Showing posts with label #US. Show all posts
Showing posts with label #US. Show all posts

Tuesday, August 22, 2023

Shades of Suez



Our resident historian and all-around sharp and savvy person, Coast Watcher, returns to the blog with an in-depth look at the recent going-ons in Africa, particularly between Niger and their former colonizer, France. Once again, the more things change...the more history repeats itself?

Shades of Suez: How the situation in Niger reflects that of Egypt in 1956

by Coast Watcher

Egypt

The British and French Empires had a long history of involvement in Egyptian affairs, mostly rooted in the opening of the Suez Canal in 1869.

The 19th century rulers of Egypt were ambitious men. Although nominally part of the Ottoman Empire, Egypt’s rulers had practiced autonomy for centuries. Beginning with the rule of Ottoman Viceroy Muḥammad ʿAlī, Egypt’s borders expanded into Syria and the Sudan, Arabia and Yemen. This expansionism by Muhammad and his successors came at a cost. By 1876 Egypt’s national debt owed to European powers exceeded its means to pay.

Egypt’s ruler, Khedive Ismāʿīl Pasha, tried to stave off bankruptcy by selling the national shares in the Suez Canal to Britain. The measure failed, and both countries established the Dual Control, a means by which Egyptian revenue and expenditure were directly supervised by French and British officials. Needless to say this imposition rankled with the ordinary Egyptians and their ruler. Exploiting popular unrest, Ismāʿīl ousted the Dual Control, but Britain and France persuaded the Ottoman Sultan—still nominal ruler of Egypt—to depose Ismāʿīl in favor of his son, Muhammad Tawfik.

A rising nationalist movement in the officer caste of the Egyptian military led to war with the British in 1882, but the movement failed in the face of superior force. Egypt remained a virtual British colony. Following the collapse of the Ottoman Empire in World War 1, it became a kingdom under British control from 1922 to 1952, with a promise of independence given by Britain in a treaty of 1936. After World War 2, the Egyptian drive to independence gave rise to a guerilla war that ousted the king in July of 1952. Colonel Gamal Abdel Nasser became president.

Prolonged negotiations with Britain led to the 1954 Anglo-Egyptian Agreement, under which British troops were to be evacuated gradually from the canal zone. Nasser put in place an ambitious plan to construct a dam across the Nile at Aswan to regulate the annual flow that powers Egypt’s agriculture. He gained a promise from the United States to fund the project, but the US reneged on the deal. In turn Nasser nationalized the Suez Canal, intending that tolls and tariffs imposed on shipping using the Canal would pay for the project. Nasser was backed by the Soviet Union, who provided arms, equipment, and advisors to the Egyptian military.

This move promptly brought Egypt into conflict with Britain, France, and the new state of Israel. France was infuriated by intelligence suggesting Egypt was funding anti-colonial rebels in its colony of Algeria. Since Nasser had no time for the new state of Israel, their military had already skirmished with Egyptian forces along their shared frontier. Israel led the invasion of Egypt on October 29, 1956, followed two days later by Britain and France.

The allied forces took control of the canal zone, but the Anglo-French deployment delay gave time for the Soviet Union to react. Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev was keen to exploit the moves toward Arab independence throughout the Middle East. He saw the invasion by the reactionary powers as a direct threat. Khrushchev in turn threatened to use nuclear weapons in Europe if the allied coalition did not withdraw.

Alarmed by this, US President Eisenhower warned the Soviets that threats of nuclear war were only exacerbating the situation. He and Secretary of State John F. Dulles told the coalition in turn that they had to withdraw from Egyptian territory or face economic sanctions. Since their economies were still suffering the after-effects of World War 2, Britain and France had to comply with American demands. All forces withdrew from Egypt by December 1956.

This established the United States and the Soviet Union as the dominant players on the world stage—a prestige the US, in particular, has trouble relinquishing.



Niger

Fast forward to the year 2023. A recent coup in the African country of Niger has caused an uproar in the West.

France moved in to what is now Niger in the late 19th century, formalizing control of the region in the following decade. This was conducted mainly to counter British and Italian imperial ambitions in the area of western Africa. In World War 2, the Niger colonial administration remained loyal to the French Vichy government, but following the war a small measure of self-governance was given to them. In 1960, Niger along with many other former French colonies attained full independence. French influence in Niger and elsewhere in its former African territories remains strong—but it is declining.

French military and local forces based in Chad and Burkina Faso were active in the past ten years during Operation Barkhane. This is an attempt to contain and eliminate the Islamic State and Al-Qaeda jihadist groups operating in the Maghreb and the Sahel, and also to counter growing Chinese and Russian influence on the continent. Needless to say, this aspect of French colonialism has the approval of the United States.

Some 5,650 French troops are deployed across the continent. Between 1,000 and 1,500 are stationed in Niger, mainly at the Niamey Airbase to control access to Niger's substantial gold and uranium deposits. France is rumored to be concentrating its African forces, possibly in preparation for an attack on Niger should the situation demand it.

Niger has played the part of a bulwark against instability and jihadist influence in the region. It’s also the location of the Americans' Airbase 201, a drone base staffed by 1,000 personnel. It is said to be the largest drone base in the world and key to the US operations across the Sahel. The recent coup by President General Abdourhamane Tchiani, that overthrew the unpopular President Bazoum, has put Western control of Niger's natural resources under threat. This has not gone unnoticed by the United States.


Indian historian and journalist Vijay Prashad observes:

Hours after the coup was stabilized, the main Western states—especially France and the United States—condemned the coup and asked for the reinstatement of Bazoum, who was immediately detained by the new government. But neither France nor the United States appeared to want to lead the response to the coup. Earlier this year, the French and US governments worried about an insurgency in northern Mozambique that impacted the assets of the Total-Exxon natural gas field off the coastline of Cabo Delgado. Rather than send in French and US troops, which would have polarized the population and increased anti-Western sentiment, the French and the United States made a deal for Rwanda to send its troops into Mozambique. Rwandan troops entered the northern province of Mozambique and shut down the insurgency. Both Western powers seem to favor a “Rwanda” type solution to the coup in Niger, but rather than have Rwanda enter Niger the hope was for ECOWAS—the Economic Community of West African States—to send in its force to restore Bazoum. --What's Happening in Niger is Far From a Typical Coup

Both France and the US are putting pressure on the African nations they still have a measure of control over. These nations are known collectively as the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS). ECOWAS is said to be amassing troops ready to intervene in Niger. Opposing them are suspended member nations of ECOWAS, backed by Russia. All the suspended members are ruled by military governments, and they were suspended for being in violation of ECOWAS rules on democracy and good government.

The neighboring countries of Guinea, Chad, the Central African Republic, and Algeria all want to see the situation resolved peacefully, but they oppose an invasion of Niger through fear the situation could escalate to a war that will engulf the entire west of Africa. As of this date, it looks like military intervention by ECOWAS forces is unlikely. There’s a great deal of push-back against the West from African nations, who rightly perceive the whole action against Niger to be nothing more than a colonial power’s attempt to hang on to the assets and a resource grab practiced—in France’s case—for centuries.

Jihadists are already exploiting the situation. Seventeen troops were killed in an ambush in the Tillaberi region near Burkina Faso recently. ECOWAS is fully aware of the threat Islamist extremism poses against their own order.

The United States announced last week that a new ambassador would soon head to Niger to help lead diplomacy aimed at reversing the coup. ECOWAS has already applied trade and financial sanctions, while France, Germany, and the United States have suspended their aid programs to Niger. The measures are being applied to one of the poorest countries in the world. Niger regularly ranks bottom of the United Nation’s Human Development Index.

It should be noted that France has substantial gold reserves. But Niger—possessing sizable gold deposits—has none. Niger possesses uranium deposits as well, uranium that is mined by French corporations to fuel France's nuclear power plants. President Macron of France is taking a harder line against Niger’s new government than the United States, but given America’s history of armed intervention, it is by no means given that the softly-softly approach will last for long.

And so it goes with history. Where once the US warned off another power (France) from exploiting an African country (Egypt), now it’s joining that power in opposing another, Niger. 

What has really changed in these last seven decades? Could it be that simply the hegemony of the West (particularly in the mind of the US government) is being threatened? Does the West fear that once they're kicked off the continent the BRICS nations will take their place, exercising control over Africa's vast natural resources? Possibly. But wouldn't it be better if Africa could be ruled, and its resources controlled, by Africans instead?

 

Related Articles:
Egypt

https://www.history.com/topics/cold-war/suez-crisis

https://www.britannica.com/place/Egypt/Abbas-I-and-Said-1848-63

Niger

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colony_of_Niger

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/8/9/niger-coup-leaders-accuse-french-forces-of-destabilising-the-country

https://www.thewaywardrabbler.com/p/rumors-of-war-in-west-africa?sd=pf

https://www.lemonde.fr/en/le-monde-africa/article/2023/08/02/niger-coup-undermines-french-military-strategy-in-sahel_6077607_124.html

https://www.lemonde.fr/en/le-monde-africa/article/2023/08/17/niger-coup-west-african-military-chiefs-meet-to-discuss-response_6096120_124.html

BIO: Coast Watcher is an armchair historian with a vast knowledge of the West's plundering of other countries' mineral wealth, land, and people. When will this plundering end? Could the fall of the petrodollar and the rising multi-polar world of BRICS bring hope to the beleaguered African continent? Only time will tell.



Other interesting articles and links:

African Union Will Not Back ECOWAS Intervention in Niger https://scheerpost.com/2023/08/18/african-union-will-not-back-ecowas-intervention-in-niger/ 

Niger: A Coup against French Control and Dominance https://unac.notowar.net/2023/08/11/niger-a-coup-against-french-control-and-dominance/ 
 
What’s happening in Niger is far from a typical coup
https://peoplesdispatch.org/2023/08/15/whats-happening-in-niger-is-far-from-a-typical-coup/
 
No U.S./French-Backed Invasion of Niger!
https://unac.notowar.net/2023/08/06/no-u-s-french-backed-invasion-of-niger/
 
As Senegal Organizes Troops To Invade Niger, Violence Mars Order At Home https://popularresistance.org/as-senegal-organizes-troops-to-invade-niger-violence-mars-constitutional-order/
 
War in Africa and War in the Americas: Accelerating the End of White World Supremacy  https://www.blackagendareport.com/war-africa-and-war-americas-accelerating-end-white-world-supremacy  
 
‘The Greatest Fighting Force in Human History’ – The Perpetual Wars You Aren’t Supposed to Notice https://scheerpost.com/2023/08/17/the-greatest-fighting-force-in-human-history-the-perpetual-wars-you-arent-supposed-to-notice/
 
How Much Aid Has the U.S. Sent Ukraine? https://www.cfr.org/article/how-much-aid-has-us-sent-ukraine-here-are-six-charts
 
Seymour Hersh: Summer of the Hawks
https://scheerpost.com/2023/08/19/seymour-hersh-summer-of-the-hawks/
 
Big Brave Western Proxy Warriors Keep Whining That Ukrainian Troops Are Cowards https://www.caitlinjohnst.one/p/big-brave-western-proxy-warriors 
 
White House Downplays CNN Poll Showing Majority of Americans Oppose More US Aid for Ukraine https://edition.cnn.com/2023/08/09/politics/white-house-responds-cnn-poll/index.html
 
The Crucifixion of Julian Assange https://chrishedges.substack.com/p/the-crucifixion-of-julian-assange
 
Wealthiest 10% Responsible For 40% Of US Greenhouse Gas Emissions https://popularresistance.org/wealthiest-10-responsible-for-40-of-us-greenhouse-gas-emissions/ 
 
EPA Finds at Least 26 Million People in US Have Toxic 'Forever Chemicals' in Their Drinking Water https://www.commondreams.org/news/epa-pfas
 
Last week's post This Is What Empire Looks Like was translated into French and posted at the Zanzibar Freedom of Speech Substack: https://zanzibar.substack.com/p/voila-a-quoi-ressemble-lempire  (Isn't that awesome? If you read French, tell us how well it was translated. Thanks.)
 
And while you're there, don't forget to subscribe to us directly on Substack: https://therevolutioncontinues.substack.com
 
Seen on the formerly known as Twitter:
 

Coming soon, the first book from The Revolution Continues blog:  The Little Red Book of Revolution

How can you get your e-copy? The easiest way is to subscribe to The Revolution Continues on Substack as a paying subscriber. Choose what level you'd like to subscribe at: https://therevolutioncontinues.substack.com

If you'd like to help out in the meantime, buy me a coffee!  https://ko-fi.com/therevolutioncontinues

More details to come. Power to the people! 

 

Tuesday, June 20, 2023

Impossible Things (Uniting The Left)



Impossible Things

(Uniting The Left)

by. C.A. Matthews

“Why, sometimes I've believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast.”

― Lewis Carroll, Alice in Wonderland

It might not be quite six, but there is one big impossible thing I believe we can accomplish before breakfast. Call me a cock-eyed optimist, but I’d like to see the Left unite just once and elect a non-duopolist, non-corporate-owned, non-warhawk candidate for president.

Yes, I’m talking about Dr. Cornel West. And, yes, I know the odds are against anyone uniting the American Left anytime this century. A girl can dream though, can’t she?

Perhaps...the time has come to bring the entirety of the Left together in order to mount a strong offense against the duopoly or the “uni-party with two names.” As a Green, Dr. West cannot accept any campaign contributions from lobbyists or corporations like the Dems and Republicans regularly do. That fact already makes him less suspect to persons who view themselves as being on the far left side of the Overton Window.  

So, there’s no chance of Big Oil promising President West a load of cash to sign over more federal lands (national parks/reserves) to them to drill for oil, such as Biden has done recently with the Willow Project. Not taking cash from billionaires/oligarchs and relying solely on the support of regular people like you and me makes Dr. West seem like an honest candidate who will listen to the working classes over the wealthy, doesn’t it?

But where does Cornel West stand on issues such as the proxy war in Ukraine? To Leftists—and I mean real Leftists, not faux ones such as A.O.C. and the Squad—this is an exceedingly important issue. The Military-Industrial Complex or simply “the War Machine” is all about making huge profits at the expense of human lives and the care of our environment. It’s safe to say that Dr. West running as a Green is decidedly pro-humanity and pro-environment. 
 
Dr. West’s Christian belief in seeing the image of God (imago dei) in the face of every human being and taking seriously the directive in the book of Genesis of being a “good steward of the earth” prevents him from starting a senseless war for profit. The idea of starting a war to grab resources, such as natural gas, while destroying hundreds of cities and killing thousands of people—while polluting an entire country’s croplands with depleted uranium shells from US given ordinance in the process—would be anathema to Cornel West. Depleted uranium is radioactive, and it’s been linked to cancer, birth defects, and environmental damage in areas it’s been used, including Iraq, where US forces frequently fired the toxic munitions. Its impact is still being felt there today.

How refreshing it is to contemplate having a US president who possesses no desire to shed blood either at home or across the globe! Since Dr. West is running as a Green, he must agree with its pro-peace/anti-violence and pro-environment platform. Rest assured, a West administration will not start another conflict such as Ukraine, Afghanistan, Syria, Iraq, Grenada, Vietnam… just to make the CEOs of Raytheon, General Dynamics, and Lockheed Martin happy.

The unhappy faux leftists (a.k.a. the Democratic Party) will try to throw dirt on Dr. West because of his well-articulated, humanity-loving beliefs. I have no doubts that some Dems will call him “antisemitic” because he has openly declared his support of the Palestinian people and their struggles to live in peace.  

Once again, as a professing Christian, Cornel West doesn’t want to see any of God’s children suffering and dying. He has said so on many occasions. He has clearly stated that he supports and cares for all people—poor, rich, black, white, brown, indigenous, gay, trans, straight, leftists or right-wingers. Why would he approve of the modern state of Israel bombing and taking land away from Palestinians? Why wouldn’t he want to bring about a peaceful end to the hostilities there and elsewhere?

Podcaster Briahna Joy Gray asked Dr. West about his support of the Palestinian people as compared to DNC candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s pro-Israel stance. West answered her quite plainly:

“You want a presidential candidate… who has a backbone… If [RFK Jr.] thinks somehow that each [Palestinian] baby who was killed somehow was never in any way, intentional, deliberate, [Israel] didn't know what they were doing—he needs to really get off the crack pipe.”

Faux leftists like RFK Jr. and Marianne Williamson stand to receive a lot of money from a political action committee funded by the Israeli government, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee or AIPAC. AIPAC is a lobbying group that advocates pro-Israel policies to the legislative and executive branches of the United States and has over 100,000 members, 17 regional offices, and “a vast pool of donors” according to their website. Their annual revenue in 2014 was over $77 million dollars. 

Faux leftists like RFK Jr. and Marianne aren’t necessarily bloodthirsty or racist or genocidal toward the Palestinian people. It’s just that they love all the money they get from lobbyists like AIPAC just by being Democratic Party duopolists. Why would they give up so much money and their party’s possible nomination just to save the lives of innocent Palestinian children? Remember: “Rich, White Lives Matter” too! 

I could go on about how I believe Cornel West is the candidate to unite the Left because of his integrity and compassion, but I like to keep these posts under 10,000 words. Besides, there’s plenty of time to articulate many more points before November 2024. For now, I just want to plant a seed in the mind of the American Left and let it germinate and grow, perhaps to blossom into a strong movement of activists determined to wipe out the corruption and warmongering that has dwelt for far too long within the halls of government. 

Too many are suffering from hunger, homelessness, lack of health care, overwhelming student debt… We owe it to them to fight for a candidate who will speak up for the oppressed both at home and abroad. Let’s sit down and talk things over about how a Cornel West presidential campaign could bring the Left together and attract others to the cause of building a better world. We owe it to future generations to cooperate now in order to get rid of the “lesser evil” mindset of the duopoly and, in turn, mandate beneficial change for the greater good.

“Our problems stem from our acceptance of this filthy, rotten system.” —Dorothy Day, peace activist 


Related articles and other fascinating links:

Green Party US Ten Key Values: https://www.gp.org/ten_key_values

Green Party Four Pillars: https://www.gp.org/4_pillars  

 


Seen on Twitter:

Coming soon, the first book from The Revolution Continues blog:  The Little Red Book of Revolution

How can you get your e-copy? The easiest way is to subscribe to The Revolution Continues on Substack as a paying subscriber. Choose what level you'd like to subscribe at via the buttons on any post online at: https://therevolutioncontinues.substack.com

If you'd like to help out in the meantime, buy me a coffee!  https://ko-fi.com/therevolutioncontinues

More details to come. Power to the people!

 

Monday, January 16, 2023

Protesting Evil (Be The Peace)



Protesting Evil 

(Be The Peace)

by C.A. Matthews

The greatest purveyor of violence in the world is my own government. I cannot be silent. —Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., April 4, 1967

It’s time to celebrate Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Day this week/month in the US. What that really means to our non-American readers is that we’ve decided to take a decent human being who spoke out boldly and straightforwardly against our corrupt socio-economic system, our endless wars for profit, and the bloodthirsty quest for Western world domination, and instead turned him into a kindly, saint-like person without teeth in order to make him totally acceptable to the rich (that is, white) and powerful elites who actually run this country. (See last week’s blog Who’s Really In Charge to see what I mean about who are actually running things. They’re probably running things in your country as well. Sorry.)

Let’s listen to Dr. King’s own words rather than the words of others who might want to “tone him down” so his legacy becomes more palatable to the powerful elites who wanted King dead (and possibly even pulled the trigger on him) in the first place. 

First off, Dr. King didn’t approve of war in any way, shape, or form. Conventional and nuclear warfare were both not to his liking, so I feel certain that he wouldn’t approve of our current $858 billion military budget. He wouldn’t have approved of the ridiculous warmongering propaganda we’re all being subjected to day and night by corporation-owned journalists, either. The following excerpts are what MLK said then and would say to us again today.

From Beyond Vietnam—A Time To Break Silence (April 4, 1967) https://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/mlkatimetobreaksilence.htm

To me the relationship of this ministry to the making of peace is so obvious that I sometimes marvel at those who ask me why I'm speaking against the war. Could it be that they do not know that the good news was meant for all men -- for Communist and capitalist, for their children and ours, for black and for white, for revolutionary and conservative? Have they forgotten that my ministry is in obedience to the One who loved his enemies so fully that he died for them? What then can I say to the Vietcong or to Castro or to Mao as a faithful minister of this One? Can I threaten them with death or must I not share with them my life?

Some of you are shaking your heads at this point. Martin Luther King Jr. didn’t hate the Communists and love his country, right or wrong, more than he hated the war in Vietnam? He didn’t patriotically rally the troops to go off to their deaths so the military industrial complex could make more profits? It seems not. MLK also said in the same speech:

Beyond the calling of race or nation or creed is this vocation of sonship and brotherhood, and because I believe that the Father is deeply concerned especially for his suffering and helpless and outcast children, I come tonight to speak for them… This I believe to be the privilege and the burden of all of us who deem ourselves bound by allegiances and loyalties which are broader and deeper than nationalism and which go beyond our nation's self-defined goals and positions. We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for the victims of our nation and for those it calls "enemy," for no document from human hands can make these humans any less our brothers.

I’m going to step out on a limb here (because I’m fairly certain some propagandist will try to link MLK to promoting the Ukraine War) and say that Dr. King most certainly wouldn’t have approved of the US and NATO violating the Minsk Agreements and vilifying the Russian-speaking peoples of the Donbass region and their wish for independence. He would have been supportive of a negotiated peace. His words say it clearly: 

Here is the true meaning and value of compassion and nonviolence, when it helps us to see the enemy's point of view, to hear his questions, to know his assessment of ourselves. For from his view we may indeed see the basic weaknesses of our own condition, and if we are mature, we may learn and grow and profit from the wisdom of the brothers who are called the opposition. (...)

Somehow this madness must cease. We must stop now. I speak as a child of God and brother to the suffering poor of Vietnam. I speak for those whose land is being laid waste, whose homes are being destroyed, whose culture is being subverted. I speak of the -- for the poor of America who are paying the double price of smashed hopes at home, and death and corruption in Vietnam. I speak as a citizen of the world, for the world as it stands aghast at the path we have taken. I speak as one who loves America, to the leaders of our own nation: The great initiative in this war is ours; the initiative to stop it must be ours.

Dr. King even ties together how war costs not only the country being bombed and shelled, but it also costs the poor of the country doing the bombing, in this case the US. Poor Americans were being actively drafted into the military in the 1960s and nowadays are enticed into joining in order to provide for themselves and their families. Sixty years on, nothing much has changed as many Americans are forced into becoming soldiers for purely economic reasons. For the poor it’s either risk death killing strangers abroad or risk death by starvation at home. MLK didn’t believe either choice was a good or moral one. 

Dr. King also states in no uncertain terms that the initiative to stop war is ours. It’s ours—not another country’s choice. We can’t keep acting like cowards. The US can tell NATO that it’s time to halt the violence in Ukraine and help all those concerned to sit down at the negotiation table and work toward a peace deal acceptable to all. The US can stop funding coups d’etats and CIA plots to overthrow governments who aren’t “friendly enough” to our corporations and billionaire businessmen. In other words, MLK  wouldn’t have recognized the non-elected Juan Guaido or approved of the CIA's help to overthrow Peru’s Pedro Castillo. Dr. King supported revolutionaries in search of peace and a better life for the oppressed:

In 1957, a sensitive American official overseas said that it seemed to him that our nation was on the wrong side of a world revolution. During the past ten years, we have seen emerge a pattern of suppression which has now justified the presence of U.S. military advisors in Venezuela. This need to maintain social stability for our investments accounts for the counterrevolutionary action of American forces in Guatemala. It tells why American helicopters are being used against guerrillas in Cambodia and why American napalm and Green Beret forces have already been active against rebels in Peru.

Decades have passed and the same countries are still being used for ill by the US. Dr. King certainly didn’t approve of cultural chauvinism and America’s “economic hitmen”:

A true revolution of values will soon look uneasily on the glaring contrast of poverty and wealth. With righteous indignation, it will look across the seas and see individual capitalists of the West investing huge sums of money in Asia, Africa, and South America, only to take the profits out with no concern for the social betterment of the countries, and say, "This is not just." It will look at our alliance with the landed gentry of South America and say, "This is not just." The Western arrogance of feeling that it has everything to teach others and nothing to learn from them is not just.

All this being said, Dr. King actually thought more highly of Americans and what they could do than we think of ourselves:

America, the richest and most powerful nation in the world, can well lead the way in this revolution of values. There is nothing except a tragic death wish to prevent us from reordering our priorities so that the pursuit of peace will take precedence over the pursuit of war. There is nothing to keep us from molding a recalcitrant status quo with bruised hands until we have fashioned it into a brotherhood.

So, why does the US celebrate a man of peace each January, a man who strongly spoke out against the immorality of war and poverty, if we don’t believe in his vision for America and the world? Why would our so-called leaders think Dr. King would support their continuing covert and overt conflicts throughout the world simply for the sake of making arms manufacturers, bankers, Big Oil CEOs, and other related parasites even wealthier? MLK thought Americans were much better than this, much more capable of acting nobly rather than simply acting like profit-chasing narcissists:

The world now demands a maturity of America that we may not be able to achieve. It demands that we admit that we have been wrong from the beginning of our adventure in Vietnam, that we have been detrimental to the life of the Vietnamese people. The situation is one in which we must be ready to turn sharply from our present ways. In order to atone for our sins and errors in Vietnam, we should take the initiative in bringing a halt to this tragic war.

Substitute "Ukraine" for "Vietnam" and re-read this paragraph.

Americans really need to ask ourselves some deep questions. Either we truly believe and agree with what Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. said or we don’t. If we do, we’ll stop all the horrible violence we perpetuate in the world and defund our military and our militarized police forces forthwith. We’ll dismantle our nuclear warheads and offer recompense to those we have harmed, both at home and abroad.

If we don’t believe in what Dr. King said, then we need to stop sullying the shining memory of such a great man with this charade of a national holiday. We don’t deserve him as a cultural icon. RIP Martin.

Where do you stand? Are you protesting the evil you see in the world as Dr. King instructed or are you cooperating with it? Let MLK’s words touch your heart and motivate you toward a positive direction. 

We still have a choice today: nonviolent coexistence or violent coannihilation. We must move past indecision to action. We must find new ways to speak for peace in Vietnam and justice throughout the developing world, a world that borders on our doors. If we do not act, we shall surely be dragged down the long, dark, and shameful corridors of time reserved for those who possess power without compassion, might without morality, and strength without sight. (…)

And if we will only make the right choice, we will be able to transform this pending cosmic elegy into a creative psalm of peace. If we will make the right choice, we will be able to transform the jangling discords of our world into a beautiful symphony of brotherhood. If we will but make the right choice, we will be able to speed up the day, all over America and all over the world, when "justice will roll down like waters, and righteousness like a mighty stream."
Which side are you on? Which side should you be on? Move there. Today. Be the peace.


Related links:

The Forgotten Socialist History of Martin Luther King Jr. https://inthesetimes.com/article/martin-luther-king-jr-day-socialism-capitalism

The 11 Most Anti-Capitalist Quotes from Martin Luther King Jr. https://scheerpost.com/2023/01/16/the-11-most-anti-capitalist-quotes-from-martin-luther-king-jr/

* * * 

Comrades, can you spare a dime? Or the cost of a cup of coffee? Help us keep The Revolution Continues going another eight years by donating once or becoming a regular supporter. You can do so via our Substack account or through the link below.