Tuesday, February 22, 2022

Notley: 
Alberta Budget must relieve pressure on families, protect public health care

OPINION 
Rachel Notley - Leader Alberta NDP

As Albertans, we all keep a close eye on global energy prices. For many cycles of boom and bust, our fortunes have been tied to the prices of West Texas Intermediate and Western Canadian Select.


© Provided by Edmonton Journal
Alberta NDP Official Opposition Leader Rachel Notley speaks to the media prior to the first in a series of budget town halls, in Edmonton Tuesday Sept. 10, 2019. 

As I write this, oil is trading at prices we haven’t seen for eight or more years, and those prices are supercharged by a favourable exchange rate for Canadian dollars. It’s a welcome reversal from the depressed prices we’ve seen to varying degrees since 2014.

But something is different this time. The energy industry has significantly restructured in response to those many years of low prices. Instead of building and hiring, most firms are passing this money directly along to shareholders, including many outside of Alberta.

Meeting with Alberta families and small business owners, it’s clear they aren’t feeling the prosperity of previous booms. In fact, many Albertans tell me they are falling further behind each month. Inflation is driving up the cost of everything from ground beef to gasoline. The policies of the UCP are driving up many other monthly costs. Albertans are paying more income tax, property tax, school fees, tuition, more interest on student debt, more camping fees, and vastly more for car insurance and utilities, all thanks to the UCP.

Meanwhile, today’s cash boom is doing wonders for the provincial treasury. Albertans should expect to see a significant surplus in the budget this month. We can also expect the UCP to claim credit for this. Let’s be clear: a traffic cone could balance the budget riding the current global energy price rally.

But with this cash boom for the government in mind, here are some of the things I will be looking for in the provincial budget.

First, the UCP must reattach personal income tax brackets to inflation. Jason Kenney used to rage against the federal Liberals for their policy of “bracket creep” — he’s called it an enormous, insidious, vicious, pernicious way to hike income taxes by stealth. It’s also the very first thing Kenney and the UCP did to Albertans, starting with their first budget. This sneaky tax hike will separate Alberta families from another $850 million in new taxes by election day of 2023. Bracket creep should be abolished in this budget.

Secondly, there are a range of benefits for Albertans that the UCP has disconnected from inflation, which means their real buying power shrinks every month. We all see what’s happening at the grocery store. With inflation at 30-year highs, the same basket of food is getting more expensive every month. The Child and Family Benefit, the Seniors Benefit, Income Support, and Assured Income for the Severely Handicapped (AISH) are all being devalued by inflation, thanks to the UCP.

Albertans who receive AISH are surviving below the poverty line, and the UCP’s policy will take about $1,000 worth of yearly buying power away from them by 2023. Our government indexed AISH to inflation, and the UCP supported this move, only to reverse it immediately after the election — yet another reason why Albertans can’t trust the UCP. I will be looking for these cruel UCP policies to be reversed in Budget 2022.

I am very concerned to hear Kenney and the UCP signal that they intend to use the COVID-19 pandemic as an excuse to push Alberta health care towards an American model of private, for-profit delivery. We have all heard the UCP try to shift the blame for their COVID failures onto health-care workers. But Albertans know the truth — we weren’t let down by the health-care system; we were let down by the UCP. This government attacked doctors and nurses before and during the pandemic, and is still rolling out a plan to lay off 11,000 frontline professionals.

In wave after wave, the UCP failed to act when the danger was obvious and pandered to extremists instead of protecting families. The UCP’s negligence led to hundreds of preventable deaths and tens of thousands of Albertans’ surgeries getting cancelled. The bottom line is this: Albertans can’t trust the UCP with their health care.


Lastly, we need to have a serious strategic discussion about how to ensure energy revenues are reinvested in jobs and projects here in Alberta that drive long-term prosperity and diversification. We must not repeat the mistakes of several Conservative governments and pretend that non-renewable resource revenue will be around forever.

We’ve started this conversation with Alberta families and businesses at AlbertasFuture.ca . I invite all Albertans to check out the proposals we have made, and to add their voices to this critical discussion.

Rachel Notley is leader of the Alberta NDP and leader of the official Opposition.
Supreme Court justice Clarence Thomas' wife had ties to January 6 rally organizers and efforts to overturn the 2020 election: report

oseddiq@insider.com (Oma Seddiq) - 

Supreme Court Associate Justice Clarence Thomas, right, and wife Virginia "Ginni" Thomas at the White House in 2019. 
AP Photo/Patrick Semansky

Justice Clarence Thomas' wife, Ginni, had ties to organizers of a January 6, 2021 rally, per The New York Times.

The Times also reported on Ginni Thomas' connections with people who sought to overturn the 2020 election results.

Thomas served on the board of a conservative group that pushed for its members to challenge the election results.


Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas' wife, Virginia "Ginni" Thomas, had ties to organizers of the January 6, 2021 rallies in support of President Donald Trump as well as to efforts to subvert the 2020 election results, according to a New York Times Magazine report published Tuesday.

The Times revealed details about Thomas' role, which had been previously unreported. The Washington Post reported last month that Thomas shared a Facebook post on January 6 before the violence broke out. "LOVE MAGA people!!!! GOD BLESS EACH OF YOU STANDING UP or PRAYING!" she wrote.

Thomas, a longtime conservative activist, played a peacemaking role between rally organizers "so that there wouldn't be any division around January 6," Dustin Stockton, who helped organized the Ellipse rally, told The Times. The Ellipse rally took place shortly before a crowd of Trump supporters descended on the Capitol, clashed with law enforcement officials, and interrupted the 2020 election certification.

"The way it was presented to me was that Ginni was uniting these different factions around a singular mission on January 6," Stockton said. The Times noted that other rally organizers disputed Stockton's account about Thomas but did not offer specifics.

Thomas also served on the advisory board of Turning Point USA, a conservative nonprofit that sponsored the event and provided buses for rallygoers on January 6, The Times reported.

Thomas is also connected to people who sought to undo the 2020 election results. John Eastman, the lawyer who wrote a memo — without any evidence — on how Vice President Mike Pence could overturn the election results, previously clerked for Clarence Thomas at the Supreme Court, and is a close friend to the couple, per The Times.

Steve Bannon, a one-time White House chief strategist for Trump, also endorsed efforts to challenge the election results. Ginni Thomas founded a group called Groundswell with Bannon's support, per The Times.

Thomas also served on the board of the Council for National Policy's political arm, CNP Action, which circulated a document titled "Election Results and Legal Battles: What Now?" after the presidential election, according to The Times. The document urged members to call on Republican state lawmakers to challenge the 2020 election results.

In December 2020, CNP Action shared a newsletter with a report called "Five States and the Election Irregularities and Issues," featuring five swing states where Trump had been attempting to overturn the results. The newsletter pointed to "historical, legal precedent for Congress to count a slate of electors different from that certified by the Governor of the state," according to The Times.

NYT drops the hammer on Ginni Thomas with scathing report on her political activism
RAW STORY
February 22, 2022

Clarence and Ginni Thomas (Facebook)


The political activism of a Supreme Court spouse is the focus of a New York Times exposé titled "The Long Crusade of Clarence and Ginni Thomas."

The newspaper noted her work for the Council for National Policy, which it said "brings together old-school Republican luminaries, Christian conservatives, Tea Party activists and MAGA operatives, with more than 400 members who include leaders of organizations like the Federalist Society, the National Rifle Association and the Family Research Council."

The newspaper explained that "Ginni Thomas insists, in her council biography, that she and her husband operate in “separate professional lanes,” but those lanes in fact merge with notable frequency. For the three decades he has sat on the Supreme Court, they have worked in tandem from the bench and the political trenches to take aim at targets like Roe v. Wade and affirmative action. Together they believe that “America is in a vicious battle for its founding principles,” as Ginni Thomas has put it. Her views, once seen as on the fringe, have come to dominate the Republican Party. And with Trump’s three appointments reshaping the Supreme Court, her husband finds himself at the center of a new conservative majority poised to shake the foundations of settled law. In a nation freighted with division and upheaval, the Thomases have found their moment."

The report noted how Ginni Thomas gained access to the Oval Office during the Trump administration.

RELATED: Clarence Thomas dissent in GOP election challenge raises new questions about his wife: 'Investigate Ginni'

"This article draws on hours of recordings and internal documents from groups affiliated with the Thomases; dozens of interviews with the Thomases’ classmates, friends, colleagues and critics, as well as more than a dozen Trump White House aides and supporters and some of Justice Thomas’s former clerks; and an archive of Council for National Policy videos and internal documents provided by an academic researcher in Australia, Brent Allpress," the newspaper reported. "The reporting uncovered new details on the Thomases’ ascent: how Trump courted Justice Thomas; how Ginni Thomas used that courtship to gain access to the Oval Office, where her insistent policy and personnel suggestions so aggravated aides that one called her a “wrecking ball” while others put together an opposition-research-style report on her that was obtained by The Times; and the extent to which Justice Thomas flouted judicial-ethics guidance by participating in events hosted by conservative organizations with matters before the court."


The Trump administration created an opposition research file on Ginni Thomas, the far-right activist married to Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas.

In a bombshell report published by The New York Times, reporters Danny Hakim and Jo Becker detail the power Ginni Thomas has within the conservative movement.

"This article draws on hours of recordings and internal documents from groups affiliated with the Thomases; dozens of interviews with the Thomases’ classmates, friends, colleagues and critics, as well as more than a dozen Trump White House aides and supporters and some of Justice Thomas’s former clerks; and an archive of Council for National Policy videos and internal documents provided by an academic researcher in Australia, Brent Allpress," the newspaper reported. "The reporting uncovered new details on the Thomases’ ascent: how Trump courted Justice Thomas; how Ginni Thomas used that courtship to gain access to the Oval Office, where her insistent policy and personnel suggestions so aggravated aides that one called her a “wrecking ball” while others put together an opposition-research-style report on her that was obtained by The Times; and the extent to which Justice Thomas flouted judicial-ethics guidance by participating in events hosted by conservative organizations with matters before the court."

The newspaper reported on a Jan. 25, 2019 meeting with Trump.

"It was the craziest meeting I’ve ever been to,” said a Trump aide.

"It was an event with no precedent, and some of the details of what transpired soon leaked: the wife of a sitting Supreme Court justice lobbying a president when several cases involving transgender rights were making their way through the federal courts," the newspaper reported. "Before the meeting, Trump’s aides assembled the research document outlining concerns with Ginni Thomas and some of her preferred job candidates, the contents of which they shared with the president."

The opposition research document noted that Ginni Thomas ally Crystal Clanton had been forced out of Turning Point USA for reportedly texting “I HATE BLACK PEOPLE. Like [expletive] them all. … I hate blacks. End of story.”

Thomas reportedly pushed for positions for Dan Bongino and former Milwaukee Sheriff David Clarke.

“In the White House, she was out of bounds many times,” one of Trump’s senior aides said. “It was always: ‘We need more MAGA people in government. We’re trying to get these résumés through, and we’re being blocked.’ I appreciated her energy, but a lot of these people couldn’t pass background checks.”

Clarence Thomas' network tied to efforts to overturn the 2020 election results: NYT



Official portrait of Justice Clarence Thomas (Wikimedia Commons)


A network of people tied to Supreme Court justice Clarence Thomas and his wife went into action following the 2020 presidential election, The New York Times reported Tuesday.

The newspaper reported that "a number of longtime friends and associates of the Thomases" were either involved in legal efforts to overturn the election results or had helped to plan Jan. 6 rallies.

The report focused on wife Ginni Thomas, reporting "it was after Trump’s November loss that she would prove her loyalty beyond doubt, when she and her group urged on efforts to overturn the election."

"New reporting also shows just how blurred the lines between the couple’s interests became during the effort to overturn the 2020 election, which culminated in the rally held at the Ellipse, just outside the White House grounds, aimed at stopping Congress from certifying the state votes that gave Joe Biden his victory. Many of the rally organizers and those advising Trump had connections to the Thomases, but little has been known about what role, if any, Ginni Thomas played, beyond the fact that on the morning of the March to Save America, as the rally was called, she urged her Facebook followers to watch how the day unfolded," the newspaper reported.

The deep-dive report focused on Ginni Thomas' political activism.

"In the weeks after Trump’s loss, court challenges began to pile up from his team, his allies and even Republican lawmakers," the newspaper reported. "By then, the network around the Thomases was lighting up. On Dec. 10, a former Thomas clerk and close friend of the couple’s, John C. Eastman, went on 'War Room,' a podcast and radio show hosted by Bannon. Eastman argued that the country was already at the point of a constitutional crisis — and he urged the Supreme Court to intervene. Bannon eagerly agreed."

The report noted Ginni Thomas was not only tied to Eastman and Bannon, but also Cleta Mitchell, who was on Trump's Jan. 2 call trying to overturn the election results in Georgia.

"Turning Point USA, on whose advisory board Ginni Thomas had served, was a sponsor of the Jan. 6 event and provided buses for attendees. Other sponsors included two more groups with which Ginni Thomas had long ties. One was the Tea Party Patriots, headed by Jenny Beth Martin, a fellow Council for National Policy activist. The other was Women for America First, which held the permit for the rally at the Ellipse and was run by Amy Kremer," the newspaper reported. "The spectacle of a Supreme Court justice’s spouse taking to Facebook to champion the attempt of a defeated president to stay in power, as Ginni Thomas did on the morning of Jan. 6, crossed a line for several people in the Thomases’ circle who talked to The Times."



LONG READ NYT full report.


Mexico City, bastion of bullfighting, considers ban





(AFP/Nicolas RAMALLO)

Jean Luis Arce
Tue, February 22, 2022,

Matadors in the Mexican capital, home to the largest bullring on the planet, are fighting to prevent a ban on a practice brought by the Spanish conquistadors five centuries ago.

Although the debate is not new, in December, an animal welfare commission in Mexico City's legislature approved a proposal to prohibit the tradition in the city of around nine million people.

The push has left bullfighting -- and the multimillion-dollar industry surrounding it -- facing an uncertain future after the season ended on Sunday.

No date has yet been set for a vote by Mexico City lawmakers on the issue, after the commission opted to open a dialogue with people who would be affected.

Mexico is a bastion of bullfighting, and at its heart in the capital sits the Plaza de Toros, which has a capacity of around 50,000 people.

But the capital is also considered a progressive stronghold in the conservative Catholic-majority country, and a pioneer in areas such as same-sex marriage, legal abortion and the treatment of animals.

- 'Bad news' for liberties -


Supporters of bullfighting say the city's freedoms should also apply to them.

"We live in a time of respect for minorities, of respect for free thought. Where does the word prohibit fit in?" said Rafael Cue, a journalist and member of Mexican Bullfighting, a group that brings together fans, bullfighters, breeders, matadors and businessmen.

The organization argues a ban would be "very bad news" for liberties if the authorities imposed the moral values of one part of society on another.

"In this way, the legal interruption of pregnancy or same-sex marriage could also be prohibited," it said in a statement.

The group wants the proposed ban to be debated from a perspective of "freedom" and not of "fads or political correctness."

Opponents of bullfighting say the supporters' arguments do not stand up to scrutiny because they treat animals as objects and ignore the social impact of abusing them in public.

"It affects me indirectly when they kill and injure a sentient animal in a public arena for fun," said Jorge Gavino, a lawmaker in the Mexico City legislature who supports a ban on shows where animals are killed or mistreated.

"It is affecting my coexistence in society, so I have the obligation and the right to act against this supposed right of a minority third party," said the member of the left-wing Party of the Democratic Revolution (PRD).

Scientifically, it can be demonstrated that the bull suffers during a fight, he added.

So far, only a handful of Mexico's 32 states have banned bullfighting.

Seven others protect the tradition -- which dates back to the time of the Spanish conquest in the 16th century -- as cultural heritage.





- 'Recognizing its bravery' -


Juan Pedro Llaguno, a 22-year-old Mexican matador and grandson of breeders, said it is a "privilege" to step into the ring to fight a bull that he has known since birth.

"It's the most beautiful thing there is because I've known it since it was little and I can finally get into the ring with it to create something unforgettable, something inexplicable," he told AFP.

Llaguno believes a bull "is born to be fought" and to die in the bullring.

"It's the way to say goodbye to life with dignity, with the public recognizing its bravery," he said.

Bullfighters also point to the economic value of the industry, which generated $343 million in 2018, creating some 80,000 direct jobs and 146,000 indirect jobs, according to industry data corroborated by the agriculture ministry.

Mexico is not the only country in the region debating the future of bullfighting.

In Venezuela, which also has a long tradition of bullfighting, judges banned events in two states in December and January,

Venezuelan Attorney General Tarek William Saab has called the practice "public massacres" and is promoting legislation that would ban shows that include animal abuse.

In June 2020, authorities in the Colombian capital Bogota decided to ban the mistreatment and killing of bulls in bullfights.

In contrast, that same year, Peru's highest court refused to outlaw the practice.

Other countries where bullfighting is allowed include Spain, France and Portugal.

jla/dr/to
UAE invests in drones, robots as unmanned warfare takes off



Training robots were among the exhibits
 (AFP/-)

-
Mohamad Ali Harissi
Tue, February 22, 2022,

The United Arab Emirates is ploughing money into drones, robots and other unmanned weaponry as autonomous warfare becomes more and more widespread -- including in attacks on the Gulf country by Yemeni rebels.

Large, black drones with the orange logo of EDGE, the UAE's arms consortium, were on display at this week's Unmanned Systems Exhibition (UMEX), along with remote-controlled machineguns and other "smart" weapons.

The exhibition comes at a time of growing unmanned attacks around the region, including the January 17 drone-and-missile assault by Yemen rebels that killed three oil workers in Abu Dhabi, the first in a series of similar incidents.

"Autonomous systems are becoming ever more prevalent around the world," Miles Chambers, EDGE's director of international business development, told AFP.

"We are really heavily investing in developing our autonomous capability... as well as in electronic warfare and in our smart munitions. These are our three pillars."

EDGE, an Abu Dhabi-based defence consortium that groups 25 Emirati firms, was formed three years ago but reached an estimated $4.8 billion in arms sales in 2020 -- nearly all of them to the UAE government.

The group was ranked 23rd among the 100 top arms-producing and military services around the globe in 2020, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute.

The UAE is part of the Saudi-led coalition that has been fighting Yemen's Huthi rebels since 2015. Although it withdrew ground troops in 2019, it remains a key player in the grinding conflict.

EDGE's most lucrative deals have included maintenance of military jets, worth almost $4 billion, as well as providing guided munitions at $880 million.

On Tuesday, it unveiled a vehicle-mounted remote-controlled assault rifle that can swivel 360 degrees and has thermal imaging and a laser range finder accurate to 50 centimetres for targets more than two kilometres (1.2 miles) away.

EDGE was looking at "expanding our international footprint" in 2022, said Chambers.

- 'Step up' -

The use of drones and other unmanned weapons is increasingly common.

Last year the United States and Israel said an Iranian drone attacked a ship managed by an Israeli billionaire as it sailed off Oman. Two crew were killed.

In November, Iraq's prime minister survived an attack by a bomb-laden drone, and according to reports, Israel's 2020 assassination of a top Iranian nuclear scientist was carried out using a remote-controlled machinegun mounted on a pick-up truck.

Drones are also favoured by Yemen's Huthis.

In December, the coalition said the insurgents had fired more than 850 attack drones and 400 ballistic missiles at Saudi Arabia in the past seven years, killing 59 civilians.

That compares with the 401 coalition air raids carried out in January alone over Yemen, according to the Yemen Data Project, an independent tracker which reported around 9,000 civilian deaths from the strikes since 2015.

Ahmed Al Mazrouei, owner of an Emirati company that mainly develops four-wheel drive vehicles and personnel carriers, said the UAE defence industry was ready to "step up" following the attacks on Abu Dhabi.

"The challenges are important because they push us to develop ourselves in order to meet those challenges," he said.

"Our goal is to have more systems and more tech" in the next 10 years, Mazrouei added. "This is an Emirati-made production... and we want to compete globally."

EDGE has signed multiple deals with foreign partners, including US firms Lockheed Martin and Raytheon, and Brazil's Embraer, Khalid Al Breiki, who heads one of EDGE's five clusters, told AFP at last year's Dubai Airshow.

The establishment of diplomatic relations with Israel in 2020 has also opened up new opportunities.

The fifth edition of UMEX is the first to include Israel, one of seven newcomers among the 26 countries taking part.

On Monday, the UAE defence ministry signed three deals with domestic and international companies with a total value of more than 654.6 million dirhams ($178.2 million), including a 10 million dirhams sale of drone systems to UAE-based International Golden Group.

mah/th/dv

-


Remote-control terminals are used to operate unmanned weapons
 (AFP/-)
-


Armed robotic vehicles were also on display 
(AFP/-)



Visitors tour Abu Dhabi's UMEX as unmanned warfare takes off 
(AFP/STRINGER)


EDGE drones were on display at the UMEX exhibition in Abu Dhabi 
(AFP/-)

Petrol from used tyres: A solution to Zambia's fuel and waste problems?


A dumping site for used tyres in Lusaka, Zambia. 
© Reuters

A company in Zambia has begun converting abandoned tyres and discarded plastic into petrol, diesel and gas in a project that could help slash the amount the country spends on importing fuel while simultaneously clearing some of the waste that litters many of the streets in the nation's towns and cities.

Israel court freezes eviction order of Palestinian family


Fatima Salem (C) looks on as Sven Kuehn von Burgsdorff, head of the European Union's mission to the West Bank and Gaza Strip (R), speaks to the media during his visit to her home in the east Jerusalem neighbourhood of Sheikh Jarrah, December 20, 2021
 (AFP/AHMAD GHARABLI) (AHMAD GHARABLI)


Tue, February 22, 2022,

An Israeli court on Tuesday froze the planned eviction of a Palestinian family in the flashpoint east Jerusalem neighbourhood of Sheikh Jarrah, pending an appeal.

The Salem family had been ordered to surrender the property to Jewish settlers who have claimed ownership of the plot.

Sheikh Jarrah has become a symbol of Palestinian resistance against Israeli control of Jerusalem, and the Salem family's imminent eviction made them a growing focus of the tensions there.

The land rights battle between Jewish settlers and Palestinians in the neighbourhood has sparked clashes and partly fuelled the 11-day war in May between Israel and armed groups in the Gaza Strip.

The Palestinian family received their eviction order in November, with a deadline to vacate by March 1.

A lawyer for the family, Medhat Diba, said the Jerusalem Magistrate's court agreed to suspend the eviction until it ruled on an appeal launched by the Palestinians.

The court also released a decision confirming the freeze.

Khalil Salem, a member of the family, told AFP the decision was "a positive step because we were on the verge of losing our house."

Earlier this month clashes broke out when far-right Israeli lawmaker Itamar Ben Gvir opened a tent "office" near the family's house after an alleged Palestinian arson of a settler's home nearby.

The United Nations said its personnel visited the Salem family on February 18.

Israel annexed east Jerusalem, which Palestinians claim as their future capital, following the 1967 Six-Day War in a move not recognised by most of the international community.

Jewish settlers groups have won legal victories claiming ownership of various plots where Palestinians live, using an Israeli law that allows Jews to reclaim land lost during the conflict that coincided with Israel's creation in 1948.

But no equivalent land reclamation law exists for Palestinians who lost homes in west Jerusalem.

Seven Palestinian families in Sheikh Jarrah have challenged their planned evictions at Israel's Supreme Court, with highly-anticipated decisions pending.

More than 200,000 settlers now live in east Jerusalem, alongside about 300,000 Palestinians. The Jewish settlements in the city are considered illegal under international law.

ha-mib/bs/it

 

Tatlin’s Tower


Tatlin and an assistant with the Monument to the Third International in Moscow, 1920.

Tatlin and an assistant with the Monument to the Third International in Moscow, 1920

Vladimir Tatlin’s Monument to the Third International, commonly referred to as Tatlin’s Tower, is an iconic work of Russian modern art from the early Soviet era. It is a symbol of the utopian aspirations of the communist leaders of Russia’s 1917 October Revolution, and of the brief period when those aspirations were allied with the futuristic visions of modern artists. The original Monument has not survived and is known only from photographs, but it was never intended to be a durable object.

An ambitious plan for a sculptural structure

It was a 20-foot-tall wooden model for an enormous structure that was never constructed, in part because the material and technological resources required to build it successfully were unavailable in post-revolutionary Russia. Tatlin’s Monument thus has historical significance that goes beyond its original purpose and meaning. It is both a symbol of exalted utopian goals and an ironic monument to the economic and technological limitations of the early Soviet state.

Vladimir Tatlin, Drawing of the Monument to the Third International, published in Nikolai Punin, The Monument to the Third International. (St. Petersburg, 1920).

Vladimir Tatlin, Drawing of the Monument to the Third International, published in Nikolai Punin, The Monument to the Third International. (St. Petersburg, 1920)

As part of a large-scale program to replace old czarist monuments with monuments to the revolution, the huge structure was both a symbolic sculpture and functional architecture. Designed to straddle the Neva river in St Petersburg, the 1300 foot (400 meter) iron and glass Monument would surpass Paris’s Eiffel Tower in both scale and complexity. Its design consists of a contracting double helix that spirals upward, supported by a huge diagonal girder. Inside this external metal structure are four geometric volumes that were intended to revolve at different speeds.

As planned, the geometric volumes would be made of glass and serve both practical and symbolic functions. The largest and lowest was a cube, making one revolution per year, that would house meetings of the legislature of the Third International or Comintern, the international communist organization working for world revolution. The next volume up was a pyramid, making one revolution per month, that would host the Comintern executive. Above that was a cylinder, making a full revolution every day, to house the Comintern propaganda services, including the press, poster and pamphlet designers, etc.; and on top was a half sphere that revolved hourly and housed the Comintern radio station.

Model of Tatlin's Tower, Royal Academy, London, 27 Feb 2012 (photo: TobyJ, CC BY-SA 3.0)

Model of Tatlin’s Tower, Royal Academy, London, 27 Feb 2012 (photo: TobyJ, CC BY-SA 3.0)

A Symbol of the Future

Tatlin’s design for the Monument conveyed meaning in multiple ways. The rising spirals, diagonal girder, and rotating internal volumes give symbolic form to the aspirations and dynamic forces of the world communist revolution. The planned materials of metal and glass were associated with modern engineering and construction technology, and signified the advanced, even futuristic, goals of communist society. This was further emphasized in the plan to have the interior volumes revolve mechanically, which symbolized the alignment of communist world revolution with the astronomical movement of the sun, earth, and moon, and also likened the new government to an efficient modern machine.

The Monument stressed the Comintern’s transparency to the people in its fully visible support structure and the glass interior volumes housing its various functions. The importance given to disseminating information and propaganda to the masses is also integral to the design and acknowledges the crucial role played by mass communication technologies in modern society and their power to promote world revolution.

Photo of Tatlin’s sculpture at the Last Futurist Exhibition.

Photo of Tatlin’s sculpture at the Last Futurist Exhibition

Tatlin and Constructivism

Although Tatlin’s Monument was never built, models of it were made and displayed at political meetings, demonstrations, and parades through the 1920s. Its most important historic role, however, was its influence on Russian Soviet modern artists, particularly the Constructivists, who were conceptualizing new aesthetic practices aligned with the goals and values of the new communist society. For these artists Tatlin’s combination of modern materials, rational structure, and utilitarian forms was an important example of how artists could synthesize the historically disparate roles and forms of art, craft, and engineering to contribute to the formation of a new world.

Tatlin had established his reputation as a cutting-edge modern artist in Moscow before the 1917 revolution. He participated in The Last Futurist Exhibition of Paintings 0.10 in 1915, where his rival Kasimir Malevich first presented Suprematist works. There, Tatlin exhibited a group of sculptures he called “counter-reliefs” and “corner counter-reliefs.” These were complex assemblages of various found non-art materials (scraps of wood, metal, glass, cardboard, wire, and rope) suspended from walls.

Pablo Picasso, Guitar, 1914, sheet metal and wire, 77.5 x 35 x 19.3 cm (MoMA).

Pablo Picasso, Guitar, 1914, sheet metal and wire, 77.5 x 35 x 19.3 cm (MoMA).

These counter-reliefs are often associated with Picasso’s early Cubist sculptures, which Tatlin saw in Paris in 1913. Both artists rejected the Western tradition of sculpture as a unified mass made from a single material (traditionally marble or bronze), and instead created assemblages — sculptures that combine heterogeneous materials in novel ways.

Picasso’s Cubist sculptures represented objects such as guitars, glasses, and bottles, and explored the formal and spatial ambiguities previously developed in Cubist painting. Tatlin’s approach was markedly different and often completely non-representational. He was more interested in the forms, textures and physical potential of the materials themselves than in exploring the ambiguities of representation, and his works were also more radical in their relationship to space than Picasso’s.

A New Type of Sculpture

Tatlin’s earliest counter-reliefs were in a rectangular format and hung on the wall. They were composed of separate but interdependent components, and emphasized the contrasts between different textures and materials.

Vladimir Tatlin, Relief, 1914 (destroyed).

Vladimir Tatlin, Relief, 1914 (destroyed).

The relief reproduced here was part of a group of works titled Selection of Materials. It is an abstract composition made of scraps of wood, metal, and glass attached to a chipped and cracked stucco surface. Each material displays its texture rather than being cleaned and polished to suggest pure abstract forms. The materiality of the object and its constituent parts is fundamental to the effect of the work.

This work and others like it engage with a prominent concern of early 20th-century modern artists and writers: how non-representational form could communicate feeling directly. Faktura was a key concept in Russian debates on modern art that was connected to the artist’s use of the physical qualities of materials. Tatlin’s reliefs were understood as displays of faktura, meaning their interest was fundamentally formal and concerned with the visual and tactile properties of their material components. They had no representational content and (unlike the work of many of Tatlin’s contemporaries) no spiritual significance.

Detail of Tatlin’s sculpture at the Last Futurist Exhibition

Detail of Tatlin’s sculpture at the Last Futurist Exhibition

Corner counter-reliefs

The corner counter-reliefs added another dimension to Tatlin’s work. They broke out of the limiting rectangle and created a new kind of spatially-ambiguous sculpture with indefinite boundaries. These were not self-supporting objects that could be easily moved; their form depended on the walls from which they were hung. This made their sculptural identity as independent objects even more ambiguous. The walls were part of the sculpture, and were sometimes covered with paper to emphasize their integral role in the work.

One of the most noticeable and innovative aspects of Tatlin’s corner counter-reliefs is the way they incorporate literal dynamic tension in the form of supporting ropes and wires. These allow the planes of various textures and materials to be suspended in space, and they also make physical tension a manifest part of the work’s composition.

We don’t just see the flat planes, curved forms, and bars hovering juxtaposition to each other, we see how the entire sculpture is put together. The structural relationships are laid bare. It was this literal incorporation of structure that came to be seen as an early stage in the development of Constructivism — the dominant modern art movement in Soviet Russia after 1920.


 

Additional resources:

Learn about the Russian Revolution

John Bowlt, Russian Art of the Avant-Garde: Theory and Criticism, 1920-1934. Revised Edition. New York: Thames and Hudson, 2017.

Christina Lodder, Russian Constructivism. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1983.

The Great Utopia: The Russian and Soviet Avant-Garde, 1915-1932. New York: Guggenheim Museum, 1992.

Inventing Abstraction 1910-1925: How a Radical Idea Changed Modern Art. New York: Museum of Modern Art, 2012.

Cite this page as: Dr. Charles Cramer and Dr. Kim Grant, "Tatlin’s Tower," in Smarthistory, September 28, 2019, accessed February 22, 2022, https://smarthistory.org/tatlin-tower/.

Killa Design's Museum of the Future opens in Dubai

Tom Ravenscroft
Dezeen Magazine

A museum in Dubai dedicated to the future, which has been dubbed "the most beautiful building in the world" by the emirate's ruler, has officially opened its doors.

Designed by local studio Killa Design, the museum stands in a prominent location alongside Dubai's elevated train line, a short distance from the Burj Khalifa skyscraper – the world's tallest building.

The Museum of the Future has opened in Dubai

Designed to be "an architectural and cultural icon", the museum consists of an elongated ring shape with a void at its centre, sat on a grass-covered mound.

The distinctive form led Dubai ruler and UAE vice president Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum to state that the museum is "the most beautiful building in the world".
It stands alongside Dubai's elevated train line

Built for the Dubai Future Foundation, the seven-storey building contains a combination of exhibits dedicated to the future and workshops for testing and developing emerging technology.

"The Museum of the Future is a 'living museum', constantly adapting and metamorphosing as its very environment drives continual and iterative change to its exhibits and attractions," said Mohammed Al Gergawi, chairman of the Dubai Future Foundation

.
Dubai's ruler described the museum as "the most beautiful building in the world"

Killa Design's museum contains a 1,000-capacity multi-use hall, a 345-seat lecture theatre as well as numerous laboratory spaces.

Five floors of gallery space contain exhibits dedicated to space exploration, a digital recreation of the Amazon rainforest and prototypes of future products.
Internally the spaces have no columns

The 77-metre-high building is supported by a steel structure, developed with engineering studio Buro Happold, which was "digitally grown" using parametric tools.

This structure means that the building has no internal columns.


Read:
Ten must-see pavilions at Dubai Expo 2020


It is clad in stainless steel with windows in the form of quotes from the emirate's ruler written in Arabic calligraphy.

The three sentences written on the building say: "We may not live for hundreds of years, but the products of our creativity can leave a legacy long after we are gone"; "The future belongs to those who can imagine it, design it, and execute it. It isn't something you await, but rather create"; and "Innovation is not an intellectual luxury. It is the secret behind the evolution and rejuvenation of nations and peoples".
Exhibits include a space station simulator

This year Dubai is hosting the coronavirus-delayed Expo 2020 Dubai.

The event contained pavilions designed by some of the world's leading architects including Santiago Calatrava, Foster + Partners and Grimshaw. We rounded up 10 must-see pavilions at the expo.

The photography is courtesy of Dubai Future Foundation.

Project credits:

Client: Dubai Future Foundation
Developer: North25
Architect: Killa Design
Lead consultant (design, site supervision and contract administration): Buro Happold:
Structural engineering, facade engineering, sustainability, building services engineering: Buro Happold
Bridges, transport, infrastructure, geotechnical engineering, access, people flow modelling, fire and life safety, specialist lighting, acoustics, waste and logistics: Buro Happold
Project manager and employers representative: Matthews Southwest
Cost consultant: AECOM
AoR/EoR: Rice Perry Ellis Cracknell (Landscape),
AV/ICT: Mediatech
VT: RBA
Civils: CDM Smith
Programming: Matrix
H&S: Atkins
Security: Arkan
Auditorium: Theatre Projects
Read more:
Architecture
Dubai
Museums
United Arab Emirates
Cultural buildings
Killa Design
Cultural

Brazil, Amazon, World: How the Munduruku Showed Up the Whole System

 

Photograph Source: Senado Federal – CC BY 2.0

To a degree that we seldom realize, we depend upon the participation of others in our lives, and upon our own participation in the lives of others.

– Roy Wagner, The Invention of Culture (p. 15).

The strategy works but it doesn’t mean that the strategist is intelligent, especially in an unintelligent system that’s destroying the planet. Brazil’s president, Jair Messias Bolsonaro knows how to hog the news with his despicable utterances, for example by comparing Indigenous reservations to a disease (“Our Amazon is like a child with chickenpox, every dot you see is an indigenous reservation”), thus remaining in the headlines and keeping racism (as well as sexism and other sociopathic views) alive and well. The mainstream press plays along, sometimes inertly echoing and sometimes playing shocked by his views which, after all, are just a more than usually brazen expression of the global system that breeds them. The system needs its Bolsonaros to make other faithful servants of the system look less noxious than they really are, and also to distract attention from things the general public aren’t supposed to know: in general, all the signs that, if humans are to thrive together with other species on this planet, a totally different social system is desperately needed.

The news that tends to be beamed out about Indigenous peoples, if not as crude as Bolsonaro’s views, tend to present them as dirt poor, backward, victims, quaint, exotic, or, in the artistic domain, set pieces aestheticising brutality and tragedy in a photograph by, say, Sebastião Salgado. The approximately 13,000 Munduruku people, who live along the Tapajós River in fourteen “Indigenous lands” in various phases of recognition by the state of Brazil, defy all the cliches. To begin with, they’re sending a powerful message to the government, the present one and the one that wins the elections in October this year: they’re not to be messed with, they understand and are exposing the rot at the heart of the system that wants to destroy them and, in doing so, have shown that history, as told today, is wrong.

The Munduruku—“fire ant people”, an allusion to their ancient fierce, swarming battle strategy—who call themselves Wuujuyû (“we are the people”) mostly live in some 130 villages along the banks of the upper reaches of the Tapajós River and its tributary, the Cururu River, in western Pará state. Their river and its tributaries, separately named on official maps made for the purposes of colonial exploitation, has one name: Idixidi, and their territory extends to where Idixidi flows because these waters are one, brought into being by the creator Karosakaybu when he threw three tucumã husks. The river is the essence of Munduruku life, providing food, water, transportation and, in particular, the centre of their cosmology. Any struggle against interference or invasion of their territory is about much more than just the land they live on. But this is how it is always presented by outsiders, who started to occupy the zone after the first recorded contacts in the second half of the eighteenth century and, especially, a hundred years later with the first missionaries in the area and the rubber boom, which catapulted the Amazon region into the world capitalist market and brought in thousands of non-Indigenous people who worked as semi-slaves in the plantations.

The incursions by outsiders continue to the present day, bringing violence and sickness, like the measles epidemic of the 1940s, which decimated the population, and now mercury poisoning from wildcat mining. More recently, since Bolsonaro took office in January 2019 attacks by illegal gold miners, and directly or indirectly, by large ranchers, soy planters, and other land grabbers have only increased, with the connivance of local and national authorities, especially following a Supreme Court ruling requiring the government to protect Yanomami and Munduruku Indigenous peoples. Bolsonaro has sworn not to keep “prehistoric men in zoos”, not to “demarcate one more centimetre” of the Amazon, and will whip up any kind of violence to get his way because for him, “Where there is indigenous land, there is wealth underneath it”. The Supreme Court is stymied, the Constitution is overridden, environmental law is sabotaged, and illegal logging and deforestation in the Amazon have been given a green light. Needless to say, the Munduruku aren’t the only Indigenous group organising and resisting the depredations of capitalism but, since Munduruku territory is one of Brazil’s most heavily mined Indigenous areas, the rampant general corruption has some of its worst and violent effects here. And they have brought it to light.

The Munduruku gold rush gives an idea of the scale of things. In 2018, the Tapajós basin produced some thirty tons of illegal gold, about a third of the country’s total and probably much more: The figures aren’t reliable as this is a secretive business, buying, processing, and selling from illegal hubs like Itaituba and Jacareacanga in Pará but with tentacles extending to other cities in Brazil, India, connecting up with drug trafficking via Colombia, French Guyana and Venezuela, and involving metal detecting, panning, cradling, sluicing, excavating and dredging, with equipment including airstrips, planes, helicopters, and excavators, through to satellite communications, generators, food supply chains, and shell companies laundering money. The business has long colonial roots, involving more than 800,000 slaves, going all the way back to the first global gold rush in 1690. The attacks on and poisoning of the Munduruku are part of a long offensive against Brazil’s Indigenous people, who have faced genocide, land appropriation and devastation for more than five centuries, in a process that was given new life by the developmental aims of the military dictatorship.

Murder is no stranger to the extractive industries. Last October Bolsonaro managed to dodge charges of genocide in a senate inquiry, although the final report found that he “commanded an anti-Indigenous policy that deliberately exposed the native peoples to neglect, harassment, invasion, and violence since before the pandemic.” Indeed, it was stated, he saw COVID-19 as “an opportunity” to harm them: “There is no disguise sufficient to cover up the president’s avowed willingness to target the Indigenous people”. The question of impunity was also raised, and also high-up complicity because everyone knows that Bolsonaro can’t act alone.

Article 231, paragraph 5 of Brazil’s 1988 Constitution reads, “Removal of Indigenous groups from their lands is prohibited, except […] in cases of catastrophe or epidemic that put the population at risk, or in the interest of the sovereignty of the country [… but] in any event, an immediate return is guaranteed as soon as the risk ceases”. Yet the law and government agencies provide no protection. They’re part of the problem. In fact, they’re “targeting nature reserves and protected areas using the Ministry of Environment to destroy legal protections and convert this land—including indigenous territories—into private property”. For example, the Munduruku Sawré Muybu territory, which hasn’t been fully confirmed as an Indigenous reserve, has been subject to thirteen mining applications, as well as fourteen more in Mato Grosso, from the UK-listed mining giant Anglo American (which got rich from exploiting black miners in apartheid South Africa). InfoAmazônia revealed in November 2020 that these applications made by Anglo American to mine in indigenous land in Mato Grasso and Pará had been approved by the National Mining Agency (ANM), regardless of the constitutional prohibition.

Worse, during the pandemic, when the Tapajós River basin had the highest mortality rate of all Brazil’s Indigenous health districts in Brazil, security forces were withdrawn from the region and, encouraged by soaring gold prices, the garimpeiros—poor, often desperate people, little able to resist the government’s nefarious plans for them—came in their thousands, setting up hundreds of illegal mining sites, invading protected Indigenous lands, poisoning the rivers, and infecting otherwise isolated communities. In May 2020 Environment minister Ricardo Salles demanded that the government should “make the most of the distractions arising from the pandemic” to bypass congress and push through further deregulation of environmental policy.

Not all the destruction of Indigenous lands has come from the right and, even if Bolsonaro is ousted and replaced by a progressive government in the elections of October this year, there is no guarantee it will stop. Yet, Brazil’s present situation is screaming out that past “development” models must be dropped. Another approach based on ancient knowledge is essential. In this regard, Brazil is fortunate that it still has groups of people who know how to live in harmony with the land. Now it needs a government that is willing to learn about it and apply it.

One major threat to the whole country today is development planning based on hydroelectric power generated by Amazon rivers, in which forty-three plants were initially envisaged. One of them—as Andy Robinson details in his excellent Gold, Oil and Avocadoes: A Recent History of Latin America in Sixteen Commodities (this article isn’t a review, but we strongly recommend this book)—was the São Luiz do Tapajós project, the second largest hydroelectric dam in Brazil after Belo Monte on the seasonably variable Xingu River, also in Pará state, and the key project of Lula’s Programme to Accelerate Growth of his second term in office. Largely thanks to Munduruku resistance, partly consisting of GPS-aided militant cartography, mapping as a strategy for community empowerment, defence of the land, producing evidence in the country’s courts, visibility, confrontation, insistence on rights, and self-determination, theSão Luiz do Tapajós project was shelved. The maps, made with cutting-edge technology and incorporating the places and narratives of ancient, mythological cosmology are used as evidence in community meetings and to challenge official maps expressing the ontology and geography of the state and of colonising intentions, scientifically rebutting the pronouncements of powerful figures like Maurício Tolmasquin, former Deputy Minister and Interim Minister for Mines and Energy in Lula’s first mandate who declared that there is “no human occupation” of land where the São Luiz and Jatobá plants were planned for the Tapajós River.

In fact, the struggles of the Amazon’s Indigenous peoples have drawn attention to the lies and misconceptions, taught by an imperial culture that believes it is superior. In his magnum opus 1499: o Brasil antes de Cabral (2017), which took Reinaldo José Lopes fifteen years to write because of the enormous amount of material he was handling, from the fields of archaeology, palaeontology and evolutionary biology amongst others, he shows that there were probably about eight million people in the Amazon rainforest before the Europeans arrived, living in multi-ethnic, politically organised groups of around 50,000 inhabitants, with complex trade networks and sophisticated artistic traditions. They built monumental squares and “a dense network of roads up to tens of metres wide; dykes and moats several metres deep that would be the envy of medieval castles, signs of large defensive palisades” (p. 12). And achieved, as Lopes told Andy Robinson (p. 328), “a subtle and gradual integration between inhabited areas, parks, and forested landscape”. The parks were “areas of managed forest that served as a source of food, medicine, construction materials, or an inspiration for art, sculpture, and worship”. The Portuguese and Spanish arms, cavalry, and strategy didn’t wipe out the people and their culture. Microorganisms brought by Europeans and their animals did most of the slaughter for them.

The vital point for Indigenous peoples fighting for their land and the rest of us who could learn from them, but that is largely ignored today (for example, Lopes’ important book isn’t translated into English) is that large areas of the Amazon jungle in the early twenty-first century, far from being virgin nature, were in fact “the result of a complex relationship between the raw material of biodiversity and human culture,” (Robinson citing Lopes, p.330). The “Amazonian flora is in part a surviving heritage of its past inhabitants” or as Manaus-based researcher, Charles Clementsays, “even areas of the Amazon that look empty today are crowded with ancient footprints”. Citing Lopes, Robinson writes, “The egalitarian orchard cities and cultural parklands that spread through the Amazon under collective land management and communal property before the arrival of the Europeans should be models even today” (p. 332).

The name “Amazon” is misleading. “There isn’t ‘one’ Amazon, but an immense variety of so-called ‘terra firme’ and flooded forests, areas of savannas and open fields, forests more or less subject to drought and even one or another mountainous region” (Lopes 2017: 86). The history of names is often a way of getting to the basics of the history of a concept, place, or object. In the case of “Amazon”, it tells a story of Indigenous peoples and colonial intrusion. Roughly speaking, multiple names refer to precolonial times and the single name to the colonial and postcolonial identity or, in other words, to insider and outsider stories.

Before Columbus reached the shores of South America, the river, the area, and rainforest had no general name as each tribe had its own name according to the area it occupied and its cultural and linguistic traditions. The Tupí-Guaraní tribes called the river Paranaguazu (Great Relative of the Sea), while the name given by the Amara Mayu meant “Mother Serpent of the World”. The conquistadores had other ideas. They had indiscriminate plans for conquering the whole area so, in 1500, Vicente Yáñez Pinzón, commander of a Spanish expedition, after venturing some 50 miles upriver from the sea, called it Río Santa Maria de la Mar Dulce (St. Mary’s River of the Freshwater Sea), thus imposing the Catholic religious motif on a notion of the river’s great size. By 1502, it was known as Río Grande and, by 1515, Río Marañon, a name that is believed by some to derive from the Spanish word maraña (tangled mess), which now shifts from the river’s size to the difficulties of navigating it (for foreigners but not Indigenous people with their small craft and intimate knowledge of their habitat).

In 1541, the Spaniard Francisco de Orellana made the first descent along the river from the Andes to the sea. It is believed that, after a battle with a Pira-tapuya tribe in 1542, in which women fought alongside men, he began to refer to the “river of the Amazons”, thus evoking the mythical women warrior tribe of Amazons of Asia as described by the Greeks Herodotus and Diodorus. And the Amazon was like a woman to be ravished so, for Walter Raleigh, writing to his London financers, Guyana was a “country that hath yet her maidenhead, never sacked, turned, nor wrought; the face of the earth hath not been torn… never conquered or possessed”. The naming history shows different ways of thinking about the Amazon, one group suggesting respectful coexistence with the particularities of its different places, and the other conquest, imposing outside values, and wholesale pillage. Now, as befits the second way, “Amazon” has been appropriated by the world’s wealthiest man, Jeff Bezos to designate the world’s “No. 1 evil tech company”, at least partly because it suggests hugeness. These two world views—grandiose wholesale seizure and caring attention to local particularities—are manifested today in the form of the effects of mass destruction of the Amazon and resistance against it. Many scientists are trying to tell us that the only way it can be saved is by learning from the latter.

The Munduruku and other Indigenous rain forest defenders have shown up not only racism, corruption, violence, and incompetence in government circles, the turning of environmental licencing processes into mere rubber stamping, and weakness of laws but, with their history and their present actions they’re also challenging the damage caused by and failures of western ideas of development (including the Programme to Accelerate Growth) at a time when the whole planet is critically endangered by them. Dams aren’t just dams. Those already constructed and those in the pipeline on the Tapajós, Teles Pires and Juruena rivers, for example, through partnerships involving the Brazilian state energy company and enterprises from countries including China, France, Portugal and Spain, are also planned to provide cheap river routes for commodities like soy through to the Atlantic, and energy for exploiting the forest’s mineral reserves.

For the last ten years the Munduruku resistance movement Ipereğ Ayũ (I am strong, I can protect myself), now opposing dam projects beyond the Tapajós, has been focusing on environmental impact studies, joining with the Beiradeiros people to demand their right to be consulted as stipulated in Article 231 of the Constitution and with the ILO Convention No. 169 on Indigenous and Tribal Peoples (ratified by only 23 countries in 2019). They’ve produced their own ‘consultation protocols’ stating how they should be informed of government projects and the ways they would take collective decisions in keeping with their own cultural specificities. But the then Rousseff government responded with Operation Tapajós, sending heavily armed personnel to accompany researchers carrying out technical studies for the dam projects, because the region was “dangerous”. For the Indigenous inhabitants, the word pesquisador(researcher) was extremely negative as it had come to mean people working for the dam consortiums.

Finally, they won the battle, but probably not the war. The São Luiz do Tapajós project was suspended when IBAMA, the Environment Agency responsible for conceding the licence found that the Environmental Impact Studies were inadequate and unconstitutional. But the Belo Monte dam and the Teles Pires and São Manoel dams went ahead, although they didn’t meet the requirements of FUNAI (National Indian Foundation) and IPHAN (National Institute of Historic and Artistic Heritage) and it was found that the Environmental Impact Studies of both these dams systematically played down the risks and negative impacts of their construction. Some of these have become glaringly obvious with the Belo Monte dam which, for example, has spawned the violent, crime-ridden town of Altamira, which is sending its raw sewage into the Xingu because of lack of infrastructure. Apart from the social and environmental damage it has caused, the dam produces, even in high water season, just a fraction of the 11,233 MW per monthbragged about by its promotors and builders because the Amazon rivers with their changing seasonal rhythms are not amenable to this kind of harnessing. But not everyone loses. The $US10 billion project went ahead since there were mega-profits to be made from its construction. Bret Millikan of the NGO International Rivers observes, “There were big construction companies and political interests connecting to them through patronage networks, kickback schemes, and so forth, that stood to just make huge amounts of money from [building it]. I think part of the evidence for that is that all of those big construction companies all migrated away from Belo Monte’s [energy generation] investors.”

Now the cascade (literally: the famous Iguaçu Falls are now a mere trickle) effect is happening. Thanks to the combined effects of deforestation and drought, hydroelectric plants are operating at well below capacity (29%) in a “critical shortage of water resources”, energy and food prices are rising, and electricity rationing looms. For Bolsonaro, it’s simply a matter of bad luck: “This lack of rain. We’ve been really unlucky”. Scientists say otherwise: ongoing deforestation and global warning act together in a lethal loop (schematically shown in diagrammatic formbelow) making the rainforest more flammable than ever. And without the rios voladores—southward moving airborne rivers bearing twenty billion tonnes of water vapour (by comparison with the 17 billion tonnes discharged every day into the Atlantic by the Amazon river) of water vapour every day per day, exhaled by rainforest trees)—central and southern Brazil, with all the towns and cities, including São Paulo, Rio de Janeiro and Belo Horizonte, could become desert.

Over 400 years, the whole Amazon Indian population has shrunk to perhaps 200,000. Everything we see now in the climate catastrophe is related with this figure. People, animals, birds, plants, habitats, rivers, soil, air, heat, water, winds, rain, not to mention wisdom, beauty, and human and animal rights, have been so harmed and desecrated that the whole planet is gravely affected. In 1972, Ursula Le Guin summed up what humans must learn with the title of one of her books, The Word for World Is Forest. But what we see today isn’t science fiction. If earthly forest dwellers have always understood their habitat as a world, a cosmos, a well-ordered whole of many harmoniously interacting parts, they also know that damaging the forest means damaging the world, perhaps beyond repair. In a letter they wrote to politicians in 2013, the Munduruku leaders warned, “People want to transform our precious wealth into business. What do they want to reach with this destruction, when we preserve and the destroyers tell us, who are keeping the balance in nature, that we are destroying it. This is opposed to our way of thinking. We never destroy our natural heritage, we are concerned about keeping it so as not to be destroyed ourselves. Man is not only destroying nature, he is destroying his own human nature. This they do not understand, they are destroying themselves.”