REVIEWS

Visualising Palestine: A Chronicle of Colonialism and the Struggle for Liberation

by Ramona Wadi

MEMO

November 13, 2024




Book Editor(s):Aline Batarseh, Jessica Anderson, Yosra El-Gazzar
Published Date:September 2024
Publisher:Haymarket Books
Hardback:392 pages
ISBN-13:979-8888902509


Khaled Adnan’s hunger strike in 2012 was the impetus for Visualising Palestine’s enduring project which depicts Israeli colonialism and the Palestinian experience of living under colonial rule. Unlike the statistics we are used to associating with Palestine, which render Palestinians faceless numbers with no identity, Visualising Palestine: A Chronicle of Colonialism and the Struggle for Liberation (Haymarket Books, 2024) uses statistics to illustrate the human experience. Research and compelling graphics have rendered the Palestinian anti-colonial struggle both relevant and prominent.

The introduction notes that, while the Palestinian struggle is gaining prominence globally, Palestinians are facing even more repression. And statistics do not convey the human and political experience: “The human brain is not designed to comprehend mass atrocities, yet we seem to give numbers immense power to describe reality.”

Visualising Palestine uses graphics to depict the truths concealed within the statistics. The book consists of twelve chapters, each dealing with a specific reality of colonialism and the Palestinian experience. Each chapter is accompanied by an introduction that summarises the context of the infographics, contextualising with quotes, historical overviews and explanations of Israel’s colonial policies and violence. Aptly, settler-colonialism is the first theme, with graphics showing the sheer scale of destruction in terms of land and people: “Sometimes, the systematised violence of settler- colonialism unfolds incrementally while, other times, it erupts into “genocidal moments” of mass killing and expulsion, as we are witnessing at the time of writing this book.”

The maps dealing with forced displacement show settler-colonialism prior to Israel’s establishment in 1948, which creates cohesion in terms of imparting the reality of Zionist settler-colonialism and how the settler-population increased as Palestinians had their permits revoked and were forcibly displaced. The book draws upon Salman Abu Sitta’s research on the depopulated villages to imagine the Palestinian Right of Return in the infographics, Return is Possible – an important inclusion because colonialism can be reversed.

Against a backdrop of the anti-colonial movement from 1945 to 1968, the book shows how several countries were gaining independence even as Israel gradually implemented apartheid policies. “Oppression in Palestine is a structure, not an event, and apartheid is a system of control that permeates every aspect of Palestinians’ daily life, from the mundane to the monumental.” The Palestinian Authority’s collaboration with Israel is one of the issues depicted in the infographics, showing “the PA’s lack of practical or moral authority in the struggle against apartheid” against a backdrop of corruption and security coordination with Israel.

The Revolution of 1936–1939 in Palestine: Background, Details, and Analysis

The chapter on Gaza is of immense significance. The infographic, “Gaza’s Untold Story”, pays attention to the enclave’s refugee history since the Nakba. “A surreal and cruel geography emerges where generations of Palestinian refugees live and die within walking distances of homes Israel prevents them from reaching,” the book explains. The infographics take the reader on a journey through Gaza’s history, the illegal blockade and its consequences, and Israel’s military bombardments, telling some of the stories linked to the killings of Palestinian civilians, up to the ongoing genocide in Gaza which started in October 2023. “Decades of impunity for Israeli war crimes paved the way for the unfolding genocide in 2023,” the book states.

While the book relies on themes, and it does so with impeccable attention, the clarity with which the colonial context is explained allows the reader to easily link one facet of colonial violence with another. The chapter dealing with “Ecological Justice”, for example, is the culmination of what the 1948 Nakba eventually cost Palestinians in terms of loss. Land is continuously usurped into the Israeli colonial enterprise, while Palestinians face political, territorial and economical loss. This chapter also allows for connection and collective efforts to emerge, as the book notes how planting parks over indigenous territory is one of the features of colonialism. In colonised Palestine since 1967, 800,000 olive trees have been uprooted, which is equivalent to 33 times the size of Central Park in New York City.

The sheer amount of information collected in this book is astounding, but it also reflects the accumulation of ramifications of colonialism in Palestine. The chapters on Palestinian political prisoners and Israel’s silencing of Palestinians and support for Palestinians; the latter also affecting non-Palestinians, are particularly important. Complicity with Israel is also explored in the infographics. Several examples are given in the book – one that stands out in terms of international collaboration with Israel is titled “Moving the Goalposts: Delaying Palestinian Football Justice” which describes the bureaucracy employed by FIFA to avoid applying its own rules on hosting matches on another member’s territory. Instead of applying its limitations to Israeli settlement teams, FIFA formed a committee in 2015 to deliberate the matter, only to block a motion two years later.

What stands out in this collection of infographics is the urgency with which Palestine should be considered. Too much time has been wasted by the international community allowing Israel to not only expand its colonialism, but also to continuously expand what the international community allows in terms of international law violations and war crimes. Politicians speak in generalised terms and from a pro-colonial framework. Visualising Palestine’s infographics imparts the magnitude of Israeli colonialism’s violations, in a way that leaves no space for doubt but all the opportunity to learn and mobilise.

by Ramona Wadi
walzerscent

Elastic Empire: Refashioning War through Aid in Palestine

Unless otherwise stated in the article above, this work by Middle East Monitor is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. If the image(s) bear our credit, this license also applies to them. What does that mean? For other permissions, please contact us.

G20

Massive Palestinian flag unfurled on Brazil´s Copacabana Beach


A group of protesters unfurled the massive Palestinian flag on the iconic Copacabana Beach in Rio de Janeiro of Brazil, November 2024. [photo Source: X paltform]

Opinion
by Eman Abusidu
November 16, 2024

MEMO

A group of protesters unfurled the massive Palestinian flag on the iconic Copacabana Beach in Rio de Janeiro of Brazil, drawing attention to the ongoing genocide in the Gaza strip and making a symbolic gesture of solidarity with Palestinians.

The initiative, organized by a Rio de Janeiro-based NGO, is part of a campaign to raise the 50-meter Palestinian flag in various locations across Brazil. Tens of thousands of pamphlets are being distributed, and thousands of posters are being displayed throughout the country.

Earlier, Brazilian activists raised the Palestinian flag on the historic “Lapa Arches” monument in Rio de Janeiro, a symbolic gesture of solidarity with the Palestinian people.

The Palestinian flag was also carried through the streets to the Selarón Steps, where it was displayed for a few minutes, attracting the attention of both tourists and residents.

These activities, which began a week ago, serve as a promotion for the massive march the country is set to witness. Several anti-imperialist entities and organizations are calling for a large demonstration next Monday. The demonstration, to be held in the famous “Cinelândia” square in the heart of the city, aims to highlight the suffering of the Palestinian people and condemn the ongoing genocide.

The demonstration has received support from Gleisi Hoffmann, president of the Workers’ Party (PT), and has garnered widespread backing from political and trade union figures across Brazil. More than 130 institutions and leaders from various sectors have announced their participation in the event.

According to the organizers, the event aims to denounce the “genocide by Israel in the Gaza Strip“ and build a popular solidarity movement ahead of the G20 summit, which is scheduled to take place in Rio de Janeiro on November 18.

Brazil will host the G20 Leaders’ Summit on November 18–19, 2024, in Rio de Janeiro. Leaders from all 19 member countries, along with representatives from the African Union and the European Union, are expected to attend. Notable attendees include Joe Biden, Xi Jinping, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, Emmanuel Macron, Narendra Modi, and several other heads of state.

OPINION: Brazil: university cancels lecture by Israeli professor after student protest

The G20 Summit represents “the culmination of efforts undertaken by the country holding the group’s rotating presidency. It is a moment for world leaders to endorse agreements negotiated throughout the year and chart a course for addressing global challenges.”

Coinciding with the summit in Brazil this year, the Palestinian issue is expected to ignite passionate demonstrations in the streets of Rio de Janeiro. Supporters of Palestine will amplify their concerns over the genocidal policies being carried out in the enclave.


Brazilian activist and member of the country’s Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement, Fabio Bosco, stated, “Raising the Palestinian flag at many iconic locations in Rio de Janeiro is an expression of solidarity with the Palestinian people ahead of the G20 summit.”

“The aim of the demonstration is to protest the presence of leaders from the 19 richest countries in the world in Brazil and to reject the complicity they exhibit—whether by sending weapons to the Zionists or maintaining trade and diplomatic relations with the Zionist entity,” Bosco added.

“Our message to the world is to demand an end to the genocide the Zionists continue to commit against the Palestinians and to advocate for a free Palestine from the river to the sea.”

Rio de Janeiro, a city teeming with tourists year-round, has not hesitated to stand in solidarity with Palestine and Gaza since the outbreak of Israeli aggression in 2023. Popular demonstrations and activists’ efforts have continued unabated since the beginning of Israel’s bombing campaign on Gaza. The city’s communities have united to denounce the actions of the Israeli occupation in Gaza.

Last year, the city witnessed a significant event covered by both local and international media outlets. On November 3, 2023, the NGO Rio de Paz placed 120 shrouds stained with red paint and marked with Palestinian flags on Copacabana Beach. This powerful protest symbolized the memory of Palestinian children killed during the Israeli military’s onslaught on Gaza.

by Eman Abusidu
EmAbusidu

Natural Resources and Palestinian Sovereignty: Israel’s Further Isolation



The results of a vote on a resolution for the UN Security Council to reconsider and support the full membership of Palestine into the United Nations is displayed during a special session of the UN General Assembly, at UN headquarters in New York City on May 10, 2024 [CHARLY TRIBALLEAU/AFP via Getty Images]

Opinion
by Dr Binoy Kampmark
November 17, 2024

MEMO

Two more United Nations committee resolutions. Both concerning the conduct of Israel past and current. While disease, hunger and death continue to stalk the Gaza Strip, and the West Bank remains under the thick thumb of occupation, deliberations in foreign fora continue to take place about how to address this hideous state of affairs. While these international matters can often seem like insipid gestures marked by ineffectual chatter, they are increasingly bulking a file that is making Israel more isolated than ever. And this is not an isolation of virtue or admiration.

On 13 November, the Second Committee (Economic and Financial) of the UN approved two resolutions. The first focused on requesting that Israel assume responsibility for prompt and adequate compensation to Lebanon and any associated countries, including Syria, affected by an oil slick on their shores arising from the destruction of storage tanks near the Lebanese Jiyah electric power plant. The strike took place in July 2006 during Israel’s previous war against Hezbollah, resulting in, to quote the words of Lebanon’s then Environment Ministry director general Berge Hatjian, “a catastrophe of the highest order for a country as small as Lebanon”. According to Lebanon’s UN representative, the damage arising from the oil spill had hampered the country’s efforts to pursue the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) by 2030.

Israel’s representative gruffly rejected the premise of the resolution, which received 160 votes in its favour, citing the usual argument that it has been unfairly targeted. Other current adversaries – here, the Houthis, who had been attacking ships in international waters – had been left unscrutinised by the committee. The issue of environmental damage had been appropriated “as a political weapon against Israel”.

The second resolution, introduced by the Ugandan representative, was of particular interest to the Palestinians. Entitled “Permanent sovereignty of the Palestinian people in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and of the Arab population in the occupied Syrian Golan over their natural resources”, it expressed pointed concerns about Israel’s continued efforts to exercise, with brute force, control over the territories. There was concern for “the exploitation by Israel, the occupying Power, of the natural resources of the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and other Arab territories occupied by Israel since 1967”. Ditto the “extensive destruction by Israel […] of agricultural land and orchards in the Occupied Territory” and “widespread destruction” inflicted upon “vital infrastructure, including water pipelines, sewage networks and electricity networks” in those territories.

Concerns also abounded about unexploded ordnance, a situation that despoiled the environment while hampering reconstruction, and the “chronic energy shortage in the Gaza Strip and its detrimental impact on the operation of water and sanitation facilities”. The Israeli settlements come in for special mention, given their “detrimental impact on Palestinian and other Arab natural resources, especially as a result of the confiscation of land and the forced diversion of water resources, including the destruction of orchards and crops and the seizure of the water wells by Israeli settlers, and the dire socioeconomic consequences in this regard”.

Letter to the UN: Will there be an arms embargo on Israel?

There are also stern remarks about needing to respect and preserve “the territory unity, contiguity and integrity of all Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem”, a situation increasingly compromised by the rampant, unchecked zealotry of thuggish Israeli settlers, emboldened by lawmakers and authorities.

The vote on this occasion – 158 in favour – was unusual for featuring a number of countries that would normally be more guarded in adding their names, notably in the context of Palestinian sovereignty. Their mantra is that backing an initiative openly favouring Palestinian self-determination over any specific subject would do little to advance the broader goals of the peace process in the absence of Israeli participation.

Australia, for instance, backed the resolution, despite opposition from the United States and Canada. It marked the first time the country had favoured a “permanent sovereignty” resolution since being introduced in a resolution. This was done despite disappointment by the Australian delegation that the resolution made no reference to other participants in the conflict such as Hezbollah. A spokesperson for Australian Foreign Affairs Minister Penny Wong stated that the vote reflected international concerns about Israel’s “ongoing settlement activity, land dispossession, demolitions and settler violence against Palestinians”. Such conduct undermined “stability and prospects for a two-state solution.”

As for Israel’s firmest sponsor in arms, inexplicable good will and dubious legal padding, the words “Palestinian” and “sovereignty” continued to grate. The fiction of equality and parity between Israel and the Palestinians, a device long used to snuff out the independent aspirations of the latter, had to be maintained.

In remarks made by Nicholas Koval of the US Mission to the UN, it was clear that Washington was “disappointed that this body has again taken up this unbalanced resolution that is unfairly critical of Israel, demonstrating a clear and persistent institutional bias directed against one member state.” The resolution, in its “one-sided” way, would not advance peace. “Not when they ignore the facts on the ground.”

While Koval is not wrong that the claimed facts in these resolutions are often matters of conceit, illusion and even omission, the events unfolding since October last year have shown, in their biblical ferocity, that the Palestinians are no longer merely subjects of derision by the Israeli state. They are to be subjugated, preferably by some international authority that will guard against any future claims to autonomy. Their vetted leaders are to be treated as amenable collaborators, happy to yield territory that Israel has no right to.

Eventually, it is hoped by the likes of National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, that the Palestinian problem will vanish before forcible annexation, erasure and eviction. At the very least, resolutions such as those passed on 14 November provide some record of resistance, however seemingly remote, against the historical amnesia that governs Israeli Palestinian relations.

OPINION: Israel’s US-backed long war against the United Nations

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.

Unless otherwise stated in the article above, this work by Middle East Monitor is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. If the image(s) bear our credit, this license also applies to them. What does that mean? For other permissions, please contact us

Twitch updates Hateful Conduct Policy to include 'Zionist' as potential slur


MEMO
November 17, 2024 

The logo of “Twitch” is displayed on a smartphone in Ankara, Turkey on October 6, 2021 [Hakan Nural/Anadolu Agency]

Twitch has updated its “Hateful Conduct Policy” to include “Zionist” as a potential slur, amid growing content critical of the occupation state and the genocide it is committing in Gaza, as well as its aggression against Lebanon, on the platform.

The Amazon-owned streaming service announced the change in a blog post on Friday, stating that “using the term ‘Zionist’ to attack or demean another individual or group of people on the basis of their background or religious belief is against our rules.” The platform emphasised its prohibition of terms that, while not inherently harmful, can be used to denigrate others in specific contexts.

Twitch clarified that referring to “Zionist” or “Zionism” as part of political discourse does not violate its policy, as long as it doesn’t target individuals. “Our goal isn’t to stifle conversation about or criticism of an institution or ideology, but to prevent coded hate directed at individuals and groups of people,” the company said.

The policy change follows criticism from figures like US congressman Ritchie Torres and the Anti-Defamation League, who argued that Twitch allowed hate toward Jewish people to persist. Torres, who recently won re-election with significant donations from the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), had accused the platform of failing to curb “antisemitic” content, specifically targeting popular Turkish-American streamer Hasan Piker for his pro-Palestine stance and speaking out against the occupation state.

Twitch’s policy change is part of a broader trend among social media platforms tightening their content rules around speech when it comes to criticising Israel and condemning the atrocities the US-backed occupation forces are carrying out. Last year, Human Rights Watch reported that Meta systematically censored pro-Palestinian voices on Facebook and Instagram.

US support for Israel fuels illegal settler violence, Gaza genocide: Palestinian Presidency


MEMO
November 16, 2024 

Spokesman for the Palestinian presidency, Nabil Abu Rudeineh speaks during a press conference in Ramallah, West Bank on December 05, 2017 [ Issam Rimawi/Anadolu Agency/Getty Images]


The escalating violence by illegal Israeli settlers in the occupied West Bank and the ongoing war in Gaza are directly linked to US support for Israel, the Palestinian presidency said on Saturday, Anadolu Agency reports.

In a statement, Nabil Abu Rudeineh, spokesperson for the Palestinian Presidency, called for “urgent international intervention to prevent further devastation caused by Israeli actions.”

He stressed that “continuous policies of condemnation and denunciation have proven ineffective in addressing the violence.”

“This Israeli escalation of terrorism and defiance of international law is a direct result of the unwavering support from the United States,” he said.

He further stressed that both “Israeli terrorism and American backing will not bring security or stability to the region.”

READ: ‘Ethnic cleansing, war crime’: Palestine slams homes demolition by Israel in East Jerusalem

Tension has been running high across the occupied West Bank due to Israel’s deadly war on the Gaza Strip, which has killed nearly 43,700 people, mostly women and children, since Oct. 7, 2023.

Over 783 Palestinians have since been killed and over 6,300 others injured by Israeli army fire in the occupied territory, according to the Health Ministry.

The escalation follows a landmark July opinion by the International Court of Justice that declared Israel’s decades-long occupation of Palestinian land “illegal” and demanded the evacuation of all existing settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem.

International observers have long decried the support of Western nations for Israel as being complicit in its genocide in the Gaza Strip, especially the US.

The support of the Biden administration, including supplying weapons to Israel, has been cited as a factor in Donald Trump defeating Vice President Kamala Harris, President Joe Biden’s intended successor, in last week’s US presidential elections.

Experts slam Cop climate talks but need to go further

Cop climate talks are a place for fossil fuel lobbyists to strike deals—moving the location of the talks won't spurn climate action

Ilham Aliyev, Azerbaijan’s president, is hosting Cop 29 despite profiting from fossil fuels (Photo: Vugar Amrullaev)

By Judy Cox
Friday 15 November 2024   

SOCIALIST WORKER Issue


The Cop climate summits are not fit for purpose, leading climate experts say. The experts have written to the United Nations demanding that future climate summits be held in countries that support action to reverse climate change.

“It is now clear that the Cop is no longer fit for purpose,” the letter states. “We need a shift from negotiation to implementation.”

Former UN climate chief Christina Figueres said, “We cannot hope to achieve a just transition without significant reforms to the Cop process to ensure fair representation of those most affected.”

The climate experts could have gone much further.

The Cop talks are not just attempts to greenwash unsustainable energy companies. They are not just hot air. The Cop talks have become a place where coal, oil, and gas companies can lobby governments. Cop talks make climate change worse.

The ongoing Cop 29 talks are being held in Azerbaijan, a major fossil fuel producer. Azerbaijan’s president Ilham Aliyev told the Cop gathering that his country’s oil and gas were a “gift from god”.

Some 1,773 lobbyists for these companies were granted access to Cop 29. The 10 most climate-vulnerable countries have just 1,033 delegates. “Industry presence is dwarfing that of those on the frontline of the climate crisis,” according to Sarah McArthur from the Kick Big Polluters Out coalition.

Major oil producers Chevron, ExxonMobil, BP, Shell and Eni brought 39 lobbyists to Cop 29. They sell oil to Israel and are profiting from the genocide in Palestine.

Last year’s Cop 28 was held in the United Arab Emirates, a petrostate. The president of Cop 28, Sultan Al Jaber is the head of Emirates’ national oil company.

“The fossil fuel industry has long manipulated climate negotiations to protect its interests while the planet burns”, said Dawda Cham of the grassroots Africa Make Big Polluters Pay coalition.

The climate negotiations are providing a forum for the big polluters to strike new deals.

The British government illegally approved the Rosebank oilfield in September 2023. The government was legally required to assess the impact of opening the oil fields, which lie off the Shetland Islands.

The government was forced to admit in court that it considered the impact of extracting oil and gas from the site, but not the effect of actually burning of the fossil fuels.

Environment groups Greenpeace and Uplift took the government to court. They are now demanding that work on the oilfields is immediately halted while further environmental impact assessments are carried out.

Shell, Equinor and Ithaca Energy are demanding the right to exploiting the oil reserves. Their lawyer told the court that urgent action is needed to stop climate change, but denied new oilfields would contribute to climate change.

At a minimum, Ed Miliband, the environment secretary, should act now to close the oilfields and prevent further harm to the climate.

The Rebel’s Clinic—a wrong critique of Frantz Fanon

A new biography of Frantz Fanon debates the anti-colonial thinker’s legacy, writes Nadia Sayed

Nadia Sayed
SOCIALIST WORKER
Saturday 16 November 2024

The Rebel’s Clinic: the revolutionary lives of Frantz Fanon by Adam Shatz

When it comes to radical thinkers and fighters, Frantz Fanon is among the most enduring of our time.

Today, after more than 12 months of Israel’s genocide against the Palestinians, people are once again turning to Fanon’s ideas. He was very clear on the difference between the violence of the oppressor and the violence of the oppressed.

In his 1961 book, The Wretched of the Earth, Fanon wrote, “Colonialism is not a thinking machine. It is violence in its natural state and will only yield when confronted with greater violence.”

Adam Shatz’s book, The Rebel’s Clinic, is among the most effective of recent efforts to understand Fanon’s life and ideas. He draws on a wealth of resources and interviews to produce his book.

Born in the French colony of Martinique in 1925, Fanon trained as a psychiatrist in France where he faced his most bitter encounters of racism. He joined the Algerian resistance to the French occupation while operating a clinic there in the 1950s.

Among those interviewed are colleagues of Fanon including Alice Cherki, an Algerian psychoanalyst, and Marie-Jeanne Manuellan, a militant activist who was Fanon’s secretary.

Shatz weaves the influences on Fanon’s life and the debates around him into the events of his life in great detail. One of the great strengths of Shatz’s book is the way he evokes the era Fanon lived in—the era of great anti-colonial struggles.

Early on in his biography, Shatz makes it clear that he’s an admirer of Fanon, but also thinks he is wrongly sanctified. But, at times, Shatz goes beyond a critical examination of Fanon’s ideas. At the start of the book, he describes Fanon as a man of “as many illusions as illuminations”, a sentiment that is a theme throughout the book.

For instance, in discussing Fanon’s relationship to the Algerian liberation movement, Shatz implies that Fanon almost imposed a vision of the movement that wasn’t shared by Algerians.

In Shatz’s account, Fanon saw the Algerian struggle as part of a global struggle. Shatz aruges that most Algerians saw it as a North African struggle that had nothing to do with the fight against apartheid in South Africa or against the Portuguese in Angola.

There are a number of issues with this interpretation. Crucially, Shatz doesn’t acknowledge the debates within the liberation movement.

Disappointingly for a biography on one of the richest anti-colonial thinkers, Shatz’s book avoids discussion of Israel’s genocide and how Fanon relates to the Palestinian resistance. Elsewhere, Shatz has addressed how we apply Fanon’s ideas to Palestine today—he tries to undermine support for Palestinians’ right to resist.

He emphasises Fanon’s warnings against “vengeful” and “undisciplined” violence against the colonisers.

When discussing Israel’s genocide, he emphasises the indefensibility of the “murderous” actions of 7 October, equating it to the violence of Israeli state terror.


Frantz Fanon, racism and revolution

Fanon did warn against undisciplined violence. But he did not do so as a condition of supporting people’s right to resist colonialism. There are important criticisms of Fanon. He said that Karl Marx was right to point to the power of the working class in advanced capitalist countries.

But Fanon argued that the same didn’t apply in the Global South where workers were “most pampered by the colonial regime”.

Yet, in the years after Fanon’s death in 1961, Africa was awash with working class struggles that shook the corrupt post-colonial leaders Fanon hated. Shatz’s book is an important contribution to the study of Fanon.

But Leo Zeilig’s biography offers a better insight, from the perspective of an activist, about the most important lessons from Fanon’s life and his ideas that can guide our struggles today.The Rebel’s Clinic: The revolutionary lives of Frantz Fanon by Adam Shatz (Bloomsbury), £22.50

UK

‘I don’t get the hours or pay I need’: workers on zero hours contracts speak out

Labour has pledged to end 'exploitative zero hours' contracts, but figures this week show the number of workers on them has increased

UCU university union branch at Sheffield Hallam University fighting against zero hours contracts (Picture: Zero Hours Justice)

By Arthur Townend
Saturday 16 November 2024  

SOCIALIST WORKER Issue

“I’ve been let go with no notice, and I’ve turned up to work only to be sent away. I wouldn’t get paid at all.,” said Tharun, a temporary teaching assistant (TA).

“On a zero hours contract, you have the commitment of a full time job, 8am-4pm, five days a week. But you don’t get the entitlement of a proper contract. It’s horrible practice. There’s no notice.”

The reality of a zero hours contract is the stress of not knowing when or where you’re working, and if you’ll have money to pay the rent. Labour has pledged to end “exploitative zero hour” contracts with the Employment Rights Bill.

But figures this week showed the number of people on them has increased since Labour’s election win. Over one million workers are on zero hour contracts and around 90,000 of those are in education. The total number grew by 10 percent, from 1.03 million to 1.13 million in the last quarter.

“Whenever a school needs a TA, I get called and go in. I go in for up to eight weeks until the school essentially runs out of money—I then get told there no more work for me anymore,” said Sky, a supply TA.

“I don’t get paid unless I’m in a school, and right now I’ve not had work for three weeks.”

Tharun added, “If you’re a single person who needs to earn, it can be so harsh because you’re so dependent on someone else for work. It’s stressful thinking, ‘Will I have work the next day?’ That dependency can be quite painful.”

Sky spoke about the personal pressure a zero hours contract puts on her. “It affects me to know I can suddenly pulled away from work. They can end the contract early—I got given a week’s notice at my last job—and financially that’s a lot of pressure, and it can be really bad for you mentally.

“It’s also stressful having to adjust to a new working environment each time I get a new job.

“As a trans worker, I don’t know what the new school will be like—I just get dropped somewhere and have to fight for myself. At one school, a student was transphobic, so the school just figured it was easier to let me go—why deal with the issue when they know I’m so disposable?”

In education, relying on temporary workers can be harmful for students. “It lets the kids down. It can dysregulate the kids a lot when I have to leave because most of the children I work with have Send (Special educational needs and disabilities),” Sky said.

Sky agreed with Tharun that workers on zero hours contracts don’t get the same conditions as permanent workers. “Agencies like the one I work for don’t want to train us, because that costs money and then they might lose us if we get a permanent contract.

“So we’re completely reliant on the agency. If you say no to a job, the agency can get annoyed and then you might not get offered the next contract. So you get pressured into accepting job that are too far away, or where you have to work a ‘trial’ where you are forced to work for free, and you still might not get the job,” she added.

All sectors rely on temporary workers for labour. Temporary contracts allow bosses to get workers without having to pay them properly or offer them proper job security. But Sky argued that this issue is rooted in the wider system.

“The irony is that I’m filling a gap that shouldn’t exist in the first place. Schools need me,” Sky said, “But they let me go because they haven’t got enough funding. So I’m reliant on the council and government to actually give schools enough money to hire me in the first place.

“This is Starmer’s own creation—he said he’ll create 6,000 new teaching jobs, but that doesn’t even cover the number of teachers leaving each year. But temporary work agencies profit off workers being in this position.”

Tharun argued that some workers may see the flexibility of a zero hours contract as beneficial. “The flexibility can be a good thing. But if you’re forced into a zero hours contract, and if you’re an average adult, you need a stable source of income. Zero hours contracts don’t provide that.

“I don’t get the hours I want. I’ve wanted more hours for a while but not got them.”

Across Britain, bosses benefit from workers in precarious positions. In education, zero hours contracts provide the government an excuse to underfund schools.

Zero hours contracts treat workers as disposable and puts them in vulnerable positions and to the benefit of the private bosses and a Labour government that doesn’t want to upset business.

ZERO HOURS ORIGINATED IN AUSTRALIA AND NEW ZEALAND IN THE AUSTERITY CRISIS OF THE NINTEEN NINTIES!

Why US unions should embrace ‘undocumented’ migrants

Workers’ resistance can beat Donald Trump’s mass deportation plans

May Day march in 2006 in Los Angeles (Photo: Wikimedia commons)

By Yuri Prasad
Sunday 17 November 2024  

SOCIALIST WORKER Issue

Donald Trump’s plan to deport millions of “undocumented” migrants is a threat not only to those in the United States without legal status. It’s a knife against the throat of all workers.

The far right president-elect wants to deport two million people within his first 24 hours, and a further 11 million early in his term. That means initiating mass round-ups of anyone that looks like they might be from Mexico or beyond.

It would mean a massive expansion of the militarised state, complete with internment camps and secret police. It would also require a mass movement of right wing militia to help in the task.

Such a vast network of racism would not confine itself to searching out hidden migrants. It would smash those who stand against racism and be hostile to the unions who fight for workers to have more.

Both the left and many liberals have reacted with horror at the plans. But it was the Democrats that initiated many of the policies that Trump wants to ramp up.

Back in the early 1990s, it was president Bill Clinton that presided over the first big increase in border enforcement. A decade later, it was president Barak Obama that ensured over 2 million people were deported.

And it was Kamala Harris that talked of her “tough” record on illegal immigration, attacking Trump for not building enough of his promised wall with Mexico.

The Democrats wrongly conceded that immigration is a problem—that poor migrants are the enemy of the “indigenous” working class.

Like all capitalists, the party recognised that racism serves a useful function for the system. It acts to divide and rule. But unlike Trump, the Democrats also understood that migration serves capital.

First, undocumented workers fill millions of the lowest paid jobs in the United States. The undocumented perform 57 percent of all jobs in agriculture, for example.

Second, because of their vulnerability, unorganised “illegal” workers are the easiest to exploit. They are less likely to unionise and more likely to scatter when faced with authorities.

Third, bosses use illegal migration as a way of disciplining all workers. Firms often threaten to sack workers demanding higher pay, saying they will replace them with cheaper ones.

Some trade unionists point to such threats when they call for immigration controls. But accepting this apparent threat as real does half the bosses work for them. Instead, the US labour movement needs to embrace a different, earlier tradition.

In 1910-15, more than 15 million people moved to the US, about equal to the number of immigrants in the previous 40 years. Rather than shun them, radicals made it their business to help migrants organise.

Recently arrived workers were at the core of a new wave of trade unionism that spread through factories, mills and mines across the country. The victories that followed benefited all workers, no matter where they were from.

In the late 1960s, Mexican and Filipino farm workers in California struck for five years for better working conditions and wages. The eventual victory of the Delano Grape Strike led to the formation of the United Farm Workers union.

And in the 1990s, Los Angeles was at the centre of a massive unionisation drive that gave rise to the Justice For Janitors campaign. The local Federation of Labor recruited 90,000 new members in 1999 alone.

Throughout 2006 there were swathes of huge protests against the increasing repression of migrants. This climaxed on May Day, with as many as 700,000 taking to the streets.

The one-day strike, led by Latino workers, highlighted the role migrant labour plays in the US. It was a day without workers—it showed the power of all labour organising together.

These strikes and organisational examples helped break the myth that immigrants are a threat to organised labour. The lesson that migrant workers are fighters is one the US left needs to spread once again.

Black people’s resistance to fascism—interview with Bill Mullen

Bill Mullen is the co-author with Jeanelle K Hope of The Black Antifascist Tradition: Fighting Back from Anti-Lynching to Abolition. He spoke to Judy Cox about anti-blackness, fascism and resistance.

By Judy Cox
Friday 15 November 2024

SOCIALIST WORKER Issue
Anti-racism

The Black Anti-Fascist Tradition

In our book, Jeanelle and I wanted to show the history of black anti-fascism in the United States and globally.

The black anti-fascist tradition connects every important black movement of the 20th and 21st centuries.

Black people have often been the first and most deeply injured by fascism, whether it’s Italian fascism in north Africa, American Nazis attacking civil rights marchers or white supremacist groups targeting Black Lives Matter activists.

Black resistance to the Italian fascist invasion of Ethiopia in 1935 was visible in London, the Caribbean and New York, led by black communists like George Padmore.

Over 100 black people from the US fought against General Franco during the Spanish Civil War by joining the Lincoln Brigades.

For young black men growing up in the South, fighting fascism was an internationalisation of the black struggle for freedom.

Black leader W.E.B. Du Bois was in Germany in the 1930s, writing articles that analysed and warned against the Nazis.

The Black Panther Party organised a United Front Against Fascism conference in 1969. Some 5,000 activists turned up. They developed a black power anti-fascism.

Each of these moments helped to generate new ideas and a new awareness of the threat posed by fascism.

Today, fascists target abolitionists and Black Lives Matter groups.

That is crucial to understanding Trumpism and the rise of the far right since the Charlottesville protests and the murder of Heather Heyer in 2017.

There is a pernicious racist and far right history of the US, and globally there is the rise of ­neo-fascism and authoritarian parties. We need to recover that black radical tradition to fight back.

We also show that anti-blackness is a key element of fascism. Walter Rodney and Aime Cesaire both wrote about how fascism emerged out of European colonialism in Africa.

Cesaire argued that the tactics used against black populations in Africa came home to roost with fascist movements in Europe.

The Nazis banned Jews from interracial marriages, restricted their right to use public facilities, legalised discrimination at work and stripped them of their right to vote.

This was all taken from the Jim Crow laws that enforced segregation in the US South.

The erasure of Native Americans was also a huge inspiration to the Nazis.

The whole idea of lebensraum—a Nazi term for military expansionism—was Hitler’s version of this ethnic cleansing.

This was enabled by laws that allowed the theft of land, the suppression of rights, the tearing up of treaties and betrayal of the idea of legality itself.

The slave codes of the 18th century enshrined anti-blackness in the law. Enslaved people were not allowed to grow food, learn to read or earn money. Slavery played a founding role in establishing race laws and influenced fascism globally.

After slavery, new laws sanctioned white supremacy, backed up by racial terrorism and lynchings.

To understand fascism, you have to look beyond inter-war Europe and recentre Africa and North America.

Whatever fascism is and has been, it will always be a white supremacist and nativist movement. Contemporary white power movements in the US all made the Black Lives Matter movement their target.

A few weeks before the January riots at Capitol Hill, the same people were marching through Washington DC, a predominantly black area.

They went to a church associated with Frederick Douglass, the great abolitionist activist. They tore down and burnt BLM signs.

Trump is the embodiment of white supremacy and far right politics.

Anti-blackness is intimately linked to the history of colonialism and they both generate fascism. That’s why we have Fortress Europe. Closing the borders on former colonial subjects is central to the new far right. Anti-black sentiment feeds into anti-Muslim ideas and Islamophobia. It targets our darker brothers and sisters.

In France, anti-black fascism draws on the history of north Africa and Algeria in particular. It is the fear of return of the colonial repressed. The rhetoric is about dark people coming in and raping our wives and mothers. Ideas like those are rooted deep in histories of colonialism and slavery.

There are consistent ingredients of fascism, like hostility to mixed race relationships, nativism and attacking the working class—and anti-black sentiment is another essential ingredient.

In 1951, a group of black radicals in the Civil Rights Congress organised the We Charge Genocide petition.

It applied the newly minted United Nations definition of human rights to the US treatment of black people—slavery, police violence, lynching—which they argued constituted a “slow genocide” or “premature death”.

The Civil Rights Congress emerged out of Communist Party groups and was led by black activists like Du Bois and Claudia Jones.

In 2013, a small group of black radical activists in Chicago wanted to draw attention to police torture in their city. They also named their group We Charge Genocide.

Now we have the genocide charges against Israel from the International Court of Justice. We think the original We Charge Genocide petition helps people understand the value of these charges, especially as they come from South Africa, an epicentre of anti-blackness in the 20th century.

Cedric Robinson argued that living under and resisting racial capitalism made black radicals “prematurely” aware of ­fascism’s history.

So, Ida B Wells—who was active from the late 19th ­century—was “prematurely anti-fascist” when she linked lynching in the southern states of the US with pogroms against Jews in Europe. She predicted the political future of racist violence.

Anti-blackness has always played an important part in fascist movements.

Historically, fascism aimed to destroy working class organisations. Racism means that black people have always been more likely to have working class jobs. So it follows that many of the most important figures in the black anti-fascist tradition were socialists and communists who wanted to smash the hierarchies of both race and class.

Back in the 1970s, Angela Davis and Bettina Aptheker argued that fascism is ­counterrevolution that aims to preempt a socialist transformation of society.

The rise of fascism is not a single event, a coup d’etat, it is a drawn-out social process.

Fascism feeds on the state repression of black, Puerto Rican and Chicano communities. It feeds on racial ­capitalism and the incarceration of countless hundreds of black and brown workers and on anti-immigrant racism.

Ukrainian refugees were welcomed in the US. At the same time Trump gave a speech opposing immigration from what he called “shithole” countries, meaning the Global South. He told the crowd, “We should have more people coming from Norway.” He stopped just short of saying “Nordic Aryans”.

Our book focuses on how the black anti-fascist tradition developed strategies for resisance, revolution and survival. It is a tradition of life-making in opposition to fascism’s march to genocide.

The black anti-fascist ­tradition is about contesting fascism and about building and sustaining radical forms of solidarity and to create new ways of living.

The Democratic Party has been an enormous enabler of the right. For the last ten to fifteen years it has stood by as white supremacists have built up their power. It made peace with Trumpism during Trump’s first term.

Kamala Harris was a leading voice for genocide. She helped enable racial terror and state violence in Palestine. Her support for the genocide is a significant reason she lost.

The Republican Party has a fascist current in it. It is trying to win hegemony.

Trump did not act like a fascist during his first term. But he is a master of dog whistling to fascist and neo-fascists to bring them into his movement.

Trumpism is a very successful right wing social movement. It wants to kick down the door as far as possible to authoritarian rule. Anti-fascists must now be prepared to hit the streets again.

The law won’t save you from fascism. Germany and Italy had sophisticated legal structures. But the courts side with the ruling class.

The Supreme Court is on Trump’s side. It is possible he will try to implement a legal-bureaucratic grab for power. One thing we can say, fascism is anti-democratic at its core and Trump is highly anti-democratic.

Now that Trump has won, we will also see new layers of people who will feel disengaged from official politics and look to the left.

No-one is going to come save us. We have to save ourselves.

Bill Mullen is Emeritus Professor of American Studies at Purdue University in the United States. He is a member of the revolutionary socialist organisation Socialist Horizon and the US Campaign for Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel.

 

‘Trump has already emboldened Israel’s far-right. Labour must act’

Richard Burden & Phyllis Starkey

Below the Sky / Shutterstock.

 You always think things cannot get any worse for the Palestinians. But every year they do. It is fifteen years since Israel last allowed a UK parliamentary delegation into the Gaza Strip through the border crossing it controlled.  The worst military assault yet experienced by the people of Gaza had ended just a month or so before. The devastation it had left made those of us on the delegation think that what we saw was as bad as it gets. We were wrong. It came nowhere near the horrors that Gaza has been going through for the past year.

Can it really get even worse in 2025? All the signs are that, with Trump’s victory in the USA emboldening the most extreme right-wing government in Israel’s history, the answer is yes. The question for the rest of the international community, and particularly, Britain’s Labour government, is whether they are willing to do anything in practice to stop it.

Just this week, Bezalel Smotrich, the Netanyahu Cabinet’s Finance Minister, declared that, following Trump’s elections, he has ordered officials to prepare to convert Israel’s 57 year occupation of the West Bank into full annexation during 2025.

“I intend, with God’s help, to lead a government decision that says that the government of Israel will work with the new administration of President Trump and the international community to apply Israeli sovereignty over Judea and Samaria,” he said.

The Geneva Conventions and successive UN Security Council resolutions have confirmed that military occupation places legal obligations on occupying powers, including prohibitions on declarations of sovereignty and colonization by civilians from the occupying power. As recently as July this year, the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the most senior court in the world, ruled that the policies and methods used by Israel have rendered unlawful its entire occupation of the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, along with its associated settlement regime, annexation and use of natural resources.

Why, then, is Smotrich so confident that Israel will get the green light from Washington for the blatant breach of international law that he threatened this week?

For the answer, just take a look at the team President-elect Trump has put in charge of his Middle East Desk.

Appointed to be US Ambassador to Israel is former Arkansas Governor, Mike Huckabee, a figure on the evangelical Christan Right of the Republican Party who has declared:

“There is no such thing as the West Bank – it’s Judea and Samaria…There is no such thing as settlements – they’re communities, they’re neighbourhoods, they’re cities. There is no such thing as an occupation.”

Trump’s choice for Secretary of State, meanwhile, is Senator Marco Rubio, who has explicitly rejected calls for a ceasefire in Gaza and backed Israel’s decision earlier this year to attack Rafah where over a million displaced Palestinian civilians were taking refuge. Indeed, he even compared President Biden’s opposition to an attack on Rafah to asking allied forces to stay out of Berlin in World War Two.

US Ambassador designate to the UN, Elise Stefanik, and Trump’s nominated “special envoy” to the Middle East, Steven C Witkoff, are also known to have hawkishly pro-Israel views.

If the second Trump presidency means either tacit or explicit endorsement of some of the most extreme actions yet seen in Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians. How should Britain’s Labour government respond?

To his credit, Middle East minister Hamish Falconer this week condemned Smotrich’s threat to annex the West Bank and both the Prime Minister and Foreign Secretary continue to insist that international law must be an enduring bedrock for UK foreign policy under Labour.

But words are not enough and it can no longer be business as usual. While President Biden has been in the White House, Britain’s incoming Labour government has more or less followed US leadership in Middle East policy.

Even though the Biden administration’s calls for restraint have been routinely ignored by Netanyahu over the past year, Keir Starmer appears to have taken the view that acting in lock step with the US administration was still Britain’s best chance of having any influence over the course of events.

All those bets are now off. If the USA no longer even pays lip service to respect for international law, Britain and like-minded allies have a responsibility to uphold the law themselves without fear or favour, with demonstrable consequences for those who flout it.

And international law is clear about what our responsibilities are.

In ruling that Israel must end its occupation within twelve months, the ICJ has also declared that all UN member states have “an obligation not to recognize as legal the situation arising from the unlawful presence of Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory” and “not to render aid or assistance in maintaining the situation created by Israel’s illegal presence…”

The UK government says it accepts the central findings of the ICJ ruling so that must be reflected in its actions. Banning UK trade with settlements and other commercial complicity with the occupation – as Ireland is currently considering – would be an obvious first step and a  clear demonstration that we are serious.

Similarly, in endorsing Hamish Falconer’s condemnation of Israel’s threat to annex the West  Bank as illegal under international law, Britain should make clear that our commitment to Palestinian self-determination is no less resolute than our commitment to the right of the people of Israel to self determination and sovereignty within Israel’s internationally recognized borders.

We can demonstrate our respect for Palestinian sovereignty on land illegally occupied by Israel since 1967 by recognizing the State of Palestine. In doing so we would join the majority of UN member states – and most recently Ireland, Norway and Spain. The time to do it is now.

And when it comes to the humanitarian catastrophe that continues to unfold in Gaza, we have to show that wringing our hands is simply not good enough. Over 43,000 human beings have been killed there over the past year,  mainly by Israeli military bombs, bullets, shells and missiles, Two million people across the Strip are denied access to the food, medicines and other humanitarian aid they need. In the north of Gaza people face nothing less than deliberate starvation and ethnic cleansing as weapons of war.

Keir Starmer continues to resist using the term “genocide” to describe what is going on in Gaza.The fact is, though, that the charge of genocide by Israel is precisely what the ICJ is now investigating. The ICJ has also made clear that it is not sufficient to simply judge whether or not genocide has been committed after the slaughter it is investigating has already taken place.

Its rulings this year say that the Palestinians have a right to expect protection now from the risk of genocide. It has therefore ordered “provisional measures” to be put in place to protect civilians and to halt military action that could potentially constitute war crimes,

The court’s requirement to act on the risk of genocide while investigations continue places immediate obligations on all UN member states, not only on Israel.

There are a range of actions which the member states could take to comply with their obligations under the ICJ ruling, with the most obvious being in relation to the supply of weapons.

Even before July’s ICJ ruling, Britain’s own arms export laws and the provisions of the international Arms Trade Treaty precluded the granting of export licences in cases where there is a known risk of weapons or components being used in breach of International Humanitarian Law.

In recognition of those rules, Labour ministers suspended thirty arms export licences to Israel in September. Doing so halted the supply of UK-made components for F16 aircraft bombing civilians in Gaza. But the UK still licences the export of components which allow F35 aircraft to do precisely the same thing. Those exports must stop. Britain’s legal obligations must be upheld without exception in the Middle East as much as anywhere else. That can only mean suspending UK arms export licences to Israel in all cases where there is a known risk of their being used in contravention of the Geneva Conventions.

It would be foolish to pretend that the UK has the power to exercise anything like the leverage over Israel that the USA can employ if it was willing to do so. History will judge the Biden Administration harshly for failing to put any effective pressure on the Netanyahu government to save lives, bring the hostages home and secure a just and sustainable peace.

But understanding that the UK is not in the same position as the USA is different from claiming that Britain and other allies have no means of exerting any influence at all. With a new administration in the White House not even paying lip service to international law or the right of Palestinians – and now the Lebanese too– to be treated with common humanity, we have a responsibility to employ every lever we have to uphold the law.

That has got to mean actions, not only words.

And it means acting fast.

Richard Burden

Richard Burden was Labour MP for Birmingham Northfield from 1992 to 2019. He is a former Chair of the Britain-Palestine All Party Parliamentary Group and of Medical Aid for Palestinians. He is an executive member of Labour Friends of Palestine and the Middle East and a trustee of The Balfour Project charity.<br /> <br /> He writes in a personal capacity.@RichardBurdenMP

View all articles by Richard Burden