The Mustard Seed

In response to za3tar who called for a Blog About Palestine Day on May 1st I would like to write my own, short post, on Palestine.

I thought I would write a small and critical post on the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine; a self described Marxist-Leninist liberation organization which has its roots with the Harakat al-Qawmiyyin al-Arab (Arab Nationalist Movement) which was founded by George Habash in 1952, just one year after graduating from the American University of Beirut.[1]

On the defeat of the Palestinians by the Zionists Habash had this decidedly Marxist outlook:

[T]he scientific society of Israel as against our own backwardness in the Arab world. This called for the total rebuilding of Arab society into a twentieth-century society…[W]e held the ‘Guevara view’ of the ‘revolutionary human being’…A new breed of man had to emerge, among the Arabs as everywhere else. This meant applying everything in human power to the realization of a cause.[2]

This cause, of course, was the liberation of Palestine through political and armed force, and to create a decidedly socialist state in the place of the Zionist and bourgeois Arab one.

While the PFLP and their leader, Habash, proclaimed itself a Marxist-Leninist organization it didn’t seem to work as one, or, at least, as what we have seen in Southeast Asia, China, Algeria, and other regions of the world; with exception of were its criticisms of many Arab leaders and of Israel (Habash refused to set foot on PA controled territory). Instead of using mass-line rhetoric and front organizations and organizing, en mass, the workers and other sectors of society the PFLP decided to go for sensationalist “revolutionary” tactics.

One aspect of this is when they introduced themselves to the world with the hijacking of El Al 707 passenger jet. But, to the credit of the PFLP, Habash stated:

When we hijack a plane it has more effect than if we kill a hundred Israelis in battle,” he told the German magazine Der Stern in 1970. ”For decades, world public opinion has been neither for nor against the Palestinians. It simply ignored us. At least the world is talking about us now.[3]

One thing the PFLP did, than any other, was advertise the plight of the Palestinians to a world that had been previously blind to their situation. However, things, in my opinion, started to deteriorate when the PFLP started bombing soft targets and killing Israeli civilians with the Jerusalem supermarket on February 20, 1969 and the bombing of Swissair Flight SR330 in February of 1970. These were fundamental mistakes which alienated the world to the cause of the PFLP and focused their attention away from organizing the mass of Palestinian society and building a stronger organization. Instead of looking at long term protracted struggle they looked at short term political goals and recognition.

Also, there was much internal dissension within the PFLP which eventually caused the group to splinter not long after it was set up. According to Wikipedia:

In 1968, Ahmed Jibril broke away from the PFLP to form the Syrian-backed Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine - General Command (PFLP-GC).

In 1969, the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine (DFLP) formed as a separate, ostensibly Maoist, organization under Nayef Hawatmeh and Yasser Abd Rabbo, initially as the PDFLP.

In 1972, the Popular Revolutionary Front for the Liberation of Palestine was formed following a split in PFLP.[4]

After the breakups the PFLP began to weaken in the 1980s and took a serious blow in 1996 when they boycotted the 1996 elections. Because of this many saw the PFLP as irrelevant on the Palestine question; and the masses seemed to have thought so as well as many began moving toward Hamas; which filled the void of those who were dissatisfied of the corrupt PA leadership.

Despite their splits, short sighted planning, use of alienating (to the world) terrorist tactics (which did little to address questions such as class solidarity and armed struggle against occupation by the IDF), and their decline one thing the PFLP did do was use Marxist doctrine and turned it to the question of Palestine: using it against the Zionist occupiers and as well as the elite Palestinian leadership.

Hopefully, in the future, a new group of leaders will arise from the ashes of the secular radical left in Palestine and be able to apply the successes and failures of the PFLP to provide a true socialist alternative for the Palestinian people.

Notes

1. Andrew I. Killgore, Washingtonreport on Middle East Affairs 27, no. 3 (April 2008).

2. John K. Cooley, Green March Black September: The Story of the Palestinian Arabs, Frank Cass & Co, London 1973, 135.

3. Edmund L. Andrews and John Kifner, “Tactician of Terrorism,” New York Times 15 May 2008.

4. Wikipedia, “Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine.” ( accessed May 14, 2008 )

“California Court Affirms Right to Gay Marriage“

Cross-posted from The Blog and the Bullet.

As’ad, a professor at CSU Stanislaus and a visiting professor at UC Berkeley, blogs about the radical left and the situation in Lebanon and the dangers in blindly supporting Hizbullah:

I believe that the radical left, or the revolutionary left, should be careful in evaluating the situation. I see that the Lebanese Communist Party has for all purposes conflated its position with that of Hizbullah–at least during this crisis. The radical left should keep a distance from an organization (i.e. Hizbullah) with which it does not share an ideology–a religious fundamentalist one at that. Today, I kept thinking of the leader of the Iranian Communist Party who sang the praises of Khumayni only to be forced to appear on TV (after the revolution) and make Stalinist-style “confessions”. He later was executed as were other communists.

The Communist Party (Marxist-Leninist) Liberation reports on the 19th All India Congress for the Communist Party of India (Marxist), one the largest and most successful “communist” parties in the world with good size representation in India’s parliament (including a CPM member being speaker of parliament) and control over West Bengal. CPI (ML) writes:

“Why, it’s not double standards, comrades, it’s dialectics!”
- Arindam Sen

How do we explain opposing Tata in Kalinganagar and welcoming him in Singur? How do we oppose globalisation and imperialist capital in other areas of the country while endorsing both in West Bengal? It was in response to many such doubts aired by some delegates to the 19th all India congress of CPI(M) that the above remark was made by one of the most visible and articulate leaders of the party. To what extent this ingenious application of Marxist philosophy enthralled his audience is anybody’s guess. Very interestingly, in a post-congress exclusive interview, a pro-party magazine like Frontline questioned the re-elected general secretary about the opinion that the “policy framework being given to the party-led State governments would be at variance with the national policy perspectives of the CPI(M) congress with regard to liberalisation”. This did indicate something, and Karat was further asked, “Would not this lead to a kind of confusion among the CPI(M) cadre?”

At the top of confusions and debates, however, it was West Bengal which really stole the show at the 19th congress…top leaders including General Secretaries have offered all assistance and guidance to the process of continual rightward drift in the Left Front Government’s economic policies. Joint ventures, or what we would call PPPs today, proved to be a transitional step towards privatisation and then the neoliberal industrial policy document of 1994. Through all such steps right up to the West Bengal SEZ Act of 2003 and the current craze of corporate industrialisation, the central leaders stood solidly behind the Bengal leadership, providing theoretical justification to whatsoever the latter did, or wished to do. In 2005, for instance, the 18th Congress opened up the gates to foreign investment. By and by it became clear to all that there was actually no such thing as Kolkata line versus Delhi line. The Bengal line was and is the central line. To be more accurate, the Bengal practice has always been the motive force in the evolution of the all India political perspective. (In this congress too, the party adopted a policy document that further liberalised the economic policies of state governments run by it.) Politburo member Sitaram Yechury made this amply clear in Coimbatore when he said, “What is happening in Bengal is not anti-liberalisation. We are open to foreign capital. Whatever we are doing in Bengal, we are asking Manmohan Singh to do for India”.

Focusing the spotlight on Bengal and its Chief Minister was a carefully considered political decision. BB is obviously the brightest poster boy of the new-look CPI(M). It is he who best represents the aggressive version of social democracy which works directly and violently for big capital and against peasants and workers while still carrying the red flag. Highlighting him is the party’s way to project its own brand of neoliberal developmentalism as the best selling point to improve the stakes in the corridors of power at the central as well as state levels…

…

But is everything going well in the party’s Bengal bastion? Not exactly, according to reports placed in the party congress. The proportion of Muslim members in the party is decreasing in Bengal and elsewhere, says the organisational report. What it does not say is that the alienation is a very normal outcome of the Advani-like steps and statements (on madarsas, or the treatment meted out to Rizwanur, for example) on the part of BB and his government. In recent times the latter have taken many a measure like appeasing Muslim fundamentalism on the Taslima Nasreen issue and announcing sops for the Muslim masses just ahead of the panchayat polls. But results are yet to show up.

…

In view of all this the 19th Congress has issued the call of yet another campaign to rectify mistakes at lower levels throughout the country. Once again this is only a ritual, an exercise in self-deception. With fundamental ideological problems originating at the top and flowing downwards, such an endeavour is bound to prove as futile as on earlier occasions. When the Gangotri remains heavily contaminated, what is the use of trying to clean up the Ganga at the lower reaches?

There is an interesting, and provocative, article in the New York Times on an American rancher who lives in Santa Cruz and has a large swath of ranch land in the gas rich hills of Eastern Bolivia. He bought some land in 11969 and has been building it up and expanding it ever since. On his land are the ranch hands, poor Indians who work the land but get paid meager wages.

The government accuses ranch owner Ronald Larsen of forcing his workers into servitude; quoted by the Times one of the workers said.

“We are not slaves…But we are not prospering. We just exist.”

Which is a pretty damning indictment for Larsen; these Indians, natives of the land of Bolivia, are forced to work, out of necessity, on the land of their ancestors, while a gringo from the U.S. gets to live a comfortable life on the ranch and in his home in Santa Cruz, fine cloths, fine food, nice car, etc.

Larsen is seen as some sort of hero, or symbol, in his stand off with the socialist government of Evo Morales and the Movement for Socialism. And indeed he is: what a more perfect symbol for the bankruptcy of the opposition than a rich, white, caustic, upper class foreigner from the U.S. who wants nothing more than to enrich himself off the backs of his poor workers. He even shows his class bias and his contempt for the natives of Bolivia when he said of the president:

“Evo Morales is a symbol of ignorance, having never even finished high school,”

Yet this native, former coca farmer, land rights activists, and “high school dropout” was able to build a mass movement in Bolivia and become its first indigenous president in history. Defying the wishes of the white elites and the American corporate imperialists.

Morales, it seems (so far), is trying to redistribute land to those who have toiled on it for centuries, through Spanish persecution and religious and economic imperialism, to a military junta, and to devastating neo-liberal reforms that benefited the elite at the expense of the urban and rural working poor.

What we have here is quite simple. An arrogant white man who bought his land from a corrupt government that persecuted the indigenous peoples of Bolivia, who exploits his workers through low payment, who resists a democratically elected government which is trying to carry out its mandate (socialism and land reform), and who uses illegal means to obtain his land that he somehow thinks he obtained “legally” through purchase of money. On the other side is a government which wants to redistribute wealth to those who helped build it up and redistribute the land to those who have truly worked on it. You have peasants whom are taking actions into their own hands by confronting the white elite and who have utilized all forms of protests to get what they deserve, sit-ins, road blockades, massive street protests, industrial actions, etc., all because the white elite refuses to give the majority of the country a slice of the pie.

Image From:
New York Times

Cross-posted from The Blog and the Bullet.

The Red Mantis hosts the 23rd Carnival of Socialism:

The Red Mantis is proud to host the twenty-third edition of the Carnival of Socialism. After a much needed revival led mostly by Jim Jepps of The Daily (Maybe) and John Angliss of the Labor Left Forum, the Carnival has had a strong showing from all of its hosts. For May Day, the Carnival self-hosted a special edition to commemorate the big day. With all of this exciting activity, I humbly present the next edition of the Carnival of Socialism. Here’s hoping it measures up.

Cross-posted from The Blog and the Bullet.

Neela blogs:

I’ve recently watched a couple of documentaries about radical movements in the 1960s and 70s:Guerrilla: The Taking of Patty Hearst, The Weather Underground and a narrative film about the Naxalite movement in West Bengal called Calcutta My Love.

Both of the first two films were fascinating but left me feeling irritated at the ludicrousness of it all - especially at the white privilege that protected many of these so-called revolutionaries, whereas members of the Black Panther Party faced a decidedly different fate.

Here is an updated version of the previous post here, with a video from Al Jazeera English.

After some calm came to Beirut Al Jazeera English reports:

At least one person has been killed in clashes between supporters of Lebanon’s government and the Hezbollah-led opposition in the northern city of Tripoli.

The fighting, which began late on Saturday and continued throughout the night, came hours after Lebanese opposition forces started to withdraw from the streets of Beirut, Lebanon’s capital.
They had earlier seized much of the capital in battles with government supporters.

An army official in Tripoli said government supporters had fought loyalists of an Alawite sect with links to Hezbollah in the Bab al-Tebbaneh, Kobel and Jabal Mohsen neighbourhoods.
“One woman has died in her house near Bab al-Tebbaneh,” he said, adding that about 7,000 people had fled the fighting.

He said that several people had been wounded in the fighting.

And PressTV:

Residents of Tripoli could hear heavy machine gun firing and the thump of exploding rocket-propelled grenades, some of which fell inside the city.

The unrest came despite a return to calm in the capital Beirut on Saturday, which was the scene of fierce fighting between supporters of the ruling bloc and the opposition.

The opposition announced that it was ending its takeover of Beirut after the army revoked government moves against Hezbollah.

Via The Angry Arab News/وكالة أنباء العربي الغاضب the Guardian reports:

Lebanon’s western-backed government was reeling yesterday after Hizbullah guerrillas seized control of Muslim west Beirut in a significant victory for the Iran-supported Shia movement.

…

The Hizbullah takeover - described by some as a coup and others as a “show of force” - broke months of political deadlock that reflects Lebanon’s deep internal divisions and the ambitions of neighbours such as Syria and Israel, as well as Iran, Saudi Arabia and the US. But, as an uneasy calm returned to Beirut yesterday, it was unclear what the change would mean.

…

Hundreds of people flooded across the border into Syria to escape the violence.

As’ad also blogs:

“…the Secretary of State is reaching out to the government of Lebanon, and we are always willing to see whatever their needs may be and work with them. It’s a democratically elected government; we want to help them succeed because it’s the right thing to do for the people of Lebanon and the people of the region.”

Razan blogs:

I just came back from the funeral wake of my neighbor’s son. He was 16 and he and his friend were shot this morning in my street. His family owns a bakery and a cafe in my neighborhood.

Also, via Razan, Press TV reports:

Embattled Lebanese Prime Minister Fouad Siniora might resign on Friday after the opposition took full control of Beirut.

Informed media sources told Press TV that Siniora might announce his resignation at 8:00 pm local time on Friday.

A Lebanese news website later reported that Siniora would resign on Friday and assign the army to take responsibilities of his cabinet until a transitional government is formed.

Meanwhile, gunmen affiliated to majority leader Saad Hariri’s al-Mostaqbal (Future) Movement have moved to eastern parts of Beirut where they are planning to team up with Amin Gemayel’s al-Katayeb and Samri Geagea’s Lebanese Forces militiamen.

MarxistFromLebanon blogs about lessons learned:

Well, by 11:00, I heard AMAL took over Makdisi Street, by midnight I was aware that the Hezbollah/AMAL forces dominated over the Future militants, and overwhelmed them easily. When I saw Nasrallah talking on TV with a big calm smile, I knew it was going to be a rough night…

So, so far. The Lebanese government threatened to take over the communications network of Hizbollah, the same low-tech network that was vital for the militia in defeating the high tech Israeli Defense Force. But, can Hizbolah really hold on to their swarth of territory in Beirut? Blacksmith Jade blogs:

Hizballah finds itself in a bind in Beirut - internationally, it is viewed as a non-legitimate force which has aggressed a democratically elected government; within the Arab/Islamic world it is seen as the Shiite aggressor against the Sunni Lebanese; and it is politically/militarily unable to hold large swaths of a hostile Beirut for longer than a few days, at which time it will have to hand control to the Army and its Commander, Michel Suleiman, thereby returning the country to an equilibrium already agreed upon politically the only difference being its having exposed its weapons by using them internally against fellow Lebanese.

The latest from Farfahinne’s Twitter:

Clashes in Tripoli between the current and future Ho Omar Karami (Leader of the Opposition)

Violent clashes between militia in Khalde and the militia of the future Arslan (Druze party in opposition) resulted in two deaths and the situation of Wal-Candidate heighten.

إشتباكات في طرابلس بين تيار المستقبل ومسلحي عمر كرامي (زعيم من المعارضة)

إشتباكات عنيفة في خلدة بين ميليشيا المستقبل وميليشيا إرسلان (الطرف الدرزي في المعارضة) أسفرت عن وقوع قتيلين لإرسلان والحالة مرشحة للتصع

So far though Al Jazeera English reports (with video):

Opposition fighters in the Lebanese capital are reported to have been pulled off the streets after seizing control of large parts of west Beirut in three days of fighting with pro-government forces.

At least 18 people have been killed in the worst clashes in Lebanon since the 1975-1990 civil war.

Beirut was reported to be “calm but tense” on Saturday following overnight clashes outside the city.

I know, I know, the headline is very CNN-esq, but work with me here people, I just got off a nine hour shift of loading heavy equipment into giant trucks and I’m tired.

So during my half-hour break at work this morning at 3:30 am I decide to go to Starbucks (the only place open 24 hours that’s near by) and I pick up the New York Times and see this as their front page picture:

Ummmm….Holy FUCK!

What the fuck happened? I started thinking to myself. Wasn’t there just a general strike yesterday? HOW DID THIS COME ABOUT???!!!

Which also made me think of Sursock, Farfahinne and MarxistFromLebanon. Quickly though, some reports from mainstream news organizations.

From the Times article:

Fierce clashes escalated in Beirut on Thursday between Sunni supporters of the government and loyalists of Hezbollah, the Shiite militant group, after Hezbollah’s leader said the government had declared war by threatening to shut down the group’s private telephone network

Minutes after Mr. Nasrallah’s speech, armed men in mixed Sunni-Shiite neighborhoods on the west side of Beirut engaged in heavy fighting using automatic rifles and rocket-propelled grenades. The army raced in armored personal carriers from one neighborhood to another, with soldiers shooting in the air to try to stop the fighting.

By late Thursday masked gunmen were roaming the streets with walkie-talkies. Some were seen shooting out streetlights to keep rooftop snipers from directing their fire at targets.

Many residents along Corniche Mazraa, a major highway that has become a demarcation line between the factions, were seen leaving their houses for safer areas. Others lined up in supermarkets, stocking up on food supplies.

The Guardian (U.K.) has a short video on the situation and this article:

Hizbullah gunmen today took control of west Beirut in street battles that left 11 people dead and forced government supporters into hiding

The Daily Star (Lebanon) reports:

Hizbullah secretary general Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah said during a press conference Thursday that Lebanon has entered a new phase of its political crisis and warned that a government crackdown on his party was tantamount to a “declaration of war.” Nasrallah stressed that Hizbullah was ready to return to dialogue, linking talks to a government back-track regarding measures taken Tuesday.

…

“The communications network is a significant part of the weapons of the resistance,” Nasrallah declared. “I had said that we will cut the hand that targets the weapons of the resistance … Today is the day to fulfill this decision.”

The cleric also stressed that Hizbullah is ready to use its weapons to defend itself should the government “cartel” seek to impinge upon the rights of the resistance.

“We have the right to confront he who starts a war with us by defending our rights and our weapons. We have yet to use our weapons inside the country but will do so to protect our arsenal,” he added.

“The [government] decision is tantamount to a declaration of war. This [signals] the start of a war … on behalf of the United States and Israel,” Nasrallah said during the conference, which was held via video link.

Nasrallah also escalated his rhetoric against a key March 14 stalwart Progressive Socialist Party leader and MP Walid Jumblatt, with whom the opposition has been trading jabs over the airport controversy and the communications debate.

Now, onto the ground.

MarxistFromLebanon was reporting

Well, after General Secretary of Hezbollah Hassan Nasrallah spoke, heavy shooting began between AMAL/Hezbollah and Future Movement extensively. Shooting took place everywhere, in my street alone guns were shot. The neighboring street, 4 masked gunners came out and are still there. A lot of my friends reported that snipers stood up on their rooftops. Rockets were reported, and everywhere these parties are presents, a gigantic shoot-out.

It seems interesting that so far there have only been 11 reported deaths, especially reading MFL’s first hand accounts of shooting going off everywhere. Is the media getting it wrong?

MFL continues:

This is a full scale war in Beirut. What we are witnessing now is the rising borders of the militia cantons. Those who successfully maintain control over their streets, then they draw their new “national borders of their mini-republics”. Now of course, with the presence of the cantons, it will be like a big chess board whereby one color signifies the government and the other would be the opposition. Reports of different opposing media accuse the other parties of performing “Sectarian Cleansing” whereby each majority would kick the minority. The site of refugees in Ras el Naba’a and Corniche el Mazra’a was repulsive, all political parties should pay them compensation. Now what to expect from militias when their universities students are using ak-47s?

Fafahinne writes (in Arabic, excuse the crappy translation)

1) What is most shocking in his [Nasrallah's] statements is his call for compromise and dialogue with all of the parties and with Condoleezza Rice. I felt his speech, despite the escalation phenomenon: the “spare hand that extends to the arms of the resistance,” an indirect call to return to the table of dialogue with these parties. This is what we have to take a decisive stand on: no dialogue with a puppet government … yes to the toppling Siniora.

…

2) In his speech he didn’t even mention the sensitive issue of the difficult economic situation and he also omitted the topic of the raising of the minimum wage, which was called for by the General Labor Union…And, hence, limited the conflict with the question of disarmament and bumped out the economic situation and economic policy of Altaher Sinoiora’s government.

أكثر ما يصدمني في تصريحه هو إتهامه بالعمالة لأطراف الحكومة “موظفي كونداليزا رايس” من جهة ودعوته للمساومة والحوار مع هذه الأطراف من جهة أخرى. فلمست بخطابه، على الرغم من ظاهره التصعيدي : “سنقطع اليد التي تمتد الى سلاح المقاومة”، دعوة غير مباشرة إلى العودة الى طاولة الحوار مع هذه الأطراف. وهذا ما علينا ان نأخذ منه موقفا حاسمًا: لا حوار مع حكومة عميلة…نعم لإسقاط حكومة السنيورة

…

في كلمته لم يذكر حتى الوضع الإقتصادي الصعب الذي يفتك بالفئات الأكثر حساسية وأغفل أيضا موضوع رفع الحد الأدنى للأجور الذي دعا الإتحاد العمالي العام ودعت “المعارضة” لإضراب من أجله يوم البارحة. وبالتالي فهو حصر الصراع مع السلطة في مسألة السلاح وأخرج الوضع الإقتصادي وسياسة التعهير

الإقتصادية التي تنتهجها حكومة السنيورة من الصراع

Sursock blogs:

The word on everyones lips is “fitna” — a schism between Sunni and Shia Muslims. At the moment this struggle is political — between the US backed government and opposition, who are supporters of the resistance.

Opposition gunmen, many of them masked, are roaming around the Hamra area of west Beirut.

****

A friend in Ain el Mreisseh (near to the old hotel district) said that Amal fighters from the opposition took over her neighbourhood “pretty quickly this afternoon”.

…

Thursday turned into a bad day for the government. The opposition forces overan Future TV and Al-Mustaqbal offices in west Beirut. Both are the media mouthpieces of Saad Hariri.

It seems that the pro government fighters (private security forces) walked away from the battle.

Rumours that Walid Jumblat, a key government ally, abandoned his house in the upmarket quarter of Clemenceau proved unfounded. But the threat against his residence seems to have triggered clashes just south of the capital.

I will update you guys more on the situation going on over there some time tomorrow. I’ll try to find more blogs fro m Lebanon (I know of a few more) plus some more news when it happens. Please check out Farfahinne’ Twitter for more updates and all those blogs and newspapers I mentioned, and of course Al Jazeera and Al Jazeera English. Special thanks to Moussa Bashir from Global Voices.

St. Petersburg Times reports:

Dmitry Medvedev was inaugurated as Russia’s president on Wednesday, pledging to bolster the country’s economic development and civil rights, in what may signal a departure from his predecessor’s heavy-handed tactics.

Medvedev took the oath of office in the Kremlin’s golden-hued Andreyevsky Hall, bringing to an end Vladimir Putin’s eight years as president. But Putin is sure to continue to wield huge influence in the country.

Little more than two hours after becoming president, Medvedev nominated Putin to be prime minister.

Cross-posted from The Blog and the Bullet.

Sokari posts:

The 15th May - a day for bloggers to unite and focus on human rights everywhere. For more information Bloggers Unite.

Via Devious Diva

There is no other man who is absorbed by the revolution twenty-four hours a day, who has no other thoughts but the thought of revolution, and who even when he sleeps, dreams of nothing but revolution.

A quote from a Menshevik opponent of Lenin.

Damn, talk about hardcore.

Image From:
LibCom.org

Cross-posted from The Blog and the Bullet.

A. R. Sakaeda blogs at the Chicago Tribune News Blogs:

When people talk about the model minority, “model” is code for never making other people feel uncomfortable about racism. “Model” means not being like all those other troublesome people of color. It means keeping your mouth shut and your eyes lowered. It means smiling brightly and nodding along. Yes, sir! Whatever you say, sir! It means never complaining.

Members of the model minority often are used to shame other people of color. They can do it, why can’t you? If you would only have those same close-knit families. If you only valued education more. If you only worked harder. Racism is a thing of the past.

Holding up Asian Americans as a model divides communities of color, making it difficult for us to see our commonalities.

[Hat Tip: angry asian man]

Cross-posted from The Blog and the Bullet.

A blogger at the Revolutionary Democratic Front (India) blogs about the rise, and current trend, of Hindu fascism in India, relating to the BJP and RSS parties:

The Hindu fascist ideology has been in existence for as long as seven and a half decades with the inauguration of the RSS in 1925 at Nagpur. But it did not play any significant role in state power. It has risen to power in the last 25 years and since then has become a strong political force. Initially its bases were upper caste people and Hindu merchant communities. In 1980s ruling classes decided to develop this fascist ideology. It has increased day by day and has made a place even amongst the dalits and backward castes. All the ruling classes have played a significant role in developing aiding and abetting the growth of fascist forces. The different fronts made with an intention of parliamentary alliances have legalized Hindu fascism. It has maintained a mask by making alliances with regional parties. BJP in its tenure associated with big commercial households and together with its organizations-CII, FICCI, and ASOCHEM-formed various committees with different ministries. It went so far as to make acquaintances with the PM office. We see that Hindu fascism is basically a result of a course of political events, which has been brought by the ruling class, which centers on imperialism and increasing political and economic crisis of national and foreign capitalists and ruling classes.