Monday, November 04, 2024

STATEHOOD OR INDEPENDENCE

The Puerto Rican Right Is Rallying Against a Rising Left

Source: Jacobin

November 5 will see elections not just in the United States but in Puerto Rico, the island that has been a colony of the United States for 126 years. Throughout much of the twentieth century, opposition to the deeply unequal economic system that has predominated within Puerto Rico has been easily dismissed as anti-Americanism by critics who seek to provoke islanders with threats of economic isolation. However, in the last year, Puerto Rico’s left-wing parties, some of which are pro-independence, have cobbled together a loose bloc. This alliance now threatens to win at the upcoming election, a possibility that Puerto Rico’s ruling elite are terrified of.

On September 24, hundreds of billboards flooded Puerto Rico’s capital, San Juan, bearing messages critical of the pro-statehood New Progressive Party (PNP) and its candidate for governor, Jenniffer González. Later in the day a tweet with photos of the billboards appeared, declaring that they were “paid for by Benito Antonio Martínez Ocasio,” better known by nom de plume Bad Bunny, a Puerto Rican rapper, singer, and producer. A couple of days later, another well-known artist, René Pérez, aka Residente, appeared in a video interviewing and endorsing González’s main rival in the November election, Juan Dalmau. Dalmau is the candidate for governor for the Alliance, a progressive electoral coalition comprising the Puerto Rican Independence Party (PIP), to which Dalmau belongs, the Citizens’ Victory Movement (MVC), and several other organized political and religious organizations.

The Alliance, which was recently endorsed by Democratic congressmembers Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Nydia Velázquez, seeks to oust the PNP and the Popular Democratic Party (PPD) from their decades-long stronghold in electoral politics, political discourse, and the management of the finances of the colony. Status-wise, the coalition is interested in developing bilateral and binding mechanisms for solving Puerto Rico’s colonial status, as an alternative to the millions of dollars continuously wasted on sterile referenda on status formulas (i.e., independence, statehood, or commonwealth) that the traditional two-party system has provided so far.

The Alliance owes its growing strength to its focus on the local protagonists that facilitate and benefit from the institutional decay of the colony. This is a reflection of a growing wave of discontent with how the different government administrations of the PNP and PPD have dealt with the social crisis effecting most Puerto Ricans. The island, which was once celebrated as an example of rapid capitalist development, is suffering from the effects of a dangerous cocktail of austerity, debt peonage, and extreme corruption.

According to a recent study, 47 percent of households would be unable to pay a debt of $2,000, a not unlikely threat given the costly impact that near-continuous power outages have had on the island’s residents. These failures have been the order of the day since September of 2017, when ﷟Hurricane Maria devastated Puerto Rico, and have been more pronounced since 2021, when the production and distribution of electricity on the island began to be privatized.The Alliance seeks to oust the the PNP and the PPD from their decades-long stronghold in electoral politics.

Some of the Bad Bunny billboards sought to draw a connection between the energy crisis and the PNP. One of them reads, “Voting for the PNP is voting for LUMA,” LUMA Energy being the current private monopoly that was awarded the distribution and transmission contract by the PNP under the then governor and former secretary of justice Wanda Vázquez. Vázquez, and the whole process that led up to LUMA being awarded this contract, is currently being investigated in an ongoing process plagued by irregularities.

The imposition in 2017 of a Fiscal Control Board to manage the finances of the island and pay off the debt acquired by various governmental administrations of the PNP and PPD has only worsened the situation. These are the same administrations that for decades have made Puerto Rico a tax haven for corporations and wealthy individuals in an economic system that has developed into a mechanism for wealth transfer and extraction. This model benefits both local and international capital while creating substantial income inequality. Puerto Rico is among the top-ten most unequal places in the world, and its poverty rate is significantly higher than that of the United States, with a population increasingly dependent on federal transfers in the form of Social Security, Medicare, reconstruction funds, and nutritional assistance funds.

These flows of income and resources coming from the US federal government, which have been increasing for almost a decade because of hurricanes, earthquakes, and COVID-19, are continuously mismanaged and swallowed up, even though they are supposed to provide a lifeline to many families on an island in which 43 percent of people sit below the poverty line. For comparison, the figure for the United States is 12 percent.

This is the reality confronting the Alliance, which faces a historic situation in which both main parties have been losing support while their once-fragmented electoral opposition has been slowly gaining ground. When the Alliance ran in the 2020 election as separate parties, the PIP and MVC, the main members of the Alliance, obtained a combined 28 percent of the vote, while the current PNP government got 33 percent, the lowest percentage in its history. The PPD, its historical rival, meanwhile won 32 percent of the vote. All these results followed on the heels of popular protests that ousted the PNP governor in 2019.

In that same 2020 election, a current member of the Alliance, Manuel Natal, who had been supported for a long time by important workers’ organizations, almost won the mayorship of the capital city of San Juan in a process also marred by irregularities. Natal is running again against the incumbent, Miguel Romero, who was secretary of the department of labor under then governor — and now Donald Trump advocate for Latinos — Luis Fortuño.

Fortuño’s tenure saw the firing of thousands of public employees in 2009 and the passing of more tax exemption laws that cost millions to the public coffers in the midst of a fiscal crisis; some of these laws, critics noticed, personally benefited Romero. Finally, Romero was a senator who endorsed the privatization of the power utility’s functions and the awarding of the contract to LUMA Energy, a private firm with no experience in the provision of electricity for such a large-scale operation.

Threat Response

It is not surprising that the weakening popularity of the PNP and PPD among voters has been accompanied by a concerted response to try and stop the growing momentum of discontented opposition. A whole generation of Puerto Ricans have now grown up in a post–Cold War era, and this has weakened the appeal of the two main parties. The backdrop to the lives of this generation has instead been the two-decade socioeconomic crisis devouring the island.

Some have been able to emigrate to the United States, a process contributing to the island’s depopulation and aging, but for many of those that stay, the prospects are bleak. A power outage on September 3, which interrupted the registration process of hundreds of students at the University of Puerto Rico’s Río Piedras campus, became emblematic of this sorry state of affairs.

There was also the case of thousands of citizens encountering problems with the digital platform that the State Election Commission had purchased for $3.7 million. At some point, around 60,000 electoral transactions, many of which were requests by citizens to register to vote, were reported to not have been processed through what was advertised as an “efficient” digital platform. Worryingly, thousands of dead people appeared in the official registry lists for voting in the upcoming election.

This last irregularity was a result of a fraud scheme recently uncovered by the Center for Investigative Journalism and published on September 24, the same day that the Bad Bunny billboards appeared across Puerto Rico. According to this report, this scam, which allowed the dead to cast ballots, could be traced to at least the 2016 election, when the now exiled Ricky Rosselló of the PNP was elected governor of Puerto Rico in administration shortened after a wave historic popular protests ousted him during the summer of 2019.

Rossello’s running mate in the 2016 election as resident commissioner, a nonvoting position in the US Congress, had been Jenniffer González, who still holds that seat and, after defeating Pedro Pierluisi, the current governor, will be the PNP’s candidate for governor in a primary for the upcoming November election. González, a self-identified Republican and fan﷟ of Benjamin Netanyahu, endorsed Donald Trump in the 2020 election. Like her current running mate for the capital’s mayoralty, Miguel Romero, she was a leader in the Legislative Assembly when it fired thousands of public employees and was implicated in a scandal involving the illegal raising of debts.The Alliance has made important strides in capturing much of the generalized discontent with how previous administrations have managed the socioeconomic crisis in Puerto Rico.

Following in the footsteps of her Republican leaders in the United States, the González campaign has decided to use Cold War and anti-communist propaganda against the Alliance. “The communists here are threatening to take power,” she said in one speech. She has, for example, sought to highlight how the Alliance’s candidate for governor, Juan Dalmau, believes in independence for Puerto Rico, independence being for them a codeword for “communism” and complete isolation from the United States.

Still, the war of words is just a complement to attacks on other fronts. The problems with the State Electoral Commission, which exposed the number of dead people potentially voting in Puerto Rico’s election, were handled by the same commission that generated them. Rather than look into these concerns, the State Electoral Commission threatened to file a lawsuit against the Center for Investigative Journalism for not making their sources public.

The Enemy Behind the Enemy

The economic crisis that started in 2006 and the debt default that came in 2017 directly affected those that earned property income on the island. They would continue to profit, but their accumulation of rents, interest, and profits would slow down with the arrival of the Fiscal Control Board and its purported focus on balanced budgets and happy creditors. In this new scenario, many representatives of Puerto Rico’s capitalist class decided to organize themselves as “Bonistas del Patio,” a group of local bondholders appealing to both the fiscal junta and the island’s citizens for priority in the payment of the public debt, because they were the fellow Puerto Ricans “most negatively affected” in what effectively was their collaboration in the dismantlement of the public welfare.

These creole capitalist groups, which thrive on politics being defined solely in terms of the relationship between the United States and Puerto Rico, and which have for decades benefitted from preferential tax treatment and regulatory laxity and pushed for labor market precarity while the country’s debt increased, have now organized themselves as a super PAC that has actively ﷟ endorsed members of the PNP and PPD that have undermined the Alliance. They have done this by preventing PIP and MVC from formally running together and disqualifying currently elected members in the legislature from running under an official party banner.

By joining the “anti-communist” chorus of the two main parties and other ultraconversative groups, this coalition of the private sector has revealed the real motivations behind its ideology: a need to sustain the colonial status quo that allows them to continuously enrich themselves while costs are socialized.

Looking to the Future

It’s undeniable that the Alliance has made important strides in capturing much of the generalized discontent with how previous administrations have managed the socioeconomic crisis in Puerto Rico. This anger, which previously erupted in 2019 and led to the ousting of the then governor, has contributed to expanding the coordinates of political understanding in an increasingly polarized society beyond the usual status discussions. Against this, the PNP, the PPD, the creole capitalist class, and ultraconservative sectors have all fallen back on old tactics to try to keep a hold on their decaying hegemony. Their battle cry that this is an “election between the Left and those that believe in a relationship with the United States” still resonates with many.

It seems that whatever the election outcome, the results are likely to be contested given the substantial loss of credibility of the State Electoral Commission in running the process. This “credibility flaw,” which was created and developed by the status quo, is already being used by both sides in a struggle that will intensify after the elections, and where the street will be center stage, in a context where the status quo is being pulled by the extreme right wing and the Alliance keeps gaining more supporters.

Why I Regret My Antiwar Protest Vote in 1968

While I see many parallels with the choice we faced back then, I now think differently about how to register my opposition to war.
November 3, 2024
Source: Waging Nonviolence


Protesting the Vietnam War by Frank Wolfe, October 21, 1967 (NARA)



In 1968, I was a full-time anti-Vietnam War organizer and voted for a third-party candidate. I now regret that protest vote, which has led me to think differently this time around.

I certainly sympathize with many progressives who intend to either sit out this election or vote for the Green Party’s Jill Stein or Cornel West. Kamala Harris’s continuing support for Israel’s war on Gaza and now Lebanon is abhorrent to anyone opposing war. For the past year the Biden-Harris administration has functioned as a willing ally and enabler of Israel’s genocide. Though not a self-proclaimed Zionist like the president, Harris parrots Israel’s talking points and lies about the war on Gaza. At the Democratic convention, she didn’t even permit a Palestinian representative to speak for five minutes from the platform.

But come election day, I won’t be casting a protest vote as I did in 1968 — even though I see so many parallels with the choice we faced then.

Like Harris, that year’s Democratic candidate, Hubert Humphrey, served as vice president, standing loyally by as Lyndon Johnson sent more than a half-million U.S. troops to Vietnam, hundreds of whom were dying every week in 1968. Far from distinguishing himself from the war hawks, Humphrey made speeches supporting the U.S. and its South Vietnamese allies as thousands of American soldiers were killed and hundreds of thousands of Vietnamese were slaughtered.

Adding to this outrage, Humphrey was nominated at the infamous Democratic convention in Chicago where the local cops brutally assaulted antiwar demonstrators in what was later described as a “police riot.” I was one of those protesters and was jailed for my efforts. Many antiwarriors demonstrated against Humphrey during the subsequent campaign, often chanting “Dump the Hump.” So, when election day came, I just couldn’t bring myself to vote for someone I considered a war criminal and cast my ballot for comedian Dick Gregory, who was running on a third-party ticket.

What I did not consider, however, was Humphrey’s opponent — Richard Nixon. At the time, I considered the parties as Tweedledee and Tweedledum. Both seemed indistinguishable on Vietnam. And both reflected the same Cold War anticommunist mentality that underlay the American imperialist project and the growing military-industrial state.

I ignored, however, the profound differences between the two candidates on a host of other issues. For example, Nixon’s campaign revolved around what he called a Southern strategy. By using thinly disguised racist “law-and-order” rhetoric, he hoped to peel away white Southern and Northern white working-class voters from the Democrats. Ronald Reagan and later Republican administrations have solidified their appeal to white voters to effectively roll back the hard-won gains of the civil rights movement, especially on voting rights.

Today, the differences between the two parties are even more stark on a wide variety of issues – from women’s and LGBTQ+ rights to the climate and consumer protections to electoral integrity. The evidence can be found in Project 2025, the Republican blueprint for a new Trump presidency. Or in what Trump proclaims at his rallies. Earlier this month, he declared that he intends to use the military against protesters whom he considers “the enemy within.”

This kind of authoritarian rule is happening around the world, including Erdogan’s Turkey, Orban’s Hungary and Putin’s Russia. There is very little to protect it from happening here. We certainly can’t rely on the current Supreme Court.

In the face of such a prospect, shouldn’t we do whatever is possible to forestall an autocratic regime? I no longer see casting a symbolic protest ballot — or sitting on the sidelines — as an act of conscience. Real acts of conscience imply taking a risk and being willing to accept the consequences.

Still, some might argue that it’s worth voting for the Green Party’s Jill Stein to send a message to the Democrats that they can’t literally get away with murder in Gaza. But would it convey that message?

In 2016, when Stein last ran for president, she received more votes than Trump’s margin of victory in three key states: Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania. In this election, that could be enough to help him retake the White House. Trump’s solution to the Gaza war: Netanyahu should “finish the job.” Is that something that would help the Palestinians?

More than anything, they need us to continue challenging the U.S.-Israeli genocide by street actions, by supporting the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement, or BDS, and by educating our fellow citizens about the reality of the Zionist settler-colonial project. When it comes to radically transforming the two major political parties it’s going to take a lot more than one election cycle. It will require building powerful movements that address systemic issues like racism, poverty, ecological devastation, and war and militarism.

Robert Levering was a full-time anti-Vietnam War organizer from 1967 to 1973. He was an adviser to the 2020 film, “The Boys Who Said NO!” about the draft resistance movement, and the Executive Producer of “The Movement and the ‘Madman’” a documentary about the impact on Nixon of the Moratorium and Mobilization demonstrations in the fall of 1969.

Robert Levering was a full-time anti-Vietnam War organizer from 1967 to 1973. He was an adviser to the 2020 film, “The Boys Who Said NO!” about the draft resistance movement, and the Executive Producer of “The Movement and the ‘Madman’” a documentary about the impact on Nixon of the Moratorium and Mobilization demonstrations in the fall of 1969.



Sunday, November 03, 2024

GOOD OLD BOY WHITE SUPREMACY

Calling Trump a Nazi Is Giving Our Own History a Pass. The Racism of MAGA Is American

November 3, 2024
Source: Newsweek

Wikimedia Commons

Former President Donald Trump and his campaign threw an event at Madison Square Garden over the weekend with tens of thousands of attendees. What we heard from the speakers about Black people, Latinos, Puerto Ricans, and Palestinians was utterly racist and bigoted. I would say I’m stunned, but I’m not. Unfortunately, it’s to be expected from those at the front of the MAGA movement. It was so vile it seemed to elicit groans from the crowd; even the MAGA faithful weren’t feeling the overt nature of the racism.

Even before the rally, there were some calling this rally a fascist, even “Nazi rally.” Yet as a Black liberationist and a former professor of African American History, the accusation troubled me. Bigotry, white supremacy, and white Christian nationalism are as American as apple pie. It is this aspect of America’s formation we cannot escape.

Fascism is a populist political movement which advocates putting the nation first through a centralized, autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader who controls the economy and suppresses opposition. I do believe former President Trump is a fascist. He fits the description. Yet that does not make Donald Trump and his movement “Nazis” as a whole.

America’s history is dark enough that we do not have to export our comparisons to Nazi Germany. At the MAGA rally in New York, the bigotry and white supremacy spewed was American through and through.

My concern is that calling him a Nazi erases the American nature of his movement and makes it a foreign concept. It’s not foreign. The bigotry is not foreign, the white supremacy is not foreign, this movement is not foreign, it’s American and we must address it head-on to defeat it.

Moreover, the Nazi label diminishes the fact that millions of Jewish people and other ethnic groups, including people with disabilities, were mass murdered. And it completely erases the vile impact of the American slave system on Africans and their American descendants. Crimes against humanity happened on this soil.Republican presidential nominee, former U.S. President Donald Trump speaks at a campaign rally at Madison Square Garden. Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images

Chattel slavery has taken up more of this land’s modern history than it has not. Black Americans were owned, enslaved, raped, and killed in this country—legally. Then, after abolition, Black Americans were lynched, discriminated against, denied opportunities, and so much more simply because we were Black.

The entire history of this country is ripe with horrifying examples of white terrorism on this soil.

During many lynchings of Black people, entire communities of white men, women, and children assembled to watch bodies burn or swing from trees. This happened in America.

Angry white mobs assembled in front of schools in the South to stop Black children from desegregating those schools is American. This happened in America.

Black people marching for voters’ rights and dignity were sprayed by firefighters with high-pressure water hoses and attacked by police dogs. This happened in America.

George Floyd was killed by a police officer’s knee to his neck. This happened in America.

This is who we are.

In 1962, author James Baldwin wrote, “Not everything that is faced can be changed, but nothing can be changed until it is faced.” I reflect on that quote at this moment. I feel as though, in calling these rallies “Nazi rallies,” many are trying to wash their hands of our history in a way to say, “This is not who we are.”

Unfortunately, the truth is, this is who we are, and if we want to address it, we must face it. We gain nothing and lose everything if we cannot acknowledge our past.

When former President Trump says he wants to round up immigrants and put them in camps, he cites the Alien Enemies Act of 1798.

It is not foreign. This is who we are.

There are always riveting reminders century after century calling on us to not forget our past sins and to atone for them. Unfortunately, we have neither learned from or atoned for White Supremacy and bigotry. You see, the same energy that empowered that white comedian to spew hate all out in the open without fear of consequence flows throughout the contours of this nation.

Our past is bloody and immoral. We must take responsibility for our own racialized mess and not attribute it to any other nation.

As the late Texas Congresswoman Barbara Jordan said, “What the people want is simple: They want an America as good as its promise—that as a nation, we live up to our historical promise of equality of opportunity.”

But a promise is not a reality. We can find hope in America’s promise, but America has yet to live up to it. Both are true at the same time.

The way to defeat this movement that endangers Americans who are working class and who aren’t insulated by wealth, power, and privilege is to confront our issues with real solutions. We must have a counter-movement that promises economic empowerment of the people, not the ultra-wealthy, with the promise of trickle-down economics.

Acknowledging our reality and addressing that reality with progressive populism is the antidote to fascism, not neoliberalism and fear-mongering.

We must acknowledge where we have been to get where we want to go.

Nina Turner is a former Ohio state senator, a senior fellow at the Institute on Race, Power and Political Economy at the New School, and the founder of We Are Somebody.

 


There are some 4,000 foreign reporters accredited in Israel to cover the war. They stay in luxury hotels. They go on dog and pony shows orchestrated by the Israeli military. They can, on rare occasions, be escorted by Israeli soldiers on lightning visits to Gaza, where they are shown alleged weapons caches or tunnels the military says are used by Hamas.

They dutifully attend daily press conferences. They are given off-the-record briefings by senior Israeli officials who feed them information that often turns out to be untrue. They are Israel’s unwitting and sometimes witting propagandists, stenographers for the architects of apartheid and genocide, hotel room warriors.

Bertolt Brecht acidly called them the spokesmen of the spokesmen.

And how many foreign reporters are there in Gaza? None.

The Palestinian reporters in Gaza who fill the void often pay with their lives. They are targeted, along with their families, for assassination.

At least 134 journalists and media workers in Gaza, the West Bank and Lebanon, have been killed and 69 have been imprisoned, according to the Committee to Protect Journalists, marking the deadliest period for journalists since the organization began collecting data in 1992. 

Israel bombed a building on Friday in southern Lebanon housing seven media organizations, killing three journalists from Al Mayadeen and Al Manar and injuring 15 others. Since Oct. 7, Israel has killed 11 journalists in Lebanon.  

Al Jazeera cameraman Fadi al-Wahidi, who was shot in the neck in the Jabalia refugee camp in northern Gaza by an Israeli sniper earlier this month, is in a coma. Israel has refused permission for him to seek medical care outside of Gaza.

Like most of the targeted journalists, including his murdered colleague Shireen Abu Akleh, he was wearing a helmet and flak jacket that identified him as press.

The Israeli military has branded as “terrorists” six Palestinian journalists in Gaza who work for Al Jazeera

“These 6 Palestinians are among the last journalists surviving Israel’s onslaught in Gaza,” United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Occupied Palestinian Territories, Francesca Albanese, said. “Declaring them ‘terrorists’ sounds like a death sentence.”

[Meanwhile an Israeli journalist has taken direct part in combat while acting as a reporter.]

The scale and savagery of the Israeli assault on the media dwarfs anything I witnessed during my two decades as a war correspondent, including in Sarajevo where Serb snipers regularly took aim at reporters.

Twenty-three journalists were killed in Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina during the Yugoslav Wars between 1991 and 1995. Twenty-two were killed when I covered the war in El Salvador. Sixty-eight journalists were killed in World War II and 63 were killed in Vietnam.

But unlike in Gaza, Bosnia and El Salvador, journalists were usually not targeted. 

Israel’s assault on press freedom is unlike anything we have experienced since William Howard Russell, the godfather of modern war reporting, sent back dispatches from the Crimean War. Its onslaught against journalists is in a category by itself.

Representative James P. McGovern and 64 House members sent a letter to President Joseph Biden and Secretary of State Antony Blinken calling for the United States to push for Israel to allow unimpeded access for U.S. and international journalists. In July, over 70 media and civil society organizations signed an open letter calling on Israel to permit foreign reporters into Gaza. 

Israel has not budged. Its ban on international journalists in Gaza remains in place. Its genocide grinds forward. Hundreds of Palestinian civilians are killed and wounded daily. During October, Israel killed at least 770  Palestinians in northern Gaza.

Israel spins out its lies and fabrications, from Hamas using Palestinians as human shields, to mass rape and beheaded babies, to a captive press that slavishly amplifies them. By the time the lies are exposed, often weeks or months later, the media cycle has moved on and few notice.

Israel’s wholesale censorship and assassination of journalists will have ominous consequences. It further erodes what few protections we once had as war correspondents. It sends an unequivocal message to any government, despot or dictator that seeks to mask its crimes.

It heralds, like the genocide itself, a new world order, where mass murder is normalized, totalitarian censorship is permissible and journalists who try and expose the truth have very short life expectancies. 

Israel, with the fulsome support of the U.S. government, is eviscerating the last shreds of freedom of the press. 

Those who wage war, any war, seek to shape public opinion. They court the reporters they can domesticate, the ones who prostrate themselves before generals and, although they do not openly admit it, seek to stay as far away from combat as possible. 

These are the “good” journalists. They like to “play” at being a soldier. They enthusiastically assist in disseminating propaganda in the guise of reporting. They want to do their part for the war effort, to be part of the club. Sadly, they constitute the majority of the media in the wars I covered. 

All CNN journalists reporting on Israel and Palestine must submit their work for review by the network’s Jerusalem bureau prior to publication, a bureau that is required to abide by rules set down by Israeli military censors.

These domesticated journalists and news organizations are, as Robert Fisk pointed out, “prisoners of the language of power.” They dutifully parrot the official lexicon — “terrorists,” “peace process,” “two state solution” and “Israel’s right to defend itself.” 

The New York TimesThe Intercept writes,

“instructed journalists covering Israel’s war on the Gaza Strip to restrict the use of the terms ‘genocide’ and ‘ethnic cleansing’ and to ‘avoid’ using the phrase ‘occupied territory’ when describing Palestinian land, according to a copy of an internal memo obtained by The Intercept.”

“The memo also instructs reporters not to use the word Palestine ‘except in very rare cases’ and to steer clear of the term ‘refugee camps’ to describe areas of Gaza historically settled by displaced Palestinians expelled from other parts of Palestine during previous Israeli–Arab wars,” The Intercept notes. “The areas are recognized by the United Nations as refugee camps and house hundreds of thousands of registered refugees.”

“There is no battle between power and the media,” Fisk noted. “Through language, we have become them.”

Retired General David Petraeus, one of the authors of the 2006 U.S. Counterinsurgency Manual used by U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan, argues that persuading the public that you are winning — even if, as in Afghanistan, you are trapped in a quagmire — is more important than military superiority. The domesticated media is vital in perpetrating this deception. 

Then there are the real journalists. They shine a light into the machinery of power. They tell the truth, for as the poet Seamus Heaney said, “There’s such a thing as truth and it can be told.” They make public the cruelty, mendacity and criminality of the powerful. They expose the collaboration of the domesticated media.

Protester in London on Oct. 29, 2023, holding a sign in memory of Reuters journalist Issam Abdullah killed in southern Lebanon by an IDF missile strike on Oct. 13, 2023. (Alisdare Hickson, Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA 2.0)

To the powerful, the war makers and the domesticated media, these real journalists are the enemy. This is the reason Julian Assange was mercilessly hounded and persecuted for 14 years. WikiLeaks published a 2,000-page Ministry of Defence document where British government officials equated investigative journalists with terrorists. The animosity is not new. What is new is the scale of Israel’s assault on journalism.

Israel has not defeated Hamas. It has not defeated Hezbollah. It will not defeat Iran. But it must convince its own public, and the rest of the world, it is winning. Censorship and the silencing of journalists who expose Israel’s war crimes and the suffering Israel inflicts on civilians is an Israeli priority.  

It would be reassuring to call Israel an outlier, a nation that did not share our values, a nation that we support in spite of its atrocities. But of course, Israel is an extension of ourselves. 

As the playwright Harold Pinter said: 

“US foreign policy could be best defined as follows: kiss my arse or I’ll kick your head in. It is as simple and as crude as that. What is interesting about it is that it is so incredibly successful. It possesses the structures of disinformation, use of rhetoric, distortion of language, which are very persuasive, but are actually a pack of lies. It is very successful propaganda. They have the money, they have the technology, they have all the means to get away with it, and they do.”

In accepting the Nobel prize for literature, Pinter said:

“The crimes of the United States have been systematic, constant, vicious, remorseless, but very few people have actually talked about them. You have to hand it to America. It has exercised a quite clinical manipulation of power worldwide while masquerading as a force for universal good. It’s a brilliant, even witty, highly successful act of hypnosis.”

The most important impediment to Israel’s mass hypnosis are the Palestinian journalists in Gaza. This is why the kill rate is so high. It is why U.S. officials say nothing. They, too, hate real journalists. They, too, demand reporters domesticate themselves to scurry like rats from one choreographed press event to the next. 

The U.S. government says and does nothing to protect the press because it endorses Israel’s campaign against the media, as it endorses Israel’s genocide in Gaza. 

Journalists, along with the Palestinians, are to be extinguished. 

avatar

Chris Hedges, who graduated from seminary at Harvard Divinity School, worked for nearly two decades as a foreign correspondent for The New York Times, National Public Radio and other news organizations in Latin America, the Middle East and the Balkans. He was part of the team of reporters at The New York Times who won a Pulitzer Prize for their coverage of global terrorism. Hedges is a fellow at the Nation Institute and the author of numerous books, including War is a Force That Gives Us Meaning.