Saturday, October 15, 2022

Iranians steadfast on toppling Islamic Regime, cry out for world help

By FELICE FRIEDSON/THE MEDIA LINE AND Sara Miller/ The Media Line - Yesterday 

For four weeks, the streets of Iran have been ringing with cries of “Women, Life, Freedom” – the slogan of a burgeoning revolution born of a desire for true liberty.

LONG READ


People light a fire during a protest over the death of Mahsa Amini, a woman who died after being arrested by the Islamic republic
© (photo credit: WANA (WEST ASIA NEWS AGENCY) 

Through an internet connection becoming increasingly difficult to access, Iranian protester Vahid tells The Media Line that he and his compatriots are ready to put their lives on the line to crush the dictatorship that has ruled their country for more than four decades.

“We want the whole world to know that we don’t want this regime, and we’re going to fight until the last drop of our blood to get rid of this regime,” he says of the fight against a brutal rule more than ready to use immense force to quell its own population.

His comments are echoed by Jasmin Ramsey, the deputy director of the US-based independent Center for Human Rights in Iran.


“We want the whole world to know that we don’t want this regime, and we’re going to fight until the last drop of our blood to get rid of this regime.”Vahid

“There are so many people in Iran that feel that they live under the thumb of an authoritarian government, and they are risking everything to speak out against that government,” she says.



A police motorcycle burns during a protest over the death of Mahsa Amini, a woman who died after being arrested by the Islamic republic's ''morality police'', in Tehran, Iran September 19, 2022
(credit: WANA (WEST ASIA NEWS AGENCY) 


Civil unrest

The civil unrest now being felt across the entire country was ignited following the death of 22-year-old Mahsa Amini in a Tehran hospital on September 16. Her death came three days after she was detained in the capital by the Islamic Republic’s so-called morality police for not wearing the compulsory hijab in a manner they deemed suitable. Amini had been on a visit to Tehran with her family from Saqqez in the Kurdistan Province of Iran.

The government said the young woman suffered a heart attack at the police station, fell into a coma, and died. But according to eyewitnesses, among them other women arrested with her, Amini had been brutally beaten by police.

UK-based Iran International news channel claims to have obtained the CT scans of Amini’s head taken after her death, which it says “vividly show a skull fracture on the right side of her head caused by a severe trauma.”

Her death proved to be the touchpaper for mass protests – led by the women who have borne the brunt of the religious regulations that have dominated the lives of Iranians since the 1979 Islamic revolution toppled the secular government.

“This time around, the women have become the leaders of these actions,” Vahid says. “‘Til now men were, but now women are leaders.”

Amini was just the first young woman to die at the hands of the regime’s security forces in the massive civil unrest that has erupted, with 17-year-old Nika Shakarami and 16-year-old Sarina Esmailzadeh among the scores killed as the government tried to end the swell of opposition that has ignited throughout the country. The Norway-based Iran Human Rights organization says that at least 201 people, including 23 children, have been killed in the crackdown on the rebellion that quickly spread in size and scope.



A man gestures during a protest over the death of Mahsa Amini, a woman who died after being arrested by the Islamic republic's ''morality police'', in Tehran, Iran September 19, 2022. (credit: WANA VIA REUTERS)

On September 30, the Amnesty International human rights organization said it had received leaked documents dated exactly a week earlier, showing that the Iranian military’s top brass ordered its armed forces to “severely confront” all protesters in every part of the country. This included opening fire on demonstrators, using tear gas and water cannons, and restricting internet access in order to hamper efforts to organize protests.

According to Vahid, while the killing of Mahsa Amini was the match that ignited the fire now burning across the country, the inferno was inevitable.

“Mahsa was only a spark, a catalyst,” he says. “People are waiting, and they can take advantage of any spark that can cause them to rise up against the regime. Sooner or later this would have happened. Mahsa was the spark that caused this to happen sooner.”

Crucially for a success that is not guaranteed, the protests have been embraced not only by the people under 40 who make up well over half of the population but now also by older men and sectors of the oil industry once beholden to the regime.

“The oil workers’ strike is a big deal, even though it is only one segment of the oil Industry,” says Dr. Iman Foroutan, the executive director of The New Iran think tank, who also served as translator for Vahid. “The hope is that more and more people will start their strikes.”

Unsurprisingly, many vocal in their support for the protests can be found in the universities of Iran.

“More than 100 universities … have had protests in recent days, and we have the names of at least 116 students who have been arrested,” Ramsey tells The Media Line.

“Professors are also taking great risks by doing this. They have tried to protect the students from being arrested. They are trying to show solidarity, but it’s not enough. What I should say is that if you’re a professor at a national university in Iran, you are going to have a big lynch [sic] on you. They want you to toe the state line, and even before this was happening, even before these protests broke out, professors were being arrested in Iran under this government of [President Ebrahim] Raisi, who is very conservative and wants to take Iran back to the ages of the 1980s when repression was at its peak and freedom was at its lowest.”

Vahid maintains that almost all of those involved in higher education in Iran are joining the protests, with the exception of some who are closely connected to the regime.

“All universities and colleges throughout Iran are on strike,” he says. “Students and a lot of the professors don’t go to classes. … A lot of the professors have joined students talking and demonstrating and not going to classes.

“There are professors who go right now and teach empty classes like [Mohammad Javad] Zarif, who used to be the foreign minister of Iran. He is now a professor in Tehran University. He goes.”

The protests are “interestingly characterized by the emphasis on young people and women,” Ramsey says. “I think that the stat that you have to look at [is] the population. It’s something like 70 or 80 [million people in Iran]. Sixty percent is under the age of 35, and so many young people feel that they don’t have any opportunity, and that is why these young people are really coming out and saying that they want more. They want better.”

Yet for all the support for the protesters’ cause within Iran, Vahid says, the change will be hard-won without pressure on the regime from the rest of the world.

“I have questions for all the countries, except for maybe Israel: Why aren’t they recalling their ambassadors to go home?” he demands.

“[What] all of these other governments have done is that they have had talking points. They are sorry to hear the news, or they feel bad for us, but they have not done any tangible action to help us or support us.”

Ramsey also has a message for the heads of state who have been reluctant to voice their concerns about the actions of the Iranian regime.

“To the world leaders that are not speaking out, I would ask what side of history they want to be on, because what people are really calling out for is fundamental and basic human rights, and how you can be silent in the face of that is just astounding to me,” she says.

In Vahid’s eyes, foreign governments are reluctant to help Iranians bring about real change because they “all benefit from the treasures of Iran.”

“The main reason is because these countries work with the Islamic Republic of Iran, and that is why they do not come out against it or do anything tangible against IRI,” he says.

“Over the years, they have taken from the Iranian people and country all of our assets, all of our treasures, all of our oil and precious minerals and whatever else [they wanted].”

Dr. Avi Melamed, founder of the Inside the Middle East Institute, which provides nonpartisan education on the region, agrees that vital expressions of support from the West have been lackluster.

“There is a need for Western support and external support, and in that sense, not so surprisingly, there is a lot of discontent,” he says. “There is a growing feeling of disappointment [among] both the Iranians and peoples in the region vis-à-vis the position of the West.”

Like Vahid, Melamed believes foreign nations should be recalling their ambassadors from Iran as an initial step but argues a more stringent response is also needed.

“I would expect very tough sanctions on the Iranian regime and its major leaders,” he says. “I would expect some international decisions that will have teeth and will be applied and will be reinforced on the ground to make very clear that the West will not put up with that story, but what we see so far is very mild.

“We see gestures of Western leaders, but what we don’t see is Western leaders or Western influential media [speaking out].”

The European Union this week agreed to sanction the Iranian regime for its brutal response to the protests, although the actual form of those sanctions has yet to be decided.

The Iranian people, Vahid asserts, will remove the Islamic government with or without help from abroad.

“If the foreign countries do something tangible to help us, obviously that will help us to get rid of this regime faster, sooner, and with less casualties. If they don’t, we’ll still continue our fight,” he vows.

Massive intervention could prove tricky for some foreign governments, with US President Joe Biden determined to revive the 2015 agreement that curbed Iran’s nuclear program in return for lifting harsh economic sanctions that crippled the country’s economy. The agreement, officially known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), effectively fell apart when former US president Donald Trump pulled his country out in 2018 and reimposed strict sanctions.

Yet such geopolitical considerations carry little weight with Iranians who want their freedom, Melamed maintains. In fact, he says, the regime’s desire for regional hegemony – including its nuclear ambitions – only provides further fuel for the unrest.

“[The protesters] are saying to the Iranian regime, look, we don’t want to be a part of your aggressive, proactive, violent, hegemonic vision of taking over the region. We want to live our lives. We want to take care of our issues. And in a way, this is a sort of indirect link to the story of JCPOA, but the story of the JCPOA does not come, at least not on the part of the protestors on the streets,” he tells The Media Line.

This sentiment is echoed by Vahid, who even expresses distaste for a deal that he sees would only serve to strengthen the regime and further facilitate its dabbling in regional affairs.

“We certainly hope that this JCPOA doesn’t get signed [and] doesn’t get executed, because if it does, none of that money that IRI receives goes to the people of Iran to better their lives. It will only be spent on bullets to hit him and his friends inside Iran, or to have terrorist activities in countries like Iraq and Syria. So, we sure hope that that agreement doesn’t get executed,” he says.

Ramsey also says that a return to the JCPOA would not be welcomed by those who are trying to bring down the Islamic government as it would only grant them more legitimacy – and funds.

“From people that we have spoken to on the ground in recent days, including a civil society member who was in hiding, is that they are afraid that this deal is going to be signed and then it’s going to be sort of a green light for the Iranian government to keep doing what it wants because it now has this sort of international legitimacy over the nuclear deal,” she says.

“People on the ground aren’t protesting [against] the nuclear deal. They are really protesting for change within the one political system within Iran.”

In fact, Melamed believes that Tehran’s desire for regional dominance is “more lethal than the story of the Iranian nuclear project.”

“This is the control of Iranian terror arms in different parts of the region, like Hezbollah in Lebanon, and Islamic Jihad and Hamas in the Gaza Strip [as well] as Iranian-backed militias in Afghanistan and Syria, the Iranian-backed Shia militias in Iraq and so on,” he says.

While Western governments are seemingly slow to act, the demonstrators in Iran have found solidarity from everyday people in many nations who held their own parallel protests outside Iranian missions.

And like at the barricades of freedom in Iran itself, these demonstrations were largely woman-led. Female protesters around the world chopped off their hair in solidarity with their counterparts in Iran – who not only removed their hijabs but also hacked off one of the symbols of forced male dominance.

The message of the protesters even resonated in Afghanistan, where the return of the Taliban saw the return of draconian restrictions on women, their movements, and of course their attire. In a remarkable display of defiance and bravery, Afghan women protested outside the Iranian Embassy in Kabul in support of their Iranian counterparts.

To Melamed, the Iranian women’s large-scale removal of the hijab undermines “one of the core pillars of this regime.”

The compulsory hijab “is something very significant from an ideological perspective and from a political perspective,” he says. “The young girls who are today defying that openly in the streets, taking off their hijab is obviously a significant act of defiance, and that creates for itself a major challenge for that regime.”

Vahid is no stranger to the protests, either. As part of a “a team of about 15 people,” he has taken to the streets often in the past month and says there is definitely no decrease in determination from the people, despite the harsh response of the regime. In fact, he says, it has become a point of pride.

“People are used to being beaten up by batons and also with BB guns, and they are not going to give up,” he insists. “The only thing they want is to get rid of this regime. In fact, it now has become a thing of honor for whoever goes and gets involved.”

Vahid says that he and his team live in one of the largest cities in Iran, where they have seen up to 5,000 people at individual protests. But, he says, the demonstrations of 2022 tend to be smaller in size and in many places at the same time so as to stretch thin the security forces’ presence at each.

“One of the differences of these recent events is that simultaneously people have different events in multiple locations in the cities, which makes the security forces more tired and less available to go and beat up on everyone,” he tells The Media Line. “In the city I live in, there are four or five events going on simultaneously.”

There have been multiple mass protests against the Iranian government over the years. Some proved to be more popular and threatening to the regime than others, but none have been able to deliver it a final fatal blow. Perhaps until now.

The protests of 2022 have mostly been compared to those that took place after the controversial 2009 presidential elections, in which hard-liner Mahmoud Ahmadinejad won a second term with 62% of the vote. Former prime minister and known reformist Mir-Hossein Mousavi was said to have received 32%.

The outcry at the widely discredited results came from within the population of Iran and from mainly Western governments. For more than six months, protests were held across Iran guided by the Mousavi-led Green Movement that sprung up in the wake of the election, under the banner “Where is my vote?”

But ultimately, the protest movement faded away, unable to survive in the face of internet restrictions that thwarted assembly and the expected violent response from the government’s security forces. Mousavi remains under house arrest to this day.

“What we see today with the protests in Iran is reminding us all that it’s not the first time,” says Melamed, stressing that the current protests are driven purely by the demand for true liberty, not individual issues that triggered short-lived unrest.

“It is definitely driven by issues of human rights, of freedom, women’s rights, and so on,” he says. “In fact, the major slogan speaking and describing this current wave [of protests] is ‘Women, Freedom, and Life.’ So, in that sense, this is one of the major differences in comparison to the previous waves.”

Ironically, it was a popular revolution of both secular and religious that brought the mullahs who now rule the country to power in 1979. Angered by the perceived corruption of Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi – who was returned to power in a 1953 US-sponsored coup that toppled a democratically elected government – Iranians welcomed an anti-Western, Islamic regime, with the formerly exiled Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini as supreme leader.

And now, more than 40 years later, Iranians are still seeking a leadership that will allow them to thrive without oppression, subjugation, and fear. Many searching for stability look back to the era of the monarchy as a period of calm and prosperity. They want that back, this time with the son of the late deposed shah as ruler.

“Me and my team are pro-monarchy, but even the people who aren’t pro-monarchy would still like for Reza Pahlavi to at least come in the interim period after the regime falls,” says Vahid.

“Mainly it is because for the majority of people in Iran, the only person or family or dynasty that they ‘trust’ is the Pahlavi family. They don’t trust all of these other people who have come up. They trust them because of all of the good they’ve done in the past, so they would like for him to come, and the people hope that he will come in the interim period of regime change and lead the revolution.”

Vahid is hopeful that this point is not too far off, as evidenced by what he says is a more conciliatory tone from Iran’s rulers as their ability to crack down appears to be waning.

“We are seeing the police and IRI forces that are getting more and more tired every day,” Vahid tells The Media Line. “We are witnessing the interviews on TV and radio by the regime’s people. Nobody is now saying that we will kill you or do this. They are now saying that we need to find out what’s going on. Let’s talk to the protestors. Let’s make things better. Let’s change the laws. So that shows that they are actually moving backwards and getting weaker.”

This, he says, gives the protesters the courage to move forward with their resistance even while being wary of promises made by embattled leaders.

“It gives us hope. However, we are 100% sure these guys aren’t going to step back. They aren’t going to do anything good for the country. This is all talk because that is how dictators always work until their last minute when they are overthrown. They are going to continue saying these things, but they aren’t going to do anything that helps us.”

Conventional wisdom states that a major factor in toppling a government is winning the support of the military. In Iran’s case this includes the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, formed after the 1979 revolution with the sole mission of protecting the regime against internal and external threats. So far, that does not seem to be happening.

According to Melamed, there have indeed been reports of some members of the Iranian military switching sides, but he says this does not include members of the Revolutionary Guard, who are instrumental in quelling any unrest.

“There has been a report, apparently a biased one, that there has been some defection of officers and soldiers from the Iranian army, but I don’t think that it has been a very significant phenomenon in scale,” he says.

Melamed believes that listening to the people is in fact one of two ways that the regime can maintain what is currently a shaky grip on the nation. The other is a clearly untenable continued slaughter of anyone who opposes it.

“The protests right now are significant, because it yet again further cracks the foundations upon which this regime is standing. It is definitely sending a very clear message, [which] is at the end of the day that if this regime would like to continue [to] control Iran, it has two ways to do it,” he says.

“One is by listening to these people, and very significantly changing its past course and trajectory [and it] is not clear whether it will do it. And the other path is just to continue and kill these people on the streets.”

Perhaps drawing on the history of many other brutal regimes who found that violence is not a solution to mass resistance, Melamed has a warning for the Iranian government: “You can’t kill people forever on the streets.”

With the line fading, Vahid has one last defiant message for the regime he is determined to topple:

“We have had people – friends – who have been killed, people who are in jail, people who have been hit and injured, and I guess tortured, but we’re not giving up. We’re going to stay and fight until the end.”

Blockade by gangs on fuel source in Haiti is causing famine: UN

A UN analysis found that 4.7 million people, nearly half of Haiti’s population, are experiencing acute food insecurity.
People walking on a quiet market street usually packed 
with people and heavy traffic in Port-au-Prince, Haiti 
[Ricardo Arduengo/Reuters]

Gangsters blockading a major fuel terminal in Haiti are causing catastrophic hunger on the island, United Nations officials have said, with more than four million people facing severe insecurity and more than 19,000 others suffering from famine.

The situation is particularly dire in the coastal neighbourhood of Cite Soleil, where swelling violence and armed groups vying for control have meant many residents cannot access work, markets or food aid, officials on Friday said.

“Haiti is facing a humanitarian catastrophe,” said Jean-Martin Bauer, the Haiti country director for the UN’s World Food Programme (WFP).

“The severity and the extent of food insecurity in Haiti is getting worse,” he said.

Haiti, the poorest nation in the Americas, is facing an acute political, economic, security and health crisis which has paralysed the country and sparked a breakdown of law and order.

Prime Minister Ariel Henry last week asked for military assistance from abroad to confront the gangs, and earlier this week, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres called for the immediate deployment of a special armed force.

He warned of a “dramatic deterioration in security” in a country that had been overrun by powerful criminal gangs and looters, and where a new cholera outbreak had been declared.

A coalition of gangs has prevented the distribution of diesel and petrol for more than a month to protest a plan to cut fuel subsidies. Most transport is halted, with looting and gang shootouts becoming increasingly common.

In mid-September, gangs surrounded a key fuel terminal to demand Henry’s resignation and to protest a spike in petroleum prices after the prime minister announced that his administration could no longer afford to subsidise fuel.

People running to board a public transport locally known as ‘taptap’
 as rubbish burns on the side of a road in Port-au-Prince, Haiti 
[Ricardo Arduengo/Reuters]

That move, coupled with thousands of protesters who have blocked streets in the capital of Port-au-Prince and other major cities, has caused major shortages, forcing hospitals to cut back on services, petrol stations to close and banks and grocery stores to restrict hours.

In a recent video posted on Facebook, the leader of the so-called G9 and Family gang Jimmy Cherizier, who goes by the nickname “Barbecue,” read a proposed plan to stabilise Haiti that includes the creation of a “Council of Sages” with one representative from each of Haiti’s 10 departments.

The gang also is demanding positions in Henry’s Cabinet, according to the director of Haiti’s National Disarmament, Dismantling and Reintegration Commission, speaking to radio station Magik 9 on Thursday.

“It’s a symptom of their power, but also a symptom that they may fear what is coming,” Robert Fatton, a Haitian politics expert at the University of Virginia, said of the gang’s demands.

The UN Security Council is considering sanctions against Cherizier and others who threaten the peace, security or stability of Haiti, according to a draft resolution, several US news outlets have reported.

Meanwhile, some 19,200 people in Haiti’s Cite Soleil are suffering famine conditions, according to an analysis by UN agencies and aid groups on Friday. Famine is only declared when at least 20 percent of the households in a region are suffering famine conditions.

The analysis said that in total 4.7 million people – nearly half of Haiti’s population – are experiencing high levels of acute food insecurity. The situation was “close to breaking point”, Bauer said.

US development agency USAID on Friday sent a Disaster Assistance Response Team to Haiti, the agency’s chief, Samantha Power wrote on Twitter.

Such teams are dispatched in response to natural disasters and complex emergencies, and typically include infectious disease specialists, nutritionists and logistics experts, according to USAID’s website.

The US Department of State has offered support for Haiti’s police and has sent a Coast Guard vessel to patrol the area.

The United States and Canada, in the coming days, will deliver armoured vehicles to the Haitian police that have been bought by Haiti, US Assistant Secretary of State Brian Nichols said in an interview with a Haitian television station on Thursday.

SOURCE: NEWS AGENCIES

 
French soccer chiefs to check migrant workers' conditions in Qatar
Reuters
Soccer Football - FIFA World Cup Qatar 2022 Stadium Preview - Khalifa International Stadium, Doha, Qatar - September 29, 2022 General view inside the stadium ahead of the World Cup 
REUTERS/Mohammed Dabbous/File Photo

Oct 14 (Reuters) - The French Football Federation (FFF) said on Friday it will send a delegation to Qatar to carry out checks on the working conditions of migrant workers after a documentary revealed poor living conditions at the team's World Cup base in Doha.

The France Televisions documentary was filmed before the summer, the national broadcaster said, as part of a joint investigation with Radio France into the controversy surrounding the World Cup being awarded to the Gulf state.

Footage showed crowded bedrooms and unsanitary kitchens and bathrooms in the accommodation for employees of a private security firm sub-contracted by the hotel where the France team will be staying for the Nov. 20-Dec. 18 tournament.

Some employees interviewed said that they were not paid overtime and hardly ever had a day off.

When the documentary confronted FFF president Noel Le Graet with footage of the accommodation, he responded that the living quarters only needed "a lick of paint".

"It's not unsolvable, there's still time to fix it," he said. "I could show you lots of pictures like that in lots of countries, even in some not far from (France)."

France's sports minister Amelie Oudea-Castera told RTL on Friday she was shocked by Le Graet's reaction and that it "lacked humanity and even coherence".

The documentary revealed the FFF had terminated the contract with the security agency because of a "number of unacceptable irregularities" and launched an investigation, which the delegation would carry out on site in mid-October.

Qatar, where migrant workers and foreigners make up the majority of the 2.8 million population, has come under severe scrutiny from human rights groups over its treatment of migrant workers in the run-up to the tournament.

A member of the World Cup organising committee said on Thursday that Qatar acknowledges gaps in its labour system but the tournament has allowed the country to make progress on issues related to workers' rights.

The government of Qatar has previously denied a 2021 Amnesty report that thousands of migrant workers were still being exploited.
Brothers get 40 years each for Malta reporter’s car-bomb murder after stunning plea reversal

George and Alfred Degiorgio initially entered not-guilty pleas at the courthouse in Valletta.

Mandy Mallia lights candles at a memorial her sister, a slain journalist, in Valletta, Malta on Friday.
Jonathan Borg / AP

Oct. 14, 2022, 
By Associated Press

Two brothers were sentenced to 40 years in prison each by a judge in Malta after they pleaded guilty to the car-bomb murder of an anti-corruption journalist Friday.

It was a stunning reversal, because hours earlier at the start of the trial in a Valletta courthouse Friday, George Degiorgio, 59, and Alfred Degiorgio, 57, had entered not-guilty pleas at the courthouse in Valletta where they were charged with having set the bomb that blew up Daphne Caruana Galizia’s car as she drove near her home on Oct. 16, 2017.

The wreckage of investigative journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia's car in Mosta, Malta in 2017.
Rene Rossignaud / AP file

Caruana Galizia investigated suspected corruption among political and business circles in the tiny European Union nation, which is a financial haven in the Mediterranean.

Prosecutors alleged that the brothers that they were hired by a top Maltese businessman with government ties. That businessman has been charged and will be tried separately.

In the run-up to the trial, the Degiorgio brothers had denied the charges. A third suspect, Vincent Muscat, avoided a trial after earlier changing his plea to guilty. Muscat is serving a 15-year sentence.

It wasn’t immediately clear why the defendants abruptly reversed their pleas.

During the prosecution’s opening arguments, the state argued they had evidence involving cell phones that would link the defendants to the bombing.

The brothers had unsuccessfully tried to negotiate a pardon in exchange for naming bigger alleged conspirators, including a former minister whose identity hasn’t been revealed.

The bomb had been placed under the driver’s seat and the explosion was powerful enough to send the car’s wreckage flying over a wall and into a field.

A top Maltese investigative journalist, Caruana Galizia, 53, had written extensively on her website “Running Commentary” about suspected corruption in political and business circles in the Mediterranean island nation, an attractive financial haven.

People hold pictures of slain journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia during a protest outside the office of the Maltese Prime Minister Joseph Muscat in Valletta, Malta in 2019. 
Rene Rossignaud / AP

Among her targets were people in then-Prime Minister Joseph Muscat’s inner circle whom she accused of having offshore companies in tax havens disclosed in the Panama Papers leak. But she also targeted the opposition. When she was killed she was facing more than 40 libel suits.

The arrest of a top businessman with connections to senior government officials two years after the murder sparked a series of mass protests in the country, forcing Muscat to resign.

Yorgen Fenech was indicted in 2019 for alleged complicity in the slaying, by either ordering or instigating the commission of the crime, inciting another to commit the crime or by promising to give a reward after the fact. He was also indicted for conspiracy to commit murder. Fenech has entered not-guilty pleas to all charges.

No date has been set for his trial.

A self-confessed middleman, taxi driver Melvin Theuma, was granted a presidential pardon in 2019 in exchange for testimony against Fenech and the other alleged plotters. Two men, Jamie Vella and Robert Agius, have been charged with supplying the bomb, but their trial has not yet begun.

In the morning session before a lunch break, a deputy prosecutor, Philip Galea Farrugia, told the court that Theuma was asked by an unnamed person to find someone to kill Caruana Galizia. Theuma allegedly approached one of the Degiorgio brothers and a payment of 150,000 euros ($146,500) was negotiated, said Galea Farrugia.

Galea Farrugia also said that a rifle was initially selected as the murder weapon, but that was later switched to a bomb. Prosecutors also said that a cell phone — one of three that George Degiorgio had with him on a cabin cruiser in Malta’s Grand Harbor — had triggered the explosion.

A 2021 public inquiry report found that the Maltese state “has to bear responsibility” for Caruana Galizia’s murder because of the culture of impunity that emanated from the highest levels of government.

Associated Press
Rescued fishermen speak about ordeal in Gulf

Associated Press
(14 Oct 2022) Two men rescued from the Gulf of Mexico after their fishing boat sank, spoke with The Associated Press Thursday. The men spent more than 24 hours in the water before help came. 

UPDATES
40 killed, dozens trapped by explosion in Turkey coal mine

By Maija Ehlinger, Gul Tuysuz, Heather Chen and Eyad Kourdi, CNN
Updated 8:27 AM EDT, Sat October 15, 2022

People gather outside a coal mine after an explosion in Amasra, in Bartin Province, Turkey, on October 15, 2022.
Yasin Akgul/AFP/Getty Images


CNN —

An explosion inside a coal mine in northern Turkey has killed at least 40 people and left 11 others hospitalized, state news media reported on Saturday.

The explosion took place in the Black Sea town of Amasra in Bartin province on Friday, trapping dozens beneath the rubble of the blast.

Eleven wounded workers were treated in hospitals, state news agency Anadolu said citing a statement from the country’s Interior Minister Suleyman Soylu.

Turkey’s Minister of Energy and Natural Resources Fatih Donmez said that a fire that broke out after the blast is largely under control, Anadolu reported.

Rescuers are working through the night as the death toll rises, with video footage from the scene showing miners emerging blackened and bleary-eyed.

There were 110 people in the mine at the time of the explosion, said Interior Minister Suleyman Soylu, who traveled to Amasra to coordinate the search and rescue operation.


Officials have not yet determined the cause of the explosion.

The blast inside the coal mine killed at least 40 people, according to state news.Khalil Hamra/AP

Emergency services worked overnight to assess the damage caused by the deadly explosion.Omer Urer/Anadolu Agency/Getty Images

“We are doing our best to ensure that the injured recover as soon as possible,” Turkish Health Minister Fahrettin Koca told reporters.

“I wish God’s mercy on each of them.”

Turkey witnessed its deadliest ever coal mining disaster in 2014, when 301 people died after a blast in the western town of Soma.

The disaster fueled public anger and discontent towards the government’s response to the tragedy.


Miners trapped underground after deadly coal mine blast in Turkey


By Euronews • Updated: 14/10/2022 -

An injured or death miner is carried by rescuers after an explosion at a coal mine in Bartin, northern Turkey, on October 14 2022. - 

At least two workers were killed and 20 others injured in an explosion at a coal mine in northwestern Turkey on Friday, the country's health minister said.

Scores of workers were still stranded underground in separate sites 300 and 350 meters below sea level, as of Friday evening.

THERE ARE NO ACCIDENTS, ONLY PREVETABLE INCIDENTS
The accident
occurred at 6 p.m. local time in the town of Amasra, in the Black Sea coastal province of Bartin.

Television images showed hundreds of people — many crying — gathering around a damaged building near the entrance to the pit.

The cause of the blast at the state-owned TTK Amasra Muessese Mudurlugu mine remains unknown.


It is currently under investigation.

Several rescue teams were dispatched to the area, including from neighbouring provinces, according to Turkey’s disaster management agency, AFAD.

There are conflicting numbers on the number of those trapped.

Local governor Nurtac Arslan told reporters that five people were trapped 350 metres below ground and another 44 at another location 300 meters below ground, while the mining trade union Maden-Is reported 35 people still trapped.

Eight miners had managed to crawl out of the damaged pit on their own and were now receiving medical assistance, Arslan added.

Maden Is said a build-up of methane gas was behind the blast, but other officials said it was too soon to draw conclusions over the cause of the accident.
THERE ARE NO ACCIDENTS, ONLY PREVETABLE INCIDENTS

Health Minister Fahrettin Koca announced the two fatalities on Twitter. He said 20 other people were injured but did not provide information on their condition.

In Turkey’s worst mine disaster, a total of 301 people died in 2014.



 

The global echoes of a British near-collapse










British economic policy under Liz Truss seems certain to end the Conservative Party’s dominance, and reversing Brexit seems to be the only solution

  • By Anatole Kaletsky

    •  

    •  

As the world’s policymakers gather in Washington for the IMF’s annual meetings, there is a historical curiosity to consider. Roughly every 15 years since the 1930s, Britain has experienced an autumn financial crisis and policy regime change that has foreshadowed global upheavals a few years later.

Britain abandoned the gold standard in September 1931; the US followed in 1933. The sterling devaluation of September 1949 ended post-World War II hopes of a genuinely multilateral currency system and confirmed the dollar’s hegemony. The second post-war sterling devaluation, in November 1967, triggered a chain reaction that culminated in then-US president Richard Nixon dismantling the Bretton Woods currency system in 1971. Britain’s IMF bailout in September 1976 discredited Keynesian economics and led to the election of Margaret Thatcher as prime minister, inspiring the monetarist revolution of then-US Federal Reserve chairman Paul Volcker and then-US president Ronald Reagan. The breakup of the European exchange-rate mechanism on “Black Wednesday” in September 1992 forced France, Italy, Spain and Greece to accept Germany’s economic dominance of Europe. The run against Britain’s most aggressive mortgage lender, Northern Rock, in September 2007, became a template for the global financial crisis a year later.

Britain has just suffered its latest financial convulsion. The near-collapses of the pound, the country’s government bond market and its pension system are likely to echo around the world in several unexpected ways.

Last month, I argued that Britain’s Conservative Party had outdone itself by finding in Liz Truss a prime minister even worse than Boris Johnson, Theresa May or David Cameron.

However, I also asked a paradoxical question about the politically disastrous experiment with “Trussonomics.” Was it possible that Truss’ bet on 1970s-style Keynesian stimulus and price controls might succeed, at least in the short term? Could some modified version of Britain’s unorthodox mixture of fiscal stimulus, price caps and energy subsidies become a model for other countries desperately trying to revive collapsing economies while keeping inflation at least temporarily under control?

Today it seems preposterous to suggest that Britain could become a model for economic revolution, as it did under Thatcher. Yet, looking beyond Truss’ political blunders, there are four features of her new economic policy that other countries could consider if they ever stop laughing at Britain:

First, the top priority for economic policy in a time of war and international energy upheavals might be to avert deep recessions, rather than worrying about inflation targets and debt dynamics.

Second, under such conditions, inflation might be better managed with price controls and fiscal subsidies than with tight money.

Third, a policy mix of bold fiscal expansion and moderate monetary tightening might succeed in avoiding an economic slump for a year or two and prepare the ground for an orderly tightening of monetary policy in the longer term.

Fourth, when inflation and debt levels increase unexpectedly, fiscal sustainability can become easier, not harder, to achieve.

All four of these statements are heretical, according to current economic orthodoxy. Yet all can be backed by plausible economic arguments and historical examples, albeit with plenty of counterarguments and counterexamples.

Consider “fiscal sustainability.” Suppose a government with 1 percent growth and 2 percent inflation aims for a debt-to-GDP ratio of 60 percent. Simple arithmetic shows that the government must keep its deficit below 1.8 percent of GDP to meet this definition of “fiscal sustainability.” Now suppose that growth is 1 percent, but inflation accelerates to 4 percent and the debt-to-GDP ratio rises to 90 percent. In that case, the government can borrow up to 4.5 percent of GDP and still keep the debt ratio unchanged.

However, if there were plausible arguments for Britain’s new policies, why did they plunge financial markets into turmoil? The reason might lie in astonishing political and institutional blunders that almost guarantee the end of a long Conservative hegemony in British politics.

By combining a useful Keynesian stimulus with an economically irrelevant and politically toxic abolition of Britain’s top tax rate, Truss gave the impression that the new government’s true objective was to redistribute income from poor people to rich people. By insisting, without evidence, that her tax cuts would boost Britain’s long-term growth trend, rather than simply promising to avert a disastrous slump caused by the Ukraine war, she exposed herself to economic derision and set herself up for political failure when her supply-side miracle fails to happen.

Truss also needlessly alienated Britain’s entire government establishment. She fired Britain’s most powerful civil servant, the permanent secretary of the Treasury, for no good reason. She refused to allow an objective analysis of her plans by the Office of Budget Responsibility, which would normally be a legal requirement for any budget. She also ridiculed the Bank of England’s monetary management. After these unprovoked attacks on Britain’s longstanding tradition of nonpartisan public service, Treasury and Bank of England officials might not have been too distressed by the market turmoil last month.

Because of all these blunders, pollsters are now near-unanimous that the Conservatives are likely to lose the next election.

Throughout British history, the party in power has always lost it after financial crises, even those that were followed by decent economic recoveries. This pattern is likely to be repeated in the coming two years.

Suppose, as I think is likely, Britain avoids the economic collapse that many observers now consider inevitable and, using energy subsidies and price controls, squeezes inflation back to tolerable levels — not to the 2 percent official target, but to 4 or 5 percent. By next summer, other countries stuck in recession might start looking with interest at Britain’s heterodox economic experiment, but inside Britain, Truss will get no credit for averting a short-term economic catastrophe, because she never presented that as her main objective. Instead, she will face ridicule for breaking her impossible promise to achieve sustained supply-side growth.

Meanwhile, the opposition parties would be preparing for government, and would need to propose alternative policies for achieving the long-term growth that the Tories failed to deliver.

With fiscal leeway exhausted by Truss’ tax cuts and inflation still a serious problem, there is no serious prospect of alternative policies based on more public spending, but any non-Conservative government that emerges from the next election could offer one completely credible policy that would instantly improve Britain’s growth prospects with no budgetary costs: Restore cooperation with its overwhelmingly dominant trading partner, the EU.

This would not mean reversing Brexit. It would mean negotiating a new customs union, aligning British regulations with the EU single market and gradually moving toward a closer relationship with the bloc, similar to Swiss and Norwegian arrangements. A month ago, this would have been a fantasy, but stranger things are now happening in Britain almost every day.

Anatole Kaletsky is chief economist and co-chairman of Gavekal Dragonomics. Copyright: Project Syndicate

EXCLUSIVE
The Dark Heart of Trussonomics
The Mainstreaming of Libertarian Theories of Social Darwinism and Apartheid

LONG READ

Nafeez Ahmed
10 October 2022
Charles Murray. Photo: Zuma/Alamy

The legacy of the Nazi ideology of eugenics – popularised by Charles Murray’s controversial book The Bell Curve – goes some way to explaining Trussonomics, writes Nafeez Ahmed


Following the reaction to Liz Truss and Kwasi Kwarteng’s economic policies, ‘Trussonomics’ has been criticised as a case study in neoliberalism. Their financial shock therapy, the assumption goes, is aimed at making the rich richer, because they believe that this wealth will ‘trickle-down’ to the rest of society, driving economic growth.

But this misses a key ideological driving force: the reshaping of neoliberalism into an extreme nationalist economics rooted in a form of social Darwinism. Under this ideology, it is impossible to reduce inequality because characteristics such as race, gender and class that cause disparities are fixed.

In this sense, Trussonomics represents the continuation of an experiment that began with Trump and Brexit, both of which were seen as radical departures from the neoliberal consensus of the ‘golden age’ of globalisation.

Instead of tackling poverty and inequality, this social Darwinistic strain advocates that social divisions are destined to become wider because of fixed biological and cultural group properties. This, in turn, underpins an economic agenda of elevating and perpetuating the ‘fittest’ groups – while finding ways to manage, control and diminish the ‘underclass’.

This ideology has an astonishing reach – from the American Enterprise Institute, which has strong in-roads into the Republican Party; to UK pressure groups including the ‘Tufton Street’ think tanks that have helped shape Conservative Party policies.
The Pseudoscience of an ‘Underclass’

At the root of this thinking is a set of unstated assumptions that have become widely accepted across the conservative landscape – assumptions that have their origins in biological theories of human nature that have become increasingly mainstream across the right, even as they have been overwhelmingly discredited by the scientific community.

The ideology can be traced back to the extraordinary influence of American sociologist Charles Murray.

Murray is one of the world’s pioneers of scientific racism and biological theories of IQ and social stratification, and his related economic theories of the ‘underclass’ have influenced policy thinking on both sides of the Atlantic and the political spectrum.

According to the Southern Poverty Law Centre – the leading civil rights law firm that tracks extremist groups in America – Murray is a white nationalist extremist who uses “racist pseudoscience and misleading statistics to argue that social inequality is caused by the genetic inferiority of the black and Latino communities, women and the poor”.

His 1994 book, The Bell Curve: Intelligence and Class Structure in American Life, co-authored with Richard Herrnstein, has been described by Scientific American magazine as “the flagship modern work reporting on racial differences in IQ score”.

The book claims that black people, women, the poor and Latinos are cognitively inferior largely due to hereditary genetic factors – and that rises in their birth and immigration rates therefore explains the rise in inequality between racial and social groups. This has led, Murray claims, to the emergence of a “cognitive elite” that consists mainly of concentrated, self-selecting, networks of white men who are well-endowed with cognitive abilities.

The Bell Curve’s core theories around genetics, race, gender and IQ come from research funded by a Nazi eugenics foundation based in the US.

The book was widely critiqued by geneticists, biologists and other experts for being “scientifically flawed” at the time of its publication and has been criticised ever since.

While few of the conservative figures and institutions cited in this article can be seen as intentionally supporting Nazism, their fascination with Charles Murray’s ideas – and their transmission of fringe pseudoscientific theories originally incubated by Nazi ideology into the mainstream – raise concerning questions.

American Conservatism’s White Nationalist Star


Charles Murray is F. A. Hayek Chair Emeritus in Cultural Studies at the American Enterprise Institute – a powerful neoconservative think tank in Washington D.C. with close ties to the Republican Party. He first joined the AEI in 1990 and has been in his current role since 2018.

In 2009, Murray received the AEI’s prestigious Irving Kristol Award. The AEI’s “highest honour”, it is given annually to an individual who has made “exceptional practical and intellectual contributions to improve government policy, social welfare, or political understanding”. Boris Johnson was honoured at a similar event by the AEI in 2018.

Photographs seen by Byline Times show that a wide range of conservatives were in attendance at the AEI’s annual dinner honouring Murray – throwing light on the extent to which he is considered a respectable and legitimate voice on the right.

Former special assistant and speechwriter to President George W. Bush, David Frum, posed alongside Fox News host Tucker Carlson and anti-Islam activist Ayaan Hirsi Ali.

Newt Gingrich, former Republican Speaker of the House of Representatives credited with paving the way for the rise of Trump with his ruthless partisan rhetoric, also attended.

Another figure at the event, who would go on to become very close to Trump, was economist Kevin Hassett, who previously served as economic advisor to the presidential campaigns of John McCain, George W. Bush, and Mitt Romney.

Billionaire Roger Hertog, a Republican Party donor credited with being the main conservative funder who financially enabled the neoconservative movement, also turned up. Hertog is linked to several other think tanks such as the Washington Institute for Near East Policy and the Manhattan Institute.

He was joined at the event by the late Antonin Scalia, a pro-Republican Supreme Court Justice since 1986.

Another prominent billionaire and conservative funder in attendance was Robert Agostinelli. The founder and managing director of global private equity firm the Rhone Group, Agostinelli funds a range of right-wing projects. He also has key political connections in Britain.

In 2018, he gave $10,000 to the Legatum Institute, an influential UK think tank with close ties to the Conservative Party. A year later, the Rhone Group paid £10,000 to Conservative Party MP Jacob Rees-Mogg for a speaking engagement. Rees-Mogg is now the UK’s Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy Secretary in Liz Truss’ Government.

But that is not the Truss Government’s only connection to the nexus surrounding Charles Murray. His influence in Britain goes far deeper than is ever acknowledged.

American Dark Money, the Mercers and the Conservative Party A Network of Influence 
Nafeez Ahmed



Charles Murray and the UK Right

Charles Murray’s entry into British politics began via The Sunday Times and Rupert Murdoch’s News International, which sponsored his writing and flew him to the UK several times. This was when Murray was still largely unknown in Britain, but he was sought after by then Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher’s Government.

By 1987, Murray had met representatives from her Policy Unit, the Department of Health and Social Security, and the Treasury Office. In 1989, Murray met Thatcher herself.

A year later, the Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA) – founded in 1955, originally based in Westminster’s Tufton Street, a driving force of Thatcherism, and widely credited as a driving force for Trussonomics today – published Murray’s essay ‘The Emerging British Underclass’. It published a follow-up by Murray, ‘Underclass: The Crisis Deepens’, in 1994 – the same year he released The Bell Curve.

In these essays, Murray expanded on his thesis that the welfare state perpetuates the growth of an underclass by creating self-reinforcing cycles of poverty – not just in America, but also in Britain.

“When I use the term ‘underclass’ I am indeed focusing on a certain type of person defined not by his condition e.g.: long-term unemployed, but by his deplorable behaviour in response to that condition e.g.: unwilling to take jobs that are available to him,” Murray wrote.

He did not mention the role of his biological theories of IQ in determining the assumptions underlying this thesis, but had few qualms about claiming that this growing underclass is “predominantly black” – making the case that this could not be explained by “black history”.

The Sunday Times printed these essays and commissioned Murray to come to Britain and investigate its alleged ‘underclass’.

In 1994, he attended a high-profile lunch hosted by the IEA to discuss his ideas. Then in 1996, the IEA published a series of essays to debate Murray’s underclass theory through its health and welfare unit, headed up by David Green. Green’s unit later seceded from the IEA, becoming Civitas – another Tufton Street organisation that former Downing Street advisor Tim Montgomerie and former Vote Leave CEO Matthew Elliott have described as a core part of the infrastructure of Britain’s conservative movement.

Civitas continued to draw on Murray’s thinking through the ensuing decade. In 2005, it published Simple Justice by Charles Murray, once again in association with The Sunday Times, calling for retributive justice to deal with crime along with a series of commentaries.

In 2008, Murray was interviewed for a Civitas report entitled ‘Second Thoughts on the Family’. In 2013, Civitas advisor, sociologist Peter Saunders, referred directly to Murray’s theory of “cognitive stratification” to justify his claims that intelligence varies between classes, and also claimed that children’s cognitive abilities are genetically inherited. Saunders then authored a Civitas report in 2019, ‘Social Mobility Truths’ – which not only referred specifically to Murray’s The Bell Curve, but even directly cited one of the dubious sources relied on by that book: the late psychologist Hans Eysenck.

Eysenck was one of the earliest proponents of the race, genes and intelligence hypothesis and received funding from the Nazi Pioneer Fund for his claims. Dozens of his papers have recently been retracted due to serious flaws in his research. As neuroscientist Andrew Colman points out in the Personality and Individual Differences journal, “a deeper understanding of population genetics has shown that race differences in IQ could be determined entirely by environmental factors even if its heritability were as high as Eysenck believed it to be” and new techniques in molecular genetics suggest “that the black–white IQ gap is not determined significantly by genetic factors”.

Neither Civitas nor the Conservative Party responded to Byline Times’ requests for comment.

Over at the IEA, by 2009, Mark Littlewood was its director-general. Two years later, Liz Truss founded the Free Enterprise Group of Conservative MPs – the de facto parliamentary wing of the IEA. In 2012, Kwasi Kwarteng co-authored an IEA paper with Jonathan Dupont on fiscal discipline. The following year, as Education and Childcare Minister, Truss cited Civitas for promoting a new curriculum for schools – a connection also inspired by the Murray school of thought.

Over the next few years, the IEA’s fascination with Charles Murray would continue.

Reports and books repeatedly cited him. In 2012, the IEA’s head of political economy, Kristian Niemietz, published a book with the IEA, Redefining the Poverty Debate, citing Murray’s work on the underclass.

In 2015, IEA’s then head of public policy, Ryan Bourne, interviewed Murray about his recently released book, By The People: Rebuilding Liberty Without Permission. Building on his previous work, Murray dismissed the role of democracy in solving the problems of governmental regulatory overreach, instead advocating for “systematic civil disobedience” to “roll-back the regulatory state”.

In 2019, the IEA’s head of education, Stephen Davies, published a critique of universal basic income citing Murray.

Eugenics & the Intellectuals Stephen Unwin



Littlewood has previously told Byline Times that, while he is no expert, he does not believe in the idea of racial differences in IQ or a biological basis for race, and that he believes racism should be called out. But it is difficult to see how that stance squares with the IEA repeatedly choosing to platform Charles Murray – while refusing to challenge the racist theories and biological pseudoscience underlying his work.

A spokesperson for the IEA did not disassociate from Charles Murray’s views and said that its publications and citations of him were not endorsements. “The IEA disagrees with racists, white nationalism, and eugenics,” they said.

But asked whether they agreed that Murray is a racist and white nationalist whose ideas are rooted in eugenics, they added: “The IEA’s mission is improving understanding of the institutions of a free society and role of free markets in solving economic and social problems. We do not then recognise your attempt to link it to things we have not published or supported, let alone third party interpretations of what they mean.”

The IEA’s engagement with Murray’s work has been careful to avoid acknowledging its well-known racist roots and dependence on questionable theories of cognitively-based social stratification – instead choosing to amplify the social consequences of Murray’s claims around a self-perpetuating underclass that must be managed and controlled by effectively ‘starving’ it of state support.
The Conservatives and Tufton Street

Liz Truss’ ties to the IEA demonstrate how the think tank is now influencing UK Government policy at the highest levels.

The IEA co-hosted numerous events with Truss’ Free Enterprise group and Truss herself has spoken at the IEA more than any other politician over the past 12 years, according to Littlewood. He has been her friend since their student days.

Truss’ senior special advisor in Downing Street, Ruth Porter, is the IEA’s former communications director. During her leadership campaign, Truss cited IEA trustee Patrick Minford in defence of her tax cuts agenda.

A total of eight members of the current Cabinet belonged to the IEA Free Enterprise Group – now known as the Free Market Forum – including Kwasi Kwarteng, Brandon Lewis, Jacob Rees-Mogg, Therese Coffey, Nadhim Zahawi, Simon Clarke, Kemi Badenoch and Alistair Jack.

A Downing Street spokesperson did not clarify to Byline Times whether the Prime Minister and her Cabinet agreed or disagreed with Charles Murray’s views.

Truss’ reference to a new school curriculum by Civitas while she was Education and Childcare Minister came from then Education Secretary Michael Gove’s vision of education as ‘cultural literacy’ – the learning of hard facts rooted in the history of a country. This, in turn, comes from the work of English professor E. D. Hirsch, who has been vociferously promoted by Charles Murray.

In 2013, a 237-page private thesis by Dominic Cummings, Gove’s then special advisor, was leaked. The document, which cited Murray, revealed that Cummings believed a child’s educational performance has more to do with their genetic make-up rather than educational standards. The paper also cited scientists who have been affiliated with eugenics, including Stephen Hsu and Robert Plomin. As author of Human Genetic Engineering Pete Shanks observed, Cummings’ analysis promoted “the blatantly eugenic association of genes with intelligence, intelligence with worth, and worth with the right to rule”.

Such claims about the relationship between genes, race and cognitive ability have been repeatedly disproved. But the influence of these ideas in British conservatism appears to have persisted.

Following Boris Johnson’s victory in 2019, Cummings appointed eugenicist Andrew Sabisky to his Downing Street advisory team. It quickly emerged that Sabisky believes black people to be genetically predisposed to have lower IQs. Before taking up his role, he had publicly lamented “the white death”, which “sits on a throne of ethnic diversity” driven by globalisation and mass immigration. Downing Street refused to comment on whether Johnson disagreed with Sabisky’s views – a spokesperson said only that his views had been well-publicised already.

Indeed, as Mayor of London, Johnson had claimed that economic inequality was due to some members of “the species” having lower IQs, with economic success equating to higher cognitive ability. While the remarks were condemned by Liberal Democrat and Labour politicians, the Conservative Party remained silent.
‘Social Apartheid’

The economic agenda spearheaded by Trussonomics cannot be simplistically equated with neoliberalism. Rather, it is a nationalist evolution of neoliberalism seeking to socially engineer market conditions that favour the so-called cognitive elite, while controlling an underclass considered parasitical to society.

Charles Murray has played a critical role in bringing social Darwinistic thinking into centres of neoliberal thought.

In 2005, The Sunday Times commissioned him to write an article explaining what he called “social apartheid”. In it, Murray argued that, given Britain’s welfare policies, the only way to deal with the rising underclass was through its “social segregation” and “increased geographic segregation”, including mass incarceration. In the US, of course, black people are incarcerated at a rate five times higher than white people.

Marshalling as much as he could to prove that genes play a large role in determining cognitive ability, he later conceded in The Bell Curve that there is yet no clear evidence on whether genetics or environmental influences predominate in determining IQ.

Eugenics was Behind Some of the PolicyDisasters of the 20th Century Samir Jeraj


Murray nevertheless concluded that the emergence of a self-perpetuating underclass of cognitively inferior people is inevitable due to “dysgenic pressures” – and that this is worsened by welfare policies incentivising the underclass to continue self-reproducing on the udder of the state.

Instead of the traditional trickle-down economics associated with neoliberalism – through which growth for the few is supposed to lift all boats – Murray’s ideology not only naturalises entrenched inequalities, but argues that there is no point in attempting to lift all boats at all.

He suggests that social policy should be designed not to improve the lives of the less fortunate, but to decrease their numbers. Murray therefore recommends the elimination of all welfare policies, hard limits on immigration, and strategies to lower birth rates among these groups through policy disincentives – while implementing ‘social apartheid’ to manage these inferior populations and contain their dangerous impacts on wider society.
An Extreme Trajectory

Charles Murray’s work has channelled the principles of Nazi eugenics into mainstream conservatism, while carefully excising its Nazi origins from visibility.

The Southern Poverty Law Centre points out that the 13 scholars on which The Bell Curve relies to substantiate its claims received funding from the Pioneer Fund – founded in 1937 by Nazi sympathisers to promote “racial betterment” via eugenics and the “repatriation” of black Americans to Africa.

Throughout the 1930s, the Pioneer Fund’s first president, Harry Laughlin, published articles in Eugenical News promoting Nazism and approving of its antisemitic laws. In The Bell Curve, Murray praises Laughlin as “a biologist who was especially concerned about keeping up the American level of intelligence by suitable immigration policies”.

The Pioneer Fund maintained intimate contacts with Nazi scientists. One organisation it finances is the Ulster Institute for Social Research, the journal of which – Mankind Quarterly – was founded by Otmar von Verschuer, who taught and mentored Nazi SS officer Josef Mengele, renowned for his medical experiments at Auschwitz.

In his AEI award speech in 2009, Murray encapsulated some of the core ideas that have come to dominate conservative movements in the US and UK.

He articulated the key ingredients of what is now the ‘Great Replacement’ theory – the baseless far-right belief that white populations in Europe are being replaced by foreign immigrants, largely from Muslim and African countries. “The European model can’t continue to work much longer,” Murray warned. “Europe’s catastrophically low birth rates and soaring immigration from cultures with alien values will see to that.”

Murray’s concern was that “every element of the Europe Syndrome is infiltrating American life as well” and he pointed to “America’s social democrats, heavily represented in university faculties and the most fashionable neighbourhoods of our great cities” as its main carriers. The good news, he declared, was that science was about to prove the European model wrong to the entire world because “within a decade, no one will try to defend the equality premise”.

“All sorts of groups will be known to differ in qualities that affect what professions they choose, how much money they make, and how they live their lives in all sorts of ways,” he said. “Gender differences will be first, because the growth in knowledge about the ways that men and women are different is growing by far the most rapidly… But groups of people will turn out to be different from each other, on average, and those differences will also produce group differences in outcomes in life, on average, that everyone knows are not the product of discrimination and inadequate government regulation.”

But the vehicle for this vision being executed, Murray said, would be the most powerful people in America, “the small minority of the population that has disproportionate influence over the culture, economy, and governance of the country” – the kind of people “in this room tonight”. He called for a “political great awakening” among these elites to consider “what they are willing to do to preserve” an exceptionalism defined by the right-wing libertarian philosophy of limited government, privatisation and deregulation blurred with social Darwinistic values of survival of the fittest.

These ideas – articulated more than a decade ago – have played a fundamental role in the transformation of Anglo-American political ideology.

Though largely unacknowledged, Charles Murray’s school of thought now permeates the background thinking of numerous politicians, conservative media pundits, thinkers and financiers. Although the specifics may not have been taken up, Murray’s work has set the mood music against which right-wing political and economic ideology is increasingly choreographed. Many who dance to its tune do not know the origins of the music and the beliefs of its composers.

Yet this goes some way to explaining the increasingly extreme trajectory of mainstream conservatism today: its intensifying race-baiting; its infiltration by Great Replacement theorists; and an obsession with an agenda containing social Darwinist strands of thought. It also helps to explain why Trussonomics has converged with the American brand of right-wing libertarianism in a doctrine that revels in inequality, and sees the poor and vulnerable as little more than ‘useless eaters’ who must bear the blame for their own circumstances.

The quiet predominance of this ideology, however, bodes ill for the future of the West. Although the Third Reich was defeated in 1945, right-wing influencers and politicians have cherry-picked from the findings of modern biology to justify retaining its ideological remnants while denying their Nazi origins.

In a time of escalating crisis, the continued radicalisation of the right poses the biggest internal threat to the values defining Western civilisation since the Second World War.