The Spanish Civil War: One enemy but no friends.

The Spanish Civil war was one of the bloodiest and most brutal conflicts of the 20th century. It is often untalked about or even unknown, but Spain was the first battleground in which Fascism and the Rest fought out for victory. It started when Franco wanted to reimpose the monarchy with a coup d'etat. The 2nd Spanish Republic was trying to lift Spain out of the feudal system it was still in. Only three regions had been industrialized: the Basque Country, Catalonia and Madrid. The rest of Spain was still agricultural and some parts, still remote. The Republic was in charge of introducing democracy into the country and of passing laws for agricultural reforms. However, because parliamentary democracy is a slow process and the country's peasants and workers had been organized by Anarchists and Socialists in unions or not, within weeks the country was paralysed by strikes and demonstrations. Very soon the Republic was forced to bring in the military, to maintain its power over the people, who were increasingly growing restless. The traditional centres of power: clergy, nobility and military and those close to them saw that the Republic could not control the situation and in 1936 organized a 'secret' coup d'etat. I say 'secret' because the Anarchists in the CNT-FAI (Anarchist Union) had discovered it through their espionage apparatus. So, in part, we could say that the Spanish Republic took part in the coup, as it did nothing to stop it; it ignored the information the Aarchists gave them. The Socialists and Anarchists practically controlled the factories and the fields. So when the military rised in every city in the country two days before the planned time, the resistance replied defeating half of them and giving out the weapons to the citizens. In the Spanish Civil War we can see how amazing workers unity can be and also how sectarian it can become. First of all, they took over half of the military forts of the country and then, when the power of the Republic had dissapeared, collectivised the land. Factories continued to run and communities continued to work, but without the elite in charge. But secondly, the many groups that formed part of the resistance: The International brigade and forces, Catalan and Basque nationalists, trotskyists, stalinists, anarchists and progressive capitalists were the key to the downfall of the movement. There was no cohesion amongst them. There was one common enemy, but the resistance would not fight in unity against it. In the backlines political skirmishes were constant. Barcelona had become the scene of "the civil war in the civil war". Its streets were a battleground amongst all of the resistance factions, even though the enemy was closing in 300 km to the west.
In the end the Republic collapsed and Franco won. 39 years of a fascist dictatorship followed, which caused many people to exile and at the end of the day a lot of suffering.

This lack of cohesion is still apparent in the revolutionary left. We may all have our differences and the way we reach our goals may be different, but it pays to create ties and help eachother every now and then, for specific long or short-term campaigns. The ISO may be trotskyist, Worker's Party Maoist and Beyond Resistance, Anarchist; but we all want to improve worker's rights. We all know that the parliamentary parties will not give us workers any improvements, so we should earn them ourselves, united. This doesn't mean we have to accept every opinion of the other groups, just that we have to remain united for the sake of the workers. This won't dilute our politics, it can only strengthen them. Through debates, arguments and demonstrations.

YFTR.

The Native America.

It's dificult to believe that some places in the US, in the 21sr century still lack running water or electricity, except if you're a Native American that is. The US isn't the land of the free for them either. How is America free at all then, if you can only abide capitalist rules to stay on top of misery?
Here's a third world America, found in the Huffington post.

Julian Assange, accused of raping a system he merely exposed.

We all know who Julian Assange is and we've all developped our own opinions of him. For some he is a thief, for stealing secret documents which they believe can actually threaten the lives of a few. For others he has merely done the honest thing, showing the world's citizens what their governments are actually doing but deny. I'm closer to the latter position. I think those threatened are in positions where they can take the diplomatic immunity card. What's more, I don't think we can compare the lives of so many civilians dead in Afghanistan or Iraq, hitherto hidden from the public records with those of a few diplomats who've been living a relatively simple life.
I think we are in trouble if it becomes a crime to tell the truth, especially when those who represent us don't, and are paid to. All Wikileaks has done is expose the world's governments but especially the US's imperialist policies and secret wars. Because most of the leaks concern US embassies, or US wars or US economic policies. At the very least US intersts in the world.
Would Palestinians have been happy to know that Fatah wanted the Israelis to bomb Hamas, fellow Palestinians? I think not. Do Saudis want Iran bombed, by the U.S.? I think not. Was the UN aware that the US was spying on the organization and its members? I doubt it. Soon Wikileaks is going to reveal the actions of the Bank of America. Exposing the realities of the capitalist system as a whole. It is about time people realize that this system has stopped working for the masses. It works for the Prime ministers, Presidents, parliamentaries and polititians, but that's about it. People are no longer even allowed to know what is happening in the world. I quote from Socialist Alternative:

Charles Krauthammer, a Washington Post op-ed columnist, was bluntest of all:
The problem is not that the purloined cables exposed US hypocrisy or double-dealing. Good God, that’s the essence of diplomacy. That’s what we do; that’s what everyone does…
“That’s what we do.” What sort of a system is this where those whose job it is supposed to be to hold those in power to account can be so blasé in the face of rank corruption of the highest order, at the highest levels? On what other planet could such forthright, frank assessment be useful propaganda? “Lies, assassinations, rank hypocrisy? Never mind, it has always been like this don’t you know?” 

Did you know that the lawyer defending the two rape victims, Claes Borgstrom, is also a polititian? Maybe he's also affected by the leaks? Why else did he re-open a closed case?

Assange isn't perfect either. If he in fact has raped those two victims, he should pay for it. However two judges have decided that he's innocent, and this accusation came just in time. If the US, interpol or whoever wanted to accuse assange of something, they had this. People despise thiefs and fraudsters but especially hate rapists. The trauma rapists cause doesn't go away. If these two victims aren't actually victims, they are downplaying the suffering millions, regretfully, suffer. They are almost making rape seem as an excuse, or a joke. It clearly isn't. Whether rapists do it because of society or their past is a different question but rape isn't something which we can laugh about, or misapply.
For all I know, Assange is reported to be authoritarian within Wikileaks, imposing his point of view among others. Also, Wikileaks' bank accounts have never been made public and when Bradley Manning was arrested in relation to the leaks, Wikileaks never gave him the money they had raised to help his case.

He may not be perfect, but in my world only liars are bad. He has been tagged a criminal for telling the truth. Free Speech has been kicked out of the backdoor. I'll finish with Assange's words:

[T]hose who commit abuses against humanity or against the law find abusing legitimate secrecy to conceal their abuse all too easy. People of good conscience have always revealed abuses by ignoring abusive strictures. It is not Wikileaks that decides to reveal something. It is a whistleblower or a dissident who decides to reveal it. Our job is to make sure that these individuals are protected, the public is informed and the historical record is not denied…

We all only live once. So we are obligated to make good use of the time that we have and to do something that is meaningful and satisfying. This is something that I find meaningful and satisfying… I enjoy helping people who are vulnerable. And I enjoy crushing bastards.

If everyone who believes what he believes were to be put in prison, we wouldn't find a continent big enough to put us in.

Here's an interview by Al-Jazeera with Wikileaks.

Spain still struggles.

Still now Spain lives under the shadow of the "great" dictator. There are many city's where monoliths or statues to him still exist. In my town the monolith was taken down only last year. And we were deeply republican, and a marxist stronghold! Three years ago one of the most bombed squares in the city was re-done. 10 years ago they erected a bridge under the name of "Liceu Escolar", the republican school in town which was also bombed. 15 years ago they found a bomb in the castle which never exploded... 35 years ago Franco died.

It isn't that long ago really, we are only a generation away from remembering him alive, and remembering the joys of a failed democracy which we have become. The war was literally fought around the dining room table. Many also have family which they lost not during but after the war, either gone into exile or killed by the dicatator's police.

The other day I saw they are going to make a new show on tv, about the Republic. At last! So much has been kept secret from that time. People who lived under Franco were told that the Republic was destroying the country, its unity. That marxists had taken over and marxists were bad. Now many still believe marxists are bad, simply because that is what their education taught them. This show on the Republic will at least show people how advanced the Republic actually was, bacause it was ahead of its age. Well, we hope. The media is the media and sometimes I doubt we can rely on it.

Consumerism.

Time goes faster here. People also seem to look older, more quickly. Not only in Spain but in Europe as a whole, at least when compared to New Zealand. There there are less people, life is more tranquil and the whole way of thinking is different. Many a time have I heard that New Zealand is like Britain 50 years back, if so I don't see why Britons decided to change it and move on. You see, unlike in New Zealand where time is set by clocks, here it's set by fashion, the latest trends and what's en mode.
Everywhere you see this bizarre way of timing the world take place. On tv you see adverts that don't say anything but the name of a brand. They also happen to be the best adverts you'll have ever seen. Made with a certain artiness and with the latest technologies. And like everywhere, people pick up what they see on tv as if it were a depiction of reality which, in the end, they help make. My town Lleida has no malls, but allegedly has one of the longest commercial streets in the world. Ofcourse, as they'd say in New Zealand, it is world famous only here, in Catalonia. Because of the few people that inhabit the antipodes, I now feel slightly stressed around too many people. It doesn't help that all of them are participating in a collective shopping frenzy. They walk in and out of shops buying things they have and therefore don't need but here's the trick, they think they need it. Tv says they need it, through adverts and programs. The Newspapers advertise new stores that have opened and people flock to it, not realizing that yes, it will in fact be here tomorrow too. The apocalypse in Europe happens everyday when shops close. People's faces become sad, as if life suddenly has no meaning.

It is something I don't understand. I understand buying clothes, but once I have some cloth that covers my vital parts I'm done. Moreover, I'd never spend a day's pay on a shirt or some jeans, especially if I'm going to have to throw it out in three months time because it is spring, and we of course have to buy a whole new closet full of clothes that look just like the ones I've just thrown out... People here have been made into these prepotent beings who look down on you if you are dressed with the wrong clothes, last week's clothes. They feel that buying a new shirt will make them happy. It is only a passing happiness that lasts for a second or two after you've bought the item. Looking for the next rush they enter the next store and buy another item which also looks crap on them. But who cares if it's in fashion? It can't look bad if everyone else has it?
I'm sorry but no. I have been asked if I want to go shopping and I never buy anything. The jeans aren't made to last anymore, no matter the brand, and that jacket looks just like the one I'm wearing. When did I buy it? Two years ago. It does the job, it keeps me warm and waterproof. It should last me another ten. That is why I spend money on clothes. I wear them until the holes in the fabric start breathing themselves.
Alas not here. Time is fashion. People keep on trying to look as if they're 22, not realizing that it is about time to buy food and start cooking dinner. In Spain dinner is left til 9. I believe it is so because that is more or less when shops close. It is a shame that we cannot eat cloth because if we could Spanish society would be fixed. People don't have enough money for food or education but they invest in clothes they'll only wear for a short while. Capitalism reigns free and wild here. People shop til they drop, then struggle to find money by the end of the month. We are made to think that we all need this and we faithfully obey.

Venturing into Racist Land.

I left the house to take a few photographs. I walked towards the old national police building, built in Franco's times it is imposing. The arquitecture is a colonial Spanish style, put into a lesser known colony of Spain, Catalonia, as a reminder of who we are and should be. Then I went to the medieval walls and St Martin's church belonging to the 12th century. It limited the jewish quarter, which was destroyed centuries ago when the jews were kicked out. Then I walked towards the Seu Vella [the old cathedral]. The streets underneath it are too small for more than one car at a time and they are shaded. Times have changed, now they are difficult to drive through and the shade is no longer a good thing. While before it would have served as a protection from the sun, now people are scared of walking through them. There are drugs and 'yonkees' in them.
Sure enough, the city centre changed 300 years ago, when the Castillians tore down the old one and converted the cathedral into military quarters. From then on we would live under their eyes, with the shadow of the best of the city, what made it important, turned into a watchdog's. Now the city centre's streets are wide and full of trees, modern. The old part became cheap, because nobody wanted to live there and the only people who could afford to were immigrants. People don't walk around here anymore. People are scared. I have always known that Spain was a racist country, this is one of the reasons why I moved. If you aren't Spainsh here, you are a second-class citizen. "Jobs should be given to Spanish first, then we can give what's left to the rest"- these aren't the words of a white power group, I heard these words from someone who I always thought was pretty tolerant. This is what happens when there are no jobs, for anyone. Even though immigrants are needed in Europe, because society is ageing, in small cities jobs are given to those you know, who tend to be friends from school, etc.
The thing is, Spain is such a mixed land that defining who is and isn't Spanish can't be done by merely looking. There are very dark people in the south, very white people in the north and a bit of everything in between.

The old section of Lleida is said to be that of immigrants because they are either predominantly black, jobless or both. At first I felt followed when walking around, but then I realized that it was stupid. Everyone goes to the same places, and I only felt threatened because people say its a bad area. They say this not because it is, I bet they've never been robbed and they haven't been insulted or anything. It's just that they are racist. This zone, with its 12th century buildings and potentially romantic small streets is bad because they live here. "They don't do anything", meaning they don't work. Likewise then, Spanish people who are from here don't do anything, because there are no jobs for them either. There simply aren't any jobs. Like everywhere, while the CEO's and directors pocket more than ever, the rest, all of us, have to make do with the remains. People die or starve because they can't afford what's going to be thrown out. Spanish people who are white hitherto lived in a priveleged situation, but they are starting to realize that there are no jobs and they blame the Roma, Africans, Arabs, etc. for no reason. How have they stopped you from getting a job? They are in fact in an even worse situation, because they are not 'Spanish'. It is even more unlikely for them to get jobs. You say they don't do anything? What should they do, protest? If they do they'll end up in the prison, or deported. Immigrants have less rights then the rest of people here in Spain and they are only allowed to obey. Moreover, immigrants aren't allowed to succeed. While poor immigrants are considered thieves, richer immigrants are called drugdealers, "because they aren't doctors".Spanish people cannot understand why immigrants recur to crime. The answer: we take away their dignity, give them no chances or opportunities and don't allow them to express themselves. We make them criminals.

I've heard people say that they don't want to fit in, but they can't. In Spain to fit in you have to be white. The underlying problem is reflected here: "before you could walk down the streets and you'd know everyone or at least recognize them"... There is this small town mentality in Lleida, Barcelona and all over Spain. Spanish want society to be like it was but it isn't. I'm sorry, the world has changed. It doesn't stop spinning. Immigrants cannot fit in to this small town mentality because they weren't here before. Spanish on the other hand, can't fit into this big world mentality because they aren't here either. They have to move on and recognize that immigration isn't a problem but an opportunity. We can all learn from each other but to do so we have to be able to accept reality: that we are all the same.
There are no jobs because the system is corrupt. The only people that matter in capitalism aren't important because they are Spanish but because they own Spanish people. In the 12th century society was feudal, in the 21st it has changed little. Serfs revolted then as we should now, but now there are more of us, each one of us different, but the same.

Iran in the Media and Palestine.

A couple of days ago I was watching the news on the Spanish station Antena 3. I have always thought that Antena 3 is a bit too right wing but it seems to be the people's favourite, maybe they don't think it's right wing. Or maybe it's because it isn't hard to be a bit more right wing then i am. Antena 3 was talking about Iran and they mentioned that they had started to produce uranium enriched at 20% the night before the talks with the IAEA. They said that it was another step towards their program for the production of nuclear weapons. So not that the IAEA was scared that this could be the case, but that this was and is Iran's goal. Antena 3, at least in this case, is not even trying to be objective. They are scaremongering. After hearing the news I started to talk about it and the people I talked to couldn't even fathom the possibility that Iran's aim is to produce nuclear energy "for peaceful purposes" or to satisfy energy needs. When time comes Spanish people won't be against the invasion of Iran because they will have been told again and again for years that Iran is in fact in the "axis of evil". The proof will be there too; they will be able to point to the tv and say 'look what they're saying, the production is for nuclear weapons'!
The problem is that this evidence is unfounded. And the situation, to me, seems quite similar to that of Iraq years ago. Iraq was clearly in the 'axis of evil' because they had weapons of mass destruction all over the country. Inside cement, inside statues, under roads, in the air... Ofcourse these WOMD were never found. This wasn't what they were looking for, they were actually looking for petroleum, natural gas and Osama, who was a good chum of Saddam's. Likewise, Iran is in the 'axis of evil' because the production of nuclear energy together with the vastness of its natural resources make it a powerful country. A country that could be as powerful as many European economies if it was allowed to develop.
Iran is a threat, not because it will produce nuclear weapons but because it can rock the establishment. It will become a powerful country in the Middle East. Saudi Arabia doesn't want this. Israel doesn't want this. The U.S. doesn't want this. This is the main problem. The U.S., the main power in the Mid-East, feels that Iran is a geostrategic threat. Like Iraq was. For Israel, Iran also poses a threat. Iran is a big supporter of Syria, but most importantly Palestine. And by supporting Palestine you are not supporting zionist Israel. Ahmadinejad has more than once threatened Israel, he believes that Israel destroys the homes of Palestinians and that they stole Palestinian land. I don't think he's wrong. But by saying that they can send weapons towards Israel they are threatening one of America's proteges and one of Europe's guilty spots. This is why sanctions have increased and become more severe, they feel that if Iran continues its program, be it peaceful or not, it will become another power in the region, that could counterbalance the region. And that could do something for the Palestinian people.

Of course, Iran is Shi'a. To the eyes of most muslims, Iran is wrong in its path. Its Islam is bad. So almost all the nations around it are against it. Al-Qaeda is also against it, so I can't wait to hear the moment Antena 3 tries to lie to its people again. Ahmadinejad and/or the Iranian state will never be close to Al-Qaeda.

Football and Politics.

Football Club Barcelona is one of the most succesful clubs in Europe. Its history is full of trophies and thanks to its most recent results it is considered the best club in Europe at the moment.
For Catalonia it is a symbol. It represents pro-immigration, charity, liberal politics and all in all Catalonia and Catalan values. It's "More than a Club". In the civil war and during the repression, Barca's rival, Madrid, was given more money and open support from the dictator. Thus Barca became a symbol of the counter-culture, much like Athletic Club Bilbao in the Basque Country. The stadium was also a place where people could speak Catalan without repurcussions. Barcelona is now one of Catalonia's best international symbols.Spain have hated it with a passion since the 50's.

Due to the air-traffic controllers sick en masse the other day [of which I may have to talk more about because there seems to be hidden info], Barca were almost left without playing. They have the tradition of leavin g on the day if they are going to go by plane and the day before if they take the bus. So the night of the strike they were talking with the Spanish Football Federation about what they should do, and the federation told them that the game would be played on Sunday instead of Saturday. So Barca's plan was to leave on Saturday at around 5 by coach, as the planes were still down. Barca ofcourse taped the conversations but it seems the federation never told Osasuna what was happening, so officially the game was still on. At 3 on Saturday the federation called Barca saying that they had to be at Pamplona at 7 or they would automatically lose three points. Three points which would go well for Madrid, who are starting to fall behind. Anyhow, the players had to rush onto a train and then take a coach. The trip normally takes 4 and a half hours, so there was no way barca was going to arrive on time. Barca arrived at 8.30 and the game had to start at 9. The crowd was angry, Osasuna was angry and Barca was very angry. Barca won, things like these are only minor incidents when you are the best team in the world. Osasuna didn;t stand a chance, but they were very good to wait for barca, because if they hadn't Catalonia would be independant today. Barcelona is politics. Catalan, national, pro-independance politics. As the Barca coach said, Barcelona is in a separate country, up north-east on the maps of the peninsula, we don't arrange times but we are forced to accept them. They treat us as if we are separate, yet abhor the thought of actually becoming independant. The team almost lost three points, which would have allowed the military to move from the aeroports to Catalonia, trash the place and not help it rebuild again. History may never repeat in some places, but in others history is like a car cassette, which is just played again and again and again, until the tape starts to burn.

Spain Reverts to Fascism.

Fascism has bever been far off the maps in Spanish politics. For a long time the "Socialists" won elections by calling the right fascist, this time they've shown that they are no better. Both "Socialists" and the right are extremely similar in their politics. This shows that reformism, or the parliamentary way, doesn't work. The 'Popular Party' in Spain, the right-winged, actually descended from Franco - the Spanish Fascist dicatator in power for close to forty years- has done a lot of criticising in the last 8 years the "Socialists" have been in power, but at no point in time have they given any advice or said what they'd do. Zapatero [President] has asked the PP if they would like to help, many a time. He has said that the recession is the worst that has hit the country and for this reason both left and right should work together. The PP, more interested in votes and the subsequent money they'll get from having more MPs in the chamber, have said no again and again. And have not given any advice. What annoys me most is that people actually believe that the PP will know what to do, they believe that the leader has ideas which will improve the country's economy. I think that the PP has not said a thing because it's surprised that the Socialists are doing everything they would have done. A small minority has complained that the "Socialists" are doing the work for the PP, they are giving them extra time to fill in all the laws and resolutions possible to stuff the workers; a majority believes that we are in a recession and therefore must strain our belts.
On Thursday the government again showed its back to its voters and to the Spanish people. It demonstrated that it lost its marxist roots very long ago, and that it in fact could even erase the social part of its name. It put down more austerity measures, now against the unemployed they created. There will no longer be any sort of benefit for those unemployed indeffinetly. So after 3, 6, 12 months or whatever (In Spain it changes depending on the duration of someone's work) people will get no money. This isn't austerity, it is murder. People will die: gas is expensive, water is expensive, rent is expensive, food is expensive and people will now have no money. People aren't stupid. They associate the "Socialists" with unemployment, because they have not done anything to improve the economy, but have instead done everything the IMF has told them. People have not benefited. However, they are starting to look at the right instead of the left. The far left I mean: real marxism, revolutionary politics.

This recession was expected. It is part of the capitalist system. At regular intervals world economies collapse. This allows the richest to get rid of the competition, and swells the number of poor in the world. Recessions allow the rich to keep their hold, keep the money and stay in power. The IMF and the World Bank exist to keep this system 'working'. It will always give more money to the world's richest, because they are the maximum contributors of these two institutions.

In Spain the air controllers decided to go on strike. The union managed to get 90% of workers to call in for a mass sicky. Thus Spanish airports were left without anyone who could organize the runways. For 17 hours there have been practically no planes flying over the Spanish airspace, which is effectively shut down. They are striking about working conditions, their pay and the new austerity measures put in. Their strike is one for the whole of Spain, the union is going against the "Socialist" party it would normally support. The problem is that this strike has come in on the first day of a 5 day holiday. Perfect timing, I'd say. They have chosen the moment they are most needed. But it also means that the year's savings of many have gone down the drain. So most of those affected are indignant. There have been no complaints so far at aeroports because people understand, but people also want a holiday. This is the reason the Spanish government has used to call in the military. The left-wing government have allowed the army to take the jobs of those brave workers striking and they have warned them that if they are still striking by 7pm, they will be arrested. For striking, legally, workers will be imprisoned. People will be imprisoned because they are defending their rights. I hope that this is the 'gota que colma el vaso' [the drop that makes the vessel fall]. It is about time that the Spanish workers go out onto the streets in solidarity. This 'recession' has only enriched the bankers. Subsidies have been given to companies. Money has been given to CEOs, I mean. Workers have been shat on. They have lost their jobs, they have no pensions and will have no unemployment benefit. Meanwhile the government is giving the military power. Soon they will be told to take over local councils and regional governments, and when workers start demonstrating, the government will tell them to shoot the country's citizens. After all, aren't there too many? This government hides itself behing a friendly mask, but it was payed for by the banks and by those old rulers.

This government has shown that it is undemocratic. Soon the military will take over again, explictly. Implicitly they've had power for 500 years. The fascists called Spain 'Una, Grande y Libre' [One, Strong and Free]. It wasn't then nor is it now.

For the first time ever I was flying over this land, leaving its clouds, above everyone else. In a matter of minutes we had crossed 30 landscapes that took me 2 years to discover. Below me were the orange plains, farmland; then the imposing mountains, forlorn with strems diced with ice and valleys unvisited for centuries, if ever; then there was the thin strip I had only visited days ago, the strip of land from which New Zealand is born and to which so many waters flow. The plains, Aoraki and the washed incline had disappeared. For the first time ever I was flying from this land I will permanently be trapped in, or because.

In Munich I was able to hear the catalan rhythm again. I felt excited! For two and a half years I'd only heard my mother tongue from my mum. Now randoms, speaking about weather and politics. It's funny how every culture has favourite topics that spring up again and again when people talk. For Catalans it's these two. I was more than glad to overhear. I ell que es, Catala o Espanyol? [What is he, Catalan or Spainsh?] You see, you can't be both. Again Catalonia is reviving politically, as it did in the late 19th century and in the 1930s. Being Spanish rules you out from being Catalan, but being Catalan automatically, to the eyes of many, puts you in a bullfighters uniform, playing a Spainish guitar. It is a shame and painful. Something many won't understand. There is this pride in seeing your own do well. Catalans have been oppressed for more or less 300 out of the last 550 years, at intervals. A mi no em costa res parlar Castella, pero si m'obliguen em fot dels ous. No em costa res, pero jo se que em podrien entendre. [It isn't an effort for me to speak Spanish, but if they force me it fucks me off. It's no effort but I know they could understand me] For most of the three hundred years the language was prohibited. This has inevitably made it closer to spanish, as it is the language that had to be used in the streets. The influence was unavoidable, like French influenced the proto-English tongue. It is frustrating for Catalans to have to speak Spanish. Simply put, how would one feel about not being able to speak English in England, or Maori in Aotearoa? However, when entering the plane the guy answered the hostess in Spanish, because that is the language he was spoken to. Spanair is Catalan. It is such a cultural thing to do to drop Catalan straight away, when asked. Catalans are bilingual, or tri; Spanish don't give a damn. This is Spain they say. Catalans may always just accept, cot their head down and do as they're told. Of course they shouldn't. Independentist feelings have grown again, for the first time since the late 80's when the resistance movement of the Catalan terrorists Terra Lliure started to dwindle. If we want to be part of a democracy, we should become independant, this comes through fighting and resistance.

"No et limites a contemplar aquestes hores que ara venen, baixa al carrer i participa. No podran res davant un poble unit, alegre i combatiu" - Vicent Ferrer.

[Don't just sit and watch these hours here to come, go on to the streets and take part. They won't be able to do anything against a united, proud and fighting nation.

Citizen Journalism and Sentimental Education.

A few weeks ago I did my last news reading at radio 1 for the year. Now I’m in Spain, time flies! I’ve been doing the radio for more than a year now. I want to become a journalist, so it only makes sense to take all the opportunities that I can now, while they’re still free. Thanks to the radio I’ve managed to meet people from other radio stations, so next year I may have a program of my own on Radio Toroa, but we will see. I will also try to write for the student mag ‘critic’.

It makes sense for me to do so, of course, after all this is what I want to do. This is me. I write, I talk, I criticize, I ask, I assess, I reason. But this is also what I want everyone else to be able to do. I want everyone to be who they are, to reach their potential. Everyone should be able to write and talk and criticize and ask; but above all to assess and reason, as these stem from the others. I’m a firm believer in equality and freedom, everyone should have a right to education and everyone should be able to use this education to make the world a fairer, better place. This is where citizen, or grassroots, journalism comes in. If every individual could publish their thoughts, by definition there would be equality and full literacy. Citizen journalism doesn’t work though. First of all not everyone has access to education because not everyone has the same opportunities. Second, there aren’t many publications that do pick up unprofessional articles. Because they are unprofessional, they are likely to have bias or be badly written. Also, they may go against what the backers of the publications believe in. This here is the most important issue. Because all publications are biased, but probably not explicitly. You can tell through hints, like when TVONE interviews little girls who don’t like teachers striking because they fear for their grades. What utter bullshit. I think if you are worrying about your grades at the age of 7, not only you but your whole family has a problem.

If people have an access to education they’ll have an improved ability to reason. With reason comes the ability to see what is good and bad. Everyone should be able to criticize what they see as bad and show their idea of good. This breaches journalism’s golden rule of objectivity, some would say. I don’t think so: I think it is much better for a journalist two expose to sides and then defend a favourite than to show one as best without actually giving arguments for the other. The latter is what actually takes place. Newspapers will say that it is bad for nurses to strike because it is putting aside the lives of millions, but not that their own lives are constantly put aside because of their services to those millions. This is why so many are wary of striking, the media gives it a bad name. I think people should be able to openly give their assessment of the world. For example, if the Taliban are again doing atrocities, we should mention the ones we do, we should mention how we do not improve Afghanistan either and how we also kill innocent people. In fact we should say that we too are taliban, that women also have less rights in our world *High Five, Diplomacy, Diplomacy, Shake Hands* We should be able to say that they don’t have education, live in poverty and have no food, maybe have a passing reference on how we have kept the country in war, and thus no education, for thirty years.

This sort of journalism is much more sentimental. And much more real. Richard Rorty defended a sentimental education, thanks to which we would feel more attached to people we do not know. We will see that they are in fact like us, but different. Highlighting the similarities, which outnumber the differences is better than doing the opposite. If everyone had the access to this sentimental education, the world would be better. Journalism should have a tinge of sentimental too, because readers like that shit, as well as exposing two sides of a story. Many of these accounts we can pick can come straight out of citizen journalists. They can provide blurbs of information which we can fit into a good article, acknowledge them and voila, the world is slightly fairer, and people happier. At least those who contributed.

Sandflies

Maori have a legend that says that sandflies were made because humans simply stood around doing no work, but instead stared at the amazing landscapes of Fiordland. When some friends and I arrived at the DOC campsite at Lake Paringa, we also stood there, enchanted, maybe 700 or 800 years after them. We had just driven from Central Otago through the Haast Pass. Two completely different landscapes: one dry, agricultural; the other luscious, green and remote. No one lives in the 90 km stretch between Matarora and Haast. Everyone one sees is holding a camara, or is gawping, or is driving slowly. Only tourists own this land, it is public and everyone's. We arrived at Lake Paringa at sun-set. There were Kaka and Kea flying overhead, Kereru in the bush. We were staring at them, there were the hills around us reflected in the waters we had waded into knee-deep. And then there were the sandflies. We hadn't noticed them but they had noticed us. All four of us seemed to be the most attractive meal they'd seen in their lives. Everyone else in the site looked oblivious to the fact that there were these creatures absolutely everywhere. They came down on us for quick pit-stops, twelve or thirteen at a time, giving us no time to concentrate fully on setting up our tents or cooking. Or taking photos even.
When our meals had been made we were already starting to lose it. We were walking around in circles with our plates and teas in one hand, fork in the other. We couldn't stop or they'd devour us. The fellow campsite users looked and laughed. After a while we did too: four young adults walking around waving their forks at an invisible foe, shaking their heads and bursting into jumps or skips, swearing... Surely we were mad? We applied suncream, deodorant and burning tea to alleviate the bites until finally we got given some repellant.
Magic.
At last they were gone! We could stretch out our hands and they would fly away. Albeit our bites were itchy and painful. We decided to hide in our tents. They were in there too. I was killing them, clapping, and soon their blood, or ours, was all over the tent. They were everywhere. They were also trapped between the inner and outer layer of our tent. Their flying pounded over us like the rain that tends to hit these regions.
I'll quickly pause. You may think this campsite was hell but it isn't. The mountains and the lake and the birds and the trees were spectacular. There were Kaka, Kiwi,Kea and Kereru. All are extremely rare yet there they were, in one place!

The next day we were forced to skip breakfast and pack up quickly: the sandflies were out again. As we were throwing things into the car I told my friend that he shouldn't "doubt in killing all the sandflies while we drive". "Can we not push them out the window?" he answered. Out of the window? Push them? Save them? These nasty little vampires!? No - I thought. He's a vegetarian and believes that everything has a right to life. I understand what vegetarians are doing. I understand that it is ethically quite brutal to kill. Where do we draw lines though? Can we compare animals to insects? He would say that any creature that can think, any creature that is independant has the right to life. I don't think it is the same to kill a sandfly than it is to kill a cow. I know a cow pains when we hurt it, but does an insect? Does it now what it is to live and die?
It knows it lives. It is what it does. It knows it is there and what it has to do.
Push it out of the window!? By doing that aren't we just giving it the opportunity to attack someone else? Therefore, isn't it selfish to do so? Isn't it altruistic to actually kill it, kill one and ten die. We are stopping the future generations from suffering, albeit ridiculous suffering. I mean, wasn't it seen as a good thing when the US, Spain, Italy and so many other countries eradicated malaria? This wasn't done by pushing the mosquitos out of the country.
There is a difference between killing a fly and killing a human, or a cow. At least I think there is.

So someone has realized that the West cannot defeat extremism.

General Sir David Richards a few days ago told a BBC reporter that the West wouldn't be able to defeat Al-Qaeda or the Taliban. That they would pose a threat to Britain for another thirty years at least... While alas(!) I celebrate that someone on the right has at last discovered something said by many around 2003-4, he has not yet reached the right conclusion. It may be another 7 years for that.
We may ask ourselves then, why are we staying in Afghanistan if they cannot be defeated? Surely it is just a mass grave of the unknown which we are helping fill? Yes it is. But he thinks that it is possible to 'contain' Al-Qaeda. Like we have [not] been doing since the beginning! What he is saying is that we should continue killing and displacing millions, making sure they have no access to education, health care or food and keeping women in the strangling clasps of men. What we are containing is their access to development and democracy. Because we know what is best for them, we are the West, a haven.
I'm a big fan of what is rational, so I think I'm a big fan of terrorism. While I don't support it and I think it will only make situations worse, I more than understand where it comes from. For the West it is rational to search half the world, destroying everything and everyone in the way, for one man. However we think it is irrational for people to resort to violence to protect their livelihoods and families and everything they've known. We see them as uneducated, but if we are the educated then maybe we should fall back into the world of Rousseau's noble savage, where civilization doesn't exist, where there are no worries, where we are free. If education is what we have and rationality guides the thinking processes of our leaders, maybe we should be more like the Afghanis instead of forcing them to accept what we impose.
Johann Hari described the terrorist situation very well. He says that the U.S. is creating far more jihadis than they are killing. He flips the situation around: imagine you are leading your normal life in whichever Western city and then, suddenly, your house gets bombed, and that of your neighbour and that of your mother. Family and friends are dieing all around you. You are a normal person, your family is normal and your friends are normal; there is no reason for the killings. Then someone comes to you under a name like 'Army of the People' says that this country called, say, Bangladesh is responsible for the bombings. Moreover, they (the AoftheP) have acquired the technology to actively fight against these people. With nothing left: no job, no wife, no kids, no food, but lots of frustration; isn't it fair to say that many would join this group? To prevent further killings, for your country? I'm not a patriot, but it is rational for people to protect that which is closest to them. It makes sense for people to feel close to people who are like them. It is a survival instinct. General Richards is right when he says that we will not defeat terrorism, but he is wrong when he says we will contain the ideology if we pursue the methods hitherto pursued.
The problem is that the people who have power in our countries are not all that concerned about the well-being of a few Muslims. Why? Because the threats from Al-Qaeda will always be directed to them. They are the exploiters of their countries as well as ours. The rich aren't all that concerned with us either. They don't care about laws. They only care about their own security, and this is when it is important [for the rest] to abide the law. They are allowed to bomb people as long as they are not bombed, if they are you are guaranteed to end up in jail with electrodes in your skin.

I read a fair while ago that the Taliban wouldn't put down their weapons until America and the rest leave the country. This is unacceptable to the West, because then we won't have the opportunity to control their resources, plunder their crops or spend billions on arms. However it is only logical. There are so many opportunities for Afghanistan, they can only start being drawn out when they become free after 40 years of war.

Only peace can create peace.

Whenua - land

I had a conversation a few weeks ago that went something like this:
"I hate possums! They're a pest. They eat our native birds and we should get rid of them all!"
"Well... I know some people who would say the same about you..."
Touche.
Of course the conversation was much more than just that. But it's true. The last statement reflects the way many Maori feel about white people. I had to regret my words. We brought the possums in, it is our fault that the native wildlife is getting destroyed. It is also our fault that the native culture, language and peoples were destroyed so many years ago. Many politicians and those in government would like us to believe that this land is ours. After all we signed a treaty didn't we? But when they say 'ours' who do they mean? The treaty was left forgotten in a basement, water-ridden and being eaten by rats for thirty years.

This is also the situation endured by Maori. For a while the white man thought Maori would die out, Hoorah they said: "Taking all things into consideration, the disappearance of the race is scarcely subject for much regret. They axe dying out in a quick, easy way, and are being supplanted by a superior race." This a statement by a so-called Dr. Newman in 1881, in 1884 Sir Walter Buller only predicted twenty more years for the Maori race. It is no surprise then that the treaty was 'lost'.
Still now we hear comments saying that our arrival to New Zealand made things better. They were savages, cannibals. We gave them technology, education... We also destroyed the education they had, we destroyed their culture, we gave them a white god, we gave them drugs and alcohol.
The Maori situation still hasn't changed. While we boast that the indigenous peoples of New Zealand have a brighter future than any other indigenous people in the world thanks to the Treaty of Waitangi: a) this is something to mourn rather than celebrate. b) this doesn't mean the situation for Maori is 'good' c) the Treaty of Waitangi was only enshrined as a national document [and isn't a very good one] in 1975 with the Waitangi Tribunal.
Maori still now are much more likely to suffer from health problems, unemployment and poverty when compared to your average Pakeha. On the other hand, the Waitangi tribunal was set up after Maori started to protest for their rights to be equal [or maybe superior] to the white man, for the acceptance of their culture and to solve the disputes the white man created when he stole Maori land. Even though the protest movement died down, the situation isn't any better.
It is difficult to give a say on issues of race. It is easy for me to say that we should all have equal rights, because at the end of the day this is also what is best for me: an educated white boy. I personally think it'd be dumb to ask for a Maori only society, I can see where the desire comes from, but this would not create an equal society by definition, it would be a Maori and a Pakeha society, two separate ones, like Apartheid South Africa. At the same time society has to recognize that Maori start off handicapped because of their skin. They are more likely to fall into broken households where the parents haven't had a good access to education, thus bringing them into crime.
The first thing to do would be to recognize that this land is theirs, symbolically. Protesters in the Far North were recently arrested because they were occupying what they claimed to be their land. They were Maori and the land was a sailing club. "We're being arrested from our whenua" one said. They were protesting because this is where the ancient waka Mamaru landed for the last time. They want this land to be recognized as the tapu-sacred place it is. Te Ika a Maui and Te Waka o Aoraki both belong to Maori, if we are here we should consider it a privilege. As part of being a New Zealander we have to embrace Maori culture and language, only this way can we be truly bi-cultural. If the only way to achieve these changes is through protest, we will protest. Protests are what stopped the Apartheid machine on its tracks and what started the international boycott movement, protests are what give French a leeway against their government, protests are what made the situation better for Maori through the 70s and 80s, this is how they gained more rights. Protests allow us to tell the government that we are here too, that we matter and that we want what is rightfully ours, in this case an equal, multicultural New Zealand.
We should be wary of what the media says when it speaks about protests. They know they're effective, which is why they want to prove otherwise. Next time Maori or anyone else protests for further rights, we should join. The struggle can only be achieved through unity. And it's 4 million against John.

If London was occupied.

This is an amazing vid about the daily struggles the Palestinians have to endure, set somewhere closer to us.

Double Rainbow for the Dunedin Stadium!

I hitch-hiked back into Port Chalmers today. Anywhere else in the world and it'd be dangerous, but here everyone does it. Buses are too expensive, due to the city council's messed up priorities. Anyhow, I had no money, which was why I was working until 6 am.
An elderly couple picked me up, the woman was a kiwi, from here I'd say but the husband was not. His accent was quite strange and I couldn't place it. Scandinavian maybe? Well it was obvious that they'd both travelled quite a bit and it seems they have settled [back] in Dunedin. I agreed with them that it's a town with absolutely everything, why would anyone want to live in a bigger, less friendly city, where it is easier to get lost or mugged? We started talking about the ODT, the local rag, and we went on to talk about its April Fool's day issues. Every year it brings out a bizarre piece of false news. For some reason there are always people who fall for it. This year it said that beer would be flowing out of the public water taps of the brewery, to celebrate its hundredth anniversary. At 6 am the next day there was a queue of students waiting. Sigh.
This year the cartoonist, Tremain, drew a strip on the new stadium used as a glasshouse full of pot. I hate Tremain, he makes one good cartoon out of every 29 but this one was spot on! The stadium received so much opposition and it is said that the majority of the town didn't want it. We have Carisbrook, the House of Pain, an international stadium with an impressive history. The proponents for the stadium including the city council said that it was too cold... We live in Dunedin... It is cold. People in Scotland don't make glass houses to keep their sports players warm. And I'm sure the average Scot doesn't complain either, but maybe Dunedin has lost its roots?  The truth is that the stadium was advertised as a multi sports complex, where cricket, soccer, rugby, etc. would be played. It turns out to be too small for cricket, demand for a soccer stadium of that size just doesn't exist in the city and the rugby team is relegating to a lower division and doesn't have the money to play in its own stadium now. Then they said that it could be used for concerts, however we are a town of 120,000. To fill it, one in four would have to go. That's not going to happen. Any sane band of international calibre would instead go up to Christchurch, which has a population of 300,000 and is the capital of the South Island.
Why then was the stadium made? I still think it will be cheaper to trash it now. It won't be ready for the world cup, so we're going to have to go back to the good old House of Pain, Home of Otago rugby for practically 130 years. Trashing it now would also mean that public transport could be funded, or a new library in South D... But using the new one for growing pot would be a great idea, everyone I've talked to (4 people) think it is an excellent idea. That's an absolute majority! Just imagine how happy people would be! And we'd get the money back if that's what they're interested in! From a utilitarian point of view, because more people would be happy with the idea than sad, it should be done. Why not?