Tag Archives: Europe

Neo-Con Think Tanks that Drive Policy and Send us to WAR


The military-industrial-propaganda complex: The neo-con think tanks that drive policy and send us to war

Well-funded think tanks push corporate agendas through media “experts” and sustain the neo-conservative apparatus


America’s first think tanks developed in the early 1900s and grew out of a desire to improve government and to help government think, according to McGann. The first kind of think tank was the academic model, such as the Brookings Institution, founded in 1916 by reformers devoted to fact-based studies of national public-policy issues. Experts at Brookings played a role in shaping plans for the United Nations and the Marshall Plan to rebuild Europe after World War II. The next model, McGann says, was the RAND Corporation, established in 1920 as a consulting agency for the government.

The advocacy think tanks emerged in the 1960s. These new-style organizations, which campaigned actively for their policy preferences, tended to reflect that decade’s swing to the political left. But the next two decades saw what McGann calls “a sort of conservative counter-revolution,” leading to a “war of ideas,” with openly ideological or partisan think tanks proliferating on both sides.

In 1963, during the period of the Vietnam War and the Great Society, the first advocacy institution was the left-leaning Institute for Policy Studies. The neoconservative Heritage Foundation was founded in 1973.

Conservative think tanks have more power and influence today in U.S. politics, McGann says, adding that there is “increasing criticism and worry over the domination of the right on policy.” David Callahan wrote in the Washington Monthly in November 1999, “The big development of the 1990s is that conservative institutes have had spectacular new success in tapping business money to fund ideologically charged policy research.” According to Callahan, “Corporate giving to right-wing groups has steadily increased as private sector leaders have seen the effectiveness with which conservative think tanks, and their armies of credentialed ‘experts,’ advance business interests in the political arena. Money, it turns out, can buy scholars as well as politicians.”

Callahan wrote that the “current gusher of corporate funding for right-wing policy work has its roots in the 1970s, when leading conservative thinkers appealed to corporations to fund intellectuals who supported their economic interests.” He pointed out that corporate leaders make up the overwhelming majority of board members at most conservative think tanks. “Even the American Enterprise Institute, among the most scholarly of conservative think tanks, has some two dozen corporate leaders on its board and only one academic, James Q. Wilson.” Wilson, who taught at Harvard, died in 2012.

One of the most powerful underwriters of far-right-wing conservative causes is Koch Industries, the oil and chemicals conglomerate based in Wichita, Kansas, with annual revenues estimated to be $100 billion. The conglomerate operates oil refineries in Alaska, Texas, and Minnesota and controls some four thousand miles of pipeline.

Writer Jane Mayer described the political activities of Koch’s owners, David and Charles Koch, in an August 30, 2010, issue of The New Yorker magazine. Since the 1980s, the Koch brothers have provided more than $30 million to George Mason University, in Arlington, Virginia, much of it for a think tank called the Mercatus Center, which describes itself as “the world’s premier university source for market-oriented ideas and real world problems.”

Mayer quotes an environmental lawyer who has clashed with the Mercatus Center and who explained to her how corporate interests use think tanks to promote their private agendas. “You take corporate money and give it to a neutral-sounding think tank” that “hires people with pedigrees and academic degrees who put out credible-seeming studies. But they all coincide perfectly with the economic interests of their funders.” Among the largest and most influential of the conservative think tanks, in addition to the American Enterprise Institute, are the Heritage Foundation, based in Washington, D.C., and the Hoover Institution at Stanford University in California.

More than twenty AEI people wound up with top jobs in the George W. Bush administration. Paul Wolfowitz, the former deputy defense secretary and backer of the Iraq War, is now a visiting scholar at the AEI, which has an annual budget of about $20 million. It has about fifty so-called scholars and about 150 on the payroll. Its objective is to influence public policy. Christopher DeMuth, president of the AEI from 1986 through 2008, who worked in both the Nixon and Reagan administrations, put it this way: “We try to get in the newspaper op-ed pages and hawk our books and magazines much more aggressively than a university would feel comfortable with.”

If you watch the op-ed pages in the newspapers carefully, you will find the AEI and other think tanks well represented, week after week, month after month. You will also see them on television presenting their point of view. When network-television talk shows and the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) want “experts” on foreign policy, they often turn to the AEI or other prominent think tanks. But they don’t always tell the public who is paying the salaries of the “experts.” You can bet it is corporate America.

DeMuth, for example, has said that his board of trustees is composed of twenty-four business and financial executives. “They read our work. They tell me what they like, and they tell me what they don’t like.” In his 2005 interview, DeMuth said the AEI raised $20 million to $25 million a year with a third of the money coming from corporations, a third from individuals, and a third from foundations. “We have over three hundred corporate donors,” he said.

Rob Stein, by profession a venture capitalist, but a former strategic adviser to the Democratic National Committee, has spent years studying conservative groups. From 2003 to 2005, by his estimate, conservative organizations spent about $295 million seeking to influence policy while those of the left spent about $75 million.

More recently, bestselling author Thomas Frank wrote in a New York Times column, “During the last three decades a cottage industry of conservative institutions and foundations has grown into a powerful quasi-academy with seven-figure budgets and phalanxes of ‘senior fellows’ and ‘distinguished chairs.’ While real academics dither and fret over bugbears like certainty and balance, the scholars of the American Enterprise Institute, the Heritage Foundation and the Cato Institute act boldly in the knowledge, to quote a seminal conservative text, that ideas have consequences.” The AEI “has long been the reliable source of corporate money. Its principals effectively ran the Goldwater campaign in 1964 and it was deep thinkers from the institute who, after moving into the Bush administration, dreamed up the war in Iraq.”

A prominent opponent of the war was the libertarian Cato Institute, which is conservative on domestic issues but traditionally opposed to foreign intervention. In California’s Orange County Register, Cato vice president Ted Galen Carpenter wrote—just days before the war began—that the pro-war camp’s justifications for invading Iraq were faulty: “The United States is supposed to be a constitutional republic. As such, the job of the U.S. military is to defend the vital security interests of the American people. U.S. troops are not armed crusaders with a mission to right all wrongs and liberate oppressed populations. American dollars are too scarce and American lives too precious for such feckless ventures.”

As for the idea that Saddam’s overthrow would trigger a democratic transformation in the Middle East, Carpenter said, “This is a fantasy. The harsh reality is that the Middle East has no history of democratic rule, democratic institutions or serious democratic movements. To expect stable democracies to emerge from such an environment is naïve.” He went on, “If free elections were held today in such countries as Egypt, Jordan and Saudi Arabia, they would produce virulently anti-American governments.”

The libertarians were right. The hawks were wrong.

HAWKS IN AFGHANISTAN

Two of Washington’s most successful think-tank hawks are Frederick and Kimberly Kagan, the husband-and-wife team who spent a year in Afghanistan working as unpaid volunteers for the U.S. general in charge of the war. Frederick Kagan is a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, which has a history of supporting American military intervention around the world.

Having written papers that advocate an aggressive U.S. military policy, the Kagans moved to Afghanistan in 2010 and embedded themselves as “de facto senior advisors” to General David Petraeus. The Kagans were given top-level security clearance in Kabul, where they reviewed classified intelligence reports and participated in strategy sessions. The Kagans used their positions to advocate substantive changes in the U.S. war plan, “including a harder-edged approach,” according to a Washington Post report about them, published December 18, 2012.

Think-tank hawks have always sought to impact defense policy. The Kagans found a way to go beyond traditional influence peddling and gain the ear of the military man in charge of a real war. The Kagans were not paid by the U.S. government for their work, but their proximity to Petraeus provided valuable benefits. The Post article reported that the arrangement with Petraeus “provided an incentive for defense contractors to contribute to Kim Kagan’s think tank,” the Institute for the Study of War, which advocates an aggressive U.S. foreign policy. At an August 2011 dinner, Kim Kagan thanked two contractors, DynCorp International and CACI International, for funding her institute and making it possible for her to spend a year in Afghanistan with Petraeus.


Excerpted from America’s War Machine: Vested Interests, Endless Conflicts by James McCartney with Molly Sinclair McCartney. Copyright © 2015 by Molly Sinclair McCartney and reprinted by permission of Thomas Dunne Books, an imprint of St. Martin’s Press, LLC. All rights reserved.

 

 

Advertisements

Pope Francis Washes Feet of Refugees for Easter Week


Pope Francis washes feet of refugees for Easter Week

25 MARCH 2016

The traditional Easter Week foot-washing ceremony by the pontiff is meant as a Catholic gesture of service.


The Holy Thursday rite re-enacts the foot-washing ritual Jesus performed on his apostles [L''Osservatore Romano/Pool Photo via AP]
The Holy Thursday rite re-enacts the foot-washing ritual Jesus performed on his apostles [L”Osservatore Romano/Pool Photo via AP]

Pope Francis has visited a refugee centre to wash and kiss the feet of Muslim, Orthodox, Hindu and Catholic refugees — a gesture of welcome at a time when anti-Muslim and anti-immigrant sentiment has risen after the Brussels and Paris attacks.

Francis celebrated the traditional Easter Week foot-washing ceremony at a refugee shelter in Castelnuovo di Porto, outside Rome, inaugurating the most solemn period of the Catholic Church’s Easter season.

The Holy Thursday rite re-enacts the foot-washing ritual Jesus performed on his apostles before being crucified, and is meant as a gesture of service.

Francis was greeted with a banner reading “Welcome” in a variety of languages as he processed down a makeshift aisle to celebrate the outdoor Mass.

A fraction of the 892 asylum seekers living at the shelter attended, though others milled around nearby and filmed the event on their smartphones.

Vatican rules had long called for only men to participate in the ritual, and past popes and many priests traditionally performed it on 12 Catholic men, recalling Jesus’ 12 apostles and further cementing the doctrine of an all-male priesthood.

But after years of violating the rules outright, Francis in January changed the regulations to explicitly allow women and girls to participate.


READ MORE: Pope visits mosque in besieged CAR enclave


The Vatican said on Thursday that four women and eight men had been selected. The women include an Italian who works at the centre and three Eritrean Coptic Christian migrants. The men include four Catholics from Nigeria, three Muslims from Mali, Syria and Pakistan, and a Hindu from India.

The new norms said anyone from the “people of God” could be chosen to participate in the ceremony.

While the phrase “people of God” usually refers to baptised Christians, the decree also said that pastors should instruct “both the chosen faithful and others so that they may participate in the rite consciously, actively and fruitfully”, suggesting that the rite could be open to non-Catholics as well.


Source: AP


 

Merkel Heads to Africa on Stemming Migrant Flow


Merkel heads to Africa with eye on stemming migrant flow

 

Africa’s Population Boom Fuels “unstoppable” Migration to Europe


Africa’s population boom fuels “unstoppable” migration to Europe

“Nobody is Ever – Just a Refugee”


A NEW NARRATIVE

“Nobody is ever just a refugee”: Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie’s powerful speech on the global migrant crisis

WRITTEN BY: Lily Kuo

Nigerian novelist Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie sits in a salon for her hair-do in Victoria Island district in Lagos May 2, 2013.
The power of lipstick. (Reuters/Akintunde Akinleye)

The Nigerian author Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie called on attendees of the United Nation’s World Humanitarian day last week to rethink the refugee crisis.

“Nobody is ever just a refugee,” said the novelist and non-fiction writer, delivering the keynote address at the event in New York. “Nobody is ever just a single thing. And yet, in the public discourse today, we often speak of people as a single a thing. Refugee. Immigrant.”

Sub-Saharan Africa is home to more than a quarter of the world’s refugee population, about 18 million people fleeing conflict in the Central African Republic, South Sudan, Somalia, and elsewhere.

Adichie, the author of Americanah and several other books, has a personal connection to migration. Her parents were displaced during the Nigeria-Biafra war and lived as refugees for three years. She proposed a new way of thinking and talking about those in need:

In my language, Igbo, the word for ‘love’ is ‘ifunanya’ and its literal translation is, ‘to see.’ So I would like to suggest today that this is a time for a new narrative, a narrative in which we truly see those about whom we speak.

Let us tell a different story. Let us remember that the movement of human beings on earth is not new. Human history is a history of movement and mingling. Let us remember that we are not just bones and flesh. We are emotional beings. We all share a desire to be valued, a desire to matter. Let us remember that dignity is as important as food.


Sign up for the Quartz Africa Weekly Brief — the most important and interesting news from across the continent, in your inbox.


Africa at war with Parasitic Capitalism

bachar Alep OK
image credit: http://www.voxeurop.eu/files/images/article/FABER-EU-Africa.JPG


The Burning Spear.com
Jun 21, 2016
Luwezi Kinsasha; Secretary General, The African Socialist International


#UnFair #Africa #Europe #Capitalism


Africa at war with Parasitic Capitalism

Since the assault on Africa began in 1415 by marauders from Christendom, which would later become known as Europe, the continent has never known a single day of genuine peace on our own terms.

From a land of free people, from a cradle of humanity and civilisation, Africa has been turned into an enslaved continent with the primary task of producing life and wealth for the European invaders, kidnappers and looters.

This feudal European attack is different from the attacks by ancient Romans, Greeks, Western Asians and all other groups who attacked Africa before 1415, because they did not result in the creation of a global capitalist parasitic system as we know it.

The Europe that attacked us was not a capitalist Europe; it was a feudal Europe, where the main contradiction in society was between the nobility or aristocratic class and the serf class. Although the latter was not owned by the former, most of what the serfs produced was owned by the nobility. In feudal society, the king claimed that his rule came from God.

Europeans did not come to Africa to export capitalism and democracy, which did not exist. Nor did they come to impart benevolent Christian morality, which also did not exist.

Europe was characterised by generalised despotism, where women were routinely burned on allegations of being witches or similar backward stuff. Democratic values were alien to feudal Europe when they assaulted Africa.

Europe came to Africa seeking wealth through wars of conquest and looting

Several decades before the ‘discovery’ and assault of the Americas by looters and thieves from Europe disguised as explorers, Africa was already bleeding under European attacks. By 1452, as Hugh Thomas explains, Africans were being kidnapped and brought to Madeira, Portugal, for sugar production:

“Portuguese sugar plantations had ever fulfilled their promise. Now Madeira seemed the best alternative. Well-watered terraces were therefore built, some by guanche slaves, from Tenerife; and Africans slaves were introduced there at much the same time in this Atlantic island. As would happen in Barbados and elsewhere in the Caribbean 200 years later, the earlier established farmers of others crops were driven into bankruptcy”.[i]

This attack on Africa 600 years ago announced the birth of European imperialism, a process which would develop fully into what is commonly referred to as capitalism; or as Marx noted: “… the discovery of gold and silver in America, the extirpation, enslavement and entombment in mines of the aboriginal population, the beginning of the conquest and looting of the East Indies, the turning of Africa into a warren for the commercial hunting of black skins…”[ii]

Chairman Omali Yeshitela and the African People’s Socialist Party have been arguing for decades that capitalism did not develop to later on become imperialist––it is the other way round.

We are clear that ours is a struggle to end the parasitic relationship that has been imposed on us some 600 years ago:

“Would capitalism and the resultant European wealth and African impoverishment have occurred without the European attack, its division, African slavery and dispersal, colonialism and neo-colonialism? No! No! No! A thousand times no!”[iii]

Europe imposed a new but deadly relationship with Africa, where nothing comes out of Africa peacefully. Up to this very moment, every natural resource that comes out of our black workers’ hands or that comes out of Africa is a bloodletting process; it is an antagonistic process to our right to life.

The violence that dominates African people’s lives everywhere on the planet is a direct continuation of the assault on Africa that started some 600 years ago. This is the origin of the relationship between today’s white oppressor nation and the oppressed African nation.

European imperialism captured, distorted and fragmented our African identity

The identities we carry today in most parts of the world are part of the historical assault on Africa and African people. Imperialism’s assault captured, colonised, distorted and fragmented our African identity in every way possible.

Look at the different despicable names we have been called by our oppressors: nigger, mulatto, coon, macaque, kaffir, etc. Or look at the different false nationalities imposed on us: Afro-American, Brazilian, South African, Black British, Afro-Swedish, Creole, Nigerian, Cameroonian, Caribbean, mixed-race, instead of one African people.

All these nationalities are falsifications of our history and of the truth. They hide the relation of oppressor and oppressed that exists between African people and imperialist oppressors.

We are African people wherever we are located; we suffer the same way, and the masses of African people will never know freedom again unless we recognise that one essential condition for black people to retrieve our freedom is to achieve self-determination as a united people in a united Africa.

Struggles for civil rights have shown their limitations in the U.S., Europe and elsewhere. Neo-colonialism everywhere in Africa is an embarrassment of titanic scale.

When we speak of being Africans, we are not solely referring to biology––though we all are connected to Africa. We are speaking about a shared historical, political and social reality; just as ‘European’ is a political definition that represents the historical, social and political privileges of a certain group of people that has access to and benefits from dominant structures and institutions of society.

Chairman Omali defines the African nation as:

“… a community of people with core identity based on historical ties to the equatorial continent of black Africa, creating a common culture, history, physiognomy (physical features of an ethnic group). All Africans on the continent of Africa, all African people everywhere who have been forcibly dispersed through slavery and colonialism, all with a sense of sameness with Africa, who because of skin color face poverty and oppression, Dalit in India, Indigenous of Australia, Asia-Pacific Islanders and Europeans, Arabs, Indians and others living in Africa who commit national suicide, unite with the African working class and abandon allegiance to predatory, colonial relationship to African people”.[iv]

In the words of Chairman Omali:

“Our revolutionary struggle for liberation, unification and socialism in Africa, throughout the colonies and other areas of the world to which we have been forcibly dispersed in the construction of capitalism, will prove to be as significant in the defeat of the capitalist social system as the slave trade was in its advent”.[v]

A worldwide African revolution is necessary to end worldwide parasitic capitalism

It will take a revolution to change our relationship with all the imperialist States which dominate our lives. There is no exception in that. Imperialism was born at the expense of the lives and the right to life of African people everywhere.

The primary role of every imperialist State is to maintain the foundation of the imperialist system itself, which means the relation of oppressor and oppressed nations across the planet.

The current U.S.-funded occupation of the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and Haiti, the split of Sudan, the war in Darfur, the military aggression against Libya and overthrow of Kaddafi, and the AfriCom military occupation are all part of the same desperate imperialist effort trying to sustain itself at the expense of Africa.[vi]

Africom is a U.S. imperialist military plan to achieve hegemonic control over African natural resources. This means conducting regimes change, overthrowing governments that are in favour of China or willing to fight for genuine independence etc.

The AfriCom website is explicit that it encompasses the whole of Africa––North, South, East, West and Central regions.[vii]

It is worth reminding readers that Africom played a key role in the co-ordination of the war and aggression that overthrew Mouammar Kaddafi in 2011.

The wealth enjoyed by corporations dealing in electronics, in the tradition of parasitic capitalism, come at the expense of the African people of the Democratic Republic of Congo where at least 6,000,000 (six million) people have died because of wars and neocolonial conditions imposed on us by the U.S. and its allies of oppressor nations––and the bourgeois press and society do not care about that.[viii]

These wars are looting enterprises to facilitate the cheap extraction of strategic minerals like coltan needed by Apple, Microsoft and other companies to make smart phones, Xboxes and other modern electronic gadgets etc. This extraction is nothing but modern-day slavery, where people work in appalling conditions, including dire health hazards, and are paid almost nothing. Furthermore, many of these exploited labourers are women and children.

Following a visit to coltan mines in the Congo, on 22 October 2015 The Mail Online filed a report which shows how the DRC is looted by foreign multinationals:

“After their haul is weighed and classified, miners are paid $5 (£3.35) a day for the back-breaking work to dig out the precious mineral that powers our $500 (£335) smartphones.

But with a minimum wage set at $3 (£2.00) a day in the DRC, the 1,400-strong work force at Luwow are prepared to endure the gruelling and sometimes dangerous conditions.

“Manufacturers Apple, who make iPhones, and Samsung Electronics, who make the Galaxy, admit they use coltan mined in the DRC to make the smartphones that fuel our 24-7 lifestyle.

“And Apple says it will continue to do so.

‘Apple remains committed to driving economic development and creating opportunities to source conflict-free minerals from the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and adjoining countries,’ Apple told the United States Securities and Exchange Commission in February this year (2015).

“Apple says its suppliers must adhere to its code that: “every worker deserves to be treated with dignity and respect”.

“Samsung says it “recognises the seriousness of human rights violations and environmental pollution problems of mineral mining in the Democratic Republic of Congo”.[ix]

Black revolution is also against the African petty bourgeoisie, the enemy within

From Barack Obama in the U.S., to Paul Kagame in Rwanda or Jacob Zuma in South Africa, there are many representatives of the African petty bourgeoisie. These are the individuals (with their close cronies) that lead the collusion of the African petty bourgeoisie with parasitical capitalism to secure their own material comfort and political power at the expense of African working classes and poor peasants everywhere.

The African petty bourgeoisie emerged as a significant player after World War II weakened European imperialism. They are the ones who organised and led the struggles against direct colonialism everywhere in Africa. They were conscious that independence meant emancipation of the African petty bourgeoisie class and status quo for African working class and peasantry class.

In the Congo, the leadership of Lumumba was demanding that independence must transform the conditions of the people. Status quo was not an option. He said, “Between slavery and freedom, there is no compromise.”[x] That is why it became necessary for the imperialists to attack Lumumba and his government.

Mobutu, a former member of Lumumba’s Mouvement National Congolais (MNC), and after being promoted from sergeant to colonel in the army by Lumumba, turned against him and carried out the 14 September 1960 neocolonial coup that brought down Lumumba’s government.

Later, at the end of the Cold War following the fall of the Soviet Union in 1990, Mobutu was no longer needed. So the U.S. intervened to remove the man who had served them so well for 32 years. The following quote provides clarity on the motives for regime change in the Congo in 1997:

“The geopolitical stakes of the international mining companies in the DRC, therefore, constituted the critical basis for the overthrow of Mobutu. So as the regional quest to remove Mobutu ripened, based on security concerns and ambitions for a Tutsi empire, mining conglomerates found the appropriate alliance with Presidents Yoweri Museveni of Uganda and Paul Kagame of Rwanda to lead a military campaign to oust the Congolese despot. The alliance also, very critically, entailed the involvement of multinational companies that were directly linked to high ranking politicians from western countries. The two main new Anglo-American mining conglomerates that stood at the heart of this alliance were American Mineral Fields Inc. (AMFI) and Barrick Gold Corporation…AMFI is based in Hope, Arkansas, and chaired by Mike McMurrough, said to be a personal friend of former U.S. president Bill Clinton…AMFI directly financed the (Alliance of Democratic Forces of Liberation) AFDL’s military campaign to remove Mobutu by, for example, putting at the disposal of Kabila its hired corporate jet. In return AMFI secured the copper-zinc mine at Kipushi in Katanga (Shaba) province…an Executive Intelligence Review (EIR) report which revealed that Barrick Gold Corporation, headed by former US president George H.W. Bush and former Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney, was also formed just before the outbreak of the AFDL rebellion. Nabudere argues that the invasion of eastern Congo by the combined forces of Rwanda and Uganda behind the AFDL rebels … prepared for a take-over of Congo’s gold rich eastern territory by Barrick Gold Corporation.[xi]

The African petty bourgeoisie today relies on the same structures born out of our enslavement and colonisation; they depend on the same colonial State apparatus and colonial systems––particularly ‘divide and conquer’––to repress the people.

The advent of China in Africa has given the African petty bourgeoisie an alternative to white imperialist bourgeoisie, but it has not created an alternative for the people whose conditions of living continue to deteriorate without any let up.

Seduced and personally rewarded by the colonising governments and corporations, the corrupted African elites unite with Sarkozy to attack Gbagbo in Cote d’Ivoire; they unite with Obama and Cameron to destroy Kaddafi; they would join the BRICS, China, Francophonie, Commonwealth or Africom, anything except building our own power.

They are opposed to the vision of Lumumba, Nkrumah and Garvey to unite the African nation. And to confuse our people, in 1963 these elites created the useless Organisation of African Unity (OAU), which later changed to the African Union (AU) in 2002.[xii] The OAU or the AU, none of them has ever done anything for the people. It was born a neocolonial organisation despite the drive and integrity of Kwame Nkrumah, whose vision of one independent and unified Africa was fought against by the likes of Nyerere, Houphouet-Boigny, Senghor and other African petty bourgeois comprador and bureaucratic leaders.

A call to unite

African workers in every country and the black community must organise under the banner of African Internationalism and the African Socialist International (ASI) in order to wrest power away from the African petty bourgeoisie and usher in a phase of revolutionary struggle to, once and for all, defeat parasitic capitalism.

We lost our freedom as a people, we would regain our freedom as a people.

All power to the people.

Black power to African workers!


 

Luwezi Kinshasa, born in the Congo, is the Chairman of the African People’s Socialist Party-UK. He is also the Secretary General of the African Socialist International. Kinshasa is based in London and has spoken throughout Europe, the U.S., Europe and Africa for the liberation and reunification of Africa and African people worldwide.

 


[i] Hugh Thomas, The Slave Trade (London: Picador, 1997) p. 70.
[ii] Karl Marx, Capital (London: J.M Dent & Sons, 1934).
[iii] Omali Yeshitela, An Uneasy Equilibrium (St. Petersburg, FL: Burning Spear Publications, 2015) p. 63.
[iv] Yeshitela, op.cit., pp. 145-146.
[v] ibid., Yeshitela, p. 127.
[vi] The US itself is, of course, a pirate nation – an ongoing European and settler occupation of indigenous lands.
[vii] “A full-spectrum combatant command, U.S. AFRICOM is responsible for all U.S. Department of Defence operations, exercises, and security cooperation on the African continent, its island nations, and surrounding waters. AFRICOM began initial operations on Oct. 1, 2007, and officially became an independent command on Oct. 1, 2008.” http://www.africom.mil/.
[viii] Owen Jones, ‘Let’s be honest. We ignore Congo’s atrocities because it’s in Africa’, The Guardian, 6 March 2105, London.
[ix] Nick Fagge, ‘Picks, pans and bare hands: How miners in the heart of Africa toil in terrible conditions to extract the rare minerals that power your iPhone’, MailOnline, 22 October 2015, http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3280872/iPhone-mineral-miners-Africa-use-bare-hands-coltan.html.
[x] Jean Van Lierde (ed.), Lumumba Speaks: The Speeches and Writings of Patrice Lumumba, 1958-1961 (Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1972). See more at: http://www.blackpast.org/1959-patrice-lumumba-african-unity-and-national-independence#sthash.9aoi7yeR.dpuf.
[xi] Sagaren Naidoo (ed.), ‘The War Economy in the Democratic Republic of Congo’, Institute for Global Dialogue, Occasional Paper no. 37, 2003, p. 6. http://www.igd.org.za/jdownloads/Occasional%20Papers/op_37_chapter_1.pdf.
[xii] http://www.au.int/en/history/oau-and-au.

Subscribe to The Burning Spear newspaper! 

Join the African People’s Socialist Party! 

Uhuru!

image credits:
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/5f/7f/bc/5f7fbcd8700f75bd1960cc091ded6dd3.jpg
http://www.public.iastate.edu/~cfford/342slavery.jpg
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/eb/79/e0/eb79e07535ae3d99d6f89877206608ba.jpg
https://intpolicydigest.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/1523735221150.jpg

stories from: Skin | Colour | Race | Caste – Made in India

%d bloggers like this: