Friday, November 01, 2024

 

Iran and the Axis of Resistance




Two years ago, Western media and academics reported that Iran was about to begin a new revolution in order to abolish the current political system, a legacy of the 1979 revolution. They dubbed this ‘new revolution, Woman, Life, Freedom,’ and described it as a feminist and democratic revolution. But as the Iranian public saw that the so-called leaders of this “new revolution” couldn’t organize a few thousand Iranians in a street demonstration and realized that the so-called leaders were not sovereign individuals who were dedicated to Iran, but Western-Israeli puppets, this “revolution” disappeared. The Iranian public soon found out that this “new revolution” was nothing more than riots whose main participants were thuggish elements who killed members of the police force and burned public assets, encouraged, instigated, and sponsored by western governments. Even though the so-called new revolution in Iran died a few months after its inception, Western governments and especially the Norwegian government were still hoping until October 6, 2023, for the revival of this fascist revolution to topple the government. In order to revive this alleged revolution, the Norwegian government awarded the Nobel Prize to Narges Mohammadi, a female political prisoner in Iran, whose invitation to any street protest in Iran, if she ever did, was unable to summon ten demonstrations.

However, this seemingly great opportunity to restart the ‘new revolution’ in Iran did not last long. On the morning of 7 October 2024, the American aspiration of a feminist and democratic revolution or regime change in Iran, which was also shared by its Western allies and West Asian client regimes, was transformed into a nightmare when a few hundred Palestinians carried out the Al-Aqsa Flood Operation in the occupied Palestine. The political landscape of West Asia has been altered by this military operation in such a way that American political projects, such as the Iranian regime change and the Abraham Accords, have faded away. To the surprise of the United States and its Western allies, such as Norway, and thanks to the Al-Aqsa Flood Operation, 8 October 2023 became the day of the revival of the ideals of the 1979 revolution, such as freedom and independence from Western Imperialism. The liberation of Palestine from occupation was one of the particular ideals of the Iranian revolution and the political system it generated. As the Iranian revolutionaries of 1979 comprehended Palestine until its liberation in a state of revolution, they coined the slogan “Wake up people, Iran has become Palestine” which became one of the most popular slogans of the revolution. Several days before the Al-Aqsa Flood Operation,  Western media outlet were reporting on the latest developments of the Abraham Accord and the excitement of the leaders of the slave-states of the Persian Gulf, such as Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirate, for signing the Accord. However, the leader of Iran, Ayatollah Khamenei, cautioned the leaders of these Arab regimes about the futility of their efforts to normalize relations with the apartheid regime of Israel. He described their efforts as “betting on a losing horse” because, in his opinion, the Palestinians were more capable than ever in their struggle for liberation from occupation.

In preparation for the Norwegian Nobel Committee’s decision to give the 2023 Nobel Peace Prize to Narges Mohammadi, a political activist with zero political influence in Iran, Norway organized a large gathering of Norwegian academics/imperialist agents and Iranian academics in diaspora who functioned as native informers. The Norwegian hosts were evidently interested in evaluating the degree to which the American regime change project coincided with the ‘new revolution’ in Iran. The conference persuaded the Norwegian Nobel Committee that Narges Mohammadi would be an ideal candidate for the Nobel Prize, as it would position her as a potential leader of the “new feminist and democratic” revolution in Iran. Because she is prone to repeating statements from Western masters about almost everything and remaining silent when they want her to be silent. The fact that she did not speak out regarding the Israeli genocide in Palestine explains, to a certain extent, why she was selected by the Nobel Committee as the winner of the 2023 Nobel Prize. Norway’s desire to play a role in the American regime change project in Iran was not a thoughtless decision, but a continuation of its effort in enhancing its own position in the American foreign policy strategy in the West Asia formulated in its foreign policy strategy document published in 2008. The document reveals that Norway’s foreign policy is merely an adjunct to the American foreign policy in West Asia and elsewhere. In accordance with the Norwegian foreign policy document and in the name of humanitarian intervention, Norway took an active role in the bombing of Libya in 2011. Many years later, as late as 2018, the Head of the Middle East Studies at the University of Oslo, who has been so dedicated to this foreign policy document, signs an open letter to the UN asking for humanitarian intervention in Syria. The letter to the United Nations states that Syrian sovereignty should not be viewed as a hindrance to protecting the Syrian people, as Kofi Anan, the former Secretary General of the United Nations, stated in one of his reports. According to Kofi Anan, “no legal principles — even sovereignty — can ever shield crimes against humanity.”

The Norwegian political elite was under the impression that by giving the Nobel Prize to a nobody of Iranian politics, they could either contribute to a regime change in accordance with the American plan or transform Iran into a new Syria and a target for humanitarian intervention. However, I doubt that any European academic would have the courage to ask the United Nations for humanitarian intervention in Palestine after the Israeli genocidal response to the Al-Aqsa Flood Operation. The unconditional support of the United States and other Western governments for the Israeli genocide against the defenseless Palestinian civilians for a year and now against Lebanese civilians has led people in the Global South to realize that the real meaning of democracy, human rights, and women’s rights that Westerners have been trying to bring them was genocide. After the 7th of October 2023, people from the Global South became aware that Israel, the state that Westerners have attempted to portray as the sole democracy in West Asia, is in fact a genocidal, racist and apartheid regime. They have discovered that the sole democracy in West Asia is a remnant of the colonial settler regimes of the past. This is the reason why its conduct cannot be distinguished from the avaricious and ruthless colonial powers of the past, and its survival and future depend on the persistence of American global dominance. The al-Aqsa Flood Operation not only succeeded in bringing to the attention of global public opinion the appeal of the oppressed and ethnically cleansed Palestinians, but also in defeating the American regime change project in Iran. Furthermore, the al-Aqsa Flood Operation revealed that Iran and the Axis of Resistance were the only forces that supported the Palestinian struggle for liberation from the Israeli occupation, as part of their own struggle against Western imperialism and in defense of their national sovereignty and independence in the region. The question is: How have Iran and its allies, in the Axis of Resistance, been able to liberate or protect themselves from the ideological deceptions and political traps, introduced and created by Western imperialism and their native informers, which would divide them and put them against each other?

Divide to Conquer and Rule

The methods Western governments use to promote their political and economic interests in the West Asia region are rarely examined by scholars and journalists who are specialized in the region. The scholars and journalists who work in the region are interested in the ethnic, religious, social and political dividing lines, cleavages or fault lines within the states and societies to enable Western governments led by the United States to exploit these dividing lines, cleavages and fault lines to their advantage. Recently, the Middle East Eye published a critical article on the preoccupation of Western governments, media, and academia with such dividing lines, whereas this publication has been preoccupied with such fault lines since its inception. While Saudi Arabia, in collaboration with the United States and Britain, was bombing noncombatant population and civilian infrastructure in Yemen for many years, the Middle East Eye was saying that the Iranian-backed Shia Houthi positions were the targets of the bombings. This publication would happily report that the Palestinian Hamas movement issued a statement supporting the ‘constitutional legitimacy’ of the Saudi collaborator, Yemeni President Abd Rabbuh Mansour Hadi. According to the Middle East Eye: “This statement is considered Hamas’s first tacit message of support for an ongoing Saudi-led military campaign against the Shiite Houthi group in Yemen, even as the Palestinian group did not clearly mention the campaign in its statement.” The Middle East Eye and outlets similar to it are the culmination of the American-Western declared plans for promoting democracy, human rights, stability and peace in West Asia. They are specialized in causing internal divisions and conflicts in the region. These media outlets typically exhibit empathy for the suffering of Palestinians and advocate for justice in the face of Israeli brutality. However, they hold Iran and the Axis of Resistance as the primary causes of instability in the region. This is why its editors, correspondents, and contributors hold an anti-Iranian position, while Iran has demonstrated that it is the only state in the entire world that sincerely supports the Palestinian struggle for liberation from the Israeli occupation. They downplay, dismiss, or criticize the Iranian position on the Palestinian issue. To create division within the Axis of Resistance, Middle East Eye spread lies about the Iranian Commander of the Qods Force’s role in the assassination of Seyed Hassan Nasrollah, the leader of Hezbollah. Qods Force is, in fact, the principal architect of the Axis of Resistance against Western imperialism and Israel in West Asia.

There are thousands of educated individuals from the West Asia region who have been working as native informers or imperialist propagandists for the United States and its Western allies since the early 1990s. These native informers and imperialist propagandists have been recruited as academics, NGOs, or political activists. While native informers have been elaborating on social, religious, ethnic, political, and cultural divisions within the region, imperialist propagandists have been attempting to turn these divisions into actual conflicts. However, the fact that a highly respected scholar of the West Asia region told the world that the 2023 fascist riots in Iran were a revolution against internal colonization demonstrated that native informers can easily turn into imperialist propagandists when the imperialist employer says so. “Woman, Life, Freedom is a movement of liberation from this internal colonization. It is a movement to reclaim life. Its language is secular, wholly devoid of religion. Its peculiarity lies in its feminist facet.”  A decade ago, this scholar argued that the security and economic interests of Western imperialism in West Asia were compatible with the political democratization of the region and considered the so-called Arab Spring to be the expression of the union between Western governments and Arab, Iranian and Turkish democrats under the leadership of Turkey. But since he has not learned anything from the failure of the Arab Spring, he has turned from being a native informer into an imperialist propagandist who refuses to learn from his logical inconsistencies and experiences. This is the reason why, years after the failure of the “Arab Spring” and months after the morally and politically justifiable suppression of the fascist riots in Iran, this native informer-imperialist propagandist cautions those he believes to be the genuine agents of the revolutionary movement that if they are unwilling or unable to assume power, others will. In his view, it was the unwillingness of the revolutionaries or those who had initiated and carried the uprisings forward in Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, and Yemen to assume power that allowed the free-riders, counterrevolutionaries, and others to assume power in the “Arab Spring”.

Before addressing the question of who are the protagonists and free riders of the “Arab Spring” in these countries, it is worth noting that the Bahraini Uprising, which was by far the most genuine uprising among the so-called “Arab Spring” uprisings, has been omitted from the narratives about the uprisings. Almost simultaneously with the brutal suppression of the Bahraini uprising by the Saudi Arabian and Emirati military, the terrorist campaigns against the Syrian government commenced. While Saudi Arabia and Qatar provided funding for the terrorist campaigns in Syria, Turkey provided logistical support for the terrorist campaign, and Western governments provided political cover by tying it to the Arab Spring. Western governments, their academia, and media, which were totally uncaring about the bloody suppression and murdering of Bahraini political activists, stood firm behind the terrorist organizations active in Syria as the only advocates of democracy and human rights. Contrary to the claims of this native informer and imperialist propagandist, almost nothing happened in Iraq and Lebanon during the ‘Arab Spring.’ After the anti-corruption demonstrations in these countries in 2019-2020 were hijacked by pro-Western and anti-Iran and anti-Hezbollah forces with the active support of American embassies, these two countries were added to the ‘Arab Spring.’

The Arab Spring 2 was an attempt to weaken and marginalize the Axis of Resistance, which included Iran, Syria, Hezbollah, the Iraqi Popular Mobilization forces, and the Yemeni Ansarullah. In fact, the same political forces and states that supported the Israeli war against Hezbollah in 2006, the ISIS and the Saudi-Emirati war against Yemen lauded the Arab Spring 2. Arab Spring failed because the United States and its Western allies did not recognize the sovereignty of the very nations whose democratic aspiration they claimed to support. By the term “democracy,” the United States and its allies refer to political regimes in the region that adhere to their directives and follow their advice irrespective of their national interests or deliberations. The political regimes that follow the American order in the region share one thing in common: their opposition to and animosity toward the Axis of Resistance. This has paralyzed them to express their opinion of their people and condemn the Israeli genocide in the region. Since the stability of these regimes depends on how useful they are for the Axis of Western Domination led by the United States in the region, they cannot do otherwise. Nevertheless, a significant fracture has emerged among the educated Arabs, Iranians, and Turks who have come to the realization that the true essence of the entire Western discourse on democracy, human rights, and women’s rights is genocide. The fact that Israel has been committing genocide against the Palestinian people with the direct assistance of Western governments and their media, in violation of the Genocide Convention, makes the latter an accomplice in the Israeli genocide. As per article III of the Genocide Convention, both the act of committing and complicity in genocide are punishable offenses. According to article IV: “Persons committing genocide or any of the other acts enumerated in article III shall be punished, whether they are constitutionally responsible rulers, public officials or private individuals.”

With Israeli genocide and the unconditional support of all the members of the Axis of Western Domination led by the United States in West Asia, this Axis has been turned into an Axis of Genocide. It is noteworthy that all members of this supported the ‘new revolution’ in Iran. Israel was the most prominent sponsor of the fascist riots, with which Norway had the illusion of competing through the 2023 Nobel Prize. From 2001 to 2011, the Axis of Western Domination bombed any state or nation that hesitated to accept their submission peacefully, provided they were defenseless. They bombed and invaded Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya because they realized that these states and nations were defenseless. Due to the failure of the Axis of Western Domination in the region to subjugate Hezbollah, Syria, and Ansarullah through the Israeli war against Lebanon in 2006, the terrorist campaigns against Syria since 2011, and the Saudi-Emirati war against Yemen since 2015, the Axis of the Resistance has been formed. The Iraqi Popular Mobilization, whose main components emerged as a response to the American occupation of Iraq in 2003, joined the Axis of Resistance to fight the Western-Israeli phenomenon known as ISIS in Iraq and Syria. ISIS succeeded in controlling large parts of these two countries in 2014 through acts of genocide against all those they deemed to be unbelievers, especially Shia Muslims. Western governments and Israel hoped that an ISIS Khalifat in Syria and Iraq would end Iranian political influence in these two countries, which they viewed as a bridge to Hezbollah in Lebanon. It is the same story with Ansarullah, who were ruling the 80% of the Yemeni population. Saudi Arabia and its Western and regional backers accused Ansarullah of being an Iranian proxy but failed to defeat it after a decade. The Western backed Saudi-Emirati war against the Ansarullah movement made the movement stronger and its ties with Iran friendlier because Iran was the only state that supported them against foreign powers politically, economically and militarily. Hamas and Islamic Jihad joined the Axis of Resistance because they realized that the Axis was the only political and military force they could rely on to free Palestine from Israeli occupation. What is common between the Lebanese, Syrian, Iraqi and Syrian and Yemeni and Palestinian experience is that they had to defend their sovereignty against states and terrorist organizations that were supported by the United States, other Western governments and Israel. The Axis of Resistance is not a result of the decisions made by governments, but rather a result of the convergence of states and movements that have been fighting for their sovereignty and independence from the former Axis of Western Domination and the current Axis of Genocide in the region for several decades. Iran learned from its experience fighting alone against an enemy who had the support of Western powers in the 1980s that it was important to form an alliance against Western intervention in the West Asia region. This is why, while trapped in a devastating war, Iran helped the formation of Hezbollah, which has become the most effective resistance organization against the Israeli occupation of Lebanon since the 1980s. Iran went on to support Hamas and Islamic Jihad, which started their Armed Struggle in the 1980s and 1990s, and at the same time supported Islamic and anti-imperialist forces in Iraq and Yemen, which are now known as the Yemeni Ansarullah and Popular Mobilization Forces in Iraq.

Each member of the Axis of Resistance has experienced the impacts of the Axis of Western Domination in their own country and in the region, and their actual resistance against such impacts has qualified them as constituting components of the Axis of Resistance. This is why each member of the Resistance raises the universalizing character of the Axis. If the slogan “one for all and all for one” has any meaning, it can be found in the practice and experiences of solidarity of the Axis of Resistance. While the Axis of Resistance was forming against the forces of Western Domination in the region, including Israel, not only Arab autocracies and Turkey, but also an army of native informers posing as academics and journalists argued that the people of the region could escape from the suffering of imperialist injustice if they are accustomed to it and contributed to its continuity. The terms of acceptance of imperialist injustice in the region and of contributing to its continuity were democracy, human rights, and women’s rights or moderation.

While Turkey represented democracy, human rights, and women’s rights for a while, especially during the Arab Spring, Saudi Arabia represented moderation. Therefore, the entire discourse regarding the politics of West Asia oscillated between moderation and democracy.

Although numerous scholars promoted Turkey while advocating for the objective of ‘Making Islam Democratic,’ the responsibility of promoting Saudi Arabia was delegated to Thomas Friedman and his like-minded people. The result was a fierce competition between the leaders of Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, and Turkey for the consolidation of American hegemony in the region and for the normalization of Israeli apartheid in occupied Palestine. These leaders believed that their contribution to the imperialist injustice in the region and their collaboration with the Axis of Western Domination would safeguard them from harsh treatment in the ongoing injustice.

The efforts to make themselves a darling of the imperialist dominance in the region might explain the animosity of the imperialist clients against Iran and the Axis of Resistance expressed in their countless English and Arabic media outlets. A glance at the seemingly progressive and reliable outlets such as Aljazeera and Jadaliyya, Middle East Eye, and TRT will reveal the extent of their anti-resistance and anti-Iranian posture, not to mention the media owned by Saudi Arabia and the UAE. The majority of regional analysts appearing in these media outlets appear to be pro-Palestinian. Convinced of the enduring nature of the dominance of Western imperialism, led by the United States in the region, they refer to the members of the Axis of Resistance as the “proxies of the Iranian regime” to remind their audience of the temporary nature of the Iranian state. It appears that these analysts are unaware of the fact that all small and large Western governments constitute the primary obstacle to Palestinian liberation in any meaningful manner. These outlets do not mention that Iran has been subject to murderous economic sanctions for several decades because of its loyalty to its allies in the Axis of Resistance. While the Saudi-Emirati war against Ansarullah was supported by all Western governments, Iran was the only state to support the Ansarullah movement. Iran has provided support to the Yemeni Ansarullah, the Lebanese Hezbollah, the Iraqi Popular Mobilization Force, the Palestinian freedom fighters such as Hamas and Islamic Jihad, as well as the Syrian government, as they all represent forces of sovereignty who defend their independence and freedom from Western dominance.

The United States and its Western allies have imposed economic sanctions on Iran due to their assertion that it has committed three unforgivable sins. They claim that Iran interferes with the affairs of other countries in the region, which implies that Iran does not accept the rulers imposed by the United States on the region. Thus, it supports forces that resist American interference in the region. According to American rules in the region, Palestinians must be prevented from fighting for their rights and for their liberation from Israeli bondage, and that Israel must preserve its military and technological supremacy regardless of the costs for other states and nations in the region. Iran not only regards Israel as an illegal state in the region that needs to be dismantled, but it also seeks to end American omnipotence and tyrannical power in the region, since it is the United States and its allies that allow Israel to commit genocide against the Palestinian and Lebanese people with impunity. According to American rule, Saudi Arabia on behalf of the United States should determine who should govern in Yemen, something Iran rejects and says that every state and nation must be the master of its own destiny. The second reason Iran is the target of American and Western sanctions is its advancing military technology, especially its advanced missile program, which the United States and other Western powers want to be dismantled. The real meaning of this Western demand is that Iran ceases its missile program and disarms itself so that it would not be able to reach enemy targets beyond its borders. This makes it easier for the United States and its allies to wage war against it. Iran not only succeeded in developing its military technology and accomplishing advanced missile and drone programs to secure its territorial integrity and national sovereignty against American threats, but it also succeeded in boosting the military technology of its allies in Yemen, Lebanon, Iraq and Palestinians to be more effective against the Axis of Western Domination and Genocide in the region. Ultimately, Iran has been subjected to demonization and economic sanctions and has become a target of Israeli terrorism due to its alleged pursuit of nuclear weapons. The United States wants Iran to prove that it is not seeking nuclear weapons in return for easing economic sanctions against it. According to this American logic, it is not the accuser who must demonstrate through the presentation of evidence that the accused has committed a wrong, but rather the accused who must demonstrate against evidence that is not present that he or she has not committed the wrong. To satisfy the American demand and demonstrate that Iran has no intention of making nuclear weapons, Iran must dismantle its entire nuclear program and refrain from developing nuclear technology. Iran does not accept this because it is a violation of its national sovereignty. Furthermore, Iran does not wish to be deprived of all options whenever it encounters an existential threat from either Israel or the United States. Therefore, it possesses all the necessary technology to produce nuclear weapons; however, it refrains from producing such weapons as it is not currently confronting an existential threat. Recently, Iranians are reminding Western powers that if they create a threatening condition for Iran, Iranians may reconsider their nuclear policy in a matter of days.

The rationale behind the economic sanctions, media war and regime change projects against Iran was that such measures would either install a Western friendly regime or convince Iran to change its behavior and give up its sovereignty. The United States and its allies were hoping that, even if all regime-change attempts and attempts to change Iran’s behavior fail, it would become so fragile that it could not hold the Axis of Resistance together and assist its allies in the region when they needed it most. Despite economic sanctions and technological embargo imposed by the Axis of Domination and Genocide in the region on Iran, Iran has proved to be more economically prosperous, technologically advanced, ideologically and politically influential, and militarily stronger than anticipated. Iran not only helped the Axis of Resistance economically and militarily, but also helped them achieve a high degree of technological sophistication and military self-sufficiency that no power could take from them, despite its own economic difficulties. Every member of the Axis was convinced by this that Iran believes in their talent and strength and wants them to be strong, self-sufficient, dignified, sovereign and equal members of the Axis. It suffices to compare the reverence of the Iranian leaders to that of Seyed Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of Hezbollah, with the contemptuous treatment of Saad Hariri, the former Prime-Minister of Lebanon, by the leaders of Saudi Arabia. Iran and Saudi Arabia have treated these two Lebanese political leaders differently, demonstrating who is considered a sovereign ally and who is a dependent proxy.

Iran comprehends that in the event that the Axis of Domination and Genocide defeats the apparent weaker links within the Axis, it will not be content with anything less than Iran’s complete surrender. Imperial agents and their native informers interpreted almost every Western aggression or any Western political project as a means of regime change in Iran. This included the occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq, the Israeli War on Lebanon, the Arab Spring, and finally the fascist riots in Iran. The fascist riots in Iran, entitled Woman, Life, Freedom, were the last misinformation and disinformation attempt by the imperialist agents and their native informers. They created the illusion for Western governments, as their employers, that Iran was on the brink of collapse and would be forced to submit to American conditions in the region. These imperialist agents and their native informers, who have been functioning as academics, journalists, political activists, and NGO activists, have failed miserably in their last attempt. All the efforts carried out by these imperialist agents and native informers who have constructed religious, political, ethnic, and gender divisions in West Asia have been guided by the principle of divide and rule. They explained that political and economic underdevelopment, conflicts, and wars in the region were related to these divisions. These epistemological assumptions serve as a guideline for Western media and pro-Western media in the West and the region, but they also serve as a point of departure for social scientists and historians in the region. What follows from the knowledge produced based on these epistemological assumptions requires the active intervention of Western governments in the region. Western governments thus finance, initiate, and establish organizations which call themselves non-governmental organizations as instruments of interference in the social and political affairs of various societies in the region. Without the financial support of their government, Western NGOs in the region will disappear. This indicates that non-governmental organizations serve to divert the local populace from the fact that Western imperialism and Western elite are the main responsible for the social, religious, and political divisions and conflicts in the region.

Since unity, solidarity, and fraternity in the region challenge American imperialism regionally and globally, movements that promise unity, solidarity, and fraternity in the region are designed as Iranian proxies that conspire against peace and stability in the region. The imperialist agents and native informers who accuse Iran of interfering in Iraqi affairs never mention the fact that the United States has taken Iraq’s entire oil revenue hostage to impose its will on the Iraqi state. The United States and its Western allies use every political means, terrorism, mass murder and even genocide to reshape the region according to their insatiable interests. Naturally, the imperialist agents and their native informers become preoccupied with Iran’s nuclear ambitions, expansion, and influence, as well as its proxies, as the main causes of political disputes and social conflicts in the region. The anti-government and anti-corruption demonstrations in Iraq and Lebanon during the period of 2019-2020 were referred to as the Arab Spring 2 by the imperialist agents and their native informers, as they turned anti-Iran and anti-Hezbollah.

The Struggle for Sovereignty

Iran managed to build and strengthen a regional front known as the Axis of Resistance against the alliance of the Axis of Domination and Genocide, while every regional analyst believed that the collective West and Israel were going to shape the West Asia region according to their own security and economic interests. In his last speech, Iran’s leader said that the only reason the U.S. and other Western powers support the Israeli apartheid regime is because it lets them control the natural resources of the region. He explained that by controlling the region’s resources, the West, led by the United States, would be more confident in their future conflicts with other world powers such as China and Russia. Western powers have become the accomplices of the Israeli genocide because not only their security and economic interests, but their supremacist attitude toward non-Westerners is indistinguishable from those of the Israeli regime, according to Iran’s leader. This is the reason why, rather than focusing on the racist and genocidal nature of the Israeli regime, the Western media places emphasis on its military might and portrays it as the most powerful entity in the region. According to the leader of Iran, the combination of Israel’s fictitious military might with the American aspiration of transforming this regime of apartheid and genocide into a hub for both energy export from the region to the West and for importing Western products and technology to the region prompted several regimes in the region to normalize their relations with this regime. But the Palestinians and other members of the Axis of Resistance are fighting for their freedom and independence from Israeli and American dominance in the region, which has turned this Western dream into a nightmare.

Iran was, in fact, the first member of this resistance and was able to anticipate its formation since the 1979 revolution. The Iranian revolution transformed the country from a client of American imperialism into a sovereign and self-governing state. According to the section on foreign policy of the constitution of this sovereign state specified in articles 152, 153, and 154, Iranian governments have a duty to reject any forms of imperialist domination or interference in Iranian internal politics. Moreover, it obligates the Iranian governments to demonstrate active solidarity with all nations that oppose imperialist dominance and interference in their internal affairs. Here, the key concept is the sovereign right of nations and states to shape their societies according to their own will, aspirations, ideas, deliberations, and decisions. According to Article 152 of the Iranian constitution, The Islamic Republic of Iran is mandated to reject any form of foreign dominance within its territory, to preserve its independence and territorial integrity, and to defend the rights of all Muslims and the oppressed peoples of the world against superpowers. Article 153 prohibits any agreements that give any form of foreign control over the Iranian natural resources, economy, army, or culture. Finally, according to the Article 154, “The ideal of the Islamic Republic of Iran is independence, justice, truth, and felicity among all people of the world. Accordingly, it[the Islamic Republic] supports the just struggles of the Mustad’afun (oppressed) against the Mustakbirun (oppressors) in every corner of the globe.” During the first year of the revolution in Iran, there was a universal consensus among all revolutionary tendencies on these ideals declared by the Iranian Constitution. These articles of the Iranian constitutions are the guiding lines of the Iranian struggle to defend its state sovereignty and to support other nations in their struggles for sovereignty and independence from imperialist powers. Iran has supported the Palestinian struggle for liberation from Israeli apartheid for the same reason it supported South African struggles against apartheid. Iran stands in solidarity with Hezbollah, the Syrian government, Yemeni Ansarullah, and Iraqi Popular Mobilization Forces as they fight for the same independence and sovereignty that it enjoys itself. Iranian independence and sovereignty prevent it from joining the Axis of Western Domination and Genocide in the region. Iran is aware that without aiding and defending the sovereignty of others, it is unable to safeguard its own sovereignty. For a long time, the imperialist agents and their native informers have argued that the Iranian nation does not endorse Iran’s interventions in Western imperialist affairs in the region. However, recent opinion polls conducted by imperialist agents and their native informers indicate that, the majority of Iranians “are invested in the idea of providing military support to Iran’s proxy groups in the Middle East, the so-called “Axis of Resistance” (Jebhe Moqavemat). Sixty percent are in favor of this policy and 31 percent are against it.”  Western governments’ academic and media mouthpieces accuse Iran for two contradictory reasons. They blame Iran for using its financial resources to assist and empower its proxies who cause instability in the region instead of using those resources to elevate the prosperity of its own people or accuse it of using other members of the Axis of Resistance for its own interests. While the first claim assumes Iran to be a nefarious but a rational and pragmatic player in the region, the latter claim assumes Iran to be an ideological, fanatic and dogmatic actor. Iran must be contained, moderated, or subject to constant demonization, economic sanctions, terrorism, and regime change since it is the cause of instability in both cases. However, despite the numerous criminal plots against the Iranian state and nation since the revolution, Iran has steadfastly upheld the revolutionary principles of sovereignty and independence against Western imperialism and demonstrated genuine solidarity with the oppressed people who fight for their own sovereignty and independence.

Even though the Soviet Union collapsed, which made the United States the global sovereign or consolidated its global hegemony, supported and facilitated by its various Western allies and regional clients, and to which Russia and other members of the former socialist block in Europe and Central Asia surrendered, Iran did not relinquish its sovereignty and independence. Iran faced two choices: either surrender to American global hegemony and its “new world order” or face American wrath in the form of regime change or land invasion, as it happened in Afghanistan and Iraq, Libya and Syria. Iran realized that it was impossible to protect its own sovereignty without promoting the principle of sovereignty and practicing a genuine practice of solidarity with all forces that resisted American domination and Israeli aggression in West Asia.

This is how the Axis of Resistance as we know it today came into being.  Iranians had to resist not only the military, economic, and political consequences of American global dominance in the region, but also the circulation of its ideology by contemporary political philosophers, historians, political scientists, sociologists, and anthropologists, who theorize, justify, and normalize the American order. The Aristotelian theory of rulership and governance is at the heart of the new world order. According to this theory, the soul, composed of the rational and expedient components of the world, is destined to reign over the physical, passionate, and natural components of the world. The American world order ideology assumes that the West, led by the U.S., represents the former and the rest of the world represents the latter in the contemporary world. This theory argues that the United States and its allies represent the human elements that must rule the animal elements of the world because both men and animals are better off when animals are tamed and ruled by men. This theory assumes that, since it is always the superior who discovers this principle of ruling, he must make sure that the inferiors understand this principle. This theory makes the inferior believe that he is a slave who must obey the superior as his master and execute his orders unquestionably. According to this principle of rulership, while the task of the slave is the administration of things and production of the necessities of life, the task of the master is the administration of the slaves. Russia, which consented to being administered by the West, led by the United States, attempted to fulfill the duties of a slave and fulfill the master’s demands, however, it was unsuccessful. However, China, which has achieved great success in the administration of things and production of necessities of life, has come to the realization that as a nation, they have high expectations and desire to safeguard their sovereignty and independence. At the same time, Russia realized that their success in the administration of things and the production of the necessities of life depended on them protecting their sovereignty and independence from Western interventions in the affairs of their nation. Aristotle advised superior men to do philosophy and politics because they were the kind of science that enable the superior to command the slave who produces the necessities of life. Modern imperialism, from an Aristotelian perspective, would not be possible without modern philosophy, social sciences and humanities that have persuaded the rest of the world of their inferiority. As Aristotle argued that plants exist for the sake of animals, and animals exist for the sake of men, and the slave exist for the sake of the master, modern human and social sciences argue that non-Westerners exist for the sake of Westerners. Imperial agents and their native informers are practitioners of the social and human sciences, whose failure to convince the inferior people of their inferiority could result in the inferior people refusing to be governed by their superiors. When this occurs, the Americans and their Western allies attempt to coerce the inferior populace into submission by means of economic sanctions, intimidation, and threats. Whenever these measures fail, and the superior Westerners find the inferior people defenseless, they turn into wild beasts by indiscriminate killing of civilians, murdering babies, women, and elderly people, and destroying their homes. The Israeli Genocide of Palestinian and Lebanese people is the last example of such crimes.  While the United States, with the help of its Western allies, attempts to dominate the world by demonstrating Western superiority and the inferiority of the rest of the world, Israel fails to dominate West Asia despite all the political, economic and military help it receives from America and Europe. In 2006, Israel attempted to replicate what the United States and its Western allies accomplished in Afghanistan and Iraq in 2001 and 2003, but it fell short. Since the so-called Arab Spring, the United States and Israel have worked together to kill as many Libyan, Syrian, Yemeni people as they can and destroy as much of their infrastructure as they can because according to the imperialist principle, the superiors can either subjugate the inferiors or destroy them. However, Iranian revolutionary foreign policy has rejected this Western superiority complex and has tried to minimize its political consequences in the region. Iran has been trying to convince the people of the region that their struggle for sovereignty and independence from imperialist domination is impossible without the formation of a united front to resist American and Western intervention in the region. From an Iranian perspective, the resistance against the imperialist dominance in the region is intrinsically linked to the Palestinian struggle for liberation from the Israeli occupation. Iran supports the Palestinian struggle for sovereignty and independence, as an unfree Palestine would make the future of its own sovereignty and independence uncertain. Because an unfree Palestine means supremacy of the Western Axis of Domination and Genocide in the region. This may explain the moral high ground held by Iran when it comes to the Israeli genocide and its Western and regional accomplices.

According to Aristotle in the Nicomachean Ethics, book VIII, it is with friends that men are more able to think and to act because the impacts of friendship are so significant that it can hold states together. Whereas men with friends do not have a need for justice, just men need friendship because justice has a friendly quality. But true friendship is about reciprocal goodwill, since friends wish what is good for one another for their own sake. It is the mutual recognition of goodwill between people that makes them friends. According to Aristotle, there are people who love each other for their utility and in virtue of some good which they get from each other. There are also those who love for the sake of pleasure because they find each other pleasant. Hence, those who love others for the purpose of their utility, do so for the sake of their own well-being, whereas those who love for the sake of pleasure do so for the sake of their own pleasure. If the parties don’t stay what they are to each other, their friendship will be easily broken up. For instance, when an individual ceases to be pleasant or useful to the other, the latter ceases to love them. Friendship is perfect when men are good and equal because they wish well for their friends for their own sake. Such friendships last as long as the parties remain good, and goodness is a lasting thing. Friendships such as these are not instrumental because they are not based on how useful friends are to each other. Since true friendship is rare and infrequent, it requires time and familiarity. The imperialist agents and their native informers fail to understand that Iran and the Axis of Resistance are the only true friends in Asia because they founded their friendship on mutual recognition of their sovereignty, equality, and struggle for justice. The familiarity with such virtues in each other took time, but the time was not wasted. The time was used to discover what is good in each other.FacebookTwitterRedditEmail

Yadullah Shahibzadeh received a Bachelor, Master, and PhD from The University of Oslo, taught and researched at the same university for many years and published several books including Marxism and Left-Wing Politics in Europe and Iran (2018) and Public Intellectuals and their Discontents: From Europe to Iran (2020). Read other articles by Yadullah.

 

Electoral College in the US: How It Came about and How It Works

The Oddities of the Founding Fathers' Electoral System that elects the US President

The most ideal title should be: “How the Electoral College in the USA came about and how it works, which even ordinary Americans completely fail to understand.”

We will indirectly refer to three texts, the “US Constitution” (1787), Howard Zinn’s book, A People’s History of the United States (1980), but also Paul Johnson’s book, A History of the American People (1997—it took him 32 years to write!). Here are some key ideas we find:

The Electoral College could be a legacy of the Wild West, but it isn’t. It is a “heavy legacy” of the era of slavery, and not only. As the various States stood on their own two feet, there were also fundamental differences. The worthy Founding Fathers had studied the experience of ancient Greece, where every citizen had one vote. So, when they were thinking about how to draft America’s founding documents, the fact of the vote had to essentially be this: one citizen equals one vote, as that is also the rule of democracy.

In the American South, slaves did not have the right to vote. The state rulers and “Southern thinkers of the time” (if such a thing can be said) wanted the slaves to be counted and considered as part of the general population to increase the power of each State, but not to vote. In addition, the Founding Fathers also wanted a compromise between electing the President by Congress—it was an idea—and electing him by the popular vote. It also played a role that, in the 17th century when all this was planned, the fastest way to convey information was on horseback.

How could these issues be resolved? With electors, i.e. the institution/body of the College of Electors.

In each State, the electors are a number proportional to the population, as it is made up of the number of representatives and the number of senators, two in each State. The representatives and senators of each State cannot become electors themselves. Each of the States starts with three electors. (After the Constitution was revised in 1961, the District of Columbia, where Washington is located, also gained three electors). The two senators and “the starting point of three electors” which is the minimum guarantee the equality of the States. The total number of electors is 538, of which 438 are representatives and 100 are senators. (For example, California has 54 electors, Arizona 11, Alaska 3).

The acceptance of the electoral system as a fixed system of electing the President has a long history and special weight. And, paradoxically, this College helped to stabilize and grow America (…buying territories from France, Russia, and elsewhere, and in time, to become the superpower of the 21st century. It is the leading power of the West. The US election concerns every corner of the planet).

The District of Columbia and all but two states have chosen the first-past-the-post system in how electors are apportioned. In other words, the party that wins in the State —with the classic 50+1 of the votes— also gets all the electors. The two states that “go against the current” are Nebraska and Maine. Here, the distribution of electors is done proportionally, i.e. according to the percentage of each party. But usually, their electors divided somewhere in the middle.

The Electoral College has “gone against” the popular vote only 5 times (there have been 59 US presidential elections). “Gone against” means there is a mismatch between what the people in the 50 States plus the District of Columbia want/vote for and what the Electoral College tally that decides who will be President finally gives. In 2016 we had such a mismatch, when Donald Trump was elected President, while Hillary Clinton won the popular vote.

Let’s add another observation here: American voters —who themselves do not understand much how the Electoral College works— do not vote on November 5 directly for president, but “tell their State” how to vote for president. Electors are not “obliged” to follow what the citizens have told them: if they wish, the law allows them to change their minds. The 538 electors will meet in December to “elect” the President and the Vice President.

In elections there are states that traditionally vote for Republicans and others for Democrats. There are seven states in total, and it is their own electors who make the big difference. As an example, Pennsylvania with 19 electors, Michigan with 15, Wisconsin with 10… And you reach the most powerful office in the world when 270 electors gather. Thriller. But, recently, there is hope that a woman will cut the thread for the first time… (And, also, one day in the future, it could be a progressive idea to return to the ancient rule of democracy: one citizen equals one vote, and reform to its core the Electoral College, or even to be completely abolished.)FacebookTwitterRedditEmail

Dimitris Eleas is a political scientist, writer and researcher living in New York. You can contact him at: dimitris.eleas@gmail.comRead other articles by Dimitris.

 ALF





FBI: Two arrested for mink release connected to anarchist communes

From The Daily Item
October 28, 2024

SUNBURY — Federal Bureau of Investigation officials say two Massachusetts residents involved in the Oct. 19 release of hundreds of mink in Northumberland County are tied to anarchist groups in New England.

Pennsylvania State Police also believe one was paid $50,000 to come to Sunbury and release the animals.

According to an amended criminal complaint filed by Stonington state police, Christopher Legere, 25, and Cara Mitrano, 27 are connected to “Firehouse,” and “Collective A Go Go,” anarchist communes located in Worcester, Massachusetts, law enforcement officials said. Police say the pair released 683 minks from Richard Stahl Fur Farm, outside of Sunbury, early on Oct. 19.

Troopers say they intercepted Northumberland County Jail phone calls where Legere claims he was promised $50,000, according to a criminal complaint.

District Attorney Michael O’Donnell amended the charges and has added felony eco-terrorism, burglary, theft by unlawful taking, criminal mischief, corrupt organizations, and misdemeanor counts of agricultural trespass on posted land, recklessly endangering another person, accident involving damage, loitering and prowling at nighttime and conspiring in unwarranted detention, according to court documents.

Police began an investigation into the second incident on the farm in a little more than a year when they were called to the farm early on Oct. 19. Police spoke to members of the Stahl family, who said they took pictures of the suspect’s vehicle as members of the fur farm attempted to block the road so the suspects couldn’t leave, police said.

The suspects tried to flee the scene once, troopers said, and when they were located, the vehicle they were in accelerated toward one of the Stahl’s vehicles, damaging it before fleeing south on Airport Road, troopers said.

The Stahls followed the vehicle and watched it turn onto Seven Points Road, then onto Captain Bloom Road, where one of the Stalls saw a backpack, work gloves and a dark sweatshirt being tossed from the fleeing vehicle, troopers said.

Ralpho Township police became aware of the vehicle and made a traffic stop soon after the incident, troopers said. The vehicle was towed from the scene, police said.

A hand-drawn map and directions were seized from Mitrano’s front pant pocket, troopers said.

After executing a search warrant signed by a Northumberland County judge, troopers said they recovered a wire-cutting tool, two stickers that read “policy proposal” depicting a police car on fire. Also found were work gloves, a lockpicking kit, a map and directions, with an “X” on Airport Road where Mitrano and Legere were going to park and an arrow illustrating where to walk through the woods to the mink farm, police said.

Both are being held in lieu of $150,000 cash bail and will appear in front of Sunbury District Judge Rachel Wiest-Benner on Tuesday morning for a preliminary hearing.

This was the second time in just more than a year the fur farm was struck by vandals. Thousands of mink were released in September 2023.

O’Donnell would not say if the two incidents were related.

In the 2023 incident, Joseph Buddenberg, a press officer with the North American Animal Liberation Press Office, said he believed the farm was targeted. According to the website, animalliberationpressoffice.org, an anonymous letter was posted to the site claiming responsibility for the attack.




 

Lindsann on In the Digital Age: Poetic Reason as an Alternative

From Fifth Estate #415, Summer 2024

a review of Poetic Reason in the Age of Digital Control by Jesús Sepúlveda. Bad Idea Publishing, 2023

Jesús Sepúlveda’s Poetic Reason in the Age of Digital Control addresses some of today’s most pressing threats and sketches out some promising ideas of a strategy in response, which will hopefully be elaborated in future works.

Most of the book is devoted to describing the threats of ecological collapse, economic exploitation, neoliberal colonialism, rising totalitarianism, and a widespread failure of empathy. These phenomena are attributed to the root cause of the unrestrained rule of instrumental reason: “eclipsed by its reduction to an instrument—a tool that performs calculations,” a totalitarian force leveraged by industries, bureaucracies, internet algorithms, and now by AI technologies.

The precise nature of the proposed response, poetic reason and its methods, is less developed, and sometimes gets lost amidst rhetoric or peripheral details. Sepúlveda bases his conception of poetic reason on an essentialist perspective, declaring that because “Nature’s experience is unmediated, so is poetry, whose gratuity is not commodifiable because one cannot sell one’s experience.”

The examples of poetic reason offered, while relatively few, are drawn from a wide range of regions across the globe, including the animism of Amazonian indigenous peoples, and the balance of instrumental and poetic reason displayed in the construction of a windmill from recycled material in Malawi, in Kamkwanba and Mealer’s memoir The Boy Who Harnessed the Wind (albeit twice mis-cited as “The Boy Who Harnessed the Wing”).

The precise nature of poetic reason nonetheless remains ambiguous and receives less attention and detail than the description of the general geopolitical situation. Some of this context is necessary, and the various factors of the global situation are persuasively woven into a strong critique of instrumental reason. The basic analysis will be familiar to anyone with a knowledge of green/anti-civ anarchy, Fifth Estate, or much of avant-garde poetics. However, this context takes up about three-fourths of the compact book. The focus shifts fully from describing the problem to presenting a solution about ten pages from the end, leaving little room for an in-depth exploration of poetic reason itself.

It is never made clear precisely what poetry itself, or by extension poetic reason, is for Sepúlveda. The relatively few poets cited, including the powerful examples of Vallejo and Paz, give some indication, but the reader trying to discern the exact nature of poetic reason’s revolutionary core is left mainly with familiar, essentialist declarations of poetry’s special purity. But what makes the reason of poetry more pure than that of prose? What constitutes its essential, radical nature: its speakable rhythms, its sensuous form? The social roles of the poet? Its evocation of imagery and symbol? Its alteration of the writer’s and reader’s state of consciousness?

It is never explained in what way poetry, a product of language, arguably mediation par excellence—is unmediated. Sepúlveda declares that “Written verses mediated by the market are not poetry,” but it is unclear whether this is part of the working definition of poetry, a turn of rhetoric, or a practical call for gatekeeping against the selling of all poetry. For instance, does selling a poem disprove this definition? Would this include zines? Busking? At least several of the poets he cites as inspiration have sometimes sold their poetry.

Sepúlveda certainly makes a strong case for the necessity of poetic reason, however defined, raising key questions: how exactly might we begin to cultivate it individually and/or culturally? How is it learned, how is it practiced beyond the confines of poetry itself? What are some strategies whereby it can combat systemic misery?

These questions have been energetically explored for generations, but there is no discussion of them here, nor of the multiple histories of anti-instrumental poetry, or analysis of the social roles or forms that characterize modern poetry.

No account is taken of poetry’s evolution and its variety in countless societies, seemingly taking contemporary bourgeois culture’s understanding of poetry for granted as a static concept.

Therefore, the idea of poetry that seems to be at play reflects the dominant model of lyric poetry which permeates bourgeois culture, regarding the purity of individual expression, its relation to mimesis (the representation of reality within art) and the social, cultural, and spiritual roles of the poet.

As a result, we miss the opportunity to explore some of the clearest, most developed, and most marvellous modes of poetic reason, including mysticism, ritual poetry, glossolalia, and shamanism. Though Brazilian Amazonian animism is offered as an example of the result of poetic reason, there is surprisingly no mention of their poetry, song, or use of language.

The modern movements and traditions which have explored this territory present an additional missed opportunity; despite the main concerns of Sepúlveda’s thesis seeming apparently congruent with those of Romanticism and Surrealism, neither is mentioned. The poetic experiments and experience of Dada, Fluxus, the Situationists, Ethnopoetics, and asemic writing, despite the strong anarchist ties of all these movements, plus the theories of anarchist and radical linguistics and semiotics, currently thriving, are all missing from the discussion, aside from one reference to Debord’s theory of the Spectacle. Explaining the reasons that Sepúlveda is, one must assume, dissatisfied with these approaches might go far in clarifying his own ideas.

The most intriguing aspect of the theory, which comes through in glancing hints and touches, concerns the relationship between poetry and time. Sepúlveda sees poetic reason as counteracting the linear time wielded by instrumental reason, leading to some thought-provoking notions regarding poetry, history, and chronology.

These scattered ruminations make one yearn for a more focused and fully manifested explanation. Poetic Reason in the Age of Digital Control stands as an eloquent critique of the pressing problems facing us in the current historical epoch and evokes a brief sketch of some ideas pointing toward a promising response.

It leaves the reader with a keen hope for future books that will flesh out this sketch into a fully articulated theory, which can provide us with a potent source of strategies for radical poetic reason and action.

Olchar E. Lindsann is a poet, theorist, publisher, translator, archivist & historian of 19th Century radical and avant-garde counterculture. He is the editor of the DIY mOnocle-Lash Anti-Press, with a catalog of over 200 zines at monoclelash.wordpress.com.

 

Contribution to days of action against nationalism and militarism

From Act for freedom now

received by mail/ Thursday 3 October 2024

As part of the transnational days of action against militarism and nationalism proposed at the end of the anarchist book fair in the Balkans 2024, we chose to attack a power supply point of the technological pole « Effiscience » at Colombelles (France). We set fire to a substation on site in an attempt to shut off several companies:

Safran Data Systems who do telemetric research and innovation from satellites for military use and sell its technologies to various armies.

Probent Technology, who do precision mechanics to build essential parts, in particular for an atomic submarine recently built by Naval Group. Its involvement in the nuclear industry, central to the world’s warmongering, is important as it also designed control rooms of EPR of Flamanville.

We could also mention NXP semiconductors, Telit Wireless Solution, Sotraban, Eff’Innov, France Travail, who among others, participate in the networks of war near or far (research-innovation, subcontracting, recruitment…).

The other companies of this campus participate in the invasive digitisation of all areas of daily life. They develop technologies that isolate us and produce the incapacity to act. Technologies that require raw materials from the extensive colonial looting organised to be produced. It is through war that the extraction of the necessary materials for technological production is made possible. Production which itself strengthens the military and repressive device and colonialist power.

We know that our action is but a grain of sand in the struggle against the military-industrial complex which is deepening technological capabilities day by day of the wars of the present time and the future. However, it allows us to get out of a position of spectator in the face of the massacres of past present and future wars.

Wars are never very far away. They require industries, transport flows and energy that are everywhere. These productions and infrastructures are likely to multiply and intensify in the current context of militarization of societies. A massive restructuring of the capitalist economy organized by the bourgeoisie is underway, and it is leading us towards a permanent war race.

Other actions of this kind take place regularly. They show the wheels of war, attack them and making our actions resonate with others seems essential to us. We recognize ourselves in the statement issued at the anarchist book fair of the Balkans and send warm greetings to those who are struggling against the resurgence of nationalism and militarism. Let us continue to strengthen our networks of resistance and solidarity.

War against war and borders!

Translated by Act for freedom now!

 

Sudanese Anarchist Group Statement

Sudan has been witnessing a brutal war that has entered its second year, with millions of Sudanese displaced both internally and externally.

Millions are without homes or work to meet their most basic needs, and millions of children are without education. The calamities continue to afflict the vulnerable and simple people of Sudan.

Today, we strongly condemn the massacres committed by the Janjaweed militia against the innocent farmers in the Gezira State, which amounts to genocide.

The militia has committed atrocities against unarmed citizens, women, and children in the villages of Saraiha, Azraq, Tambul, and Al-Hilaliya. They have taken citizens captive, raped women, and assaulted the elderly.

This criminal militia has long served as an arm of the state, using the same brutal tactics against anyone who resists oppression and tyranny.

This is a revolutionary and humanitarian call to all anarchists to raise awareness about the Janjaweed's crimes and the urgent need to stop them and hold the perpetrators accountable. It is also a call for solidarity to support our people in their weakness so that they may rise again.

Long live peace, no to wars!

two short essays by anarchists in sudan from the beginning of the revolution and the transition into a civil war

https://crimethinc.com/tags/sudan

 

Colin Ward’s school without walls

from The New Statesman by Ken Worpole, photo by The Estate of Colin Ward

The New Statesman columnist and anarchist was a proponent of radical social change that put the most vulnerable first.

We could say of Colin Ward, anarchist and former New Statesman columnist, what he said of his mentor WR Lethaby: “His ideas were too simple for people to understand them.” As the author of over 30 books on architecture, housing policy, play theory, environmental education and prison reform, Ward was a philosopher of the vernacular. Mutual Aid, Everyday Anarchy, a collection of essays on Ward edited by Andrew Kelly, was published by Five Leaves to commemorate the centenary of his birth in 1924. For Ward’s biographer, Sophie Scott-Brown, his “priority was to revitalise anarchy in the popular imagination by showing how its principles of self-reliance, cooperation and mutual aid were already part of our daily lives.”

Growing up in Wanstead in suburban Essex, and leaving school before taking exams, Ward started work as a trainee draughtsman. From an early age he espoused the anarchist cause as a fluent writer: first for the anarchist weekly Freedom from 1947 until 1960, then as editor of Anarchy between 1961 and 1970. In 1971 he took a full-time job as Education Officer at the Town & Country Planning Association (TCPA), where he established an international reputation, becoming “one of the few anarchist writers to have a larger readership outside of anarchist circles than within them.”

At Anarchy, Ward pioneered a new kind of socially concerned journalism, commissioning articles from community activists, dissident academics, and voices from the social margins. These essays amounted to a vibrant re-description of contemporary British life as a patchwork of voluntary action, informal education and social endeavour, with a strong sense of locality. When the like-minded journal New Society arrived in 1962, “Ward was an instant fan,” writes Scott-Brown, though the first two editors were already fans of his.

He moved to the New Statesman in 1988, contributing over 400 weekly columns under the rubric “Fringe Benefits”. “If Ward was anything,” records Scott-Brown, “he was a columnist and a virtuoso one at that.” The NS literary editor Boyd Tonkin recalled Ward “championed the twilight world of allotment-diggers, unofficial smallholders, prefab dwellers, caravan habitués, rural squatters, estate children, multitasking traders, DIY artisans and housebuilders, most as remote from the trim land of planning applications as they were from tax demands.” While Ward was alert to inequality and injustice, cheerfulness was always breaking in.

The historian Raphael Samuel detected deeper undercurrents in Ward’s forays into everyday life. In his 1987 essay “Utopian Sociology”, Samuel celebrated Ward’s foresight in understanding the radical changes that had emerged in Britain in the 1960s: “Anarchy represented better than any other publication the cultural revolution of the 1960s; and it did so far earlier than anyone else, and more thoughtfully.” Ward’s optimism, he suggested, “drew strength from a whole new terrain of social politics in which local initiative counted for more than national direction,” provocatively contrasting Ward’s libertarianism with “born-again Marxism, of Maoist or neo-Trotskyism hue”, which seeks to replace “real-life self-assertion with make-believe bids for power.” Samuel saluted Ward’s “constructive antinomianism”, which took its energy from having “no articles of faith to subscribe to, no canonical texts to refer to, no gods or heroes to placate”.

Housing was Ward’s early political testing ground – encouraged by postwar squatting campaigns from ex-servicemen – and direct action a key tactic. Making one’s own “home in the world” was the abiding ideal. This explains the paradox by which a self-confessed anarchist enjoyed such esteem in international planning circles, as he did at the TCPA. When asked about this, he recalled that urban planning had its origins in the anarchist ideas and writings of Élisée Reclus, Patrick Geddes and Lewis Mumford. At the TCPA he and Anthony Fyson launched the legendary Bulletin of Environmental Education (BEE) handbook: sent to every school in England and Wales, this initiative kick-started a new movement in environmental studies.

For Ward and fellow anarchist John Turner (the global chronicler of self-build settlements), successful housing projects required three things: reasonable security of tenure, shelter appropriate to climate conditions, and location offering access to work and social life opportunities. Urban planning was as simple – or as difficult – as that. In an ideal world, individuals and communities ought to be able to create their own settlements, hence a preoccupation with the story of Britain’s plotlands, allotment colonies, houseboat communities, housing co-ops, foyers and homeless shelters (and more recently community land trusts and progressive retirement villages).

While such initiatives are often viewed as strategically marginal, their time has come again. Ward knew that radical innovation in housing was best realised in the independent, not-for-profit sector, an insight with lessons for the current crisis in residential social care. There is a desperate need to supply a fast-growing population of older people with well-designed homes or settlements, yet the care-home sector, now largely in the hands of private equity companies, is failing miserably. Ward would have welcomed the resurgence of the almshouse movement, now providing not only for the elderly but for young people, while the development of more community-minded retirement villages is growing. There are other imaginative models of community-based residential care coming to the fore – but they will need paying for.

Ward’s most influential book, however, examined concerns at the other end of the age range. Published in 1978, The Child in the City “can probably be credited with inspiring the entire international child-friendly city movement,” says Tim Gill, former director of the British Play Council. In putting the world of the child at the centre of “everyday anarchism”, Ward broke with the left’s privileging of the male industrial worker as the principal agent and subject of social change. Children come first, and if you plan for the most vulnerable you will be planning for everybody else.

That breakthrough stemmed from his work at the TCPA, where in 1973 he and Fyson published Streetwork: The Exploding School (the title possibly a quiet joke on the anarchist stereotype), a handbook on how to explore the neighbourhood. Pupils were to be sent out with notebooks and cameras, looking at where people lived, worked, where they went and how they enjoyed themselves; in short, how one part of the jigsaw puzzle of everyday life connected to others. Ward’s long-term vision was to create “schools without walls”, wholly immersed in the life of the community – inspired by Henry Morris’s village college movement in 1930s Cambridgeshire, with the very youngest encouraged to “climb out of the sandbox and into the city”.

Understanding the street primarily as a public space, in an age when the car was fast becoming the major determinant of urban planning and postwar reconstruction, owed much to Jane Jacobs’ influential study The Death and Life of Great American Cities (1961). In the UK, Jacobs’ arguments were reinforced by The Lore and Language of Schoolchildren (1959) and Children’s Games in Street and Playground (1969) by the folklorists Iona and Peter Opie, who foregrounded the street and the playground as the formative terrain of sociability and a shared urban culture. By then, as Ward realised, in the battle between the child and the car for territorial control of the street, the car would win. Today this conflict is being revisited: strategies for LTNs (low-traffic neighbourhoods) and “15-minute cities” – intended to reduce car use and encourage walking – cycling and playing out are back on the urban agenda.

Finally, at the heart of Colin Ward’s anarchism was a profound disagreement with the assumption that “the social” and “the political” were one and the same thing. Reporting from the front line of community action in his New Statesman columns, Ward understood that the social was a larger, more inclusive, informally constructed and sustained world than the political – and less easily captured by vested interests: people make and unmake the social world each day, which is why it retained its flexibility and resilience.

I was lucky to know Colin and his wife, Harriet, for nearly 40 years. When young, while working on Freedom, he had known leading British and American writers and commentators such as Herbert Read, Alex Comfort, Paul Goodman, Dwight Macdonald and Ethel Mannin. Harriet was the daughter of the redoubtable feminist Dora Russell and the Greenwich Village journalist Griffin Barry, who in his New York days was close to John Dos Passos, Edmund Wilson and the poet Edna St Vincent Millay. Yet Colin and Harriet lived quietly in rural Suffolk during much of their long marriage. Formidably kind and generous with their time, modest in lifestyle, fond of music, they corresponded with friends and admirers across the world. Colin died in 2010, Harriet in June this year. They found the good life in fellowship and generosity to others, in a world in which people carried on learning and supporting each other until the music stopped.

 Anarchist Studies

Reflections on the ASN8 conference – looking back/forward

Reflections on the ASN8 conference – looking back/forwardReflections on the ASN8 conference – looking back/forward

From Anarchist Studies

Early September in Belfast can be surprisingly sunny and balmy. It was so sunny even, that the closing plenary after three days of conferencing at Ulster University happened outside, in the sunshine – providing a physically open space as an opportunity for open dialogue between all participants. During the plenary, there were some initial reflections on the 8th edition of the conference, as well as some first promising ideas for the next edition.

Belfast was a rather appropriate place for a conference on the theme of ‘anarchism in/with/as/beyond conflict’. The wider region experienced a 29-year long conflict known as ‘The Troubles’ (quite the understatement!) which is still tangible today when walking the streets of Belfast. Still present are the ironically named ‘peace walls’, erected from 1969 onwards to separate communities on the basis of their supposed sectarian fealty (along the reductively binary lines of Catholic/Irish/nationalist/republican versus Protestant/British/unionist/loyalist) – there are now more than 100 of them across the city. Indeed, some of these walls have had fences added to increase their height (to prevent projectiles being thrown over), whilst many of the gates between the two areas remain locked from the early evening until morning. Does this mean that the city is still in conflict? Or is the region beyond conflict? Or do people simply live with conflict? Those are questions to ponder on, over an Irish stout maybe, in one of the several venues that played host to our members (The Sunflower, and Ulster Uni Art Shop, amongst them).

For now, we as conference organisers want to take the opportunity to use the lens of that overarching theme to share some of our personal reflections, to engage with some ideas and comments we received from participants, and to offer a few general thoughts and questions on next steps. We hope that this will start a productive conversation around ways to improve the conference, and, as usual, we are open to any level of engagement from you.

The ASN8 programme.

 

With conflict: to conference or not to conference? 

As co-organiser Elizabeth Vasileva also already mentioned in her preliminary conference reflections, much can be said about the purpose of an academic conference and whether or not it makes sense for the Anarchist Studies Network to organise one. It remains useful to have this debate and differing views are welcome. For this 8th edition, we aimed for a subversive and thought provoking convergence between academia and a DIY approach. Aside from presentations and talks there were also opportunities for social gatherings, and Do-It-Yourself conference slots were kept open. But, it’s worth stressing that the academic aspect of the programme is purposeful. The ASN is a Specialist Group of the Political Studies Association (in the UK) which gives Anarchist Studies a ‘legitimate’ place in academia and also provides (minimal) funding to support anarchist academics in organising our activities – this includes, but is not limited to, the biennial ASN conference. There are not many obvious opportunities to share academic knowledge and work on anarchism and, where these are carved out, we try to cherish them. This 8th edition fulfilled that purpose and gave space and time for people to share, question, and contemplate their own and each other’s work with that specific academic focus. This isn’t an exclusively introspective exercise – activist voices and lived experience formed the grounding for many of the critical exchanges. But we recognise that theory holds a significant place within broader anarchist praxis.

A live sketch of conference proceedings by Mike D. The numerous sketches were collated into a zine, distributed at the end of the in-person conference.

While we effectively subvert the format where we can, the set-up of ASN remains that of an academic conference. With all acknowledgement of the ‘ivory tower’ baggage, this is a space for rigorous critical thinking and a place to have one’s work scrutinised. A conference is a distinct space from other anarchist gatherings (anarchist book fairs, social centres, and other events where we might meet and discuss ideas), and while there is always more that we can do to push the boundaries of what that academic conference space looks and feels like, it cannot ultimately escape ‘academia’ (nor do we want it to).

There are limits to academic conferences and some of them are particular to the format and some are particular for anarchists. Because of time constraints, the conference is very fast-paced with overlapping panels. Other limitations come from the fact that academia, and anarchism in the UK, are both overwhelmingly white, middle-class, male-dominated spaces – diversity is difficult to achieve. While we put a lot of effort into outreach, and always prioritise financial sponsoring of under-represented groups, more work is still needed. But, that said, the conference has massively diversified in the last ten years and now hosts female-only panels, non-binary presenters, children and disabled people, alongside international participants from the Global South who wouldn’t have been able to come without support. Whilst this is a step forward, it is important to recognise that black and PoC groups from the UK still find it hard to penetrate these spaces and more work needs to be put into ensuring they feel welcome. This opportunity for convivially critical and deeper dialogue with other anarchists or anarchist-adjacent participants should be recognised for its unique contribution, while we push the limits of what it can become.

Friendly Street FC hosted ASN8 participants for a kickabout.

As for the social aspects of the conference, we enjoyed seeing many familiar faces, but also many new faces (including several first-timers on the organising team: Elke Van Dermijnsbrugge, Luke Ray Di Marco Campbell, Cassidy Ferrari, and David Fox). This shows that the conference continues to reach a wide (and new) audience! The social events gave us all the opportunities to mingle in a range of contexts – some more physically exerting than others. We joined Friendly Street F.C. at Ormeau Park for training and a nine-on-nine match. We had a pre-conference pub social and a second pub gathering, accompanied by live Irish folk tunes. We had an ‘intentional listening’ session, scoffing copious quantities of vegan pizza while hearing the raucous punk emanating from Belfast, Banda Aceh and Kosovo as part of the Failed States//Creative Resistances compilation project. We value these events, and also appreciate the spontaneous socials organised by attendees (in true anarchist fashion), because they make the conference a more spontaneous space, more aligned with our DIY ethos, and far more than just an academic programme.

The Shop at Ulster University hosted the ‘intentional listening’ social event.

 

As conflict: inclusivity, a shared responsibility

In this 8th edition, we had quite a range of presenters: from early career researchers to activists and academics from a range of disciplines, as well as more unexpected ones like children! We want to offer every interested party an opportunity to share work, whether it is published or not, to get inspired, and be challenged as well as encouraged by the audience. Across all panels with very diverse themes and perspectives, both online (2nd September) and face-to-face (4th-6th September), we saw a lot of input and engagement from the audience, going from challenge to affirmation to provocation.

As organisers, we’ve been reflecting on how tightly we should moderate Q&As. Moderators are not there to censor questions, but to ensure respectful dialogue and time-keeping. Ultimately, people’s behaviour is their own and, collectively, everyone is responsible for creating the space together. Some people see academic jargon as exclusive while some people thrive on it because of the clarity of expression it brings – there is a challenge to find a shared ground for understanding each other. Taking responsibility for creating the space together means sometimes accepting that one doesn’t understand, or is not understood, and doing something about it. This is something that we could have addressed more at the beginning of the conference, and next time we would encourage participants to work more on a common understanding of how we might share the space (because some people took up too much space this time around, to be perfectly frank).

A panel session at ASN8.

 

In conflict: location matters

As mentioned at the start, Belfast was an appropriate place in relation to the conference theme. This location, however, also had downsides and logistical challenges. While the hosting of a first ASN conference outside Britain might be understood as a decolonising gesture, Northern Ireland remains part of the United Kingdom. The particularly harsh border regime of the UK Government meant that a significant number of would-be attendees were refused visas to enter for the in-person events, impoverishing the diversity of the conference as a whole. On the other hand, being in the north of Ireland meant an additional travel burden for people arriving from Wales, Scotland and England. There were a good number of attendees from previous (Loughborough-based) iterations of the conference who made the effort to come to Belfast, but there were a number of notable absences too.

Funding was available to help with travel (and associated) expenses, and we were glad to welcome in-person attendees from Pakistan, Kosovo, Finland, the US, India, Italy, Greece, Iceland, Canada, France, Britain, and Ireland (north and south),

The geographical location and venue(s) of the conference very much depend on the cost and the availability of rooms. As it is an academic conference, ASN organisers have usually tried to find a hosting university that does not charge us (too much) for room use, is accessible in a range of ways, and allows us to DIY (in other words: does not force us to use lanyards or to pay for expensive catering, and the likes!). The organising team members based at Ulster University ensured a degree of familiarity with the space and an ‘in’ to accessing an abundance of resources that aided the running of the event (in-house projectors, charger ports, computers, water fountains etc.). Existing relationships with colleagues at The Art Shop enabled attendees to share or sell their own literature (pamphlets, books, and materials) without having to staff a table, so they could get on with participating in conference events.

However, the space was, at times, challenging to navigate. Across the three-day in-person event, at least four other conferences were also taking place in the same building, whilst the Friday turned out to be an Open Day event for local high school children. These brought many hundreds of other people to the same space, creating quite a loud environment within which capitalist innovation reminded us how thin and non-soundproof fold-down room dividers are, and the craven extents to which universities will go to attract a young crowd. For anyone wondering, this included blaring techno music throughout the building, hosting multiple food trucks at the venue entrance (congesting access), and occupying much of the foyer with selfie stands. We shit you not.

A live sketch of conference proceedings by Mike D.

Despite the challenges, we would argue that running the event in these conditions was better than the alternative of not doing it, or of paying huge costs to hire a private venue. Reflecting on this, however, means accepting that the space is not ‘ours’ and, consequently, far from ideal. It is, however, a resource we can tap into without (or with minimal) costs. To run academic events (whatever changes we are enacting to the traditional formats), we all stand to benefit from access to the equipment in-built at many universities. Thus, when we hold the necessary connections within the ASN to access these without significant restrictions, why not carve out our own nook at Ulster or any other campus? If you see opportunities to host any of the future conferences at your institution, get in touch!

This year, we chose to have one online conference day before the physical conference, to offer an opportunity to participate and/or present to those who were not able to travel. Apart from a few minor tech hiccups with stroppy Zoom links, the day went well and we had an active and engaged audience across the different panels. This is one positive thing we learnt from the pandemic: online conferences can be constructive! We would like to reiterate what comrade Elizabeth wrote in the preliminary conference reflection:

‘Despite our excitement to be back to in-person events, we really wanted to preserve the element of enabling participants who couldn’t physically attend (because of space, borders, ability, other commitments) established during the previous two conferences. Virtual participation has now become a matter of accessibility, as many activists have pointed out since the pandemic, and is something which we are committed to.’

A live sketch of conference proceedings by Mike D.

 

Beyond conflict: where to next?

The final plenary of the conference ended up, as usual, with a few proposals on next edition’s theme. Anarchism: More-Than-Human generated the most enthusiasm and is likely to be the chosen one for ASN9 in 2026. Location is yet to be confirmed, but, again, we are looking for a free and accessible space anywhere in the world (with a local crew to help organise). We know it’s a long wait, and given that there are two whole years in between, we are hoping that ASN members will step in and propose some mini-events we can do next year.

 

Please reach us on asn.conference@protonmail.com for comments, thoughts and ideas!