HUMAN RIGHTS & EQUALITY FOR ALL,FREEDOM & JUSTICE FOR PALESTINE, ZIMBABWE, BURMA, EVERY COUNTRY SUFFERING FROM WARS, DROUGHTS, STARVATION, MILITARY ADVENTURES, DICTATORSHIPS, POLICE STATES, RELIGIOUS OPPRESSION, HOMOPHOBIA, CENSORSHIP & OTHER OBSCENITIES.INTERNATIONAL ASYLUM SEEKER SUPPORT
A BLOG SITE, "BLOGNOW" COLLAPSED IN 2009, SO USE THE GOOGLE SITE SEARCH ENGINE
ll road users should pay for the roads they use and it is appropriate for electric vehicle (EV) owners to pay their fair share. However, the proposed EV road tax is unfair on several levels (‘‘Pallas zaps electric cars with road charges’’, 22/11).
It fails to account for the benefits of EVs to society, such as reduced health costs attributable to pollution-related illness and costs of mitigation of the effects of climate change. It beggars belief that a state that has just endured a climate emergency-related catastrophe would decide to introduce legislation that would increase the risk. It ignores the fact that the fossil-fuel energy is already subsided to the tune of $1480 for every Australian per year.
It will mean that Victoria will be one of the few places in the world with not only minimal EV incentives but actual disincentives. Without adequate incentives to buy EVs and without stringent fuel efficiency standards, Australia has become a dumping ground for car manufacturers’ least fuel efficient, most polluting models. An EV road tax will only exacerbate this problem.
It would be far better to develop a more equitable system that ensures that all road users pay their fair share, not only of the cost of building and maintaining roads, but of the cost to society based on their choice of vehicle.
Michael Fink, Donvale
A mind-boggling decision
For a government with ambition to tackle pollution and climate change, Tim Pallas’ decision to follow South Australia’s questionable lead and tax electric cars is mind boggling.
Why would you tax the one form of transport technology that can produce zero emissions? The ACT has said it will offer zero interest loans, stamp duty exemptions and two years of free registration for EV buyers, yet in Victoria we plan to place a new tax on not polluting?
Nowhere else in the world (not even Donald Trump’s America) are EVs the subject of a special tax. Our failure to encourage the uptake of EVs means we will be the dumping ground for old polluting cars while manufacturers send their new and cheaper EVs to more welcoming shores. Mr Pallas needs to reconsider this damaging proposal before budget night.
Guy Abrahams, Richmond
We need leaders, not dinosaurs
So Tim Pallas thinks drivers that are not filling up their vehicles with petrol are not paying their way . This would have to go down as one of the most short-sighted political statements in recent memory, perhaps to be quoted in the future as one of the prime examples of misguided policy as climate change stares us in the face.
Drivers of petrol cars (me included) are not paying our share of the costs associated with the emissions they produce. I guess for a short time earlier this decade we were, but Tony Abbott saw that idea off. Sure, electric vehicles can indirectly produce emissions because of the generation source, but because of the high efficiency of electric motors, even a car run on coal-fired power is less polluting than a petrol one. A properly constructed price on carbon-based fuels would account for this.
Australia is set to become the dumping ground for vehicles that car manufacturers cannot sell in advanced markets. Take a look at Volkswagen’s websites for European countries for example – the new electric range is promoted front and centre. Boris Johnson (Conservative, UK) would think the Victorian government is “bonkers”.
We need leaders, not dinosaurs.
Alex Judd, Blackburn North
Compromising a good record
The Andrews government’s move to slap a new tax on electric vehicles is bizarre. While claiming to be a leader on climate action and clean energy, the Victorian Treasurer seems intent on creating barriers to clean technology uptake.
While European countries embrace government incentives for electric vehicles, the Andrews government’s good record on clean energy and climate action is now looking severely compromised.
Unemployment for black South Africans is worse today than before 1994
By Ayal Belling• 12 November 2020
Photo: Flicker
On Thursday, Stats SA released its latest Quarterly Labour Force Survey.
The record numbers of unemployed should send a shock through our system
and compel an immediate reconsideration of our economic policy. The
toll on poor people is now unbearable.
South Africa is literally not working. Thenumbers out on
Thursday suggest that a recovery is barely being staged. At 14.7
million, the number of people employed in the country remains far below
even the disastrously low level of 16.4 million just before Covid-19 hit
South Africa. To put this in perspective, there are 39.2 million people
aged 15 to 64 in the country (the “working age”). Between July and
September of this year, only 37.5% of them were in work. This is barely
more than half the world average.
South Africans, particularly black working-age South Africans, are less employed today than in 1994.
The narrow or strict unemployment
figure sits at 30.8%, the highest on record, exceeding even the first
quarter of 2020 figure of 30.1%. However, this alarming rate does not
capture the full picture. There are still 10% (1.7 million) fewer jobs
in the country than in January to March of this year.
To be classed as strictly unemployed,
you must have actively looked for work over the past month. The number
of people who have completely given up looking for work has increased by
2.7 million since before lockdown.
Only 543,000 jobs have returned to
the market of the 2.2 million lost since April. Informal workers such as
traders, own-account workers, domestic workers and those in
micro-enterprises, who engage in the most survivalist and
entrepreneurial activity in the country, accounted for 292,000 of the
returning jobs. However, as the most financially vulnerable group, there
are sadly still 16% fewer people employed in this way than in the first
three months of 2020.
How unemployment impacts on the poor
Ntsikelelo Msweswe, a 36-year-old volunteer at the Gugulethu branch ofOrganising for Work
(OfW), the unemployed movement I am associated with, says that the
“lockdown came and made things worse for me as I have to sit at home and
wait for NPOs [non-profit organisations] to help us to have food”.
Despite feeling “very helpless”, Msweswe says that, “I would love to do
something for people with criminal records … to share the skills and the
energy I have towards working.”
OfW, which launched in 2018, does
grassroots community organising to alleviate unemployment. It has
branches in some of the highest unemployment areas of Cape Town.Its model is to organise unemployed people to run their own branches that support people in their search for work.
The branches – run for free by
unemployed volunteers in public libraries – also push for better
treatment of jobseekers and act as communal spaces that make searching
for work a little less solitary. They are in a sense free job centres
connecting unemployed of all ages, education levels, abilities and
criminal records directly to employers from where they live.
Msweswe, as well as many other volunteers and members of OfW,has been involved in local organising efforts likeCape Town Together that arose in response to the pandemic. More than ever, government failure in South Africa hasplaced the burden of alleviating poverty and worklessness on individuals.
Thomas Piketty, a French economist
regarded as the world’s foremost expert on inequality, describes South
Africa as an extreme case of an “inequality regime”. In his latest book,Capital and Ideology,
he lays out in detail how inequality regimes around the world result
from choices made by the political classes – choices that are never as
forced by circumstance as they are later portrayed.
Disgracefully, inequality in South
Africa, along with unemployment, has worsened since the end of
apartheid. Piketty, as well as many local economists, will tell you that
the choices made since 1994 were made instead of many other competing
and feasible options. For example, the choice by the ANC in the first
two years of democracy to scrap rather than carry out the Reconstruction
and Development Programme (RDP) – the cornerstone pledge of their 1994
national election campaign – haunts us today.
Fast-forward 26 years and President
Cyril Ramaphosa speaks of an Economic Reconstruction and Recovery Plan
that promises some of the housing, infrastructure and manufacturing of
the RDP. The past two and a half years of his speeches have contained a
relentless recycling of economic plans that are never realised,dead or inadequate.
They make it hard not to see him as anything more than aBaghdad Bob, a farcical character promising victory in the face of catastrophic destruction.
The unemployed members of OfW are best placed to know how empty his words are.
Millicent Kamase, a 39-year-old
member of OfW’s Site B Khayelitsha branch, summarises them well when she
says that his promise of 800,000 public jobs “will never happen. We’ve
been voting for years and are still unemployed.”
Ramaphosa’s recovery plan and
R500-billion stimulus were revealed last month in the National
Treasury’s Medium-Term Budget Policy Statement to be, in reality, a
reduction in spending over the next three years through regressive
austerity. For an excellent summary of the “puffery and confusion” of
Ramaphosa’s plans and Treasury’s defunding of them, read Duma Gqubule’sdetailed and investigative analysis.
What appears not to occur to the president nor to his finance minister, Tito Mboweni, is that there are other options.
For example, a new-money stimulus and
an infrastructure-led jobs programme which actually creates jobs and
builds infrastructure that supports and reaches the poor. Their choice
to go for austerity in the midst of the worst economic crisis since the
Great Depression is the worst of all possible options.
Comparable economies such as Brazil
and poorer ones, such as India, which have higher public debt than South
Africa, have massively increased their spending and debt to cover the
cost of the pandemic.
Not only is the national government’s
approach stalling the South African economy, tax collection and job
creation, but the cost of the pandemic is also being placed
disproportionately on the country’s poor in the form of worklessness, a
reduction in public investment and contraction of basic services in
health and education.
City of Cape Town hoards while people starve
Of course, it is not only failures at
the national level that hold back job creation and make job seeking
even more gruelling, discouraging and unaffordable than it needs to be.
The City of Cape Townapproved its budget
in June this year, during the darkest days of lockdown, retaining
R4.6-billion as surplus in 2020/21, R6.2-billion in 2022/23 and
R5.4-billion in 2023/24.
It is an extreme indictment of the
hypercapitalist, socially aloof city council and its executive not to
direct these funds towards, for example, public employment, township
infrastructure and free public Wi-Fi.
As I write, the city’s public
libraries, virtually the only sites of free public Wi-Fi in poorer areas
and the sites of OfW branches, are still operating unnecessarily
restrictive lockdown policies.
Life was hard before Covid-19 for
unemployed South Africans. The paltry R350 per month that will continue
to reach a minority of those not working until January next year, pales
in comparison to lost income related to the pandemic.
As Mnyamezeli Sibunzi, a 26-year-old
member of OfW’s Langa branch, puts it: “Finding work now is something
that I wish, I even dream about… I’ve never been so broke in my life.” DM/MC
Ayal Belling is a founder of the
unemployed movement Organising for Work. He previously worked in finance
and technology in London and Cape Town. He can be contacted at ayal@ofw.org.za.
Kendall Lovett and Mannie de
Saxe holding the Lesbian and Gay Solidarity banner at an 'Out of Iraq'
rally for peace, Melbourne, 2005, photograph by John Storey, courtesy
Australian Lesbian and Gay Archives.
Article courtesy of Di Minnis and Ken Davis from First Mardi Gras.
Sadly justa few short weeks after turning 98,78er Kendall Lovett has passed away. Ken is survived by his partner of 27 years, Mannie De Saxe.
Ken was a tireless activist and campaigner for LGBTQI, refugee and human rights. Every demonstration that Gay Solidarity Group, later Lesbian and Gay Solidarity, organised from the late 70s onwards had Ken’s placards, banners, slogan vests or people-shaped placards – all inhis distinctive calligraphy.
Ken was a lovely supportive colleague in the Gay Solidarity Group (GSG),which organised the first Mardi Gras and coordinated the massive Drop The Charges campaign that followed.
Ken joined GSG after the first Mardi Gras in 1978, and was arrested in the August demonstration in Taylor Square. Often during Mardi Gras parades and demonstrations, Kendall was waiting on alert with bail money ready. Ken stayed active in GSG, later renamed Lesbian and Gay Solidarity into the 2000s, after he and Mannie moved to Melbourne.
Ken had been active in Gay Liberation after he returned to Sydney from the UK in the late 1960s, and took part in the 1972 demonstration outside St Clement’s Anglican Church at Mosman after they had dismissed Peter Bonsall-Boone from staff. Kendall’s main political activism prior to GSG in 1978 was in a resident actiongroup saving Woolloomooloo from developers, with the support of the Builders’ Labourers Federation Green Bans in the early 1970s.
Ken was very active at the time of the
nationalist bicentenary in 1988, helping organise a big queer contingent
in the First Nations mobilisation, around the slogan “200 years of
oppression and bad taste.” He was involved in Enola Gay, the peace and antinuclear activist group, and founded “Inside Out” a network supporting gay and lesbian prisoners. Ken was one of the people in GSG who was very involved with international solidarity. He sustained a long correspondence with anti-Apartheid gay activist Simon Nkoli when he was in prison in South Africa on treason charges.
In the early 1980s Ken and GSG were active in organising around inclusion of homosexuality in the NSW Anti-Discrimination Act, in demanding removal of the anti-buggery law and in responding to the rise of the Christian Right. Just prior to American Jerry Falwell’s visit in 1982, Kendall and Leigh Raymond registered the name, Moral Majority,and used it to campaign against Fred Nile and Falwell.
Ken also supported the Gaywaves radio program on 2SER FM over many years. He provided a weekly news bulletin – GRINS (Gay Radio Information News Service) – sometimes as a collective effort, but mainly as a one-man band, week in and week out. This was circulated to other lesbian and gay media across the country.
Ken was a key member of the Sydney collective of Gay Community News
(1980-82) and the organising body for the Sixth National Conference of
Lesbians and Homosexual Men in Sydney (1980). He was also a
correspondent to gay newspapers overseas and the International Lesbian
and Gay Association (ILGA).
In October 1982 Ken and GSG supported Roberta
Perkins and the Australian Transsexual Association (ATA), in staging the
first transgender protest in Australia, in Manly. The protest was held
to challenge a judgement against two transwomen, who a Magistrate had
ruled were men. In response the NSW Attorney-General said that
‘Attorneys-General of the six states had committed to new legislation to
recognise the validity of sex changes’.
In 1985 the Sisters of Perpetual
Indulgence canonised him, in recognition of his extensive gay activism,
as St Kendall the Constant.
Kendall formed a relationship with Mannie De Saxe, a revolutionary socialist and Jewish anti-Zionist activist from South Africa, after they met in GSG. Both of them remained active in lesbian and gay, and other social justice,
causes. They volunteered to help people with AIDS, and founded SPAIDS,
which planted a memorial grove of trees in Sydney Park.
After retiring from his job at Choice magazine, Ken moved to Newcastle. Twenty years ago, Ken and Mannie moved to live together in Melbourne and in recent years had practical home support from otheractivists and friends.
Ken and Mannie have been very engaged in the Australian Lesbian and Gay Archives. They
have made big contributions to the struggle to improve services for
older lesbian, transgender and gay people. Ken and Mannie were featured in the “2 of Us” in Good Weekend magazine on March 10, 2007. But they were very angry in 2009 when the government, as part of a path to marriage equality, decided they were a couple and cut their pensions, even though they had been independent tax payers.
Ken and his long-term support for LGBTQI and othersocial change struggles will be sadly missed.
Our condolences to Mannie and to Ken’s many friends.
Kendall Lovett (L) and Mannie De Saxe (R) holding the Lesbian and
Gay Solidarity banner at an 'Out of Iraq' rally for peace, Melbourne,
2005.
Photo by John Story, courtesy Australian Lesbian and Gay Archives.
Vale Kendall Lovett
6.10.1922 – 21.10.2020
A life of activism for social justice
We are sad to report that a few weeks after turning 98, 78er Kendall Lovett has passed away. Ken is survived by his partner of 27 years, Mannie De Saxe.
Ken was a tireless activist and campaigner for LGBTIQ, refugee and human
rights. Every demo from the late '70s onwards had Ken’s placards,
banners, slogan vests or people-shaped placards – all in his distinctive
calligraphy.
Ken was a lovely supportive colleague in the Gay Solidarity Group, which
organised the first Mardi Gras and coordinated the massive Drop the
Charges campaign that followed.
Ken joined GSG after the first Mardi Gras in 1978, and was arrested in
the August demonstration in Taylor Square. Often during Mardi Gras
parades and demonstrations, Kendall was waiting on alert with bail money
ready. Ken stayed active in GSG, later renamed Lesbian and Gay
Solidarity into the 2000s, after he and Mannie moved to Melbourne.
Ken had been active in Gay Liberation after he returned to Sydney from
the UK in the late 1960s, where he was part of the move for homosexual
law reform. He took part in the 1972 demonstration outside St Clement’s
Anglican Church at Mosman after they had dismissed Peter Bonsall-Boone
from staff. Kendall’s main political activism prior to GSG in 1978 was
in a resident action group saving Woolloomooloo from developers, with
the support of the Builders’ Labourers Federation Green Bans in the
early 1970s.
Ken was very active at the time of the nationalist bicentenary in 1988,
helping organise a big queer contingent in the First Nations
mobilisation, around the slogan “200 years of oppression and bad taste.”
He was involved in Enola Gay, the peace and antinuclear activist group,
and founded “Inside Out” a network supporting gay and lesbian
prisoners. Ken was one of the people in GSG who was very involved with
international solidarity. He sustained a long correspondence with
anti-Apartheid gay activist Simon Nkoli when he was in prison in South
Africa on treason charges.
In the early 1980s Ken and GSG were active in organising around
inclusion of homosexuality in the NSW Anti-Discrimination Act, in
demanding removal of the anti-buggery law and in responding to the rise
of the Christian Right. Just prior to American Jerry Falwell’s visit in
1982, Kendall and Leigh Raymond registered the name, Moral Majority, and
used it to campaign against Fred Nile and Falwell.
Ken also supported the Gaywaves radio program on 2SER FM over many
years. He provided a weekly news bulletin – GRINS (Gay Radio Information
News Service) – sometimes as a collective effort, but mainly as a
one-man band, week in and week out. This was circulated to other
lesbian and gay media across the country.
Ken was a key member of the Sydney collective of Gay Community News
(1980-82) and the organising body for the Sixth National Conference of
Lesbians and Homosexual Men in Sydney (1980). He was also a
correspondent to gay newspapers overseas and the International Lesbian
and Gay Association (ILGA).
In October 1982 Ken and GSG supported Roberta Perkins and the Australian
Transsexual Association (ATA), in staging the first transgender protest
in Australia, in Manly. The protest was held to challenge a judgement
against two transwomen, who a Magistrate had ruled were men. In response
the NSW Attorney-General said that ‘Attorneys-General of the six states
had committed to new legislation to recognise the validity of sex
changes’.
In 1985 the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence canonised him, in
recognition of his extensive gay activism, as St Kendall the Constant.
Kendall formed a relationship with Mannie De Saxe, a revolutionary
socialist and Jewish anti-Zionist activist from South Africa, after they
met in GSG. Both of them remained active in lesbian and gay, and other
social justice, causes. They volunteered to help people with AIDS, and
founded SPAIDS, which planted a memorial grove of trees in Sydney Park.
After retiring from his job at Choice magazine, Ken moved to
Newcastle. Twenty years ago, Ken and Mannie moved to live together in
Melbourne and in recent years had practical home support from other
activists and friends.
Ken and Mannie have been very engaged in the Australian Lesbian and Gay
Archives. They have made big contributions to the struggle to improve
services for older lesbian, transgender and gay people. Ken and Mannie
were featured in the “2 of Us” in Good Weekend magazine on 10
March 2007. But they were very angry in 2009 when Social Security, as
part of a path to marriage equality, decided they were a couple and cut
their pensions, even though they had been independent tax payers.
Ken and his long-term support for LGBTIQ and other social change
struggles will be sadly missed. Our condolences to Mannie and to Ken’s
many friends.
- Tribute written by Diane Minnis and Ken Davis, the Co-Chairs of
First Mardi Gras Inc., a community association for 78ers. 78ers.org.au.
Ken Lovett Presente! Immense legacy for all with a passion for justice
Alison Thorne 25 October 2020
Ken
Lovett and Mannie De Saxe marching with the Lesbian and Gay Solidarity
banner at a Melbourne refugee rights rally, 23 June 2002. Photo by
Alison Thorne.
The
world is a better place today, thanks to Kendall Lovett. Ken exuded
enormous energy and creativity as a community campaigner and movement
linchpin who identified with all who are exploited.
Ken
died peacefully at home in Melbourne, where he lived with his partner
of 27 years, Mannie De Saxe. He was 98 and remained active until the
end, responding to emails and sharing political news.
My
earliest memories of Ken were in 1980. I’d travelled to Sydney to
participate in the 6th National Homosexual Conference, which Ken helped
organise. He was living in a small townhouse in the inner suburb of
Woolloomooloo. His home also housed boxes of material, carefully
organised for archiving — a lifelong tradition, which the Australian
Lesbian and Gay Archives will long thank him for.
Ken
was proud of his working class community. He’d been an activist with
Residents of Woolloomooloo (ROW), which won the crucial support of the
Builders Labourers Federation. A green ban, in place for two years, from
1973 til 1975, prevented the suburb from being bulldozed, gentrified
and replaced with skyscrapers.
The
‘70s was an explosive period for Gay Liberation. Ken was in the thick
of it from the get-go. After the arrests at the first Mardi Gras in
1978, Ken joined Gay Solidarity Group (GSG). He was arrested during the
tumultuous campaign to drop the charges, which followed. The movement in
this period was militant, liberationist and multi-issue. This was
reflected in the refrain that rang out through the streets of
Darlinghurst to “stop police attacks, on gays, workers, women and
blacks.”
Ken was renowned for his banners which always had a bold message. Photo by Debbie Brennan.
GSG
drew the connections between LGBTIQ oppression and the struggles of all
the oppressed — this solidarity was at the core of Ken’s activism. He
was a voluminous letter writer. This included writing to gay prisoners,
through the prisoner support group, Inside Out. Ken had a long
correspondence with Tseko Simon Nkoli — the Black, gay, anti-apartheid
activist who was diagnosed with HIV while in jail on treason charges.
Nkoli became internationally known in the ‘90s when he went public about
his sexuality and HIV status at a time when the stigma in South Africa
was immense.
Ken’s
commitment to challenging racism ran deep. He joined many marches to
stop Aboriginal deaths in custody. In 1988, he rejected the gross
nationalistic jingoism and joined up with Gays Against The Bicentenary.
On January 26, “Invasion Day,” First Nations people from across the
continent led the 40,000-strong March for Justice, Freedom, and Hope.
Marching alongside Ken and the huge queer contingent with my FSP
Comrades is one of my enduring memories.
In 1993, after Ken retired from his job with the consumer advocacy magazine, Choice,
he moved to Newcastle. Then early this century, Ken relocated with
Mannie to Melbourne. He had met Mannie, a socialist and anti-Zionist
Jew, through GSG. In Melbourne the pair continued organising, carrying
on the traditions of marching against war, in support of Palestine and
for refugee rights. Ken made many unique banners, signs and a host of
innovative protest artefacts. He was also a prodigious photographer. In
the days before digital photography, when documenting rallies was more
costly, he captured and carefully labelled many hundreds of photos.
Gay male nuns from the Sydney Order of Perpetual Indulgence at a
Women’s Abortion Action Campaign street march, 7 September 1991. Photo
by Ken Lovett.
As well as
being regularly out on the streets, Ken was also a movement builder,
contributing a great deal behind the scenes. This included community
media. He was part of the Sydney Collective for Gay Community News.
For 10 years, from 1983 to 1993, he produced the Gay Radio Information
News Service (GRINS). He researched and wrote the scripts for this
weekly gay news service — recording the bulletin each week and packaging
and mailing cassette tapes around the country to be played on community
radio stations, including 3CR in Melbourne and 2SER in Sydney.
Ken’s
passion for feminism was legendary. He supported reproductive justice,
frequently challenging anti-choice bigots. He also went nose to nose
against the right wing, embracing many creative tactics. He was part of a
duo that registered the trade mark Moral Majority in Australia ahead of
a visit by Jerry Falwell in the ‘80s. He then designed a selection of
bright yellow Moral Majority ™ stickers declaring support for a pantheon
of radical causes! He also had a long record of protesting the vile
Fred Nile!
He was a
mainstay of the Sydney Park AIDS Memorial Grove (SPAIDS), and after
moving to Melbourne, he helped push Northern Melbourne Institute of TAFE
into re-opening the AIDS Memorial Garden at Fairfield.
Ken Lovett at home in Woolloomooloo in the 80s. Photo by Alison Thorne
Ken
supported the work of the Freedom Socialist Party since our Australian
Section was founded. He was one of the first Australian subscribers to
the Freedom Socialist newspaper and kept his subscription current for almost 40 years. He wrote a piece for the Freedom Socialist Bulletin
about the need to resist discrimination sparked by HIV/AIDS, and we
published many of his photos. Ken never missed donating to our regular
fundraising drives. Ken was always pleased to get behind socialist
projects — the month he died, he and Mannie had a large sign outside
their house, advocating a vote for the socialist candidate in the local
council election.
We
celebrate the life of Ken Lovett as one very well lived. He will be
missed by many, but especially Mannie. His legacy will long continue to
provide inspiration for all who have a passion for justice.
Ninety-eight
years old and Ken Lovett hadn’t stopped! Ever the activist, while
facing terminal cancer, Ken made sure he posted his voting papers for
Victorian Socialists’ candidate Omar Hassan in the 2020 local council
elections. He died just a few days later, politically committed to the
end.
Ken lived through economic
depression, world war, McCarthyism and then the hope of the late 1960s
and early 1970s, when revolutionary struggles swept the world. This life
experience made him a passionate campaigner in the fight against
oppression.
In the mid-1960s, when
living and working in London, he joined the Albany Trust, an
educational, counselling and research organisation that worked alongside
the Homosexual Law Reform Society. Law reform was partially won in the
UK in 1967, but the Albany Trust continued its valuable work.
When Ken returned to
Sydney, he threw himself into the still very new LGBTI+ activism,
joining the lively Homosexual Law Reform group there. In 1972, when
Peter Bonsall-Boone was dismissed by the Church of England after he came
out on ABC TV’s Chequerboard program, Ken joined the rally outside the church. It was to be the first of many protests in Sydney, Newcastle and Melbourne.
When the Sydney suburb of
Woolloomooloo, where Ken lived, came under threat from corrupt and
greedy developers, he co-founded the activist group Residents of
Woolloomooloo. Backed by the New South Wales Builders Labourers
Federation, he was part of the world-famous battle to save this
important working-class suburb. He was also a keen environmentalist and
anti-nuclear activist, joining protests as part of the LGBTI+ Enola Gay
group, named after the US plane that bombed Hiroshima on 6 August 1945.
As the LGBTI+ activist
movement grew, he was involved in groups such as the Gay Solidarity
Group, later Lesbian and Gay Solidarity, which organised the first Mardi
Gras in 1978. Hundreds, including Ken, were arrested in Sydney during
1978 in the demonstrations for gay rights and Ken was heavily involved
in the successful Drop the Charges campaign arising from these protests.
The charges were eventually dropped, but the campaign also won the
right to protest without a permit in New South Wales, a victory not just
for LGBTI+ people, but for everyone.
From 1978, Ken was involved in countless
groups, protests and campaigns, including the Sydney-based Gay Radio
Information News Service in the Gaywaves program on Radio 2SER and the
Gay Community News Sydney Collective. His stand against right-wing
homophobes led him to join the Coalition Against Repression which
organised protests during the visit of British homophobe Mary
Whitehouse.
In the 1980s, he and others campaigned
against another visiting homophobe, this time the US Christian preacher
Jerry Falwell. As his friend Ian McIntyre recalls, they cheekily
registered the name Moral Majority—a name previously associated with
Falwell and other right-wing homophobic, sexist groups. Under that name,
they put out badges, T-shirts, banners, stickers and press releases,
all proclaiming that the Moral Majority supported gay rights, abortion,
women’s and trans’ rights and so on. Ken himself was a strong supporter
of women’s rights.
He was anti-racist and an
internationalist to the core. He had a long-term correspondence with
Black, anti-Apartheid, gay activist Tseko Simon Nkoli after he was
jailed in South Africa on treason charges. Nkoli
became known around the world in the 1990s, when he went public about
his sexuality and HIV status at a time when the stigma in South Africa
was immense.
Ken was also involved with Inside
Out, an Australian gay prisoner support group, and marched to protest
Aboriginal Deaths in Custody. He was part of the big Gays Against the
Bicentenary contingent that joined the tens of thousands in Sydney on 26
January 1988 to protest Invasion Day. Then there was the Gay and
Lesbian Immigration Task Force NSW and Friends of the ABC that he was
involved in, and he was equally committed to Palestinian, refugee,
anti-war and other human rights causes.
In October 1982, Ken and the Gay
Solidarity Group supported Roberta Perkins and the Australian
Transsexual Association in staging the first transgender protest in
Australia. The protest was held to challenge a ruling that two
transwomen were men. In response, the NSW attorney-general gave an
assurance that all states had committed to recognising sex changes.
One of Ken’s abiding causes was
for people with HIV-AIDS, volunteering for and supporting two HIV-AIDS
garden memorials in Sydney Park and the Melbourne suburb of Fairfield.
More recently, and while not
himself wishing to marry, Ken was a strong supporter of the marriage
equality campaign, attending every Melbourne protest he could. He wrote
thousands of letters of protest, submissions to enquiries and often
designed and produced his own banners with his own distinctive writing
style and imaginative slogans.
Twenty-seven years ago, he met
his dearly loved partner Mannie de Saxe, a committed socialist,
anti-Zionist Jewish activist, a South African and fierce opponent of
that country’s apartheid regime. Together, they campaigned for so many
of these and other causes, for equal rights for all, including, more
recently, many contributions to improve services for older lesbian,
transgender and gay people.
We have all lost a committed
fighter for our rights, but one who has enriched the struggle and helped
give us the strength to keep on fighting.
◊
Liz Ross is a socialist activist and historian. She is the author of several books, most recently Stuff the Accord! Pay Up!, available from Red Flag Books.
Vale Kendall Lovett who passed away yesterday at 98. Condolences to Mannie and all others who knew and loved him. As a founding member of the Gay Solidarity Group/Lesbian Gay Solidarity, the Residents of Woolloomooloo Action Group, the Sydney Park AIDS (SPAIDS) Grove project, Gaywaves radio program, Gay Radio Information New Service (GRINS) and others Ken was in the thick of many political and cultural projects and struggles. His fine pen and signwriting skills saw him help create innumerable posters, flyers and banners, an example of which, with him in the middle, can be found below. We became friends about 12 years ago and my family appreciated the beautiful cards he wrote us on behalf of himself and Mannie, often adorned
with photos from the pair’s past.
Ken was one of the loveliest people I’ve had the fortune to know, a true gentle man. When I first met him, he and Mannie were involved in lobbying NMIT to maintain the Fairfield AIDS Memorial Garden that the TAFE had inherited when they took over the former Fairfield hospital site. Although only occasionally attending rallies by that time he kept up letter writing and lobbying work around gay and lesbian rights, seniors issues, environmental causes and more, pretty much up until the end.
I enjoyed hearing his memories of growing up and of gay life from the 1940s onwards. Gay Solidarity Group/Lesbian Gay Solidarity lived up to their name and for decades Ken attended rallies for just about progressive issue imaginable, always with a banner and always out and proud. He had many stories of cheeky and funny actions, including attending a counter-demo against anti-abortionists in 1978 where he carried cardboard cut outs of friends who couldn’t be there. They were subsequently trashed when he and many others were arrested. In the 1980s he was one of a group of radicals who registered themselves as the Moral Majority ahead of a visit from corrupt US evangelist Jerry Falwell. They put out various pro-GLBTIQ, pro-choice and other statements, stickers and t-shirts under the official name. He lived an incredibly full life, some of which is documented on his and Mannie’s website - http://www.josken.net/
Having reported the long, epic ordeal of Julian Assange, John
Pilger gave this address outside the Central Criminal Court in London on
September 7 as the WikiLeaks Editor’s extradition hearing entered its
final stage.
When I first met Julian Assange more than ten years ago, I asked him
why he had started WikiLeaks. He replied: “Transparency and
accountability are moral issues that must be the essence of public life
and journalism.”
I had never heard a publisher or an editor invoke morality in this
way. Assange believes that journalists are the agents of people, not
power: that we, the people, have a right to know about the darkest
secrets of those who claim to act in our name.
If the powerful lie to us, we have the right to know. If they say one
thing in private and the opposite in public, we have the right to know.
If they conspire against us, as Bush and Blair did over Iraq, then
pretend to be democrats, we have the right to know.
It is this morality of purpose that so threatens the collusion of
powers that want to plunge much of the world into war and wants to bury
Julian alive in Trumps fascist America.
In 2008, a top secret US State Department report described in detail
how the United States would combat this new moral threat. A
secretly-directed personal smear campaign against Julian Assange would
lead to “exposure [and] criminal prosecution”.
The aim was to silence and criminalise WikiLeaks and its founder.
Page after page revealed a coming war on a single human being and on the
very principle of freedom of speech and freedom of thought, and
democracy.
The imperial shock troops would be those who called themselves
journalists: the big hitters of the so-called mainstream, especially the
“liberals” who mark and patrol the perimeters of dissent.
And that is what happened. I have been a reporter for more than 50
years and I have never known a smear campaign like it: the fabricated
character assassination of a man who refused to join the club: who
believed journalism was a service to the public, never to those above.
Assange shamed his persecutors. He produced scoop after scoop. He
exposed the fraudulence of wars promoted by the media and the homicidal
nature of America’s wars, the corruption of dictators, the evils of
Guantanamo.
He forced us in the West to look in the mirror. He exposed the
official truth-tellers in the media as collaborators: those I would call
Vichy journalists. None of these imposters believed Assange when he
warned that his life was in danger: that the “sex scandal” in Sweden was
a set up and an American hellhole was the ultimate destination. And he
was right, and repeatedly right.
The extradition hearing in London this week is the final act of an
Anglo-American campaign to bury Julian Assange. It is not due process.
It is due revenge. The American indictment is clearly rigged, a
demonstrable sham. So far, the hearings have been reminiscent of their
Stalinist equivalents during the Cold War.
Today, the land that gave us Magna Carta, Great Britain, is
distinguished by the abandonment of its own sovereignty in allowing a
malign foreign power to manipulate justice and by the vicious
psychological torture of Julian – a form of torture, as Nils Melzer, the
UN expert has pointed out, that was refined by the Nazis because it was
most effective in breaking its victims.
Every time I have visited Assange in Belmarsh prison, I have seen the
effects of this torture. When I last saw him, he had lost more than 10
kilos in weight; his arms had no muscle. Incredibly, his wicked sense of
humor was intact.
As for Assange’s homeland, Australia has displayed only a cringeing
cowardice as its government has secretly conspired against its own
citizen who ought to be celebrated as a national hero. Not for nothing
did George W. Bush anoint the Australian prime minister his “deputy
sheriff”.
It is said that whatever happens to Julian Assange in the next three
weeks will diminish if not destroy freedom of the press in the West. But
which press? The Guardian? The BBC, The New York Times, the Jeff Bezos Washington Post?
No, the journalists in these organisations can breathe freely. The Judases on the Guardian who
flirted with Julian, exploited his landmark work, made their pile then
betrayed him, have nothing to fear. They are safe because they are
needed.
Freedom of the press now rests with the honourable few: the
exceptions, the dissidents on the internet who belong to no club, who
are neither rich nor laden with Pulitzers, but produce fine,
disobedient, moral journalism – those like Julian Assange.
Meanwhile, it is our responsibility to stand by a true journalist
whose sheer courage ought to be inspiration to all of us who still
believe that freedom is possible. I salute him.
Photograph Source: A street in Jenin, 2011 – Almonroth – Template:Hey – CC BY-SA 3.0
When the Palestinian actor Mohammed Bakri made a documentary about
Jenin in 2002 – filming immediately after the Israeli army had completed
rampaging through the West Bank city, leaving death and destruction in
its wake – he chose an unusual narrator for the opening scene: a mute
Palestinian youth.
Jenin had been sealed off from the world for nearly three weeks as
the Israeli army razed the neighbouring refugee camp and terrorised its
population.
Bakri’s film Jenin, Jenin shows the young man hurrying silently
between wrecked buildings, using his nervous body to illustrate where
Israeli soldiers shot Palestinians and where bulldozers collapsed homes,
sometimes on their inhabitants.
It was not hard to infer Bakri’s larger meaning: when it comes to
their own story, Palestinians are denied a voice. They are silent
witnesses to their own and their people’s suffering and abuse.
The irony is that Bakri has faced just such a fate himself since
Jenin, Jenin was released 18 years ago. Today, little is remembered of
his film, or the shocking crimes it recorded, except for the endless
legal battles to keep it off screens.
Bakri has been tied up in Israel’s courts ever since, accused of
defaming the soldiers who carried out the attack. He has paid a high
personal price. Deaths threats, loss of work and endless legal bills
that have near-bankrupted him. A verdict in the latest suit against him –
this time backed by the Israeli attorney general – is expected in the
next few weeks.
Bakri is a particularly prominent victim of Israel’s long-running war
on Palestinian history. But there are innumerable other examples.
For decades many hundreds of Palestinian residents in the southern
West Bank have been fighting their expulsion as Israeli officials
characterise them as “squatters”. According to Israel, the Palestinians
are nomads who recklessly built homes on land they seized inside an army
firing zone.
The villagers’ counter-claims were ignored until the truth was unearthed recently in Israel’s archives.
These Palestinian communities are, in fact, marked on maps predating
Israel. Official Israeli documents presented in court last month show
that Ariel Sharon, a general-turned-politician, devised a policy of
establishing firing zones in the occupied territories to justify mass
evictions of Palestinians like these communities in the Hebron Hills.
The residents are fortunate that their claims have been officially
verified, even if they still depend on uncertain justice from an Israeli
occupiers’ court.
Israel’s archives are being hurriedly sealed up precisely to prevent
any danger that records might confirm long-sidelined and discounted
Palestinian history.
Last month Israel’s state comptroller, a watchdog body, revealed that
more than one million archived documents were still inaccessible, even
though they had passed their declassification date. Nonetheless, some
have slipped through the net.
The archives have, for example, confirmed some of the large-scale
massacres of Palestinian civilians carried out in 1948 – the year Israel
was established by dispossessing Palestinians of their homeland.
In one such massacre at Dawaymeh, near where Palestinians are today
fighting against their expulsion from the firing zone, hundreds were
executed, even as they offered no resistance, to encourage the wider
population to flee.
Other files have corroborated Palestinian claims that Israel
destroyed more than 500 Palestinian villages during a wave of mass
expulsions that same year to dissuade the refugees from trying to
return.
Official documents have disproved, too, Israel’s claim that it
pleaded with the 750,000 Palestinian refugees to return home. In fact,
as the archives reveal, Israel obscured its role in the ethnic cleansing
of 1948 by inventing a cover story that it was Arab leaders who
commanded Palestinians to leave.
The battle to eradicate Palestinian history does not just take place in the courts and archives. It begins in Israeli schools.
A new study by Avner Ben-Amos, a history professor at Tel Aviv
University, shows that Israeli pupils learn almost nothing truthful
about the occupation, even though many will soon enforce it as soldiers
in a supposedly “moral” army that rules over Palestinians.
Maps in geography textbooks strip out the so-called “Green Line” –
the borders demarcating the occupied territories – to present a Greater
Israel long desired by the settlers. History and civics classes evade
all discussion of the occupation, human rights violations, the role of
international law, or apartheid-like local laws that treat Palestinians
differently from Jewish settlers living illegally next door.
Instead, the West Bank is known by the Biblical names of “Judea and
Samaria”, and its occupation in 1967 is referred to as a “liberation”.
Sadly, Israel’s erasure of Palestinians and their history is echoed outside by digital behemoths such as Google and Apple.
Palestinian solidarity activists have spent years battling to get
both platforms to include hundreds of Palestinian communities in the
West Bank missed off their maps, under the hashtag #HeresMyVillage.
Illegal Jewish settlements, meanwhile, are prioritised on these digital
maps.
Another campaign, #ShowTheWall, has lobbied the tech giants to mark
on their maps the path of Israel’s 700-kilometre-long steel and concrete
barrier, effectively used by Israel to annex occupied Palestinian
territory in violation of international law.
And last month Palestinian groups launched yet another campaign,
#GoogleMapsPalestine, demanding that the occupied territories be
labelled “Palestine”, not just the West Bank and Gaza. The UN recognised
the state of Palestine back in 2012, but Google and Apple refused to
follow suit.
Palestinians rightly argue that these firms are replicating the kind
of disappearance of Palestinians familiar from Israeli textbooks, and
that they uphold “mapping segregation” that mirrors Israel’s apartheid
laws in the occupied territories.
Today’s crimes of occupation – house demolitions, arrests of
activists and children, violence from soldiers, and settlement expansion
– are being documented by Israel, just as its earlier crimes were.
Future historians may one day unearth those papers from the Israeli
archives and learn the truth. That Israeli policies were not driven, as
Israel claims now, by security concerns, but by a colonial desire to
destroy Palestinian society and pressure Palestinians to leave their
homeland, to be replaced by Jews.
The lessons for future researchers will be no different from the
lessons learnt by their predecessors, who discovered the 1948 documents.
But in truth, we do not need to wait all those years hence. We can
understand what is happening to Palestinians right now – simply by
refusing to conspire in their silencing. It is time to listen.
A version of this article first appeared in the National, Abu Dhabi.
Torturing Assange: An Interview with Andrew Fowler
By John Kendall Hawkins
Drawing by Nathaniel St. Clair
“I love Wikileaks.”
– DJ Trump
“Can’t we drone him?”
– Hillary Clinton
Andrew Fowler is an Australian award-winning investigative journalist
and a former reporter for the ABC’s Foreign Correspondent and Four
Corners programs. and the author of The Most Dangerous Man in the World: Julian Assange and WikiLeaks’ Fight for Freedom.
This is an updated edition of his 2011 account of the rise and
political imprisonment of Assange. Much of that account explained how
Assange seemingly inevitably moved toward an adversarial positioning
against American imperialism abroad. He was a tonic for the indifference
expressed by so many ordinary Americans in the traumatic aftermath of
9/11 and the rise of the surveillance state. Boston Legal’s Alan Shore
(James Spader) seems to sum it up succinctly.
His updated version discusses the torture Assange is currently undergoing at Belmarsh prison in Britain. Here is a mut-see film regarding his torture.
His book also contains the latest on UC Global’s comprehensive spying
on Assange and his visitors at the Ecuadorian embassy in London in the
last year of his ‘refuge’ there. UC Global is a Spanish security company
hired to protect the embassy. It has since been revealed that they were
passing on data to American intelligence, presumably the CIA.
Certainly, Fowler implies such a connection in his updated book, citing
two Assange hacking breaches of US government servers, each of which,
Fowler writes, the CIA went berserk, as if they’d been hit by a foreign
enemy. In the last (new) chapter of the book, “The Casino,” Fowler
describes how outraged the CIA was when Assange published their hacking
tools, known as Vault 7, on Wikileaks: “Sean Roche, the deputy director
of digital innovation at the CIA, remembers the reaction from those
inside the CIA. He said he got a call from another CIA director who was
out of breath: ‘It was the equivalent of a digital Pearl Harbor.’” Below
is my recent interview with the author.
* Note: Upon his release of the Pentagon Papers, Daniel Ellsberg was referred to as “the most dangerous man in the world.”
What is the up-to-date status of Julian’s health?
It seems quite clear that there is an attempt by the British and US
administrations to destroy Assange, either driving him to suicide or a
psychological breakdown. He has had a lung condition for a number of
years, which has not been properly treated, and is clearly suffering
from huge stress. During his last court appearance over a video link,
there were long pauses between his words, even when speaking his own
name.
When Chelsea Manning was imprisoned at Quantico she spent 23
hours per day in solitary confinement and was stripped naked at night.
How does Julian’s treatment at Belmarsh compare? Manning’s treatment was
said to be an attempt to coerce her into ratting on others, including,
presumably Assange. What do you see as the ultimate purpose of Assange’s
treatment? And how does it amount to torture?
The ultimate purpose of Assange’s treatment is a warning to others.
Particularly other journalists. It’s the modern day equivalent of
crucifixion, putting heads of enemies on spikes, or public hangings. The
torture of Assange involves two main areas: being confined to three rooms
in a single building for 7 years, and unable to leave without fear of
arrest and extradition to Sweden which was playing an underhand role to
allow Assange to be extrdited to the US. As the UN rapporteur on torture
Nils Meltzer wrote that never in the two decades he had spent
investigating war crimes had he ever seen such a ganging up of so many
powerful nations against one individual. It is a testament to Assange’s
mental strength that he resisted at all.
No effort was made by the Swedes to “question” Assange once
he was lifted from the Ecuadorian Embassy, suggesting that their purpose
all along was, as Assange and his defenders averred, a pretext for
hand-over. You’d think there was some way to nix the bail jump charge
given this likelihood of intergovernmental collusion. Thoughts?
There are no outstanding allegations for Assange to answer in Sweden.
They were always only allegations, rather than charges. It is important
to understand that if the Swedish prosecutors had charged Assange, they
would have had to reveal the evidence of the ‘offences’ to his lawyers
upon which those charges were based. And the evidence was not only thin,
it pointed to a conspiracy. So it was possible to keep Assange in the
embassy, while the UK prosecuting authority worked at ways of getting
him extradited to Sweden. There seems little doubt that the plan all
along was to use Sweden as a holding pen for Assange as the US applied
for his extradition. It is possible he could take his case to the
European Human Court of Human Rights, but the Brexit decision, makes
this area extremely murky.
Can you provide more details about the UC Global, the Spanish
company brought into the Ecuadorian Embassy to spy on Assange? Do we
know more about what data that they gathered? Has a more definitive
connection to the CIA been made? Has any further effort been put into
place to quash the extradition process based on this fact alone? (He
could never expect a fair trial back in the US if such surveillance and
potentially framing were done.)
UC Global not only recorded hundreds of conversations inside the Ecuadorian embassy, but also photographed the phones [and] their location identifying IMEI numbers,
passports and other documents of everyone who visited Assange in the
embassy between 2015 and 2018. It’s my understanding that the case
running in Madrid at the moment against the former CEO of UC Global,
David Morales, who is charged with illegally spying on Assange and his
lawyers (a specifically illegal act in Europe) will be used by the
Assange legal team to argue that the US extradition case should be
thrown out. It is my understanding that if any material gathered spying
on Assange and his lawyers is used, or even known about, by those
involved in the US prosecution – the charges must be withdrawn. There
has been no definitive connection to the CIA. The closest I have managed
to make the link is to the State Department and White House
confidantes.
Snowden’s, Permanent Record
is one of the best reads I’ve had in quite some time. You could argue
that his revelations are equally, if not more significant, than what
Assange offers up through Wikileaks. Where do you stand on the
difference of value, if any, between Wikileaks and the Snowden
revelations?
The main differences are: Assange is a recipient of information which
as a journalist he publishes. Snowden is a source. When it comes to
quantifying the different values of their work, Assange mainly provided
information and analysis, whereas Snowden exposed intelligence gathering
systems. In the source-journalist relationship, they both need each
other. Both exposed the activities of a war-making machine. Without
Assange it is unlikely that we would have had Snowden. It was WikiLeaks
that opened up the public on a truly massive scale to a secret world of
horror and deception which until then had been largely hidden from view.
For Snowden’s part he brought the argument home that it wasn’t just
foreign governments who were being spied on, it was the Americans
themselves. They both played a significant and at times overlapping role
in revealing the truth about the world we’re in.
Assange and Snowden seem to have had their differences over
the years. Snowden describes in PR how he chose his nickname: “The final
name I chose for my correspondence was ‘Verax,’ Latin for ‘speaker of
truth,’ in the hopes of proposing an alternative to the model of a
hacker called ‘Mendax’ (‘speaker of lies’)—the pseudonym of the young
man who’d grow up to become WikiLeaks’s Julian Assange.” (p.193)
There was irritability there between them, and Snowden didn’t trust
Assange with his life (fearing that a dump, rather than a
journo-processed revelation system, would close off future whistleblower
arguments). His first choice had been the NYT, but their
suppression of James Risen’s 2004 pre-election piece on STELLARWIND
enraged him and he ended up going with Greenwald et al,
instead. Snowden suggests character differences between the two, but on
the other hand Assange really pissed the US government off when he sent a
woman to rescue Snowden from Hong Kong. Some of us thought Obama was
going to shoot down Bolivia One with president Evo Morales on board
because Obama thought Snowden was onboard.
I see in Permanent Record Snowden says he decided not to go
with WikiLeaks because of a change of policy to publish material
unredacted, or ‘pristine’ as he calls it. Not sure why he says this
because WL policy is to redact. [Here’s Snowden’s explanation.] WL did put all the Iraq/Afghanistan/Cablegate documents online un-redacted, but only after David Leigh of the Guardian
published the password — and the material was already out on the
internet. I’ve never asked Assange this, but there is another Mendax. In
the 1920s an Australian science fiction writer Erle Cox’a Mendax was an
eccentric inventor. Mendax experiments with ‘matter transmission’
‘invisibility’ and ‘extracting gold from seawater’. There is a tension
between the two, no doubt about it. Snowden still errs on the side of
secrecy and Assange on the side of publication, possibly the difference
between an ex-intelligence agent and a journalist.
Covid-19 seems to be the wild card in the deck, vis-a-vis
Assange’s extradition to the US. If he doesn’t contract the illness in
prison, then his extradition next year could prove problematic — courts,
protests, circus. How do you think the virus will affect the legal
proceedings? Do you think he’ll be better off under Biden’s DOJ? Or
worse, given the perceived threat to the Democrats he represents? Do you
see a way for his defense to exploit the DNC/Russia hack dishonesty?
Not sure how Covid will impact anything much, other than slowing down
the process, which in itself is extremely problematic for Assange. He’s
already been in prison or under house arrest (including the embassy)
for nine years. I’m not sure what it takes to embarrass the UK
government into refusing the extradition request, but the new indictment
is surely turning the political prosecution into a farce. The US now
wants to re-arrest Assange to wrap in a new indictment because the first
one was likely to fail. In past years it might have been possible for
the UK Government to reject this deceptive or incompetent behaviour by
the US, but Britain is a spent force now on the world stage, and the US
can do whatever it wants.
As for Biden’s DoJ, he’s called Assange a ‘high-tech terrorist’
and has recently said though he favours freedom of the press it should
not compromise US national security. Not much hope there.
One hope Assange has is the possible pardoning of Snowden. It plays
to Trump’s ‘deep state’ argument that the intelligence agencies are out
of control and were involved in the fabrication of Russian collusion.
[Here’s Snowden referencing his work for the “Deep State”]
Assange’s work has exposed CIA atrocities (which supports Trump’s
position) but WikiLeaks has also revealed evidence of war crimes by the
US military, an establishment so admired by his core supporters. I fear
that a Snowden pardon, much as I would personally welcome it, would only
further isolate Assange.
If Assange goes down, do you see a future for journalism in
the world — given America’s so-called leadership in this area, by way of
the holy first amendment, but with dwindling global newspapers. The Guardian, WaPo and the NYT
remain the only papers of record available in every international
terminal in the world — and sales falling for them, the fight over
what’s real news and what isn’t underway (a proxy war to control the
narrative), how do you see the fight for journalism ahead?
If Assange goes down, it will be the third domino. First, the rising
power of executive government; second, the destruction of the, at times,
countervailing power of the mainstream media, including public
broadcasters who draw their political power from their audiences (and
thus to a certain extent are independent). The internet has savaged
media budgets which has weakened the overall media environment and
empowered governments to attack and cut public broadcasters. Assange who
used the internet as a weapon for journalism provided a way to
re-energise old media structures — engage readers and challenge
executive government authority. He provided a way to democratise
journalism. It is the reason he is such a threat to the hegemony of the
US led five eyes nations, who until recently in a uni-polar political
and strategic world, have ruled supreme.
I sometimes marvel at the effect on journalism and even
constitutional issues in America that Australians have had. Early on,
Assange seems to have declared war on the DoD and, later, the US State Department; John Pilger has, with his interview with the CIA “rogue”
Duane Clarridge, exposed the full fuckin hubris of American foreign
policy; and, Fox News has so dumbed down the political conversation in
America that it may be heading for a fate like that depicted in Idiocracy. Any thoughts?
There’s a strange contradiction in Australia. Australians are very
conservative, and cautious, but part of the national identity is tied to
the notion of anti-authoritarianism, dating back to the nation’s
convict past. The degradation of the mainly poor, transported to
Australia from the UK and Ireland two centuries ago for often minor
crimes, created a bedrock of antagonism against the ruling ‘elites’.
This long history of dissent in Australia has produced outstanding
journalists such as Pilger and Assange, Wilfred Burchett and Philip
Knightly. I can think of no better way to explain how Assange and
Murdoch became two of the most influential global media figures in the
past century. Murdoch rose to power as an anti-establishment figure in
the UK and Assange has done the same on a global basis.