The Music Of Protest

At the weekly meeting of the Inkwell 3, we discussed many things and many issues, but this one we felt needed to be covered. The new music of protest--hip-hop. I recall the music for change of the 60's and 70's, not hip-hop is becoming the new songs of protest.

It started off as the voice of the inner city and the problems that were lived by the singers. I recent years it has exploded on the world as the music of protest. From the reservations for Native Americans to the world of war, performers are voicing their opinions and feelings about the world and the world situation.

There are groups like Off The Rez, a NA rap group or groups in Senegal or South Korea or The Palestinians Territories, or those in the Southern part of Asia. The music style is growing and as it grows it is becoming the voice of political oppression, poverty, hunger and hopelessness.

I know that too many people see rap or hip-hop as a group of guys with lots of gold and barely clothed women, but it is evolving into so much more and it is becoming the music of protest and the music for change.


CHUQ

Protest In Switzerland

Huh? Switzerland? Who could make of this stuff?

Recently at a get together of the ultra-Rightist part, Swiss People's Party, the party faithful were spreading there racist diatribes to the public. Racist? Yes, racist! Their most popular campaign protest is a flock of white sheep expelling a black sheep. Does that sound like a racist organization? You bet you ass!

Back to the meat of the post. During this campaign rally, it was reported, that masked leftist broke into the meeting and ripped down banners, posters, threw rocks and such. The biggest thing was that these "leftist" made victims out of the fascist. And that it would strengthens there position in the upcoming election.

Well as an update, apparently the attack gave them the sympathy they searched for and they were elected into the government.

I am one of those "leftist" and I say it was not the work of the Left, but rather an orchestrated attack done by the SPP, to gain an upper hand. Why do I say that? Well. it seems that no one stepped up to stop the rampage. Why? There were no physical attacks on the SPP. Why? The Left and the ultra-Right in Europe have had a long history of attack on each other and most of them ended with blood being spilt. Why not this time?

I recall another fascist that used a similar tactic in Germany and he did real well in the elections. As did the SPP. History does repeat itself! IMO, this was a planned "attack" by the SPP to gain the upper hand in the elections. BTW, it worked!

CHUQ

Genocide?

Genocide! Genocide! Where is the genocide?

The Senate has passed the Armenian genocide resolution, but it seems to be losing support in the House. The term genocide is a delicate one at best. Turks say it was not, Bush says it was not, Armenians say it was, but what would you expect them to say?

So, sports fans, who is right? Was it genocide? If you say yes, then is Darfur genocide? If you say yes, then what a bout Tibet? HUH, you may ask. In the 1950's China invaded a free country of Tibet and since then has set about killing people, destroying culture and remaking the country into a Chinese province. Is this genocide?

To the Tibetan people it is! But why has not the present and past Administrations not labeled it as so?

Ask yourself, who is the US largest trade partner? Thinking.....thinking.....CHINA? Nothing gets past you guys, does it? If you think that the US will jeopardize that partnership, you are being delusional.

Genocide is a horrible violation of human rights; no matter who does it. But to pick and choose who will be labeled a genocidal state is pathetic. As long as we are talking about it, what about Serbia and the Balkans, all those deaths, were they from a genocide?

My point is, pick a definition of genocide and stick with it, no matter who you offend--genocide is genocide--it should never be a political hot button for discussion--it should be condemned on all fronts.

CHUQ

When Is It Genocide?

That is the question. Where does killing stop and genocide begin? Who defines what is genocide? The simple definition is, the systematic killing of a people. That is the simple one. But who decides when it is genocide or just killings?

Six million deaths of a people in WWII has been called genocide. What about the approximately 15 million Russian deaths? Was that a genocide? The 1.5 million deaths in Cambodia has been labeled a genocide. OK, how many deaths must there be for it to be labeled as a genocide? Darfur has been called a genocide by the US, but most other countries do not call it as such. So is it genocide?

I bring this up because of the recent vote in the Congress that has labeled the deaths of Armenians in 1915 as genocide. The country of Turkey has condemned the vote and now has warned of dire consequences if the vote was in favor of calling it a genocide. The vote has been taken and it is genocide in the eyes of the Congress. Now the consequences will be whatever happens.

The deaths of many people is not something that is a good thing, but to call something genocide should be a decision by the UN or a world body similar. I do not think that one country declaring it as a genocide is necessarily the final word. For most times these things are done as a special favor to a huge campaign contributor.

I am not saying that the deaths of the Armenian people was anything but a tragedy, but who is the US to declare it so over the rest of the world?

I ask again, when is it genocide? And who is the one to label it as such? When is it official? Does the deaths of American Natives count as genocide? Congressional person, Boehner, you gotta love a guy named Boner, you remember him he is the one that cries at the drop of a hat. Anyway, he has said that the vote was a waste of time and that the decision should be left to historians. Who is paying him?

This subject is something that we can debate until the cows come home and never find a spot where we can agree. Genocide is a horrible technique used on a people and it should be condemned and reported. The problem is there is NO good definition for the act. Until there is, any discussion is just purely an argument.

Enough said? you bet!

CHUQ

Burma Shame

BURMA SHAME

Myan……Myna…..May…M…Ma—Damn! Burma!

The media has labeled the situation in Myanmar as the Saffron Revolution, because of the color of the robes that the monks wear, since they are the leading force of the protests. Saffron revolution? Why do the media have to tart up everything? Like The environmental revolution, the Green Revolution or the democratic process in the Ukraine as the Orange Revolution? It is like changing a Jungle to a Rain Forest, it is more serene sounding and people will save a rain forest, but not so much a jungle.

Sorry, I digress. Myanmar, then Burma flirted with democracy in 1990, when a democratic election swept into prominence a bunch of elected “democrats”, but as quickly as they were elected the military junta annulled the election to keep power. Since those days Burma has slipped into the darkness of poverty; it is one of the poorest, if not the poorest countries in the world. The country’s major source of income is natural gas and gemstones. About 90% of the world’s rubies come from Burma.

The Myanmar military junta lives in relative luxury compared to their beleaguered people. Price increases have led to the situation now in Burma. Monks began quietly protesting the government’s move and were joined by thousands of Burmese. The government could not tolerate this affront to their authority and sent out security forces to quell the protests. Hundreds of monks and civilians have been detained or just up and disappeared. People beat in the streets, but not as many were killed as there were in 1988, which led to the success of the democracy movement of 1990.

The UN has enacted sanctions against the Burmese government, but what will that mean? Not much! A French company is still using Burmese gas and oil, “blood” rubies will still be bought at Macy’s.

These sanctions are just a way for the world to appear to care what happens to the people of Burma. In reality, they care not. The loophole of the sanctions on rubies is huge. For the US they cannot buy Burmese rubies from Burma, but as long as the stones are cut and polished in another country, it will be legal. The people will continue to suffer and the junta will continue to oppress.

Burma is a good example of why I personally do not like the theory of non-violent action. The people protest peacefully and with conviction and the response will be violence and conviction. Sorry to say, but the violence will triumph every time.

Since the fateful day, much has been said and even street demonstrations throughout the world. People are marching and carrying signs in cities like London, Bangkok and other cities. Everyone is trying to do their part to bring about more democracy for Burma. I would like to point out that a hundred people have died in Burma. But what of Darfur? Thousands have died, millions displaced and yet the world is not up in arms about that, why? A hundred deaths, the people of Darfur would consider themselves lucky if that was the total deaths from the situation with Sudan. Why no more outrage than a whisper for Darfur? Is it because they are black? Are black Africans somehow less important than Asians?

I bring up Darfur, not to lessen the situation in Burma but to bring attention to the fact that there are people all over this world fighting for democracy. No matter where it is, one situation is no more important than another. We stand for democracy for ALL people, no matter where the live, what they believe or who will lead them. If the people do not participate in the country’s government, then it is not a democracy, no matter how hard it is sold. May I suggest that if a person does not embrace “real” democracy then please shut the hell up! If you want to demonstrate for democracy, then do so for ALL oppressed people, or stay home and play HALO 3. Stay out of the way of us who are fighting for ALL humanity, not just the situation du jour.

It was amazing to see the amount of conviction of the Burmese people to demonstrate peacefully, but all they accomplished was a momentary footnote in recent history. Their struggle will soon be forgotten when the story slides from the headlines. I am sorry to suck the life out of the moment, but face reality—POLITICAL POWER GROWS FROM THE BARREL OF A GUN!

You may not like Mao, but he was correct in this assumption. The only way the Burmese will rid themselves of the parasitic junta is through an armed struggle. If they wait for the world to come to their rescue, then they need to see the progress that it has made in Darfur. That is what they will have to look forward to in the future.

We Communists condemn the actions of the junta in dealing with the Burmese people. We stand together with our comrades and demand human rights for all people. We will work with our comrades to bring an end to the suffering of the Burmese people and a return to “real” democracy for all.

WORKERS OF THE WORLD UNITE!

Professor CHUQ

06 Oct 07

Professor's Perspective

Myan....My.....Man....M.......m......BURMA!

Hopefully the world now knows what is going on in Myanmar. You know the country that is having the domestic protest problem?

Myanmar was renamed from Burma about 19 yrs ago when the present military junta took control. And from that point all democratic institutions have been oppressed. The country has been under military control for about 40 yrs and the present one has been the most oppressive.

Bush made several comments about the country to include stiffer sanctions on the country. Good idea. But why now? This has been going on for decades and no one really gave a screaming crap. Why now?

The answer is easy--it is the 800 pound gorilla in the room. It is in the news. The media is covering this daily and often. Bush had to appear to be sensitive to the plight of the Burmese people because of his admin's total lack of concern for the people of Darfur. The Bush Boyz have taken lots of grief over the Darfur thing and they wanted to avoid any such thing again.

When the news ceases so will the Bush concern with the country.

CHUQ