There have been two “walkouts” from the World Conference Against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance in Geneva….The first walkout, led by the United States, was of those countries boycotting the entire conference. These included the U.S., Canada, Israel, New Zealand and Australia—the major settler states that through genocide displaced Indigenous populations from their territory. The Netherlands, the plunderer of Indonesia, and Germany and Italy, which waged murderous wars against barely armed African populations, joined them, as did Poland, now itself a semi-colony.
A few of the largest historical despoilers and plunderers of the colonized world held back from this first walkout. France and Britain, for example, which had divided up most of Africa, the Middle East and large parts of South and East Asia, opted to participate in the conference. This gave them the opportunity to disrupt from inside—which they did a few days into the meetings.
On April 21, when President Ahmadinejad of Iran spoke denouncing the racist actions of the Israeli state against Palestinians, most of the U.N. delegates applauded the speech….However, Britain, France and the rest of the European Union countries present walked out, accusing Ahmadinejad of “racism”.
Their actions spoke louder than any words of phony concern…There has to be a vigorous struggle against racism precisely because the imperialist powers and their settler states—which for historical reasons are mostly white—have promoted racism against peoples of color and all Indigenous peoples throughout the world in order to better exploit them. The ones who wound up walking out of the conference on racism are exactly those most guilty of racism. And everyone who remained knows it.
— Racist States Walk out of Geneva meeting (via dialecticsof)
1:10 pm • 1 September 2014 • 436 notes
The topic of prostitution makes me rage because I know how the majority of young liberals on this site think of it. And then there are the facts and stats sitting here being ignored.
1:08 pm • 1 September 2014 • 7 notes
“Seventy percent of women in prostitution in San Francisco, California were raped (Silbert & Pines, 1982). A study in Portland, Oregon found that prostituted women were raped on average once a week (Hunter, 1994). Eighty-five percent of women in Minneapolis, Minnesota had been raped in prostitution (Parriott, 1994). Ninety-four percent of those in street prostitution experienced sexual assault and 75% were raped by one or more johns (Miller, 1995). In the Netherlands (where prostitution is legal) 60% of prostituted women suffered physical assaults, 70% experienced verbal threats of assault, 40% experienced sexual violence and 40% were forced into prostitution and/or sexual abuse by acquaintances (Vanwesenbeeck, et al. 1995, 1994)… The prevalence of PTSD among prostituted women from 5 countries was 67% (Farley et. al. 1998), which is the same range as that of combat veterans (Weathers et. al. 1993).”
From Farley et. al. (2003) “Prostitution in Nine Countries” (x)
Prostitution is created and supported by an established culture of men’s perceived and socialized entitlement to sex. This is also reminds me of how many people on this website as well as offline tend to glorify sex work (of its various forms; street prostitution, massage brothels, escort services, outcall services, strip clubs, lapdancing, phone sex, adult and child pornography, video and internet pornography and prostitution tourism) by assuming that it financially empowers women without realizing that a) Sex must not be a commodity; its commodification in patriarchy targets women firstly and most violently, b) Re: Young female students and privatized education. Young female students taking up prostitution/pornography is often extolled by liberals and viewed as sexually/financially liberating whereas the question should not concern individual agency but the one that must be asked is completely forgotten: Why is she compelled to take up such a profession in the first place. And the answer directly leads you to understand how neoliberalism/the privatization of education hits young women in a very different and vicious manner and also that marketplaces are so cutthroat now that basic survival, without having to turn your body into a commodity, is virtually impossible in this era. This further reminds me of how often white, Western women will put a spin on prostitution and assert that if they enjoy it, everyone else does too. Which is false.
If you read Prostitution, Liberalism, and Slavery, you will learn: “Only a tiny percentage of all women in prostitution are there because they freely choose it. For most, prostitution is not a real choice because physical safety, equal power with buyers, and real alternatives don’t exist. These are the conditions that would permit genuine consent. Most of the 1% who choose prostitution are privileged because of their ethnicity and class and they have escape options. Poor women and women of color don’t have these options.” Again, as I’ve said before, liberal individual agency becomes an abstract concept in this debate of empowerment because it fails to account for the material conditions of the majority of prostitutes, which is not a pleasant picture as liberal Western women would have you think. Ask the average prostitute in Pakistan or Ukraine or Nigeria about the empowerment of her work and she will think you’re insane.
I would urge everyone to watch Farley’s lecture why it is wrong to pay for sex.
"If we ignore the evidence for the structural inequalities of sex, race, and class in prostitution and if we ignore the clear statements of women who tell us that they want to escape prostitution, then we end up in a postmodern neverland where liberal theory unanchored to material reality frames prostitution as a problem of sexual choice, workers’ rights or sex trafficking as an immigration problem. Prostitution is the international business of sexual exploitation. Describing the strategic focus on sex buyers, a Swedish detective said, “trafficking is a business, we try to destroy the market.” Yes." [x]
So, it’s a lot uglier and horrifying than we think it is.
(Source: exgynocraticgrrl, via padarnaalat-deactivated972100372)
1:03 pm • 1 September 2014 • 571 notes
“And there it is. A nearly all-white crowd chanting to a nearly all-black crowd, “Shoot! Shoot! Shoot!” Contemporary racism encapsulated by an attempt to package it as support for the police, exposed by calls to shoot black men.
There are no words.”
— Ferguson protesters chanted, “Hands up, don’t shoot!” Darren Wilson supporters replied, “Shoot!” (via brutereason)
12:34 pm • 1 September 2014 • 7,067 notes
Pakistan is not your talking point, it isn’t your political news of the day, the trending global current affair you want to learn so you seem more cultured to your friends. It’s not your choice blogging topic. It isn’t Gaza or Ferguson. Sometimes spreading awareness can backfire and do more harm than good. Why are you caring about Pakistan now when this protest was under way for the last two weeks and when many people were discontented with the Nawaz regime for the past year? How can you say anything about it when you don’t take loadshedding into account and in fact have never sweltered in the summer without air conditioning because the circulation of electricity is limited and available foremost to the rich and privileged, something directly contributing to the people’s agitation? How can you say anything about it when you know nothing about the military dictatorship Pakistanis suffered in the 1990s and the recent 2000s? Are you only caring about it now because the crisis has escalated, friction and violence have increased and it’s going to make headlines and receive more attention? You will view this event in an isolated vacuum, decontextualized from the factors that produced it in the first place. Martial law is imminent. The bourgeois democracy we suffered has all the traits of a regime, but a military coup cannot help us again.
My only request is to be sensitive in how you circulate information. My only request is that you don’t sensationalize it. My only request is that you don’t use language that trivializes and insults the people on the ground just because they’re faraway from you. You cannot understand a political crisis without knowing the 60+ year long history of the country, its institutional dynamics, the praetorianism that has characterized the state since its inception. And most importantly, you cannot understand this without knowing the mood, hope and aspirations of the people in the face of mass poverty, government corruption and military subjugation. The masses are being manipulated and used as pawns. Their rightful rage against bourgeois democracy that is both class exploitative and repressive in freedom of speech is being coopted by highly opportunistic and dishonest politicians cum demagogues, Tahir al-Qadri and Imran Khan, who care more about expanding their power than on nation-building and helping the people, and who are most likely in cahoots with the military. Seasoned Pakistani activist Lal Khan described it best
Khan is a right-wing politician with religious and national chauvinism at the core of his ideological bearings. Qadri is an impostor mixing religious mysticism and demagogic sloganeering including references to poverty, deprivation and welfare, but this is more rhetorical than any serious programme. Both are staunch supporters of free market economics, foreign investment and neoliberal capitalism and, hypothetically speaking, if they ever came into power, they would be steered by the military, imperialism, and financial institutions like the World Bank and the IMF…
The PTI of Imran Khan, with its azaadi march, has no real solution for the woes of the populace. Qadri’s revolution does not even have a name, what to say of a concrete programme or a strategy. Both totally fail to call for even the basic of human needs, i.e. free health and education. They will not dare call for the nationalisation of corporate vultures known as the IPPs to end the curse of load shedding. The PTI leadership is actually a reunion of old Aitchisonians. None of them would ever call for the nationalisation of their mother institution, built by the British imperialists to create and educate a class for the perpetuation of their colonial rule. It is an institution reflecting the grandeur of the colonial and postcolonial elite, disgustingly slavish to their imperialist bosses.
Health and education are the most profitable businesses after the drug trade and ransom in today’s Pakistan. Both these radical forces cannot touch these and other leeching enterprises as their support and finances are dependent on these very entrepreneurs and imperialist monopolies. For that matter, all political parties of the present bourgeois political order are representatives of these different black and grey crony capitalist and feudal classes. These ‘freedom’ and ‘revolution’ marches are in fact primitive putsches to derail and subvert the real tide of a revolutionary tide that can erupt from below. The serious strategists of capital can feel the heat of this seething revolt underneath the surface. They are terrified of a volcanic explosion of society. Once that class struggle erupts with a Marxist leadership it will be unstoppable; the state, clergy and the political elite will be swept away. The capitalist, landlord and imperialist stranglehold shall be obliterated. It will break this boisterous stagnation and society will surge ahead towards a socialist victory.
What we’re seeing unfolding in Pakistan right now may be an engineered military coup or the army propping up the political puppets that will most closely cater to its interests and appease the severely agitated people. The state police feel threatened by the organized protesters in their tens and thousands and react in police brutality. The economy has suffered under Nawaz, Pakistan has come into the yoke of the IMF and the energy crisis is neverending. The military has already become involved as a so-called ‘mediator’ when in reality it possesses foremost control over the situation because it is the most powerful institution in Pakistani society. Pro-Musharraf and dictatorship people have already come out of the woodwork and are calling for army intervention. In the end, the people lose. For them, both openly military and democratic regimes are exploitative, murderous and oppressive. Keep the average working class Pakistani foremost in mind whenever you blog, tweet, or post about this. They’re the ones who are most adversely affected by this, and they’re the ones paying for it with their lives.
12:40 pm • 31 August 2014 • 1,037 notes
"Yeah Anita is such a bitch how dare she make video commentaries about video games being ~sexist~ they aren’t sexist our community isn’t discriminatory, stupid feminazi bitch, what do we have to do to prove to you feminists that sexism doesn’t exist and there is no problem? Hm, a good way would be to constantly harass and prove your point over and over. You know what a better way is, is to run Anita out of her house. Yeah!! Let’s run this bitch out of her house literally to prove that women don’t face intense backlash for speaking out against obviously unreal sexism! And to prove there is no misogynistic problem" — Embarrassing as all hell Men/Gamers/Dudebros/MRAs/Asshole internet users around the world & Co. United TM All Rights Reserved
1:12 am • 31 August 2014 • 12 notes
This is not Gaza but Islamabad.
Police just tear gassed and shot at a protest. 7 people dead, 144 injured, numbers still climbing.
Could someone please explain the situation in Pakistan to me?
11:55 pm • 30 August 2014 • 68 notes
I just hate that Americans need Jon Stewart/liberal comedians to denounce something for it to be an issue worthy of attention. It’s just sad.
Why is that sad? Jon Stewart is scrutinizing mainstream media for their years of visible decline when it comes to journalistic standards. He (and The Daily Show staff obviously) fact checks everything they say and if they’re being misleading he straight up calls them on it. The fact that he happens to be funny about it is a bonus not a hinderance. Sure it shouldn’t be people’s only source of information but it’s not like that’s what he wants anyway. I mean it sucks that some people are only informed of things when he talks addresses them but isn’t that ultimately a good thing too? That’s at least one more outlet shining light on important issues and getting people involved. This day and age when every “serious” news station is clamboring for the flashiest headline I’m glad there’s a “liberal comedian” or two doing their part.
It’s pathetic because it reflects priorities and the hierarchy of voices. The same “scrutiny” you’ve mentioned has already been voiced by Black people since the very beginning. The same “critique” has already been issued by Black people for years now. Yet for some curious reason, the amount of attention they deserve is never given to them. They have to fight for it. But when a white man like Jon Stewart says something, suddenly it’s novel and original commentary. Ultimately it isn’t a good thing because it’s seen as a part of entertainment culture, it is eventually overlooked as a skit but not a perpetuating broad-based cultural issue. It doesn’t matter if he says it or not. If he really cared, he’d point at the fact that when he says something, it’s heard. But when a Black person says the same thing, it’s either dismissed or condemned. That shit is hypocritical and your average liberal comedian won’t raise this point because it highlights his standing in society. You ought to think harder.
11:54 pm • 30 August 2014 • 323 notes
||(thinks something mean)
||dont be fucking rude
10:54 pm • 30 August 2014 • 46,441 notes
It literally kills me when men think they know women’s fashion better than women
(Source: liamdunbarsss, via waitingforrevan)
10:50 pm • 30 August 2014 • 80,240 notes