Sami al-Hajii: Free at last

“Al Jazeera cameraman Sami al-Hajj has hit out at the US treatment of detainees at the Guantanamo Bay military prison where he was held for nearly six and a half years.

Saying that “rats are treated with more humanity”, al-Hajj said inmates’ “human dignity was violated”.

Al-Hajj, who arrived in Sudan early on Friday, was carried off the US air force jet on a stretcher and immediately taken to hospital.

Later, he had an emotional reunion with his wife and son.

His brother, Asim al-Hajj, said he did not recognise the cameraman because he looked like a man in his 80s.

Still, al-Hajj said: “I was lucky because God allowed that I be released.”

But his attention soon turned to the 275 inmates he left behind in the US military prison.

‘Dignity violated’

“I’m very happy to be in Sudan, but I’m very sad because of the situation of our brothers who remain in Guantanamo. Conditions in Guantanamo are very, very bad and they get worse by the day,” he said from his hospital bed.” (http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/55ABE840-AC30-41D2-BDC9-06BBE2A36665.htm)

 

Baghdad reality

The security and Prosperity Partnership

Many Canadians are under the impression that we live in a democracy. It’s bad enough that the Dion liberals vote with the Harper government on everything they say they stand against. It’s enough of a crime that Canadian troops are involved in the occupation of Afghanistan - a situation that has Canadians divided because we have not had a full and open debate about why we are there. Then there is this deal which will further imperil Canadians. We are slipping into an elite-run corporate totalitarianism.

notcountingcanadians-1

Marxism 2008, Toronto Ontario, Canada

Click for more info: marxism2008_program2

The truth will set us free….. after we see it

New work from Howard Zinn

Canadian net Neutrality and Bell Canada

Writing to learn…..April 3, 2008. By: Paul Chislett

The peer writing experience during the 2007/8 school year, at the University of Windsor, has been very rewarding. In this age of MSN and Facebook, the idea of two people sitting, huddled over a piece of writing, and talking about writing, and how to best communicate via the written word seems an unlikely thing; yet the process of peer collaboration in the writing process is needed more than ever.  I feel as though I did help other students in a meaningful way with their papers even though it was mostly local editing and proofreading.  I did have a chance in the second semester to have discussions with some students about the goal of the Academic Writing Centre (AWC) to collaborate during the writing process, with the understanding that the paper belongs to the student and that I, as a writing assistant, may offer suggestions which the student can consider. The experience was extra special as well because of the other peers I worked with: Mahinaz, Amira and Jessica. I felt welcomed and accepted as an equal and I was always happy to help and offer advice when I was asked. I have been privileged to work with Richard, Dave and Jennie, and I am very happy to be able to come back in the fall and be a part of the work of the AWC.

          So, what was it like out there? My first shift in September was at the student centre and I remember feeling quite exposed in that vast space with my red T-shirt! Almost without exception, students felt better about their paper after having it looked over. I found that in looking over other papers I came to see how incredibly important punctuation alone is in creating meaning and understanding. My own writing has benefited out of the experience of peer tutoring. The library seems a better fit for our work, and the CAW centre is just too large and busy. I am sure other locations, such as the residences, offer somewhat similar settings as the library. I benefited a great deal from the weekly meetings and the readings. I will value the courseware package always, and the readings and references in it. 

Ambassador Bridge, Windsor (P. Chislett)

          The international students are by far the largest percentage of students I helped. I am literally awed at the efforts they make to gain a degree far from home, in a different culture, using English as a second language. Discussing the collaborative process with them was minor compared to their need to have the papers proof read. Native English students were more open to that global discussion and even then, the drive to produce a paper for the best mark overshadowed any possible joy and interest in a discussion of the writing process. Somehow, the idea that we “write to learn” seems an alien concept for many students. Writing is supposed to be a process of intellectual and even personal discovery. I think there is supposed to be some pain in the writing process and of course no sane person goes around looking for ways to torture themselves! However, discoveries of any kind will entail emotional and spiritual turmoil and I don’t think any level of the education system is designed to grapple with this, and as a result students miss out on a particular kind of learning experience.  Learning seems to have become another commodity and universities seem to view students as raw material to be credentialzed for profit; the ideals of reflective and critical thinking risk being lost. In my opinion, writing centres and peer writing assistants are the key to restoring meaning to learning, and I know I am fortunate to be a part of this process. I surely hope the university allows the expansion of the peer writing program.  

Paul Chislett

April 3, 2008       

Books in Canada finds Klein’s “Shock Doctrine” a shrill “screed”

Nicholas Maes‘ “review” of Naomi Klein’s “screed”, The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism in Jan.-Feb issue of Books in Canada seems more a rant than a reasoned attempt to take issue with another author. I haven’t read the book, but I am familiar with Klein’s politics, while Maes seems to be shocked that negative things are being written about neoliberalism. In trying to be balanced he instead ends up justifying atrocities running from Allende’s murder in Chile to the war in Iraq. Maes’ defence of neoliberalism rests solely on the old doctrine of ‘might makes right’.

Maes does an excellent job summing up capitalist history in the first couple of columns of his review. When he comes to Chile’s Allende and Alan Friedman, his analysis starts to fall apart. The “…number of Chileans living in poverty…” was not the result of a failure of neoliberalism or Friedman, rather the poverty was a direct result of the success of this ideology. And make no mistake - neoliberalsim is as much a political ideology as socialism. The difference is the latter seeks to allow humans to produce what is truly needed, not what can be produced for profit. Ideologies in themselves, as concepts, are not the problem. It is the intent of an ideology that is the point, not ideology per se, and often, to uncover the intent, means to follow the money. If one follows that trail left by neoliberalism one finds far more the cash in the pockets of what C. Wright Mills called the power elites, than in the pockets of the global working class. William E. Kilbourne (2004), writing in Journal of Macromarketing, states that with neoliberalism

…what were once considered political questions

are reduced to economic questions to be answered through

the operation of impersonal market mechanisms. This does

not imply that all political questions are reduced to economics

but that many areas that have traditionally been political

questions, such as education, health care, and security, are

being relegated to the market for resource allocations.[1]

And within that quote lies the class struggle before us. The triumphalist bravado of free market advocates is based on the ludicrous premise that with the end of politics comes the end of history. Instead, history is simply repeating itself. Global, neoliberal capitalism is the same animal as industrial capitalism of 100 years ago. Elites argue amongst themselves over how best to exploit for profit, and the working class argues on how best to counter or overthrow the power elites.

Maes states that neoliberal principles have been “…misapplied … and easily lend themselves to authoritarian regimes…” Neoliberalism is a deliberate strategy deliberately applied in democracies and dictatorships to exploit everything from human beings to the very earth itself. Maes says aspects of the war in Iraq are “…deeply troubling…” Many call the war a crime against humanity. To call aspects of the war troubling is the year’s greatest understatement, or lying to go to war has become acceptable around certain dinner tables.

Klein is certainly not a conspiracy theorist. The rationale for privatization has always been well understood - as a myth. Maes has simply digested and regurgitated the old lie that public services are mismanaged, inefficient and inferior. Those were the big lies which had to be fed to people before the likes of Mike Harris could be elected, never mind Mulroney, Thatcher and Reagan. Maes then moves on to defend the likes of Donald Rumsfeld. Does Maes seriously believe that outsourcing an invading army, so it is less visible, is a positive value? The U.S. army is outsourced in Iraq because it is stretched to the limit in terms of boots on the ground. A draft in the United States is not politically feasible so the Bush administration is increasing numbers through contractors. There is no possibility of a moral defence for the war in Iraq! That war has killed 4000 American soldiers and thousands of Iraqis, gated off Iraqi oil and placed the US military in a position to deny China further ground in the area, including Africa. In short we are staring at another Cold War - and more likely another global war. Neoliberalism has a violent history because it is inherently anti-democratic, elitist, and relies on force and intimidation for success - from Chile in 1974 to Iraq in 2008. There can be no moral defence of neoliberalism as well. This isn’t new. From the Philippines in the late 1800’s to United Fruit in Guatemala in 1954, the list of American culpability in the thwarting of popular movements around the world is long and sordid.

If Klein is strident and passionate, it is not because she is simply “…raising legitimate questions…” It is because she is calling neoliberalism what it is: anti-democratic and possibly criminal. It will be up to our children and grandchildren to make that call. For Klein and many others the evidence is not based on innuendo, rather on hard, observable evidence.

---

[1] Kilbourne William E. “Globalization and Development: An Expanded Macromarketing View”. Journal of Macromarketing vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 122-135, 2004

Canadian politics: the drudgery continues.

Canadian politics have never been Great or Grand. MacDonald’s National Dream was the Orangeman’s conceit; racist and murderous. Trudeau’s vision of the Just Society followed the bent of the times and the prodding of the NDP; the times were led by Che Guevara, the student protests in Paris, and the Civil Rights/Anti-War movement in the United States. Our contribution to something approaching Great has been the efforts towards multi-culturalism and international multi-lateralism, and the latter reached its zenith during the Cold War when Canada was seen as a credible middle power in the world. Our attempt at multiculturalism is being left to rot as surely as books in a moldy basement.

Last week the last nails were hammered home in the coffin of the Canadian experiment. Liberal leader Dion (with Bob Rae and Michael Ignatieff hanging like ghouls in the background) supported the Harper government in both the Bill on the Canadian military extension in Afghanistan and on the budget. Mr. Dion and the liberal party have sold out whatever is left of their ideals and cannot in good conscience declare themselves distinct from the conservatives. If Mr. Dion is wielding a hammer, (after politely taking one from Mr. Harper) then surely too many Canadians are providing the nails, blueprints and direction for the coffin building.

There was hope in the early years of the 20^th century, when the working class found expression in socialism and we fought the elites for economic and social justice until the end of the 1940’s. Then the so-called long boom lasted into the 1970’s and this too has proved to be a dead end because consumerist, suburban expansion is not sustainable. This boom did allow us to fall into the trap of thinking that the working class had “won”. Yet, all we managed was to simply enable capitalists to squander resources, creativity and labour potential so those few capitalists could live lavish lives.

Global neo-liberalism is the new name for the exact same animal that was battled during the Progressive Age of the 1870’s to the beginning of WW I - industrial capitalism. Industrialization created vast wealth for the few while workers toiled and died in misery. The Third World is today’s meat packing plants exposed by Upton Sinclair in his 1906 novel The Jungle. The workers of China, Mexico, Vietnam, etc. are today’s wage slaves, just like the miners and garment workers of Sinclair’s day. The people of Afghanistan, Africa, Iraq, Pakistan - the so-called terrorists - are the equivalent to First Nations living on land valued for resources or militarily strategic. The ca