Speaking Truth to Power & Other Worthwhile Civil Disobediences (#NousSommesTousPalestiniens)

London 09 08

London, UK. August 9th, 2014. An estimated multitude of 150.000 marches in solidarity with the Palestinian people. Israel’s war crimes in Gaza have sparked massive demonstrations in several cities worldwide. Read BBC’s article. Follow the Facebook page Palestine Solidarity Campaign UK.

Cheers, fellow earthlings!

alice walkerMrs. Alice Walker, author of the highly acclaimed novel The Color Purple (winner of the Pulitzer Prize for Fiction and filmed by Steven Spielberg), hits the nail on the head when she says: “The most common way people give up their power is by thinking they don’t have any.”

I’ve been thinking a lot about that wonderful phrase lately, especially after “witnessing” the latest events in Gaza. From a distance, here in Toronto, I followed the news with an inner feeling of powerless outrage. “So many people are afraid to speak at all”, said Mrs. Walker to Amy Goodman in the WebTVshow Democracy Now, “and I think this is very dangerous. Wherever there’s oppresion, wherever you see people being humiliated, it’s our duty as human beings and citizens of the planet to speak. If that’s all you can do… speak, at least!” 

The streets of several cities, all around the world, are shouting out: “enough is enough!” Israel’s genocidal practices against the Palestinians must end, and those allies who sell weapons of mass destruction for the State’s politics of racist Sionism, murderous islamophobia and militarily-imposed Apartheid should be aware: thousands of us, citizens of global Civil Society, won’t take it anymore.

We can’t allow ourselves to believe in our own powerlessness, to feel beat -own and out-of-strenght to oppose high-collar criminals, or else we’re lost – and genocide will happen again. As Mrs. Rosi Brandotti says, we have to join our voices in a global chorus that states: “we organize, we don’t only agonize!” In apathy we’ll drown, in empathy we’ll rise!

 Mrs. Walker and Mrs Roy, together:

* * * * *

Children

UNICEF: The conflict in Gaza has killed more than 400 children and injured over 2,500. Thousands more suffered trauma and will need psychosocial support. Pernille Ironside, Chief of UNICEF’s Field Office in Gaza describes the “catastrophic and tragic impact” that this war is having on children: uni.cf/1pCl5NA via The New York Times.

From the United Nations "Gaza Crisis Appeal" - Download the full document. http://bit.ly/1spNBD7

From the United Nations’ “Gaza Crisis Appeal” – Download the full document. http://bit.ly/1spNBD7

Unfortunately, the most common discovery we make when genocide and ethnical cleansing are being commited is that we are unable to stop them. We lament after human lives have already been slaughtered, and during the slaughter we feel unable to create an effective obstacle in the way of the murderers. Methinks it’s a healthy symptom of empathy to experience sadness and grief for the thousands of victims of Israel’s heinous crimes – more than 400 hundred children killed; half a million people displaced; bombardments of hospitals, schools, universities, UN-shelters etc. But it would be unhealthy and unworthy to do only that. We may lament and cry over the spilt milk (or, rather, the spilt blood), but now action needs to be taken collectively in order that such horrors don’t happen again.

Hundreds of thousands of us spoke out in solidarity with Gaza. Thousands marched in the streets all around the world. Thousands more shared their indignation on social media and on the Blogosphere, made independent documentaries and photo essays. More than ever, I think we should as Jello Biafra likes to suggest: “don’t hate the media, become the media.” Considering the warmongers, profit-seeking sharks, ecocidal maniacs and trigger-hapy genocidal leaders who are currently in power, shouldn’t we speak out  as loud as we can? Will we let the powerful keep on getting away with the genocide of the powerless, with the murderous politics of Apartheid? Will the world accept silently the Guernica-like bombardment of the civil population of Gaza, for instance?

More than ever, I cherish these voices – such as Alice Waker’s or Arundathi Roy’s or Cornel West’s or Tariq Ali’s – who not only speak out for the powerless and for the crushed, defending the fundamental humanity of those treated by Power as subhumans or pests. It’s fundamental that we amplify and ressonate these voices who speak-out, shouting Truth into Power’s half-deaf ears, putting their words in the service of those who have been silenced. Simone Weil knew: it’s an optimistic lie to believe that love can’t be crushed by force, by violence, by mad strenght. It can. But we mustn’t let the hateful forces of bloody antagonism keep on winning over peace, love & empathy.

* * * * *

Recommended further reading:

The Case

“Provides clear arguments for international sanctions against Israel because of its treatment of the Palestinians. This excellent collection of essays is an essential text for anyone interested in why they should support the movement to boycott Israel. The essays are not just good reading; they are also an eloquent call to the world to give a damn.” – Ron Jacobs, CounterPunch (official) – DOWNLOAD FREE EBOOK

“For decades, Israel has denied Palestinians their fundamental rights of freedom, equality, and self-determination through ethnic cleansing, colonization, racial discrimination, and military occupation. Despite abundant condemnation of Israeli policies by the UN, other international bodies, and preeminent human rights organisations, the world community has failed to hold Israel accountable and enforce compliance with basic principles of law. Israel’s crimes have continued with impunity.

In view of this continued failure, Palestinian civil society called for a global citizens’ response. On July 9 2005, a year after the International Court of Justice’s historic advisory opinion on the illegality of Israel’s Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT), a clear majority of Palestinian civil society called upon their counterparts and people of conscience all over the world to launch broad boycotts, implement divestment initiatives, and to demand sanctions against Israel, until Palestinian rights are recognised in full compliance with international law.

The campaign for boycotts, divestment and sanctions (BDS) is shaped by a rights-based approach and highlights the three broad sections of the Palestinian people: the refugees, those under military occupation in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, and Palestinians in Israel. The call urges various forms of boycott against Israel until it meets its obligations under international law by:

  • Ending its occupation and colonization of all Arab lands occupied in June 1967 and dismantling the Wall;
  • Recognizing the fundamental rights of the Arab-Palestinian citizens of Israel to full equality; and
  • Respecting, protecting and promoting the rights of Palestinian refugees to return to their homes and properties as stipulated in UN Resolution 19

The BDS call was endorsed by over 170 Palestinian political parties, organizations, trade unions and movements. The signatories represent the refugees, Palestinians in the OPT, and Palestinian citizens of Israel.

Boycotts target products and companies (Israeli and international) that profit from the violation of Palestinian rights, as well as Israeli sporting, cultural and academic institutions. Anyone can boycott Israeli goods, simply by making sure that they don’t buy produce made in Israel or by Israeli companies. Campaigners and groups call on consumers not to buy Israeli goods and on businesses not to buy or sell them.

Israeli cultural and academic institutions directly contribute to maintaining, defending or whitewashing the oppression of Palestinians, as Israel deliberately tries to boost its image internationally through academic and cultural collaborations. As part of the boycott, academics, artists and consumers are campaigning against such collaboration and ‘rebranding’. A growing number of artists have refused to exhibit or play in Israel.

Divestment means targeting corporations complicit in the violation of Palestinian rights and ensuring that the likes of university investment portfolios and pension funds are not used to finance such companies. These efforts raise awareness about the reality of Israel’s policies and encourage companies to use their economic influence to pressure Israel to end its systematic denial of Palestinian rights.

Sanctions are an essential part of demonstrating disapproval for a country’s actions. Israel’s membership of various diplomatic and economic forums provides both an unmerited veneer of respectability and material support for its crimes. By calling for sanctions against Israel, campaigners educate society about violations of international law and seek to end the complicity of other nations in these violations.”

Source: The BDS National Committee
http://www.bdsmovement.net/bdsintro

 

* * * * *

From the streets of Montréal, Québec:
“Nous Sommes Tous Palestiniens”  (subtitles in English)

* * * * *


The Case for Cultural & Academic Boycott of Israel with intro by Ken Loach

* * * *

See also the statements made by Noam Chomsky, Brian Eno, Cornel West, Tariq Ali.

TO BE CONTINUED…

Glamour and Envy: remarks on the Madness of Consumerism, with John Berger…

Fellow earthlings! Many among us are surrounded by images of Photoshoped, Barbiesque, and very highly-paid top-models. Many of us have the unfortunate luck to be surrounded by an army of ads and its insistent and annoying injunctions: “Buy! Own! Consume! Work! Obey! Enrich! Just do it!” Many of us have been told – and the stupidiest among us have even believed in it! – that Money will open the gates of Heaven for anyone who’s smart enough to get his hands in a lot of it.

This pervasive commercial imageryinfest the cities where capitalism and “modernity” reign (and also in the places where Imperial power took them…). They command us to consume products that large multi-national corporations are devoted to selling us. These corporations don’t want anyone of us to wonder about the work conditions for the people who actually produced them (and usually are very badly paid and live in places of terrible health conditions… remember Nike’s sweatshops in Asia?). The corporations don’t want any of us to question this system that permits extreme accumulation of wealth in a few hands (the last time I checked the statistics, 85 people were the owners of a wealth equivalent to that of half of Mankind).

The publicity machinery is destined to turn us into stupid unquestioning puppets, who give their money away in exchange for products whose real producers are being explored and kept in poverty in lots of societies who, in the Global Market, are the peryphery of cheap labour destined to suffer miserably through life so that the so-called First World can enjoy the delirious delights of Consumerism. As most of you are quite aware, this has been wrecking our planet and, if it’s allowed to go on, will only lead us to witness, in coming years, some of the worst ecological catastrophes ever endured by our species – and all other who share with us this “pale blue dot”, as Carl Sagan called it. But enough, for today, of my awkwards incursion into Saganesque ecology or Marxist critique of the commercial-society’s trashy productions… Let’s put aside the theme of ecocide and save it for another ocassion, fellow earthlings!

Many have pointed out that the “subliminal effect” of modern marketing campains is to brainwash us into a nowadays very wide-spread behaviour: that which is dominant on consumerist societies. You can’t be possible consider yourself a fully-fullfiled person if you’re not the owner of fancy cars, chic houses, hi-tech electronic devices, jewels and gizmos… The so-called Show Business is a factory of dreams who attempt to invade our subconscious minds and turn us into morons who obbey ads like Pavlov’s dogs did with the bells.

We are made to believe, by this day-to-day conditioning, not very disimilar to Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World techniques of mass indoctrination, in a link between Happiness (or The Greatest Good in Human Life) and consumerism and ownership. In BBC’s documentary The Century of the Self, the tale is told of a certain Mr. Edward Bernays, Sigmund’s Freud nephew, who was a key figure in the United States early 20th century mass-conditioning of consumering citizens. It’s scary to take a look behind the curtains and discover these sinister experiments that contributed so much to boost up capitalism. Wherever Free Market capitalist gained predominance, it created as by-products of consumerism an unbelievably high mountain of trash – literal trash, but also aesthetic trash (I mean: ugly ads and terrible publicity images). We’ve been going mad on this overdose of images with promises of delight – if only you buy! Many of us, fellow earthlings, have forgotten all delights that can’t be bought, all the beauty that can’t be owned, all the happiness that can be experienced without any need of possessions.

The manufacturers of this Show Bizz dreams, those who sponsor the Mass Media, those who spread through society this images that promise delight in connection with the enjoying of a bought merchandise, they’ve been leading large portions of mankind into a very questionable path: that of seeking for happiness in the process of buying and owning things, in having instead of being. We’ve been praising competition instead of cooperation, individualism instead of collective effort,  superficial glamour instead of genuine beauty.

Well, at least these were some of the thoughts that popped up in my head while I was watching BBC’s Ways of Seing, in which John Berger embarks in similar considerations about what Guy Debord called La Societé Du Spetacle. Berger has lots of interesting things to say about Consumerist Society’s imagery and how they produce large amounts of toxic envy and cheap glamour. According to Berger’s interpretation, glamour is something that evokes or produces, in its receiver, a feeling of envy. Glamorous images are supposed to depict something desirable, something to strive for; they’re ideal scenes who don’t intend in any away to portray reality. They appeal to our emotions and try to manipulate them into a set-up that’s deemed profitable by the economical powers reigning in commercial societies, and “personified” in banks and stock markets.

Imagine a woman who sees in a daily basis, for years and years, gorgeously sexy and wealthy women exhibiting all their glamour in magazines and outdoors – figures such as the millionaires Kate Moss or Gisele Bünchen. One of the possible effects is: this woman will envy that which the fabricated image is supposed to depict. Once again, the subliminal effect is intended to be: you’ll only be a happy and fulfilled human if you look like Moss or Bünchen… Thus the epidemics of gyms, plastic surgery, silicone boobs, anorexia – among other techniques that try to turn a woman into something similar to a commercially produced cliché. Our ideals of beauty have been so deformed by publicity’s invasion of the public space, by its invasive glamourous imagery, that feelings of low self-steem, depression and inedequacy are skyrocketing (just check Prozac’s sales!). But well, I’ll shut up right now and summon Mr. Berger to continue this debate – so here it comes, a quote from Ways of Seeing fourth and last episode, certainly one of the greatest critiques of publicity ever aired on TV:

berger-author-pic“Publicity is the process of manufacturing glamour. Without social envy, glamour cannot exist. Envy becomes a common emotion in a society that has moved towards democracy and then stopped halfway. Where status is theoretically open to everyone, but enjoyed by only a few. (…) Publicity and oil painting share many of the same ideals, all of them related to the principle that you are what you have. (…) Publicity appeals to a way of life we aspire to, or think we aspire to, but have not yet achieved. A publicity picture suggests that if we buy what it is offering, our life will be different from what it is. Not only will our home be different, but all of our relationships will become radiant because of our new possessions. But we can only achieve such radiance if we have money, thus urging each of us to scramble competitively to get more… and making money appear as if it were itself magical. (…) It promotes the illusion that a man’s ability to consume is directly related with his sexual virility. According to the rules of the dream, those who do not have this power, those who lack glamour, become faceless, almost non-existant. Publicity both promises and threatens. It plays upon fear, often the fear of not being desirable, of being unenviable. It suggests that you are inadequate as you are, but it consoles you with the promise of a dream… But the highest value of this civilization is the individual ego… one can only say this culture is mad.” – BERGER

BBC’s series “Ways of Seeing” (by John Berger, 1972, 4 episodes)

berger2

WAYS OF SEEING

By John Berger (1972)

A BAFTA award-winning series with John Berger, which rapidly became regarded as one of the most influential art programmes ever made. With the invention of oil paint around 1400, painters were able to portray people and objects with an unprecedented degree of realism, and painting became the ideal way to celebrate private possessions. In this programme, John Berger questions the value we place on that tradition.

Ways of Seeing is a 1972 BBC four-part television series of 30-minute films created chiefly by writer John Berger and producer Mike Dibb. Berger’s scripts were adapted into a book of the same name. The series and book criticize traditional Western cultural aesthetics by raising questions about hidden ideologies in visual images. The series is partially a response to Kenneth Clark’s Civilisation series, which represents a more traditionalist view of the Western artistic and cultural canon.

Watch the full series: