyranny and self-restraint is oppression, is it any wonder that mental health conditions, self-harm and suicide, and epidemic levels of anxiety and confusion characterize the emerging generation?

"We must end the indoctrination of our children with destructive and narcissistic ideologies, instead protecting childhood, training children in the timeless virtues and teaching them how to love our country," she added.

Lord John Mann, the Government's antisemitism czar, raised concerns about Cates's utilization of the term "cultural Marxism," stating that it originates from a conspiracy theory with antisemitic underpinnings, according to The Telegraph.

However, Yoram Hazony, the conference chairman and Orthodox Jewish theologian, argued that the term accurately characterizes the cultural agenda endorsed by numerous left-leaning individuals today. Hazony emphasized that he unequivocally rejects any association with antisemitism and does not provide a platform for such individuals.

According to Cates, liberal ideology is facing an imminent decline due to a lack of pride in national history among children, resulting in decreased motivation to carry it forward.

Additionally, she asserted that the declining fertility rate in the UK poses a greater threat to Western society than both Vladimir Putin's Russia and the escalating global temperatures.

"None of our philosophical musings or policy proposals will amount to anything long-lasting unless we address the one overarching threat to British conservatism and the whole of Western society," she said.

"No, it's not climate change, it's not Russia or China or Iran. It's not the neo-Marxist ideology that has so weakened our institutions. No, there is one critical outcome that liberal individualism has failed to deliver and that is babies."

Read the original:

Tory MP uses controversial term connected to antisemitic conspiracies - The Jerusalem Post

Fijis Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka Sunday apologised for his role in orchestrating the 1987 coup that overthrew the democratically elected government of then Prime Minister Timoci Bavadra, the first Indo-Fijian to lead the country.

I make this confession on my own behalf and on behalf of all those who took part with me in the military coup on the 14th of May, 1987. We confess our wrongdoings, and we confess that we have hurt so many of our people in Fiji, particularly those of the Indo-Fijian community of the time and among them sons, daughters, grandsons and granddaughters of those who were indentured as labourers from India between 1879 and 1916, Rabuka said in the countrys capital, Suva.

Rabuka, who was then an army lieutenant colonel, entered Fijis parliament, arrested Prime Minister Bavadra, and suspended the constitution. The takeover, the first of several military coups in Fiji, was driven by indigenous Fijians fear of losing political control to Indo-Fijians, who dominated the countrys economy.

Rabukas action had far-reaching and long-term consequences for Fiji, and altered its relationship with the rest of the world, especially India.

The May 1987 coup

On the morning of May 14, 1987, Rabuka, who was accompanied by 10 masked soldiers, stormed the parliament building, herded Bavadra and 27 members of the ruling coalition into a waiting truck, and drove them to an unknown destination.

At a news conference subsequently, Rabuka announced the suspension of the constitution and said he would form a caretaker government until fresh elections are held to restore civilian rule and go back to democracy, The Indian Express reported at the time.

Meanwhile, the countrys Governor General Ratu Sir Penaia Ganilau declared a national emergency and announced he was taking charge of the government under the provisions of Fijis British-made Constitution. Fiji was a member of the British Commonwealth (the country has been in and out of the British Commonwealth over the years. It was most recently reinstated as a member in 2014) at the time, Queen Elizabeth II was the head of state, and Penaia Ganilau was officially her representative.

The coup took place a little over a month after an alliance of the National Federation Party and Labour Party won elections that led to the formation of a cabinet dominated by ethnic Indians for the first time since Fijis independence from Britain in 1970.

A day after his takeover, Lt Col Rabuka announced he was drafting a new constitution that would guarantee Fiji would never again have an Indian-dominated government (No Power for Indians: Rabuka, The Indian Express, May 16, 1987). He denied discriminating against Indians, and claimed that he was only looking after the Fijians interest.

On May 19, anti-Indian riots broke out in the country. [A] crowd of ethnic Fijians ran through the streets of Suva in an hour-long rampage, attacking Indians and Indian-owned shops despite Rabukas appeals for calm, The Indian Express reported on May 20. At least 50 Indians were reported injured in the violence that was provoked by a rally that Indians took out in support of the ousted Prime Minister.

Rabukas second coup

Widespread racial violence followed the military takeover, wrote academic Dr Amba Pande in an article published in Strategic Analysis, a monthly journal of Columbia University (Race and Power Struggle in Fiji). Pande wrote that an attempt by the governor-general to form an advisory council with both Bavadra and Rabuka failed after the ousted Prime Minister refused to participate on the grounds that the composition of the council was unconstitutional and biased.

Following weeks of negotiations, in July 1987, plans to reform the constitution were approved, and it was decided that Bavadra and Kamisese Mara a former Prime Minister popular with indigenous Fijians would form an interim government.

In response, Rabuka orchestrated a second coup on September 25 of that year. He declared Fiji a republic, and proclaimed himself head of the state, replacing the Queen. Countries around the world condemned these actions and refused to recognise his regime, and India imposed trade sanctions on Fiji.

Under pressure, Rabuka resigned as head of state on December 6, 1987, and Penaia Ganilau became the first President of the Fijian republic. A new constitution was promulgated in 1990, and elections were held two years later.

Background of crisis

The election victory of the Indo-Fijians was only a trigger for Rabukas coup. Since independence, the South Pacific Ocean archipelago had been seeing a widening political divide between ethnic Indians and indigenous Fijians.

Indians were brought to Fiji from 1879 onward as girmitiyas or indentured labour transported to work in sugar plantations. The majority of these Indians stay back after the indenture system ended and, over time, gained prosperity. The Indian community eventually became the backbone of Fijis economic system, and they had, by the 1940s, outnumbered ethnic Fijians in the islands population.

Another reason for the Fijians resentment was the nature of landholdings. Indigenous Fijians owned more than 83% of the land on the islands, but Indian tenant farmers held most of it on 99-year leases, according to Pandes article. Despite the fact that the land was legally made inalienable by the constitution of 1970, the fear of losing it had always been there in the minds of the Fijians, Pande wrote.

All these insecurities came to a boil after the general elections of 1987, and a section of indigenous Fijians sought to thwart Indo-Fijians from getting political power. Rabukas two coups triggered a massive wave of emigration according to a report published by The Guardian in 2000, around 70,000 Indians fled the country to escape the oppression.

Mondays apology by Rabuka who was elected Prime Minister in 1992 and then again last year was not his first for the 1987 coups. He had apologised publicly on the 21st anniversary of the takeover in 2008. It was a mistake and I admit I was wrongStaging a coup is something no one should be proud of because you dont become a hero, so all the copycats should not think they will be heroes, he said on that occasion, according to a Reuters report.

Continued here:

Fijis 1987 coup: Why did Prime Minister Rabuka apologise to the Indo-Fijian community? - The Indian Express

The crises of capitalist economies in several countries throughout the world has deepened social inequalities and the plight of millions of migrants that are desperately fleeing a life of misery. This is especially the reality in Latin America, where governments collude against the most vulnerable sectors of our class and our peoples: from governments that implement economic plans that target the working class to those that push to pass anti-immigrant policies, in line with those being passed in the U.S. This situation creates the kinds of tragedies like the most recent migrant crisis which will only become worse as a result of the policies announced by the Biden administration. Instead, this historic crisis demands an internationalist response from below based on the unity of the working class across our borders. It is with this perspective that we put forward the following declaration.

Entire families are begging for access to the United States at Mexicos northern border in front of undaunted guards carrying long guns at the edge of the Rio Grande. They are thirsty, hungry, exhausted men, women and children, often passing from Ecuador, through the Darien Gap and northward through Central America. They are those who survived the dangerous journey through Mexico, leaving behind their lives, including documents and their few belongings, from the Caribbean islands, from Central America, from Venezuela and Ecuador in South America and from Mexico.

The past few weeks have been crucial in determining the immigration status of thousands of people displaced by violence, the effects of environmental devastation, and poverty. On Thursday, May 11, Title 42, which was approved by the Trump administration during the pandemic and continued under the Biden administration expired. The policy restricted the entry of migrants in the name of preventing the spread of Covid-19. This brutal and inhumane bipartisan policy sought to delay and hinder at all costs the asylum requests and visa processing for hundreds of thousands of Mexican, Central American, Caribbean and Venezuelan migrants, and led to a record number of deportations: 2.8 million during both administrations and 72,000 alone since September 2022, in addition to 142,000 arrests making 2022 the year with the highest undocumented migration since the Second World War.

The Biden administrations policy, disguised under the guise of a humane and orderly migration policy, actually carried out more deportations than under the Trump administration, while promising to increase the quota of visas for asylum seekers, in the face of what his administration has called an unprecedented exodus from countries such as Nicaragua, Haiti, Venezuela and Cuba, with which the U.S. has no diplomatic relations. Biden has agreed to establish migrant processing centers alongside Gustavo Petro, President of Colombia, and Alejandro Giammatei, President of Guatemala, in their respective countries.

In contrast to these promises, the U.S. has deployed 1,500 additional soldiers to its southern border with Mexico where a total of 4,000 troops are now mobilized. At the same time, the Biden administration is pressuring the administration of Andrs Manuel Lopez Obrador (AMLO) to militarize the border with Guatemala. Biden has also returned to the Title 8 policy disqualifying people from seeking asylum in the U.S. if they do not first apply in countries they crossed earlier in their journeys or cannot demonstrate that they would be exposed to persecution or torture if they were deported to their countries of origin. At the same time, his policy also subjects migrants to harsher consequences for crossing the border illegally and expedites their arrests, fines, penalties, and deportations if they are caught crossing. The Biden administration has also initiated a policy so that migrants will only have 24 hours to find a lawyer after crossing the border to seek asylum, whereas previously they had 48 hours. These measures will speed up deportations and make visa and asylum procedures even longer and more difficult.

For his part, Greg Abbott, governor of Texas and one of the hardliners of the Republican Party, has sent Black Hawk helicopters and C-130 aircraft along with a new U.S. National Guard unit, which according to his statements, now totals 10,000 troops, to prevent the entry of migrants before the end of Title 42. This xenophobic Republican is also promoting a state law to consider the entry of migrants without papers into Texas a serious crime and penalties of up to 10 years in prison for hiding migrants without legal residency permits.

In addition, the Republicans have introduced a Border Security Bill that calls for increased funding for border security, the resumption of the construction of a border wall, improvements in surveillance technology along the U.S. southern and northern borders, and an increase in the number of Border Patrol agents. However, since they do not have a majority in the Senate, it is unlikely to pass.

At the same time, independent Senator Kyrsten Sinema, a representative from Arizona and former member of the Democratic Party, together with Senator Thom Tillis, a Republican legislator from North Carolina, are pushing for a bill to reinstate Title 42, without any reference to the pandemic.

Both the Democratic and Republican Parties are responsible for the implementation of imperialist policies throughout the Americas that have led to poverty and violence in this vast region. This imperialist orientation was evident in the statements of the General of the U.S. Army Southern Command, Laura Richardson, who recently stated that the wealth of natural resources in Latin America are a matter of national security for the U.S., in the face of its geopolitical adversaries; a position that she also promoted in Central America during her visit to Costa Rica in February. Clearly, the reactionary policies against immigration are a bipartisan affair. Both parties are driving a situation which entails greater oppression and precariousness for the entire migrant population living in the U.S. or intending to settle there. The bipartisan regimes imperialist policies also put downward pressure on the working conditions of the entire multi-ethnic working class north of the Rio Grande.

After the signing of the Bicentennial Agreement at the end of 2021, more than 32,000 National Guard troops were deployed to Mexicos southern border. The agreement, which aims to strengthen cooperation and security measures in a new chapter of the publicized War on Drugs, is being touted as a measure to curb the illegal entry of fentanyl into the United States.

In spite of the progressive rhetoric of AMLOs government and a discourse that attempts to distance itself from the previous administrations in Mexico and from the Biden administration in particular, regarding issues such as the blockade of Cuba or Venezuela which has been denounced by AMLO the reality is that in substance, AMLO and his government of the so-called Fourth Transformation (4T) have continued the essence of subordination to imperialist policies. This was expressed most recently with the renegotiation of the T-MEC, to continue oiling the North American value chain through the precarization of the labor force in Mexico. Added to that is the continuation of a policy initiated in 2006 by the governments of Felipe Caldern and George Bush to militarize Mexico to protect the interests of big national and transnational imperialist businessmen. Finally, the implementation of racist and xenophobic policies against migrants is another example of the subordination to imperialist policies.

Far from demilitarizing the country as he promised in his electoral campaign, AMLO ramped up the presence of the army in the streets, introduced the new civilian security corps the National Guard in security tasks, and deployed thousands of troops across both borders, particularly in Guatemala, to act as Border Patrol south of the Rio Grande. With the excuse of fighting organized crime, the reality behind this militarization has more to do with controlling strategic resource zones and guaranteeing mega-projects such as the Mayan Train than with crime. The militarization is also a way to prevent potential mobilizations and protests against the bosses policies of the 4T.

In turn, the government has implemented policies such as Stay in Mexico, a program promoted by Trump that forces migrants wishing to enter the United States to wait in Mexico to process their immigration. This has resulted in all kinds of complications for migrants in transit, such as overcrowding in immigration centers that in reality function as prisons.

While AMLO has put forward a slew of social programs that are aimed at combating poverty and helping those that live in the countryside, he has not resolved the conditions faced by the rural masses. Instead, the character of his regime becomes evident through his policies that seek to prevent migration and contain displaced migrants from countries in the region within Mexico, in accordance with the agreement with the United States. On the southern border of the country, the Mexican army represses Latin American and Caribbean brothers and sisters every day to contain their passage to the United States.

The most recent episode that highlighted the oppressive nature of the Mexican state was the tragedy that led to the deaths of 41 migrants who were locked up in a migrant jail in Ciudad Jurez, under the complicity of the guards of the National Institute of Migration who refused to help them while their lives were in danger during a fire. This is yet another example of the negligence and contempt of immigration officials against people who have been unjustly deprived of their liberties and faced a situation of complete defenselessness.

At the same time, the government continues to attempt to dismantle migrant caravans and prevent their passage through the largest migratory corridor in the world via repression and by presenting arrests as a humanitarian rescue from human traffickers. In addition, dozens of migrants disappear on a daily basis in states along the northern and southern border of Mexico due to the action of organized crime which collaborates with the police, the National Guard and the army. In the context of this violent situation, women and trans folks are among the most vulnerable to disappearances and sexual violence at the hands of the police, military and criminal gangs.

The situation of migrants in the rest of the region is no different. Hundreds of thousands have been displaced by violence, the effects of the environmental catastrophe, unemployment and poverty all consequences of imperialist policies in the region. This comes as new adjustment plans are in the works in order to pay foreign debts to imperialist institutions like the IMF, as is the case in Costa Rica.

There are no figures on the number of Salvadorans expelled by the violence and repression of the Bukele government, only the records of U.S. deportations are known. But since the beginning of the Biden administration, the border police have deported 195,720 Salvadorans according to reports from the Border Patrol and Customs, in addition to 6,037 citizens of that country who requested asylum in Mexico during 2021. Along with the Salvadoran population, it is mainly Nicaraguans (20,917), Colombians (17,195), Venezuelans (20,044), Cubans (28,848), Guatemalans (14,806) and Hondurans (14,003), according to figures from the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection, who are forced to make this crossing, risking their lives. In the case of Nicaragua, the repressive and authoritarian government of Daniel Ortega has had an iron fist policy against migrants, as well as against social protest and opponents of his government, whom he has expelled from the country.

In Venezuela, the urgent situation has to do with a catastrophic crisis, a national collapse that produced what is already the biggest exodus of a country in the history of the region: the dismantling of the main public industries (including the oil industry) and the brutal capitalist adjustment policies of Maduro are combined with the criminal sanctions imposed by the U.S. and European imperialisms, in accordance to their own political objectives. The dismantling of the value of wages and the national currency, the drastic expansion of poverty and misery, have gone hand in hand with the profoundly authoritarian decomposition of the political regime, including the persecution of workers. That is what drives millions of Venezuelans into fleeing their country!

In Colombia and Honduras, the violence from organized crime and the militarization of these countries has expelled tens of thousands of people, while the supposedly progressive governments of Xiomara Castro and Gustavo Petro seek to minimize the migratory crisis through measures such as increasing humanitarian visas, while reducing institutional measures and support programs for the migrant population and maintaining the militarization of their borders and territories.

The situation in Haiti is also dire, especially since the imperialist occupation of the country after the 2010 earthquake. The humanitarian crisis and extreme poverty have increased with the proliferation of trafficking networks and criminal groups associated with the repressive forces, an untenable situation for Haitians who have opted to migrate to various Latin American countries. There is even a U.S. imperialist policy underway to militarily reoccupy the country, shielded by the request of the puppet president Henry.

In the Southern Cone, governments like Gabriel Borics in Chile, who also claims to be progressive, have supported the xenophobic and anti-immigrant policies pushed by U.S. imperialism by militarizing its borders and deporting thousands of migrants. In the same vein, the murderous coup government of Dina Boluarte in Peru has deployed the military to its borders to explicitly contain the flow of migrants.

The socialists of the Movement of Socialist Workers of Mexico, the League of Workers for Socialism of Venezuela, the Revolutionary Socialist Organization of Costa Rica and Left Voice of the United States, affiliates of the international network of newspapers that are part of the Trotskyist Fraction Fourth International in 14 countries and 8 languages around the world, denounce the criminal and anti-immigrant policy of U.S. imperialism, and its accomplices, the governments of Mexico, the various countries of Central America and the Caribbean.

The plundering of national resources by transnational capital and the respective local bourgeoisies is at the heart of the crises and hardships of our peoples. The resources that they deny us are those that the handful of exploiters keep for themselves, the dramatic needs of billions in our countries are their profits and opulence. There is no progressive solution to this situation without attacking their interests, without turning the tables: it is them or us, we must fight with an anti-imperialist and anti-capitalist perspective, united with an internationalist perspective. Otherwise, we will remain prisoners of the respective demagogic, xenophobic, and reactionary policies of all the bourgeois governments of the region and of Yankee imperialism. No to the barbarism suffered by the migrants!

As inflation hits the economy of the working class and popular sectors around the world at different levels the funding of the militarization of borders and the harassment of migrants throughout Mexico is scandalous. It is necessary to fight on both sides of the border for the abolition of Immigration and Customs Enforcement in the United States, as well as the withdrawal of funds from institutions that repress migrants in Mexico and Central America, and to allocate them to the establishment of shelters and health care for those seeking a better future in other countries, as well as the urgent increase in the budget for education, health, and housing in all countries of the region. Stop the mistreatment and murder of migrants in the United States!

Faced with the harassment and criminalization of migrants, and the xenophobic and racist policy deployed by imperialism and the native bourgeoisies subordinated to it, we promote an anti-imperialist and internationalist policy, to be taken in hand by the working class of the U.S., Mexico and Central America, so that it can lead the struggle for the rights of migrants.

A solution to this humanitarian crisis that is favorable to migrants can only come from the working class of the region, together with those who face racism and police violence in the United States, peasants, indigenous peoples, queer folks, women, and youth who have resisted the attacks of these regimes in our countries, which in some cases, as in Mexico, display humanitarian and progressive discourses while persecuting those who migrate.

The struggle for migrants rights is twinned, in the United States, with the struggle against racism such as the protests for justice for Jordan Neely, recently murdered by a former Marine police officer and the white supremacist groups that terrorize Black folks, Latinos, and families crossing the southern border and risking their lives. It is also twinned with the struggle of the screenwriters of studios and streaming platforms on strike against job insecurity and wage increases, among other demands, and with the recent struggles of other sectors of workers, such as railroad workers who struggled for a collective contract that includes medical leave or the Amazon workers struggling to unionize.

In the case of Cuba we pronounce ourselves in favor of the immediate end of the blockade imposed by the United States, which only hits the working class and the popular sectors who are facing an increasingly acute social crisis, and against the capitalist restoration measures and the repression of the Daz Canel government against the workers and popular protests, such as those on July 10-11, 2022 and the recent ones in Caimanera for food, or those of the railroad workers on strike for back pay.

In Venezuela we are for an immediate end to imperialist sanctions and the return of all companies, goods, and resources confiscated by the United States. At the same time we denounce the policy of savage capitalism applied by Maduro from his anti-worker economic measures to the repression of those who struggle.

In Central America we denounce all the governments complicit in the imperialist agenda, whether they are dressed up as progressive or transparently neoliberal; we denounce the curtailment of democratic freedoms in the region and the increase in social violence in general, the responsibility for which lies exclusively with the different governments of the Central American states.

It is essential that north of the Rio Grande the trade union organizations and those that claim to be socialist take up the struggle against the imperialist policies of their own government and in particular against the plundering of Latin America that is being carried out through foreign debt and the subordination of national economies, now organized in the interests of U.S. imperialism in the framework of the commercial and technological competition with China, as well as through direct military control over the seas and lands of the region.

Down with the scourge of foreign debts! At different levels, this mechanism of imperialist plunder is among the reasons for the crises, it is a mechanism of usury by which enormous resources are taken from the countries, for the benefit of a handful of vultures of big international finance capital. There is no future for our countries without a break with this: resources for education, health, housing and wages, not for foreign debt!

In unity across our borders, let us strive to build a broad movement to win free transit for migrants throughout the countries of the region, with the right to health care, to work with full labor rights and to safe, dignified, and free shelters.

We fight for full social and political rights for all migrants, granting them automatic legal residence and nationality for the United States or any other country they wish to live in, while confronting racism, repression, and all acts of xenophobia.

It is necessary that trade unions, human rights, youth, feminist and left organizations throughout the region take up these demands as part of a great international campaign for migrants rights led by the working class.

The working class is one and without borders!

Originally published in Spanish on May 12, 2023 in La Izquierda Diario.

Translated by Maryam Alaniz

Link:

Declaration on the Migrant Crisis: Socialists From the U.S., Mexico ... - Left Voice

Brittney Griner: 'Surreal' being back with Mercury

Mercury center Brittney Griner attends Mercury Day for pictures and interviews and talks about the surreal feeling of being back.

Patrick Breen, Arizona Republic

Brittney Griner made her long-awaited return to a basketball court last Friday in Phoenix. The song that was played before the game didnt sound quite the same.

Hearing the national anthem, it definitely hit different, Griner said. Its like when you go for the Olympics. Youre sitting there, about to get gold put on your neck. The flags are going up and the anthem is playing. It just hits different.

Yeah, nine months in a Russian prison will do that to a person.

It was Griners first game since authorities at a Moscow airport found vape cartridges containing cannabis oil in her luggage. The WNBA star may well have planned on using them to help cope with another winter of moonlighting for UMMC Yekaterinburg.

Or, Vladimir Putin may well have had the stash, wanting to turn Griner into a negotiating pawn. The Russian judicial system is not exactly set up to stop such a ploy.

Richardson stands out: Whitley's Believe It Or Not: Rest assured, Richardson will not leave a mess in Indianapolis

Sports and gambling: The sky isn't falling, but there are storm clouds with insiders betting on college sports

Embiid and Gainesville: Joel Embiid's the MVP of the NBA and The Rock had something to do with it

Griner was convicted of drug smuggling and sentenced to nine years in a penal colony. The U.S. eventually traded her for Viktor Bout, aka the Merchant of Death.

Swapping a basketball player for the worlds most notorious arms dealer made the Red Sox trading Babe Ruth seem pretty innocuous. But its good when any American is freed from such a fix.

Even one who hasnt been too keen on America.Griner was one of sports more outspoken social justice warriors in the long, hot summer of 2020. As protests raged, taking a knee during the national anthem was the standard calling card.

Griner took it a step further, saying she didnt want to be in the same room where The Star-Spangled Banner was played.

Im not going to be out there for the national anthem, she told the Arizona Republic. If the league continues to want to play it, thats fine. It will be all season long, Ill not be out there. I feel like more are going to probably do the same thing.

When Griner did just the opposite last week, it prompted a hearty I told you so from a lot of people. No, she didnt burn her old Black Lives Matter T-shirt and offer the full-throated mea culpa. But her words indicated shed learned not to hate America.

To which Griners defenders say, she hasnt actually changed.

She never hated America. As with the other kneelers, Griner wanted to protest Americas flaws and make it a better country.

That conflict was roiling sports long before anyone heard of George Floyd, of course. One side hears the anthem and thinks of freedom and fallen soldiers. The other hears oppression and police brutality.

Has Griner changed her tune?

In the moral panic of 2020, it was easy to condemn the United States for its past sins and present shortcomings. To conscientiously take a knee and look away as federal buildings were torched and thousands of small businesses many minority-owned were destroyed.

Silence is violence, at least according to BLM. And I cant recall Griner asking protesters to at least think twice before tearing down statues of abolitionists.

Then she was cast into another reality, one that billions of people live every day. One where there is no rule of law or presumption of innocence. One where protesting against the government is a ticket to a torture chamber.

Then, as LeBron James was wondering why Griner would want to go back to America as it failed to get her release, the US gave up a mass killer to bring Griner home.

She returned to a country that believes in life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Maybe she realized the dusty old men who came up with those ideas should not be reflexively torn down.

Maybe she realized there are a lot more reasons to stand than kneel for the national anthem.

In summation: It hits different.

I dont know what to read into Griners comments. I do know that actions speak louder than words.

Before, she did not even want to hear the national anthem.

Now it sounds like music to her ears.

David Whitley is The Gainesville Sun's sports columnist. Contact him at dwhitley@gannett.com. Follow him on Twitter @DavidEWhitley

See the original post here:

WNBA star Brittney Griner standing and listening to national anthem - Gainesville Sun

ANI | Updated: May 16, 2023 23:35 IST

Islamabad [Pakistan], May 16 (ANI): Pakistan's former Prime Minister Imran Khan, on Tuesday, said that he will address the next public meeting on Thursday and will announce the next plan of action. In a video message, shared by Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf's official Twitter handle, Khan said, "Earlier, I decided to start Jalsa on Wednesday but as I have to appear in court for various cases, I will start Jalsas on Thursday. My first Jalsa will be in Muridke, and I want everyone nearby to come and join it so that I can share my plan with you that how to get the country out of the quagmire and how we have to set ourselves truly free, how we have to snatch freedom."Earlier, on Tuesday, Khan released another video where he urged the public to hold a peaceful protest for the "freedom" of the people. In a video message, shared by PTI's official Twitter handle, Khan said, "This is the time for Haqeeqi Azadi and you can't let this moment go in vain."Khan has said that fear was being spread among the public to oppress them as he likened the situation in the country today to the atrocities during the rule of Genghis Khan. He further claimed that his supporters, including women, were being tormented in a manner never seen before. PTI Chief was arrested on May 9.

"All this fear is being spread only to tell the public that those who stand against them will be treated this way," Khan said in a video message. "When the nation decides that it won't tolerate this oppression ... when it decides that it won't allow the violation of the Constitution and that it wants elections ... then no one will be able to stop them.""When Genghis Khan used to kill and kill, he used to leave a few people alive and told them to tell the world how cruel I am, how much terror I have. The same is happening here, people's houses are being broken, women have never been oppressed like this, and stories of atrocities are being played on TV and social media, but my Pakistanis, this is the time for your freedom. to take," PTI tweeted while sharing the video of Imran Khan. Meanwhile, Lahore High Court (LHC) on Tuesday reserved its verdict on the petition filed by Khan -- the day after his arrest in the Al-Qadir Trust case -- seeking pre-arrest bail in every case filed against him since then, Geo News reported.In the backdrop of protests sparked following Khan's arrest in the infamous land corruption case, other cases were also filed against the former prime minister.Meanwhile, the court enquired about the PTI chief's absence at the beginning of the session to which Khan's attorney responded that his client would show up in court by 11 am.The interim government of Punjab's lawyer had opposed the bail request of Imran Khan, claiming it was inadmissible. The lawyer said, "Imran Khan hasn't even appeared in the court and seeking protective bail," as per Geo News. (ANI)

Read this article:

Imran Khan to unveil next plan of action at a rally on Thursday - ANI News

A coalition of Isoko youth groups, Urhobo ex-agitators and other youth stakeholders in Delta state has threatened a showdown with the Managing Director of the Nigerian Petroleum Development Company (NPDC), Ali Zahra; Tantita Security owned by ex-militant leader, Government Ekpemopolo (aka Tompolo); and Heritage Oil and Shoreline Petroleum.

The coalition accused them of fomenting an inter-ethnic crisis in the state and the Niger Delta region.

According to the coalition, this followed what they called a "blatant" refusal to pay the coalition what is due them from the federal government's multi-billion-naira oil pipeline surveillance contract awarded to Ekpemopolo's company.

Addressing a joint press conference in Abuja, Tuesday, conveners of the coalition, Iteveh Nur'Ekpokpobe, Karo Edor, Joseph Figbele and Abraham Ekokotu stated that NPDC MD and the International Oil Companies (IOCs) have taken decisions that are inimical to the peace drive in Delta state.

It said, "As you are aware, sometime in August 2022 a contract for the surveillance of oil pipeline in the entire region was awarded to Tantita Security owned by the family of Mr. Government Ekpemupolo (Tompolo), an Ijaw from Oporoza in Niger Delta, without recourse to any Isoko representation, body or council. Following our petitions, the Nigerian Senate Committee on Ethics, Privileges and Public Petitions headed by Sen. Ayo Akinyulere, on instructions of the Senate President, Ahmed Lawan, held (a hearing) on January 28, 2023, on the issues raised.

"The hearing was attended by the conveners of coalition of Isoko youths, president generals of Isoko communities in Bayelsa state, representative of the Minister of State for Petroleum, Chief Timipre Sylva and others. The Senate committee recommended at the end of the hearing, the need for the NNPC and the Federal Government to engage Isoko youths and stakeholders for keeping the peace and protecting crude oil installations in their areas ever since the beginning of exploration till date.

The Group Chief Executive Officer of the NNPC, Mr. Mele Kolo Kyari reached out to the leadership of the coalition after which the Managing Director of the Nigeria Petroleum Development Company (NPDC), Mr. Ali Muhammed Zahra, delegated to interface with the leadership of the coalition and the companies, to wit, Tantita Security and Zane Energy Limited in order to officially accommodate our youths. These deliberations which kicked off since February gave birth to several meetings and decisions. For over three months, we were shifted on a course. This course was supposed to resolve the issues that instigated our agitations.

This meeting gave birth to other meetings with the management of Tantita Security. First, with Keston Pondi in Warri sometime in February where, against all odds, we accepted a 100 slot quota of N50,000 naira monthly for our youths which was a far cry from the 150 slots of N100,000 promised by the NPDC MD.

We were asked to submit a list of the youths which we did, but till today, they have not been paid even with a later agreement that 230 slots would be available at the same N50,000 to include some parts of Urhobo where dissatisfaction is rife. Lastly, that fund would be made available for Hilux truck rentals and logistics.

"After another meeting, the trio of Zahra, Matthew Tonlagh and Dennis Otuaro both of Tantita security promised to pay two months backlog for February and March to enable us kick off properly. These promises have not been fulfilled till this very moment. Since these series of meetings and interface with the NPDC and Tantita, no promises made have been fulfilled. We have been tricked, our honesty and compromises have been insulted, our peaceful demeanors have been mocked, and there is only so much a people can take.

We dare say today, that Isoko and Urhobo nations have been insulted and swindled. We have been mocked and relegated by the Zahra, management of Tantita and all those who Kyari delegated to resolve this matter.

The coalition called on Kyari to step in and address the matter before it degenerates into heightened tension in the region.

It alleged that the mandate given to the NPDC MD, by Kyari has been sabotaged by selfish interests.

On the back of this fact, we are stating that the Isoko people cannot fold their arms this time around, because one can only accommodate oppression for so long. Tempers are already high and the need for NNPC GCEO, Mr Mele Kyari to step in and personally address this matter once and for all is now more pressing than ever. It is sad that over this period of time, all the promises made to us have not been kept. This back and forth movement has confirmed our fears and obvious truth, that there is a deliberate attempt to deprive Isokos and by proxy, Urhobos of their quota in this negotiation, it said.

At the time of filing this report, efforts to reach Matthew Tonlagh, representative of Tantita security, were not successful as he did not answer calls nor reply to the text messages sent to him.

But the Managing Director of NPDC, Ali Muhammed Zahra, told SaharaReporters that the contractor of the surveillance contract by the federal government is Tantita and not coalition of Isoko or Urhobo group.

The directive by my Group Chief Executive Officer (GCEO) is to mediate between Tantita and the coalition for sub-contract to their community group, which I did. Their payment rest with Tantita and not the NNPC Exploration and Production Limited, (NEPL). Thank you for reaching out. Kindly request them to forward their contract with NEPL to you if any."

Here is the original post:

Delta Youths Threaten Showdown Over Exclusion In Multi-Billion ... - SaharaReporters.com

As Prepared For Delivery:

Good morning. Its my honor to be here with each of you today. When Jonathan asked if I would give keynote remarks at this gathering, I eagerly agreed because of the vital mission of this organization, the partnership that we have built in the Biden Administration, and the urgent issues facing our community.

Jonathans vision and innovation are defining what it means to lead an international civil rights organization in these very challenging times.

As President Bidens Homeland Security Advisor a West Wing role created just after 9/11 its my job to deal with the threat to our homeland that antisemitism represents. But for me, its also personal.

My great-grandparents fled oppression in Eastern Europe to build a new life in America where they could practice their faith without fear and seek opportunities denied to them in their homelands because they were Jewish.

Still, my mother was chased home from elementary school in Omaha as a little Jewish girl. Her family moved West to seek a more open-minded and tolerant place. She met my father in high school in Los Angeles, where they subsequently married at Wilshire Boulevard Temple.

At that time, my father was considering entry level job offers from several law firms after finishing Harvard Law School and a Supreme Court clerkship. One offer was from the most esteemed, blue-chip firm in the community, which had no track record of making Jews partners.

Another was from a firm established by Jewish leaders that welcomed young lawyers of Jewish faith into very successful practices. When my father was trying to choose between the two, his peers at the Jewish firm reached out and implored him not to accept their offer and instead go to the place where he would blaze a new trail for others to follow.

That story was told to me to emphasize the need to build bridges rather than walls to the greatest degree possible to be integrated rather than segregated, to know the other and to have the other know us across faiths and races.

My father experienced anti-Semitic discrimination long into adulthood. But he chose repeatedly, just like with his choice of a law firm, to build bridges from the Jewish community to other groups confronting discrimination and hate, including the Black and Asian communities in Southern California and beyond.

As Martin Luther King said, The ultimate tragedy is not the oppression and cruelty by the bad people but the silence over that by the good people.

Or, as we say in our faith, it is our obligation to do tikkun olam. We must use our lives to heal a broken world.

I take that imperative seriously. I know you do, too. And every day, I see how what is broken seems even more jagged than it used to be.

Ethnic and religious hatred is being normalized in our melting pot. Antisemitism is being normalized its more mainstream, its out in the open. And, most disturbingly, violence against Jews is being normalized.

Jews are being targeted in their neighborhoods, synagogues, schools, homes, and online. By whatever measure you choose to employ, we have not seen this level of hatred towards Jews since Europe before the second world war.

For example, last month the ADLs annual audit reported that 2022 represented a 34% increase in antisemitic incidents in the U.S. over the previous yearthe highest number recorded since ADL began tracking these incidents in 1979.

To say this is concerning is a profound understatement.

So it was with urgency that President Biden charged us with crafting this countrys first-ever National Strategy for Countering Domestic Terrorism. We started this work on literally the first day of the Administration. Then, as part of that larger effort, we embarked on the first National Strategy to Counter Antisemitism specifically.

We expect to complete this work by the end of May. The White House Domestic Policy Council Director Susan Rice, my co-chair in in this vital work, will speak more about the strategy later today.

Among its many initiatives is the one that to me is most urgently neededthe restoration of safety for Jews in our country.

And that goal means working in partnership with you, to address three pressing issues simultaneously.

First, we will continue to improve the security of synagogues and Jewish institutions.

The Biden Administration has expanded security assistance for houses of worship and religious institutions for example, increasing the funds to improve physical security of buildings from 180 million dollars two years ago to 305 million dollars today. And we have asked Congress to continue to increase these funds.

Were also sharing more information with law enforcement and community allies, creating partnerships between them, and training congregations to confront threats.

We saw how this work can make a difference in January of 2022 in Colleyville, Texas, when a rabbi and four members of his congregation were taken hostage. Ahead of time, the synagogue had already mapped out its floor plan and submitted it to local officials and the FBI. They had installed security cameras so law enforcement could see what was happening in real-time. As a result, they could move quickly to mount a rescue operation. And when there was an opportunity to escape, the hostages relied on their active shooter training to take decisive action and flee safely.

Colleyvilles then-Rabbi, Charlie Cytron-Walker, said after the hostage crisis that quote over the years, my congregation and I have participated in multiple security courses from the Colleyville Police Department, the FBI, the Anti-Defamation League, and Secure Community Network. We are alive today because of that education.

Second, we need to reduce the threat itself and decrease hate-driven violence and harassment.

This brings me back to my fathers lesson to build the bridges within our communities that make it hard for hate to flourish. That was the Administrations aim last year when the President convened the United We Stand summit.

The summit mobilized Federal agencies in new and renewed ways. For example, the Justice Department has improved the reporting of hate crime incidents, to address the problem of underreporting by victims, witnesses, and law enforcement agencies.

Another takeaway from the summit was the benefit of community-based prevention efforts that see teachers, coaches, pastors and many others working together to steer individuals away from hate and violence works that takes time and trust and seeing each other as human beings living in the same community wherever possible.

And when these efforts are insufficient, we will rely on our law enforcement partners to prioritize the investigation and prosecution of those who harass, abuse, and harm Jews and Jewish communities.

On this point, strong partnerships between the government and diverse community groups can have a real impact. Let me give you an example.

Last November, the Community Security Initiative, a community-based security organization, detected a social media threat to quote shoot up a synagogue in New York City. They relied on their strong ties to law enforcement and reported the threat to the FBI and NYPD, who quickly determined the threat was credible and identified two men as suspects. That information was shared widely with local authorities and houses of worship, which resulted in the swift apprehension of the men after a local transit worker recognized them in Penn Station and alerted the police.

The police arrested the suspects and found a handgun and a large capacity magazine in their possession. All this was possible because a community group had strong relationships in place with law enforcement.

So whether you are working to strengthen ties within your community, or helping us address harassment, abuse, and threats, it matters. You are making a difference in the fight to end antisemitism.

Third, while we enhance protections in the short term and expand prevention efforts to reduce the threat over time we also need to address the creeping normalization of antisemitism in our everyday lives, especially through online media.

That includes tackling the ways in which antisemitic and other hateful views circulate online and mix with conspiracy theories and disinformation that can lead some people to undertake violence.

We need to ensure that those who spread lies and conspiracy theories remain outside the mainstream. And we have to do this in a way that protects not just members of the Jewish faith but members of all religious denominations. That is how we will build common cause against those who seek to divide us.

That means speaking out forcefully and clearly when we encounter expressions of hatred for Jews and other community groups, which is something President Biden has done throughout his presidency and his career in public service. Hate speech should never go unchallenged.

We as a Federal government are taking actions to address this. For example, the Departments of Commerce and Education are using model curricula and grant programs to help Americans recognize online hate speech and reduce its spread.

Through entities like the Global Internet Forum to Counter Terrorism, we are sharing information with technology companies, to ensure they understand the threat of antisemitism and more effectively enforce their terms of service. This is critical given the algorithms that suck people into more sinister conversations that we know may lead to incitement of violence.

And two years ago, after the prior Administration refused to join, we announced our decision to join the Christchurch Call, an international partnership among 56 governments and 10 technology companies, including Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube, to develop new solutions to eliminating terrorist content online while safeguarding free expression.

For example, when the perpetrator of the Buffalo supermarket murders last May tried to livestream his attack, the Christchurch Call and GIFCT worked swiftly to terminate the livestream. Then, they ensured it was neither posted online nor shared widely, which meant the content was far less widely circulated than we have seen in prior attacks, diminishing the prospects of incitement, motivation by example, or copy-catting.

We know we need to go much further than this, and we are working with Congress to do that. As the President called for earlier this year, we are looking to Congress to reform the laws to ensure technology companies are responsible for the malign content they spread and the algorithms they use.

As I hope all these examples illustrate we cannot do this alone. We in government will do everything we can to improve the safety of Jews and other religions, races, and ethnic groups who face threats and discrimination. But we need to do this work with you all.

We need the public to understand antisemitism and rally against it in all its forms, while standing shoulder to shoulder with other communities targeted by hate.

We need community groups, law enforcement, schools, houses of worship, businesses and others to work together both to rally against hate and to use all of their tools to prevent hate-driven violence.

We need leaders at the local and state levels to join us in speaking out and condemning antisemitism and hate whenever it arises.

And we need the Anti-Defamation League. And we will continue to work alongside you. Because whether its the ADLs COMBAT plan to fight antisemitism in our communities your REPAIR plan to address online hate or many of the other remarkable initiatives you have underway. we share the ADLs comprehensive approach to end the defamation of the Jewish people and to secure justice and fair treatment to all.

Coming back to the lessons I learned from my familys experience fleeing hate and violence, starting new lives in a new land, making their way despite skepticism and sometimes outright hostility, and always looking for ways to lift up others and heal the world I would leave you with this final thought: Turn understandable fear into empowering action.

Rabbi Marc Katz of Temple Ner Tamid in Bloomfield, New Jersey recently put this best when he wrote that quote There will always be bad actors, hateful people, bad agents. But they need not derail our lives. Every triumph, no matter how small, takes up the room in our psyche that was once full of our anxieties. We need to ask not what will happen tomorrow but what we can do today. Then, when tomorrow comes, we arrive, realizing we have been so busy fixing our broken world that we had no time to be afraid.

Thank you for allowing me to join you this morning, and I look forward to doing tikkun olam together with you in the days, months and years ahead.

View post:

Remarks by Homeland Security Advisor Dr. Liz Sherwood-Randall ... - The White House

Eds: This story was supplied by The Conversation for AP customers. The Associated Press does not guarantee the content.

(THE CONVERSATION) Every year, the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) releases a report on religious oppression around the world, recommending that the State Department designate specific countries as especially severe violators. In this years report, released May 1, 2023, Iran came in for particular criticism after months of protests and arrests sparked by headscarf laws. Sri Lanka, Cuba and Nicaragua were also singled out as areas of concern; Nicaragua is specifically accused of persecution against Catholics.

Created through the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998, the commission exemplifies how the right to freedom of religious expression has come to play a significant role in U.S. discussions about human rights and not just abroad. Legislation and recent Supreme Court rulings have created a new legal landscape in which religious freedom claims have become more likely to prevail at home, including well-known court cases like the Hobby Lobby ruling on contraception.

Underlying many debates about how courts and policies treat religion is an often-unspoken question: Is any human right religious freedom in particular more important than another? And what happens when human rights claims come into conflict?

As a scholar of human rights and religion, I believe its important to unpack those questions and to unpack the difference they make in the lives of people affected by U.S. policies around the world.

For one, for all

For the last several decades, the United Nations has been careful to describe all human rightsas interdependent. In this view, protecting any human right requires protecting all human rights.

As an example, think of two distinct rights recognized in the Declaration of Human Rights: the right to adequate food and the right to protest. A person who doesnt have enough food to live on is unlikely to have the health and energy to protest, and someone deprived of food because of government policies may find it necessary to protest in order to claim their right to food.

The U.N. and many human rights advocates have also argued that all rights are equal: No human right outweighs another.

According to this view, the only permissible reason one right could ever be temporarily suspended is to protect some other right. Even then, restricting the first right should be a last resort, and it should be restored as soon as possible.

For instance, a person with active tuberculosis or some other contagious disease might be ordered to quarantine for a period. Forced quarantine restricts the individuals right to freedom of movement, but it is considered more urgent to protect other peoples rights to life and health.

In other words, rights might sometimes conflict, but they all depend on each other and are of equal importance in principle. No human right can be ignored or downplayed.

Picking and choosing?

International discussion of human rights has not always reflected this view.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights was adopted in 1948, after the horrors of the Holocaust and World War II. It captured a general international consensus that rights protection should shape international humanitarian policy. However, when the U.N. General Assembly attempted to make the rights in the declaration enforceable in international law, disagreements about the importance of different types of rights led to not one but two treaties: the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. Some countries have not ratified the first, including China and Saudi Arabia; others have not ratified the second, including the United States.

Today, too, many political leaders do not view all rights as equally weighty. For example, the Chinese government is known to regularly invade citizens privacy and has brutally repressed minority groups. Chinese leaders and state-owned media have insisted that advancing peoples social and economic rights, such as peace and the right to basic subsistence, takes priority over pursuing civil and political rights.

In the United States, the opposite is true. U.S. leaders and influential thinkers have often argued that civil and political rights, like the right to vote or to a fair trial, are more fundamental than economic and social rights, that they are more practical to uphold, or that they fit more neatly into the countrys history of political thought. For example, some Republican politicians, such as Wisconsin Sen. Ron Johnson and Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul, have argued that health care is a privilege, not a right.

Two-tier rights?

Questions about how U.S. foreign policy should balance protections for different kinds of rights came under a spotlight in 2019, when then-Secretary of State Mike Pompeo created the Commission on Unalienable Rights. This commissions stated goal was to advise the U.S. government on human rights, drawing on both the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the founding documents of the United States.

USCIRF was not involved in the Commission on Unalienable Rights, but put out a statement in support of its work. At the time, USCIRFs president was Tony Perkins, best known for his leadership of the evangelical nonprofit Family Research Council. In the statement, Perkins referred to religious freedom as the most foundational fundamental right.

The commissions report received both praise and criticism from advocates and scholars for its attempt to distinguish unalienable rights, which all individuals have by nature, from positive rights, which are based in custom and written law. The report contends that, from the founders point of view, property rights and religious liberty are most essential, and governments should promote economic rights only insofar as those rights do not infringe on property and religious liberty rights.

The report also describes a few types of rights claims as matters of debate rather than settled law, such as the right to same-sex marriage, which it calls one of several divisive social and political controversies where it is common for both sides to couch their claims in terms of basic rights. Two sentences later, the writers argue that an increase in rights claims, in some ways overdue and just, has given rise to excesses of its own.

In short, the commission prioritized property rights and religious freedom claims. Pompeos State Department acted in line with these priorities, holding two summits on religious freedom with civic and religious leaders from around the world. The State Department also created an International Religious Freedom Alliance with more than two dozen nations, without similar initiatives around other human rights.

The course ahead

Under the administration of President Joe Biden, the Commission on Unalienable Rights was shelved. Secretary of State Antony Blinken has argued that all human rights are co-equal and has criticized the commissions report for seeming to create a hierarchy of rights.

The State Department under Biden has expressed its intent to advance rights claims of LGBTQ+ individuals. Recently, it threatened sanctions on Uganda over a new bill that would impose punishments as severe as death for same-sex relationships.

The latest International Religious Freedom report demonstrates that the right to religious freedom is threatened in many places. The entire world has a long way to go in ensuring it is meaningfully protected. At the same time, debates remain heated over whether protecting this right should ever mean violating others.

The Conversation is an independent and nonprofit source of news, analysis and commentary from academic experts. The Conversation is wholly responsible for the content.

See the rest here:

Are some human rights more important than others? Religious ... - Jacksonville Journal-Courier

The South African government has a longstanding history of HIV denialism. Throughout his presidency from 1999 to 2008, Thabo Mbeki continually questioned the validity of HIV research. Infamously, he presented his dissenting positions in a letter to world leaders in 2000. In speeches that same year, he stated, A virus cannot cause a syndrome. A virus can cause a disease, and AIDS is not a disease, it is a syndrome. In addition to this rhetoric, Mbeki sponsored panels that highlighted dissenters from current HIV research, furthering his pseudoscientific views. As a result, HIV conspiracy theories became rampant in South African political life. Mbekis claims were met with immediate backlash from media outlets, AIDS activists, and healthcare organizations. However, these responses disregard the South African historical context. The legacies of apartheid, corruption, and colonialism that linger in the South African collective consciousness provided the perfect climate for conspiracy theories around HIV/AIDS to proliferate.

In South Africa, public health and systemic oppression have been intertwined for centuries, with the racial segregation of healthcare codified by the 1883 Public Health Act. Under this acts emergency provisions, Black South Africans were removed from urban centers during flare-ups of the Bubonic Plague. Between 1900 and 1910, this policy surrounding Plague epidemics resulted in the sweeping loss of property for Black South Africans. This period of racial segregation became impressed upon the national consciousness of South Africans. It was a time when racism was thinly veiled as public health policy.

In later years, fearful of anti-apartheid movements, the South African government began investing in Project Coast, an operation within its chemical and biological warfare (CBW) department. Former military-doctor Wouter Basson headed this project, modeling it on programs in other countries. Allegedly, this bolstering of the CBW department was originally intended to combat chemical weapons threats during the South African conflict in Angola. Testimonies from the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) hearings, however, uncovered it to be an effort to possibly commit genocide against the Black population.

Researchers attempted to create a bacterium to target Black individuals. Additionally, Bassons team investigated how CBW such as cholera and micro-organisms could be deployed for population control. One of the most terrifying projects included a vaccine to covertly sterilize the Black population. This effort became extremely explicit during the TRC hearings, in which one doctor stated that their final brief, [] was to develop a product to curtail the birth rate of the [B]lack population in the country.

These genocidal plans coincided with the faulty AIDS response by the partheid government throughout the 1980s and 1990s. As soon as AIDS began afflicting the Black population, the government response reflected the enduring racism in South Africa. The voices of right-wing parliament members offered an alarming prophecy of the destruction to come. Dr. F. H. Pauw claimed that the Black majority would no longer be a threat due to many dying of AIDS. Conservative Party MP Clive Derby-Lewis stated, If AIDS stops black population growth, it would be like Father Christmas. While the government eventually attempted to advocate for contraceptives, this only aggravated anti-apartheid groups and was seen as another method of reducing the Black population.

"The legacies of a racist, morally bankrupt colonial government lent themselves to a poor response to the growing HIV crisis."

When Nelson Mandela was elected in 1994, his post-apartheid government inherited a public health system riddled with mistrust and an increasing number of people living with HIV. In fact, in 1994, 7.6 percent of South Africans were HIV positive (compared to 0.7 percent in 1990). This figure would only keep growing, hitting 22.4 percent in 1999. South Africas crippled healthcare system needed to address this growing crisis, yet officials refused to credit the results of HIV studies, slowing government interventions.

One of the biggest failures of Mandelas new government was its refusal to properly use the antiretroviral drug azidothymidine (AZT), the primary treatment given to people living with HIV at the time. In other countries, AZT helped address mother-to-child transmission, wherein children were infected by their mothers during pregnancy. Scientific evidence highlighted that proper use of AZTwhen used in tandem with cesarean sections and formula feedingsresults in a near-zero mother-to-child transmission rate. Still, Health Minister Nkosazana Clarice Dlamini-Zuma claimed otherwise, espousing the view that AZT was too expensive and ineffectively addressed the pandemic. Her successor echoed similar sentiments, arguing the drugs benefits did not outweigh its toxicity. Dissenting from scientific evidence on antiretroviral drugs, the South African government failed to respond to the HIV crisis: A study from the Harvard School of Public Health estimated that more than 330,000 people died prematurely and 35,000 babies were born with preventable HIV infections. An antiretroviral treatment program was not implemented until 2003, three years after Mbekis troubling letter was presented.

Despite these obvious failures, they must be considered in the context of apartheids oppression. The legacies of a racist, morally bankrupt colonial government lent themselves to a poor response to the growing HIV crisis. This legacy helps explain why the government withheld the authorization of AZT. With the discovery of genocidal planning and anti-fertility research, the post-apartheid government was sensibly wary of drugs specifically marketed toward mothers. Coupled with the fact that Western pharmaceutical corporations were heavily pushing and profiting off of the drug, the government was extremely cautious of AZT in the post-apartheid era.

Mbeki was extremely hesitant to blindly accept wisdom from countries that participated in the oppression of his people. In his letter, he emphasized that prohibiting HIV dissent is precisely the same thing that the racist apartheid tyranny we opposed did. He also highlighted the unique nature of the African HIV crisis, a claim which some have misconstrued as stating that there existed a new African source of AIDS. Yet, the HIV crisis itself in South Africaand other countries affected by colonialismis unique. Many challenges come from grappling with the legacy of apartheid, which undoubtedly fractured the response from the onset. This begs the question: Can we really judge a leader for not trusting their oppressors?

Today, the legacy of apartheid continues to influence public health in South Africa. In 2020, South Africa had approximately 7.8 million people living with HIV, and around 19.1 percent of people ages 15 to 49 had tested positive for HIV. South Africa has the fourth highest HIV prevalence rate and has the greatest number of people living with HIV in the world, making it a pressing matter of consideration for global health.

This consideration became especially apparent once the Covid-19 pandemic struck. HIV has left many South Africans immunocompromised. Coupled with low vaccination rates, South Africa and other Sub-Saharan African countries were at high risk for Covid-19. This had a global impact: Some scholars believe that the Omicron variant originated in South Africa in part due to its sizable immunocompromised population, which put it at greater risk of mutations appearing.

While one cannot trace back every public health failure to apartheid governments, it is important to note the role of lasting legacies of oppression left by them. It forever changed the consciousness of South Africa, as the memories and trauma of apartheid have not been erased with transitions of power. This sentiment is not confined to South Africa, but rather, it is the case in every country with a deep oppressive history. Medical mistrust is especially pervasive among Black Americans due to systemically racist medical malpractice and a centuries-long legacy of chattel slavery. The Tuskegee Syphilis Study, while perhaps the most infamous, is only one example of a racist weaponization of science against the Black community. Similarly, many Indigenous populations also continue to distrust post-colonial medical establishments.

Every colonizing power must reflect on its weaponization of health, as they have colored the modern-day responses to public health crises. How can we expect people to trust the science if the source has an untrustworthy track record? While it is easier said than done, governments must invest time and resources into mending the wounds that they inflicted. Without addressing past atrocities, conspiracies will continue to run rampant, frustrating the global response to future health emergencies. As the world is hopefully on the tail end of the Covid-19 pandemic, the present moment stresses the urgency of reconciling prior wrongdoings for the sake of the health of all eight million people on the planet.

[Editors Note: This article was published in the Fall 2022 issue of the BPR magazine.]

The rest is here:

Postcolonial Plague: The Legacy of Apartheid South Africa in ... - Brown Political Review