SUKANT ON RT's CROSSTALK PROGRAM NO THE SUBJECT OF RUSSIA & SYRIA

PROF MARANDI FROM TEHRAN ON ASSAD's VISIT TO MOSCOW ON RT

SECTARIAN AND DIVISIVE POSTURE IN THE SIKH COMMUNITY, RE: SO-CALLED #SikhLivesMatter

Undivided India's greatest martyr, the nationalist, anarchist and communist Shaheed Bhagat Singh, 

in jail by the brits in 1930, executed at the age of 23years old. An amazing revolutionary genius and primary revolutionary figure

RE: So-called ‪#‎SikhLivesMatter‬ and the Khalistanis

Sukant Chandan,
Sons of Malcolm
27Oct 2015

This movement of political forces using and abusing Sikhism are broadly called 'Khalistanis', a supremacist religious sectarian movement which has direct parallels with either colonial supremacist movements such as Zionism and and the 'Muslim brotherhood' and other more sectarian supremacist forces in the Muslim world. All three movements have internalised colonial frameworks of sectarian division and project them as political projects.

Punjabi Sikhs are NOT oppressed as Sikhs in India, although like other supremacist sectarian forces the Khalistanis use the religious nature of the masses to construct a false notion of oppression borne of their provocative actions which results in over handed repression by the Indian state which these supremacist forces disingenuously use to further promote their sectarian project.

Punjab in India has many problems as the rest of India, but it is one of the most relatively affluent States, Sikhs are very confident across India and there is no mass problem of prejudice and state discrimination against them. Against a tiny group of sectarian political forces, yes, but not against the community at large. They are a tiny force in Punjab itself, but their base of support and financing is mostly in england.

Jagmohan Joshi, leader of the mass based Indian Workers Association (GB) and editor of Lalkar

'Khalistan' is a project for a 'pure' Sikh state in Punjab. It's growth is complex but it's modern growth is on the basis of sectarian diaspora support from communities in the 'west' especially England, the British state was very happy to at least turn a blind eye and facilitate their rise here as the socialist anti imperialist Sikh community here was massive and part of the backbone of the actual socialist, working class and militant anti imperialist movement. Just two examples of such people and organisations were Jagmohan Joshi, a leader of the Indian Workers Association (GB) (pictured) and Abhimanyu Manchanda (pictured), both were important radical anti-imperialist, socialist and working class leaders in this country. It takes little political nouse to understand that the British state would prefer to have sectarian divisive forces that makes no dent in the divide and rule and business of oppression and exploitation of the British state domestically and globally.

The last 20 years has seen this militant socialist anti imperialist Sikh community defeated and now the sectarian supremacist forces have hegemony in Sikh diaspora in the 'west'. Direct parallels with sectarian supremacist forces in the Muslim community.

Like the last 25years of the Muslim community seeing the state sponsored hegemony handed over to pro gulf monarchist and sectarian forces. Just as some sections of Muslims have been saying for decades that this supremacist sectarianism is a reaction to oppression, similarly we now have many South Asian and Indian lefties giving ground to three supremacist 'Sikh' forces due to 1, having given up and being defeated in trying to organise theses communities, 2, being too afraid to push back against these sectarian thugs, and 3, trying to spin their failures and cowardice as making out these are somehow some legitimate response to repression.

In India due to the Indian state's repression and interaction with these forces were at times very unhelpful and counter productive, however let's not forget that this movement was a brazen murderous one with such acts such as stopping buses dividing Sikhs from non- Sikhs and killing all the non Sikhs. They were and remain a highly violently divisive force.

Today their actions include sectarianising and essentialising the Sikh religion into a sectarian one, and forces in this movement have been literally sabotaging mixed marriages (whereby mostly Sikh women are marrying non-Sikhs) in Sikh temples ('Gurdwaras') through straight forward thuggish and bullying tactics. Can you imagine?! Dozens of thugs sabotaging marriage ceremonies! The Gurdwaras need to be pressured to protect wedding ceremonies and families, but the Gurdwaras are increasingly giving ground to these sectarian forces, which unfairly puts the onus on families of the people getting married to protect their ceremonies.

Like supremacism in all communities, this problem has two basic sides to it: 1, the political situation in Indian Punjab - for a few decades the peoples forces against this sectarianism has been subsiding, and 2, For a few decades South Asian / Indian and Punjabi pro-people and unity forces have been subsiding to now a negligible state. These sectarian forces will only be defeated when the struggle in India sees a definitive push to defeat these forces in ALL communities of faith, and similarly in England. In England, there is no sign of it, it must be built however.

While we have a internally sectarian force using and abusing Hinduism in the form of Modi/BJP govt, the situation internally in India politically is much stronger than in England against all these sectarian supremacist forces. Unlike in England there are mass based pro peoples, pro unity, nationalist, socialist and communist forces and a healthy intelligentsia allied to these forces.

In England we need a new generation of South Asian Workers and Students United struggle needs developing in England. Are South Asian youth and workers ready to take this task on, or will we continue to give ground to sectarian supremacist forces?

The spirit, ideologies, legacy and path of Shaheed Bhagat Singh and Shaheed Udham Singh of uniting our peoples for our collective rights must inform a new age of our struggle.

Abhimanyu Manchanda

MUGABE AND AFRICAN REACTIONARIES

Zim: The envy of African reactionaries

Obi Egbuna Jr Simunye
Zimbabwe Herald

WHEN Zimbabwe is discussed internally by both its leadership and citizens, those on the outside looking in, are forced to acknowledge that the country’s political understanding collectively speaking in comparison to other African nations is extremely high. That very attribute automatically prevents our former colonial and slave masters’ efforts to demonise President Mugabe and zanu-pf, from having the impact they so desire, which encourages African neo-colonial agents resorting to cheap and tacky publicity stunts whenever they attack Zimbabwe directly or indirectly.

The African world along with the international community witnessed a 27-year old Nigerian journalist Adeola Fayehun attempting to embarrass President Mugabe while he was at the inauguration of Nigerian President Muhammadu Buhari.

While it was natural for Zimbabweans in particular and Africans as a whole to be outraged by the disrespectful manner in which Ms Fayehun approached President Mugabe, what must not be lost was her comment that she raised the same identical questions asked by CNN journalist and hatchet-woman Christiane Amanpour when she interviewed President Mugabe in September 2009.

If this generation of African journalists whether they write for established newspapers or blogs and other additional social media outlets, are deciding to use Mrs Amanpour as a source of inspiration or reference when engaging any African head of state, speaks volumes about the decline of constant political education among our daughters and sons today.

Any African journalist who aspires to be like Amanpour should understand what this represents personally and politically. Amanpour’s biological uncle Captain Nasrollah Amanpour is married to the sister of General Nader Jahanbani, who commanded Iran’s Imperial Iranian Air Force under the brutal and repressive rule of the Shah of Iran, the General’s biological brother Khosrow was married to the Shah’s daughter Princess Shahnaz Pahlavi. Amanpour is married to James Rubin, who was US Assistant Secretary of State during the Clinton administration and an informal advisor to President Obama and former US Secretary of State and presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton.

This exposes that Amanpour’s questions for President Mugabe, by no means represented objective journalism, but an intelligent well-spoken woman who unapologetically defends the interests of US-EU imperialism every time she gets in front of the camera representing the corporate monsters who have made her a multi-millionaire.

As this numerical year marks the 50th anniversary of Osagyefo Dr Kwame Nkrumah’s book Neo Colonialism The Last Stage of Imperialism, Fayehun’s 15 minutes of fame exposes that the colonial and slave mentality, has indeed been passed down by the previous generation which puts a negative spin on the concept of passing the torch.

During the 13th ordinary session of the African Union General Assembly in 2008, which took place in Egypt, Liberia’s President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf stated Zimbabwe’s June 27th elections were not credible, Sirleaf went on to say that in 1985, the African Union and the world endorsed elections and this frustrated the will of the people and engendered a 14 year civil war that left 200 000 people dead. For Sirleaf to compare Zimbabwe to Liberia was not only preposterous and irresponsible, but the equivalent of equating Ghana under the Osagyefo to Zaire under Mobutu Sese Seko.

For Africans at home and abroad to understand President Sirleaf’s political motivation for even mentioning Zimbabwe by name during this time period, there are some extremely important gestures and overtures, that US-EU Imperialism made towards Liberia that are entirely too important to overlook or dismiss.

In 2007, the US became the first country to grant debt relief to Liberia waving an amount of 391 million dollars borrowed, later that year the German Chancellor Angela Merkel then leading the G-8 provided an additional 324.5 million dollars that represented 60 percent of Liberia’s IMF debt.

This was followed in 2008 Liberia becoming eligible for the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries Initiative which saw the IMF and World Bank in 2010 agree to fund 1.5 billion dollars in writing off Liberia’s multi- lateral debt, along with the Paris Club cancelling 1.26 billion dollars with independent bilateral creditors cancelling an additional 107 million dollars.

The International Development Association, at a discount rate of 97 percent, provided Liberia resources to write off its foreign commercial debt.

We then saw and heard President Sirleaf, a Nobel Peace Prize winner in 2011, offer to allow US Imperialism if they were interested, to use Liberia as their headquarters for AFRICOM, and receive a US Presidential medal of Freedom under the Bush administration.

What makes Zimbabwe very interesting is its African detractors have no problem whatsoever attempting to duplicate their policies, when it appears to serve their interests in the short term or long term, this explains Liberia’s One China Policy is an obvious duplication of Zimbabwe’s Look East Policy.

It is for this reason President Mugabe and zanu-pf are not holding their breath waiting for President Sirleaf to admit that the decision to appoint Joice Mujuru Vice President of Zimbabwe created a groundswell, rooted in self determination that ultimately led to her becoming the President of Liberia.

Throughout history, African heads of state rarely admit to errors and mistakes, however, at any given moment they are prone to make a comment to gloss over previous negligence. We saw last year, Sirleaf send the following congratulatory statement to President Mugabe and zanu-pf.

“We pray that God will endow President Mugabe with abundant wisdom and strength as he leads the people of Zimbabwe to greater prosperity” This was similar to when the former President of Nigeria, the late Umaru Musa Yar’Adua, attacked Zimbabwe at the Germany/European Partnership with Africa in Wiesbaden, Germany one month before the EU-African summit in Portugal, President Yar’Adua accused Zimbabwe of heavy handed tactics towards the opposition. This comment by President Yar’Adua may have gotten him a pat on his back by US-EU Imperialism, however, it put him on a collision course with the entire sadc region, because the entire region threatened to boycott the conference if President Mugabe decided not to attend. That bogus suggestion was made by the former Prime Minister of Britain Gordon Brown when he stated he would boycott the summit if President Mugabe was present.

Because President Mugabe is without question a man of integrity he not only called President Sirleaf after she presented her post 2015 Development Agenda to the African Union High Level Committee and African Peer Review Mechanism Forum reports substantive and informative, but went on to call her an asset to the AU, African Continent and her people.

In his classic book The Wretched of the Earth the Pan Africanist Freedom Fighter Frantz Fanon had two eloquent points pertaining to this dynamic, the first is everything can be explained to the people on the single condition you want them to understand, the second is for a colonised people the most essential value became the most concrete is first and foremost the land: the land bring them bread and above all dignity.

The decision by President Mugabe and zanu-pf to maintain their course has not only hardened the people’s resolve as a unit, but is forcing its enemies at home and abroad to recognise the value of not compromising your principles regardless of the hardships you are forced to endure.


Obi Egbuna Jr is the US Correspondent to the Herald and the External Relations officer if the Zimbabwe-Cuba Friendship Association his email is obiegbuna15@gmail.com 

CORBYN FUELLING ANTI-CHINESE RACISM

Jeremy Corbyn and his Contribution to Popularising anti-Chinese Racism in Britain

Sukant Chandan
Sons of Malcolm

"At the end, the statement [from the Labour Party on the Corbyn-Xin meeting - SC] said Corbyn “also raised the issues of human rights and the impact of Chinese imports on the UK steel industry”. 
(- source)

For over a week the british mainstream media was provided with plenty of material to attack China on 'human rights' by Jeremy Corbyn, the current leader of the Labour Party. Corbyn threatened to bring up the human rights western/imperialist posture in the meeting with Chinese Communist and country leader Xi Jinping during last night's state banquet, and that is what he did.

For over a one week preceding this Corbyn helped directly to feed anti-Chinese sentiment, and also during the meeting last night also fed the british empire workerist racism towards China by somehow giving it some primary responsibility in relation to the british state's own culpability in creating unemployment and job precariousness in this country.

Corbyn himself is no overt racist, but that is not the point. When you are operating in an imperialist country, especially if your voice has any relative resonance over the masses, not to mention if you are the leader of the opposition party, you must be or should be extremely careful in how you tread in issues pertaining to the Global South, especially countries who have had a recent history of genocide and colonial occupation as did China until 1949, and even after that it was threatened with direct nuclear attack by the USA, and also was surrounded by imperialist genocidal war in the case of the USA and British-led war against Korea in the early 1950s (killing 4 million Koreans), and the British, French and USA war of gencidal war against Vietnam from 1945-1975 (killing 3 million Vietnamese), both of whose struggles China was directly supporting the revolutionary liberation forces.

For Britain amongst other imperialist countries to have conducted such brutal wars against East and South East Asian countries, they had an elaborate construct of racism to justify genocide in the minds of the masses in the west.

China and East Asian people in general are a easy target for racist abuse, particularly suffering a nasty misogynistic abuse from not only white westerners but this has been internalised by non-white westerners as well. Much of this racist nastiness has been and continues to be promoted by the western media and 'entertainment' industry. The sexist-racist slurs against East Asian women is pretty much normalised in the west, which also dovetails the western imperialist rape industry whereby it is normalised for western men to go to East and South East Asia to conduct rape and sexual assault on an industrial level.

Within the 'UK' itself, racism towards East and South East Asian people is massive, but little known and talked about. Racist physical attacks are frequent, especially towards East Asian people residing in smaller towns and villages where their low numbers makes it easier for them to be attacked.

The issue of anti-Chinese racism in the west and in Britain is sadly often erased out of existence, downplayed or just ignored. There are many reasons why this is the case, but part of the confusion and ignorance around this is the false notion that because China is doing relatively well in terms of poverty reduction, infrastructure development and and increased involvement in supporting the Global South across the world, that somehow Chinese people are protected in the west and in the UK. It's not true.

And this thinking can indirectly contribute to a lack of resistance towards and support in pushing back this largely unaddressed racism against our East Asian peoples here. This is a good report on the issue from leading anti-racist advocacy group The Monitoring Group (in which organisation I happened to be a case worker for over a year in 2012).

There is also an imperialist/colonial emasculation of East Asian men which is another plank in the tool box of colonial and imperialist on-going war against East Asian peoples.

When there East Asian and Chinese people are such easy targets for racist scaegoating and oppression, Corbyn and anyone else need to navigate carefully projecting and publicising their hostility and so-called criticisms of China, lest they feed that centuries long and profound racism. But that is exactly what Corbyn has done.

All this promotion of misogynistic and racist colonial and imperialist stereotypes are rooted with the old British colonial 'yellow peril' racist propaganda, which facilitated their genocidal and usurping and looting actions against the Chinese people since the nineteenth century.

This dehumanisation and assumption that the Chinese people like other colonised people are basically at the level of children or/and animals, and can be exploited, killed and raped at will is an on-going phenomenon of mass consciousness especially amongst Western peoples.

All of this things considered, Corbyn this last week has shown himself to be unwilling to engage positively in this framework of colonialism, imperialism and racism towards China. Instead he has stoked the flames of anti-Chinese prejudice and racism on this island by threatening to raise the new 'white man's burden' against the Chinese leadership: human rights imperialism.

It is the first rule of global solidarity that people in the west desist from acting out in a colonially arrogant manner and respect the indepdencence of non-western countries, and resist the urge to negatively interfere in their own affairs especially when it is done in such a colonially ignorant and arrogant fashion. The fundamental first rule of global solidarity is to fight especially 'one's' own imperialist state in relation to the countries that the imperialist state is targeting. To campaign consistently against any historical or current or planned imperialist tricks, intrigue and oppression that your own state is rolling out against the Chinese and other peoples. On this, Corbyn fails as he is quite profoundly imbued with colonial prejudices.

For over one week Corbyn has helped to raise hatred against the Chinese in quite direct implication that the Chinese are responsible for the economies woes of workers here, and that the Chinese are somehow unable to constructively and positively address the human rights of their own people.

Corbyn did not have to do that, but he chose to. It has been Corbyn that has been threatening to raise these issues with Xhi Jinping which he did last night, and as although the government here and media have also similarly promoted this human rights imperialism and racism towards China, it was Corbyn who was the only high level politician who raised this issue with the Chinese leadership during the four day state visit here. As such on this issue Corbyn stands to the right of the Tories and even the queen, as it was the tories and other right wing elements of the political class that put pressure on Corbyn to refrain from developing this diplomatic spat with the Chinese.

There are also some very tiny political forces around Corbyn who are in general somewhat luke-warm to positive about China, these include the socialist action sect, the communist party and a few individuals. None of these tiny political forces close to Corbyn and who are somewhat pro-China managed to stop him from raising 'human rights' and 'why you Chinese taking our jobs' nonsense. Such is the influence of these groups on issues that matter most to billions of people who happen to not be in the european white world.

Unfortunately, it was not only Corbyn that acted in such a manner. It also has to be stated that the Scottish National Party (SNP) and Nicola Sturgeon treated the Chinese in a similar colonial manner in which westminster and the english elites treat the Scots by failing to attend the state banquet in honour of the Chinese last night. To quote Alex Salmond in another context, it was 'infantile' of Sturgeon to have done that, and this also helped to encourage prejudice against the Chinese. This is that much more disappointing as clearly Alex Salmond and other colleagues in the leadership of the SNP are very close politically to the Chinese leadership. One hopes that the SNP and Scottish independence oriented Scots who I am loyal to can reflect on the colonial dynamics of snubbing the Chinese and how that reflects their own legitimate gripes with English colonialism and arrogance towards the indy movement and peoples in Scotland.

In Chinese reports on meetings with Corbyn, they have as to be expected tried to give it the most positive spin possible, as this is diplomacy and it would be very undignified for the Chinese to have to respond with anything that smacks of terseness and irritability when they are being feted by the british state. One should not read the diplomatic comments to reflect the actual actions and to base political analysis and judgement on that.

Corbyn is hostile to every single country in Africa and Asia. He supports British war sanctions against Eritrea (easily verified by checking the parliamentary voting record online), he has helped to demonise the Libyan Jamahirya and the Syrian government while it has been the target for imperialist divide and ruin and death squad destruction led by the British state. Saying some nice things about relatively poor people on this island but treating in a colonially arrogant manner the Scots, Eritreans, Libyans, Syrians and Chinese is not 'progressive' or 'socialist' politics. Those of us who are not politically (or financially!) corrupted by the 'left wing' of the imperialist system must speak with a clear voice that we do not agree with this racist and colonial treatment of our own people. We deserve better.

SCOTTISH MPs TOLD IN PARLIAMENT: GO BACK TO WHERE YOU COME FROM

"Porridge wogs", "Jockistan" and now this: 'go back to where you come from'. The Scots are and have been racialised as outside of whiteness by those who consider themselves inside that white supremacist colonial club. Like all colonially racialised peoples the Scots have internalised a fair bit of that oppression, although compared to colonised Black and Asian people in England the Scots are well ahead in terms of anti colonial socialised-orientation. - Sukant Chandan, Sons of Malcolm

"SNP MPs "need to be on their planes back" to Scotland, a Tory MP said today as she defended government proposals to restrict the voting rights of non-English MPs.

"Apparently responding to a comment about the timing of tonight's vote, South Derbyshire MP Heather Wheeler gestured towards the SNP and said: "no, they need to be on their planes back."

"She told the House that her constituents felt huge "grievance" about Scottish and Welsh MPs voting on English-only matters.

""This has gone on too long," she told the Commons." (source)

ANTI IMPERIALIST HIP HOP ON SYRIA