|
by Swati Chaudhary  Motivation Today, we are living in historical times when the power balance in the world is undergoing epochal shifts. The West is at its weakest in centuries and new superpowers are emerging in the East. This unprecedented and imminent collapse has engendered a massive wave of paranoia and confusion in the Western world. As a result, the West is employing more sophisticated tools and highly insidious tactics to hold on to the ideas of Western supremacy. One such example is the rapid increases in intensity of attacks on different anti-imperialist freedom movements across the world. The legacy of the black and Indian freedom movement, especially, is facing vicious attacks from so-called intellectuals who are fed by an agenda of Western supremacy. Even the most prominent figures like Gandhi and King who led these revolutions with a profound love for humanity are put under trial by the media and ultra-leftist intellectuals. It’s imperative for the youth to understand different undercurrents in these epochal times and find a way to contribute to this New World Order in a positive and constructive manner. The youth of any generation is full of revolutionary potential but the process of mobilizing this revolutionary potential for the betterment of society needs to be understood. We live in a world where even the best intentions of the youth are easily hijacked by the ruling class to serve their agenda. This emasculates the society of their ability to bring a concrete positive change. In such times, it behooves us to learn our history and look at the freedom movement from the eyes of heroes and heroines who sacrificed their lives to break the shackles of centuries long colonial rule. Our history is rife with exemplary heroes who worked tirelessly to empower and uplift the masses. It is only by examining their lives that we can gain some clarity on how to find a purpose in our lives. Aruna Asaf Ali also commonly known as ‘the heroine of 1942’ is one such fearless but forgotten freedom fighter who dedicated her life to educating and organizing masses who toppled the British empire. She strived throughout her life to empower workers, women, and other oppressed classes. Her revolutionary spirit, social-reform ideas, sacrifice, and idealism inspire us to bend our lives towards a purposeful striving and develop a strategy to address the social crisis of our times. Early Life : A rebel in making Aruna was born in 1909 in Kalka, Punjab to a Brahmo Samaj Bengali family as Aruna Ganguly. She was the eldest child of the family and displayed exceptional leadership qualities since her childhood. She received her early education in the Convent of the Sacred Heart at Lahore where her father was working as a journalist. She was a very curious and sincere student. She was quite attracted by the Roman Catholic lifestyle and had decided to become a nun. Perturbed by her unbecoming and impractical religious predilections, her parents sent her to a Protestant school in Nainital where she completed her education. With this, came the pressure of arranged marriage, which the strong-minded Aruna refused to cave in to and instead decided to leave her house. She started teaching at the Gokhale memorial school in Calcutta. This was merely the beginning of the rebellious streak which she kept in her personal and political life. The course of her life was changed completely when she met 41 year old Asaf Ali, a young charming barrister who was a member of Congress party. He was quite well-known mainly because of his participation in the non-cooperation movement in the 1920s. The two of them bonded very deeply and they decided to marry. This union was highly unconventional on the grounds of religion and age difference. As a result, her family strongly opposed the wedding and went to the extent of performing her shradh (remembrance of the dead) when she went ahead with it. The rebel inside her was too strong to be imprisoned by social customs. However, little did she know than in marrying Asaf Ali in 1928, she actually married a cause. This marriage brought her in contact with the political elite of the day who were striving to make India free from foreign rule. These high profile political connections combined with her revolutionary spirit catapulted her on a remarkable and highly unconventional political career. Political activity and ideology: A true leader of the masses Aruna dedicated all her life to different political activities centered around the anti-imperialist revolution. Her political endeavors were always rooted in her love for the masses and she saw a transformatory revolutionary potential lying latent in them. She toured India extensively to organize the masses and mobilize their revolutionary potential. She became immensely popular among workers, peasants, students, and women. Her dynamic personality and the ability to deeply analyze different political ideologies forced her to change her political associations on many occasions during her long career before and after independence. She always prioritized the upliftment and political education of masses throughout her life. Her first major political involvement occurred during Salt Satyagraha when she made a fiery speech about the revolution of 1857 after the arrest of her husband. In their attempts to suppress Aruna’s rebellious spirit, the British government prosecuted her on the charge of vagrancy. She was sent to Lahore female jail where she started to impart political education to fellow women prisoners. Unlike other political prisoners, she was not released under the Gandhi-Irwin Pact. However, during a few months stay at Lahore jail, she had ignited the revolutionary spirit of other women in the jail. As a result, her prison mates refused to leave until Aruna was set free. This later led to an agitation all over India and the government was compelled to set her free. It was not very long before she was arrested again in 1932 and was sent to Tihar jail. Wherever she went, she considered it her moral duty to fight against the injustice of the British government and kept on working for the betterment of exploited people. She was outraged by the discriminatory and callous behavior of jail authorities towards political prisoners. As a protest, she went on hunger strike and kept up her fast until her demands were met. However, this rebellious act of hers incurred her a punishment of solitary confinement in Ambala jail. After her release from Ambala jail, she took a break from active politics for almost a decade. Those were very confusing times for Indian politics. It was difficult for a young revolutionary to figure out the correct ideology which could lead to complete freedom from colonial rule. On the one hand, the young revolutionary Bhagat Singh was executed and on the other hand the memories of the mass movement led by the Congress during the Salt satyagraha were very fresh. She identified the importance of combining the revolutionary potential of youth and their spirit of idealism with the power of disciplined collective action. During these years, she started working closely with Congress members and got more engaged in work with Rameshwari Nehru who was the founder and president of the Delhi Women’s league. It was a very crucial time as Aruna learnt invaluable organizational skills under Rameshwari Nehru’s mentorship. Her interactions with Rameshwari and other women activists vitalized her interest in political activities. She also participated in the All India Women’s Conference and felt the need to become more engaged in organizing people for the Freedom Struggle. She also utilized this time to understand the connection between Gandhism and socialism. Socialist ideas resonated very strongly with her spirit to bring together the masses. She kept on analyzing different ideologies for a very long time. It was only later when she came in contact with Jayaprakash Narayana that she made up her mind and said “towards Socialism shall I march”. In the meantime, she also became a follower of Mahatma Gandhi. She had now become an active member of Congress and also managed to win Mahatma Gandhi’s trust. She was selected in the list of Satyagrahis when Gandhi launched the Individual Satyagraha movement in 1940. Her participation in this movement led to her arrest and she was again sent to Lahore jail. Now, she was very well-equipped to organize women and continued her mission of political education of women. The most important period of her life came in August 1942, where she came into prominence due to her participation in the Quit India movement and earned the title ‘Heroine of 1942’. On August 8, 1942 she accompanied her husband who was participating in the 45th session of AICC in Bombay. The main goal of this session was to launch the Quit India movement which Gandhi called "An Orderly British Withdrawal" from India. However, on the morning of August 9, all prominent Congress leaders were arrested by the government and imprisoned without trial. She compared this brutal and lawless action of police to Pearl Harbor and said” “Pearl Harbour methods are anathemic when practiced by yellow-skinned Japs. When employed to crush a revolt they signify forethought, courageousness, and rulership. Entrenched authority, an usurper authority had decided not to allow freedom of movement, speech or action to natives demanding its withdrawal.” It was during that momentous hour that Aruna stepped forward and decided to preside over the Flag hoisting ceremony in the absence of all important Congress leaders. Soon after the flag hoisting ceremony, the police released gas and lathi-charging on an otherwise peaceful crowd in Gowalia Tank Maidan. What infuriated Arun the most was the trampling of the flag by a White sergeant. It was at this moment she vowed that she would help to tear up British rule. Her revolutionary spirit became unstoppable after the Gowalia Tank Maidan incident and she knew very well that she would be arrested any day. Those were critical times as all prominent Congress leaders were already in jail so she had to continue her work under any circumstances. After her short stay in Delhi where she addressed some Congress workers and students to instigate hope and courage among them, she went underground to escape arrest. After hearing the news of her escape, Gandhi wrote “I have been filled with admiration for your courage and heroism. I have sent you a message that you must not die underground. Do come out and surrender yourself.” Aruna responded by saying “please forgive me if I say that the word surrender in your letter has surprised me. It hurts my pride to think that I should be expected to humiliate myself. I am in no mood to surrender to an unrepentant enemy. That would imply voluntary submission and willing renunciation of my revolt.” To which Gandhi replied “My whole heart goes out to you. I consider myself to be incapable of asking anyone, much less you, to do anything that would hurt your pride…This struggle has been full of romance and heroism. You are the central figure.” This phase where she lived the life of a fugitive revolutionary tested her mettle to the core and she epitomized the spirit of idealism and sacrifice. She lost her health and couldn’t even attend to her sick husband and dying mother. However, she did very useful work during this period. She visited many famine-stricken villages with her colleagues and tried to help the poor families in whatever ways she could. She connected with people from different walks of life and continued to educate them about political activities. Her own political views evolved a lot during this period. She was in the movement along with Jayaprakash Narayan, Ram Manohar Lohia, Achyut Patwardhan, and Edatata Narayanan and committed herself fully to a socialist vision. The warrant of arrest against Aruna was canceled in January 1946 and she resurfaced in public life after it. She toured many different cities and she usually addressed the crowd with the words: “Do not glorify me. You must glorify the martyrs of 1942. There is no occasion for rejoicing over the removal of restrictions on me. Until all the political prisoners and detenus are released, I shall not consider myself free. The truth is that I feel myself less free than I felt before January 25, 1946 when I was underground and refused to recognize the laws of the British Government that stand in the way of our struggle for freedom.” As Aruna’s socialist bent became more prominent, she became very popular among workers. As a result, soon after coming out in public, she got embroiled into another controversy when she joined the strike of Royal Indian Navy Ratings who were protesting against the discriminatory and unjust treatment by the government. It started as a small peaceful strike but the situation worsened and it turned into complete hartal in Bombay. She requested the support of Congress to control the situation and RIN ratings were advised to lay down arms and surrender. She had a huge disagreement with Gandhi about this RIN rating strike and didn’t like the fact that they were forced to surrender. She was always invited to many different worker unions across the country. She addressed many strikes against the ill treatment of workers by the British government. She always urged them to lead their struggle with unity, solidarity, and organization. Contrary to what many might believe she always warned the workers not to resort to violent methods. She also appealed to them to place their grievances before the Congress Working Committee prior to resorting to hartals. She always connected very deeply with workers, peasants, women, and students. Her moving speeches roused the ardent fervor of independence in the minds of many youths and she was able to engage and organize masses including women.. Being a part of Muslim household, she also developed a deeper understanding of Hindu-Muslim issues. Aruna always strived for Hindu-Muslim unity and held the Muslim League responsible for instigating hatred between Hindus and Muslims. She asked Congress ministers to win Muslim hearts by action. She described the Hindu-Muslim problem as a farce “I do not concede such a thing as a Hindu Muslim problem. All this is a farce. What I find is a fight among a certain section of the people for loaves and fishes of office.” while alluding to the behavior of Muslim league. For Congress, she suggested that they should appeal directly to the Muslim masses instead of Muslim leaders. Aruna and Gandhi: An important lesson for Gandhi critics Aruna and Gandhi had a very deep relationship filled with love, respect, and admiration for each other. The young Aruna sometimes struggled to understand Gandhi’s message and defied him on many occasions. Although all her actions were not approved by Gandhi, she always had immense respect for him. In the beginning she didn’t agree with everything Gandhi suggested but at the same time, she was extremely critical of those who criticized Gandhi for his faith and spiritual outlook. Over time, she gained more clarity and she understood the core message of Gandhi’s teachings and his socialism. In her essay on Gandhi on his anniversary in 1969 she wrote: “But what was Gandhiji’s “faith”? Can it be defined as mere acceptance of “beliefs in spite of evidence”, a rejection of the rational or spurning of man’s objective knowledge of himself and his environment, mere flabby piety and the blind worship that traditional religion prescribes? If that sums up “faith” and Gandhiji propagated such faith, then quite obviously his life and teaching are utterly valueless and totally meaningless for those who want human beings to respond to all that is challenging in life on this earth and beyond. His beliefs, however, had nothing to do with a set of dogmas or a static view of man and his social destiny. Otherwise, how could he have cast such a phenomenal spell over his compatriots and become a source of strength for the millions? By daring them to act regardless of consequences, by urging upon them again and again to overcome their intellectual, social, and moral lethargy, Gandhi rejected Indian obscurantism in all its manifestations. As if overnight, “he became a symbolic expression of the confused desires of the people” asking them to “be free”, “be slaves no more”, trying to tell them that liberation from spiritual thraldom is essential if they are to attain freedom from imperialist thraldom. Those who have studied Gandhiji’s writings and worked with him are aware that by laying stress on the need to “spiritualise” politics he was in reality laying emphasis on the need for making his people realize that not intellect alone but the moral values of goodness and truth were necessary for strengthening their character, because thus only could human beings be instrumental in winning back their lost heritage…” Her interactions with Gandhi helped her to understand the process of revolutionary change. The young Aruna equated rebellious activities to revolutionary change but as her political thinking matured she started to realize the difference. This helped her to understand the situation of young people whose spirit is filled with revolutionary ideas and idealism but they lack political maturity. Later on, she worked extensively to convey this message to young people through her writings and speeches. Post-independence: Always a rebel Aruna’s political journey is marked by many sharp transitions in her ideology and political associations. Her dynamic personality and the ability to analyze different events scientifically made it impossible for her to stick to one party. Her political thinking kept on evolving but her actions always remained rooted in her love for her countrymen. She prioritized the upliftment and political education of masses and continued her struggle against imperialist aggression and poverty. She remained deeply invested in the socialist cause and her search for a cadre with similar beliefs continued throughout her life. She believed that the hungry millions in our country will need socialism. Soon after independence, she left the Congress Socialist Party and joined the Socialist party with Edatata in 1948 as she found the Congress party’s approach towards socialism very dissatisfactory. She soon got disillusioned by the conflict of compulsion of power with the ideals and left the Socialist party. She traveled to Moscow with Edatata and joined Communist Party of India in the early 1950s as she got influenced by Marxist ideas. One central theme in her political thinking was to engage different sections of the society in the process of nation building. She saw a large potential in women, workers, and students and witnessed its power during the struggle for independence. It was imperative for her to continue the political education and training for these sections. As a result, she became a founding member of National Federation of Indian Women, the women's wing of CPI in 1954. However, she ended up leaving CPI in 1956 when Khruschev started the process of de-stalinization in the Soviet Union. Aruna’s mission to educate masses continued with her vision to carry Gandhi-Nehru legacy forward. She started a publishing house in 1958 and published a weekly journal ‘Link’ and newspaper ‘Patriot’. The writings in these publications focussed on discussions about different political ideologies in post-independence India, reflections on different aspects of the freedom struggle, and challenges of new India. It was during this period that she participated in the peace movement, in the movement of Afro-Asian solidarity and the Women’s International Democratic Federation. In addition to political education, she also recognized the power of organization for bringing dedicated youth together to bring a positive change in the society. She called for the development of cadres, a “corp of dedicated volunteers who would be willing to forgo lucrative careers and to work for the cause of national regeneration on a modest allowance.” Lessons from her life for our times Aruna’s arduous but extremely meaningful and rewarding journey teaches us many valuable lessons which are highly relevant for our times. The first thing it teaches is the importance of political education. Most of our life choices are directly or indirectly dictated by the capitalistic and individualistic tendencies of the society. The ideas of Western supremacy are fed to us from a very early age and our attempts to overcome this inferiority complex land us in a dangerous trap where all connections to our rich past and culture are severed. It’s our moral duty to understand the different ideological forces in our life and educate ourselves about the forces which defined our history. She strived to understand the suffering of the masses and worked for their upliftment throughout her life. Her life inspires us to commit ourselves to big causes. She was born and married in a privileged household but she chose the rigors of the underground life over the comfort of luxuries. It inspires us to reflect on our choices and how they affect the society around us. Her revolutionary spirit, social reformation ideas, sacrifice, and idealism inspires us to bend our lives towards a purposeful striving. It’s only by knowing such role models and following their teachings that we can assert our true identity and reclaim our dignity. Bibliography 1. Fragments from the past: Selected Writings and Speeches of Aruna Asaf Ali Swati Chaudhary is a postdoctoral fellow at the University of Texas at Austin.
0 Comments
 China has become a topic of conversation the world over whether you look in the pages of the New York Times, the Financial Times, The Hindu or the Rajasthan Patrika. Interpretations of its political system and its democratic value are highly one sided in media outlets. The western media and intellectuals, as well as its allied outlets in Asia and Africa, want to paint the Chinese people as victims of an authoritarian state, and deny the existence of rich debates and civil life within China. Here we have compiled a list of books that offer an understanding of Chinese history, its political system and thought, and its current meteoric rise on the world stage. These are works that attempt to study China on its own terms, independent of Western propaganda and racist rhetoric.
History of the Chinese Revolution
by Jahan Choudhry  This year there was political turmoil in the heart of imperialism as the ruling elite struggled to continue their war policies while new possibilities for a multipolar world were seen in the continued rise of Russia, China, the struggle for sovereignty on the African continent and even the FIFA World Cup. A serious reckoning with this year’s events reveals new possibilities for the world order to move into a more progressive direction. Midterms in the US: Escalating Crisis November 2022 saw the US midterm elections. Held every two years (marking the halfway point of a four year presidential term), it is usual for the party holding the White House to lose seats. Polls prior to the elections were predicting a “red wave” in favor of the opposition Republican Party. The election results bucked many established trends. Biden’s historic low approval rating did not lead to the expected disaster. While the Republicans picked up respectable gains, including a record amount of minority voters and a record number of Black Republicans elected to the US House in a century, it was far from a Democratic Party wipeout. However, this better than expected performance is linked to severe voting irregularities. For the second time since the 2020 election, mail in ballots played a major role and NGOs and trade unions were mobilized by the Democratic Party to encourage mail in ballots in their favor. A nexus of well funded pro-Democratic NGOs engage in this process of “ballot harvesting” and “ballot curing” to “help” voters fill out ballots. This is unprecedented and has changed election dynamics in the US in harmful ways that we do not fully understand yet. The mainstream media itself tried to portray this as a defeat for the Trump movement. However, what the election and subsequent media narrative revealed is the Trump movement’s conflict with elites in both parties. Trump refused to back down in his challenge to the elites with a defiant speech announcing his candidacy for the 2024 presidential election in which he raised the issue of nuclear war and inflation among others. Trump’s campaign along with pro-Trump House Republicans promises to audit the Ukraine War spending will be an obstacle to the ruling elite’s war agenda. The ruling elite has anticipated this, with the lame duck Congress’s final spending bill, which gave Ukraine $40 billion in military aid, bringing the total amount of military aid to Ukraine since the start of the war to $100 billion which is more than Russia’s total 2022 military budget of $75 billion, and astronomically higher than average annual US spending on the Afghanistan war which was $217 million. Relatedly, maverick entrepreneur Elon Musk purchased the social media platform Twitter. Musk has promised to restore free speech to the platform which has been accused of suppressing dissenting voices on issues ranging from the Ukraine War to the Covid 19 pandemic. Musk has released a number of Twitter files exposing the collaboration of Twitter with powerful elements in the US deep state. Among Musk’s revelations about Twitter’s previous management has been the release of documents concerning Twitter’s collaboration with the FBI during the 2020 election to suppress tweets about the Hunter Biden laptop scandal as well as criticism of Dr. Anthony Fauci’s Covid policies. Musk’s revelations are fueling discontent about the 2020 elections and actions of the deep state in swaying its outcome. The public will likely be shocked by the level of deep state involvement in social media, especially as it pertains to the 2020 presidential election. Americans will see clearly that the election manipulation was to oust Donald Trump, a president opposed to military confrontation with Russia, and to engage in a war that will take money out of the pockets of the American working class. FIFA World Cup Qatar: Reflecting Multipolarity Fall 2022 marked the Fifa World Cup in the gulf emirate of Qatar. The decision to give hosting duties to the gulf nation was made in 2012 at a time in which the world was very different. Donald Trump was an eccentric reality show host, Russia had yet to be ejected from the G8, Xi Jinping was only the vice president of China and the people’s republic had yet to announce the Belt and Road Initiative. Fresh off a regime change operation in Libya, it is fair to say that Washington did not believe its hegemony would weaken so quickly. By this Fall, the collective West began a hysterical campaign against Qatar. Though Qatar’s record on labor rights, not to mention its historic partnership with the West, is not ideal, the Western media campaign was full of double standards. It seems the real fear was that a world cup in Asia would reflect an increasingly multipolar world. Morocco’s historic run became a phenomenon for fans in the Third World especially due to its successive upsets of Iberian giants Spain and Portugal in which fans referenced historic revenge for the Reconquista and Spanish inquisition. Despite the Moroccan kingdom’s pro-Western policies, the Arab-African team’s confidence on the pitch and displays of Islamic piety and familial affection won the hearts of darker humanity. The ubiquitous displays of Palestinian flags, including by the Moroccan team after wins, showed a strong Third World consciousness among players and fans. A spectacular final between a French team composed heavily of players of African descent and South American powerhouse Argentina sealed the most representative world cup ever. Despite racist coverage of Qatar’s “hijacking” of the award ceremony, the tournament was symbolic of the direction the world is moving in with the FIFA president himself pointing to the fact that Europe must apologize for 3,000 years for colonialism before condemning anyone else. China’s Continued Challenge While the US state delves deeper into a crisis of legitimacy, China’s state illustrated its consolidation via the 20th Party Congress. President Xi Jinping gave a comprehensive address covering the need for the development of socialism, civilizational rejuvenation, and peaceful co-existence and sovereignty. Coupled with this were Xi’s first two post-pandemic foreign trips to Uzbekistan for the Shanghai Cooperation Organization and to Saudi Arabia for a meeting with heads of Arab states. The SCO summit produced resolutions to encourage trade between member states in their own currencies. The Islamic Republic of Iran formally applied to join the grouping. This is significant given Iran’s 25 year treaty of friendship with China as well as its military assistance to Russia during the Ukraine war. Similarly it was reported that Saudi Arabia, Argentina, and Algeria applied to join BRICS, now tentatively renamed as BRICS+. Although November 2022 also marked the G20 summit in Bali, Indonesia it was notable most for its lack of coherence between Western and non-Western powers. The summit produced a face to face meeting between Biden and Xi as well as a tepid criticism of Russian operations in Ukraine. Commentators such as Pepe Escobar have noted the ways in which the G20 is hobbled by Western pressure and how BRICS+ with its new additions will serve as a more effective economic forum for non-Western nations. BRICS+ expands its heft with the addition of Saudi Arabia, responsible for nearly half the world’s oil production; Argentina, the second largest economy in South America after BRICS founding member Brazil; and Algeria, whose president reiterated his country’s continuing commitment to the New International Economic Order. It is also significant to note Lula Da Silva’s victory in the 2022 Brazilian presidential election due to Lula’s pioneer role in the establishment of BRICS as well as his public commitment earlier this year to establishing a pan-Latin American currency. It is in the context of all of this that one must analyze the recent protests against the hijab mandate in Iran and covid lockdowns in China. Though there may be real frustration in the minds of many of the participants, the pattern of recent protests supported by the Western media shows the likelihood of their being attempted color revolutions aimed at overturning or at least weakening uncooperative regimes. The Iranian or Chinese masses have nothing to gain from a regime change or even a regime weakening in the face of US imperialism’s policies in Asia. The anti-hijab protests have come in the wake of what Iranian authorities have alleged is Western disinformation about the death of Mahsa Al Amini. Chinese protests are happening at a time in which prominent intellectuals such as Jeffery Sachs have argued Covid 19 is a lab leak and in the same year in which Russia called for a probe into an alleged US funded bioweapons facility in Ukraine. In this context it must be remembered that scientists such as Joseph Needham in the Korean War that US and allied forces used biological weapons against Korean and Chinese troops and civilians. Saudi Arabia: A Turn Away from Western Imperialism? The US is doubling down on a strategy of organizing its allies around imposing a “price cap” on Russian oil in order to hit oil revenues for the Russian government. However, this is becoming difficult due to Saudi Arabia’s move away from its traditional alliance with the US as evidenced by its application to join BRICS+. Following Saudi Arabia’s application for BRICS+, Xi received a festive welcome in the kingdom’s capital. Commentators noted the contrast with the cold reception crown prince Muhammad Bin Salman afforded to US president Joe Biden earlier this year following his refusal to accept Biden’s request to increase oil production to reduce Russia’s strategic advantage in the current scenario. During the summit with Bin Salman and other Arab leaders Xi publicly called for moving China’s import of oil away from the dollar to the yuan. If this move is followed it will be devastating for the dollar’s role as a global reserve currency and will likely increase the economic crisis within the United States. This in contrast to 2014, prior to Bin Salman’s rise to power, Saudi Arabia increased oil production on the Obama administration’s direction in order to lower oil prices to hurt Russia, Iran and Venezuela. In contrast the current Saudi has coordinated with other OPEC+ members to cut oil production which means rising revenues for itself as well as the same US foes of Russia, Iran, and Venezuela. The last attempt by Saudi leadership to defy Western dictates on oil production was the 1973-74 Arab oil embargo in protest of Western support for Israel, which was followed by the assassination of Saudi King Faisal by his nephew in 1975. Though Saudi Arabia continues its multi-year war on Yemen with US support and continuing tensions with Iran, it is logical to ask how long this will be sustained given the kingdom’s embrace of China which is a close partner of Iran and Bin Salman’s own attempts to distance himself from the Biden administration. Fulfilling these moves by the Saudi leadership must necessitate moving out of coordination with US military strategy which would be welcome news to the people of Yemen. The Houthi leadership in Yemen has publicly advised Bin Salman to implement further cuts in oil production to pressure the West, despite being at war with the Saudi government. Africa: A Struggle for Sovereignty The world situation has had a great impact on the African continent as well. States are resisting Western infringement on their sovereignty in a way that can open up a path away from neocolonialism. For example, Washington is unhappy with Ethiopia’s prime minister Abhiy Ahmed, despite the fact that he won the Nobel Peace Prize for his work in normalizing the bitter relationship with neighbor Eritrea, for pursuing an independent foreign policy and transitioning Ethiopia’s state structure away from ethnic politics. The former ruling party, the Tigray People’s Liberation Front, failed to return to power following which the US supported an separatist insurgency by the TPLF in November 2020. The insurgency was put down by Ethiopian troops, possibly with Eritrean support. Despite the Ethiopian government’s success and peace treaty mediated by the African Union, the US goal is to maintain a wedge between Ethiopia and Eritrea to prevent peace and development in the Horn of Africa and to maintain AFRICOM troops in the region. Western media has also been on a campaign against the Central African Republic for its relations with Russia. The CAR’s president hired the Wagner group, a private military contractor from Russia, to regain territory lost to Islamist rebels simultaneously removing French troops from separatist regions. Western media is upset with the CAR president’s sovereign relationship with the Wagner group and Russia, his expulsion of Western forces, and his regaining the diamond rich countries territorial integrity. The Western media is also upset at similar examples of Russian influence in the West African nations of Burkina Faso and Mali with independent governments establishing relations with Russia as a counterweight to Western, especially French hegemony over their countries. It is in this context, as well as the refusal of the majority of African governments to condemn Russian actions in Ukraine in the UN, that the Biden administration held a US-Africa summit in December 2022 with the heads of 49 African states. Although Biden promised $55 billion in American commitments to Africa with the hopes of regaining ground lost to China, the New York Times reports that the African heads of state who attended are skeptical of the promises being fulfilled. This indicates Washington’s sense of desperation in losing hegemony over the African continent. African states, mired in various forms of neocolonial instability since the end of the Cold War, have the opportunity to regain sovereignty over their lands and pursue serious development to meet the needs of their citizens. The examples of Ethiopia, Eritrea, and the Central African Republic are evidence that African leaders are taking this historic shift seriously. Conclusion The end of 2022 shows the world moving closer to a just world order with a strengthening collaboration of states and social movements opposed to Western hegemony. From Russia to China to Africa and Latin America there is reason for optimism undergirded by a continued struggle. However, US war policy remains the greatest threat to humanity as evidenced by US policy in Ukraine, attempts to stir up conflict in the Taiwan straits and ongoing attempts at regime change and domination throughout the world. The US ruling elite is facing a crisis of legitimacy perhaps even greater than the US Civil War. Yet a growing basis of unity between a populist movement of the American people and the anti-imperialist forces in the world is becoming more possible. The new year will bring new challenges but this gives the forces of peace a direction for serious work. Jahanzaib Choudhry is a graduate student at Carnegie Melon University and a member of the Saturday Free School.
by Emily Dong 
 On the last two weekends of this past September, the Saturday Free School for Philosophy and Black Liberation celebrated its 10th anniversary in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, entitled “Knowledge and Recapturing the Revolutionary Spirit for Our Time.” The 10th anniversary spanned across the city, holding symposia on Martin Luther King Jr. and his uncompromising faith in the future of the American people; documentary screenings on James Baldwin and African revolutionaries such as Marien Ngouabi, Modibo Keita, Patrice Lumumba, Kwame Nkrumah, and Amilcar Cabral who, hand-in-hand with Asia, led a world struggle against colonialism and imperialism; panels dedicated to pedagogies for the moral, spiritual, and political education of youth and children; and a closing intercivilizational concert and tribute to heroes whose lives are an example to the youth. In a time of domestic and global crisis, where the actions of the American ruling elite pose an existential threat of nuclear war, the Saturday Free School’s 10th anniversary declared that now is the time of a heightened struggle of the American people to forge a new nation and a new people. What is happening in the U.S. is not what the Western media, intellectuals, or large parts of the so-called Left insist. The American people are not becoming more fascist and more white supremacist. There is an increasing crisis of legitimacy, where the American people do not trust their government to serve their interests, and the government is wholly ill-equipped to know which direction their people will head and how they will respond. These developments are positive and have revolutionary potential. It may not be clear to those outside of America that this country has a revolutionary tradition and history. The Saturday Free School’s 10th anniversary explained that America has had three revolutions, each of which has elevated the capacity of the American people, qualitatively changing them in the process: 1776, Civil War and Reconstruction, and finally the Civil Rights Movement. Today, we are on the cusp of achieving a new nation. Contrary to popular claims, this is not a counterrevolutionary moment. It is the opposite. The Saturday Free School considers today possibly a pre-revolutionary situation in America, ushering in a Fourth American Revolution that can complete the unfulfilled democratic goals of the Third American Revolution, the Civil Rights Movement. The 10th anniversary’s vision statement declares: Despite the uncertainty and chaos of the moment, we are at the beginning of a Fourth American Revolution. The central democratic goal of the Fourth American Revolution is to bring to actuality the yet unfinished goals of the Third American Revolution. To achieve Democracy and Peace, we as a nation must grasp the moral, spiritual and political values articulated by Martin Luther King Jr. Based on these values and the vision that inspired them, the people must take power. If we are to have a future, a new democracy anchored to the people and their aspirations must be established. A large advancement the Saturday Free School made in its 10th anniversary was putting forth a new theoretical framework which synthesizes W.E.B Du Bois and V.I. Lenin. It is Du Bois who offers us the necessary science and knowledge to recognize that there is a revolutionary process and essence in the United States. Leninism, the highest form of Marxism, is not enough on its own to help us understand America today and our path forward. Only a new synthesis of Du Bois and Lenin allows us to not only understand America’s past – its revolutionary history. But also to understand our present and any possible future. Thus, despite false “movements” pushed by the ruling class, and cynicism pushed by so-called progressives and leftists, it is clear to us that the American people are more united than ever not only in their discontent with the state but in their desire for and movement toward a new America – one where they can earn enough to retire and give their children a future, one where democracy guarantees peace, safety, and development. The American people have the capacity to achieve a new nation. It is not a question of whether they will do so; the 10th anniversary asserts that the American people are already in the process of emerging as a new people. We know this because there is a qualitative change in the American people from 100, or even 50, years ago to now. The Civil Rights Movement, defined by the ideas, philosophy, and vision of Martin Luther King, who we consider to be the Father of a New Nation, fundamentally transformed the American people. W.E.B. Du Bois explains in Black Reconstruction that during the Civil War, the white poor were unable to “look forward” – imagine beyond the aristocratic and existing systems which their economic position, identity, and existence had all depended on. They refused to join the masses of formerly enslaved black workers in creating a new society out of the ruins of the cotton kingdom. Many white workers responded violently, blaming black people for their low status, homelessness, and unemployment, and only knowing how to report their suffering to the government rather than organize. The recently freed African Americans were different. They self-organized, helped each other, armed with the deep belief in their destiny for freedom and democracy: "The most discouraging feature was the utter helplessness of the white community in the face of the terrible problem. Almost any thoughtful traveler could see that the majority of the whites were parasites, idlers and semi-vagabonds. According to Sidney Andrews, 'The Negro, as bad as his condition is,' said he, 'seems to me, on the whole, to accommodate himself more easily than the whites to the changed situation. I should say that the question at issue in the South is not 'What shall be done with the Negro?' but 'What shall be done with the whites?' (General Hatch, p. 143-4 of Black Reconstruction) Unlike the reconstruction period, today the white working class and poor are coming to understand that their suffering will never be alleviated by the powers that rule this country. Problems of the people are addressed when convenient and profitable to those in power, or to suppress the masses’ growing discontent. Today ordinary white Americans are understanding what King declared in his opposition to the Vietnam War: that the enemy of the American people are the intertwined evils of war, poverty, and white supremacy (and whoever upholds and profits from them). Like Henry Winston, former Chairman of the National Committee of the Communist Party USA said: “The oppressors themselves are never divided by color.” The only solution is a united struggle for a new society which serves the people. How could the American people not see the enemy today? Today the people experience the devastating fallout of a promise that they believe to have been broken but in actuality was never really given. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control recently announced this December that the average American’s life expectancy fell to its lowest since 1996 (76.4 years). Besides the Covid-19 pandemic, this large drop in life expectancy is blamed on a rapidly growing drug epidemic, in particular fentanyl addiction. Drug overdose deaths have jumped from 28.3 deaths per 100,000 people in 2020 to 32.4 in 2021. Most Americans are poor, and inflation has made basic necessities such as food, gas for cars, and heating oil so expensive that “rising wages” don’t mean net gain. Local governments have no effective solutions for rising violence in major U.S. cities. Homicide rates in rural America rose by 25% in 2020 (the largest increase since tracking data in the 90’s), while homicide rates spiked by 30% in metropolitan areas. A prosecutor in Arkansas said “she felt helpless. ‘I don’t know what to say, besides y’all stop killing each other.’” American neighborhoods may differ in their geographic location and racial makeup, but they share the same deep trauma. Martin Luther King was assassinated for speaking the dangerous truth that the American people, white and black, have everything to unite around and fight for during the Vietnam War to make America truly free. We see white people today asking why does my child have to die from drug addiction, suicide, unemployment, broken dreams, and unfulfilled promises by the government and state? Why is a country so rich and noble enough to send “aid” to Ukraine, and so democratic enough to lecture Russia and China on just governance and morality, so disinterested in finding my husband a job and giving my child an education let alone keeping them safe? These are the questions which challenge the legitimacy of the state, American democracy, and the existence of freedom in American society. These white workers in deindustrialized areas are not the backwards, white supremacists that the Western media insists them to be. They are the white people in the impoverished, deindustrialized parts of Pennsylvania, often living in their communities for generations, experiencing firsthand time pass by in America but life not getting much better. They are the workers who see fewer job opportunities in their communities and barely earn enough at the jobs available to provide for themselves and their children. I know women who choose to work just enough hours to count as a part-time employee, not because they don’t want to work more hours, but because they need to qualify for state health insurance. There are workers who call off sick, not because they are ill and can’t make it to work, but because they sometimes don’t have enough money to pay for the gas to drive to work. They call off sick out of embarrassment and because their supervisors tell them to budget better next time. Despite how much the media or woke ideology works overtime to convince people that white workers and black workers have little in common, to the point of demonizing the white workers and poor, white workers in upstate Pennsylvania are sociologically not that different from black workers of Philadelphia. Today, they share much in common: their threads of consciousness, discontents and sense of betrayal, their agreement that there is a deep crisis in the United States with implications for the world, and that there is undeniably a better, alternative future that we must win. Attended by and in partnership with the Church of the Overcomer, Church of the Crucifixion, Nation of Islam, and Mother Bethel AME, the 10th anniversary confirmed that the American people are more of one people than ever before. In fact, the main ideological white supremacists are the ruling class dedicated to dividing and neutralizing the American people in one of the greatest crises of legitimacy this country has experienced. The ideological white supremacists are the banks and corporations who promote Black Lives Matter and create “Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion” committees but are committed to keeping Americans poor. The ideological white supremacists are the nonprofit, labor union, and progressive leaders who hypocritically reinstitute a new form of the color line, spending their time and money on convincing the black, Latino, and Asian poor that the white poor are what’s wrong with America. Sadly, many alleged leftists and liberals are on board with this project of the ruling class. The real fascist is the consolidation of this country’s government, intelligence agencies, high finance, military industrial complex, and media, committed to pushing Russia, China, and North Korea to war by any means necessary. For what? So-called leftists claim that the history of America is the history of counterrevolution and that the U.S. state was not forged in a revolutionary anticolonial struggle but in its opposite – a struggle to consolidate slavery. The historian and scholar Gerald Horne, speaking from what he believes is the Left, advances a racist, anti-people, anti-working class, and anti-struggle thesis which gives the upper hand to the ruling class and its ideology. He does this at a time of perhaps the greatest political crisis in this country, containing the possibilities of a revolutionary democratic resolution of the crisis. There is a future for America. It is with the world’s people who are already embracing a new world order. The American people, too, are moving in joining humanity’s march forward – for themselves and their children. The Saturday Free School, which anchors itself in the people and in the Du Boisian thought, views the Black Proletariat, formerly enslaved, as the advanced guard of the multiracial peoples’ democratic peace and humanistic aspirations. Such a democratic remaking of American society and ultimately as envisioned by Martin Luther King Jr., the emergence of a new people who in fighting for democracy opens the door to the establishment of a socialist United States. It is our responsibility to join them. To nurture and protect the youth’s revolutionary potential, and to instill in them the confidence to love themselves, each other, and change the world. To inspire people to have, like Martin Luther King said, “an abiding faith in America and an audacious faith in the future of mankind.” Emily Dong is a union organizer in Philadelphia and a member of the Saturday Free School.
 by Nandita Chaturvedi Panipat is a small city. It is a city of commerce and poetry, of religion and textile. Dark faces, red faces, long Afghan noses and short stubby noses, tall lean sinewy men, short and stocky men, women dressed in energetic salwar kurtas and swathed in fuzzy maroon and mustard shawls. Their faces and hands are lined and creased with sunlight and toil. People in Panipat look familiar, and it really has little to do with their faces. In a corner of Panipat is the Haali Apna School opened in memory of poet and reformer Khawaja Altaf Hussain Hali Panipati. The director of the school is Ram Mohan Rai. It is a humble brick structure, sandwiched between two others, the school spilling onto the road strewn with cement and mortar. Inside is a large courtyard with light that streams in through a brick mesh ceiling. It is here that I met 200 of the most beautiful children of Panipat. They sat on a rug on the floor, all ages. Three year olds that looked like they were little more than bits and bobs of clay, climbing over their older brothers and sisters, facing the wrong way, crying out with delight and frustration. Eight and ten year olds with eager and beaming faces, not yet fully aware of the shadow of judgment and failure. The older children, young men and women, looked shy, conscious of themselves, aware of their long and spindly bodies, wary of our gaze. Together they were a sea of rough blue uniforms and brown hair. We were introduced to the students by Ram Mohan Rai as his ideological compatriots, friends who knew each other through ideas and a vision. They sang for us, the national anthem, and a prayer. The prayer was an all faith prayer, it started with a Vedic hymn, and then a verse from the quran, followed by a Sikh, Jain, Buddhist, Christian and a Hindu prayer. Their voices raised in unison, shrill and uninhibited. Their loud songs compelled us to join them, to be a part of their discipline. Then there was dancing, happy and free dancing. The young women imitated the steps of grown women, graceful in their slender movements. They ended by singing a ghazal by Faiz Ahmad Faiz, hum dekhenge, and shouts of a working people’s song, O worker, strive hard. They were a grand sight, youthful and exuberant in their strong music. I wanted to tell them, You don’t know this, but I love you. I want to give my life to you. I wanted to understand them on their terms. I wanted to know their anxieties and fears, their aspirations. I wanted to tell them how beautiful they were, those wonderful brown faces. I wanted them to know how intelligent and capable they were, no matter what grown people around them said. I wanted them to understand that older people were often broken by life, and what they said about them was really most often about themselves. I wanted to tell them, you will decide the future. I felt as though we were old friends, meeting after a painful separation, and that they recognized me, just as I knew them. We spoke with the young men and women after the assembly. They wanted to know, what is America like? How come Panipat is so dirty and how can we fix it? One young man asked, what is success? We asked them, what music do they listen to, which films do they watch? What work do they want to do? Do they use instagram? Our conversation moved in staccato, us speaking much more than them. They seemed reluctant to open up in the group, who knows when someone will use your vulnerability against you? Afterwards a few young women cornered me, hesitating at first. They were so happy to meet me, they said. I told them I was too. They blurted out many of their thoughts, my parents want me to get married, I am fifteen, I like to be in the city, village life is difficult, we want to be free, we want to be trusted enough to be allowed to go where we want, study what we want, how will society ever change, I don’t know how I’ll do in my exams. I told them of my own experience, so different from theirs. Some of the young men spoke to my comrade, so much on their shoulders. We want to be men, they seemed to be saying, to protect our young siblings, contribute to bearing our parents’ burden, but how? Study is difficult, but I want to make something of myself. Do you know what I should do? They are the children of workers. Their fathers and mothers work in garment factories, at construction sites and tea stalls. They are children of that India which was born in the villages where there is no work. They live between the slowness and clannishness of the village, and the speed and anonymity of the city. They are the youth that will define the world’s future. The West is a part of their consciousness, and they are taught of their inferiority early, yet, they do not aspire to be white or westernized. These are the young men and women that are striving for more, fighting for survival and struggling to assert that they are somebody. As we watched them sing their songs in the sun, we asked ourselves, what will happen to all that beauty? Their quest is long and full of meaning. Each of them, as individuals, represent the aspirations of our country as it matures 75 years after our struggle for freedom from bondage and slavery. As we become aware of ourselves as a nation of the poor, we will have to do right by these children of Panipat. Nandita Chaturvedi is a contributor to and editor of this journal. by Meghna Chandra  Declaration on the Establishment of a New International Economic Order, 1974 at the United Nations In his Nobel Prize acceptance speech, Dr. Martin Luther King expressed a profound optimism for the future of humanity. He spoke of how the Civil Rights movement was but one part of a zeitgeist of the darker nations moving towards a new world order. This new order would turn its back on conquest and move towards freedom and justice. He spoke of the contradiction of poverty alongside technological advancement, and called for wealthy nations to use their resources to “develop the underdeveloped, school the unschooled, and feed the unfed”. He spoke of the interrelation and interdependence of the rich and the poor in a single garment of destiny, and the indispensability of peace for the survival and flourishing of mankind. Dr. King delivered his speech in the same year that the darker nations came together to found the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) and the Group of 77. These African, Asian, and Latin American nations including Afghanistan, India, Indonesia, Ecuador, Ghana, Jamaica, Lebanon, Yugoslavia, Somalia, and Tanzania came together to fight for the development interests of the Global South. It has since expanded to 133 countries, comprising over 80% of world humanity and two thirds of UN membership. UNCTAD and the Group of 77 sought to transform the economic relations between the West and non-Western countries to a relationship of equality. They crystallized their demands for justice in the form of the resolution for a New International Economic Order. The Birth of a New World The New International Economic Order was a vision for a global economy planned for the needs of many, rather than the profits of few. The NIEO was founded after the close of the first UN Development Decade from 1960-1970, a decade that did not yield the outcomes developing countries hoped for. The darker nations realized they had to consolidate political independence with economic independence and use their collective leverage to rewrite the rules of the international economic system. On May 1st, 1974, the Group of 77 convened the Sixth Special Session of the General Assembly to study the problems of raw materials and development and to understand the common economic problems of the world community. Drawing upon the Charter of the United Nations which called for the economic and social advancement of all peoples, the declaration proclaimed a united determination to work for the NIEO based on “equity, sovereign equality, interdependence, common interest and cooperation among all States, irrespective of their economic and social systems”. The NIEO began its declaration in the framework of the struggle for national liberation and against the continuation of colonial domination, racial discrimination, apartheid, neo-colonialism, and growing international inequality. It pointed out the outsize impact of external crises on the developing world, and the need for the developing world to have a voice in the formulation and application of decisions that concern the international community. The NIEO stressed the interdependence of all nations, and called for international cooperation towards shared prosperity. The NIEO rooted itself firmly in the principle of sovereign equality of all states and the right to self-determination. The NIEO stood against imperialist destabilization like the 1973 coup in Chile after Allende tried to nationalize the copper industry. It firmly stated that transnational corporations had no right to interfere with the political processes of developing nation states and were subject to their regulation, and that nations had the right to adopt the economic and social system it wished without fear of discrimination. It underlined the right to nationalization and control over national resources. On the economic front, the NIEO demanded just and equitable relationships between raw materials exported by developing countries and goods imported by them from developed countries. It aimed to rebalance the terms of trade which were skewed badly in favor of developed countries, as the prices of raw materials declined relative to foreign imports, and the purchasing power of developing countries declined during the 60’s and 70’s. This was especially important because the imperialist world system has a vested interest in keeping raw materials cheap. Also, revenue from the export of raw materials could finance industrialization and human development needed to end dependency. The NIEO also demanded a reformed international monetary system that would finance development, and the right of developing countries to concentrate their resources for development. Finally, it called for the transfer of technology from developed countries to developing ones, and the creation of indigenous technology that would suit respective nations’ economies. Ultimately, the NIEO was a vision for a planned global economy based on simple but revolutionary principles. It was an indictment of the profoundly undemocratic colonial order. It envisioned a new order based on true democracy, that is, the right of each nation to determine its own future rather than being decided by a white minority. It took a stand against imperialist bullying and underlined the right of nations to use their resources for the good of their own people. It fought for the producers of raw materials and for their right to recover from colonial underdevelopment and industrialize according to their own needs. Finally, it argued for the interdependence of humanity and the moral duty of all people to end poverty and inequality and unleash the potential of all. Underlying the NIEO is the belief that sovereign nation states embody the victory of the anti-colonial struggle and will of their people for peace and development. Also underlying it is the belief that political independence is not the end of the anti-colonial struggle; formerly colonized nations must consolidate their political independence with economic emancipation. The darker nations realized they had to wield their collective strength as producers of raw materials to fight externally imposed dependency and backwardness. The Global Counterrevolution by the West The demands of the NIEO rang with such moral clarity that it was difficult for developed countries to attack it directly. Furthermore, as the number of liberated nations grew, the West was outvoted on the world stage. European statesmen like Willy Brandt and Olaf Palme joined the North-South Commission which advocated that the West remove trade barriers for developing countries, reform international institutions, and move towards disarmament. US-based think tanks like the Trilateral Commission started to speak of interdependence through peaceful cooperation, and advocated that some developing countries have a greater voice in international financial institutions. Even Henry Kissinger said his strategy towards the NIEO would be one of pragmatism and subversion, rather than blatant ideological opposition, and that “our basic strategy must be to hold the industrialized powers behind us and to split the third world”. In response, US politician Daniel Patrick Moynihan of the infamous “Moynihan Report” wrote an article in 1975 called “The United States in Opposition” coming to terms with the changing world order. He strongly opposed a strategy of appeasement to the third world. He deplored the “tyranny of a new majority” of developing countries laying claim to the wealth of industrial nations. He rejected the idea that imperialist and neo-colonial countries should be blamed for inequality and blamed formerly colonized countries for their own backwardness. He even suggested that some parts of the NIEO movement were not looking for redistribution but for “something ominously close to looting”. Black liberation fighter and Communist Party USA chairman Henry Winston drew a powerful comparison between Moynihan’s racist domestic policy and his racist international policy: "In his original report Moynihan denied the Black minority's rightful claim to political and economic equality in the United States by naming the Black community, not state monopoly capitalism, as the source of inequality. Now Moynihan denies the "third world" nations their rightful claim to political and economic equality by disavowing U.S. and world imperialism's responsibility for their present inequality". Moynihan’s racist victim blaming became mainstream thinking in the West by the 80’s with the election of Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher, and underlined the reactionary economic policy that undermined the movement for the NIEO. In the 1970’s, the US faced a crisis of wage stagnation and inflation, or stagflation. This was caused by the increasing military budget as well as rising oil prices. Western propaganda blamed inflation on oil producing countries for raising their prices in defiance of imperialist designs in the Middle East, but progressive forces argued that the weakening economy was the consequence of corporate oil monopolies and the contradictions of capitalism. Rather than cutting the military budget or cracking down on corporate oil monopolies, American technocrats implemented the Volker Shock to tackle inflation. This entailed limiting the nation’s money supply and raising interest rates, limiting liquidity. The Volker Shock led to negative growth, unemployment, and a debt crisis in the third world in which governments found the cost of their debt rising at the same time as their prices for commodity exports were decreasing. Developing countries’ exports as a share of the world trade declined sharply while commodity prices fell to 1930’s levels. The US reasserted economic power over the Third World through the negotiation of structural adjustment loans. These loans were made upon conditions that nations would reduce government budget deficits, lift state protections on imports and exports and devalue local currencies, and privatize state owned industries. The new order came to be known as “the Washington Consensus”. Ultimately, the Washington Consensus stood for the exact opposite of what the NIEO fought for. Instead of the right to choose their own system of production, it left countries to the dictatorship of international financial institutions. Instead of the right to nationalize natural resources, it forced nations to open their resources up for corporate plunder. Instead of financing development, international financing created more austerity and underdevelopment. Instead of scientific and technological advancement of the developing nations, it led to a brain drain of third world technicians. Instead of a monetary system accountable to the international community, it led to dollar hegemony. Instead of an indictment of imperialism and neocolonialism, it blamed developing nations for their own backwardness. The fall of the Soviet Union in 1991 created a world atmosphere of complete Western domination. The era of the Western hegemony spelled disaster for the developing nations, from successive bankruptcies of third world governments, the war in Iraq and Afghanistan, the establishment of AFRICOM, the ruin of Libya, and ultimately, the deferral of the anti-colonial dream. The Propaganda of History against the Third World Nation State The NIEO’s spectacular effort to uplift the majority of humanity has been ignored or undermined by the majority of scholars writing today. The writings of W.E.B. Du Bois can help understand this glaring omission and the correct way to understand this history. Du Bois entitled the last chapter of Black Reconstruction “The Propaganda of History”. He writes that despite the undeniable achievements of the freedmen, white historians wrote of Reconstruction as the collapse of civilization, and of blacks as ignorant, lazy, dishonest, and extravagant. They wrote propaganda rather than history in order to justify Jim Crow and the imperialist world system. Du Bois argued that the chief witness of Reconstruction, the emancipated slave himself, was barred from court. The same framework applies to the writing on the New International Economic Order. Western scholars echo Moynihan’s assessment, though in more politically correct terms. They speak about the “internal cracks” in the NIEO, like the conflicting interests of oil producing countries with oil consuming countries. One scholar says it was “a combination of the oil and debt crises of the 1970s as well as corruption and authoritarianism in the Third World”, along with widening inequality within nations, that led to the failure of the NIEO. In contrast, members of the Non Aligned Movement (NAM) laid the blame for the subversion of the NIEO squarely on the imperialist bloc. These nations struggled for unity and solidarity, and the sanctity of the nation state against imperialist destabilization. In a speech at the 34th Session of the UN General Assembly in 1979, NAM President Fidel Castro said that the actions of international financial bodies and private banks to raise interest rates and increase foreign debt amounted to financial suffocation and blackmail of developing nations. He pointed out the West used the price of energy to pit the developing world against one another, when in fact the corporate oil monopolies bore central responsibility. As he said, “transnationals simultaneously exploit producers and users, obtaining extraordinary and unjustified benefits from both of them, while at the same time wanting to blame developing countries, the oil exporters of the current situation.” He called for solidarity between oil producing and exploiting countries and that oil producer countries should use their funds to finance development. Finally, even while acknowledging that there are exploiters in poor countries, he emphasized that the fundamental problem of the non-aligned nations is neo-colonial destabilization of developing nation states. Ultimately, the NIEO did not fail. It is the scholars who have failed to write its true history because they lack the courage to identify the enemy of humanity’s progress. These scholars wear a “postcolonial” guise, but reveal themselves in their attack on the sovereign nation state, which remains the object of imperialist attack and agent of the NIEO. The Rebirth of Hope The irony of the NIEO is that the world order it challenged is in crisis today–not only from the outside, but from the heartland of imperialism. After decades of deindustrialization, austerity, and anti-labor trade agreements, the downtrodden Western working class rebelled. The Donald Trump presidency rejected technocrats by stopping the Transpacific Partnership (TPP), renegotiating NAFTA, and trying to decouple from global manufacturing to rebuild industry at home. Populist movements stood against “regime change wars” and foreign entanglements. The world situation is also changing dramatically. The rise of China represents an unprecedented economic challenge to Western hegemony. The Belt and Road Initiative, the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, and BRICS+ provide an alternative to Western financial institutions like the IMF and World Bank. Countries like Bangladesh, Ethiopia, Algeria, Venezuela, and even Italy have used Chinese financing to build infrastructure on much fairer terms than those of the IMF. Western propaganda cries “debt trap diplomacy” and “modern day colonialism”, but principled observers know that there is no equivalency between the centuries long cruelty of Western finance capital and the overtures of Chinese creditors. Developing countries are moving away from dollar hegemony, spelling cracks in the Western-dominated monetary system. Russia responded to Western sanctions by selling oil to India and China in rupees and yuan. Brazilian President Lula Da Silva ran and won his election on the promise of creating a new currency in Latin America to be freed from the dollar. Saudi Arabia has applied to join BRICS and made gestures toward abandoning the petrodollar in favor of the petroyuan. With the weakening of the forces of greed, blackmail and destabilization, the time for a New International Economic Order has returned. At a speech at a meeting of BRICS countries, a group which Algeria will soon join, Algerian President Abdelmadjid Tebboune called for a renewal of the NIEO. He said, “economic underdevelopment from which several emerging countries suffer isn’t only an internal issue but derives its roots from an obvious imbalance in the structures of the international economic relations and the hegemony exerted by a group of countries… Breaking off with this vicious circle is achieved through the spirit, the principles and the objectives of… the Declaration for the Establishment of a New International Economic Order based on equity and equality in sovereignty, as well as on the mutual and integrated interests and cooperation between all the countries…” Like Dr. King, we live in times that merit great optimism. In remembering the history of the NIEO, we can understand the true nature of the world situation beyond the Western propaganda of history and grasp its potential for the majority of humanity. Meghna Chandra is a postdoctoral fellow at the Loyola University of Chicago Institute for Racial Justice and a member of the Saturday Free School.
|
CategoriesArchives
May 2024
|
RSS Feed
