[rothstei] Jeez, bud. Where do you come up with this shiit?
[Adam] Hyperlinks, man. When you're drunk, they do the thinking for you. I'm going to watch Aeon Flux (flucks) now.
[begin surfing...]
A Little History Lesson
Consider, if you will, the following:
GOERING: Naturally, the common people don't want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leader of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drage the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliment or a Communist dictatorship.
GILBERT: There is one difference. In a democracy, the people have some say in the matter through their elected representatives, and in the United States only Congress can declare wars.
GOERING: Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do it tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and (for) exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country.
-Nuremberg Diary, 1947.
[link!]
In total, over 200,000 prisoners from more than 30 countries were housed in Dachau. Camp records list 130,000 persons killed in the camp, with thousands more who died due to the conditions in the camp. In early 1945, there was a typhus epidemic in the camp followed by an evacuation, in which large numbers of the weaker prisoners died.
In the last war months the conditions were catastrophic in the camp. Due to continual new transportations from the front the camp was constantly overcrowded, the hygenic conditions were beneath human dignity. Starting from the end of 1944 up to the day of liberation 15000 people died, about half of all victims in KZ Dachau. On 27 April Victor Mauer, delegates of the International Committee of the Red Cross, was allowed to enter camps and distribute food. In the evening of the same day a prisoner transport arrived from Buchenwald. Only 800 survivors were brought from originally 4,480 to 4,800 persons in transit. Over 2,300 corpses were let lie in and around the train.
[link!]
The last leader of the camp's prisoners was Oskar Müller (an imprisoned German anti-fascist), who later became minister of labor for Hesse. According to the report of Father Johannes Maria Lenz, Müller sent two prisoners to bring the U.S. Army to free the camp, because orders had come to kill all the prisoners.
U.S. soldiers, shocked at what they discovered in the concentration camp, randomly shot and killed an estimated 50 to 120 German SS-Totenkopfverbände guards as they attempted to surrender.
Adjoining buildings included a Waffen-SS training camp and a Red Cross-marked hospital housing wounded soldiers from the Eastern Front who had been found unfit for duty. US soldiers entered the hospital and ordered everyone out. The American GIs decided to separate the guards from Wehrmacht soldiers; however, this was not done carefully. It is alleged that those killed then included members of the regular Wehrmacht and the Waffen-SS combat troops, as well as Axis volunteers from Germany, Hungary, the Netherlands, and Denmark. As soon as the shooting started, the battalion commander, Colonel Felix L. Sparks, was alerted by the sound of gunfire and ran over to stop the shooting, but nevertheless at least 12 were machine-gunned to death. According to the testimony of a German survivor, the wounded were given razor blades by US medics to "finish themselves off."
After the hospital shooting, the U.S. soldiers gave a number of handguns to the now liberated inmates. It has been claimed by witnesses that they tortured and killed an estimated 40 more German soldiers, either SS guard-staff or regular troops. The same witnesses claim that many of the German soldiers killed by the inmates were beaten to death with shovels and other tools. Numerous Kapo prisoner-guards were also brutally killed by the inmates.
[link!]
Robert Byrd (Sen-D, W. Virgina) read that quote from The Nuremberg Diary when voicing his opposition to the war in Iraq in 2003. In 1945 Dachau was liberated, part of the Final Solution which Goering had designed. In that year Robert Byrd was a member of the Klu Klux Klan. At that time Byrd vowed never to fight: "with a Negro by my side. Rather I should die a thousand times, and see Old Glory trampled in the dirt never to rise again, than to see this beloved land of ours become degraded by race mongrels, a throwback to the blackest specimen from the wilds."
[link!]
Sources: Goering, Nuremberg Diary, Robert Byrd, Dachau Liberation, Dachau, Dachau Masssacre
Have a nice day, human.
11.18.2006
Google me, baby...
Whoa! 3 out of the top 5 Google hits for me are actually me! Although, one is the talk page of my Wikipedia identity... hmm. On the second page is the S&B letters to the editor responding to my letter about pro-lifery and fascism... HA! Those brought up some funny memories, and really reminded me of what jackasses people are (I suggested in my letter if people doubted my invocation of fascism to read Adorno's analysis [pretentious, true] and someone responded by looking up "fascism" on dictionary.com!!! Hooray!!!). I really hope that shit turns up when I apply for a job.
11.16.2006
Mexico's Dirty War
A letter from UC Berkeley Scholars to Fox protesting the actions of the government in Oaxaca. At least some scholars are interested in what is going on. Not too many non-hispanic last names on it though...
The makings of a Mexican Dirty War.
Also, the AP (end of article) is reporting (in fully complicity with the Mexican government) that Brad Will was shot by the APPO, although all the photographs, video (including Brad's own video), and witnesses of the shooting contradict this account. The evidence cited is that the corner's report found the gunshot was point blank (you can clearly see in the photograph (warning: graphic) that it is not a point blank shot). This is also the reason that the murderers were released from custody. FUCKED UP, Associated Press.
when they kick at your front door
how you gonna come
with your hands on your head
or on the trigger of your gun
The makings of a Mexican Dirty War.
Also, the AP (end of article) is reporting (in fully complicity with the Mexican government) that Brad Will was shot by the APPO, although all the photographs, video (including Brad's own video), and witnesses of the shooting contradict this account. The evidence cited is that the corner's report found the gunshot was point blank (you can clearly see in the photograph (warning: graphic) that it is not a point blank shot). This is also the reason that the murderers were released from custody. FUCKED UP, Associated Press.
when they kick at your front door
how you gonna come
with your hands on your head
or on the trigger of your gun
11.14.2006
Some Oaxaca Updates
Although the crisis is far from over, it seems that things have calmed down by degrees. I'll continue to post more as I find it. Here is some better stuff.
A nice testimony of Brad Will and the cause of Indymedia
A chronicle of the Oct. 29 invasion of Oaxaca, apparently to be continued
A detailed recap of Oaxaca, plus commentary in the context of the over-all social justice movement from Foreign Policy in Focus and International Relations Center, social justice think-tanks. While it isn't too in depth, if you don't feel my pseudo-anarchist/freudian death-drive tendencies yet are at all interested in social justice you should give it a read.
A nice testimony of Brad Will and the cause of Indymedia
A chronicle of the Oct. 29 invasion of Oaxaca, apparently to be continued
A detailed recap of Oaxaca, plus commentary in the context of the over-all social justice movement from Foreign Policy in Focus and International Relations Center, social justice think-tanks. While it isn't too in depth, if you don't feel my pseudo-anarchist/freudian death-drive tendencies yet are at all interested in social justice you should give it a read.
11.03.2006
Oaxaca Update: Some Political Analysis
The most current Oaxaca update I've found yet... I'm going to keep looking throughout the day, so forgive the constant plan edits.
This is interesting because it describes some protester tactics. Bottle rockets with nails? Shit yo. It is the Post, but I think that is accurate because I read on the Universidad radio transcripts people requesting people to bring bottles (for gasoline) and fireworks.
Political Analysis
I've been doing main "reporting" on Oaxaca, for the most part. No real political analysis. This is because the events are happening, and that is what I think is most important, really, not what it "means". But as I've been uncovering more information, and reading more about the background of what is happening and politics in Mexico in general, there is some stuff I think that should be taken in mind when hearing about what is going on. That is, it is how I take it in mind, and therefore I offer it to you as a way that you might take it, although you no dobut have your own ways of understanding politics, history, etc.
I think that every person probably has some "political" (in the sense of "actionable thought", something that may make you take an action of some sort) response when they heard about something that has happened, even if this response is uninterest or nothing at all. You have to form an opinion about things, even if your opinion is materially empty. With Oaxaca and most history, I think what is most important is that people hear about it so that they can form this opinion. I hate how history like this tends to just sink in the flood of information and whatever else that fills up our american lives, and get forgotten or never even heard of to begin with. Even if you have no real thought about it after hearing about it, I would rather that [you] hear about this rather than other stuff that's going on in the world, because I think it particularly has the potential to create important opinions regarding the way states, peoples, and power interact. Then again, maybe not. That's for you to decide.
I'm hoping, that once you do hear about it, you will in fact have an opinion with content, perhaps even rich with content. Maybe you don't become an anarchist/activist/martyr/whatever, but maybe you will stop and reflect on what sort of conditions would lead to such a situation, and take that to heart if/when the time comes that you have to opportunity to make some sort of a decision that is relevant to a similar/analogous situation. Again, maybe you won't do this at all, but hey, at least I tried.
If you're still reading, hooray! Maybe you are interested! (It actually doesn't matter anyway, cause this is all for me and not you, so there).
So, this article is a perfect example of what I'm NOT interested in by way of "being political" (actionable thought). You can read it if you want, it is somewhat interesting. But to summerize, it is basically a call to arms by some Trotskyite organization, and it is stupid. (The best part reads: "Let us pass from declarations to deeds. Let us vote on a tentative date now!" Who let that be published?) I'm not even really interested in an anarchist pro-APPO position either, which is the direction indymedia and infoshop and the Other Campaign are coming from. I probably sympathize with anarchists more than any other political "position" (thats a whole other story) but I'm not convinced that the APPO even self-indentify as anarchists, despite the "circle-a"'s in the local Oaxaca graffitti. It's really hard to determine who the APPO is, actually. Their website (while being suprisingly Flash-y... I wonder who is behind their technological setup? The Universidad radio is somehow also simulcast on the internet even though the power to the University was cut) doesn't translate into english, and all secondary reports just mention vague things about solidarity and non-violence.
Point is, its hard to say anything real about what the "politics" (in the usual sense of the term, more like ideology) of the situation is. The only thing that is definite about the situation is that people are fighting against each other for "control" of an area, and alot of people are being hurt. (an interesting discussion along these lines is going down on the wikipedia talk page of the APPO article.)
Now, some people would choose to side with the police in favor of "law and order" (my favorite tv show) and some would side with the people in favor of "freedom", or "liberty", or something else, and that is how those people would form an actionable thought of the situation, and form their opinion, in the lack of any ideological basis for sympathies. Not necessarily a bad way to form an opinion.
But what I think is really interesting is that while the institutional forces in the situation, the government, the police, the political parties, the richer classes, are all interested in basically resolving the situation with some stability of power (even the Trotskyite communique wanted to form a movement out of what's going on, and so does the stated goal of the APPO) the people who are actually facing off against the government and their paramilitary gangs in the streets are interested in fighting. Pretty much just straight up. They want autonomy, sure, but these demands only arose after they were confronted, first when cops arrived back in June, and then recently this weekend as they were pushed out of the Zocalo. Before that it was a teacher strike. Now the strike is unimportant, and they are fighting for "ground". First it was the Zocalo, then the University. It's not property, like their homes or fields or stuff, but literally the ground beneath their feet and the streets of their city. I don't know if they have some well-defined notion of what this ground means to them or not, or whether they have a fully developed critique of how their are tired of being opressed by the social and political institutions and now they are fighting back. But its almost the most radical (in the sense of the root) sort of class-consciousness that could exist; some sort of unconscious (not in the technical sense) thinking process that decides NOW is the time when they won't just go home, but they will tear down their beautiful city to make a point, some sort of point, about their claims to do what they want to it. Maybe its all just some sort of mob group-think; that is totally possible. But you would think that under pressure of basically ever institution abandoning them to the violence of police and army force, if it was just a sort of spur of the moment thing, it would easily be dispelled once people starting getting killed. The mob would turn and run. But it didn't for some reason, it only dug in and fought harder. Maybe they felt they didn't have anywhere to go, or maybe they underwent some sort of suicidal pscyhosis, or maybe they are brainwashed by their own ideals and slogans into thinking they are morally correct. Who knows? It doesn't really matter why, because probably its a combination, and different for different people.
But what we know is that they aren't giving up. And the government, if it wants to retain control over Oaxaca, can't give up either. So what is going to happen? Will the government simply kill or arrest everyone? Its happened before. Or will the government give up, and give Oaxaca some sort of autonomous control over itself? What will the people do then, once they have to clean up their own city and figure out how to govern themselves? Or will something else happen? I really don't know, and don't want to guess, because I don't see any really awesome answers rising out of this war.
The one conclusion I can come to is that I support the people above all. Not knowing why they fight, I still support them simply because they are fighting. If a people is going to put themselves into a horrible war even at a disadvantage, with no weapons, all over some sense of a ground, I don't think anyone can tell them that they are wrong for any real reason, just it is difficult to say precisely why they might be right. Maybe they are going about it all wrong, or maybe they are just gangs roving a city looking for violence (although I doubt that). But, it is completely obvious that sending a police state to fight them is not a legitimate answer, and therefore the attacking of that police force becomes the only answer now. I'm not saying this is their thought process, I'm saying it is mine. If the police cared about law and order, they would not have attacked the Zocalo to begin with. Now it is too late. If any one does care about law and order they would stop parading uniformed state officers around, and actually work on resolving the problem. Given that, anyone opposing the police (the police in Oaxaca that is) is merely responding naturally to state oppression. I mean that. Even if they are looting, and spray painting, and burning property. Because the police arrived, all the rest of those small ethics is put to the side. I know that must sound really weird, but I think its true. Because none of those "small" ethics can be fixed right now, not while the police and the APPO (or whoever it is) are fighting. "Polishing the silver on the Titanic" comes to mind. How can you expect to create a just society by oppressing people? Not in the sense that Opression is the opposite of Justice, but in the sense that when you are an institution oppressing a people it is really hard to get them to form a civilized society at the same time. It is illogical, and therefore the opposition of that move becomes the only sensible alternative. If there are to be institutions, fine, but they should not act suprised if the people become unhappy with them to the point that they refuse to cooperate. And once they have refused to cooperate, the institution should cease to exist, because trying to earn cooperation by force, especially violent force, is not going to win them back. For me it really comes down to what makes sense at the time. Right now, the only thing that makes sense is for the state to be repelled until it withdraws, and the violence stops. That is the only way the violence will stop, and therefore it is the only thing to do. This is what most idealists can't understand about resistance, and why their pacifism is stupid. Even if your resistance is non-violent, it must be resistance, and cannot give in, otherwise it ceases to be resistance, and becomes merely an impediment and an obstacle to be cleared. That is not pacifistic. It is this radical reaction of violence (although not necessarily physical violence) that I am talking about, this sort of force which would draw people into the streets and to the barricades, and this is here entirely different than institutional violence (ordered by someone or something) or mob violence (doing it because everyone else is). This is the only kind of violence (I reiterate, not necessarily physical violence) that I support, simply because it is the sort of violence that cannot be opposed, it can only run its course.
This is the opinion that I take away from observing the situation, and I think it is a very important lesson as well. Whether its fully correct, given my blind-observer position, I don't know. And I doubt many other people will reach a similar conclusion, for reasons that I won't speculate on right now. But I do think that it is still important to look at violent situations like this and try to think about why what is happening is happening, and maybe take an opinion away from it. Especially when its so close to home.
This is interesting because it describes some protester tactics. Bottle rockets with nails? Shit yo. It is the Post, but I think that is accurate because I read on the Universidad radio transcripts people requesting people to bring bottles (for gasoline) and fireworks.
Political Analysis
I've been doing main "reporting" on Oaxaca, for the most part. No real political analysis. This is because the events are happening, and that is what I think is most important, really, not what it "means". But as I've been uncovering more information, and reading more about the background of what is happening and politics in Mexico in general, there is some stuff I think that should be taken in mind when hearing about what is going on. That is, it is how I take it in mind, and therefore I offer it to you as a way that you might take it, although you no dobut have your own ways of understanding politics, history, etc.
I think that every person probably has some "political" (in the sense of "actionable thought", something that may make you take an action of some sort) response when they heard about something that has happened, even if this response is uninterest or nothing at all. You have to form an opinion about things, even if your opinion is materially empty. With Oaxaca and most history, I think what is most important is that people hear about it so that they can form this opinion. I hate how history like this tends to just sink in the flood of information and whatever else that fills up our american lives, and get forgotten or never even heard of to begin with. Even if you have no real thought about it after hearing about it, I would rather that [you] hear about this rather than other stuff that's going on in the world, because I think it particularly has the potential to create important opinions regarding the way states, peoples, and power interact. Then again, maybe not. That's for you to decide.
I'm hoping, that once you do hear about it, you will in fact have an opinion with content, perhaps even rich with content. Maybe you don't become an anarchist/activist/martyr/whatever, but maybe you will stop and reflect on what sort of conditions would lead to such a situation, and take that to heart if/when the time comes that you have to opportunity to make some sort of a decision that is relevant to a similar/analogous situation. Again, maybe you won't do this at all, but hey, at least I tried.
If you're still reading, hooray! Maybe you are interested! (It actually doesn't matter anyway, cause this is all for me and not you, so there).
So, this article is a perfect example of what I'm NOT interested in by way of "being political" (actionable thought). You can read it if you want, it is somewhat interesting. But to summerize, it is basically a call to arms by some Trotskyite organization, and it is stupid. (The best part reads: "Let us pass from declarations to deeds. Let us vote on a tentative date now!" Who let that be published?) I'm not even really interested in an anarchist pro-APPO position either, which is the direction indymedia and infoshop and the Other Campaign are coming from. I probably sympathize with anarchists more than any other political "position" (thats a whole other story) but I'm not convinced that the APPO even self-indentify as anarchists, despite the "circle-a"'s in the local Oaxaca graffitti. It's really hard to determine who the APPO is, actually. Their website (while being suprisingly Flash-y... I wonder who is behind their technological setup? The Universidad radio is somehow also simulcast on the internet even though the power to the University was cut) doesn't translate into english, and all secondary reports just mention vague things about solidarity and non-violence.
Point is, its hard to say anything real about what the "politics" (in the usual sense of the term, more like ideology) of the situation is. The only thing that is definite about the situation is that people are fighting against each other for "control" of an area, and alot of people are being hurt. (an interesting discussion along these lines is going down on the wikipedia talk page of the APPO article.)
Now, some people would choose to side with the police in favor of "law and order" (my favorite tv show) and some would side with the people in favor of "freedom", or "liberty", or something else, and that is how those people would form an actionable thought of the situation, and form their opinion, in the lack of any ideological basis for sympathies. Not necessarily a bad way to form an opinion.
But what I think is really interesting is that while the institutional forces in the situation, the government, the police, the political parties, the richer classes, are all interested in basically resolving the situation with some stability of power (even the Trotskyite communique wanted to form a movement out of what's going on, and so does the stated goal of the APPO) the people who are actually facing off against the government and their paramilitary gangs in the streets are interested in fighting. Pretty much just straight up. They want autonomy, sure, but these demands only arose after they were confronted, first when cops arrived back in June, and then recently this weekend as they were pushed out of the Zocalo. Before that it was a teacher strike. Now the strike is unimportant, and they are fighting for "ground". First it was the Zocalo, then the University. It's not property, like their homes or fields or stuff, but literally the ground beneath their feet and the streets of their city. I don't know if they have some well-defined notion of what this ground means to them or not, or whether they have a fully developed critique of how their are tired of being opressed by the social and political institutions and now they are fighting back. But its almost the most radical (in the sense of the root) sort of class-consciousness that could exist; some sort of unconscious (not in the technical sense) thinking process that decides NOW is the time when they won't just go home, but they will tear down their beautiful city to make a point, some sort of point, about their claims to do what they want to it. Maybe its all just some sort of mob group-think; that is totally possible. But you would think that under pressure of basically ever institution abandoning them to the violence of police and army force, if it was just a sort of spur of the moment thing, it would easily be dispelled once people starting getting killed. The mob would turn and run. But it didn't for some reason, it only dug in and fought harder. Maybe they felt they didn't have anywhere to go, or maybe they underwent some sort of suicidal pscyhosis, or maybe they are brainwashed by their own ideals and slogans into thinking they are morally correct. Who knows? It doesn't really matter why, because probably its a combination, and different for different people.
But what we know is that they aren't giving up. And the government, if it wants to retain control over Oaxaca, can't give up either. So what is going to happen? Will the government simply kill or arrest everyone? Its happened before. Or will the government give up, and give Oaxaca some sort of autonomous control over itself? What will the people do then, once they have to clean up their own city and figure out how to govern themselves? Or will something else happen? I really don't know, and don't want to guess, because I don't see any really awesome answers rising out of this war.
The one conclusion I can come to is that I support the people above all. Not knowing why they fight, I still support them simply because they are fighting. If a people is going to put themselves into a horrible war even at a disadvantage, with no weapons, all over some sense of a ground, I don't think anyone can tell them that they are wrong for any real reason, just it is difficult to say precisely why they might be right. Maybe they are going about it all wrong, or maybe they are just gangs roving a city looking for violence (although I doubt that). But, it is completely obvious that sending a police state to fight them is not a legitimate answer, and therefore the attacking of that police force becomes the only answer now. I'm not saying this is their thought process, I'm saying it is mine. If the police cared about law and order, they would not have attacked the Zocalo to begin with. Now it is too late. If any one does care about law and order they would stop parading uniformed state officers around, and actually work on resolving the problem. Given that, anyone opposing the police (the police in Oaxaca that is) is merely responding naturally to state oppression. I mean that. Even if they are looting, and spray painting, and burning property. Because the police arrived, all the rest of those small ethics is put to the side. I know that must sound really weird, but I think its true. Because none of those "small" ethics can be fixed right now, not while the police and the APPO (or whoever it is) are fighting. "Polishing the silver on the Titanic" comes to mind. How can you expect to create a just society by oppressing people? Not in the sense that Opression is the opposite of Justice, but in the sense that when you are an institution oppressing a people it is really hard to get them to form a civilized society at the same time. It is illogical, and therefore the opposition of that move becomes the only sensible alternative. If there are to be institutions, fine, but they should not act suprised if the people become unhappy with them to the point that they refuse to cooperate. And once they have refused to cooperate, the institution should cease to exist, because trying to earn cooperation by force, especially violent force, is not going to win them back. For me it really comes down to what makes sense at the time. Right now, the only thing that makes sense is for the state to be repelled until it withdraws, and the violence stops. That is the only way the violence will stop, and therefore it is the only thing to do. This is what most idealists can't understand about resistance, and why their pacifism is stupid. Even if your resistance is non-violent, it must be resistance, and cannot give in, otherwise it ceases to be resistance, and becomes merely an impediment and an obstacle to be cleared. That is not pacifistic. It is this radical reaction of violence (although not necessarily physical violence) that I am talking about, this sort of force which would draw people into the streets and to the barricades, and this is here entirely different than institutional violence (ordered by someone or something) or mob violence (doing it because everyone else is). This is the only kind of violence (I reiterate, not necessarily physical violence) that I support, simply because it is the sort of violence that cannot be opposed, it can only run its course.
This is the opinion that I take away from observing the situation, and I think it is a very important lesson as well. Whether its fully correct, given my blind-observer position, I don't know. And I doubt many other people will reach a similar conclusion, for reasons that I won't speculate on right now. But I do think that it is still important to look at violent situations like this and try to think about why what is happening is happening, and maybe take an opinion away from it. Especially when its so close to home.
11.02.2006
The Death of the University
Director of the University to police: "Leave this place; you are attempting to fight against history"
It's unfolding right now, so it is hard to say what is precisely going on, but the National Police are attacking the University in Oaxaca, trying to destroy the radio station that has been a unifying force for the APPO. The APPO is calling for nonviolent resistance, although there has been rock throwing at the police they are trying to calm it down and resist nonviolently to prevent more deaths. However, it doesn't seem like this is a very unified position. It is hard to follow the translated stream but it seems like a battle. Anyway, here is the indymedia source, which is the most recently updating thing I can find right now.
Just to reiterate, this is like Kent State to the third power. If you are interested in this, you need to be. Please spread the word about this because there is zero coverage in the international news, and even if it all ends today (which it won't), people need to hear about this and remember what happened.
Update: a more easily readable timeline of events at the University
It's unfolding right now, so it is hard to say what is precisely going on, but the National Police are attacking the University in Oaxaca, trying to destroy the radio station that has been a unifying force for the APPO. The APPO is calling for nonviolent resistance, although there has been rock throwing at the police they are trying to calm it down and resist nonviolently to prevent more deaths. However, it doesn't seem like this is a very unified position. It is hard to follow the translated stream but it seems like a battle. Anyway, here is the indymedia source, which is the most recently updating thing I can find right now.
Just to reiterate, this is like Kent State to the third power. If you are interested in this, you need to be. Please spread the word about this because there is zero coverage in the international news, and even if it all ends today (which it won't), people need to hear about this and remember what happened.
Update: a more easily readable timeline of events at the University
11.01.2006
Oaxaca (if you don't know now you do)
Top Story (notice at bottom the next biggest headline is Reese splitting with Ryan)
More Story (more than a graphic of a burning car)
True Story
Background Story
More
More Story (more than a graphic of a burning car)
True Story
Background Story
More
Oaxaca, and Brad Will
I found out last night that a friend of mine in the department was a friend of Brad. Brad Will was the "one American" killed in Oaxaca this past weekend. If you are finding out about this for the first time, scroll up to my original post on Oaxaca and read the "True Story" link. As you can expect, my friend Jacob is pretty broken up about this, alot of people are. They are all involved in various campaigns, causes and movements involving Latin America, immigrant and worker rights, etc. so they were probably as aware as anyone of what was/is going down in Oaxaca, but still they did not expect to lose someone so close to them in so violent a way. I guess there isn't really anyway to prepare yourself for that.
Now, while the American media ignores Oaxaca, Brad, and everything else important, Fox and the Mexican government are using Brad's death as a "reason" for the national police's repression of the APPO. Although most media that is covering the events are portraying it as "over", what with the police's whitewash of the main square, there are still barricades set up in the city, as far as I can find out the APPO's radio is still broadcasting, and the University is still in the hands of the people. If you listen to any of the actual people in the city (as in Brad's video) it doesn't sound like everyone will just go "back to work" any time soon.
I know, we are all busy, jaded, uninterested people. Maybe you don't even really follow politics, or world events. But really, if you care AT ALL about human rights, self-determination in governance, or authoritarian repression YOU MUST follow this issue. This is a government using its own "protective" force to kill its own people, in the name of those people. We can find a thousand instances of this in history, but this is not yet history, it is still the present. It is happening TODAY, AT THIS VERY MINUTE, in a country that shares a border with this one.
Read these articles. Watch Brad's video. Find out what you can and tell other people, because CNN sure as hell won't. There were protests at embassies and consulates in 14 American cities on Monday. I'm not sure when there will be more, but there will be. Go to your local IndyMedia site to find out about local events, or if you are in an activist community/organization, organize your own. I'll post about events in NYC on my plan.
I'm not saying that just because an American was killed now all of sudden we should care about Oaxaca. But I think it does humanize death in a way that simple information cannot. The people you will see in the video standing up to gunfire know what a bullet can do in a way that even watching it doesn't transmit. Any of them could have been hit by that bullet, and some were hit by bullets. But they stood up anyway, because it was either facing the bullets or living a life that they did not want to live as it was. That is why I posted the video and graphic picture, not to make him seem like a victim, but to show what the people of Oaxaca are standing up against. If it is disturbing to you, it is because you can see the humanity in it. They believed enough for that, and Brad believed in them enough to stand and face the bullets with them in order to tell their story. Although I never met him, this is the story that I've heard from those who did. Dying doesn't make him a martyr, but I think every person should reflect on it and try to understand how people could believe so strongly. And if we understand that believe, I think we have no human choice but to support them however we can.
A good article that portrays the divide in the city.
Day of the Dead
NYC represents for Brad
Last report of Brad Will (It's shaky, understandably so. But the interviews are good and it does give a very strong impression of what its like to defend a barricade.)
Brad Will - Shot (careful, this one is graphic) - His killer, again They are reported to be cops working as paramilitary hit squads for Ruiz.
General Oaxaca Pictures:1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Now, while the American media ignores Oaxaca, Brad, and everything else important, Fox and the Mexican government are using Brad's death as a "reason" for the national police's repression of the APPO. Although most media that is covering the events are portraying it as "over", what with the police's whitewash of the main square, there are still barricades set up in the city, as far as I can find out the APPO's radio is still broadcasting, and the University is still in the hands of the people. If you listen to any of the actual people in the city (as in Brad's video) it doesn't sound like everyone will just go "back to work" any time soon.
I know, we are all busy, jaded, uninterested people. Maybe you don't even really follow politics, or world events. But really, if you care AT ALL about human rights, self-determination in governance, or authoritarian repression YOU MUST follow this issue. This is a government using its own "protective" force to kill its own people, in the name of those people. We can find a thousand instances of this in history, but this is not yet history, it is still the present. It is happening TODAY, AT THIS VERY MINUTE, in a country that shares a border with this one.
Read these articles. Watch Brad's video. Find out what you can and tell other people, because CNN sure as hell won't. There were protests at embassies and consulates in 14 American cities on Monday. I'm not sure when there will be more, but there will be. Go to your local IndyMedia site to find out about local events, or if you are in an activist community/organization, organize your own. I'll post about events in NYC on my plan.
I'm not saying that just because an American was killed now all of sudden we should care about Oaxaca. But I think it does humanize death in a way that simple information cannot. The people you will see in the video standing up to gunfire know what a bullet can do in a way that even watching it doesn't transmit. Any of them could have been hit by that bullet, and some were hit by bullets. But they stood up anyway, because it was either facing the bullets or living a life that they did not want to live as it was. That is why I posted the video and graphic picture, not to make him seem like a victim, but to show what the people of Oaxaca are standing up against. If it is disturbing to you, it is because you can see the humanity in it. They believed enough for that, and Brad believed in them enough to stand and face the bullets with them in order to tell their story. Although I never met him, this is the story that I've heard from those who did. Dying doesn't make him a martyr, but I think every person should reflect on it and try to understand how people could believe so strongly. And if we understand that believe, I think we have no human choice but to support them however we can.
A good article that portrays the divide in the city.
Day of the Dead
NYC represents for Brad
Last report of Brad Will (It's shaky, understandably so. But the interviews are good and it does give a very strong impression of what its like to defend a barricade.)
Brad Will - Shot (careful, this one is graphic) - His killer, again They are reported to be cops working as paramilitary hit squads for Ruiz.
General Oaxaca Pictures:1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
