Bulletins and News Discussion from April 29th to May 5th, 2024 - Césaire's Boomerang - COTW: United States
Also known as "Foucault's boomerang" or the "imperial boomerang".
Image is of a sniper on the roof of the Indiana Memorial Union at Indiana State University, overlooking a student protest.
The Imperial Boomerang is the observation that the tactics of mass oppression and totalitarianism used by Western countries in their colonies and neocolonies will, sooner or later, return home to be used against the citizens of those Western countries. While the people living at the time of WW2 were, rightfully, in deep shock of the concentration camps used by Nazi Germany, those paying attention to what was occurring in Africa would not have been terribly surprised. Concentration camps were used in several countries in order to separate out ethnic groups and place them in more easily controlled environments which aimed to prevent them from rising up and fighting back against the Western governments which exploited them. There is the additional factor of governments taking notes from each other - Hitler was inspired by America's racial segregation and genocide of indigenous groups, which author Carroll Kakel among others have written books on.
Today, the totalitarian strategies used by the Zionist entity in occupied Palestine are being brought home to Western countries as the American Reich and its global influence accelerate in their decline. Gaza was and is a cyber-concentration camp, with digital surveillance taking place alongside old-fashioned techniques of paying informants. Aside from being an unsinkable aircraft carrier and disrupting the entire Middle East, Israel's primary role appears to be to generate new ways to monitor entire populations. Propaganda about China being an authoritarian police state with social credit scores and AI which knows where everybody is at all times was probably created, at least in part, to deflect attention from Israel doing those exact things. The paranoid and flimsy American regime with its gerontocratic upper circles now use these tactics at home: cracking down on any and all protestors with political views left of Mussolini; placing snipers on roofs ready to fire at the slightest provocation; and arresting organization leaders. Pegasus has wormed its way around the world, with a notable recent example in Poland, in which the previous conservative government used the spyware to monitor the current liberal ruling party. The Israeli military, experts only in killing children and not actual warfare, have trained the police of other nations.
It would be easy to end the preamble there, on a gloomy note about the brick wall - or, indeed, iron curtain - that upstart left-wing groups are up against. What history has shown is that these regimes are, in fact, beatable. Liberation movements around the world have found ways to counter imperialism, even if they required wars in which millions of their countrymen were murdered. The legacy of Israeli propaganda psyops and digital tracking is not victory, as Hamas demonstrated on October 7th and continues to show with every ambush executed and every Merkava destroyed. The legacy of Western military defence equipment is not success, demonstrated by every missile fired by Hezbollah and Iran which hits Israel. The legacy of the American Navy is not competence, with a naval blockade of the Red Sea still maintained after months by one of the poorest countries on the planet.
The protests of at least the last couple decades have been marked by failure to produce material results: from those against the Iraq War, to Occupy Wall Street, to the BLM protests of 2020. Of course, it would be silly to tell American protestors to start digging tunnels. But sooner or later, the failure of Western protest movements will be overcome, and a more effective strategy will be devised, in order to deflect the boomerang.
The COTW (Country of the Week) label is designed to spur discussion and debate about a specific country every week in order to help the community gain greater understanding of the domestic situation of often-understudied nations. If you've wanted to talk about the country or share your experiences, but have never found a relevant place to do so, now is your chance! However, don't worry - this is still a general news megathread where you can post about ongoing events from any country.
The Country of the Week is the United States! Feel free to chime in with books, essays, longform articles, even stories and anecdotes or rants. More detail here.
Defense Politics Asia's youtube channel and their map. Their youtube channel has substantially diminished in quality but the map is still useful.
Moon of Alabama, which tends to have interesting analysis. Avoid the comment section. Understanding War and the Saker: reactionary sources that have occasional insights on the war. Alexander Mercouris, who does daily videos on the conflict. While he is a reactionary and surrounds himself with likeminded people, his daily update videos are relatively brainworm-free and good if you don't want to follow Russian telegram channels to get news. He also co-hosts The Duran, which is more explicitly conservative, racist, sexist, transphobic, anti-communist, etc when guests are invited on, but is just about tolerable when it's just the two of them if you want a little more analysis.
On the ground: Patrick Lancaster, an independent and very good journalist reporting in the warzone on the separatists' side.
Unedited videos of Russian/Ukrainian press conferences and speeches.
Pro-Russian Telegram Channels:
Again, CW for anti-LGBT and racist, sexist, etc speech, as well as combat footage.
https://t.me/aleksandr_skif ~ DPR's former Defense Minister and Colonel in the DPR's forces. Russian language. https://t.me/Slavyangrad ~ A few different pro-Russian people gather frequent content for this channel (~100 posts per day), some socialist, but all socially reactionary. If you can only tolerate using one Russian telegram channel, I would recommend this one. https://t.me/s/levigodman ~ Does daily update posts. https://t.me/patricklancasternewstoday ~ Patrick Lancaster's telegram channel. https://t.me/gonzowarr ~ A big Russian commentator. https://t.me/rybar ~ One of, if not the, biggest Russian telegram channels focussing on the war out there. Actually quite balanced, maybe even pessimistic about Russia. Produces interesting and useful maps. https://t.me/epoddubny ~ Russian language. https://t.me/boris_rozhin ~ Russian language. https://t.me/mod_russia_en ~ Russian Ministry of Defense. Does daily, if rather bland updates on the number of Ukrainians killed, etc. The figures appear to be approximately accurate; if you want, reduce all numbers by 25% as a 'propaganda tax', if you don't believe them. Does not cover everything, for obvious reasons, and virtually never details Russian losses. https://t.me/UkraineHumanRightsAbuses ~ Pro-Russian, documents abuses that Ukraine commits.
BBC News at 10 goes even further than the bullshit clashes rhetoric:
On tonight's BBC News at Ten, the narrative about the campus protests moved even deeper into the realms of mendacious fiction.
Earlier in the day the BBC led with a fake headline – "Rival protesters clashed" – even though the footage clearly shows outside pro-Israel agitators violently attacking a peaceful camp set up at UCLA by anti-genocide demonstrators, and throwing fireworks into their midst.
Tonight, the BBC went further, precisely reversing the roles of aggressor and victim. It falsely attributed responsibility for the violence not to the pro-Israel groups attacking the anti-genocide protesters, but directly to the victims of the attack. The anchor stated: "In Los Angeles, demonstrators at a camp set up by people who oppose Israel's military action in Gaza clashed with counter demonstrators."
In other words the BBC is claiming, contrary to all the visual evidence it and others have presented, that it was the anti-genocide protesters initiating "the clashes" rather than the reality that the pro-Israel groups are the aggressors.
This is not accidental. This is meant to deceive audiences, to justify police brutality and to further efforts to crush the popular movement trying to stop a genocide. These media lies are integral to winning popular legitimacy for further curbs on suppressing our right to protest.
Idk yesterday the BBC had a UCLA student journalist on and he undeniably said it was the pro-Israel group that was using pepper spray, tear gas, etc. Today they had some Zionist dude (described by the interviewer as a far right nationalist) on and the interviewer pushed back when the guy tried to call it Judea instead of the occupied West Bank.
(Not that the BBC isn’t lib, but they’re not explicitly suppressing pro-Palestinian voices)
The anchor stated: "In Los Angeles, demonstrators at a camp set up by people who oppose Israel's military action in Gaza clashed with counter demonstrators."
In other words the BBC is claiming, contrary to all the visual evidence it and others have presented, that it was the anti-genocide protesters initiating "the clashes"
How did whoever wrote this make this jump? Feels based reporting lol.
The show you linked is by the BBC World Service which, while operating under the same charter and being part of the BBC, is a distinct organisation with different a editorial board and decision. The quote I posted is specifically about UK television news coverage and the flagship 10 o'clock news.
Furthermore, you don't have to maintain perfect exclusion of any pro-Palestine voices to offer false narratives or continually produce shamefully biased reporting. As well as the evidence the BBC churn out every day, there's been plenty of rigorous studies done on this reporting trend by the likes of Dana Najjar and Jan Lietava or OpenDemocracy.
They've pulled appearances and even advertising from authors promoting books about the conflict that were deemed to be too critical of Israel. Hell, this isn't even new. And of course, this is just the most recent escalation of a policy that's been in place for decades, like when the BBC desperately tried to stop elder statesman Tony Benn from mentioning the Gaza charity appeal on air or when the BBC's rap radio station censored the words 'Free Palestine' from artist's music, both 15 years ago now.
In addition to the wealth of insanely biased coverage in general - demands that their pro-Palestinian guests denounce Hamas and assert Israel's right to defend itself, their policy of cutting off pro-Palestinian guests only for the hosts to then give the Israeli line without rebuttle, their insistence on the Israeli government line on every atrocity, perpetuating the government line that pro-Palestine protests were inherently anti-semitic violent and dangerous etc - there's the fact that they refused to air the prosecution's case against Israel before the ICJ live or in full, despite doing so for Israel's defense arguement.
They spent the past weeks airing and supporting the criminal Israeli lobbying org CAA and Gideon Falter's staged 'protest scandal' with the Met police in order to ignore attacks on aid by Israel and the continued discovery of mass gravesof bound victims in Gaza.
Or for an extremely recent example, the fact that in their domestic coverage of the student protests the only student they interviewed was an ADL connected Zionist, who has been attempting to go viral by antagnosing the encampments all week, who has been pictured working with the cops, and was involved in the violence against encamped students.
How did whoever wrote this make this jump?
If calling a one sided attack on peaceful demonstrators a 'clash' between two groups is false equivalence, then naming only the peaceful camp has having 'clashed' with others is absolutely shifting the idea that the intent and initial action to them.
And for the record the person quoted is Jonathan Cook, a former Guardian staff writer and journalist whose work on Israel/Palestine has been published (now long since in the past) by the BBC.
The BBC is an absolute behemoth with an absurd and complex structure of divisions, editorial boards, and ever so slightly differently pitched tones for domestic and international audiences, slightly different again between television and radio, news and culture etc. I've known people who have worked there, I've been around their offices for various things in the past, and written about the organisation itself and its still a fucking mess in terms of exactly what editorial decision gets made where by who. But especially for an organisation like that I think it's important to look at the patterns in the totality of their reporting. And that's pretty fucking black and white.
Also my bad on the quote attribution. I thought I'd linked it but forgot the link, probably because it was about 3am and I was sleepy.