Monday 13 December 2021

Christian Johann Heinrich Heine (13/12/1797 – 17/2/1856) - That was but a prelude; where they burn books, they will ultimately burn people as well.

 

Christian Johann Heinrich Heine, one of the most significant German poets of the 19th century was born on December 13, 1797, He was also a renowned journalist, essayist, and literary critic, but is best known for his wonderful lyric poetry, while his radical political views led to many of his works being banned by German authorities
Heine lived during the high watermark of German Romanticism,the idyllic, idealistic days of Schiller and Goethe,but Heine was only a half-hearted Romantic. Having suffered persecution first hand as a German Jew, Heine was far too disillusioned by the injustices of the world to fully take up the hopeful, sentimental spirit of Romanticism. Although he dabbled in utopian philosophy for a brief time,  Heine always kept his distance from the Romantic humanistic idealism of his age. He was one of the more cynical poets of the early nineteenth century, and for this reason he is perhaps one of the wisest; his poetry avoids the high flights of fancy that so marred later Romanticism, and his opinions, though harsh and often pessimistic, come as a breath of fresh air in the poetic universe of unrealistic Romantic humanism.
Heine was Heinrich Heine was born  in Düsseldorf, Rhineland, as the eldest of four children into a Jewish family in a time when antisemitic sentiments were rife among the yet-to-be unified German kingdoms.. His father Samson Heine was a textile merchant, his mother Peira van Geldern was the daughter of a physician. He was called “Harry” as a child, but became “Heinrich” after his conversion to Christianity in 1825.
 Heine's parents were not particularly devout Jews. When he was a young child they sent him to a Jewish school where he learned a smattering of Hebrew. Thereafter he attended Catholic schools. Here he learned French, which would be his second language, although he always spoke it with a German accent. He also acquired a lifelong love for Rhineland folklore.
When his father's business failed, Heine was sent to Hamburg, where his uncle Salomon encouraged him to undertake a career in commerce. Salomon Heine was famous in his own right as a multi-millionaire and one of the must successful businessmen in German history to that point; Salomon encouraged his young nephew to follow in his footsteps and take up a career in banking. Heine, however, failed miserably as a businessman, and, with his uncle's financial support, he turned to the study of law at the universities of Göttingen, Bonn and Berlin. Heine quickly discovered that he was more interested in literature than in the law, nonetheless earning a law degree in 1825. During his time at university he also decided to convert from Judaism to Protestantism. Heine believed that this was necessary because of the severe restrictions on Jews in almost all of Germany; in many cases, Jews were forbidden to enter certain professions or live in certain regions, and antisemitic persecution was experienced every day. Particularly problematic for Heine, Jews were forbidden to lecture at universities, so Heine, who dreamed of one day becoming a professor, saw no choice but to abandon his religion. As Heine said in self-justification, his conversion was "the ticket of admission into European culture." For much of the rest of his life Heine wrestled over the incompatible elements of his German and his Jewish identities.
In the late 18th century Heine’s birthplace, Dusseldorf in particular and the Rhineland in general, was occupied by France. The Jews of the Rhineland were emancipated, with Karl Marx’s father and Heine among them, and were free to attend university and even to practice law or medicine. When the area was annexed to Prussia in 1815, thus far emancipated Jews were given the choice to convert to Christianity and hold on to their profession, or to keep their faith and lose their position. The backlash of this “choice” was that it radicalized the intellectuals, sowing the seeds of future revolutionaries and communists.
With German nationalism, anti-Semitism grew in the early 19th century. Mostly forgotten Kantian philosopher Jakob Friedrich Fries even called for legislation against Jews. Jews were so marginalized at the time, they were basically invisible The sentiment of physical exclusion of Jews had been present before the German unification of 1870, although it was the most "Jewish-friendly" country for a short while.
In 1817, two years after the German nationalists' victory over Napoleonic France and on the 300th anniversary of Luther’s 95 Theses, the student fraternities (Burschenschaften) organized a pilgrimage to Wartburg, a center of German nationalism where Luther found sanctuary after his excommunication. At the Wartburg Festival, students declared their universities wouldn’t accept any foreign students - foreign meaning French or Jewish. The only exception was the University of Heidelberg, whose fraternity was labeled the “Juden” fraternity from then on. Nationalistic, pro-unity speeches were given by students and academics, and books whose authors antagonized German unification were burned. The first book to be thrown onto the bonfire was written by a Frenchman and carried the title “Civil.” Few believed it could happen in the twentieth century until May 6, 1933. That day, the German Student Association announced a nationwide “Action against the Un-German Spirit.”
During his college years Heine fell hopelessly in love with two of his uncle's daughters, Amalie and Therese, both of whom rebuffed his advances and ridiculed Heine over his financial failures. Heine was heartbroken by these incidents, but he poured his emotions into his poetry, creating what is perhaps the most memorable of his works, Die Buch der Lieder (The Book of Songs). This early volume, consisting primarily of love poems dedicated to Amalie and Therese, is most certainly written in the tormented mode of German Romanticism, similar in style to the works  of Johann Wolfgang von Goethe  and Freidrich Schiller. Heine, however, brings a unique element to his love poetry: his poems, far from being sentimental, are bittersweet and self-doubting. The poet frequently questions whether his feelings are, after all, as powerful as he thinks they are, or worth the effort he has invested. In so doing Heine proves himself to be a much more honest and human poet than any of his contemporaries, as well as much easier for modern audiences to digest. For these reasons Heine has often been labeled the first "post-Romantic" poet, as he was one of the first poets of the nineteenth century to openly cast doubt on the values of Romanticism. In particular, Heine's poetry would constantly question the divide between "poesy" and "reality"—that is, the divide between the flighty world of the artistic imagination, and the material world.
In 1824, while still at Gottingen, Heine took a break from his law studies to travel in the Harz Mountains. While on his travels Heine wrote a short book about his experiences, freely mixing in imaginative fancy and social commentary with his loving descriptions of nature and the mountainsides; Der Harzreise (The Harz Journey) became the first in a series of travel books that would earn Heine a modicum of critical acclaim, the first stepping stones in the development of his literary celebrity. In addition to the book on the Harz, Heine would write additional travelogues for a trip to England, in 1827, and a journey to Italy undertaken in 1828. The most popular of all Heine's Reisebucher, however, would be the last volume, entitled Ideen. Das Buch Le Grand (Ideas. The Book Le Grand), in which Heine would take a whimsical "journey" into his own self. The book, a curiously lyrical melange of memoir, meditation, and journalistic commentary, would prove to be one of Heine's most popular.Following the July Revolution of 1830, Heine left Germany for  Paris, France in 1831. Heine was particularly attracted to Paris because of the pseudo-religion of the socialist philosopher, Count .Saint-Simon. Saint-Simon hoped to organize a utopian state, in which the State owned all property, and everyone would be rewarded based on the quality and amount of their work. Heine was attracted to this utopian vision, believing that it might at last bring an end to the long history of persecution and injustice which he saw as having tarnished all of human history. In Paris, he  began his second phase of life and work. The French capital inspired Heine to a veritable flood of essays, political articles, polemics, memoirs, poems and prose. Heine increasingly took on the role of an intellectual mediator between Germany and France and for the first time presented his position in a pan-European framework. He acquainted the French public with German Romanticism and German philosophy
Later, as it began to dawn on Heine that he would never return to Germany again, he began to write a series of works of cultural criticism, this time in French, critiquing German culture and particularly chastising what he viewed as the failed movement of  Romanticism.
 As the towering figure of the revolutionary literary movement Young Germany (Junges Deutschland), he continued from Paris to disseminate French revolutionary ideas in Germany.
Censorship of the time had a funny rule that books under 320 pages were to be reviewed before publication. Anything larger was considered to be uninteresting to the general public and not worth the censors’ time.
Heine’s publisher flouted this law by printing his clients’ work in large font, increasing the page count and bypassing the censors, but still spreading revolutionary texts. 1834 saw an end to this loophole, and as Heine refused to be censored, his work went unpublished in Germany. In 1835 the German Parliament banned the works of Young Germany and thus, Heine’s book were also banned. Heine enjoyed life in the French capital and made contact with the greats of European cultural life living there, such as Hector Berlioz, Ludwig Börne, Frédéric Chopin, George Sand, Alexandre Dumas and Alexander von Humboldt. Gradually it became a matter of course that German authors of distinction as visitors to Paris also visited Heine.
 One event which really galvanised him was the 1840 Damascus Affair in which Jews in Damascus had been subject to blood libel and accused of murdering an old Catholic monk. This led to a wave of anti-Semitic persecution. The French government, aiming at imperialism in the Middle East and not wanting to offend the Catholic party, had failed to condemn the outrage. On the other hand, the Austrian consul in Damascus had assiduously exposed the blood libel as a fraud. For Heine, this was a reversal of values: reactionary Austria standing up for the Jews while revolutionary France temporised. Heine responded by dusting off and publishing his unfinished novel about the persecution of Jews in the Middle Ages, Der Rabbi von Bacherach (The Rabbi of Bacherach).
 
 “Great genius takes shape by contact with another great genius, but less by assimilation than by friction.”

— Heinrich Heine

In October 1843, Heine’s distant relative and German revolutionary, Karl Marx, and his wife Jenny von Westphalen arrived in Paris after the Prussian government had suppressed Marx’s radical newspaper. The Marx family settled in Rue Vaneau. Marx was an admirer of Heine and his early writings show Heine’s influence. In December Heine met the Marxes and got on well with them. He published several poems, including Die schlesischen Weber (The Silesian Weavers), in Marx’s new journal Vorwärts (“Forwards“). Ultimately Heine’s ideas of revolution through sensual emancipation and Marx’s scientific socialism were incompatible, but both writers shared the same negativity and lack of faith in the bourgeoisie.
Despite his isolation in France, Heine continued to comment on the evolution of German culture. Plagued by criticism and censorship, Heine didn’t make life any easier for himself. He regularly involved himself in liberal factions at the universities he attended, held questionable and unrequited romances, and challenged 10 different people to duels throughout the years.
Though regarded as a literary celebrity, his exile in Paris was also fraught with dissidence within the Young Germany group, exacerbated once again by Heine’s tendency towards provocation, culminating in his last duel in 1840, which he survived.
Following a visit to Germany in 1843, Heine wrote a long satirical poem Deutschland. Ein Wintermärchen (Germany. A Winter's Tale), an account of his visit and a harsh lampooning of the political culture of the German people. Disillusioned with Saint-Simonism and utopanism in general for some time, Heine also satirized utopian politics with another long satirical poem entitled Atta Troll: Ein Sommernachtstraum ("Atta Troll: A Midsummer Night's Dream"), published in 1847.
In 1844, he published a second volume of poems, Neue Gedichte (New Poems) that illustrated the poet's disillusionment with Romantic ideology. The volume contains a sequence entitled "Verschiedene" that is a satirical, grotesque version of his earlier love poetry; the "Verschiedene" poems describe the poet's bitter feelings and resentment towards a litany of fickle French girls of loose morals and little devotion. The "Verschiedene" poems earned Heine a significant degree of scorn, though they are now recognized as a comic masterpiece that signaled the end of Romanticism. Neue Gedichte also contained a number of satirical poems written on political topics, meant to illustrate the need for social reform.
Heine's early years in Paris had been happy ones. the French proved to be a much more tolerant people than the Germans, and Heine enjoyed a relatively high-class life as a literary celebrity. He was married, happily, it seems, to a woman of low birth in 1841. Heine's constant attacks on German culture and politics, however, had not come without a price; by 1835 his works were banned by the German government; and by 1840 Heine himself was barred from returning to the country. Heine wrote movingly of the experience of exile in his poem In der Fremde ("Abroad"): 
 
Ich hatte einst ein schönes Vaterland.
Der Eichenbaum
Wuchs dort so hoch, die Veilchen nickten sanft.
Es war ein Traum.
Das küßte mich auf deutsch, und sprach auf deutsch
(Man glaubt es kaum,
Wie gut es klang) das Wort: »Ich liebe dich!«
Es war ein Traum.
Oh, once I had a lovely fatherland.
The oaks grew tall
Up to the sky, the gentle violets swayed.
I dreamt it all.
I felt a German kiss, heard German words
(Hard to recall
How good they rang) - the words "Ich liebe dich!"
I dreamt it all.

(Translation by Hal Draper) 

In 1844, Heine's uncle Salomon died at last, leaving the poet destitute and at a loss for stability. His uncle, who had reluctantly supported his poet-nephew during his life, had completely disinherited him from his will; penniless, and having no other options, Heine entered into a lengthy legal battle with his uncle's estate, a fight which would drain much of the poet's energy as well as seriously tarnish his reputation among his peers. Moreover, around this time, Heine began to suffer from the symptoms of a nervous disease, possibly multiple sclerosis or syphilis. Confined to bed in 1848, Heine, blind, paralyzed, and in constant pain, returned to poetry, writing some of the bleakest and most heartbreaking verses ever rendered in the German language. These poems were collected in the volumes Romanzero in 1851, and Gedichte 1853 und 1854 (Poems: 1853 and 1854), and they are now considered by critics to be his greatest achievements. Here, for instance, is Heine's heartrending "The Mad Carnival of Loving," translated by Richard Garnett:

This mad carnival of loving,
This wild orgy of the flesh,
Ends at last and we two, sobered,
Look at one another, yawning.
Emptied the inflaming cup
That was filled with sensuous potions,
Foaming, almost running over—
Emptied is the flaming cup.
All the violins are silent
That impelled our feet to dancing,
To the giddy dance of passion—
Silent are the violins.
All the lanterns now are darkened
That once poured their streaming brilliance
On the masquerades and murmurs—
Darkened now are all the lanterns.
He would not leave what he called his “mattress-grave” (Matratzengruft) until his death  on February 17, 1856 in Paris. Three days later he was buried in the Montmartre cemetery. Cimeterie. His wife Mathilde survived him, dying in 1883. The couple had no children. 85 years later in 1941 when France was under Nazi occupation, Hitler ordered the German  army to obiterate Heine's grave. No trace of it remains
 Heine is often labeled the first of the "post-Romantic" poets. His criticisms of Romanticism, which became more and more scathing as the poet matured, would help to precipitate the realist  phase of literary history. .
Many composers have set Heine's works to music. They include Robert Schumann (especially his Lieder cycle Dichterliebe), Friedrich Silcher (who wrote a popular setting of "Die Lorelei", one of Heine's best known poems), Franz Schubert, Felix Mendelssohn, Fanny Mendelssohn, Johannes Brahms, Hugo Wolf, Richard Strauss, Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky, Edward MacDowell, and Richard Wagner; and in the 20th century Hans Werner Henze, Carl Orff, Lord Berners, Paul Lincke, Yehezkel Braun, and Friedrich Baumfelder (who wrote another setting of "Die Lorelei", as well as "Die blauen Frühlingsaugen" and "Wir wuchsen in demselben Thal" in his Zwei Lieder).
Heine's insight into the human condition, and his constant search for real hope and change, make him one of the most moving and influential poets in the European tradition. His conversion to Christianity and attempted assimilation into German Christian culture, only to be scorned and reviled by Nazi hatred of Jews makes Heinrich a pure case and embodiment of one of the enduring horrors and tragedies in European history, namely the Christian abuse and inhuman oppression of its Jewry.
Banned by the German authorities during his own lifetime, Heine’s works faced backlash again when they were posthumously banned by the Nazis in the 1930s. Censorship went beyond bans and up in flames, when in 1933 Nazi students and youth began a nationwide book burning in Berlin as part of a nationwide action “against the un-German spirit”.
The librarian Wolfgang Hermann was instrumental in drawing up the blacklist of books to be burnt, which was published in Börsenblatt, the trade magazine for the German publishing industrywhich were then used to plunder private bookshelves, public libraries and academic collections. . More than 2,500 authors were consigned to the flames.. Among the famous German-speaking authors were Bertolt Brecht, Albert Einstein, Sigmund Freud, Heinrich Heine, Franz Kafka, Karl Marx and Stefan Zweig. The list included authors such as the 1929 Nobel Prize winner Thomas Mann, targeted for his support of the Weimar Republic, and international best-selling author Erich Maria Remarque whose “All Quiet on the Western Front” was vilified as a betrayal of the martyred soldiers of the First World War. 
 Before the books were burnt, the organisers sent out what they called their “Twelve Theses”, which were to be read at the book-burnings in every town.  The first works attacked were those of Marx. His cousin’s would soon follow suit. Never mind an author’s actual political leanings or literay message, under the Nazi regime, Jewish authors were all censored, “regardless of subject matter.
 It wasn’t only German-speaking authors whose books were burned, but also American writers like Ernest Hemingway and Jack London, French writers like Victor Hugo and André Gide, English writers like D.H. Lawrence and H.G. Wells and Russian writers like Leo Tolstoy and Fyodor Dostoyevsky.
The Nazi student leader Herbert Gutjahr held a contemptuous speech. "We have turned our actions against the un-German spirit. I turn everything un-German over to the fire," he cried.The seething bonfire below him was already swallowing up thousands of books as the 23-year-old threw another handful of volumes into the flames.
Scenes like this one played out all over Germany on May 10, 1933. In the cities with major universities, students burned works by authors who didn't uphold their racist ideology. Students had already spent weeks lugging condemned manuscripts out of the libraries.
In their eyes, the books contained "un-German" thoughts, or their authors were considered enemies of National Socialism. Most of the authors were socialists, pacifists or Jews.
The students didn't have to fear resistance: Library employees and many professors went along with the emptying of their collections, even if they didn't all agree with it.
After the Nazis took power in January 1933, Adolf Hitler received dictatorial authority. That marked the beginning of his campaign to win the minds of Germans. The German Student Union, an umbrella group for all student organizations, announced in April 1933: "The state has been conquered! But not yet the universities! The intellectual paramilitaries are coming in. Raise your flags!"
With hardly any involvement from the Nazi party, the Nazi student organization took the lead and culminated their campaign with the book burnings on May 10.
The central book burning event took place at the Opernplatz in Berlin and was broadcast live on the radio. Many students arrived dressed in the SS or SA uniforms worn by the Nazis' paramilitary groups. A number of professors turned out as well.
Selected students threw books into the fire again and again as ideological proclamations were shouted into the crowd. One of the statements was: "Against decadence and moral decay! For breeding and convention in the family and state! I turn writings by Heinrich Mann, Ernst Glaeser and Erich Kästner over to the fire!"
Erich Kästner, the author of internationally renowned children's books including "Emil and the Detectives" (1929), was present that night at the Opernplatz and bore witness to the hideous spectacle Later he described this dark day with the word “Begräbniswetter” (funeral weather)."I stood in front of the university, wedged between students in SA uniforms, in the prime of their lives, and saw our books flying into the quivering flames," Kästner wrote. He concluded: "It was disgusting." It rained so hard that the flames kept going out, and the fire brigade had to pour petrol on the fire to get it burning properly.The majority of Germans, including many uncritical intellectuals and professors, quietly stood by as their country's creative talent went up in flames. Some even approved. Most troubling, however, is the key role students played in ideologically shaping the country.
The main speaker arrived at midnight. Joseph Goebbels, the Nazi propaganda minister with a PhD in Germanic studies, spoke to the Berlin crowd and the short-wave listeners at home. "German men and women! The age of excessive Jewish intellectualism has come to an end, and the breakthrough of the German revolution has cleared the path for the German way."
Goebbels belied how much he mistrusted the students' self-organized campaign; at that point, he and Hitler were afraid of losing their grip on the Nazi movement.
Ominously, a character in Heine’s play Almansor (1821) a tragic love story between an Arab man and Donna Clara, a Moroccan woman who’s forced to convert from Islam to Christianity. Taking place in Granada in 1492, the tragedy depicts the burning of the Qua’ran, the act that prompts the sentence  “That was but a prelude; where they burn books, they will ultimately burn people as well.”these chilling prophetic words are now engraved in the ground of Berlin's Opernplatz commemorating the horrifying book burning of 1933. Heine's words  were tragically fulfilled: Mass murder of Europe's Jews began just several years later.
Why Heine depicted Muslims as the victims of book burning and not the Jews is still an open question. But one can’t help but wonder whether or not the Nazi censors were aware of the terribly ironic scene they enacted in Opernplatz that repressive evening, or if anyone could have guessed at the tragedy to come. The mobs also burned the books of Helen Keller, an American author who was a socialist, a pacifist, and the first deaf-blind person to graduate from college. Keller responded: “History has taught you nothing if you think you can kill ideas. . . . You can burn my books and the books of the best minds in Europe, but the ideas in them have seeped through a million channels and will continue to quicken other minds.”  The US magazine Newsweek called the burnings a "holocaust of books."
The Opernplatz memorial shows what is missing. Underground, almost out of sight, no books, empty white shelves, directly under the Bebelplatz. What was lost and burnt were the books by those who the Nazis ostracised and persecuted, who had to leave the country and whose stories were no longer allowed to be told. Symbolically, the underground bookshelves have space for around 20,000 books, as a reminder of the 20,000 books that went up in flames here on 10 May 1933 at the behest of the Nazis. The Israeli artist Micha Ullman designed the library memorial, which was unveiled on 20 March 1995.
 1933 marked the beginning of a mass exodus among Germany's intellectuals and artists. Thomas Mann and Bertolt Brecht fled to America, Sigmund Freud fled to England and Lion Feuchtwanger fled to France, where he was arrested and sent to a prison camp, but escaped and fled to the United States. Those writers who didn’t emigrate, like Erich Kästner, were banned from publishing their works in Germany until after the war. The nation that had often been admired abroad as the land of poets and thinkers had made it clear to its most talented minds that they were no longer welcome.
 Today the city of Dusseldorf honours Heinrich Heineits poet with a boulevard (Heinrich-Heine-Allee) and a modern monument. In Israel, the attitude to Heine has long been the subject of debate between secularists, who number him among the most prominent figures of Jewish history, and the religious who consider his conversion to Christianity to be an unforgivable act of betrayal. Due to such debates, the city of Tel-Aviv delayed naming a street for Heine, and the street finally chosen to bear his name is located in a rather desolate industrial zone rather than in the vicinity of Tel-Aviv University, suggested by some public figures as the appropriate location.
Ha'ir (a left-leaning Tel-Aviv magazine) sarcastically suggested that "The Exiling of Heine Street" symbolically re-enacted the course of Heine's own life. Since then, a street in the Yemin Moshe neighborhood of Jerusalem and a community center in Haifa have been named after Heine. A Heine Appreciation Society is active in Israel, led by prominent political figures from both the left and right camps. His quote about burning books is prominently displayed in the Yad Vashem Holocaust museum in Jerusalem. (It is also displayed in the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum). Always more precise about  what  he loathed than  about what he loved, incapable of leading or of following party; exile, poet, jew.,Heinrich Heine was the ultimate outsider, le the last words be in his own verse,

I am a German Poet,
In German lands I sine;
And where great names are mentioned
They're bound to mention mine.


                                     Nazi book burning 1933

Friday 10 December 2021

International Human Rights Day 2021: EQUALITY - Reducing inequalities, advancing human rights.

 


“Where, after all, do the universal human rights begin? In small places, close to home – so close and so small that they cannot be seen on any maps of the world. […] Unless these rights have meaning there, they will have little meaning anywhere. Without concerted citizen action to uphold them close to home, we shall look in vain for the progress in the larger world” - Eleanor Roosevel

In 1945, the Second World War came to an end. It is estimated that over 70-85 million people perished. At the time that was just over 3% of the world’s total population. Devastated by the event, 51 countries pledged that they would never want a repeat of such mass destruction ever again. They came together and formed what is now known as The United Nations. Following their pledge to international peace and security, they realised the importance of the security of the individual. Many atrocities had taken place during the war including mass killings, atomic bombings, torture cases and genocides. In a bid to never repeat such “barbarous acts which […] outraged the conscience of mankind”, Eleanor Roosevelt was tasked to chair the Commission on Human Rights which drafted what became known as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR).

December 10th marks Human Rights Day. On this day the whole world celebrates  one of the greatest  accomplishments of the last century, by resolution 217 A(III) of 1947 the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.in 1948 was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly. With the principles having been borrowed from the Code Napoleon, the Universal Declaration became the cornerstone document for Constitutionalism in the 20th Century. 

Today it seems unimaginable that the world could ever have existed in a time where human rights were not the foundation of the social contract.. The Declaration set out, for the first time in history, those fundamental human rights that Governments all over the world undertook to respect, protect and promote. .In 1950, the Assembly passed resolution 423 (V), inviting all States and interested organizations to observe 10 December of each year as Human Rights Day.

 And ever since that auspicious day it has stood as the first major stride forward in ensuring that the rights of every human across the globe are protected. From the most basic human needs such as food, shelter, and water, all the way up to access to free and uncensored information, such has been the goals and ambitions laid out that day.

The Declaration proclaims a simple, yet powerful idea :

 "All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights,"  "They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood."

These rights are the birthright of all people: it does not matter, what country we live in and even who we are. Because we are human, we have these rights; and Governments are bound to protect them. They are not a reward for good behaviour, nor they are optional or the privilege of a few- they are inalienable  entitlements of all people, at all times- regardless of race, colour, religion, sex, language, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. And because they are universal, they are also matters of legitimate concern; and  standing  up for them is a responsibility that binds us all.

 It is the most translated document in the world, available in more than 500 languages.  When the General Assembly adopted the Declaration, with 48 states in favor and eight abstentions, it was proclaimed as a "common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations", towards which individuals and societies should "strive by progressive measures, national and international, to secure their universal and effective recognition and observance".

Although the Declaration with its broad range of political, civil, social, cultural and economic rights is not a binding document, it inspired more than 60 human rights instruments which together constitute an international standard of human rights. It has helped shape human rights all over the world.

Today the general consent of all United Nations Member States on the basic Human Rights laid down in the Declaration makes it even stronger and emphasizes the relevance of Human Rights in our daily lives.The High Commissioner for Human Rights, as the main United Nations rights official, plays a major role in coordinating efforts for the yearly observation of Human Rights Day.

Human Rights Day reminds us that there is much to be done  and around the world to protect those who cannot voice or respond to perpetrated discrimination and violence caused by governments, vigilantes, and individual actors. In many instances, those who seek to divide people for subjective means and for totalitarian reasons do so around the globe without fear of retribution. Violence, or the threat of violence, perpetrated because of differences in a host of physical and demographic contrasts and dissimilarities is a blight on our collective humanity now and a danger for our human future.

Human Rights are the basic rights and freedoms that belong to every person in the world, from birth until death. They apply regardless of where you are from, what you believe or how you choose to live your life. They should never be taken away, these basic rights are based on values such as dignity, fairness, equality, respect and independence. But human rights are not just abstract concepts, they are defined and protected by law.

The aim of Human Rights Day is to raise awareness around the world of our inalienable rights – rights to basic needs such as water, food, shelter and decent working conditions. In the UK we are protected by the Human Rights Act 1998, however in other countries, especially developing countries, the laws are not in place to protect people and to ensure that their basic needs are met.

For millions of people, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is still just a dream.Many people around the world are still denied the most basic of human rights on a daily basis. Women’s rights are still repeatedly denied and marginalised throughout the globe, despite 70 years of the milestone declaration on human rights. Confronted with widespread gender-based violence, hate and discrimination, women’s well-being and ability to live full and active lives in society are being seriously challenged. 

Racism, xenophobia and intolerance are still  problems prevalent in all societies, and discriminatory practices are widespread, particularly regarding the  targeting of migrants and refugees. including in rich countries where men, women and children who have committed no crime are often held in detention for prolonged periods. They are frequently discriminated against by landlords, employers and state-run authorities, and stereotyped and vilified by some political parties, media organizations and members of the public.

Many other groups face discrimination to a greater or lesser degree. Some of them are easily definable such as persons with disabilities, stateless people, gays and lesbians, members of particular castes and the elderly. Others may span several different groups and find themselves discriminated against on several different levels as a result.

Those who are not discriminated against often find it hard to comprehend the suffering and humiliation that discrimination imposes on their fellow individual human beings. Nor do they always understand the deeply corrosive effect it has on society at large.

The Human Rights Act is currently under attack, with the UK’s Justice Secretary having indicated, in the past, that he does not support the Human Rights Act and does not believe in economic and social rights,. As part of its efforts to hide from accountability and make itself untouchable, the Government has announced it will ‘overhaul’ our Human Rights Act.
 
Human rights are about values we all hold dear: dignity, fairness, equality. And the Human Rights Act makes our rights real. It places obligations on public authorities to respect our rights and gives ordinary people the power to enforce those rights in British courts if they don’t.
 
But the Government wants to ‘overhaul’ the Act that protects us all from the State and keeps power in check.  
The only people who benefit from weakening human rights are those in power. And that is a government that is systematically attempting to shut down all avenues of accountability. Its attack on the Human Rights Act is not an isolated incident. Its Policing Bill will criminalise protesters who dare stand up to power. Its plans for voter ID will stop people getting to the polling booth. 
 
And its Judicial Review Bill will make it harder for people to challenge the Government’s unlawful actions in court – and make it so that even winning your case won’t be worthwhile.
The Government is re-writing the rules to make itself untouchable.
 
Priti Patel's Racist cruel and hateful, anti-refugee bill  will criminalise refugees and the Bill will  see 2 out of 3 women & children who have been accepted by the UK as refugees turned away in the future, It will  give the UK Government the ability to strip individuals of their British citizenship without warning, and the UK Government would be exempt from giving notice to people if it is deemed not “reasonably practicable” to do so, or if it is in the interests of national security, diplomatic relations or the wider public interest.
 
Critics are warning the Bill is too draconian, giving Home Secretary Patel too much power over people’s lives and sends the the message that certain citizens, despite being born and brought up in the UK and having no other home, remain migrants in this country. 
 
Asylum seekers could soon face renewal on their claim every 30 months, while being subjected to the “no recourse to public funds” condition, preventing them from accessing social security services.
Campaigners have warned it risks asylum seekers falling in and out of being documented, increasing their chances of destitution.
 
The Refugee Council said: 
 
“This new approach flies in the face of the Refugee Convention, which states that the status of an asylum claim should not be dependent on the mode of entry into a country.
“It will create a group of vulnerable, precarious people, unable to plan for their futures in the UK or start to integrate. They will also have limited family reunion rights so will be kept apart from their children and spouses.
“This cruel approach will not stop people arriving in the UK. It will, however, cost more as people will be waiting in limbo for months before their claim is heard, or as they cruelly move through the court and prison system.” 
 
The humanitarian rights of refugees & displaced persons are protected legally under the UN Convention & Status of Refugees 1951 & Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights. There is a reason why Tories & media refuse to recognise those fleeing war zones as refugees.

For this  Human Rights Day we must continue to  stand with all people targeted for giving expression to the vision and values embodied in the declaration. Every day must be Human Rights Day, as every person in the world is entitled to the full and indivisible range of human rights every day of his or her life.Global human rights are not selective in their value or meaning, nor are they limited to a day or time of year. Until all people have access to these human rights we must stand up, advocate for, and insist that more must be done. Human Rights Day should serve as a reminder to act for those lacking basic rights each and everyday. 

 Human Rights Day calls on us all to ‘stand up for someone's rights today!’ It reminds us what we have achieved over the years to respect, promote and protect human rights. It also asks to recommit and re-engage in championing these rights for our shared humanity since whenever and wherever humanity's values of equality, justice and freedom are abandoned, we all are at greater risk.

Human Rights are universal rights of every human being to be treated with dignity, respect, and fairness. This year theme for Human Rights Day is; EQUALITY - Reducing inequalities, advancing human rights. The theme this year is based on Article 1 of the UDHR. The Article states that all human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights and have reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood. Equality is at the core of human rights in that through realising equality we can break power cycles and even tackle the root causes of conflict.

The COVID-19 crisis has been fuelled by deepening poverty, rising inequalities, structural and entrenched discrimination and other gaps in human rights protection. Only measures to close these gaps and advance human rights can ensure we fully recover and build back a world that is better, fairer  more resilient, just, and sustainable society for future generations.  
 
With the pandemic still ongoing, it is also necessary to address vaccine inequality and ensuring that those in need are taken care of it. The UN also puts forth the case of addressing climate change and environmental damage through a human rights lens, saying harmful practices "exacerbate existing inequalities and negatively affect the human rights of present and future generations".
With the pandemic still ongoing, it is also necessary to address vaccine inequality and ensuring that those in need are taken care of it. The UN also puts forth the case of addressing climate change and environmental damage through a human rights lens, saying harmful practices "exacerbate existing inequalities and negatively affect the human rights of present and future generations".

https://www.news9live.com/knowledge/human-rights-day-2021-history-theme-significance-and-all-you-need-to-know-139532?infinitescroll=1
With the pandemic still ongoing, it is also necessary to address vaccine inequality and ensuring that those in need are taken care of it. The UN also puts forth the case of addressing climate change and environmental damage through a human rights lens, saying harmful practices "exacerbate existing inequalities and negatively affect the human rights of present and future generations".

https://www.news9live.com/knowledge/human-rights-day-2021-history-theme-significance-and-all-you-need-to-know-139532?infinitescroll=1

Equality means that like cases must be treated alike. It means that where there is a difference in treatment, it must be justifiable and that there must be proportionality between the aim sought and the means employed when it comes to dealing with people. In some cases, affirmative action must be taken in order to even the playing field and eliminate unfair conditions. This is the only way to reduce inequalities and advance human rights.

 Principles of equality and nondiscrimination lie at the core of human rights, according to the U.N. website. “Equality has the power to help break cycles of poverty; it can give young people the world over the same opportunities; it can help in advancing the right to a healthy environment; it can help tackle the root causes of conflict and crisis.” 

 “Societies that protect and promote human rights for everyone are more resilient societies, better equipped through human rights to weather unexpected crises such as pandemics and the impacts of the climate crisis,” the U.N. website said.  “Equality and non-discrimination are key to prevention: all human rights for all ensure everyone has access to the preventive benefits of human rights but, when certain people or groups are excluded or face discrimination, the inequality will drive the cycle of conflict and crisis.”

Nearly a billion people do not have enough food to eat, and  even in wealthier countries like the UK and the US where there is an increasing growth in food banks. Poverty is a leading factor in the failure to protect the economic and social rights of many individuals around the world. For the half of the world population living on less than $2.50 a day, human rights lack any practical meaning.

Nelson Mandela once said that “overcoming poverty is not a task of charity, it is an act of justice. Like Slavery and Apartheid, poverty is not natural. It is man-made and it can be overcome and eradicated by the actions of human beings.” .

It’s important to acknowledge that human rights, have rarely been gifted to us through benevolent leaders. Rather, they have been won after long fought battles and collective struggle. We need to recognize and pay tribute to human rights defenders the world over, putting their lives on the line for others, our voice must be their voice. 

 As thousands of struggles have proved, human rights are a vital lever in the quest for equality and social justice. If governments will no longer protect human rights it will be up to us, the people to keep on fighting for them and ensure our human right are always upheld.

We all need to stand up for these Rights which are too often under threat.  We need to remind people of the importance of protecting our Human Rights to ensure that they cannot be eroded. Lets work to achieve a better life for all. And more importantly, to continue to take a stand for people whose human rights are still not being met across the globe, find a way to use our voices for those who may not have an opportunity to advocate for themselves. At the same time  strengthening  international law and justice in order to end impunity, and bring to justice those guilty of violations of human rights and offer protection to their victims. 

Today is an opportunity to reaffirm the importance of human rights in rebuilding the world we want, the need for global solidarity as well as our interconnectedness and shared humanity. A future  of cooperation among citizens, peoples and between nations. It is a a prerequisite for a more peaceful future where disputes are solved through negotiation and diplomacy.

"If your neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor, "- Desmond Tutu

http://www.un.org/en/events/humanrightsday/  

 I Have the Right

I have the right to my own opinions
to state what I believe to be the truth,
I believe in freedom of thought
I believe in freedom of speech,
I have the right to be free from bondage
to be free from chains and mental slavery,
to choose what I want to be, where I need to go
because this is my right to be free.

I have the right to speak out
this is my choice, this is my conscience,
this is my right to freedom of expression
this right allows me to speak out against oppression,
this right allows me to stand against transgression, 
                                           aggression, exploitation
this right acknowledges that all born equal and free.

Everyone  is a unique individualistic form 
all have a right to life and liberty,
dignity and pride, the security of protection
that allows us to cry, to love and laugh,
remember that when justice is forgotten 
alternative paths trample down opposition,  
decency and justice, respect, and all that has been given
so  keep on fighting for human rights with no inhibition
remember actions speak louder than words
and what unites us is greater than what seperates

Thursday 9 December 2021

Beyond The illusion


Last Christmas they partied, while we cried 
They thought it was funny, then tried to cover it up,
Our PM literally still laughing, continues to mock us
Giving billions of taxpayers money to his mates,
Running down the NHS, in order to privatise it
Making rules, that he does not stick to himself,
With corruption of thought, destroying souls
Ensuring the clinically gullible, keep falling for the lies,
While tolerating children, having no breakfast or lunch
The death of disabled benefit claimants, Windrush,
Wasting money away on luxury decor
While Grenfell cladding homeowners were failed, 
Out of control, let Covid run rampant
In moments of real need, became stagnant, 
Threw his friend Allegra Stratton under a bus
So he could pass the Nationality and Borders Bill,
That seeks to criminalise survivors of perilous sea
And those at Dover who try to help them,
Beyond the tinsel, unmistakeable  negation
Power games of superfluous distraction,
The clown in charge, no joke, just a moral shit show
I'm reading reports of 'snow' in Westminster now,
We had a choice once, a fairer equitable society
We chose establishment, now predictably we suffer,
Not too late to rise up, keeping masks on
Stop us from falling deeper into man crafted oblivion,

Monday 6 December 2021

Frantz Fanon: the revolutionary psychiatrist


 

Frantz Omar Fanon was a psychiatrist. writer and revolutionary, who played an active role in the Algerian war of independence from French colonial rule who remains a key thinker on decolonisation and Third World independence struggles.Fanon was born on July 20, 1925 in Fort-de-France, Martinique. He was the fifth child of a middle class mixed family of eight children. His father was a civil servant and his mother a successful shop owner He received a middle class education  He originally thought of himself. as was true of many others at the time . as French and not “Black.” That began to change when he  experienced  the racism of Vichy France soldiers sent to occupy the island during World War II  which compelled him to leave Martinique and fight with Free France forces against fascism,
Decorated for bravery with a Croix de Guerre after sustaining a serious shrapnel wound in the chest. Fanon returned briefly to Martinique to complete his studies. He met Aimé Césaire – later the most famous radical Caribbean poet – who, for a time taught him. The contact with the poet’s work marked him for the rest of his life. Césaire was a teacher, recently returned from France, of brilliant and precocious intelligence. Fanon memorised large sections of Césaire’s celebrated poem Cahier d’un Retour au Pays Natal and was struck by the poems forthright pride and courage: “no race has a monopoly on beauty, or intelligence, or strength, and there will be a place for all at the rendezvous of victory”.
Césaire was a proponent of Négritude, a movement of black renaissance which he, Leopold Senghor and Léon Damas founded in Paris in the 1930s. It was a confident assertion of the vitality and pride in being black, and of African society and culture. Fanon was influenced by the movement but questioned the way Négritude contrasted a contrived African emotionality with European rationality and science. Fanon praised Négritude’s important celebration of being black in a world of overwhelming racism. 
Fanon graduated from his Fort-de-France lycée and moved to Paris to study dentistry. His decision was no longer based on a romance of the motherland, but a pragmatic recognition that Martinique was too small to contain his plans and ambitions. He abandoned dentistry and Paris for medicine and Lyon. In Lyon he specialised in psychiatry and became active on the periphery of the Communist Party (PCF).  Here he began writing political essays and plays, and he married a Frenchwoman, Jose Duble. 
At the same time, he absorbed the latest European intellectual developments such as phenomenology, existentialism, psychoanalysis, and Marxism.”This led to his first book, published in 1952 when Fanon was only twenty-six: Black Skin, White Masks. originally titled “An Essay for the Disalienation of Blacks,” in part based on his lectures and experiences in Lyon in which he denounced racism and "linguistic colonization"
  BSWM is part manifesto, part analysis; it both presents Fanon’s personal experience as a black intellectual in a whitened world and elaborates the ways in which the colonizer/colonized relationship is normalized as psychology. Because of his schooling and cultural background, the young Fanon conceived of himself as French, and the disorientation he felt after his initial encounter with French racism decisively shaped his psychological theories about culture. Fanon inflects his medical and psychological practice with the understanding that racism generates harmful psychological constructs that both blind the black man to his subjection to a universalized white norm and alienate his consciousness. A racist culture prohibits psychological health in the black man.
What does the Black want? To be recognized as human. The question and logic has resonance with the idea of Black Lives Matter. Why? Because Black Lives Matter is a demand not a request. In its gestures to humanism, it is an imminent critique of White liberal humanism and its abstract universals, which, by saying all lives matter, elides the concreteness and specificity of Black lives mattering  In other words, at the level of daily experience of Black life, especially the life of Black youth, Black life does not seem to matter, or matters only as a threat to civil society, which is normatively White. Put another way, in cosmopolitan civil society, racially coded across space and place, Black life is still not fully human
The opening pages of Black Skin, White Masks contained a vivid declaration: “Man is a ‘Yes’ resounding from cosmic harmonies.” Fanon conceived of freedom as a “world of mutual recognitions,” insisting that a desire “to touch the other, feel the other, discover each other” was an essential part of humanity’s very being.
After practicing psychiatry for several years in France, Fanon moved to Algeria in 1953, where he took up a position at the Blida-Joinville hospital, outside of Algiers. He did not make this move for political reasons, knowing little of Algeria at the time, and having had minimal contact with African liberation movements.
When Fanon arrived in Algeria, at the age of 28 and only a year after the publication of his first book, he was already a man of wide and precocious intellectual culture, equally at home in European philosophy and Afro-Caribbean thought as well as the intellectual linkages between Africa and the African Diaspora, quite aside from his professional training in psychiatry and psychopathology.
Until he arrived in Algeria his political passion against colonialism and racism were focussed almost entirely on how these affected “Black” people, whose origins were in “Black” Africa, with whom his own identity as a very dark-skinned “Negro” was profoundly enmeshed. In Algeria, however, he saw victims of colonial racism and violence who were not “Black”, and once the war of Algerian independence began, he encountered a colonial violence far more extreme than anything he had seen in Martinique. He quickly learned that colour, per se, was secondary in structures of colonial racism; the “Arab” could be stigmatised just as brutally and contemptuously as the “Black”.
His initial project at the Blida Hospital was simply to train nurses and interns in the kind of socio-therapy he had learned from Tosquelles and to investigate the cultural backgrounds of his patients in the course of his own psychiatric practice.
Though understaffed, Fanon and his colleagues made use of techniques such as occupational therapy, having patients produce newspapers and plays, and allowing them to freely associate with each other in the institution. In the course of this work, Fanon was still prepared to administer pharmaceutical drugs, and he even deployed shock therapy. But he did so while seeking to create a humanist environment that treated the patient as a person. He created a café that functioned as a kind of social club or meeting place. He “organized daily meetings, built a library, set up ergotherapy stations—weaving, pottery, knitting, gardening—and promoted sports, especially soccer, which, he argued, could play an important role in the re-socialization of patients.”
Fanon noticed that these activities were instantly successful with European women patients at producing stronger social ties and self-determination, but less so with the Muslim men under his care. In the act of decolonization, he and his colleagues set out to sensitize themselves to the culture of these men, rather than continue to impose an imperialistic “western grid” on them.
He traveled throughout Algeria and discovered that the Muslim culture there was more interested in religious and familial gatherings than “parties.” They were more familiar with storytelling and reciting epic poems that modes of entertainment such as theater.
In response, Fanon and colleagues “changed their movie selection and privileged action-filled films; they picked games that were familiar to Algerians; they celebrated the traditional Muslim holidays; they invited Muslim singers to perform in the hospital, and they hired a professional storyteller to come speak to the patients.”
An openness to human possibilities grounded this approach, both in Fanon’s work as a psychiatrist, and in his later role as a revolutionary activist. It was in the course of such investigations that he began to see how deep the psychological wounds are that the colonial system inflicts upon its subjects.
Fanon quickly discovered a “Manichean” society where the French settlers, about 10 percent of Algeria’s population, lived in a different world from its Arab and Kabyle masses. The latter were subjected to discrimination that was far more brutal than anything he had experienced in the Antilles.
Soon thereafter, he began to see victims of torture almost as a routine matter in his practice;
When the Algerian revolution broke out in November 1954, Fanon  discovered at his hospital an underground network associated with the National Liberation Front (FLN), and came into contact with the FLN himself, initially in his capacity as a psychiatrist.Fanon embraced the movement’s aims and its advocacy of armed struggle.Fanon now combined his psychiatric work with involvement in a revolutionary movement. He secretly hid FLN militants in the hospital and provided therapy to victims of rape and torture. He also became increasingly active in political debates within the FLN. 
As one who was philosophically committed to an authentic existence in which thought and action had to be organically united, he found it personally untenable to remain an official in colonial service in the midst of a revolution, and in the midst, moreover, of the wholesale colonial machinery of torture. He chose to serve the revolution, instead, and resigned from colonial service in the summer of 1956 and joined the revolution soon thereafter. His letter of resignation encapsulates his theory of the psychology of colonial domination, and pronounces the colonial mission incompatible with ethical psychiatric practice: “If psychiatry is the medical technique that aims to enable man no longer to be a stranger to his environment, I owe it to myself to affirm that the Arab, permanently an alien in his own country, lives in a state of absolute depersonalization … The events in Algeria are the logical consequence of an abortive attempt to decerebralize a people” (Toward the African Revolution 53) 
Following his resignation, Fanon fled to Tunisia and began working openly with the Algerian independence movement. In addition to seeing patients, Fanon wrote about the movement for a number of publications, including Sartre’s Les Temps ModernesPresence Africaine, and the FLN newspaper el Moudjahid; some of his work from this period was collected posthumously as Toward the African Revolution (1964).
Fanon contrasted the revolutionary praxis of the colonized with the passivity and betrayals of the European Left. The French Socialist and Communist Parties supported the war of French imperialism against the Algerian revolution, which led to over half a million deaths.
A Socialist premier, Guy Mollet, presided over the violent clampdown in Algeria, while the Communist deputies in the French parliament voted in favor of war credits, despite their formal commitment to Leninist anti-colonialism. With the important exception of figures such as Jean-Paul Sartre, there was little active support for Algeria’s revolution from even the most radical sections of the European Left. This led Fanon to become increasingly critical of the paradigm that defined much of Western thought.
Fanon’s work for Algerian independence was not confined to writing. During his panytenure as Ambassador to Ghana for the Provisional Algerian Government, he worked to establish a southern supply route for the Algerian army.
In December 1957, Abane Ramdane, Fanon’s closest comrade in the Algerian national liberation movement, was assassinated by a right-wing faction within the movement that aimed to subordinate political work to military authority. Fanon’s name was placed on a list of people to be watched, and subject to a similar fate should there be open defiance within the movement in response to the assassination. From this point on, Fanon lived knowing that there was a potential of significant risk from the authoritarian nationalists in the movement, and a vital struggle within the struggle. and continued his anti-colonial political engagement until the end of his life, always maintaining the intimate link between sociopolitical and economic violence and mental health.
In speaking about the project of emancipation, Fanon believed that the oppressed in society must walk a fine line between rootedness in tradition and a more universal, humanist openness toward the future. He encouraged people to avoid “imitating Europe” and its models for life (and psychiatry), while also avoiding a hopeless return to an imagined pre-colonial past or tribalism.
In 1961, his life ebbing away from leukaemia  (he had contracted the disease in the course of his exhausting trip across the Sahara as a part of a team trying to open a third front for the revolution and its supply lines. In this sense, he died for the revolution that he had sought to serve with his life) Fanon dictated his masterwork, “The Wretched of the Earth”, to his wife, friends and secretaries. Finding some strength after a new round of treatment, he travelled to the Tunisian/Algerian border (Ghardimaou in Tunisia) and spoke to the Armée de Libération Nationale as it prepared to fight the French and enter a free Algeria.
In his book The Wretched of the Earth  Fanon outlined the cure to colonialism which he believed induced mental illness in the colonized and colonizers alike and develops the Manichean perspective implicit in BSWM. To overcome the binary system in which black is bad and white is good, Fanon argues that an entirely new world must come into being. This utopian desire, to be absolutely free of the past, requires total revolution, “absolute violence” To throw off the shackles of colonialism, Fanon argued that colonized peoples have no other choice but to meet colonists’ physical and emotional acts of violence with a violence of the same magnitude, until “the last become first”  Fanon further believed violent rebellion has the capacity to cure the ailments of the colonized while unifying a people as a basis for a new nation.
He described how the national bourgeoisie, after independence, is only too happy to accept what crumbs the departing colonial powers throw to it. Without social reform, without political and economic transformation, he warned, national liberation would be an empty shell.
Fanon’s final act was to encourage – and yet subvert – the revolutionary movement to which he had devoted the last and most important years of his life. He had stubbornly refused to accept treatment in the United States, which he condemned for its racism.
But, in October 1961, he flew there from Tunisia, his home in exile. His last Atlantic crossing was to no avail. On December 6 1961 he died at the tragic young age of 36 at the National Institutes of Health in Bethesda, Maryland, where he had sought treatment for his cancer,At his request, his body was returned to Algeria and buried with honors by the Algerian National Army of Liberation.
Since his death Fanon has been endlessly resurrected, sometimes bastardised, often deified.
In his adoptive Algeria, which won independence in 1962 after a gruelling eight-year war that killed hundreds of thousands of Algerians, he has received uneasy recognition. His work has been translated into Arabic, his old hospital in Blida named after him, a school and large street carry his name in Algiers.
 Critics and fellow travellers alike  have declared him a prophet of violent revolution, accusing him of championing the detoxifying and cleansing effects of violence without appreciating its destructive and degenerative whirlwind, but in the mid-1960s a new Black Power movement, principally in the United States, took up Fanon’s writings. It interpreted his analysis of racism and his insistence on the necessity of organising the wretched of the earth, and on the therapeutic effects of violence as defence against oppression, as tools to deploy against the “colonisation” of black communities there.
Bobby Seale, co-founder of the Black Panther Party, cited the influence of everything that Fanon said about violence and the spontaneity of violence, how spontaneous violence educates those who are in a position with skills to lead the people to what needs to be done.The Black Panther activist Eldrige Cleaver once claimed “every brother on a roof top” could quote Frantz Fanon.
Ultimately, though, the major point is that Fanon is still relevant sixty years after his death in 1961. As he wrote in The Wretched of the Earth each generation must discover its mission, fulfill or betray it, in relative opacity”. Certainly, a much-needed call to action. Individuals continue to be subject to the daily pain of alienation, they experience the daily indignity of threats to their various and multiple experiences of well-being. Millions face very real threats to their survival, both physical and psychological. 
Despite the hope that existed in the late 1950s and early 1960s, decolonialization did not help people on the social, cultural, and economic margins of these newly “independent” nations. The national bourgeoisie mimicked their colonial masters and enriched themselves at the expense of the poor. The brutality simply took another form, and the exploitation continues apace.
Frantz Fanon is buried in the cemetery chouhadas (martyrs cemetery of war) near the Algerian-Tunisian border, in the town Ain Kerma (wilaya of El-Tarf) in Tunis. At a time when activists are turning a spotlight on racial oppression, he’s never been more relevant, his innovative thinking still speaks vividly to the present, his ideas remaining the weapons of the oppressed.


Saturday 4 December 2021

Sparks in the Dark


The wolves of winter are upon us
Though many are still sleeping,
Silently sensing the foreboding gloom
As truth is desecrated in a blurry haze,
Marred by government negation
Fuelling poverty and desperation,
Wake up poets, use your pens
Point your fingers of blame,
Be warriors of change and good fortune
Sweep dark currents strongly aside,
Implore your words to reach out
Be inspired by a brighter tide,
Beyond man's self-centered deeds
White nightmare sowing division,
With our beds laden with red roses
We can build a society defused of fear,
Of kindness strong, with no regret
Past the present that calibrates pain,
The sky pierced with much needed change
For the many not the few, open your eyes,
As the hands of the clock move round you
Live struggle, resist, laugh till you cry,
In the darkest of seasons be a spark of reason
Fixing and mending, releasing inner vision .

Thursday 2 December 2021

Remembering John Brown : Militant abolitionist who was executed by the state of Virginia on December 2, 1859.

 .

On December 2, 1859, abolitionist John Brown was hanged in Charles Town Virginia (now West Virginia) for treason for his raid on the U.S. Armory at Harpers Ferry six weeks earlier, in a plot to incite slave rebellion. While Brown’s raid had failed miserably, his capture and hanging had a much greater impact on national events. Brown’s actions set off shockwaves across the country. In the North, many hailed him as a hero. In the South, he was viewed as a villain and a true reflection of the North’s intended war on slavery. 
Tensions mounted in the days leading up to Brown’s execution. Rumors of a massive jailbreak circulated in both the North and South. The jail and gallows were guarded by Virginia troops, including Major Thomas Jackson—later to be known as “Stonewall.
As Brown was brought to the gallows, he handed off a note that read, “I, John Brown, am now quite certain that the crimes of this guilty land can never be purged away but with blood.” Perhaps more than any other event, Brown’s death hastened a cascade of events that culminated with the first shots of the Civil War 16 months later.
John Brown was born May 9, 1800, in Torrington, Connecticut to Calvinist parents Ruth Mills and Owen Brown. His father, who worked as a tanner, taught Brown that slavery was immoral from an early age and opened their home as a safe stop on the Underground Railroad.
Brown witnessed the barbarity of slavery when he was 12 years old and saw a Black child beaten in the streets while he was traveling through Michigan. That experience and his father’s repulsion for the institution of slavery had a lasting affect on young John that would lead him to infamy in the annals of American history.
Whereas slavery, throughout its entire existence in the United States, is none other than the most barbarous, unprovoked and unjustifiable war of one portion of its citizens against another portion, the only conditions of which are perpetual imprisonment and hopeless servitude, or absolute extermination, in utter disregard and violation of those eternal and self-evident truths set forth in our Declaration of Independence.” — John Brown, Provisional Constitution and Ordinances for the People of the United States, 1858.
During his first fifty years, Brown moved about the country, settling in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, and New York, and taking along his ever-growing family. (He would father twenty children.) Unfortunately, his first wife died, as did half of their children during infancy. Working at various times as a farmer, wool merchant, tanner, and land speculator, he never was finacially successful, he even filed for bankruptcy when in his forties. His lack of funds, however, did not keep him from supporting causes he believed in. He helped finance the publication of David Walker's Appeal and Henry Highland's "Call to Rebellion" speech. He gave land to fugitive slaves. He and his wife agreed to raise a black youth as one of their own. He also participated in the Underground Railroad and, in 1851, helped establish the League of Gileadites, an organization that worked to protect escaped slaves from slave catchers.
John Brown’s life is indivisible from his religious beliefs. Puritan religious devotion was intense on both sides of his family. The religion of the Brown clan was not that modified by time, but rather the Orthodox Calvinism of Puritan times. Indeed, Brown modeled himself on the Puritan warrior, Oliver Cromwell. Owen Brown had bequeathed to his son an intense hatred of slavery. Brown took as his text those words of the Bible that admonished “You shall not give up to his master a slave who has escaped…Rather he shall dwell with you.” (Deuteronomy 23: 15-16) 
Throughout his life, Brown turned to the Bible for solace and guidance.In his community, he demonstrated his anti-racist views by sharing meals with Black people and addressing them as “Mr.” and “Mrs.” He also vocally denounced segregated seating in church. Starting in 1834, Brown began educating Negroes, and for the next twenty years he, and his family, worked actively within the abolitionist movement.
The abolitionist movement was a revolutionary struggle to end chattel slavery in the American republic. The Nat Turner Slave Rebellion of 1831 had influenced all that followed.https://teifidancer-teifidancer.blogspot.com/2012/08/nat-turner-2101800-111131-his-legacy-of.html Among the major figures in the movement: Angelina Grimke, a daughter of Southern slaveholders who turned against the system that she initially saw as corrupting white slaveholders. An intellectual, William Lloyd Garrison, impelled by both the religious and secular spirit of the time to seek a more perfect society, became the voice and the pen of the movement. A slave, Frederick Douglass, came to fight back against the “slave breaker” brought in to beat him into submission. And there was Elijah Lovejoy, an abolitionist editor in Alton, Illinois. His murder in 1837 inspired John Brown to dedicate his life to the destruction of slavery.What set Brown apart from his contemporaries was that he’d had enough of trying to use peaceful discourse as a means to end slavery. He opted instead for violence.
 Brown’s Calvinist upbringing had convinced him that fighting against slavery was his primary mission in life. He believed it was a sin so thoroughly that Frederick Douglass, who he  first met in 1847, said, “John Brown was a man who though a white gentleman, is in sympathy, a Black man, and as deeply interested in our cause, as though his own soul had been pierced with the iron of slavery.
It was at this meeting that Brown first outlined his plan to Douglass to lead a war to free slaves.
Brown moved to the black community of North Elba, New York, in 1849. The community had been established thanks to the philanthropy of Gerrit Smith, who donated tracts of at least 50 acres to black families willing to clear and farm the land. Brown, knowing that many of the families were finding life in this isolated area difficult, offered to establish his own farm there as well, in order to lead the blacks by his example and to act as a "kind father to them."
Despite his contributions to the antislavery cause, Brown did not emerge as a figure of major significance until 1855 after he followed five of his sons to Kansas, a territory deeply divided over the slavery issue. There, he became the leader of antislavery guerillas and fought a proslavery attack against the antislavery town of Lawrence.
Perhaps more than any other American historical figure, the militant abolitionist John Brown embodies the idea that one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter. Brown’s zeal at the Pottawatomie Massacre, on the night of May 24, 1856, where Brown and his sons murdered five men who supported slavery, although none actually owned slaves. Brown and his sons escaped. Brown spent the next three years collecting money from wealthy abolitionists in order to establish a colony for runaway slaves.Their republic hoped to form a guerrilla army to fight slaveholders and ignite uprisings, and its population would grow exponentially with the influx of liberated and fugitive enslaved people. To accomplish this, Brown needed weapons and decided to capture the arsenal at Harpers Ferry.
In 1794, President George Washington had selected Harpers Ferry, Virginia, and Springfield, Massachusetts, as the sites of the new national armories. In choosing Harpers Ferry, he noted the benefit of great waterpower provided by both the Potomac and Shenandoah rivers. In 1817, the federal government contracted with John H. Hall to manufacture his patented rifles at Harpers Ferry. The armory and arsenal continued producing weapons until its destruction at the outbreak of the Civil War.
In the summer of 1859, John Brown, using the pseudonym Isaac Smith, took up residence near Harpers Ferry at a farm in Maryland. He trained a group of twenty-two men, including his sons Oliver, Owen, and Watson, in military maneuvers. On the night of Sunday, October 16, Brown and all but three of the men marched into Harpers Ferry, capturing several watchmen. The first victim of the raid was an African-American railroad baggage handler named Hayward Shepherd, who was shot and killed after confronting the raiders. During the night, Brown captured several other prisoners, including Lewis Washington, the great-grand-nephew of George Washington.
There were two keys to the success of the raid. First, the men needed to capture the weapons and escape before word reached Washington, D. C. The raiders cut the telegraph lines but allowed a Baltimore and Ohio train to pass through Harpers Ferry after detaining it for five hours. When the train reached Baltimore the next day at noon, the conductor contacted authorities in Washington. Second, Brown expected local slaves to rise up against their owners and join the raid. Not only did this fail to happen, but townspeople began shooting at the raiders.
Armory workers discovered Brown’s men in control of the building on Monday morning, October 17. Local militia companies surrounded the armory, cutting off Brown’s escape routes. Shortly after seven o’clock, a Harpers Ferry townsperson, Thomas Boerly, was shot and killed near the corner of High and Shenandoah streets. During the day, two other citizens were killed, George W. Turner and Harpers Ferry Mayor Fontaine Beckham. When Brown realized he had no way to escape, he selected nine prisoners and moved them to the armory’s small fire engine house, which later became known as John Brown’s Fort.
With their plans falling apart, the raiders panicked. William H. Leeman tried to escape by swimming across the Potomac River, but was shot and killed. The townspeople, many of whom had been drinking all day on this unofficial holiday, used Leeman’s body for target practice. At 3:30 on Monday afternoon, authorities in Washington ordered Colonel Robert E. Lee to Harpers Ferry with a force of Marines to capture Brown. Lee’s first action was to close the town’s saloons in order to curb the random violence. At 6:30 on the morning of Tuesday, October 18, Lee ordered Lieutenant Israel Green and a group of men to storm the engine house. At a signal from Lieutenant J.E.B. Stuart, the engine house door was knocked down and the Marines began taking prisoners. Green seriously wounded Brown with his sword. Brown was taken to the Jefferson County seat of Charles Town for trial. 
Of Brown’s original twenty-two men, John H. Kagi, Jeremiah G. Anderson, William Thompson, Dauphin Thompson, Brown’s sons Oliver and Watson, Stewart Taylor, Leeman, and free African Americans Lewis S. Leary and Dangerfield Newby had been killed during the raid. John E. Cook and Albert Hazlett escaped into Pennsylvania but were captured and brought back to Charles Town. Brown, Aaron D. Stevens, Edwin Coppoc, and free African Americans John A. Copeland and Shields Green were all captured and imprisoned. Five raiders escaped and were never captured: Brown’s son Owen, Charles P. Tidd, Barclay Coppoc, Francis J. Merriam, and free African American Osborne P. Anderson. One Marine, Luke Quinn, was killed during the storming of the engine house. Two slaves, belonging to Brown’s prisoners Colonel Lewis Washington and John Allstadt, also lost their lives. It is unknown whether or not they voluntarily took up arms with Brown. One drowned while trying to escape and the other died in the Charles Town prison following the raid. Local residents at the time believed the two took part in the raid. To discredit Brown, residents later claimed that these two slaves had been taken prisoner and that no slaves actually participated in the raid. 
 Northern abolitionists immediately used Brown's executions as an example of the government’s support of slavery. John Brown became their martyr, a hero murdered for his belief that slavery should be abolished. In reality, Brown and his men were prosecuted and executed for taking over a government facility. But in non-slave states, his execution on December 2, 1859, was marked by the tolling of church bells and martyrdom within the abolitionist movement and  as time went on, Brown’s name became a symbol of pro-Union, anti-slavery beliefs.
"He did not recognize unjust human laws, but resisted them as he was bid. . . .," said Henry David Thoreau in an address to the citizens of Concord, Massachusetts. "No man in America has ever stood up so persistently and effectively for the dignity of human nature. . . ."
After the Civil War, a school was established at Harpers Ferry for African Americans. The leaders of Storer College always emphasized the courage and beliefs of John Brown for inspiration. In 1881, African-American leader Frederick Douglass delivered a classic speech at the school honoring Brown. Twenty-five years later, W.E.B. DuBois and Martinsburg newspaper editor J.R. Clifford recognized Harpers Ferry’s importance to African Americans and chose Storer College as the site for a meeting of the Second Niagara Movement, which later became the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP). Those in attendance walked at daybreak to John Brown’s Fort. In 1892, the fort had been sent to the Chicago World’s Fair and then brought back to a farm near Harpers Ferry. Today, the restored fort has been rebuilt at Harpers Ferry National Historical Park near its original location.
In his biography of Brown, Du Bois said the following about Brown’s legacy:
Was John Brown simply an episode, or was he an eternal truth? And if a truth, how speaks that truth today? John Brown loved his neighbor as himself. He could not endure therefore to see his neighbor, poor, unfortunate, or oppressed. This natural sympathy was strengthened by a saturation in Hebrew religion which stressed the personal responsibility of every human soul to a just God. To this religion of equality and sympathy with misfortune, was added the strong influence of the social doctrines of the French Revolution with its emphasis on freedom and power in political life. And on all this was built John Brown’s own inchoate but growing belief in a more just and a more equal distribution of property. From this he concluded – and acted on that conclusion – that all men are created free and equal, and that the cost of liberty is less than the price of repression.
John Brown's  dedication to a cause, was, and is, immortalized in the song, "John Brown’s body"
 
John Brown's Body- Pete Seeger 
 
 

John Brown's body lies a-moldering in the grave
John Brown's body lies a-moldering in the grave
John Brown's body lies a-moldering in the grave
But his soul goes marching on

The stars above in Heaven are looking kindly down
The stars above in Heaven are looking kindly down
The stars above in Heaven are looking kindly down
On the grave of old John Brown

Glory, Glory, Hallelujah
Glory, Glory, Hallelujah
Glory, Glory, Hallelujah
His soul goes marching on

He captured Harper's Ferry with his nineteen men so true
He frightened old Virginia till she trembled through and through
They hung him for a traitor, they themselves the traitor crew
But his soul goes marching on

Glory, Glory, Hallelujah
Glory, Glory, Hallelujah
Glory, Glory, Hallelujah
His soul goes marching on