Caleb Maupin on evilness of imperialism, the Sino-Russian Eurasian alliance, the ugliness of Jim Crow, and the importance and duty of being on the right side of history.
Caleb Maupin
EDITED BY PATRICE GREANVILLE
Dispatch dateline | 25 Jul 2020
Live #118 - Saturday Night Conversation! Capitalism, Socialism, Revolution, Geopolitics, the Mexican Revolution, How Socialism Saved my Life, and much more.
Caleb's chats are the ideal tool for those who wish to acquire a solid understanding of contemporary history in an easy, accessible manner.
Caleb Maupin is one of the best guides to the multitude of news, lies, distortions, rumors, idiocies, hypocrisies, and ideologies that shape our world.
Caleb Maupin has worked as a journalist and political analyst for the last five years. He has reported from across the United States, as well as from Iran, the Gulf of Aden and Venezuela. He has been a featured speaker at many Universities, and at international conferences held in Tehran, Quito, and Brasilia. His writings have been translated and published in many languages including Farsi, Chinese, Russian, Arabic, Spanish, and Portuguese. He is originally from Ohio.
[premium_newsticker id=”154171″]
The Battle of Seattle was fought by the pro-war “left” in Northern Syria
The ongoing series of protests, riots and unrest following the death of George Floyd culminated in the establishment of a self-declared “autonomous zone” by activists in Seattle, Washington, after police abandoned a local precinct in the city’s Capitol Hill district. Lasting just three weeks until law enforcement retook the six block territory from occupants on July 1st, the Capitol Hill Organized Protest (CHOP) — initially called the Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone (CHAZ) — was a short-lived experiment which unfortunately exhibited all the contradictions of the so-called “left” that have become characteristic in the United States today. Although it is undeniable that American police have a brutality and racism problem (having been trained by Israel), within weeks it was clear that what began as spontaneous protests were hijacked for an establishment agenda. Meanwhile, the ill-fated demise of the Seattle commune should be understood as symptomatic of a larger problem within the U.S. left as a whole.
One of the most influential figures of the French Revolution, Maximilien Robespierre, who died 226 years ago this month, famously said that “the secret of freedom lies in educating people, whereas the secret of tyranny is in keeping them ignorant.”
The insurrectionary Paris Commune was established after the storming of the Bastille fortress on July 14, 1789.
Unfortunately, this protest movement could not be any less educational and the siege of the Seattle Police Department’s East Precinct was certainly no Bastille Day. Many have speculated as to why Mayor Jenny Durkan and the SPD seemingly allowed the protesters to occupy the neighborhood, while they enjoyed direct support from local politicians such as Seattle City Council member Kshama Sawant of the Trotskyite Socialist Alternative organization who fancies herself the first “socialist” to win an election in the city since Anna Louise Strong in 1916. However, the more meaningful question is what has this movement accomplished besides recoiling the U.S. working class further away from progressive politics?
The biggest misconception across the political spectrum, especially on the right, is that this leaderless and haphazard movement is somehow “Marxist.” Karl Marx, whose entire worldview was based on a material and scientific understanding of history, focused on the class system and would be spinning in his grave knowing what a mess identity politics has made in his name. In contrast, the ‘wokist’ cult at the center of these marches ignores both science and class with no political vision beyond destruction, vindictiveness, and the stifling of free speech. This is why the U.S. political establishment, which has been completely unable to implement the most elementary measures in providing healthcare and securing employment to Americans during the pandemic, is quite happy to jump on board a narrative that pits divisions of the working class against each other based on race while wealth surges up to the 1%.
The CHOP/CHAZ occupants reportedly established a reverse hierarchical social structure where whites self-flagellated by performing quasi-religious rituals of atonement for the sins of slavery. There was also a diversity quota of “centering” certain individuals based on their ethnic background, gender and sexual orientation to cede leadership roles at the co-op, with white participants coerced into overcoming their “fragility” (or sensitivity in discussing racism). Concurrent with the protests, corporate consultant and University of Washington professor Robin DiAngelo’s intellectually fraudulent book White Fragility shot to the top of The New York Times bestseller list and is a perfect example of how such identity politics fails in dealing with social issues. Collective punishment is never a suitable guiding principle in addressing social problems, nor is using a conception akin to the religious idea of original sin where “white privilege” is the root cause of racism. There were even mini-reparations demanded of repenting white protesters reminiscent of the collection plate passed around by worshippers in a church. This sort of bizarre and self-indulgent identity politics is much like what was widely mocked in a viral video of a Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) convention collapsing into infighting last year.
What began as protests against police brutality were not only derailed into efforts to set-up communes in major cities but a nationwide debate on statues, after the wave of demonstrations and rioting across the country led to the Taliban-style destruction of historical monuments perceived as glorifying racism. As a result, the toxic political atmosphere which surrounded the events in Charlottesville, Virginia in 2017 was reignited. While the calls for the removal of Confederate statues erected during the Reconstruction era is long overdue, more debatable is the removal of those honoring slave-owning Founding Fathers such as George Washington and Thomas Jefferson which were toppled in Portland, Oregon. This was followed by a statue of Union General Ulysses S. Grant being knocked over in San Francisco and calls to remove the Lincoln Memorial in D.C., two men who victoriously led the North in the Civil War. Regrettably, the prioritization of such iconoclastic gestures has not only defanged the protests but diverted them from bringing real change to social inequities in the immediate future.
This is not the first time we have witnessed these phenomena. Last year, a more troublesome example were the calls to remove a historic mural at George Washington High School in San Francisco that were capitulated to by the city school board. The thirteen panel mural, Life of Washington, painted in 1936 by Russian-American artist Victor Arnautoff was commissioned as part of the Federal Art Project, a New Deal program funded by the Works Progress Administration (WPA) which employed visual artists to create public works during the Great Depression. One controversial panel depicts George Washington pointing to a group of armed colonizers standing over the corpse of a Native American, while another fresco portrays two colonizers surveying land as slaves toil in a field. It would seem obvious to anyone that the mural is not only explicitly anti-racist but representative of an important period in U.S. history where art was a force for social change and progressive politics was at the center of American life. Arnautoff was a Russian immigrant who was an assistant to Mexican muralist Diego Rivera, while the WPA and its art program were dominated by communists such as the two men. Still, no matter the context or intent — the unflinching depiction of American history was deemed “offensive to certain communities” because students were “triggered” by the harsh realities illustrated.
This might seem unrelated, but the same illogic is behind the vigilantism of the statue removals. While the Arnautoff mural is clearly anti-racist and certain monuments may glorify slavery, the distinction is indecipherable to the social justice sect which needs its “safe space” from the uncomfortable truths of American history. The differentiation between a left-wing WPA mural opposing racism and colonial statue commending it is illegible to them. The entire purpose behind the Arnautoff mural is to make one uncomfortable because its subject matter is something no one should ever be at ease with. Yet its undeniable educational and artistic value did not prevent the San Francisco school board from voting to paint over it, while articles were published in The New York Times and even The Nation magazine applauding their decision. What on earth is happening to the left when it is censoring anti-racist art in the name of fighting racism?
While some activists have expressed concern that the protests have deviated from their original purpose, the right has fixated on the presence among the marches of “Antifa” which Trump wants to designate as a “terrorist organization”, a reckless idea given the completely decentralized nature of the group. The original Antifa movement in the 1930s had been part of the Communist Party of Germany (KPD) in its effort to form a popular front against fascism, but the dilettantes in the modern incarnation are closely associated with black bloc anarchism and other amateurish orientations. Two decades ago, Seattle had been the site of the 1999 protests against the World Trade Organization (WTO), often referred to as the ‘Battle of Seattle’, which saw 40,000 march against globalization. Some may recall this was where the black bloc first became notorious for injecting vandalism and senseless violence into peaceful demonstrations and were widely thought to have been infiltrated by law enforcement. In 2016, the current embodiment of Antifa first came to attention during protests on college campuses against speaking appearances by far right media personalities during the U.S. presidential election, including at the University of California at Berkeley which had ironically been the site of the Free Speech Movement in the 1960s.
Following Trump’s election, the stage was set in Charlottesville during the Unite the Right rally and counter-protests over the removal of a Robert E. Lee statue in August 2017 for ‘Antifa’ to be crowned as heroes shadowboxing the historical ghost of fascism. When the likes of The New York Times is suddenly promoting the black bloc, that’s your first clue something else is afoot. In order to prevent the emergence of a truly progressive movement in the wake of Hillary Clinton’s defeat, a false narrative was concocted by the political establishment about the significance of Trump’s victory, which we were told was the result of alleged Russian meddling and the racism of “deplorable” Trump voters. Instantly, any critique of the system which produced Trump disappeared and the establishment wing of the Democratic Party was able to neutralize the Bernie Sanders-led opposition in its ranks.
As a result, the vast majority of the left became convinced by the interpretation that Trump’s election was purely the outcome of a resurgence of “fascism”, thus making Trump the singular, most immediate danger — while U.S. imperialism and endless war continue unopposed, including the support for actual fascists in Ukraine. It should be understood that what Trump and the wave of pro-Zionist, Islamophobic right-wing populists in the EU represent is something qualitatively different. Still, anyone on the left who dares oppose U.S. imperialism today is risking being branded a ‘red-brown’ collaborator. The Democratic Party, which spearheaded the Orwellian idea of “humanitarian interventionism” used to justify the wholesale destruction of uncooperative nations by the American war machine in recent decades, has since tricked the majority of the left into unwittingly backing U.S. imperialism to unseat “dictators.” Even when the left today ostensibly opposes war, it is often forced to qualify its objections by repeating the same talking points about countries attacked by Washington used to justify it.
The U.S. foray in the Syrian war is a perfect example. Trump’s idea to designate Antifa as a terrorist group would be especially ironic considering that many American leftists who self-identify using the “Antifa” black and red standard have thrown their support behind the creation of another infamous “autonomous zone” in Northeast Syria established by mostly-Kurdish militias known as Rojava — with the help of none other than the U.S. military. There is even a self-proclaimed International Freedom Battalion of American and European volunteers fighting to defend the enclave that purports to be in the tradition of the International Brigades which defended the Spanish Republic during the Spanish Civil War. These “Antifa” conscripts fight alongside the YPG (People’s Protection Units), a Kurdish-majority militia which has been rebranded by the Pentagonas the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF). These leftists are apparently in serious need of a history lesson, considering it was the Soviet Union alone which intervened to defend the Spanish Republic from fascism, not the United States. From Washington’s perspective, CHOP/CHAZ should be considered blowback from this policy.
The U.S. creation of the SDF has not been without controversy, as the YPG is widely regarded as the Syrian branch of the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) in Turkey which Washington’s NATO ally regards as a terrorist organization. While the Kurds and their Western volunteers may believe they are creating an anarchist utopia, in reality they are infantryman for the Zionist plan to balkanize Syria and prevent Damascus from accessing it own resources. So it makes perfect sense that they would try to replicate what they learned in Afrin in an American city using Rojava as a model. When Trump tried to follow through on his anti-interventionist pledges as a candidate and pull U.S. troops out of Syria, it sparked outrage from the pro-war “left” which glorifies Rojava as a ‘libertarian socialist’ and ‘direct democracy’ experiment, even though non-Kurds such as Arabs and Assyrian Christians face ethnic cleansing at hands of Kurdish nationalists in their efforts to create an ethno-state.
The ideological inspiration for the Rojava federation is the Jewish-American Zionist anarchist philosopher Murray Bookchin who was especially influential to PKK founder Abdullah Öcalan. Unbeknownst to many, Bookchin was also a noted Zionist — but this is not as unlikely a paradox as it may seem. After all, Israel itself was initially established with the settlement of communes and the Zionist form of “autonomous zones” known as kibbutz (“gathering” in Hebrew). Even prior to WWII, European Zionists and early kibbutniks came to Mandatory Palestine as illegal immigrants and began living in their communes while fusing Jewish nationalism and their own conception of socialism, an amalgamation not unlike what the Kurds are practicing in Syria today. One other highly influential thinker in the anarchist community who purports to be a ‘libertarian socialist’, Noam Chomsky, was himself part of the Zionist kibbutz movement in his youth. This explains why Chomsky would call for a continuation of the U.S. occupation of northern Syria on the basis of “protecting the Kurds“, who are trying to repeat the formula used to found Israel to create a Syrian Kurdistan as another U.S. protectorate in the Middle East.
It is no coincidence that in the manifesto listing the demands of the sit-in in Seattle, nowhere to be found is the defunding of the Pentagon — the primary supplier through the 1033 Program of the militarized police violence being protested. The same cognitively dissonant left calling to “defund the police”, which will almost certainly be used as a pretext to privatize them, completely ignores endless U.S. wars abroad and opposed efforts by the Trump administration to scale back expansionism in Syria. The focus on the tearing down of statues from America’s colonial ‘past’ has also coincided with Israel’s preparations in colonizing what remains of Palestinian territory with the annexation of the West Bank — where are the mass protests to stop that? If Black Lives Matter dared focus on AIPAC, it would be shut down very quickly. In 2016, when BLM endorsed the Palestinian-led Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) campaign to boycott Israel, their previously enjoyed benefits suddenly were in jeopardy and was revealed to be the direct result of sabotage by the Zionist lobby.
In the last several decades, there has been a retreat of class conscious forces in U.S. political life, especially after the fall of the Soviet Union. The degenerate form of the left that exists today is an unfortunate result of the academization of social issues and the influence of the Frankfurt School critical theorists whose bourgeoisification of Marxism reduced it to a lens by which to critique culture and the arts while removing its class politics. The politically correct obsession with the policing of language by the postmodern cult of identity politics is excluding the working class from the conversation and counteracting its revolutionary potential. The CIA fronts in the Open Society, Ford, and Kellogg Foundations of the non-profit industrial complex have successfully corralled the protests while no substantial change has been made to the real ills in U.S. society where the 1% has made trillions during the pandemic and subsequent economic depression. While the masses are busy tipping over statues and monuments in a crusade to purify history, the ruling class is laughing all the way to the bank.
 |
Interesting observations from Michael Parenti. Reflection on the questions of 'relative' and absolute oppression. The perspective of workers in struggle - un...
youtu.be
|
Max Parry is an independent journalist and geopolitical analyst. His writing has appeared widely in alternative media. Max may be reached at maxrparry@live.com 
[post-views]
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS
A Deep State Grudge Against Bernie Sanders?
Caleb Maupin
[dropcap]A[/dropcap]fter the Democratic Primary Debate on February 7th, 2020, MSNBC host, Chris Matthews, did what he normally does, which is give his opinion. However, instead of being clear or coherent and basing his opinion on facts, he let loose a very paranoid sounding, and somewhat confused diatribe against US Senator Bernie Sanders, the Presidential candidate currently leading in the polls.
He said: “I have my own views of the word ‘socialist’ and I’d be glad to share them with you in private. They go back to the early 1950s. I have an attitude about them. I remember the Cold War, I have an attitude towards Castro. I believe if Castro and the Reds had won the Cold War there would have been executions in Central Park and I might have been one of the ones getting executed. And certain other people would be there cheering, okay? So, I have a problem with people who take the other side. I don’t know who Bernie supports over these years. I don’t know what he means by socialist.”
This is not the only odd primetime TV moment related to Bernie Sanders and his presidential campaign. Appearing on Tucker Carlson’s program in January of 2019, former Assistant FBI Director, Terry Tuchie, proclaimed:
“The electorate in some places is putting more and progressives and self-described socialists in positions and, ironically, years ago – when I first got into the FBI – one of the missions of the FBI in its counterintelligence efforts was to try to keep these people out of office.”
Why did they call it “COINTELPRO”?
Many Americans would roll their eyes if they were told that the FBI had interfered in elections and systemically worked to destroy the lives of activists, resulting in multiple deaths. The term “conspiracy theory” would be thrown out and people would exclaim: “Everyone knows America has freedom!” “This country isn’t a dictatorship! That could never happen here!”
The knowledge, or lack thereof, relating to the FBI’s Counter Intelligence Program is a deeply tragic example of how easily the American public is influenced. The program was first revealed when FBI files were stolen from offices and leaked to the press in 1971. When the Congressional Church Committee investigated the FBI and CIA in 1975, their misdeeds became a matter of public record. However, afterward it disappeared from public consciousness.
The Congressional testimony and files released under the Freedom of Information Act revealed that the FBI had a massive program with the sole purpose of meddling in US politics. The FBI worked to destroy the US Communist Party, despite the fact that the Supreme Court had specifically ruled that it was a legal organization in its 1957 Yates v. United States ruling.
The FBI went after the Civil Rights Movement, planting stories in the media, and slandering Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. as a homosexual and a Soviet agent. The anti-Vietnam War protest movement was also targeted, as were many left-wing and Black Nationalist groups. FBI actions resulted in the death of many activists from the Black Panther Party.
The Socialist Workers Party sued the FBI, documenting 18 years of harassment which had destroyed lives, prevented victories at the ballot box, and otherwise violated US law. The organization was awarded a settlement of $264,000 in 1987.
Among those who campaigned for the Socialist Workers Party in the 1980 and 1984 elections, as the court proceedings against the most powerful law enforcement agency in the United States went on, was an up and coming Vermont politician named Bernie Sanders.
So, why was this FBI program called COINTELPRO or Counter Intelligence Program? The reason was that the FBI did not consider left-wing political parties and activism to be a legitimate part of American discourse. The Communist Party USA, and eventually the Civil Rights Movement, Black Nationalism, and the larger left-wing milieu, were labelled as “intelligence” because they were considered to be penetration of the United States by the Soviet Union and China.
During the 1930s, The Soviet Union became a global superpower with its 5 year economic plans. The Soviet-led Communist International had pre-empted the Second World War by building massive anti-fascist coalitions starting in 1935. While the Communist Party USA openly used the slogan “Communism is 20th Century Americanism” and insisted it was a domestic political movement rooted in progressive and democratic struggles, the FBI considered the Communist Party USA to be nothing more than a wing of the KGB. The fact that the party had longtime labor giants like William Z. Foster, salt of the earth, Midwestern American steelworkers like Gus Hall, or beloved African American academics like Angela Davis as its leaders, made no difference.
Different Strategies to Oppose Marxism
The reality is, however, that not all of the American deep state agreed with the FBI. The US Central Intelligence Agency, following the strategies of Zbiegnew Brzezniski, had the opposite approach. With the Congress for Cultural Freedom Program, the CIA funneled money to Marxist and Communist writers and thinkers in the USA and Western Europe. The Frankfurt School, a German institution that pushed an anti-Soviet version of Marxism that focused on cultural criticism, was covertly built up and supported. The CIA bankrolled the publication of Partisan Review, a Trotskyite magazine that pushed a critique of western capitalism alongside a condemnation of the USSR and China. All of these efforts resulted in the historic breaks, in which the Italian Communist Party, the Spanish Communist Party, and other massive Communist organizations denounced the Soviet Union. Zbiegnew Brzezniski spoke very enthusiastically about the “Eurocommunists”as useful to the United States in its geopolitical efforts.
Left-wing voices were essential in the CIA’s effort to fight the Soviet Union with soft power. Joint “days of action” against Nuclear energy in which Soviet citizens and US citizens took to the streets simultaneously, along with a constant inflow of western cultural figures in the Soviet Union, all set the stage for the fall of the USSR in the 1980s.
But this did not stop the Republican Party, voices linked to the military industrial complex, and the FBI itself from denouncing anything but full on anti-communism as treason. A clear difference of strategy existed, and the fall of Jimmy Carter and the rise of Ronald Reagan represented a clear polarization within the US intelligence and military apparatus.
Can Bernie Sanders be forgiven?
In the 1970s, Bernie Sanders sounded like a Marxist. He called for the workers to control the means of production. He was associated with Trotskyists, Social-Democrats and peace activists. He praised Fidel Castro and the Sandinistas of Nicaragua. Sanders always had strong criticism of the USSR, and his admiration of international leftist forces never seemed to go beyond Latin America.
In the 1990s, after the fall of the Soviet Union, Bernie Sanders foreign policy views shifted even closer to the Pentagon. Despite being a longtime peace activist, Sander’s supported Clinton and NATO’s bombing of Yugoslavia in 1999. This shift prompted peace activists to protest in front of his office, and ended his friendship with Marxist writer, Michael Parenti. Sanders supported the US invasion of Afghanistan in 2001, though he strongly opposed the US invasion of Iraq in 2003.
Though Sander’s praised Hugo Chavez in his early years, in 2016 he denounced him as a “dead Communist dictator.” Sanders has spoken of Maduro, Chavez’ successor, in harsh terms such as “tyrant.”
Furthermore, Sanders no longer advocates the Marxist understanding of socialism. He has made this clear on numerous occasions, saying: “I don’t believe the government should own the means of production, but I do believe that the middle class and the working families who produce the wealth of America deserve a fair deal.”
At one 2015 Presidential debate, Sanders went as far as saying that he does not oppose capitalism, and that Democratic Socialism exists merely to facilitate a profit centered economy, saying:
“Everybody is in agreement. We are a great entrepreneurial nation. We have to encourage that. Of course, we have to support small and medium-size businesses. But you can have all of the growth that you want, and it doesn’t mean anything if all of the new income and wealth is going to the top 1 percent… We should look to countries like Denmark, like Sweden and Norway and learn from what they have accomplished for their working people.”
But the tone of the Chris Matthew rant about public executions seems to indicate that many within the US deep state do not believe in Sanders change of heart. Despite the Soviet Union having collapsed and Sanders’ views drastically shifting, it appears that many in the US government view him as a Soviet agent.
The beliefs underlying the COINTELPRO program, that all left-wing views are merely an expression of foreign influence appears to be very well alive.
As Sanders polls well, and wins democratic primaries, the question must be asked: Will this long standing deep-state grudge be strong enough to keep him from being the Democratic Nominee?
Originally published in New Eastern Outlook
Caleb Maupin is a widely acclaimed speaker, writer, journalist, and political analyst. He has traveled extensively in the Middle East and in Latin America. He was involved with the Occupy Wall Street movement from its early planning stages, and has been involved many struggles for social justice. He is an outspoken advocate of international friendship and cooperation, as well as 21st Century Socialism. He doesn’t shy away from the word “Communism” when explaining his political views, and advocates that the USA move toward some form of “socialism with American characteristics” rooted in the democratic and egalitarian traditions often found in American history. He argues that the present crisis can only be abetted with an “American Rebirth” in which the radicalism and community-centered values of the country are re-established and strengthened.
[premium_newsticker id=”211406″]
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS
Read it in your language • Lealo en su idioma • Lisez-le dans votre langue • Lies es in Deiner Sprache • Прочитайте это на вашем языке • 用你的语言阅读
[google-translator]
Keep truth and free speech alive by supporting this site.
Donate using the button below, or by scanning our QR code.
And before you leave
THE DEEP STATE IS CLOSING IN
The big social media —Google, Facebook, Instagram, Twitter—are trying to silence us.
Antifa: A Look at the Antifascist Movement Confronting White Supremacists in the Streets
A crosspost with Dandelion Salad, site of first iteration
Image by Karla Cote via Flickr
with Chris Hedges
RT America on Sep 30, 2017
Mark Bray, author of Antifa: The Anti-Fascist Handbook discusses the resurgence of the movement to counter the rise of the far-right and responds to Chris Hedges’ critique of the violent tactics used by the activists. RT Correspondent Anya Parampil looks at the origins of Antifa.
Antifa: A Look at the Antifascist Movement Confronting White Supremacists in the Streets
Democracy Now! on Aug 16, 2017
https://democracynow.org – President Trump is facing widespread criticism for his latest comments on the deadly white supremacist protest in Charlottesville, Virginia. Speaking at Trump Tower on Tuesday, Trump said the violence was in part caused by what he called the “alt-left.” President Trump’s comment were widely decried. Former Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney wrote on Twitter, “No, not the same. One side is racist, bigoted, Nazi. The other opposes racism and bigotry. Morally different universes.” We look at one of the groups who confronted the white supremacists in the streets: the antifascists known as antifa. We speak to Mark Bray, author of the new book, Antifa: The Anti-Fascist Handbook.
Part 2 || Antifa: A Look at the Anti-Fascist Movement Confronting White Supremacists in the Streets
https://democracynow.org – President Trump is facing widespread criticism for his latest comments on the deadly white supremacist protest in Charlottesville, Virginia. On Tuesday Trump said the violence was in part caused by what he called the alt-left.
We continue our conversation with Mark Bray. He is a lecturer at Dartmouth College. His new book is Antifa: The Anti-Fascist Handbook.
from the archives:
Abby Martin: Voices From People’s Congress of Resistance
Abby Martin: From 1776 to Trump: White Mobs, Racist Heroes and Hidden History
The Road to Charlottesville: Reflections on 21st Century U.S. Capitalist Racism by Paul Street
Creative Anti-Nazism by David Swanson + Confederate Statues Come Down in Baltimore and Durham
Charlottesville is a Call to Action Against Fascism + Deandre Harris on Attack by White Supremacists
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS
Read it in your language • Lealo en su idioma • Lisez-le dans votre langue • Lies es in Deiner Sprache • Прочитайте это на вашем языке • 用你的语言阅读
[google-translator]
Keep truth and free speech alive by supporting this site.
Donate using the button below, or by scanning our QR code.
And before you leave
THE DEEP STATE IS CLOSING IN
The big social media —Google, Facebook, Instagram, Twitter—are trying to silence us.
