Recent Blog Posts

The Eternal Victim

Each side in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict believes criticisms in the media are biased, but the Palestinians are the ones doing almost all the suffering and dying these days. Antony Loewenstein argues for reality-based coverage.

Antony Loewenstein
|
26 Jan 2009
|
5 comments

Israel's highly decorated Chief of Staff, Mordechai Gur, once said, "we make no distinction between civilian and military targets."

Ze'ev Schiff, once the country's leading defence analyst, further explained Gur's remarks: "the Israeli army has always struck civilian populations, purposely and consciously...the army, he said, has never distinguished civilian [from military] targets...[but] purposely attacked civilian targets."

The reason was clear then and now. According to this deluded theory, the Palestinian population will pressure its leaders to cease hostilities with the Jewish state and simply accept colonization and expansion.

Israel's recent war against Gaza must be seen in this light.

These realities are largely ignored in the Western media. Israel is a religion that only the bravest dare challenge publicly in the United States.

Instead we have to listen to claims about the Israeli Defence Force being "unsurpassed in its moral traditions." Now, with over 1,300 Palestinians in Gaza murdered and a handful of Israeli soldiers killed by the Israeli army, many may disagree.

How can we think rationally about this conflict, which consumes more column inches than virtually any other issue in the world? Laugh at the black humor of it all, the supreme irony of Israeli soldiers leaving graffiti in Gazan homes that reads, "We came to annihilate you."

As a Jew, I wonder what my family's Auschwitz ghosts would think about that.

Israel is the eternal victim, surrounded by enemy states and peoples and desperately in need of deadly weapons to kill them as easily as possible.

Or so its most energetic supporters would like the world to believe.

But who really does anymore?

Washington has been happy to provide freedom bombs for Israeli wars and reliably despotic Arab friends.

Hamas rockets threatened Israel's nuclear facility at Dimona during the recent war, according to Rupert Murdoch's Australian newspaper. The Iranian-backed militia are allegedly so crazy that they would risk destroying nuclear warheads and consequently spreading radiation across the occupied Palestinian territories and neighboring Arab states.

But then, Muslims are irrational and have a death wish.

The Zionist lobby regularly complains that the Western media is inherently biased against its noble mission of enforcing apartheid in the West Bank. During the Gaza onslaught, however, virtually all journalists were barred from entering the war zone. The result was unconvincing managed spin, pissed-off journalists and horrific pictures of Israeli devastation from local, Palestinian sources.

Just another win for the well-oiled, Israeli PR machine.

When Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni said that there was "no humanitarian crisis" in Gaza during days of ceaseless bombardment, this lie was all too evident. Bloggers, human rights workers, Arab journalists and civilians all told a vastly different tale.

I spent hours watching Al Jazeera English on its YouTube channel – Australia's previous conservative government, like the Bush administration, opposed the network's "alternative" perspectives and pressured satellite channel providers to restrict access – and often just laughed at the screen. War is peace. The Palestinians will thank us for destroying their homes. We are fighting a war against terror. You're either with Hamas or us.

I know which side the civilized world has chosen.

Antony Loewenstein is a Sydney-based journalist, bestselling author and blogger. Visit his website, www.antonyloewenstein.com.

Politics For Sale

After the iconic success of his Obama poster, Shepard Fairey continues to do what he does best: selling out.

Sarah Nardi
|
26 Jan 2009
|
25 comments

I've never been a fan of Shepard Fairey's work. Far from the rebellious, meta-critique of consumer culture that it is purported to be, Fairey's art strikes me as contrived, unoriginal and uninspiring. But when Fairey created the now iconic image of Obama for his presidential campaign, I was forced to briefly reconsider my opinion of him as an artist. Now, just days after the inauguration, as the country basks in the light of cultural transcendence, Fairey is exploiting whatever political cachet he may have built with the Obama poster for the purpose of championing mindless consumerism.

Now I remember why I don't like his work.

Fairey has partnered with Saks Fifth Avenue to create a Constructivist-inspired marketing campaign for the high-end retailer's Spring season. Appropriating the style of one of his favorite go-to artists, Alexander Rodchenko, Fairey is doing what he does best – recycling politically-charged imagery in a way that is completely devoid of meaning. Borrowing from the aesthetic of 20th century workers' rights movements, Fairey's designs depict models with raised fists "arming themselves" with designer handbags. "Want It!" scream shopping bags in the same bold, graphic style that artists emerging from the Russian Revolution used to encourage the overthrow of the old social order.

"Some people might think [this campaign] could be making fun of what's going on right now," Fairey told the New York Times. "But I think most people are sophisticated enough to realize it's a way of grabbing attention. It's commerce. I don't think there is really any political statement embedded in this." What Fairey is either unable or unwilling to acknowledge is that the overtly political feel of the Saks campaign serves to mock and undercut the genuine desire for change inspired by the Obama campaign.

In urging a newly introspective populace to WANT, to NEED and to BUY, Fairey is helping to promote the same bullshit mindset that got us into our current mess – the very thing that we finally have a real opportunity to overthrow. He couldn't have chosen a more cynical project.

Campus Divestment vs. Israeli Apartheid

Can movements like The Swarthmore Campaign end the apartheid in Israel?

Micah White
|
18 Jan 2009
|
23 comments

A Divestment from Israel campaign has been launched by alumni at Swarthmore College

The massacre in Gaza has prompted many people to actively boycott Israeli products. The effects of the consumer boycott are already being felt by Israeli farmers who are now complaining that their produce is rotting in warehouses because of canceled orders. And in London, The Swarthmore Campaign, the first divestment campaign to be formed after the invasion of Gaza. Within three days we have already gathered over 60 signatures with more coming in every hour. The positive response demonstrates that the moment is ripe for divestment campaigns to sweep universities across the world. As we saw with the anti-apartheid struggle in South Africa, divestment is an effective tool to bringing about peace.

Two aspects make The Swarthmore Campaign different from previous divestment campaigns. First, we are an alumni organization which makes our structure durable and less susceptible to pressure from the school's administration. And second, signatories to The Swarthmore Campaign open letter are not just asking our alma mater to divest -- we are threatening to withhold donations until divestment occurs. For in the midst of an economic collapse, most educational institutions are in desperate need of donations from their alumni, which provides activists with a bargaining tool for peace.

Organizers of The Swarthmore Campaign hope that divestment campaigns will spread to campuses across the world bringing an end to the Israeli apartheid.

Does your campus have a Divestment campaign? Is divestment a more effective strategy than boycotting?

Update on January 21: This blog post was edited to more clearly state that my wife and I aided in the foundation of The Swarthmore Campaign and continue to publicly support its efforts.

Micah M. White is a Contributing Editor at Adbusters Magazine and an independent activist. Micah is currently writing a book of philosophical meanderings into the future of activism. He lives in Binghamton, NY with his wife and two cats. www.micahmwhite.com

Imagining a Blackspot Music Label

How do we reclaim music from the corporations?

Micah White
|
14 Jan 2009
|
14 comments

One of our primary concerns as culturejammers is how to build and sustain a non-corporate culture. In the domain of music, this is a question of pressing concern because corporations have managed to almost entirely co-opt our culture. One minute a band is making original music in a basement and the next their bland songs are playing in supermarkets to encourage consumption. How do we get out of this predicament?

Josh Koleszar, a Blackspot musician and member of the Jake Russell Band in Omaha, wrote the following sketch of what he thinks a Blackspot Music Label would look like. After reading what Josh has to say, please post your own ideas on the future of Blackspot Music.

"A Blackspot music label's highest priority should not be to find a sound that will sell, because what is popular constantly changes. That leaves artists to be just as disposable as a factory worker on an assembly line. A music label should be committed to taking care of their artists, so they should pick them very carefully. When choosing artists, the label needs to find an artist with an original twist on the musical and lyrical worlds, not just a more refined knock-off of the latest trend. When art can repaint the world so that you can better understand it, yourself, and yourself in it, it has achieved, in my personal opinion, its highest goal."

"The chosen artist's most valuable possession is their potential. It is the label's duty to commit itself to seeing that potential developed to its fullest. This is in direct opposition to the current industry's directive of stripping the music down to the bare uniqueness and then simplifying everything else, so that you are blasted with the unique and "catchy". Their purpose behind this is to get the songs rooted in your head so that you find yourself humming them and hopefully buying the album. The quality of the song doesn't matter at all, nor the content. The Blackspot label would work with the artist to push them and challenge them as musicians and lyricists. They would surround the artist with people to help record, produce, mix, and master their music, but leave the final say to the artist themselves. Another missing element in mainstream music labels is a sense of community between artists. I think we're missing a lot of what was gained from the old school of training with masters and apprentices. This relationship can be carried over successfully into music, as is seen in Daniel Smith and Sufjan Stevens time together during the recording of Seven Swans. "

"A third and final aspect that needs to be addressed in the concern of 'crossover' artists is the destruction of 'celebrity.' When an artist can reach so many people with their words and impact their lives, it's hard not to attribute some sort of god-like aspects to them. This creates the celebrity effect, which creates a distance between the listener/fan and the artist. Instead, artists and their labels should work at breaking these walls down so that music achieves one of its greatest and most spiritual effects - that of creating a community between people who may have had nothing in common before the concert. Music helps us share in the collective human experience and stratifying the distance between artist and fan only serves to disconnect us from the very inspiration that empowers us. By portraying the artist in the same light as the listener, the listener is free to take part in the performance and make it his own, interpret it in his own way, possibly even making art inspired by the artist."

"Basically, the business aspect needs to be put much lower on the priority list in the music business. If all labels followed this theory, there wouldn't be a need to emphasize the money-making aspect - it would come naturally out of the talent they have nurtured and promoted instead of the One-Hit-Wonders they have used and abused."

If you would like to respond directly to Josh Koleszar, he can be reached via email at josh.koleszar *at* gmail.com.

What do you think Blackspot music is all about?

Fury Erupts

Tired of talk, riotous crowds shake Europe.

Micah White
|
13 Jan 2009
|
28 comments

Montage of photos taken at protests in London, Madrid and Manila

At the start of 2009, fury is erupting. Today, something is qualitatively different about the mood on the street. For the first time in forty years, the anger of people is palpable. The general sense of discontent that was expressed in the Greek riots is spreading. And a storm is now shaking cities across Europe as protesters galvanized by the Gaza massacre smash windows, overturn cars and confront riot police. Given the passion for resistance already displayed, it appears likely that 2009 will become a year of fury.

Global protests against the invasion of Gaza raged furiously during this, the second week, of the Israeli war. Over 100,000 people marched in France, 70,000 in Brussels, 100,000 in Madrid, 100,000 in London and protests continue to appear in cities across Europe including Athens, Berlin, Budapest, Oslo, Sarajevo and Stockholm. However, unlike the antiwar protests of the past, what is remarkable now is the widespread militancy of protesters. In each city, riot police were called in and violent clashes ensued. London protesters smashed the windows of Starbucks, in Brussels they vandalized car windows and in Yemen police opened fire on protesters, wounding five. For a complete summary of the global protests, visit The Raw Story or The Daily Mail.

Rage is one factor that marks the mood of 2009 as different. And another is the militancy of average people. Like in Greece, where the majority supported the anarchist riots, today's militant protesters are also joined, and supported by, mainstream opposition. In the UK, for example, the former mayor of London, Ken Livingstone, declared: "The British government and European Union have the economic leverage to stop this carnage. They must take decisive action to force Israel to end the slaughter." And in Spain, Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero told protesters, "It is my duty to call on Israel to implement an immediate cease-fire."

At this moment it seems clear that the mood on the street is one of riotous fury. Only time can tell whether the passion will be sustained long enough to usher in systemic change.

Do you think your friends and neighbors are furious? What do you think is behind the passion sweeping the globe?

Enough. Boycott Israel.

Is it time we organized a broad campaign to boycott, divest and sanction Israel?

Micah White
|
11 Jan 2009
|
101 comments

Palestinians transport the bodies of 13 people killed in an Israeli air strike overnight on a house. Medics said the dead, including several children, were members of the same extended family. (Mahmud Hams / AFP / Getty Images)

In a recent editorial in the Guardian UK, Naomi Klein called for a widespread Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions campaign against Israel. She wrote that, "It's time. Long past time. The best strategy to end the increasingly bloody occupation is for Israel to become the target of the kind of global movement that put an end to apartheid in South Africa... Every day that Israel pounds Gaza brings more converts to the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions cause - even among Israeli Jews. In the midst of the assault roughly 500 Israelis, dozens of them well-known artists and scholars, sent a letter to foreign ambassadors in Israel. It calls for "the adoption of immediate restrictive measures and sanctions" and draws a clear parallel with the anti-apartheid struggle. 'The boycott on South Africa was effective, but Israel is handled with kid gloves ... This international backing must stop.'"

Naomi Klein's assessment resonates with many people who are terribly upset by the injustice they see happening in Gaza. Now is the time that we should collectively act to simultaneously reject consumerism and the war in Gaza. Getting involved is easy:

First, visit the Boycott Israeli Goods website and begin actively refusing to buy any product made in Israel. You can also download a comprehensive guide of Israeli products.

And, if you have a website, you can promote this campaign by adding a small "Boycott Israel" banner to the top left of your website. To do so, put the following code anywhere on your webpage. For an example of how this looks, visit why-war.com

Do you think a boycott of Israel can end the occupation of Palestine? How can we spread this Boycott campaign more widely?

Update: The following websites have joined the Boycott Israel campaign. We will keep updating this list as more sites join!

Cutting Through the Crap

Bob Simon of 60 Minutes and Jon Stewart are members of the mainstream media who have shown a rare willingness to avoid the party line in discussing the Gaza conflict.

Kono
|
09 Jan 2009
|
27 comments

Few issues are more divisive than the Israel-Palestine conflict. The comment boards at Adbusters haven’t seen this much action since the hipster issue. We also received an unusually high number of responses to our recent email broadcast, in which we urged everyone in our Culture Jammers Network to “throw their weight behind Gaza.” Some readers were disgusted with our opposition to Israel’s bombing campaign in Gaza, while others thought we’d be insane to adopt any other view.

This weekend we’d like to draw your attention to two voices in the crowd — two videos which we feel cut through some of the crap.

The first video [link] is Charlie Rose's penetrating interview with 60 Minutes correspondent Bob Simon. Simon lived in Israel for ten years and just got back from an assignment in the West Bank.

The second video [link: US/CA] is Jon Stewart's take on the media's handling of it all. No, it isn't hard-core journalism, but here is at least one 'mainstream' voice that isn't buying the standard line. This clip already done the rounds on the net, but if you haven’t seen it yet, watch it now.

Who are the Tarnac 9?

While we affirm new forms of blackspot community, the State reacts with fear and repression.

Micah White
|
09 Jan 2009
|
4 comments

Home of a blackspot community in Tarnac, France recently raided by police.

In the tiny village of Tarnac, located on a mountain plateau in central France, nine culturejammers have been arrested for leading a revolutionary blackspot lifestyle: they lived frugally, fostered community and shunned capitalism. Their existence has been deemed a threat worthy of a police raid, terrorism charges and arrest.

The Guardian UK explains that the "alleged ringleader, Julien Coupat, 34, is still being held in prison despite a judge's ruling that he be released. A former business and sociology student from an affluent Parisian suburb, Coupat moved to Tarnac in search of a non-consumerist lifestyle, saying he wanted to live frugally. The poor village of 350 people is home to a growing number of young people who have escaped the city for a simple life and sense of community. Together, the newcomers ran the shop, a mobile delivery service, the restaurant, a cinema club and an informal library."

How could nine people be a threat to the State of France and the whole of capitalism? Simple: they demonstrated through their daily actions that an anti-capitalist lifestyle is both possible and desireable. They fostered community and tried to work on changing the world from the local level. And their actions have already convinced their neighbors that a better world is possible.

The ordinary villagers of Tarnac are now raising their voices in defense of their unjustly arrested neighbors. A mayor of a nearby village had this to say about the culturejammers: "They were my neighbours, helping me on the farm and selling my meat at the shop. They were kind, intelligent and spoke several languages. They were politicised, on the left and clearly anti-capitalist like lots of people here, but they were people active in community life who wanted to change society at a local level first. To say that they were the descendants of Baader-Meinhof or the Red Brigades with no proof, I'm completely against that." And another villager says, "I see them at the shop every day of the year, I help them with their drains, they help me. They are people who came to Corrèze to change their lives, to help people. We don't view them as terrorists here."

The example set by the arrested Tarnac residents is inspiring others to speak out against State repression of anti-capitalist attempts at building alternative communities. For example, the famed Italian philosopher Giorgio Agamben has recently spoke out in support of the so-called Tarnac 9. He writes, "We must have the courage to say with clarity that today, numerous European countries (in particular France and Italy), have introduced laws and police measures that we would previously have judged barbaric and anti-democratic, and that these are no less extreme than those put into effect in Italy under fascism."

Before his arrest Julien Coupat allegedly wrote, "The Coming Insurrection", a text that may become a key manifesto of our generation's uprising. Take a look at this document and then share your thoughts here. How do you think we should overcome State repression? Will our attempts at creating new ways of being always be thwarted?

The Last Boom-Bust Cycle

Can our planet sustain an economic recovery?

Micah White
|
31 Dec 2008
|
15 comments

All eyes are on the economy as startling statistics are released daily: the Dow Jones Industrial Average dropped 35% this year, jobless claims are at a 26 year high in the United States and over twenty-five banks failed in the US alone in 2008.

Given the constant litany of bad news, most people now understand that years of unsustainable growth based upon overzealous money lending and rampant financial speculation have pushed the world into a major economic depression. In other words, the capitalist roller coaster ride has reached the summit of a period of economic boom and we are now racing to the bottom of an economic bust.

Cries for help resound from all sides. But all these urgent calls seem to have one common assumption: that what we need is an economic recovery. Is this necessarily the case? I wonder whether an economic recovery is really in our collective best interest or whether it will simply mean the resumption of a period of unsustainable growth in anticipation of another (even worse) economic collapse.

And then there is the question of whether our weary, devastated planet can even sustain another period of economic growth.

Is it time we stopped calling for an an economic recovery and started demanding an economic rethinking?

Rich People Have Taken Up Stealth Shopping

The ultra-rich are opting for unmarked, unbranded bags to disguise spending on luxury goods.

Paul
|
22 Dec 2008
|
15 comments

Rich People Have Taken Up Stealth Shopping

The Daily Beast reports on the latest shopping trend among those wealthy few who haven't been seriously affected by the economic downturn:

"...Anyone who can still afford, say, the three cashmere throws at $2,225 each that Mrs. Fuld bought when she stopped by the store that day isn't likely to advertise it. Instead, the city's most extravagant shoppers are ferrying their purchases home in unmarked bags; delegating delivery to assistants; or manipulating credit card bills to disguise their spending from outsiders--and their spouses..."

Read the rest.