Monday, September 07, 2020

Beethoven was black': why the radical idea still has power today
An 1814 etching of Ludwig van Beethoven by Blasius Hoefel, after a drawing of Louis Letronne. Photograph: Imagno/Getty Images


He helped galvanise the US civil rights movement, and today sparks intense debate about cultural dominance and the musical canon. In his 250th anniversary year can we listen to Beethoven and what he represents with fresh ears?


Philip Clark
Mon 7 Sep 2020 11.47 BST

Exactly 80 years after Beethoven’s death, in 1907, the British composer Samuel Coleridge-Taylor began speculating that Beethoven was black. Colderidge-Taylor was mixed race – with a white English mother and a Sierra Leonean father - and said that he couldn’t help noticing remarkable likenesses between his own facial features and images of Beethoven’s. Having recently returned from the segregated US, Coleridge-Taylor projected his experiences there onto the German composer. “If the greatest of all musicians were alive today, he would find it impossible to obtain hotel accommodation in certain American cities.”
British composer Samuel Coleridge-Taylor (1875-1912). Photograph: Hulton Archive/Getty Images

His words would prove prophetic. During the 1960s, the mantra “Beethoven was black” became part of the struggle for civil rights. By then Coleridge-Taylor had been dead for 50 years and was all but forgotten, but as campaigner Stokely Carmichael raged against the deeply ingrained assumption that white European culture was inherently superior to black culture, the baton was passed. “Beethoven was as black as you and I,” he told a mainly black audience in Seattle, “but they don’t tell us that.” A few years earlier, Malcolm X had given voice to that same idea when he told an interviewer that Beethoven’s father had been “one of the blackamoors that hired themselves out in Europe as professional soldiers”.

“Beethoven was black” became a refrain chanted on a San Francisco soul music radio station and, in 1969, hit mass consciousness when Rolling Stone magazine ran a story headlined: “Beethoven was black and proud!” In 1988, two white students at Stanford University in California, following a heated discussion about music and race, defaced a poster of Beethoven, giving him crude stereotypical African American features, an act reported in the press as an act of racism.


Beethoven: where to start with his music
Read more


Itchiness about Beethoven’s cultural dominance would continue to bring classical music out in occasional hives, and in 2007 Nadine Gordimer published a collection of short stories called Beethoven Was One-Sixteenth Black. But the issue of race laid largely dormant until this year – the 250th anniversary of his birth – when against the backdrop of Covid-19 becoming inextricably linked with the Black Lives Matter movement, echoes of Carmichael and X were voiced, coming from directions nobody expected.

William Gibbons, a musicologist at the College of Fine Arts in Forth Worth, Texas, had already put a bomb under classical music Twitter with a thread that began: “As 2019 winds down, here’s a short thread about one of my big resolutions for 2020: spending a full year avoiding Beethoven.” Then the pandemic struck and swept all the Beethoven celebrations aside anyway. With Europe heading towards lockdown, the composer Charlotte Seither, debating at the Beethoven-Haus in Bonn, caused a stir when she spoke of Beethoven fatigue and of his “toxic cult of genius” and “thinking in categories of dominance”. Andrea Moore – assistant professor of music at Smith College in Northampton, Massachusetts – writing in the Chicago Tribune, called for a “year-long moratorium” on Beethoven performances. His music is ubiquitous, she reasoned – so how about using the “Beethoven-sized hole” left to commission new music, then return to the composer with fresh ears in 12 months’ time?
Malcolm X at a civil rights demonstration in 1963. Photograph: Bob Henriques/Time & Life Pictures/Getty Image


Moore’s proposal would end positively at least: we get Beethoven back, plus a stack of new compositions. But the truth is Beethoven is like Michael Rosen’s bear hunt – you can’t go over him, you can’t go under him, you have to go through him. Academics manufacturing a culture war, in which there can be no winners, is a very 21st-century way of dealing with a figure perceived as a problem: you turn him into a straw man and complain about being triggered. Carmichael and Malcolm X were far wiser. They didn’t advocate cancelling Beethoven, nor did they deal in easy gesture politics – the stakes were too high.

Was Beethoven black? The evidence is scant and inconclusive. The case rests on two possibilities: that Beethoven’s Flemish ancestors married Spanish “blackamoors” of African descent, or that Beethoven’s mother had an affair. But the truth Carmichael and Malcolm X sought was not scientific. “Beethoven was black” was a grand metaphor designed to unsettle and shake certainty.
Had Beethoven been black, would he have been classed as a canonical composer? And what about other black composers lost in history?

Metaphors ran right through black music. Edward Ellington and William Basie were ennobled to the status of a Duke and a Count, and the most intricate metaphor of all was spun by the Alabama-born bandleader Herman Blount who had begun to perform as Sun Ra. Blount – like Malcolm X, originally Malcolm Little – rejected his given surname as a “slave name”, and created an elaborate metaphorical backstory about Sun Ra, an alien from Saturn, who descended to Earth to preach peace and togetherness.

Corey Mwamba – musician, researcher and presenter of BBC Radio 3’s contemporary jazz programme Freeness – thinks that the metaphor has retained its potency. “The statement ‘Beethoven was black’ was a disruption of a very canonical way of thinking,” he tells me. “It makes us think again about a culture that gives his music so much visibility. Had Beethoven been black, would he have been classed as a canonical composer? And what about other black composers lost in history?”
 
Disappeared … the tragic composer Julius Eastman. Photograph: LCMF

Among many black composers whose work has disappeared from history, the story of Julius Eastman is perhaps most telling. As composer, singer and pianist Eastman was a vital part of the 1960s and 70s New York music scene, his open-form scores fusing the loops of minimalism with the grooves of popular music – a volatile synthesis that often detonated into free improvisation. Before his death on the streets and homeless in 1990, he loaded his pieces with deliberately provocative titles that pushed the spirit of “Beethoven was black” from slogan towards something that actually happened in sound.

In his recent book, A Hidden Landscape Once a Week, Mark Sinker reported his conversation with the photographer and writer, Val Wilmer, about when she interviewed Steve Reich, who had recently completed his landmark piece Drumming, based on drum patterns he heard in Ghana. Talking about an African American musician of mutual acquaintance, Reich said “he’s one of the only blacks you can talk to,” before adding “blacks are getting ridiculous in the States now”. Wilmer was shocked and enraged. “Wouldn’t you become politicised?” she concluded. The wider pressures on black composers in 1970s America can never be doubted.

“Radicals like James Baldwin and Angela Davis took time to think about what they were doing, then produced change,” Mwamba adds, “We actually need a deeper understanding of Beethoven, to understand why we love this music. It’s important we present this music from a position of love, rather than hierarchy or power, or as ‘something we’ve always done’.”

•The Aurora Orchestra perform Beethoven’s 7th symphony at the Proms on Radio 3 and BBC4 on 10 September alongside the world premiere of Richard Ayres’ No. 52 (Three pieces about Ludwig van Beethoven, dreaming, hearing loss, and saying goodbye)



 

Hong Kong shocked by violent police arrest of 12-year-old girl

Child’s mother says her daughter was buying art supplies when she was tackled and pinned to the ground by police

 12-year-old girl one of hundreds arrested in huge Hong Kong protest – video report

Hong Kong police have been strongly criticised over the rough arrest of a 12-year-old girl whose family says was caught in a protest crowd while out buying art supplies.

Video widely shared across social media and in Hong Kong media showed the officers seeking to corral a group of people including the young girl, who ducked aside and tried to run away. An officer tackled her to the ground, while several others helped to pin her down.

The arrest came amid the largest street protest seen in Hong Kong since 1 July, the first full day under the national security laws imposed by Beijing on the city, outlawing acts of sedition, secession, foreign collusion and terrorism.

The girl’s mother told Apple Daily she intended to sue and lodge a formal complaint. She said her daughter and her 20-year-old son – who were both fined under the city’s pandemic-related laws against gatherings – were out buying art supplies, and that the girl ran away because she was scared. Her daughter was bruised and scratched after the encounter.

Claudia Mo, a pro-democracy legislator, said the actions taken towards the girl “shows how unnecessarily jumpy [and] trigger-happy Hong Kong police have become”.

 Hong Kong police violently arrest 12-year-old girl – video

In a statement a few hours after the incident, Hong Kong police confirmed the arrest of a 12-year-old girl, saying she had run “in a suspicious manner” and officers had used “minimum necessary force” to apprehend her.

“Police were concerned about youngsters participating in prohibited group gathering. Their presence at the chaotic protest scenes also endangers their own personal safety,” it said.

In a later statement police said: “Police attach great importance to integrity. If any person considers he or she is affected by police misconduct, he or she may lodge a complaint to the Complaints Against Police Office. It will be handled in a fair and impartial manner according to established procedures.”

On Sunday night, the Hong Kong government said people had ignored advice from police not to participate in unlawful assemblies, risking anti-pandemic efforts and potentially breaching the national security law. The government “strongly condemn[ed] these unlawful and selfish acts”.

“Police discharged their rightful duties today and took prompt and decisive actions to apprehend the offenders.”

The liaison office for the central government accused protesters of seeking to “reignite war”, and accused them of having “a cold-blooded disregard for the lives and health of the general public” in breaching gathering bans.

The spokesman said since the implementation of the law “Hong Kong society had undergone a positive change from chaos to governance”, and said there would be “zero tolerance” for any violations.

Almost 300 people were arrested on Sunday, the vast majority for unlawful assemblies. About 2,000 police officers were deployed early in the day, ahead of the protests which had been planned by a coalition of pro-democracy groups to mark the day that Hong Kong’s elections were supposed to be held.

Carrie Lam, Hong Kong’s chief executive, announced in July the elections would be postponed for one year because of the danger of Hong Kong’s most recent Covid-19 outbreak, but was accused of using the pandemic to silence opposition. Many protesters also called for the release of 12 people arrested by Chinese coastguards while attempting to flee by boat to Taiwan.

Separately, activist Tam Tak-chi was also arrested on Sunday, for “uttering seditious words”, Hong Kong police said.

The vice-president of radical democratic party People Power and a former radio host, Tam was arrested by the national security squad of the Hong Kong police force but was charged under the regular criminal ordinance, not the national security law.

Senior superintendent Li Kwai-wah said the squad was leading the investigation because of earlier suspicions that Tam had breached article 21 of the national security law, criminalising “incitement to secession”.

Tam’s words had “brought into hatred and contempt of the government and raised discontent and disaffection among Hong Kong people”, Li said.

At least 25 people have been arrested under the national security law so far, although just one has been charged.

The law has provided authorities with the means to widen the scope of their crackdown on dissent in Hong Kong, and has created a chilling effect across academia, media, and pro-democracy members of the public.

In the past month, newspaper offices have been raided, academics removed from their posts, and books regarded as be problematic removed from shelves or altered. Restaurants and shops have torn down “Lennon walls”, where people stuck up post-it notes with pro-democracy messages, and some politicians and activists have fled overseas.

The law’s articles are so broadly defined they have been found to potentially violate numerous international laws, UN groups said last week.

Media organisations have warned there is little clarity about whether standard acts of journalism – such as quoting someone advocating for independence – would put them in breach of the law, and some outlets have removed such content from online platforms. Visas for foreign journalists have also been delayed or outright denied.

The forgotten victims of the Beirut explosion: domestic workers

Dumped on the streets after Covid-19 hit, hundreds of nannies are now starving amid the ruins of last month’s blast

An Ethiopian migrant worker waits outside her country’s embassy in Beirut.
An Ethiopian migrant worker waits outside her country’s embassy in Beirut. Photograph: Joseph Eid/AFP/Getty Images

It is just over a month since the Beirut port explosion, and the footage from that day remains as shocking as it was when it first began to appear on our TV screens and social media. In fragments of video, the world saw Beirut life freeze in confusion at the unfamiliar sound of the explosion, then shatter as its impact hit. Among those bits of film we saw one scene, captured on domestic CCTV, that was replicated across the city – an African nanny instinctively scooping children up out of harm’s way, and protecting them with her body.

Many of these nannies are now sleeping on the streets of Beirut. Most are starving. Even before the explosion, an economic crisis exacerbated by the coronavirus pandemic meant that Lebanese employers could no longer pay their domestic workers. And so they made them gather their belongings, drove them to their embassies, and dumped them outside. Last June alone, more than 100 Ethiopian domestic workers were left outside their home country’s consulate. They live out of suitcases, and share mattresses. Some still try to maintain the discipline of wearing masks even as they sleep cheek by jowl on the unsanitary pavement.

Last week I spoke to Christine, a West African nanny and domestic worker who didn’t want to use her real name for fear of reprisals from her employer. A veteran of the Beirut labour market, she told me that she was trying to raise some money to help abandoned African women go back to their countries of origin. But that journey can’t be the priority. First, the women sleeping in the streets need to eat. If there is any money left over, it will be spent on shelter.

Travel from Lebanon to destinations in Africa is expensive, so the golden ticket home is reserved for the very sick who need to be with their families. She counts herself as one of the lucky ones, as her “madam” has kept her on, giving her a place to stay, and only reducing her salary by half.

The consulates, even when they are predisposed to helping, have to negotiate a labyrinth of Lebanese government bureaucracy, already infamous for its corruption and inefficiency. In order to secure the necessary paperwork for exit, hefty fees are levied by the ministry of labour, and then there are the travel costs. Ethiopian migrant workers are often told to try to return to their employers.

At the heart of this human rights crisis is a system of migrant labour that remains a stain on many countries in the Arab world. Known as kafala, or “sponsorship”, it effectively hands the fate of workers to their employers, who often withhold their passports to maintain control, and then demand that fees paid to employment agencies be repaid if workers want to leave before their contracts are up. This forces some workers to run away and become undocumented.

Anna, a nanny from the Philippines, told me how she managed to slip away from her abusive employer by layering three sets of underwear, tops and trousers on top of each other. That way she managed to bring with her a change of clothes without carrying a bag. She had lost so much weight by then, she jokes, that she could wear that much stuff without raising suspicion. She left everything else, including her passport, behind.

The cruelty of this kafala system isn’t an unfortunate outcome of bureaucracy, it is the result of a racist hierachy in which black workers find themselves at the bottom. Of all the nationalities that jostle and hustle for a living in the Middle East and the wider Arab world, dark-skinned African women are the cheapest to hire, the most desperate, and the most abused.

All migrant workers in Lebanon are struggling, Christine told me, but African women suffer the most because “we are not considered human beings, everybody ignores us. We are invisible.” Employers who can no longer pay their workers’ salaries can still house and feed them, but they choose not to, even though many maids and nannies offer to work for free.

As with any crisis, the most vulnerable are pushed off the cliff edge. Lebanon is struggling with a corrupt and incompetent political class, and now the aftermath of an explosion that would challenge the most robust infrastructure. The size of the rebuilding process that Beirut faces means that hungry African women sleeping rough on Beirut’s streets are rendered invisible twice – first by Lebanese society, which treats them as subhuman, and again by a global community that cannot see so many layers down into Lebanon’s ranking of victims.

For now, Beirut’s migrant workers are sticking together and sharing whatever meagre resources they have. They also try to warn others to stay away from the country. Christine fears they will still come in any case, because they believe they may be the lucky ones. “When you are poor you think, ‘Let me try,’ she says. “We just want to try.”

• Nesrine Malik is a Guardian columnist and the author of We Need New Stories: Challenging the Toxic Myths Behind Our Age of Discontent


Julian Assange: WikiLeaks founder arrested over 18 new allegations as he appears in court to fight US extradition

The new US indictment, filed in June, contains 18 charges and was handed to Assange moments before he appeared at the Old Bailey


Monday 7 September 2020 15:21, UK
Image:Supporters of Assange gathered outside the Old Bailey


Julian Assange has failed to get new allegations against him thrown out as he battles extradition to the US.

The WikiLeaks founder, 49, appeared at the Old Bailey in London after being held for months on remand at high-security Belmarsh Prison.

He was re-arrested in the court's cells on Monday over new charges contained in a US indictment.

It details a further 18 charges, lodged in June, which accuse him of plotting to hack computers and obtain and disclose national defence information.

Image:An artist's impression of Assange in the dock at the Old Bailey on Monday

They allege that he conspired with army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning to crack a scrambled password, known as "hash", to a classified US defence department computer.


The charges also offer further details of alleged hacking plotters that Assange and his WikiLeaks colleagues are said to have recruited.

The 49-year-old spoke only to state he "does not consent to extradition" and confirm his name.

Assange, who is wanted in the US for publishing hundreds of thousands of classified documents in 2010 and 2011, was clean-shaven with short hair and wore glasses, a dark suit, maroon tie and white shirt.

If convicted, he faces a maximum possible sentence of 175 years in jail.

\Image:Fashion designer Vivienne Westwood was outside court

His lawyer, Mark Summers QC, said the "fresh allegations at the 11th hour" were brought without warning or explanation, which meant they had no time to prepare a response.

He highlighted the difficulties Assange faced in speaking to his lawyers in the midst of ongoing restrictions.

"It would be an impossible task for the defence to deal with these fresh allegations in any meaningful way in the time that has been afforded to them, and that time is a matter of weeks in respect of which we are provided absolutely no explanation for the late arrival of these matters."

He added: "What is happening is abnormal, unfair and liable to create injustice if allowed to continue."

Image:Julian Assange's father was also at the central London court

But District Judge Vanessa Baraitser rejected the defence's bid to "excise" the allegations, saying: "These are issues which must take place in the context of considering the extradition request and not before it."

Outside court, hundreds of protesters gathered in support of Assange, including his father John Shipton and fashion designer Vivienne Westwood.

She said: "I'm an activist, I am very frightened, I've lost days and years of sleep worrying about Julian Assange.

"Julian Assange is the trigger, he is shining the light on all the corruption in the world."

Image:Assange has spent months on remand at Belmarsh Prison in south London

His father described the proceedings as an "abuse trial", which his defence claims has been targeted by Donald Trump's re-election campaign for "political reasons".

His partner, Stella Moris, who he shares two children with, was in the public gallery after delivering an 80,000-signature petition against his extradition to Downing Street.

Dozens of witnesses are expected to be called to give evidence at the Old Bailey over the four-week hearing, with the judgment likely to be delivered at a later date.

Assange has been on remand in Belmarsh Prison since last September after serving a 50-week sentence for breaching bail conditions while he was in London's Ecuadorian embassy for nearly seven years.

Assange’s legal battle to avoid US espionage trial resumes in London


Issued on: 07/09/2020

Text by: NEWS WIRES


A London hearing resumes on Monday to decide if WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange should be extradited to the United States to face trial over the publication of secrets relating to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

The 49-year-old Australian, who is currently being held on remand at a high-security jail, faces 18 counts from US prosecutors that could see him jailed for up to 175 years.

The hearing at the Central Criminal Court, the Old Bailey, is due to last three to four weeks. It had been due to go ahead in April but was delayed due to the coronavirus outbreak.

Any ruling is "almost certain" to be appealed by the losing side, according to John Rees, of the Don't Extradite Assange Campaign, raising the prospect of more time behind bars for the former hacker.

Rees told AFP that Assange -- who has become a figurehead for press freedom and investigative journalism -- had a "very strong defence" but was concerned the case was "highly politicised".


Assange's French lawyer talks to FRANCE 24 as London extradition hearings resume
509000

A previous hearing in February was told that US President Donald Trump had promised to pardon Assange if he denied Russia leaked emails from the campaign of Hillary Clinton, Trump's opponent in the 2016 election.

Assange faces charges under the US Espionage Act for the 2010 release of 500,000 secret files detailing aspects of US military campaigns in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Washington claims he helped intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning to steal the documents before recklessly exposing confidential sources around the world.

At the February hearing, Assange's lawyer, Edward Fitzgerald, said his client would not get a fair trial in the United States and would be a suicide risk.

James Lewis, representing the US government, said WikiLeaks was responsible for "one of the largest compromises of classified information in the history of the United States".

"Reporting or journalism is not an excuse for criminal activities or a licence to break ordinary criminal laws," he added.

'Extradition will be a death sentence'

Assange's partner and the mother of his two young sons, South African-born lawyer Stella Moris, attempted to secure his release in March, claiming he was in danger inside prison during the coronavirus lockdown.

"The life of my partner, Julian Assange, is at severe risk," she said, arguing that Covid-19 was "spreading within (the) walls" of Belmarsh prison in south London.

In an interview published in The Times newspaper on Saturday, Moris, 37, said: "For Julian, extradition will be a death sentence."

She said she feared he would take his own life, and that his sons, who were conceived during his asylum in Ecuador's London embassy, would grow up without a father.

Assange appeared weak and confused during his February court appearance, apparently forgetting his date of birth. He also told district judge Vanessa Baraitser he had not understood what had happened in the hearing.

His legal team has repeatedly warned about his health and an independent UN rights expert said in November that his continued detention was putting his life at risk.

Meanwhile, the Council of Europe rights group warned that Assange's extradition would have a "chilling effect" on press freedom.

Other high-profile supporters of Assange include the Pink Floyd co-founder Roger Waters, "Baywatch" star Pamela Anderson, designer Vivienne Westwood, and Greece's former finance minister Yanis Varoufakis.

The saga began in 2010 when Assange faced allegations of sexual assault and rape in Sweden, which he denied.

He was in Britain at the time but dodged an attempt to extradite him to Sweden by claiming political asylum in Ecuador's embassy in London.

For seven years he lived in a small apartment in the embassy, but after a change of government in Quito, Ecuador lost patience with its guest and turned him over to British police in April 2019.

Swedish prosecutors confirmed last year they had dropped the rape investigation, saying that despite a "credible" account from the alleged victim there was insufficient evidence to proceed.

(AFP)

As British show-trial resumes: The working class must defend Julian Assange!

By Oscar Grenfell
7 September 2020

The latest stage in the decade-long persecution of Julian Assange begins today, with the final three weeks of British court hearings for the extradition of the WikiLeaks publisher to the US, where he faces 175 years in prison for exposing American war crimes, human rights violations, coups and meddling operations around the world.

Whatever the court decides will likely be subject to years of legal appeal, but the scenario that Assange has warned of for the past ten years—that he risks being hauled before a secret US court, prosecuted for lawful publishing activities and thrown into a hellhole run by his CIA persecutors—is all too real.

The innumerable pundits and media commentators who derided these warnings as a conspiracy theory and promoted the slanders used to undermine public support for Assange have fallen silent. The legal travesty underway in the land of the Magna Carta either goes unmentioned in the official press, or is discreetly buried in brief columns halfway through the papers.

The hearings are only proceeding because the attempt of the British state to kill Assange by exposing him to the danger of coronavirus infection has so far failed.

Throughout the pandemic, Assange has been held in the maximum-security Belmarsh Prison, where he has been denied a mask or any other protection, even as dozens of inmates and staff have contracted COVID-19. A bail application has been contemptuously dismissed, despite the fact that Assange has been convicted of no crime, as have warnings that his health continues to deteriorate.

Assange, facing the most consequential legal proceedings of his life, has been unable to meet with his lawyers for the past six months. Weeks before the resumption of the trial, US prosecutors filed a superseding indictment, based on the lies and slanders of FBI informants, over a year after they were required to submit their final charge sheet. The transparent purpose was to inundate Assange’s legal team with tens of thousands of documents, after they had finished preparing their case, to prevent even the possibility of a defence.

As a matter of law, the US extradition request should have been thrown out as soon as it was submitted.

It violates innumerable treaties, laws and international conventions, including a ban on extraditions from Britain to the US for political offenses, prohibitions on the refoulement of those who have secured asylum to their persecutors and an absolute proscription on subjecting anyone to the likelihood of cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment, which Assange would unquestionably face in the US.

The WikiLeaks founder’s defence is expected to submit detailed evidence establishing that the CIA illegally surveilled Assange when he was a political refugee in Ecuador’s London embassy. His legal meetings were intercepted, in a flagrant breach of attorney-client privilege, and his infant child was spied upon, in a violation of fundamental human rights.

Despite the lawlessness, the hearings proceed, with the backing of the entire British political, media and legal establishment. The case is overseen by a judge whose husband has the closest ties to the intelligence agencies and the military. The Conservative government and the Labour opposition explicitly support the show-trial. The unions and the pseudo-left are opposed to any defence of Assange.

The line-up is proof that the only viable political strategy to fight for Assange’s freedom is one based upon the independent mobilisation of the working class against all of the official parties and the profit system that they defend.

Assange’s dire plight cannot be understood in isolation. It is one of the sharpest expressions of a turn to authoritarianism and censorship by governments around the world, amid a breakdown of capitalism, an escalation of imperialist militarism and the emergence of major class struggles.

The very governments persecuting Assange are at war with the population. In Britain, the US and Australia they have pursued a homicidal response to the pandemic, based on exposing millions of workers to a deadly virus so that capitalist production and corporate profits can continue.

Ordinary people are being made to pay for the economic crisis accelerated by the pandemic. Mass unemployment, the gutting of welfare and jobless payments and a stepped-up assault on wages and conditions goes hand in hand with government handouts of trillions of dollars to the banks, financial speculators and oligarchs.

The class war at home is accompanied by escalating war abroad, exemplified by continuous US provocations and threats against China and Russia, which risk a global nuclear conflagration.

None of this is compatible with democratic norms. Well aware that their criminal policies are inflaming mass social and political opposition from below, the ruling elites are responding with the blunt instruments of repression.

The US authorities, who want to destroy Assange, have, for the past three months, overseen state violence against mass protests in opposition to police killings. The turn to dictatorial methods is epitomised by Trump’s threats to illegally deploy the military against domestic opposition and his attempts to cultivate a fascistic movement.

His nominal opponent, Democratic Party presidential candidate Joe Biden, is rallying support from war criminals and the intelligence agencies. Biden’s program is internet censorship, military confrontation with Russia and China and trillions more for Wall Street.

The unanimity of the ruling elite in the assault on democratic rights is summed-up by the fact that the two official candidates in November’s US presidential election, Biden and Trump, both support the prosecution of Assange, which is a frontal assault on the press freedom enshrined in the US Constitution by the American Revolution. A similar bipartisanship is evident in every other country.

Desperate illusions that a section of the political establishment would come to Assange’s aid now take on the character of hopeless delusions.

Former British Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, who occasionally claimed to be a socialist, refused to defend Assange and has handed over control of the party to the Blairites. Bernie Sanders, who said that he was waging a “political revolution” through the big business Democratic Party, but would not even mention Assange’s name, is Biden’s most enthusiastic supporter.

The promotion of such bankrupt figures, including by organisations like the official Don’t Extradite Assange campaign group, has only served to demobilise and disorient the latent mass support for the WikiLeaks founder, and direct it behind the very forces responsible for Assange’s persecution.

Experience has shown that the social force that can and must take forward the fight for his freedom is the international working class. All over the world, teachers, auto workers, medical staff and many others are entering into struggle against the governments and corporate elites that have imperilled their lives during the pandemic, and attacked their social and democratic rights.

The persecution of Assange is not only aimed at silencing forever a courageous journalist and publisher who has exposed historic war crimes. It is an attempt to intimidate this emerging movement and establish a precedent for far broader victimisations and frame-ups.

But just as the working class will not accept the turn towards dictatorship, so it must defend Assange.

The World Socialist Web Site appeals to workers, students and young people to become active in the fight to block Assange’s extradition and secure his unconditional release. The fight for his freedom is your fight! It is inseparable from your struggles against inequality, the corporate onslaught on social conditions and the capitalist system that is responsible for the global crisis.

We encourage the broadest meetings and discussions in neighbourhoods, schools, universities and workplaces, along with public protests and rallies, where it is safe for them to be held. Resolutions should be adopted at workplaces, demanding an end to the persecution of Assange and calling on other sections of the working class to join this struggle.