The Neofascist Colonial Agenda

What's the Agenda of the Neofascists and Neocolonialists?

Deo Adjuvante, Non Timendum

“With God as My Helper, I Have Nothing to Fear”

Understanding the Neofascist Colonial Agenda: African Solidarity, Global Oppression, and the Struggle for Black Liberation

By Dr. Kevin J. Turnquest-Alcena
Nassau, NP, The Bahamas

Introduction

In today’s rapidly changing world, it is more important than ever for the people of Africa, the Caribbean, and the wider diaspora to understand the dangers of the neofascist colonial agenda.  Although classical colonialism officially ended in the twentieth century, its strategies have evolved into more subtle and sophisticated systems designed to control weaker nations through political marginalization, economic dependency, and cultural domination.

While slavery and direct colonial rule may belong to the past, new forms of oppression have emerged under the labels of progress, globalization, and development.  History has shown us repeatedly that when societies fail to learn from the struggles of the past, they are destined to repeat them.  Our ancestors fought courageously against slavery, colonization, and systemic injustice, believing they were securing freedom for future generations.  Yet today, many of the same forces that once divided and exploited humanity are resurfacing in modern forms.

As Malcolm X warned, “If you’re not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people who are being oppressed and loving the people who are doing the oppressing.”  The manipulation of information has become one of the most powerful tools of modern domination.

African Solidarity and Pan-Africanism

Across Africa and the diaspora, the call for solidarity has always been central to the fight for liberation.  Pan-Africanism, pioneered by leaders such as Marcus Garvey, Kwame Nkrumah, and W.E.B. Du Bois, taught that people of African descent across the globe share a common history and a shared destiny.  It called for unity between Africa, the Caribbean, and global Black communities as a strategy to resist oppression and reclaim sovereignty.

Modern institutions such as the African Union (AU) and CARICOM are building on this vision.  The African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) aims to increase intra-African trade, reduce dependency on foreign markets, and strengthen Africa’s bargaining power on the global stage.  At the same time, CARICOM has launched a Reparations Commission to demand accountability for centuries of exploitation.

In recent years, CARICOM and the AU have begun coordinating their diplomatic efforts at the United Nations to ensure that reparations, debt justice, and equitable development remain central to the global agenda.  Pan-African solidarity is not symbolic. It is a practical strategy for empowerment.  By pooling economic resources, harmonizing policies, and strengthening regional alliances, African and Caribbean nations can create collective bargaining power in a global system that is still stacked against them.

Neofascism and the Global Power Struggle

Neofascism represents a dangerous resurgence of authoritarianism, systemic control, and concentrated power.  It does not always resemble the fascism of the early twentieth century. Instead, it has adapted to modern contexts, embedding itself within global policies, financial systems, and cultural institutions.

Although many African and Caribbean countries are politically independent, their economies remain tied to powerful global institutions such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Bank, and the World Trade Organization (WTO).  These institutions promote policies that often deepen dependency rather than strengthen self-reliance.  Unequal trade agreements, restrictive loans, and one-sided investment deals are now tools of control designed to maintain global hierarchies.

As Kwame Nkrumah warned, “Neocolonialism is the last stage of imperialism.” Many nations appear politically free but remain economically constrained, unable to shape their destinies without external approval.

The Resurgence of Neo-Colonialism and Neo-Classism

In recent decades, there has been a clear resurgence of neo-colonialism.  While direct colonial rule has ended, new systems of control now operate through debt dependency, exploitative trade agreements, privatization policies, and resource extraction that benefit external powers far more than local populations.

At the same time, neo-classism has become a growing internal challenge. A small elite, often aligned with foreign interests, gains wealth and political influence while the majority face limited access to opportunities, poverty, and systemic inequality.

This resurgence is dangerous because it creates a double oppression. Nations are pressured externally by neo-colonial systems and internally by widening class divides. Those in power are sometimes co-opted into maintaining these global hierarchies, weakening resistance movements and fragmenting solidarity.

Neo-classism also deepens existing social divides, including elitism, privilege, and exclusionary access to education and economic advancement. Without addressing these structural inequalities, the vision of Pan-Africanism and Caribbean integration will remain incomplete.

Systemic Inequality and Global Dependence

Global economic systems continue to sustain dependency in developing regions.  International financial structures often favor large economies while limiting smaller nations’ ability to compete on equal terms.  Resource-rich regions still struggle with unfair contracts that undervalue exports, while illicit financial flows drain billions annually that could otherwise fund healthcare, education, and infrastructure.

As Marcus Garvey stated, “A people without the knowledge of their past history, origin, and culture is like a tree without roots.”  Understanding the systemic nature of these challenges is the first step toward dismantling them.

The Caribbean Experience: Discrimination in Latin America

There is also a growing concern over how Caribbean citizens, especially Jamaicans, are treated when traveling to certain Latin American countries.  Many are initially welcomed through tourism campaigns and diplomatic agreements that appear friendly on the surface.  Yet, when they arrive, some face discrimination, hostility, or are even asked to leave despite following immigration rules.

This is not an isolated issue but part of a broader neocolonial pattern.  These nations create the appearance of openness and regional partnership, yet they engage in practices that exclude and marginalize Caribbean citizens.  It reflects deeper systemic biases disguised as immigration control.

CARICOM has a responsibility to act.  As a regional body, it must defend the dignity and rights of its citizens wherever they travel.  Stronger diplomatic negotiations, fairer travel agreements, and policies that ensure equal treatment across Latin America are necessary.

True Caribbean integration cannot exist if CARICOM members remain silent on these injustices.  Solidarity requires collective action to challenge discriminatory practices and ensure that Caribbean citizens are respected and protected.

External Destabilization and Regional Instability

African and Caribbean nations continue to face destabilization through geopolitical manipulation.  From economic sanctions and predatory loans to covert political interference, powerful actors often undermine independent leadership to secure strategic advantages. Conflicts are fueled, governments are destabilized, and economies are weakened in ways that make external intervention appear inevitable.

Modern strategies rarely rely on military invasion. Instead, influence spreads through financial dependency, trade manipulation, and security agreements. Achieving true sovereignty requires recognizing these patterns and creating regional strategies to resist them.

Self-Reflection: Internal Barriers to Progress

While external systems shape much of the struggle, internal challenges cannot be ignored.  Corruption, mismanagement, and weak governance in many African and Caribbean nations deepen poverty and inequality.  Transparency International’s 2024 data shows Sub-Saharan Africa scored lowest globally on the Corruption Perceptions Index, highlighting major accountability gaps in institutions.

Brain drain also weakens regional development.  Skilled professionals often leave in search of better wages and working conditions, depriving their home countries of vital talent.  While diaspora remittances are important, sustainable growth depends on creating conditions that encourage skilled workers to remain, return, and invest.

How Do We Fight Against These Things

The first step in fighting neocolonial and neofascist systems is awareness.  We must expose these structures and reveal the forces that continue to undermine sovereignty and development.  Many operate quietly, disguised behind trade policies, debt programs, and diplomatic partnerships.  By bringing these practices into the open, we weaken their influence and empower communities to act.

As Frederick Douglass said, “Power concedes nothing without a demand.  It never did and it never will.”  Progress requires confronting systems directly rather than accepting the narratives we are given.

Education must be prioritized.  Schools and communities across Africa, the Caribbean, and the diaspora need to teach accurate histories of colonization, exploitation, and resistance.  Without knowledge of the past, we cannot defend our future.

Economic independence is equally critical.  Initiatives like the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) and CARICOM integration strategies must be accelerated to strengthen intra-regional trade and reduce dependency on external markets.

CARICOM also needs to defend Caribbean citizens more forcefully, especially in cases of discrimination when traveling within Latin America.  Stronger diplomatic representation and legal protections are essential.

Externally, reforms are needed in global financial institutions and trade systems to ensure fairness.  Exposing exploitative contracts, restructuring unfair debt, and closing channels of illicit financial flows are critical to breaking cycles of dependency.

Internally, greater transparency, strong governance, and community-driven development are necessary.  Corruption, neo-classism, and elite capture must be addressed so that resources benefit populations rather than narrow interests.

Finally, regional unity is our most powerful defense.  A united Africa, Caribbean, and diaspora can speak with one voice, resist manipulation, and negotiate equitable partnerships on the global stage.

Conclusion

The neofascist colonial agenda threatens to reverse decades of progress by replacing open conquest with systemic dependency, financial manipulation, and cultural domination.  However, the power to resist lies within collective action, informed leadership, and regional solidarity.

As Malcolm X stated, “You can’t separate peace from freedom because no one can be at peace unless he has his freedom.”  Through education, exposure, economic cooperation, and unity, African and Caribbean nations can reclaim sovereignty and chart their own path toward development and dignity.

The future depends on vigilance, collaboration, and a refusal to accept systems that exploit, divide, and silence us.

August 21, 2025

Source / Comment

US VISA Restrictions on Complicit Politicans and their Family Members involved in the Cuban Government's Coercive Forced Labor Export Scheme

USA Visa Restrictions on African, Cuban, and Grenadian Government Officials Involved in the Cuban Regime’s Coercive Forced Labor Export Scheme

Today, the Department of State took steps to impose visa restrictions on African, Cuban, and Grenadian government officials, and their family members, for their complicity in the Cuban regime’s medical mission scheme in which medical professionals are ‘rented’ by other countries at high prices and most of the revenue is kept by the Cuban authorities.  This scheme enriches the corrupt Cuban regime while depriving the Cuban people of essential medical care.

The United States continues to engage governments, and will take action as needed, to bring an end to such forced labor.  We urge governments to pay the doctors directly for their services, not the regime slave masters.

The United States aims to support the Cuban people in their pursuit of freedom and dignity and promote accountability for those who perpetuate their exploitation.  We call on all nations that support democracy and human rights to join us in this effort to confront the Cuban regime’s abuses and stand with the Cuban people.

Source

The Sacred Honour of Emancipation

Celebrate Emancipation

Deo Adjuvante, Non Timendum

“With God as My Helper, I Have Nothing to Fear”

Appreciating Our Emancipation

By Dr. Kevin J. Turnquest-Alcena
Nassau, NP, The Bahamas

Emancipation is a profound reflection on the brutal enslavement of Africans forcibly brought to the Americas.  We must never forget the arduous journey of our ancestors, as history remains a vigilant reminder of our resilience and collective strength.  Today, racism and fascism loom ominously, rearing their heads in ways reminiscent of past oppressions.  Many individuals harbor intentions rooted in repeating the dark chapters of history, aspiring to once again subjugate Black people.

In confronting such threats, we must steadfastly remember the significance of emancipation—where we originated, where we stand today, and where we must venture tomorrow.  We must remain acutely aware that slavery was a mere six generations past, yet its scars remain palpable in our contemporary societies.  Nations throughout Latin America are persistently entangled in structural apartheid, exemplified by classism and systemic racism.

“A people without the knowledge of their past history, origin, and culture is like a tree without roots.” – Marcus Garvey

Garvey highlights the vital importance of historical and cultural education for identity and resilience.

Exposing the neo-colonial agenda rooted in racism and the geopolitical exploitation of resources, especially within our ancestral continent, Africa, is imperative.  We must decipher and dismantle the mechanisms perpetuating racism, economic exploitation, and resource extraction.

“Freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed.” – Martin Luther King Jr.

King emphasizes the necessity of active resistance to systemic oppression.

The pursuit of self-reliance through education and strategic partnerships with nations in Asia and Africa is vital.  Realizing autonomy requires concerted efforts and robust collaborations globally.  “Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world.” – Nelson Mandela

Mandela’s words underline education as essential in dismantling oppression and fostering equality.

We must acknowledge that hate and racism persist, stemming largely from inherited colonial governance systems characterized by political clientelism.  Such governance stifles Caribbean development, compelling urgent reform.

“If there is no struggle, there is no progress.” – Frederick Douglass

Douglass argues that genuine advancement arises from persistent effort and resistance.

Democracy inherited by default necessitates deliberate reform, including significant improvements to our prison systems.  Proactivity in preserving and sharing our ancient history is vital.

“You can’t separate peace from freedom because no one can be at peace unless he has his freedom.” – Malcolm X

Malcolm X clarifies that peace fundamentally requires freedom as its cornerstone.

Our emancipation celebration must impart a profound sense of responsibility to younger generations, emphasizing enthusiasm, unity, and brotherhood.  Recognizing our ancestral origins in the motherland enriches our cultural appreciation and underscores our historic contributions to humanity.

“History has shown us that courage can be contagious and hope can take on a life of its own.” – Michelle Obama

Obama inspires us to harness courage and hope in confronting ongoing challenges.

We, descendants of profound innovators and creators—pioneers of mathematics, astrology, chemistry, physics, and inventors of the wheel—must reclaim our rightful place in history.

“I am no longer accepting the things I cannot change.  I am changing the things I cannot accept.” – Angela Davis

Davis encourages us to actively challenge and alter unjust realities.

History must cease the systematic reclassification erasing our truths.  Affirming the true identities of historical figures such as Jesus and Moses as Black individuals is integral to cultural authenticity.

“Never forget that justice is what love looks like in public.” – Cornel West

West underscores justice as an expression of communal love and equity.

Governmental institutions across the region must rectify historical neglect within educational curricula, ensuring accurate representations of our history and the influential Haitian Revolution.

“Until the lions have their own historians, the history of the hunt will always glorify the hunter.” – Chinua Achebe

Achebe highlights the need for self-narration to accurately reflect our histories.

On this Emancipation Day, let unity prevail in meditation and celebration, never forgetting our shared humanity and inherent dignity.

“I am because we are.” – Ubuntu Philosophy

This philosophy encapsulates the interconnectedness of human existence and collective well-being.

“No one is free until everyone is free.” – Fannie Lou Hamer

Hamer’s words stress the universal nature of liberation and justice.

“Truth is powerful and it prevails.” – Sojourner Truth

Truth inspires resilience and steadfastness in our ongoing struggle for equality.

“The cost of liberty is less than the price of repression.” – W.E.B. Du Bois

Du Bois reminds us that freedom, despite its challenges, is always preferable to subjugation.

“The future belongs to those who prepare for it today.” – Malcolm X

We must proactively shape the future we desire by investing in our communities now.

August 01, 2025

Source

The Organization of American States (OAS) on the Promotion and Protection of Freedom of Religion or Belief

The OAS General Secretariat Declaration on the Promotion and Protection of Freedom of Religion or Belief

Freedom of religion or belief is closely linked to the principle of freedom and human integrity in all its dimensions, as well as to the principle of plurality and diversity, taking into account the wealth of religious and spiritual expressions that are part of our territories

The fundamental right to freedom of religion or belief is part of the origins of human rights treaties and conventions. It is related to the freedom to identify with a particular belief, as well as to change religion, and even not to have any particular religious affiliation.  Freedom of religion or belief is closely linked to the principle of freedom and human integrity in all its dimensions, as well as to the principle of plurality and diversity, taking into account the wealth of religious and spiritual expressions that are part of our territories.

For these reasons, guaranteeing freedom of religion or belief continues to be a fundamental responsibility of States.  This translates into legal frameworks and public policies that recognize the plurality of religious, belief and spiritual voices, that enable treatments and paths of democratic dialogue, that account for the richness and diversity of the world of beliefs, and with it, that prevent the privilege or predominance of particular and individual expressions over the rest.

The resolution "Strengthening protection and promotion of the right to freedom of conscience and religion or belief," in section XXV of the Resolution for the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights of 2022, approved during the 52nd OAS General Assembly, highlights the importance of these issues.  However, this document also brings to light a set of pressing problems in our region: the persecution and discrimination of religious and belief groups (also called “members of religious minority groups”), as well as the presence of acts of intolerance and violence in the name of religion.

For all this, it is essential to understand that religious freedom or belief as a human right is, in turn, linked to the defense of the rights of all individuals and groups, in all areas.  Discussing freedom of religion or belief not only implies creating mechanisms to recognize the existence of particular groups of believers, but also represents a right that is intrinsically related to respect and promotion of other identities, other expressions, other freedoms, other rights.

Hence, from the General Secretariat,

1. We urge member states to prioritize the development of guarantees -both legal and political- that account for the importance of religious freedom and belief as a principle of recognition, visibility and promotion of religious plurality and belief as a basis of democracy.

2. We call for States to promote spaces for meeting and inclusive dialogue that allow the plurality of religious expressions and beliefs to be known, with the aim of preventing the spread of discriminatory stereotypes and prejudiced actions against members of religious minority groups.

3. We request the creation of spaces for dialogue and exchange -among States, specialists, religious and belief communities, spiritual practitioners, civil society and other multilateral instances- for the development of specific standards for the protection of religious minority groups, for the prevention of discrimination based on religion or belief, and instrumentalization of religious discourse for the violation of other rights and freedoms.

4. We invite States, civil society organizations, faith-based organizations, and religious and spiritual groups, to build spaces for meeting and mutual recognition -both nationally and multilaterally- that allow accounting for the multiplicity and richness of interactions between the religions and spiritualities present in our societies, from their vast and unfathomable wealth of expressions, manifestations and positions.

February 27, 2023

Source 

Is civil society becoming extinct?

By Anthony GOMES

 

THROUGHOUT the world, civil society is disappearing and being replaced by violence of all descriptions and brutality of the worst kind.   Apart from the cultural coarsening of civil society, whether they include violent street protests.  engaging the police at one end of the spectrum, or civil war fuelled by sectarian lifestyle differences, the planet again faces the possibility of world conflagration.

The humanitarian tragedy of Syria, the Boko Haram Islamic uprising in Nigeria, the sabre-rattling aggression of North Korea, the unwinnable Afghanistan campaign, the neutralising of al-Qaeda in Yemen, the intense cultural differences between Sunni and Shea in Iraq, the interventions by Iran in Iraq and Lebanon by Hezbollah, and incursions by al-Qaeda in Mali, Algeria and Libya all began with inaccurate Western intelligence regarding the presence of weapons of mass destruction (WMD), that were never found.  Theey were recently believed to be stored in Syria, mainly consisting of chemical weapons, and used, according to France and the EU, against the Syrian rebel cohorts.  Let us also not forget the struggle in Pakistan against the al-Qaeda Taliban.   Being a nuclear power with a well-stocked atomic arsenal, Pakistan is of serious concern to the Western powers, lest atomic weapons were to fall into the hands of the Taliban.

As described above, there is no denying that the deadly plague of terrorism is spreading beyond all borders, in the name of Islam.   In recent years al-Qaeda has suffered heavy losses resulting from drone strikes that regrettably have a high rate of collateral damage, which has made them a very unpopular offensive weapon.  The al-Qaeda magazine Inspire has revealed their newly devised strategy that calls for home-grown individual jihadists, who have been radicalised to carry out attacks, mostly on "soft" targets; similar to the Boston bombings, the murder of the young Fusilier in London, and the latest shootings with the resemblance of an al-Qaeda operation in Santa Monica, US, that is yet to be confirmed.  The Western Christian powers are still considering how to deal with this new offensive self-sacrificing run of events.

Since the end of WW II, the faith and morals of the Christian West have undergone serious diminution in the cause of social freedom, sovereignty, and fuelled by secularism that has given new intepretation to what is right or wrong.   Traditions and other cultural norms have been tested in the legal and ecclesiastical domains, widening the meaning of "truth" to embrace influential factors of human rights, gender and race, all of which have spawned pernicious arguments, which may be termed "modern" jurisprudence.   In colloquial language: "One can do no wrong," if you can afford a skilled defender.

These liberalised modern statutes represent a departure from what was considered normal or accepted, or regarded as right.  This new-founded attitude has given rise to open disobedience that challenges all the rules of the historic social establishment which, in too many cases, ends up in tragedy.  The sinister characteristics can be seen in the murder of innocents, the aged, decapitations, abortion, and euthanasia, to list some of the more common acts that stalk the "land we love".   The defenders of human rights from abroad find it difficult to grasp the multiple and brutal murders that occupy the pages and waves of our media.  They find it difficult to understand why capital punishment is appropriate in such indescribable assaults on human kind.  This mindset is due, in part, to the landmark case of Ruth Ellis, which changed the previously held attitude to capital punishment in the UK.

In 1955, in Britain, the practice of capital punishment encountered a major challenge which resulted in the mandatory requirement for the death penalty in capital cases being removed.  Until then, there was strong support for the application of the death penalty, dictated by the law at that time.  However, with the landmark case of Ruth Ellis, a 28-year-old young woman born in North Wales on 9th October 1925, who was the last woman to be hanged on 13th July 1955 at Her Majesty's woman's prison, Holloway, in London.  Her case was one of premeditated murder to which she confessed, and, according to public opinion, would have been classified in this century as a "crime passionelle" that warranted life imprisonment.  She was executed by Albert Pierrepoint, a member of the historically famous family of executioners.   The event caused a fundamental change in public opinion that has reshaped contemporary jurisdiction in the UK.

Since then, Western societies have witnessed a raft of dramatic liberalisations which have changed the current social lifestyles across the Western hemisphere from same-sex unions to rampant multiple shootings of innocent civilians and schoolchildren, due to the easy possession of powerful military-type firearms which, in the case of the US, is enshrined in the Second Amendment of their constitution and relentlessly upheld by the powerful National Rifle Association.

The cost of maintaining the new-found liberalised lifestyle comes at a high price, with many deserving malevolent souls walking free, given the present complex system of proving guilt due to the monumental earnings in circulation from the drugs trade, and the threatened reprisals against the families of witnesses that form the themes of the nightly television stories that are becoming more realistic as time goes by.

May we be guided to calmer waters by the prayers of the faithful.

June 12, 2013

Jamaica Observer

Ending criminal defamation in the Caribbean

By Alison Bethel McKenzie

Executive Director
International Press Institute

Early this year, Dominican journalist Johnny Alberto Salazar was sentenced to six months in jail for slander and libel.  The charges stemmed from Salazar's on-air comments accusing Pedro Baldera, a local Human Rights Committee official, of "protecting delinquents and people linked to organised crime."  Salazar, an elected council member and well-known local gadfly, said prior to his arrest that he had been receiving threats from the government for his criticism of officials.

In June, the decision was thrown out by an appeals court.  But the effect of the prosecution remains.  Though the Dominican Republic retains a fairly clean press record, with Salazar potentially becoming the first ever journalist jailed for professional activities, the existence of criminal defamation laws leaves the threat of retribution forever looming.

As recently as June, Dominican politicians, and diplomats across the Caribbean, expressed their belief that defamation is best dealt with in a civil courtroom.  The International Press Institute (IPI) calls on these countries to take the next step and remove these latent laws from their books.

Criminal libel law was born in an Elizabethan England courtroom as a means for silencing critique of the privileged class.  A law of such antiquated ethos has little place in modern society where the press plays a pivotal role in shaping public discourse.

IPI is actively campaigning for the governments of the Caribbean to redress their current criminal libel laws.  At present, the law is vague and open to indiscriminate and inconsistent implementation, largely wielded to quell dissent and stifle government criticism.

In the past two years, Caribbean criminal defamation cases have included a government official charging a previous campaign opponent with the crime and another where accusations made in a town hall meeting resulted in a lawsuit.  These cases exemplify the elasticity of a law largely wielded by those in positions of power.

While infrequently used in the Caribbean, criminal libel statutes remain an unnecessary resource at the disposal of any offended official.  The mere threat of prosecution chills investigation and free speech, sustains corruption, unnecessarily protects public officials, and denies one of the most basic of human rights, freedom of expression.

Criminal libel is one of the most pernicious media constraints in contemporary society.  Implemented at the will of any insulted public official, it frequently leaves no recourse for the defendant.  In most countries, truth is not a valid defence, leaving defence a vexing proposition.

Many countries have no clear demarcation or standard for determining the line between fair criticism and criminal offence.  That most existing criminal libel laws also lack a requirement for actual malice, a higher criterion for the libel of public figures -- to allow for debate and discourse of government and other instruments of power -- only further underscores the capricious nature and implementation at the disposal of government figures.

IPI condemns modern use of criminal libel and advocates banishing the law, and utilising civil remedies as alternatives.  Often governments argue the need for strong punitive measures as a defence against scurrilous journalism, but freedom of expression and the press requires a more nuanced regulation in order to allow for public dialogue.  Certainly, punishment for careless or slanderous speech is necessary, but this should take place in a civil courtroom.

IPI stands beside numerous international accords, court opinions, and governments in these beliefs.  As early as 1948, the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights declared the significance of freedom of expression, with special note to press rights, by naming it one of the basic truths of humanity.

More recently, an international coalition comprised of members from the United Nations, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), the Organization of American States (OAS), and the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights (AFCHP) named the criminalisation of defamation as one of the ten biggest threats to the freedom of expression.

IPI has conducted press freedom missions in a number of Caribbean nations.  An IPI delegation visited Trinidad and Tobago Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar, Barbados Prime Minister Freundel Stuart, and government ministers and officials in both Jamaica and the Dominican Republic.  In each instance, IPI received support for its position on criminal libel, with each government reaffirming its commitment to an independent press.

In June 2012, the IPI General Assembly meeting in Port of Spain endorsed the Declaration of Port of Spain, calling for the abolition of "insult laws" and criminal defamation legislation in the Caribbean.  Stating that "the Caribbean urgently needs a strong, free and independent media to act as a watchdog over public institutions," the Declaration of Port of Spain identifies "the continued implementation of ‘insult laws’ – which outlaw criticism of politicians and those in authority and have as their motive the 'locking up of information' – and criminal defamation legislation as a prime threat to media freedom in the Caribbean."

IPI has received further endorsement for the Declaration of Port of Spain from numerous organisations throughout the Caribbean, including the Association of Caribbean Media Workers, and media and press associations in Jamaica, Trinidad and Tobago, Barbados, Grenada, Guyana, Antigua and Barbuda, Saint Lucia, Suriname, and St Kitts and Nevis.

A free society is founded on an open exchange of opinions, popular or not.  Criminal libel does little more than stifle this public discourse.  We’ve evolved a great deal since the 16th century origin of criminal libel.  To continue to rely on an antiquated law that acts as little more than a tool of repression would signal a society uncertain of its democratic principles.  Many Caribbean countries have publicly repudiated criminal libel.  IPI calls on these governments to join in the progress of freedom of expression and recognise their existing criminal libel laws as archaic and detrimental, and to remove the law from their books.

Considerable work lies ahead in achieving this goal, but IPI is encouraged by the progress thus far.  With diligence and continued collaboration, IPI is confident the nations of the Caribbean will proceed in striking this relic of a bygone era from their records and take their rightful places as homes of truly free and independent press.

September 05, 2012

Caribbeannewsnow

It’s time we emancipate ourselves from mental slavery... ...None but ourselves can free our minds...

Rethinking Freedom in The Bahamas

By Nicolette Bethel

In 1833, the British Parliament passed an Act to abolish slavery in the British Empire.  As of August 1, 1834, all slaves throughout the empire were to become free to some degree — if they were under the age of six, they would become free immediately, but if they were over six, they were to be apprenticed to their former masters.  Apprenticeship was finally abolished on August 1, 1838.

It is partly for this reason that Emancipation Day is a holiday in The Bahamas.  It is a holiday throughout the former British slave colonies of the Caribbean as well — and the reason that Jamaica, for example, chose it as its Independence Day.  We don’t celebrate our holiday on August 1, although we remember the date; rather, we have chosen to make the nearest Monday the holiday.

Here, then, together with hot weather, rain, and hurricanes, the summer months bring the twin holidays that commemorate our freedom.  As a nation, we have the opportunity of remembering how far we have come, of honouring our ancestors who — slave and master alike — were dehumanized by the institution of slavery and indentureship.

So far, though, we have not made the most of this opportunity.  Oh, we celebrate all right.  We have a Junkanoo parade on Independence Day, and two Junkanoo parades on the August Holiday weekend.  We have cook-outs (what better way to party than eating?)  But that’s about as far as it goes. Indeed, considering the amount of time we spend speaking of such things, it’s possible to imagine that if a Bahamian child didn’t grow up watching American television, they might be surprised to learn that Bahamians were once ever slaves.

And yet.

As I’ve written before, slavery is not over in the Caribbean.  I’m not talking about the kind of “slavery” that people like to raise when making these kinds of statements — a “slavery” that assumes that every Black Bahamian is subordinate to and poorer than every White Bahamian, that assumes that all Whites were slave owners and all Blacks slaves, that believes that Black Bahamian slaves were captured in African jungles and transported to The Bahamas on slave ships — an image of slavery that has more to do with history as outlined in the ABC miniseries Roots than our own story, which is far more complicated and interesting.

No.  I’m talking about the kind of slavery Bob Marley recognized in his own people when he wrote and performed his “Redemption Song” — the mental slavery that continues to dominate our society.

What do I mean by mental slavery?  It manifests itself in a number of different ways.  There are the obvious — the concept that Bahamians aren’t able to do things very well, and the resultant habit of looking elsewhere for models and expertise; the preference for hiring consultants from abroad to give advice that Bahamian experts have already considered and rejected; the willingness to privilege outside plans for development over local ones; the general contempt for anything home-grown, and the overconsumption of anything from across the sea.

But as common as these tendencies are, I’m thinking of other, smaller, more insidious actions and habits that show the residue of slavery in our everyday lives.

The biggest one is the apparent reluctance of the ordinary employee ever to make a decision.  Decisions, you see, require that one take responsibility for those decisions, and if one is wrong, one gets in trouble.  The result — particularly in the civil service, but not only there — is that for too many people, there is only one way of doing something.

How many of us have found ourselves in a situation where we make a request that is unusual, that takes a salesperson out of her comfort zone, that surprises her, forces her to think?

The result: roadblock.

Another one, though, that I get to see often in my line of work, is the tendency of many people who are possessed with a good idea to seek first and foremost the kingdom of Government Money.  Despite the fact that we live in a society which welcomes millions of tourists every year, in which money flows like water, in which Bahamians as well as visitors are willing to spend good cash on things they enjoy, we seem to believe that our enterprise must first and foremost be supported by handouts from the public treasury.

A third is the paralysis that I also witness, as a manager of a department and as a teacher of students, among people who seem to be waiting for someone to tell them What To Do.  They can’t — or won’t — act unless they get an order or a clearance from above.

All of these are examples of the mental slavery from which we continue to need emancipation.

Emancipation, you see, only begins with the awarding of political freedom.  It is true that on August 1, 1834, slaves were given the gift of themselves; they were able, for the first time since their enslavement, to own their bodies, their loved ones, their offspring, and their possessions.

But the residue of slavery lingers still.  The political and physical emancipation of the slaves didn’t mean that there was a corresponding psychic and mental freedom that came with it.  That has to be worked on.

So it’s that time of the year again; it’s our freedom time.  Massa’s long gone.  It’s time for us to realize that every West Indian who refuses to make a decision, every Bahamian who seeks a handout, every West Indian who looks outside our region for validation, every Bahamian who believes that what we do isn’t good enough, is in need of emancipation still.

It’s time we emancipate ourselves from mental slavery.  None but ourselves can free our minds.

thenewblackmagazine.com

Freedom is Slavery, Popular Support is Authoritarianism

By Lizzie Phelan:



A recent article by The Washington Post’s Juan Forero, entitled Latin America’s new authoritarians, is just the latest example of how the imperialists’ media machine is relentlessly engaged in media warfare against sovereign nations in the South, in order to fertilise the ground for new or increased economic and military aggression against them.  Such psy-op campaigns also seek to influence events on the ground in target nations, in this case in Venezuela ahead of the October elections, where all signs point to another resounding victory for current President Hugo Chávez Frías.

The article is part of the psychological wing of what Nicaraguan based website tortilla con sal terms the West’s “War on Humanity,” in order to convince the world of the moral superiority of the minority (the Western elite/imperialists) over the majority, so as to minimise the threat of a mass organised effort to challenge that minority’s increasingly doomed attempts to achieve total global hegemony.

Their morals, the minority argues through its vast propaganda network which bombard the majority, are superior because they are universal and therefore must be defended and achieved regardless of the cost, including that of the destruction of entire nations, let alone millions upon millions of lives, whose governments stand in the way, Libya being the most recent example.

Inconvenient facts, like the unrivalled criminal record of the NATO powers/imperialists who claim moral superiority, must relentlessly be legitimised through the imperialist’s media (including The Washington Post) and the entertainment industry’s portrayal of NATO crimes as acts of freedom, while acts of resistance and self-defence by their adversaries which undermine that claim to moral superiority and the total hegemony agenda, are presented as crimes against mankind.

And so looking through Forero’s lens, the sovereign nations of Latin America, that are consolidating their freedom from western domination through the continent's growing unification, are the emerging bogey man that the US government should do something about.

His hook is Human Rights Watch's recent onslaught against Venezuela in their report entitled Tightening the Grip, which, as the name screams out, is a document arguing that Chavez has become more authoritarian than ever.

And in one fell swoop Forero takes all of the popularly elected leaders of sovereign, progressive nations on the continent down with the report on Chavez, with a focus on those with the greatest support: Ecuador’s Rafael Correa and Nicaragua’s Daniel Ortega.  

Forero/HRW and the evil Venezuelan judiciary straw-man

In Venezuela the crux of the article’s venom, in line with the HRW report, is aimed at the country’s judicial system.  Neither the article nor the report make mention of the Venezuelan government’s recently published plan for the next six years which has a section entirely devoted to the judicial system which outlines the government’s intention to tackle that system’s “racist and classist character…and impunity”.  In the West, such admissions only come after lengthy, meek and costly public inquiries.  Those governments would never dream of acknowledging the racism, classicism and rife impunity so blatant in their own systems without, for example, scores of embarrassing racist murders and sustained public pressure by victims’ families, as happened when a public inquiry “found” that the British police were institutionally racist in the wake of the scandalous trial of Stephen Lawrence’s murderers.

To make his case Forero cites the cases of two former judges who have accused the Venezuelan government of rigging the judicial system.  Top government officials, he says, would call ex-magistrate, Eladio Aponte who has since sought exile in the US, and ask him for “favours”.  Forero conveniently fails to inform the reader that Aponte was dismissed from his post because he faces charges of accepting money from drugs traffickers and providing now jailed infamous drugs barron Walid Makled with an identity card.  During Makled’s trial he alleged that he paid approximately $70,000 to Aponte.  Nor does the article mention that Aponte first fled to Costa Rica to evade trial, from where he travelled to the US in a US Drug Enforcement Administration plane, no less. Aponte has denied the allegations but provided no evidence to support his denial.  The Venezuelan authorities have said they will present the evidence of their charges against Aponte.

Forero devotes just one sentence to mentioning that former judge Maria Lourdes Afiuni, is facing trial after having “infuriated Chavez with one of her rulings”.  If more than 23 words had been devoted to the case of Afiuni than perhaps some facts would have got in the way of a good story, as the old adage goes.  Because Afiuni, after making a ruling where no prosecutors were present (contrary to the law) that Eligio Cedeño, a financier who was charged with embezzling millions of dollars and playing a role in other huge cases of corruption, be set free, then immediately actually escorted him out of the courtroom and saw him off onto a motorcycle where he began his escape ending up finally in Miami.   Regardless of the legality of Afiuni’s ruling, she unilaterally violated the normal procedure of sending the defendant to the court’s detention facility while the administrative procedures regarding his release were completed.  It is that scandal of such grave proportions that infuriated the Venezuelan public and government, and it is for that that Afiuni is facing trial.

The Washington Post includes a disclaimer paragraph conceding that “pro-American” leaders, like in Colombia, have “weakened democratic governance”.  So Colombia is a weak democracy but Venezuela, Nicaragua and Ecuador are authoritarian regimes?  This is another total inverse of the reality.  Colombia, the continent’s (and one of the world’s) top recipients of US military aid, boasting seven US military bases, currently detains approximately 5,700 political prisoners and has an eye-watering 3.6 million internal refugees. Such a bleak situation is totally incomparable with the reality in non-US client states like those The Washington Post and HRW have focused their ire on.

And indeed the most abysmal picture globally in terms of domestic abuse of the judicial system is at the hands of the US regime.

Unlike in Venezuela, Nicaragua and Ecuador, in the US you can be detained indefinitely without charge. One in every 48 men of working age is behind bars and that figure excludes tens of thousands of immigrants facing deportation and people awaiting sentencing. The US imprisons five times more people than Venezuela, six times more than Nicaragua and eight times more than Ecuador.  While, the US tops the list of global prison population rates, the other three are far behind at number 98, 122 and 160 respectively.

Conditions inside US prisons are unrivalled, especially given that some 2.3 million people squander in them.  Sexual abuse rates are staggering and corporations use inmates as cheap – to - free sources of labour.  This is 21^st century systematic slavery in the “developed” world and such a dangerous phenomenon means that there is actually a huge monetary incentive for the corporate elite, which pull the strings of the US political system, to incarcerate more and more.

While Venezuela has pledged to tackle the racist character of its judicial system, and has supported the creation of an array of groups of African descent which will act as pressure groups to ensure that the struggle against racism progresses, the US has historically cracked down on African-American organizations that genuinely strive for such progress.  There is nowhere on this planet where the treatment of Black people is worse than at the hands of the US regime, as exemplified by the fact that of the US’ 2.3 million inmates, 46 per cent are Black, despite that Black people make up just 13 per cent of the US population.

But neither The Washington Post or HRW dedicate a report to scrutinising the status of human rights in the US as they do with their sexy “Tightening the Grip” headline for Venezuela and mention of the US’ domestic abuses are buried in their annual world reports. That is left every year for the Chinese to do.

While HRW has been busying itself propagandising for the fall of the Syrian government on the back of a bunch of shaky youtube videos, purporting to show Syrian security forces using weapons against peaceful protesters, regarding which head of the UN Human Rights Commission investigating Syria, Paulo Pinheiro said: “YouTube isn't a reliable means of investigation... There is manipulation of the media”; there is no way it would mount a campaign for US regime change on the back of this very real video, which only adds to the reams before it, of US police opening fire on unarmed protesters in California’s city of Anaheim.

Popular leader or repressive authoritarian?

Continuing with this drive to divert attention from who the greatest enemies of humanity are, the undertone of Forero’s article is that the Venezuelan masses who back Chavez are somehow not in full control of their mental capacities, and this therefore is another sign of how the power hungry Venezuelan government are hoodwinking its people.

And so he quotes one Venezuelan judge who talks about his loyalty to Venezuela’s Bolivarian Revolution and Chavez, as an example of how supporters of Chavez are everywhere, including in the country’s most important institutions.  The ridiculous logic seems to be that popularity is dangerous because, with people everywhere who support the government, there will be less people to stand in the way of its agenda, regardless of whether that agenda is to improve the lot of all Venezuelans as it has proven hitherto to have done.

Forero patronisingly portrays the masses of poor Venezuelans like sheep under the spell of a “captivating, messianic leader,” as though they support Chavez for no other reason than being brainwashed by his charisma.  Even more abhorrent, is the use of academic Javier Corrales, who authored a book about Chavez with the overtly racist title Dragon in the Tropics, as a source to add to the shrill of voices claiming that Chavez is abusing his popularity.

Never mind then that that popularity is a direct result of the fact that since Chavez won his first election in 1999, that country which had one of the world’s widest gaps between rich and poor has seen poverty reduce by more than 50 per cent, illiteracy eradicated, tens of millions now able to access free health care, millions more participating in higher education for free, the creation of tens of thousands of communal councils that give the population the opportunity to participate in the political system, the emergence of 200,000 cooperatives, the emergence of an array of women’s, indigenous and as mentioned African descendant organisations and much more.  These are the reasons why, like Nicaragua’s President Daniel Ortega, when Chavez speaks in open squares, something which the imperialists could never dare to dream of, millions flock to hear him speak.  This is why they came again in their millions to defend him from the failed US backed coup in 2002 and this is why they repeatedly vote for him in their millions.

Far from consolidating power in few hands, both Nicaragua and Venezuela are steadily moving to strengthen and expand the organs of direct democracy.  Venezuela’s communal council’s were cited above, while in Nicaragua, the Citizen’s Power model continues to improve the ways in which local communities can make decisions about how government money is spent in their municipalities. The connection between that model and the recent statistics which showed the FSLN had managed to halve extreme poverty in the second poorest country in the Americas after Haiti, is clear. It is local people who know best the needs of their community and as such, it is them who decide where government investment should be prioritised for huge infrastructure development, i.e. road, house, roof and electricity development, and social initiatives which have been targeted particularly at enabling Nicaragua’s poorest women to become self-sufficient. The ruling FSLN party has also expanded the number of local government representatives, while not increasing the budget for their salaries.  This is a move which ensures more balanced representation and will cut the salary of civil servants, to improve the monetary/social service incentive of such a position in favour of the latter.

Addressing the material and spiritual needs of the poor and marginalised majority, as the nations attacked by Forero have done and are doing, is key to ensuring that they enjoy the conditions that enable them to participate in democracy building.  Meanwhile, in the US and England, for example, the idea that citizens should be able to have more say over policies that affect their local communities over and above choosing from two or three parties that all represent the same corporate interests every three or four years, which is really no say at all, is unheard of.

In Libya, the West’s preferred style of “democracy” has arrived on the back of white phosphorous and Tomahawk cruise missiles, at the expense of the system of direct democracy that was being built there, not to mention tens of thousands of lives, millions of livelihoods, stability and a level of development that brought the Libyan people the highest standard of living in Africa.

Unmasking the missionary

But HRW has a track record of preferring to propagandise in favour of destroying such progress in countries where the balance of power is not in the favour of the NATO powers.

Since its founding in 1978 as Helsinki Watch by the Ford Foundation, HRW has consistently promoted humanitarian intervention in countries viewed as adversaries by the West.  Most recently in Libya, HRW was a signatory to the document that led to Libya’s suspension from the UN Human Rights Council, in violation of the UN’s own procedures, and the subsequent Security Council Resolutions that led to nine months of airstrikes supported by approximately 40 NATO countries.

Amidst its long and dirty history, HRW in 2010 announced that they would be accepting $100 million from George Soros who is the honey-pot behind some of the US’ most powerful think-tanks, lobby groups and NGOs and therefore enjoys considerable clout in influencing the US’ imperialist foreign policy.

Others amongst HRW’s long list of malignant backers include the Sandler Foundation which has given approximately $30 million to the group. The foundation is the child of Marion and Herb Sandler who themselves have been key donors of the Democrats and helped found a number of think-tanks and lobby groups, including the Center for American Progress, also funded by Soros and headed by John Podesta, White House chief of staff under President Clinton. It is therefore unsurprising that the foundation has consistently promoted US meddling in the South including supporting the KONY2012 saga that called for military intervention in Uganda on an entirely bogus pretext.

In short, if you follow the money of the NATO countries vast network of think-tanks, lobbyists, NGOs, newspapers, news websites, news channels, music and film industry, that of The Washington Post and HRW included, it can almost always be traced back to a corporate or “philanthropic” elite that have a vested interested in promoting NATO countries global hegemony agenda.

I have noticed some surprise from people who discover the role of organisations like HRW and Amnesty International. The humanitarian-intervention discourse, however, is perhaps one of the oldest tricks in Western empire’s book, but it has only evolved its disguise. This Global Research article was right to call western NGOs modern “Missionaries of Empire” or as Black Agenda Report labelled HRW, “Human Rights Warriors for Empire”. Accounts of the first English presence in Africa, like those given in Chinua Achebe’s Things Fall Apart, show the insidious way in which missionaries, following the first carve up of Africa at the Berlin Conference, would embed themselves in African communities and prey on some points of tension as an opportunity to promote the idea to minority sections of those communities that their grievances with their community were examples of suffering of the gravest degree, the cause of which was the moral backwardness of their society and could be solved if they embraced the only correct moral path, the English church.  This splitting of the community meant that by the time the disastrous consequences became clear to all, and true suffering of the gravest degree felt, it was too late.

NGOs operate in much the same way today, facilitating imperial designs which only bring war, instability and misery first to the majority people’s of the South behind the mask of those people’s “human rights”.  It is a mask however that is being ripped off, first with the call by ALBA for member countries to expel US AID and its representatives, and then this week with Russian President Vladimir Putin signing a bill that will make all NGOs that receive external funding register as foreign agents, and most recently with Chavez pulling Venezuela out of the OAS’ Inter-American Human Rights Court.  The OAS is of course another tool of Western domination of the region; a body that is supposed to promote democracy is itself undemocratic and continues to violate the majority will of its members to end the criminal blockade on Cuba.

Chavez’ decision to withdraw, he said, came, “out of dignity, and we accuse them before the world of being unfit to call themselves a human rights group."  It is not unheard of for such groups to be barred by governments in the South from their countries when they face actual military aggression.  But the war against such sovereign countries begins long before direct military action. It begins in articles such as Forero’s.

Source: Lizzie Phelan

July 26, 2012

Venezuelanalysis 

To glorify the Grenada Revolution is a continuation of abuse

By Hudson George

March 13, 1979, was a day in Grenadian history we must never forget, and whatever happened before and after that day must be discussed if we want to move forward and accept democracy and individual freedom.

However, it is unfair and very disrespectful for persons of influence due to their professional status within society to tell us that we must focus only about the good things of the revolution. Persons who are trying to give us such an advice do not seem to understand and respect human beings feelings.

They fail to realise that the March 13, 1979, revolution was successful because oppressed Grenadians were able to unite together because they shared the same human feelings on that day. The oppressed Grenadians came out without fear and overthrew the Gairy regime.

The evil deeds of Gairy’s regime were what the leaders of the revolution preached against and used as evidence against Gairy, to gain support from the Grenadian masses throughout the period of the revolution. The good things that Gairy did were not mentioned by the them, therefore it is very selfish and disrespectful for any Grenadian whosever they are, to be that boldfaced to tell us that we must focus on the positive side of the revolution and try to suppress our memories of the negative events.

The Grenadian revolution did not belong to one group of people. It was supposed to be a people’s revolution, and if some people feel that the revolution did injustice to them, they should have a right to give their side of the story.

Personally, as a Grenadian I can say that the revolution was like the old English Language nursery rhyme, Solomon Grundy, who was born on a Sunday and buried on a Saturday. The leaders of the revolution were intellectuals who wanted to lead the people, but refused to listen to the voice of the people.

I can say that there were some revolutionaries who were right to show their disapproval of what was going on within the revolution, but their approach was wrong, because they went about the whole process the wrong way, trying to remedy the situation through violence.

I can say that the leaders of the revolution were happy and ready to use brute force against disgruntled revolutionaries who picked up arms to fight against them, because the leaders of the revolution were always scared of former supporters who did not say too much and just went about their daily life of survival.

Additionally, I can say that the revolution did not allow influential persons with a strong rural base to represent the rural communities in the interest of rural people. However, I know that my critics will say that I am talking rubbish and they will make excuses and say that Bernard Coard and Unison Whiteman were born in rural parts of Grenada.

But the fact is that Bernard Coard and Unison Whiteman became urbanised at an early age, because they did not live most of their lives in the rural parts of the country where they were born. They spent most of their years in St George’s and in foreign countries where they went to school and work for some time as professionals.

Those among us who want to glorify the revolution must also glorify Eric Gairy and his GULP party regime too, if they want to avoid talking about our brutal political past. Both regimes had similar political culture of doing good and bad things that left a major impact on the Grenadian society.

Grenada is supposed to be a Westminster democracy, but unfortunately, up to this present time in our history, we are still struggling to enjoy media freedom. Some of our journalists continue to play politics with the social media privilege that they have in their domain. Those of us who have an opinion that is not politically in line with what those mini media lords want to hear are despised and sometimes they go as far as warning us not to make any comments on their internet websites.

Sometimes we try to blame Eric Gairy as the genesis of political oppression in Grenada, but based on my personal experience within Grenadian political culture, it seems as though the majority of Grenadians do not like opposition. Whenever they have the privilege to control important institutions, they become oppressors, and when they fall to disgrace, those who take their place continue the legacy of oppression.

Therefore, in order for us to create a healthy functioning democracy we must end that cycle of ignorance so that the next generation can take Grenada to the next level. As long as we keep trying to avoid addressing the evils of our political past, we are creating a climate to repeat the same old violent political culture again.

Young people must be encouraged to ask questions about the revolution and they must enjoy the freedom to listen the stories of what took place, and those who were involved in the process must give the correct answers. Our young people should have the right to get the right answers from the various groups that were involved in the revolution.

However, I personally do not believe that any one of the groups involved in the fight and strife during the revolution period want to tell the Grenadian people the true story. And as long as they continue to keep their mouths shut, they should avoid trying to be so boldfaced and telling us to glorify the revolution.

I believe that the truth must reveal, if we want to discuss that very important period in our history. Therefore, to glorify the Grenada revolution is a continuation of abuse.

March 22, 2012

caribbeannewsnow