“1,700”
— That’s how many people died in Syria this week, it’s bloodiest ever — and yet, you heard nothing about it (via micdotcom)

(via anarcho-queer)

descentintotyranny:

#GazaUnderAttack
descentintotyranny:

#GazaUnderAttack
descentintotyranny:

#GazaUnderAttack
descentintotyranny:

#GazaUnderAttack
descentintotyranny:

#GazaUnderAttack
descentintotyranny:

#GazaUnderAttack
descentintotyranny:

#GazaUnderAttack
descentintotyranny:

#GazaUnderAttack
descentintotyranny:

#GazaUnderAttack
“‎Poverty is not fate, it is a condition; it is not a misfortune, it is an injustice. It is the result of social structures and mental and cultural categories, it is linked to the way in which society has been built, in its various manifestations.”
— Gustavo Gutiérrez (via anarcho-queer)

(via dendroica)

Q

Anonymous asked:

Can you explain what a "liberal" is? And what is the difference between being a Liberal and being liberal? I always hear them referred to differently, like "big L Liberal/little l liberal"? I'm just confused because I thought they were leftists? I know this is really stupid, but I'm a n00b, please bear with me haha

A

america-wakiewakie:

Well there is a lot of muddling with where it is you are using the term liberal. The United States, as usual, has adopted the word and thoroughly bastardized it into representing the opposite of what it means. Noam Chomsky breaks down the inability to communicate when the meanings of words are constantly debased and re-appropriated to mean very different things from what they meant in the context of their histories.

Liberal today is capitalist in nature. Wikipedia provides this:

Liberalism is a political philosophy or worldview founded on ideas of liberty and equality. Liberals espouse a wide array of views depending on their understanding of these principles, but generally they support ideas such as free and fair electionscivil rightsfreedom of the pressfreedom of religionfree trade, and private property.

Well look at the contradictions there, namely the “ideals of liberty and equality” while advocating so-called “free trade” and “private property,” the bedrocks of capitalism which have given rise to massive inequality and debilitating poverty. So, and I am being brief here — and somewhat too reductionist so I apologize — liberalism, in the economic sense, is merely the cousin of its further rightwing family. 

The reason it is perceived as “the Left” is because of the framing of our political system to represent only a tiny spectrum of political discourse. 

In Democrats & Republicans: A Political Cartel I wrote:

Liberals and conservatives are two factions of the same team (read capitalists); we just perceive them as markedly different because of the degree to which the spectrum of political possibilities has been narrowed. A complex system of normalized indoctrination exists in our lives which ensure radical (read communist and anarchist) solutions are weeded out, or marginalized in one way or another.

The end result is a set of normalized choices manifested in a political cartel, or an association of political parties with the purpose of maintaining concentrated political power and restricting or repressing competition. What is valued as acceptable within this cartel comprising the modern political sphere then is a tiny spectrum which reflects only the range of needs of private corporate power and nothing more.

…Liberals and conservatives wholeheartedly participate in the concentration of power when they take a set of political positions which express the basic ideas of capitalism and then present a range of indoctrination within that framework — so any “solution” only enhances the strength of capitalist institutionalization, ingraining it in our minds as the entire possible spectrum of choice that there is.

This is the purpose of electoral politics, to present from our capitalist masters individuals whose ideas keep the flow of power moving upward; to normalize indoctrination; to, in effect, control the market by maintaining the perceived pedigree of capitalist ideas and restricting competition through the marginalization and repression of ideas new or contradictory.

The central point I am making is this: Liberals are not leftists, they are only perceived to be because we have ruthlessly destroyed real leftist movements in this country. 

In another piece — How could a Keynesian capitalist liberal like Obama be called a ‘socialist’? — I go on to explore why Liberals/Democrats would want to be called leftists at all. 

Democrats embrace the populism and sentimentality of proletarian emancipation while simultaneously advocating their enslavement to a wage economy (read capitalism), albeit a more equitable — word used loosely — distribution of wealth than the far right alternatives. They legislate from the Keynesian model, accommodated by welfare safety nets. This is why Democrats gladly accept “the Left” epithet.

Conservatives on the other hand use the same label (“the Left”) to disenfranchise would-be Keynesians through associating the failed USSR with real leftist ideology, contradictingly calling liberals “socialist.” The effect, therefore, is that both major American political parties benefit from falsely portraying one capitalist faction as “the Left”, granting it widespread however fallacious legitimacy in the eyes of the American public. 

All this is to say that a Liberal/liberal is a capitalist, oftentimes imperialist, rightwinger who happens to be just slightly “left” of their further right cousins, the free market capitalist. Liberals, essentially, are “left” because they advocate trying to humanize an inherently exploitative system. 

I suspect the difference between the capital and lowercase iterations has more to do with identifying as a Liberal, synonymous with Democrat, and generally being more liberal (as in open-minded, accepting) of new ideas, change, different people’s and cultures. Still, even with the fore-mentioned attributes, lowercase “liberal” people often fail to address systemic issues like institutional racism, heteropatriarchy. and imperialist foreign policies while claiming to love and care for oppressed peoples. 

Don’t forget, liberals are rightwingers too. All capitalists are rightwingers.

america-wakiewakie:

Zionism & the Mainstream Press: Turn Off the TV Before You Become A Tool of Oppression | AmericaWakieWakie
Former Iranian Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadegh, before the world at the United Nations Convention in 1951, spoke to expose Britain’s colonialist domination of his country. In his address he said, “They [the British government] are trying to persuade world opinion that the lamb has devoured the wolf.”
These sentiments reverberate in the mainstream media’s current portrayal of Israeli domination and occupation over Palestinians. In such a narrative life is preserved and life is taken. But we who digest the news fed to us do something sinister when we listen or read unquestionably: We become the silencer attached to the tip of a rifle invading Palestinian homes… the stealth by which genocide encroaches upon a people, executing them without a sound.
The press is supposed to keep us informed, aware and alert, critically engaged in the events of the world, so that when we object or want to change the course of happening-history, we can. In reality the mainstream press has acted more to misinform us, to make us the silencers of bombs, missiles and bullets, enablers of war and genocide, than wielders of knowledge and actors for justice.  
Keeping the blinders on at all times  
As events in Gaza grow increasingly lethal, as more and more Palestinians suffer or are displaced by Israeli forces — deaths now top more than 560 — the Western news machine drones on and on framing story after story in colonist narratives. Pro-Zionist coverage has and continues to dominate prominent Western news outlets. We are never meant to know the truth of Palestinian struggle — even if large protests about it are happening in our backyard. 
Sunday’s  march in San Francisco, and elsewhere in the United States, turned-out crowds of thousands. Counted together, tens of thousands. Still, not more than a bleep made it to airtime on local news. When the protests have gotten coverage, they have been misconstrued.
After the crowd mobilized in San Francisco to make their solidarity with Palestine known, passionately but peacefully occupying all lanes of traffic from the Ferry Building to City Hall, local news outlets reported the march as a “dueling protest” with another low-key, pro-Israel gathering in the city.
Da Lin, reporting for CBS San Francisco, per the usual course in mainstream coverage, committed the oft repeated fallacy of blaming both sides equally, or the act of creating similar culpability where it cannot possibly exist. In his follow-up to the station’s video coverage he stated:
“[S]upporters on both sides of the Middle East conflict chanted slogans outside the Jewish temple Congregation Emanuel.
Palestinian supporters called Israeli troops terrorists for killing dozens of women and children in recent days, while supporters of Israel denounced attacks by Hamas.”
And that’s it basically. Nothing was said of Israeli occupation, siege, or the ongoing blockade for which Hamas has taken to armed resistance. Not a word was spoken about the fact that Israel is the 4th largest military power in the world, or that it receives full backing AND billions in funding from the U.S. No mention of the Palestinian children actually killed by the Israeli Defense Force, or that “defense” against a people with no army who are resisting colonial domination, alien occupation, and a racist regime is not a “conflict” — it’s genocide. 
But this is what blaming both sides does: It ignores material reality. Atif Choudhury, in a recent op-ed for the Huffington Post, put it well:
"Sentiments like “it’s both sides fault” may be true in the strictest sense of the principle that it takes two parties to have a conflict, but in practice the gulf is stark.
One side routinely have their houses demolished, while another is building mansions in their place. One side are routinely expelled from their homes; the other side is adverse possessing them like it’s a monopoly game. One side has water use rationed down to the drop; the other draws upon the same water supply to support swimming pools and fountains in illegal settlements. One side routinely has pregnant women and/or their newly born children die while trying to get through a maze of checkpoints in order to get to their local hospital, the other has roads criss-crossing occupied territory exclusively for their own use. One side can be jailed, shot, and even killed for protesting, while the other can vandalize, harass, and assault with impunity and has the full resources of a sovereign state act as their personal security guards.
The list of disparities goes on and on, and again does not even take into account a stark reality of each and every phase of this six decade tragedy — that one side routinely loses far more of their sons, daughters, husbands, and wives than the other.”
Being fed information is easy, understanding resistance is not
There is a sort of defacto pro-Zionism happening when we accept the mainstream narrative. It is frighteningly easy to do too (because it is meant to be). It is easy to digest a story which says two opponents are hashing out differences with all ignorance to nuance. One is winning. One is losing. Some are dying. Some are not. One is moral. The other is evil. It is a binarization of history which when one side is chosen as truth, the other’s history and struggle is executed.
Less we want to be culpable in the onslaught of Gaza, this is a time when we must make a choice between what is right, and what is easy. We have to realize when we listen to and accept the Zionist narrative we facilitate the conditions of Palestinian oppression. As Malcolm X once said, “If you aren’t careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people who are being oppressed and loving the people who are doing the oppressing.”
(Photo Credit: AmericaWakieWakie) 

america-wakiewakie:

Zionism & the Mainstream Press: Turn Off the TV Before You Become A Tool of Oppression | AmericaWakieWakie

Former Iranian Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadegh, before the world at the United Nations Convention in 1951, spoke to expose Britain’s colonialist domination of his country. In his address he said, “They [the British government] are trying to persuade world opinion that the lamb has devoured the wolf.”

These sentiments reverberate in the mainstream media’s current portrayal of Israeli domination and occupation over Palestinians. In such a narrative life is preserved and life is taken. But we who digest the news fed to us do something sinister when we listen or read unquestionably: We become the silencer attached to the tip of a rifle invading Palestinian homes… the stealth by which genocide encroaches upon a people, executing them without a sound.

The press is supposed to keep us informed, aware and alert, critically engaged in the events of the world, so that when we object or want to change the course of happening-history, we can. In reality the mainstream press has acted more to misinform us, to make us the silencers of bombs, missiles and bullets, enablers of war and genocide, than wielders of knowledge and actors for justice.  

Keeping the blinders on at all times  

As events in Gaza grow increasingly lethal, as more and more Palestinians suffer or are displaced by Israeli forces — deaths now top more than 560 — the Western news machine drones on and on framing story after story in colonist narratives. Pro-Zionist coverage has and continues to dominate prominent Western news outlets. We are never meant to know the truth of Palestinian struggle — even if large protests about it are happening in our backyard. 

Sunday’s  march in San Francisco, and elsewhere in the United States, turned-out crowds of thousands. Counted together, tens of thousands. Still, not more than a bleep made it to airtime on local news. When the protests have gotten coverage, they have been misconstrued.

After the crowd mobilized in San Francisco to make their solidarity with Palestine known, passionately but peacefully occupying all lanes of traffic from the Ferry Building to City Hall, local news outlets reported the march as a “dueling protest” with another low-key, pro-Israel gathering in the city.

Da Lin, reporting for CBS San Francisco, per the usual course in mainstream coverage, committed the oft repeated fallacy of blaming both sides equally, or the act of creating similar culpability where it cannot possibly exist. In his follow-up to the station’s video coverage he stated:

[S]upporters on both sides of the Middle East conflict chanted slogans outside the Jewish temple Congregation Emanuel.

Palestinian supporters called Israeli troops terrorists for killing dozens of women and children in recent days, while supporters of Israel denounced attacks by Hamas.”

And that’s it basically. Nothing was said of Israeli occupation, siege, or the ongoing blockade for which Hamas has taken to armed resistance. Not a word was spoken about the fact that Israel is the 4th largest military power in the world, or that it receives full backing AND billions in funding from the U.S. No mention of the Palestinian children actually killed by the Israeli Defense Force, or that “defense” against a people with no army who are resisting colonial domination, alien occupation, and a racist regime is not a “conflict” — it’s genocide. 

But this is what blaming both sides does: It ignores material reality. Atif Choudhury, in a recent op-ed for the Huffington Post, put it well:

"Sentiments like “it’s both sides fault” may be true in the strictest sense of the principle that it takes two parties to have a conflict, but in practice the gulf is stark.

One side routinely have their houses demolished, while another is building mansions in their place. One side are routinely expelled from their homes; the other side is adverse possessing them like it’s a monopoly game. One side has water use rationed down to the drop; the other draws upon the same water supply to support swimming pools and fountains in illegal settlements. One side routinely has pregnant women and/or their newly born children die while trying to get through a maze of checkpoints in order to get to their local hospital, the other has roads criss-crossing occupied territory exclusively for their own use. One side can be jailed, shot, and even killed for protesting, while the other can vandalize, harass, and assault with impunity and has the full resources of a sovereign state act as their personal security guards.

The list of disparities goes on and on, and again does not even take into account a stark reality of each and every phase of this six decade tragedy — that one side routinely loses far more of their sons, daughters, husbands, and wives than the other.”

Being fed information is easy, understanding resistance is not

There is a sort of defacto pro-Zionism happening when we accept the mainstream narrative. It is frighteningly easy to do too (because it is meant to be). It is easy to digest a story which says two opponents are hashing out differences with all ignorance to nuance. One is winning. One is losing. Some are dying. Some are not. One is moral. The other is evil. It is a binarization of history which when one side is chosen as truth, the other’s history and struggle is executed.

Less we want to be culpable in the onslaught of Gaza, this is a time when we must make a choice between what is right, and what is easy. We have to realize when we listen to and accept the Zionist narrative we facilitate the conditions of Palestinian oppression. As Malcolm X once said, “If you aren’t careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people who are being oppressed and loving the people who are doing the oppressing.”

(Photo Credit: AmericaWakieWakie) 

(via america-wakiewakie)

(via truth-has-a-liberal-bias)

“I was covering Ronald Reagan at that time. He was in Santa Barbara at his ranch when that happened, and quite frankly he didn’t want to leave. And his advisers realized how terrible this looked, and eventually persuaded him he had to fly back to Washington and had to give this speech to the nation, but it did take him four days.”
— Fox host Chris Wallace corrects Fox News’ repeated romanticization of Reagan’s response to a Soviet attack on a Korean airliner in 1983. (via mediamattersforamerica)

(via truth-has-a-liberal-bias)

america-wakiewakie:

The boy who clung to the paramedic: the story behind the photo | Electronic Intifada 

This photo of a boy injured in an Israeli strike clinging to a medic at al-Shifa hospital went viral on the Internet.

Thursday night, 17 July, was the heaviest yet since Israel’s bombardment of Gaza began almost two weeks ago.

Dozens of people arrived to Gaza City’s al-Shifa hospital, where I was on shift that night. Some arrived torn to pieces, some beheaded, some disfigured beyond recognition, although still alive and breathing.

Seemingly indiscriminate artillery fire, a new element in Israel’s assault, had exacted a heavy toll on civilians.

The medical staff were lucky to get a break of less than half an hour. Some spent it watching the flares and bombs Israel was raining on the eastern neighborhoods of Gaza City, while others refueled with coffee or lay down for a few moments.

The relative calm did not last long. At around 3am, about eight or nine casualties arrived at the emergency room all at once. The last to come in were four siblings — two of them little children, both about three years old, with relatively superficial wounds. But it was clear they were pulled from under rubble, their faces and clothes covered in dirt and dust.

Then came the older of the four siblings, a boy in his early teens. His head and face were covered in blood and he was pressing a rag to his head to stanch the flow. But his focus was on something else: “Save my little brother!” he kept screaming.

The last to arrive was his brother, the child in the above photo that circulated around the world.

"I want my father!"

He was carried in by a paramedic and immediately rushed to the intensive care unit, which is right next to the ER. He clung to the paramedic, crying, “I want my father, bring me my father!” until he had to be forced to let go.

As I stood by, alert for orders, a group of four medical personnel immediately started to treat the boy. But he kept kicking and screaming and calling for his father.

His injuries were serious: a wound to the left side of his head which could indicate a skull fracture and a large piece of shrapnel in his neck. Another piece of shrapnel had penetrated his chest and a third had entered his abdomen. There were many smaller wounds all over his body.

Immediate measures had to be taken to save his life; he was sedated so the medics could get to work.

Upon carefully examining the wounds, it appeared that the explosion from the artillery round sent flying small pieces of stone from the walls of his house, and that some of his wounds were caused by these high-velocity projectiles.

He was extremely lucky: his neck injury was just an inch away from a major artery, his chest injury penetrated all the way through but failed to puncture his lung, and his abdomen was struck by shrapnel that just missed his bowel.

Luck

He had a stroke of luck denied to many that night.

The medics performed heroic measures in a remarkably short time, and the little boy’s life was saved.

Meanwhile in the emergency room, the elder brother was stitched up and the younger two siblings were washed and thoroughly examined for possible hidden injuries.

Somehow, despite the horror and the pain, they were sleeping. I don’t know how they did it, but I felt envious and grateful for the divine mercy that found its way to them.

Their brother with the most serious wounds will almost certainly survive, but with many scars and a difficult recovery period, both physical and psychological.

Too many casualties came in that night, too many for me to get this boy’s name, to know whether he was reunited with his father, or even what became of the rest of his family.

But there’s one thing that I know for sure, which is that hundreds of children just like him suffered similar or worse injuries, and up to the moment of this writing, nearly eighty children just like him have been killed as Israel’s merciless attack goes on.

Belal Dabour is a recently graduated doctor from Gaza, Palestine. He blogs at belalmd.wordpress.com.

(Photo Credit: Ezz al-Zanoun / APA images)

(via truth-has-a-liberal-bias)