Refugees are the future. Ours or theirs?

I have written in a fair while, I've been way too busy. It'd be more correct, actually, to say I haven't blogged in a fair while. I have been doing a lot of work for Critic and a lot of planning tends to go in to the political Radio shows -I could fit two or three entries worth a week- you can listen to it on Radio1 from 10 to 12 on Fridays, internationally if you want! Last but definetly not least, the set-up of our political organisation, OGNA, is going well. Although we are all busy, we now have a magazine, to which I contributed many articles. All the mag articles are on the blog linked above.

Right, that out of the way, is it any wonder I have lately been looking into space unintentionally, much more often than usual. Thoughts blank, I stare until I notice my eyes are getting dry. In other words, I'm exhausted! A word I argue is quite onomatopeic. Uni, work, Critic, Radio, seeing people... 15+15+6+6+20=no sleep. Enough of that though, though I'd love to rant, I only have so much time before I'm hungry!


What I really want to talk about is the New Zealand respose to refugees. A couple of weeks ago, the media, which tends to be rather story-less in NZ, reported that Sri Lankans were planning on coming to New Zealand. Normally this wouldn't be a problem. As long as they spend money, they can take over the country for all John Key cares. However these were refugees, economic migrants. There are clear distinctions between the two words, but both imply they will need the support of the New Zealand welfare system. May I add, at one point enviable, now deplorable. John Key is already on a crusade to steal the gold off the Afghanis poorer kiwis. The burden of education, necessary to keep democracy running and society efficient is every day more obviously being thrown onto the backs of parents or students. Medical services are being cut, the dole isn't rising, sometimes I wonder why my taxes increase. What do I get from paying them but an increase in debt and a reduction in pay? I digress. These Sri Lankans, first may not have been coming to New Zealand at all. For all we know, they were escaping their country and we have to ask why... Is it because the Tamil population has been subject to a government aided campaign of ethnic cleansing? Aimed at destroying language, culture and race? This is the treatment the Tamil population has received in the last almost 30 years. Is it then irrational that they want to leave in the most insecure of boats, often paying years-worth of salaries, in search of a better education and a better future?
I think not.

John Key, calling on metaphores of war and behind a wall clearly saying 'fuck off you foreigners' is saying this not just to Sri Lankans or any other group of refugees, he is saying it to anyone foreign to his own mansion. It is a lie to say Sri Lankans would divide society, it already is: rich and poor. I'm part pf the poor, you reading this blog are too. We are part of an economic class that keeps this country afloat. Meanwhile we are forced to agree with the media's portrayal of refugees. It's an us vs. them situation.

In terms of media analysis, at my disposal only TV news, John Key was presented as an individual, standing before the Kiwi flag- holding all our opinions. No Sri Lankan was interviewed. Instead TV3 showed images of an unrelated refugee boat crashing into the rocks years ago (2006, Christmas Island FYI). We see all the refugees crammed, an intent to make a metaphor for the future of the country? Maybe, they are certainly portayed in a negative light. Crowded, loud, crying, different. We are not given insights into the situation, we are abstracted from any possible feelings of sympathy. John Key on the other hand is smiling, he looks honest, he is well-dressed. We are certainly two worlds apart.

The future will only bring us more threatening invasions of refugees. Dhaka's floods, swelling already; or Somailia's future wars. But remember their cries, their hunger, their desperation. They desire a future too. I believe future is based on past experiences. The past is what makes us hopeful. What do they have to hope for if we shut off our sympathy. Are we not all human? Or is it better to ask, are we all not human? Not all no.

The indignation within you and I is a cross-cultural experience, fruit of capitalism in desperation.

On the 15th of May a movement started in Spain, still active now almost a month later. In this article I will look into the reasons for the movement, these are embedded in history but are also a fruit of the capitalist system. The indignant who claim to be “autonomous” and “a-political”, have been left unemployed by the austerity measures imposed by the IMF. The autonomous and a-political nature of the protests though can be seen as a threat. They are tags imposed on the protesters by the media, protesting is political and the idea of autonomously and coincidentally coming together for the same cause is irrational. Wanting a better future is being  political and mass strikes are one of the many ways to achieve it, what this better future looks like and who envisages it is the key. I will argue that only socialism can achieve a better future for the working class and the majority of the people, but to do this socialists have to be not only involved but also leading the movement with their ideas and experience. This movement is currently not present in Spain to a significant enough degree. As a last point I will talk about socialism’s role in the future struggles of Aotearoa.

This movement did not spring out of nowhere, Spain has a long history of mass movements. In the ‘far-left’, anarchists, communists and socialists had successfully put their ideas into practice on a large scale in the 1930’s. In 1931 Spain got rid of the monarchy and within a couple of years had put the foundations of one of the most ambitious social projects in Europe, with reforms to industry, education, marital laws, religious laws... The government though, intent on keeping control of the power void it created tried to put restrictions onto the social revolution that was taking place. Whole communities became fully independent of the state and fully self-sufficient too. Individuals were no longer subjugated to the orders of the nobility and the church. The government though, run by the new bourgeoise class, was mired with corruption and inefficiency. Ministers were being sworn in and out continuously. Its inability to hand out the benefits Spanish society had been promised and so eagerly needed led to widespread dissatisfaction. Anarcho-syndicalist, socialist and communist ideas were spreading, promising a better society. The rising number of strikes and the powerful union movement derived from these ideas became objectives of a government which had quickly failed. The Spanish republic relied heavily on the old military apparatus, thanks to this the generals, who had interests with the old sources of power saw an opportunity to take control of a state which was on the verge of breaking up, economically (as 7 million Spanish were living in communes by 1936 and factories had been appropriated by the working classes) and politically, as Catalonia and the Basque Country threatened to become independent. The military organised a wide-spread coup d’êtat in August 1936. Even though the Anarchist movement had foretold of the date and time, thanks to its spy network, the Republican government was caught by surprise. The efficiency of workers councils, organised by Anarcho-syndicalists and socialists stopped the fascist coup on its tracks but lead to a bitter civil war.

In short the civil war was a failure on the behalf of the Republic. At the time the European powers were wary of the costs of war so the Republic was left to recuperate a country it never fully controlled by itself- until the USSR got involved. As Franco’s military possessed more arms and had the aid and support of Mussolini and Hitler, the Republic called for the military aid of the USSR. Stalin was opposed to the more democratic nature of the anarcho-syndicalist and socialist troops fighting for the Republic. He actively fought against them, instead of actually fighting the common enemy: Franco. Many anarchists and socialists were executed, if not by Stalin by Franco once he won the war. This decimated the number of Trotskyist and anarcho-syndicalist groups working around the country. The fascist dictatorship, which lasted as long as 40 years in some parts of the country imposed a culture, a history and sense of unity which have only started to be questioned now. To understand Spain now we have to be aware that it has only had 30 years worth of ‘democracy’, moreover its transition to a democratic state took place when the UK and the USA were jumping onto the ideas of neo-liberalism. Spain has had low-salaried jobs for decades, unions have never had much strength since the late thirties and the introduction to the EU in 87 forced it to become even more of a low-wage economy with few incentives for a higher education. Nowadays a ‘good’ job in Spain is one earning a 1000 euros a month and the minimum wage is 624 euros, incomparable to the rest of Europe. In France the minimum wage is above 1350 euros a month. Housing in Barcelona or Madrid can easily cost around 600 euros, add on to that the relatively high price of food, the price of electricity, transport, education... It is no wonder Spanish youths live at home until they’re thirty. Low-paying jobs, high rents, an awful system of education and the constant bombardment of capitalist products makes it difficult, but more so if unemployment is at an average of 21%, 45% for youths. In this aspect Spain resembles Northern Africa, the series of governments have happily abided the orders of the IMF- making Spain a heavily poor and indebted society- a lapdog of US interests since Franco’s time. In the last couple of years there have been job losses in the public sector, cut-backs in education, a raise in the retirement age and some unemployment benefits have been done with.

Where Spain doesn’t resemble Northern Africa though is in the fact that Spain is supposedly democratic. Democracy is relative, when the citizens don’t have any actual input into how society should run, when there are only two parties who represent the same set of companies, when the benefits of society are not reaped by those who overwork for little pay and when the individuals ‘participating’ in the democracy are constantly being lied by media sympathetic and benefited by a system advertised as pluralistic and free; democracy starts to resemble an oligarchy, or a dictatorship by a handful of individuals. Spanish are starting to wake up from their somber mid-day nap to realise they are being robbed. These protests, with protesters ranging from high school kids to grandparents, are against the current parliamentary system.

In the squares the protesters almost seem like an amorphous range of individuals with nothing in common but a desire for a job, a flat and some money. There is no actual, concerted, goal. Some groups within the ‘plataformas’ are demonstrating for a better electoral system while others are wanting to create an actual revolution out of the spurs of fury. The media and the politicians have used this to their advantage. It is hard to find objective news articles in the Spanish press that do not call the protesters anti-system, rebels or “ni-nis”, a term used to describe Spanish youths, who “neither work nor study”. It is also difficult to find news on sites such as the BBC, CNN or even Al-Jazeera; there has been an effective media blackout. The anarchist group FAI, present at the protests, says that though the political and media circles were initially shocked: “Naturally, we couldn’t be hopeful, we knew there was the danger of the situation becoming midiatised: criticising the more radical propositions and reducing the situation to a simple critique of bipartisanship and the financial system without shaking the foundations of the state and capital”#. It definitely does look like the media have taken control of the situation to say it is run by the “fringes of society”, this way giving legitimacy to any police or government action. They go on to say that the right has in effect always been in power to differing degrees at different points in time. A case which in Spain is very much true and the Anarchists of FIJA agree, going so far as to say that the current protest movement is “suspicious” and aims to “dissipate frustrations”#.

Although these ideas seem to verge on the side of wacky conspiracy theories, what is true is that political groups and campaigning has been banned. This is because the organisers did not want mainstream parties to use the platforms as a rallying point for the 22nd of May elections (In which by the way the ruling party lost 40% of its vote).FIJA points out that there is an inconsistency with the platforms position as by protesting you are being political, however these protests are not actually imposing too much of a threat to the capitalist system for the time being. The government could simply call for a vote to change the electoral system, thus appeasing many of the present.

These two anarchist groups are calling for a social revolution: “a radical change at all levels to decentralise politics and the economy through direct action”. These two groups have been involved in the protests, the direct action they call for verges on the IST idea of an armed insurrection. At OGNA we agree that political organisations should be able to show a presence at the protests but we disagree with armed insurrection: this will only alienate the majority of the ‘indignados’, who are admittedly apolitical individuals. Socialists though have not had much of a say. En Lucha, a trotskyist organisation, has had some involvement, mainly in Madrid, but other than that there are many groups that are even rejecting to participate- as the ideas held by the organisers are reformist. These groups that are against participating are Stalinist and their position is similar to that taken by Stalinist groups in Greece a couple of years ago. In our view, it is upto socialists to point out the injustices of the system and call for a concerted struggle against the ruling top echelon. We have to point out that unions “signed agreements with the ruling Socialist Party which attacked workers’ rights. [Making] it easier to sack people, attack[ing] pensions and rais[ing] the retirement age.#” At the same time though we have to prove that unions are the only protection mechanism the working class has and that it is through the cooperation amongst unions that we will achieve an educated proletariat ready to confront the government non-violently. What’s more, we have to show that this recession is an inevitable downfall of capitalism, it will happen again in 10 years time and again and again until we defeat the system, worldwide.

Socialists in Spain have hitherto not seen the potential of these protests. One month on and we still have people on the streets, still largely ignored by politicians and the media. Although recently police have been more violent against the peaceful gatherers. The youths in Spain, like in Tunisia and Egypt, have nothing to lose as they admit they cannot see a future as a part of capitalism. The potential lies in how far Marxist ideas can be spread. As a general rule the protesters see the problem as lying in the system. For now though they have been given no alternatives. As the days go on, numbers are stagnating. While the police violence used to get rid of protesters in Barcelona caused them to come back in multiplied numbers, after a couple of hours the protest was back to its usual size#. The failure of socialist organisations to see the importance of these protests and also to show up with significant numbers is a key to the slow decimation of the movement.

Only with the spread of socialist ideas can the movement increase in size and span.Youths are unemployed and furious. Quite reasonably, Spanish workers are disenchanted with unions, it is up to socialists though to prove the unions’ worth. Spain has been hit hard by the IMF, but only because it is in the interest of capitalism to seek for profit instead of humanity. Socialists should use the platform to spread their ideas to youths and to workers, this way we can achieve a conscious working class. Socialists must also promote ideas of tolerance in terms of sex, sexuality and immigration- the inability of Spanish society to accept these is a remnant of fascist Spain. It is curious to see how little immigrant involvement there has been, compared to their percentage of the population. We must also see the spread of ideas as the only way to achieve an equal and fair world system. Spreading the ideas through Spain will push the ideas to Portugal, France and Central Europe. For now Greek and Italian ‘indignados’ have already started to protest.

For OGNA, the only way forward for Spain is to keep the protests strong and to remain non-violent. Non-violence attracts more followers and non-violent direct action is much more difficult for governments to confront. There has been talk of dismantling the platforms, in Barcelona there was a decision to pack up. Even then, 80% of tents are still pitched#. We think this is a mistake, these platforms provide the opportunity to express the widespread dissatisfaction society feels and the symbolic presence in central squares of cities across Spain will be like a thorn constantly jabbing the ribs of the politicians. It will be a forum for debate. Breaking up the presence counts as a victory for the ruling class, a pat on the back of the policemen who have brutally battoned protesters, this way showing the true nature of democracy in Europe.
In New Zealand the situation would be treated much the same by the media, for this reason it is up to unions and revolutionary organisations to lay the seeds for revolution and disseminate the truths of who does and who should hold the power in society. The large number of revolutionary organisations and the emergence of working class oriented unions and parties such as Unite and Mana is a significant development. The situation here is not too indifferent from that in Spain, youth unemployment is at 26% and there are some obviously underprivileged sectors of society, namely Maori and Pacifica. As socialists we have to break down ideas of racism and unite forces across Aotearoa. The government is not supplying jobs and is raising the hurdles to get in to education and for decent health care, it is time for Kiwis to protest too.

If we want a true democracy socialists have to direct the working class, history has shown that privilege belongs to the rulers but it is being handled by the working class, we must take grasp of this privilege and distribute it fairly to society as a whole.

Prisoners forever?

I just answered a poll on the stuff.co.nz website: Should prisoners be given a healthier range of food? Answer: Yes. 62% said no...
It may be a bit farfetched, but I reach the conclusion that this majority-part of the population also believes that prisoners should never be forgiven, they should rot in jail, much like the green loaves of bread we are giving them, they should die because they are bad and they are a threat to society and the status quo. The Status Quo Ante. I do not know what sort of food prisoners eat. I do know that the facilities they are incarcerated in tend to be rather fabcy in this part of the world, which sparks the question that 62% ask: Aren't they meant to be penitent of their actions? Answer: Yes.
We are all filled with a sentiment of remorse when we do something we know is wrong, what if there is no alternative? Should a bank robber be enjailed forever, if all he was trying to do was to provide some means for his family? If this person happens to be black or indigenous in a still racist socoety, how do we know the crime they committed is one they are in fact guilty of?
I'm too naive to think people are bad, and even more to believe that people cannot improve. We all do things we regret and we also do things because we need to. Families do tend to take priority over the system, and mine does too. If I were in a desperate enough situation to have to steal food from a supermarket in order to keep my kids healthy I would steal that supermarket. I'd be scared, no one wants to go to jail; even if it does have satellite TV, a gym, library, etc. There is another factor though, some jails are so much better than the society the criminals live in that it is better and more life-saving to be in jail than to walk the streets in a gang whose use is the protection of communities.
On food, should we give them better food? Yes, why? Because prisons are meant to rehabilitate. This is why there are workshops, criminals are obliged to do community service, go through counselling sessions. They aren't people born naturally defective, we cannot hide them behind high walls forever. Like a toy, if it comes out broken whose fault is it, the toy's or the machine's? I'd say the lattter, we cannot blame something on an inanimate object. We aren't inanimate but we do learn from the way we've been raised. I'd say the environmental factors are key in distinguishing who is going to turn out well or not. Genetics has a role; some people are naturally more aggressive or have more addictive personalities but these genetic differences will be pushed to the for by environmental injustices.
Why should they have better food? Simply because they should learn how to eat healthily so that they do when they leave prison. Then there children, if these prisoners have actually been rehabilitated, will stand a chance to grow healthily and in good environmental conditions.

This system throws more Maori in prison than Pakeha. Maori, as a fact are also poorer, there communities are unsafe due to the lack of jobs and because the youths parents are in prison. How are they meant to give their children a decent childhood if they aren't there? Maori also lost out in their culture, they were pushed away from their original communities and large family units into small private houses, uninhabited for the ten, eleven hours of work a week but for their children, who have no-one to teach them, show them or protect them.

Anzac: Why do we celebrate death?

Tomorrow we will be again seeing flags raised across New Zealand, bands piping at 7 am and crowds gathering around every cenotaph in the country. This is a commemoration of war, but is war worth remembering? Well of course we are not remembering war, but who we have lost in it. We remember the stupidity of war, we remember that killing people we don't know is irrational when they have done nothing to us. Because they haven't personally, nor has their country. We remember all those who died for somebody else's war, the war of an empire our great-grandfathers may have never seen first hand.
This wasn't the war of our fathers nor our grandfathers, they are now our great-grandfathers, people so distant we can hardly imagine them. They didn't listen to the radio and half of New Zealand was still rural. All their information, all their sense of nationalism was very different to ours. They read newspapers that reported the information a week late and who were they but an amalgamation of Brits and Irish fighting for their livelihoods in a quite unknown climate? They still saw Maori as savages and some even hoped they would go extinct, like a beast...
So why do we remember those we do not know?
I guess I cannot really speak. I come from a nation, Catalonia, that celebrates the defeat to Spain and its empire on September 11th 1714. When the Spanish finished sieging my hometown Lleida in 1708, less than 2000 people were reported still alive. Hitherto Lleida had been an important agricultural centre, the most important city of a trade-route between Catalonia and Aragon and from there Spain, and was the seat of one of Europe's oldest universities, our contributions to the field of medecine are innumerable, in part because Jews and Muslims participated in scholarly life. Spain though destroyed the city and killed the wounded in the hospital of St Mary. All universities in Catalonia were torn down, in Lleida the Queen's castle, where she lived for 200 years was destroyed as well as all the other noble buildings. We went from 300 noble palaces to none, overnight. Saying that the city was destroyed is an understatement, it did not recover until the early 20th century. Spain prohibited the use of the Catalan language too and imposed military rule, further breaking up the territory, half of which had recently been given to France.
Yet we celebrate the loss. We are insistent and we survive, the language is blooming, 10th most important on the internet according to Google, culture re-rooting and we are looking at starting our own path once more. The two previous times we did led to the loss in 1714 and the loss in the civil war in 1939. Looking at 1714 shows the unity of the Catalan people and our tenacity, we never gave up. It is a source of pride.

New Zealand and Anzac could be something similar, in a sense it did unite the country in grief. 95 years since the first service and we still cry. New Zealand though wasn't fighting for itself, it was fighting for an empire that took lots from its colonies but seldom gave back. Moreover, Gallipoli is an example of racism:
My great-grandfather almost fought there. His regiment had been selected to train for it, in Tanganyika and in Gaza. Both of these were a failure, the army was left to jump off boats and sink- the navy did not want to get any closer. It was a failure in logistics repeated in Gallipoli and a success for the Turkish who in some areas were well outnumbered. My great-grandfather though was not allowed to fight because he was in the East Indian regiment. Churchill decided Gallipoli would be for the French and the British to recapture, Europe would be in safe hands once again as the oldest nations tied the continent back together. Because the Indians were not European, they were not allowed to attack, even though they had been preparing for it for the last year.
Anzac is a day of unity, almost every Kiwi has someone who fought in the Great War. New Zealand is a small country yet it committed itself more than anyone else. Gallipoli entitles the kiwi to a sense of pride much like Catalonia's, even though we may be small, we matter. We tread twice as hard to make ourselves heard. This sense of pride can be seen in every town and atop mountains and tomorrow New Zealanders will remember the dead there, but are we celebrating New Zealand or celebrating a bygone empire.

Why don't we celebrate the day New Zealand was discovered? Because it could be offensive to Maori. Why don't we celebrate the day Maori and Pakeha put down their arms after the Maori Wars? Because we slaughtered so many in order to take away their land.
New Zealand's problem is that it has to celebrate a day it truly united and it hasn't got one. Even in WWI many Maori iwi refused to participate. Maori did not see why they should be fighting for an empire that had abandoned them.

I bought a white poppy to show my stance on war: it kills. It doesn't mean I refuse to remember, it means I will not forget war's price. 2271 Kiwis died in Gallipoli, why are we still fighting then? Shouldn't Anzac day symbolise the day we put down arms and war remind us of what we should never do again?

Media as structurally racist.

We are all affected by the media, as we watch the news on TV or some chat-show, or we turn on our computer screens we are given information that, to us unknowingly, can be one-sided. We are also wary of walking down streets on a Saturday night by ourselves, or scared of sirens which remind us of a war we've never been in. In Port Chalmers the fire siren whales as if it were alerting of a bomb-strike in World War Two, it sends a chill down my spine every time I hear it, most of the time of which is just to test it, to see whether this relic still works. The RSA building is close by it, I wonder what they think...

Everytime I hear a siren now though, it reminds me of Christchurch and the chaos after the earthquake. We have been fed so much info that I find it disrespectful. On the day and for days afterwards they had a 24 hour program about the developments, or lack thereof. While it does inform those who have family they haven't heard of, they probably just wonder if it was one of theirs who was pulled out of the rubble of a bookshop. During the two or three days of repeated footage, we only really heard of the bad stories, or just the CBD. And that was on because of the B. Suburbs remained uncommunicated and I remember reading an article about a group of 20 living in a garage who, after a week, still hadn't been visited by any emergency personnel. They were of course looking out for the B. People in the Pyne Gould are dead, those in an eastern suburb only lost and hungry, possibly infected. Who should we try save? The dead or the living? I found it disrespectful. But I guess the New Zealand media hardly ever has any big stories to comment on.

I went to an open lecture the other day on Media and racism. I didn't think it was all that great as it only focused on the anti-Indian riots that took place in some Australian universities last year and the year before. However the talk did raise some interesting points.

The media, in my eyes, is a structurally nationalistic system in many senses. Each country puts more focus onto the particular country it is based in than any other. This makes perfect sense, the citizens watching or reading that piece of media are more likely to be interested in a catastrophe up the road than one elsewhere. It is racist too though, economically if that makes sense. The west payed a lot of attention to Australia when the floods were devastating the Queensland cities and coasts, but no attention was payed to Brazil and even less to Sri Lanka. I think this is because there isn't as much money put into these economies and Australians are culturally much more similar to Europe or the US. The same happened with the Chinese earhquake. It stopped existing once the bigger one rattled Japan. Yes it was larger, but China left the maps pretty quickly. Those damn reds!

The media is sensationalist because that is what people want. We would rather hear about a wedding than about an election, even though the outcomes in South Sudan and Niger are uplifting for democracy. But that raises the issue of Africa. Don't they just fight all the time? Aren't they just too corrupt, maybe too tribal still?

Should public tv spend more time on world issues? Should its programming be more welcoming to cultural minorites? Should it be that unbiased precedent the public would want to see?

Sagacitas, Veritas et Libertas.

London shows the hidden side of Europe.

After being in Catalonia during December, I saw more racism than I had ever seen before, and it disgusted me. And Catalonia is a nation relatively open to newcomers, integration has been a part of their ethos for centuries. I'm not sure if this ethos started to fade as I left or if it was just a figment of my imagination. Maybe this ethos never existed. Maybe it existed because I wanted it to exist. The case is, as I've said previously, Catalonia, Spain and, frankly, most of central Europe, if not all, is racist. And I think this is because of our governments.

There are two theories, that I know of, which are used to integrate newcomers: assimilation and multiculturalism. Assimilation is the approach used by France, Spain, Italy, Switzerland... It basically consists of the new population having to become French, Spanish, etc. Multiculturalism is the approach used by Britain and until recently Germany. This approach accepts that many different cultures can live within a state and each one is allowed to maintain its traditions as long as they don't interfere with the wellbeing of other cultures therein.

I've explained Spain's immigration problems before and the Spaniards attitude of 'they should be like us' and in France it became clear that the assimilation route had failed with the riots in Paris' banlieues in 2005, staged mostly by sons-of-migrants.

London however isn't like that. I had this mental image of the city being incredibly Victorian. In the sense that it was dirty, people were closed and I guess it was too big and scary. It wasn't like that at all.
My Granny, before I left the Bury station to Liverpool Street had told me that if I got lost I should seek a black or a brown person, not someone who's white as they'd be foreigners. Far from being racist slur, I feel it is a representation of true, current London. Migrants from Africa and the West and East Indies have been in London so long that the city is theirs. This isn't a bad thing, au contraire, it shows that British society can be so much more accepting and tolerant than the rest of Europe. It is a society where it isn't strange to see people other than white nor will they be considered strangers straight off. Liverpool Street Station was the first glimpse of London I'd had in years, the train journey was dark as I left passed four. There, now six, it was rush hour and I, for the first time ever felt lost. Not lost in the sense of directionless, I'd been in plenty of aeroports; I was lost because I'd never seen so many people rushing from one place to another. And they did it so gracefully. No-one bumped into anyone else, they all knew where they were going and that they had to get there fast. I was overwhelmed and literally stood for thirty seconds without knowing what to do, I guess it's a sort of Kiwi curse.
When I finally managed to get back into character and took the train, I saw something I'd never seen before. I was sitting on central line and around me the faces were of african origin, or latino, or pacifica, or chinese, or philipino. All these people were going back from work, all were thinking of the meal they were going to have with their wife and kids, everyone was actually the same. London is the clearest example of multiculturalism. The person opposite could be speaking in Arabic on the phone and the one next to you reading a book in Hindi; standing, a jewish person and on the far seat someone holding a rosary. They are all Londoners, regardless of views, ethnicity or religion.

London may not be the centre of a vast empire anymore, instead it is in the limelight of globalisation. However one place where things have yet to change is in the theatre. The West End is where it used to be and the Lion King is still being played at the Lyceum. Whilst in there though, I only saw European faces. Maybe I was sitting in the wrong area or wasn't looking hard enough but it seems English higher culture is still restricted to the English.

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.

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.