Date   

Re: Leading Members of the DSA Want You to Get Out the Vote for Biden | Left Voice

John A Imani
 

I do not take politics in a cavalier manner. These are dangerous times. Most dangerous since the 50's-60's. I grew up in segregated Alabama where our voting choice, when we were allowed to vote, was literally between one who called us "Negras" and the other who called us "Niggers". Lesser of two evils. Janus-faced heads and tails of a wooden nickel.

 

I agree that Trump, in addition to being a clown only missing a round red nose, is the most dangerous individual in modern memory. With that I most definitely understand voters’ revulsion. But I think that he is powerful only because he is saying things that were in the back of his followers' 'minds' the whole time. And now that they have spouted their hatred aloud it is now quite possible to consciously expose it and unabashedly oppose it. In that his presence has been good.

 

But, if all we continue to do is to vote for the lesser that is what we will end up with, evil. Lincoln was a Republican. Trump the same. The Democratic Party of the 60's was the party of George Wallace and other Southern racists and refused admission to its convention the Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party and Fannie Lou Hamer. The Democrats Southern wing was stolen by the Republican's Southern Strategy.) The parties change with opportunities. But their apples (positions) fall not far from their tree (capitalism). Thus the capitalists have two parties. We must have a party of our own to put forward what it is that we must have.

 

I voted and donated to Green Party candidate and open real socialist, Howie Hawkins.

 

JAI

 


From the final chapter of “China’s Engine of Environmental Collapse | Louis Proyect: The Unrepentant Marxist

Louis Proyect
 

(I got the Walter Benjamin quote about revolutions and emergency brakes from Richard Smith's new book.)

Pan Yue was certainly prescient. The Chinese "miracle" has come to an end because the environment can no longer keep pace. The question is, can the Chinese find a way to grab the emergency brake and wrench this locomotive of destruction to a halt? One thing seems certain: The locomotive is not going to be stopped so long as the Communist Party has its grip on the controls. The CCP is locked in a death spiral. It can't rein in ravenous resource consumption and suicidal pollution because, as a national superpower-aspirant, it needs to maximize growth to "catch up with overtake the USA," maximize jobs to keep the peace, provide more bread and circuses to distract the masses, and build the glitziest "blingfrastucture" to wow the masses and the world with the "Amazing China" that it has built. The Communist Party doesn't do subtlety or understatement. Given these drivers, I just don't see how China's spiral to ecological collapse can reversed by anything short of social revolution—one way or another.

full: https://louisproyect.org/2020/10/15/from-the-final-chapter-of-chinas-engine-of-environmental-collapse/


Thailand: Another Bloody Crackdown Looms against the Democracy Movement!

RKOB
 

Thailand: Another Bloody Crackdown Looms against the Democracy Movement!

Down with the military dictatorship! Abolish the monarchy!

Emergency Statement,15 October 2020 (14.00 UTC)

https://www.thecommunists.net/worldwide/asia/thailand-another-bloody-crackdown-looms-against-the-democracy-movement/

-- 
Revolutionär-Kommunistische Organisation BEFREIUNG
(Österreichische Sektion der RCIT, www.thecommunists.net)
www.rkob.net
aktiv@...
Tel./SMS/WhatsApp/Telegram: +43-650-4068314

Virenfrei. www.avast.com


The Contagious Assembly – The New Inquiry

Louis Proyect
 

In the early days of the pandemic, Europe and the U.S. attempted to differentiate themselves from what they claimed was a peculiarly “Eastern” form of coercive and deceptive rule. These states insisted that “Western” governments would have to respond to COVID-19 in a manner following the principles of economic liberalism — that the freedom of the individual would not be sacrificed for the benefit of the collective. As the pandemic hit, however, it rapidly became apparent that the freedoms guaranteed by liberalism were not as expansive or extensive as their defenders liked to believe. The only sacrosanct rights, it turned out, were the rights that guaranteed the extraction of surplus and the preservation of property. Here, Mitropoulos highlights both Boris Johnson’s pursuit of “herd immunity” in Britain and the striking words of Kevin Hassett, the White House adviser who declared that “our human capital stock is ready to go back to work.”


Mitropoulos reads these slippages on herd and stock through Marx’s suggestion that, just as agriculture had provided “the tropes of aristocratic right through primogeniture in late feudalism,” it had contributed, within capitalism, logics for both the management of populations and the philosophy of virology. Much of the established knowledge of COVID-19 still draws on the devastating outbreaks of bovine coronavirus in the late 19th​ century, and the vast culls undertaken to control them. It must be remembered that the law of the household is as much about the transfer of properties as about holding property — logics of breeding, inherited superiority, and patrilineal purity are essential to the preservation of the oikos. Ideas of natural selection, or even eugenics, are an easy partner to a concern for the inheritance of properties. This juxtaposition sets up Mitropoulos’s evisceration of the British government’s plan for herd immunity, which, if allowed to run its course, would have had more in common with a cull than with a control.

https://thenewinquiry.com/the-contagious-assembly/


Interview: Keeanga-Yamahtta Taylor on Why Racism Has Been Profitable ❧ Current Affairs

Louis Proyect
 

NJR:

What I really think is important about this book [Race for Profit] that you are filling in an often neglected piece of an important historical story about race and economics in the twentieth century, because when we discuss housing discrimination, people often talk about redlining and they talk about the 1930s and 40s and the period in which Black Americans were explicitly excluded and subject to racist programs from the FHA and the government. But you’re looking at the 60s and 70s. You’re looking at the period after that. And you make a point that I think is not emphasized sufficiently, which is you develop this concept of “predatory inclusion” and you say that when it went from exclusion to inclusion, that actually that was an illusion. That was kind of a myth, and it clouds our understanding of how inequality has persisted.  

KYT:

Yeah, I think that it is the kind of typical narrative that has been produced to understand the Black movement and its relationship to the state, that it has been one of ongoing, cumulative progress over time, and that really, in the 1940s and 1950s with the onset of the Cold War, what is referred to as either Cold War liberalism or racial liberalism, develops to eventually say that discrimination is real so it’s not being made up by African Americans, but how we deal with it is to stop discriminating, and to just simply include Black people into the existing structures of these societies that have of course produced this vibrant and robust white middle class. 

And if given the same opportunities, if included in the same types of ways, then the dynamism of American Capitalism can produce the same kind of outcome for African Americans, and so there’s a concerted effort to essentially remove race from the law in the United States, particularly in the North. I mean, almost exclusively in the North until the Civil Rights movement of the 1960s, but what we find with housing—and we find it in other areas as well, but the focus of my book is on housing—is that the efforts to include African Americans don’t produce the same outcomes. They produce different outcomes that are deeply scarred by the continuation of racism and discrimination, even if it’s done so within the framework of colorblindness, meaning that there are no longer restrictive covenants telling African Americans where they can or cannot live. There’s no longer state sanctioned housing discrimination as there was up until 1968, but even without that, you still have Black people who are treated differently in the housing market. You still have African Americans who are treated differently by the real estate industry, and differently by banks, and part of this is because of the cumulative impact of racial discrimination and divestment of Black enclaves over time, meaning that those areas are then viewed by the banking industry, by the real estate industry, as impaired, and that impairment, as a result of discrimination that was practiced by these very same institutions as a result of the kind of impairment that is created by divestment, that becomes the pretext for treating Black renters and Black homeowners differently from their white peers. It becomes the basis for underwriting that is defined by risk. That the greater levels of poverty, the greater distress of Black housing, the greater concentration of substandard housing means these areas are considered to be risky. So that creates the context for higher interest rates, higher fees, different banking practices that in many ways produce the same kind of exploitative outcome or the same kinds of exploitative practices that create financial disparities and particular financial deficits for African Americans, what Black people up through this period refer to as a “race tax.” And so predatory inclusion is a way of drawing attention to the continuity of these practices, even when the formal structures of race and discrimination have been removed. 



https://www.currentaffairs.org/2020/07/interview-keeanga-yamahtta-taylor-on-why-racism-is-profitable


Safety in the Worst Case

fkalosar101@...
 

A podcast by Kelly Hayes discussing the dangers of "right wing violence" and other "manufactured chaos" as Trump rejects and attempts to overturn an unfavorable election result.
Hayes uses the word fascism, but the "chaos" part sounds more like Trump.

https://truthout.org/audio/searching-for-safety-in-a-right-wing-nightmare/


Re: U.S. Election: Neither Trump Nor Biden!

workerpoet
 

There are ongoing attempts to build an independent People's party but the legal obstacles on the state levels as well as the corporate media monopolies and lack of class and political consciousness in the US make this more fantasy than possibility in the short term. The best organizing tool remains the struggle around issues that affect us.

This site and it's naive proclamations go to the heart of my feelings about being either revolutionary in form or in function.. The former with its manifestos, proclamations and symbolism is cathartic in the short term though it does more to put off and alienate working people than to attract them. The latter is not as glorious, entails hard work and often doesn't look revolutionary but moves people toward needed militant class-consciousness.


U.S. Election: Neither Trump Nor Biden!

RKOB
 

U.S. Election: Neither Trump Nor Biden!

Workers and oppressed need to organize and to fight independently!

https://www.thecommunists.net/worldwide/north-america/u-s-election-neither-trump-nor-biden/

-- 
Revolutionär-Kommunistische Organisation BEFREIUNG
(Österreichische Sektion der RCIT, www.thecommunists.net)
www.rkob.net
aktiv@...
Tel./SMS/WhatsApp/Telegram: +43-650-4068314

Virenfrei. www.avast.com


China after Covid

Louis Proyect
 

Amassive pool party was held recently in Wuhan, ground zero of the pandemic, with thousands of people piling into the water without wearing masks or practising social distancing. This outraged many people on Twitter, who didn’t know that there have been no new cases of Covid-19 in Wuhan for months. For local people, who experienced the chaotic early weeks of the virus in late January and early February, the respite must seem long overdue.

Restrictions are diminishing everywhere in China. International flights are resuming, and friends who were marooned while visiting the US and Europe are flying back one by one. Plane tickets cost three to five times more than usual for an economy seat, and passengers have to comply with quarantine regulations on arrival: 14 days in a designated hotel, couples in separate rooms, no visitors allowed. They are tested almost every day, and have to put up with the not very desirable food provided – food delivery is out of the question. Afterwards, we throw a nice dinner party to celebrate their return to normal life. It’s the most we can hope for in 2020: a normal life. Other friends who are still stuck abroad (unable to get a flight or a visa) are missing a succession of delicacies: the crayfish season, the lychee season, the waxberry season, the durian season, the gordon euryale seed season, the sugar fried chestnut season, the pork mooncake season have all gone by. Will they catch the end of the mitten crab season, or will they have to wait another year?

At first the Covid situation in the West was roughly two months behind China. But, as the Wuhan pool party shows, the Chinese experience has now diverged from that of Western countries. China began lifting lockdown in April. Cinemas were among the last public spaces to reopen, after museums, theatres, even Disneyland. After much complaining by the public (one executive from a big movie company jumped out of a window and killed himself), the government finally allowed them to reopen with strict social distancing rules. The first time I used my health code (a barcode that can be downloaded on your smartphone: ‘green’ means Covid-free, ‘red’ means immediate hospitalisation, ‘yellow’ means self-quarantine at home) was when I went to see Tenet at the cinema. I’d managed to dodge using this code for a long time, even when visiting hospitals (ID required) or checking in to hotels (ID and facial scan required). At the cinema, the seats around me were taped so no one could sit down, and masks had to be worn during the whole movie, which meant no popcorn or chicken wings. I’d think twice before going again.

Before the summer rain season in Shanghai, I tried to hire someone to fix the damp patch on my ceiling, where mushrooms have been growing upside-down for years. I called several people who’d done work for me in the past, but no one had the time. It took me two weeks to find two rookies to do the job, poorly and for three times the usual cost. They said the renovation business was booming because so many small shops and restaurants closed down during the pandemic (most small businesses only have the cash flow for three months), and newcomers were now starting up businesses. I thought about the changes in the shops near where I live: all the nail and hair salons remain, a few cafés have started to sell bubble tea, and one clothes shop has become a posh cat café – before that, it was a ‘happy massage’ salon (once I saw an old gentleman coming out with two girls, one on each arm), but it got busted in the last national police campaign against organised crime.

Other shops face different challenges. I passed a shop that sells luxury watches in a Shanghai mall recently and noticed that there were no watches in the display case, only the cushions on which they used to be displayed. The sales clerk told me all the watches the shop had in stock had been sold. Swiss watchmakers haven’t fully resumed work yet, so there is a shortage. I thought people might have spent their time in quarantine contemplating the things that matter most in life. But apparently Chinese consumers had a different idea: they call it ‘revenge consumption’. In April, the Hermès flagship store at the Taikoo Hui mall in Guangzhou reopened, achieving a new sales record: 19 million RMB in one day. In August, the Louis Vuitton shop in Shanghai made 150 million RMB, almost double the amount it usually takes in a month. After a rumour spread that several luxury brands were planning to raise their prices, millennials started to queue outside the shops. Middle-class Chinese usually go abroad on holiday and to do their luxury shopping, but this year, thanks to Covid-19, the estimated $300 billion spent on overseas consumption is staying at home. This is good news for the government: boosting domestic demand is central to its latest economic strategy. Luxury goods are only part of it. Seven million couriers deliver food in China every day. An algorithm sets fixed delivery times, encouraging the couriers to ignore traffic laws to get to their customers in time, and avoid suffering a penalty. If they make the journey on time the algorithm closes in, making the time allowance shorter and shorter. We enjoy food from our favourite restaurants, fresh and hot, for a tiny delivery fee (5-8 RMB), and never think of the human costs behind it.

Since China tamed the virus and normal life resumed, the CCP has bestowed its highest honours on key scientists and doctors. Political commentators, like middle-class consumers, are in high spirits. The ‘keyboard warriors’ or ‘keyboard heroes’ active on various social media platforms and forums argue that, since our government takes care of almost everything, there’s no reason to bother with a democratic electoral system that could produce Trump or Brexit.

Their latest idea is known as ruguan xue, ‘the barbarians at the gate’. This narrative compares the current Sino-US confrontation with the overthrow of the Ming dynasty that ended in Manchu rule. During Ming rule the country grew immensely rich, thanks to the trade carried by Manila galleons, and the life enjoyed by the aristocracy reached new heights of sophistication. Ming civilisation, so the narrative goes, was the centre of the world, economically and culturally. Meanwhile, the Jianzhou branch of the Jurchens (later known as the Manchus) were leading an unenviable life on the far side of the Great Wall, surviving by catching fish and digging ginseng. No matter how much they hunkered down, the Jurchens were targeted by the hegemon, enduring repeated military repression (sometimes involving mass slaughter) and economic exploitation. The only way they could save themselves was to conquer the Ming Empire and create a new imperial order.

In the ruguan xue allegory, the United States resembles the Ming dynasty of the early 17th century: it’s the paramount power and dictates the rules, but is rotting within. China takes the place of the barbarians: hard-working, paying due tribute, but never respected, constantly smeared and demonised. ‘Catching fish’ refers to risky, low prestige work, while ‘digging ginseng’ is high-tech work that brings greater profit but also exploitation. Russia is the equivalent of the Jianzhou Jurchens’ ally (and one-time foe), Mongolia, which was also under constant attack from the Ming. Japan and South Korea map onto the Ming’s stooge Joseon dynasty in Korea. Covid-19 is the great disruptor, the peasant rebel leader Li Zicheng, who conquered Beijing and overthrew Ming rule, but lost to the Manchu in the end. In short, US hegemony has to be challenged and the barbarians have to enter the gate if we are to enjoy peaceful progress.

It’s a shame this grand scheme is only an internet fantasy. So far ruguan xue warriors haven’t developed any concrete battle plans. As experts could tell them, China’s huge military capabilities are largely defensive. Besides, as Marxist historians used to say, ‘the barbarian conquerors, by an eternal law of history, were themselves conquered by the superior civilisation of their subjects.’ Manchus acculturated to the Han bureaucratic culture they inherited, and ruled for almost three hundred years (the not-so-well-acculturated Mongolians managed only 67 years). Are China’s ‘humble barbarians’ willing to be absorbed by America’s ‘superior civilisation’ once they enter the gate?

Ruguan xue’s weak allegory raises more questions than originally intended. Shan Gao Xian, who initiated the discussion on Zhihu, a question-and-answer website, was banned from the forum, and the topic isn’t mentioned there any more. No need to inflame the already tense stand-off between the US and China. Before ruguan xue grabbed our attention, gongye dang (‘the technology party’ or ‘the industrial party’) was trending. We have a popular saying: America is run by lawyers; China is run by engineers. Engineers are pragmatic. Their key text is the science fiction writer Liu Cixin’s The Three-Body Problem, in which, as in most of his books, survival is everything, and scientists make tough choices, with no room for sentiment or useless humanists. When a New Yorker journalist asked Liu about the state of human rights in China, he replied: ‘That’s not what Chinese people care about. For ordinary folks, it’s the cost of healthcare, real-estate prices, their children’s education. Not democracy.’ And: ‘Here’s the truth: if you were to become the president of China tomorrow, you would find that you had no other choice than to do exactly as [Xi] has done.’*

An unwavering belief in perpetual technological progress, a lack of complacency and a readiness to face the next catastrophe (whether alien invasion, climate doomsday or a new world war) are the key sentiments of gongye dang. From the engineer’s point of view, the Belt and Road Initiative isn’t an example of new colonialism or a debt trap or a propaganda programme or a sinister scheme to take over the world, but simply normal barbarian behaviour when confronted with an ageing Western market whose buying power is dwindling. The Chinese industries that used to supply this market now have excess capacity. The new markets in Africa and elsewhere have plenty of youthful consumers but not enough buying power yet, and need to be built up. Infrastructure investment (roads, ports) is always the first step towards economic connectivity: when people in Pakistan, Nigeria or Indonesia start to get better off, they will buy Chinese-made goods – smartphones, household items, clothes and so on. If the push to use RMB as the regional settlement currency goes smoothly, it could undermine the dollar’s monopoly and avoid the financial ‘chokeholds’ the US has used so effectively.

At the other end of the political spectrum, young liberals quickly descend into a kind of accelerationism. The trade war with America, deteriorating relationships with many other countries, increasing nationalism, the South China Sea dispute, the Hong Kong National Security Law, and, especially, the global pandemic have shown everyone in China just how volatile history can be. President Xi has gained another nickname: ‘chief accelerationist’. For liberal optimists, things need to get worse before they can get better and acceleration looks like the quickest route to reconstruction. They invoke a Chinese proverb that says pain is easier to endure than an itch. But this optimism isn’t shared by most people, who feel only exhaustion and helplessness. When the US and China began closing consulates and recalling diplomats, some netizens cried: ‘Accelerate, accelerate! Sever diplomatic relations!’ Several books about the Hong Kong National Security Law were given a one-star rating by users of Douban (a major site where people review books, movies and music) as a way of expressing dissent, causing it to shut down its book-rating function for more than a month. The accounts of the ‘troublemakers’ were disabled, and people began to notice that quite a few books no longer allowed any ratings or comments, among them, all of President Xi’s books.

For the older generation of Chinese liberals, who saw the Cultural Revolution, the 1989 protests and other social movements and upheavals, accelerationism takes a different form. They see the West through rose-tinted glasses. Many think Trump is the ultimate rival of the CCP and the saviour of the Chinese people, because unlike the ‘wuss’ leftie Democrats, he doesn’t mind using tactics from the Chinese playbook (banning this and that) and is willing to go lower – the only way, in their minds, to outmanoeuvre the CCP. It doesn’t matter to them if democratic values are damaged along the way. In a zero-sum game, you just need to win. Chinese liberal Trumpists celebrate whenever he targets a big Chinese enterprise – Huawei or TikTok or WeChat – just as they approve ‘herd immunity’ as ‘the ultimate humanity’. Like Trump, they think the cure can’t be worse than the disease. When Xi calls for people not to waste food (the pandemic and flooding have led to a shortage of grain), they immediately spread alarm by warning that the great famine is coming. Lin Yao, a PhD student at Yale, saw his discussion of Chinese liberal Trumpism cut from an article for Business Insider because the editors thought it would be too far-fetched for Western readers. Radical Chinese nationalists may also be happy to see Trump re-elected. They have nicknamed him ‘the nation-builder’, because he has improved Chinese understanding of American hypocrisy and rallied people round the flag.

Claims of double standards, Western hypocrisy and whataboutism are gaining ground online. We used to be told that whataboutism wasn’t a valid argument: another person’s wrongdoing doesn’t justify yours. But now it’s more like, what about whataboutism? The argument races to the bottom, or somewhere close to the bottom. We can always claim that we prefer our competent dictator to the wannabe incompetent dictator in the US. China’s promotion of order, stability, meritocracy, competence, efficiency and convenience looks increasingly superior to the Western package. Elections, free markets, the judicial system, medical care and education are contested on all fronts and have begun to lose their sheen. China has a peculiar sense of history, a cycle in which empires and dynasties divide and fall before reuniting. The wind has been blowing from the West, now it’s time for the wind from the East.

Confucians have been quiet in recent discussions. Perhaps ruguan xue doesn’t fit with their high-minded notion of civilisation in which Han culture is the orthodoxy and far superior to all barbarians. Gongye dang doesn’t seem to have much moral purchase either. Neither ruguan xue nor gongye dang represent serious ideological debate with the West, since their proponents consider the terms to have been set by the West. Confucians used to aspire to universalism, preaching benevolence, integrity, loyalty, natural order and the concept of zhongyong – moderation, the middle way, no extremes. Unfortunately, in an era of social media and keyboard politics, the middle ground is the least attractive; you have to be QAnon-crazy to get an audience. But Confucianism has survived for thousands of years and survived the iconoclastic May Fourth Movement and the Cultural Revolution. Maybe it’s time to dust off some of its ideas, ‘benign monarchy’ perhaps, or ‘enlightened despotism’? Since representative democracy is no longer on the table, can we hope for a monarch who claims to have the best interests of his subjects at heart? If we’re lucky?


10/15 (Tonight) Trump's Walls Must Fall! - Greg Grandin & Avi Chomsky (7:00 p.m. Eastern)

Suren Moodliar
 

Trump's Walls Must Fall!
with Greg Grandin & Avi Chomsky
This Thursday evening (October 15, 2020) at 7:00 p.m. on Shelter & Solidarity. 
Join via Zoom or view live on Facebook.
[http://www.ShelterAndSolidarity.org/join]
 
Take a deep dive with 2020 Pulitzer Prize-winner Greg Grandin, author of The End of the Myth: From the Frontier to the Border Wall in the Mind of America (among many other books). Scholar and activist Aviva Chomsky, (author of Undocumented and ”They Take Our Jobs!” and 20 Other Myths about Immigration joins the conversation.

As the 2020 Election draws near, how do we understand the nature of Trumpism and its relationship to what has come before?
How do we grasp the rise of Trump’s Border Wall and the way it is re-shaping US political imagination?
How has U.S. history from the beginning been shaped by the way that the edges of the country have been imagined and constructed–often through racism and violence?
How does grappling with the long and bloody American history of the “frontier” and the border change the way we see the present politics and future possibilities for the USA in the 21st century?
How does studying the history of the border help us to see the ways that US “domestic” & “foreign” policy are deeply related?
What will the “end” of the long-standing myth of perpetual American economic and geographic expansion mean for contemporary politics?
What can be done to refuse a future defined by rising border walls and to instead reimagine global human liberation in this era of crisis?

Share the Facebook event>>
https://fb.me/e/1NkfTyhF5


The Right’s War on Universities | by Ruth Ben-Ghiat | NYR Daily | The New York Review of Books

Louis Proyect
 

First came the declaration of war on The New York Times’s 1619 Project, which examines the way slavery has shaped American society and national identity. In September, Trump tweeted a threat to defund California schools if they included the 1619 Project in their curricula. Then came measures to ban antiracist trainings for government employees. A September 22 executive order made official the prohibition of workplace instruction on sex and racial discrimination, both deemed “divisive concepts.” Over the summer, as antiracist pedagogy gained currency among Americans following the Black Lives Matter protests sparked by George Floyd’s death at the hands of police, an alarmed Trump administration sought to limit its circulation in multiple ways.

https://www.nybooks.com/daily/2020/10/15/the-rights-war-on-universities/


H-Net Review [H-War]: Hinnershitz on Short, 'Uniquely Okinawan: Determining Identity during the U.S. Wartime Occupation'

Andrew Stewart
 



---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: H-Net Staff via H-REVIEW <h-review@...>
Date: Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 9:19 AM
Subject: H-Net Review [H-War]: Hinnershitz on Short, 'Uniquely Okinawan: Determining Identity during the U.S. Wartime Occupation'
To: <h-review@...>
Cc: H-Net Staff <revhelp@...>


Courtney A. Short.  Uniquely Okinawan: Determining Identity during
the U.S. Wartime Occupation.  World War II: The Global, Human, and
Ethical Dimension Series. New York  Fordham University Press, 2020. 
272 pp.  $105.00 (cloth), ISBN 978-0-8232-8838-0; $30.00 (paper),
ISBN 978-0-8232-8772-7.

Reviewed by Stephanie Hinnershitz (Independent Scholar)
Published on H-War (October, 2020)
Commissioned by Margaret Sankey

Courtney A. Short's _Uniquely Okinawan: Determining Identity during
the U.S. Wartime Occupation _offers a policy-oriented view of the
United States' military occupation of the Japanese prefecture during
and after World War II. This is a departure from existing scholarship
in which authors focus on the cultural aspects of this moment or the
lingering economic impact of neoliberal ideas that accompanied the
American presence in Okinawa. Short's focus on "the occupation of
Okinawa from the wartime planning stages in late 1944 and early 1945
through the end of the US Navy's responsibility for occupation in
1946" allows for an examination of "the contact between a besieged
civilian population and the US military rather than the contact
between two combatant militaries" (p. 17). Most important for Short
is the impact of the army's, marines', and navy's considerations of
race and ethnicity on determining whether or not Okinawans were
enemies or friends and, subsequently, the nature of the American
occupation. Short frames her book as a corrective to the narrative
that the racism of military leaders and soldiers led to brutal
violence perpetrated against the Japanese by American forces.
Instead, she argues that the military used "complex, educated,
sophisticated, mindful consideration of identity, race, and ethnicity
during planning and execution of the mission." The architects of
occupation "acknowledged culture and ethnicity from a stance of
balanced evaluation meant to inform objective military decisions;
they did not use impassioned racist sentiments to drive action and
provide an excuse for wanton violence" (p. 13). There is also an
argument that Okinawans used their ambiguous ethnic and political
heritage as traditionally Japanese but "uniquely Okinawan" to shape a
new, pro-American identity to build beneficial relationships with
their American occupiers. There are multiple arguments in Short's
ambitious reexamination of Okinawan occupation, with the strongest
contribution being the author's refashioning of occupation as
military policy informed by cultural practices and ideas.

_Uniquely Okinawan _is difficult to summarize because it covers so
much ground, but Short uses different stages of military planning and
occupation to thematically and chronologically organize her book. The
first two chapters offer comparisons between the army's and the
marines' approaches to developing and implementing occupation plans.
As shown in chapter 1, Pacific commander general Simon Bolivar
Buckner and his colleagues "carefully considered practical military
matters in their decision making" (p. 22)._ _Intelligence did not
provide a clear answer to the question of Okinawan countenance, but
it did demonstrate a level of concern for understanding the
Okinawans' culture and history, particularly the island's legacy of
Japanese colonization. In contrast, chapter 2 charts the marine
corps' strategy, which, based on interactions with Okinawans at
Saipan, leaned more toward suspicion that Okinawans were loyal to the
Japanese enemy. Chapter 3 provides a brief overview of the
contrasting relationships among generations of Okinawans to the
Japanese, which influenced later relations between Okinawans and
American military units during the Battle of Okinawa (which is the
focus of chapter 4).

The remaining chapters follow the American occupation and the role of
the Okinawans within this process. Short devotes chapter 5 to
examining the rise of a "new" Okinawan identity--one that
demonstrated "the malleability of race and ethnicity" during the war
as well as the "deliberate choice" of the Okinawan people to shift
toward accommodating ("appeasing" could be another word to use here
considering the context) the Americans and loosening their cultural
and historic ties to the Japanese (p. 61). The Japanese soldiers' own
brutality shattered the Okinawans' devotion to the emperor and
created opportunities for reassessing Japanese descriptions of
Americans as demons and monsters. In turn, each branch of the US
military at Okinawa also adjusted (to some degree) their own
preconceived notions of the Okinawans. Doing so contributed to a
well-executed occupation that left more energy and resources to
follow through with combat planning. Short explains in chapter 6 that
although soldiers still held the idea that Okinawans were culturally
prone to "filthy" habits and poor hygiene (rather than accepting that
their plight was a product of war) and "viewed the population as
uncivilized, primitive, and unintelligent," the army's mission of
removing civilians from the battlefield resulted in more direct
interactions between the military government units and Okinawans (p.
78). A new level of cultural understanding prompted the army to
slowly abandon the strict regulations in camps for more congenial
relationships with the civilians. While chapter 7 describes the
evolution of an Okinawan "identity for survival" that was
"ingratiating" to the troops and pro-American, chapter 8 uncovers the
marines' continued treatment of Okinawans as potential enemies, a
belief that stemmed from numerous attacks on marine camps by
pro-Japanese Okinawans (p. 91). The final two chapters situate the
reader within the last days of military occupation when the Okinawans
cooperated with the navy to gain some control of their own
government, ending in a unique political and social Okinawan identity
and, as Short notes in the conclusion, a successful operation. This
success depended on consideration of racial and ethnic identities and
evolving policy that incorporated changing personal interactions
between soldiers and Okinawans.

Short's strength is her emphasis on military policy and _Uniquely
Okinawan _will occupy a unique place in the historiography of Pacific
military and social history. Her ability to blend these two subfields
makes her work a fascinating case study. Short convincingly argues
that the military's process of using intelligence on the cultural and
ethnic history of the Okinawans represented a careful approach to
occupation that could be useful in "provid[ing] an example for
effective military government programs now and in the future" (p.
161). She defines a successful occupation program as one that
expeditiously transfers military governance to locals, allowing the
occupied people a level of authority in creating political and social
programs. As Short explains, "military and government officials need
to understand the historic foundation of ethnic traditions and
loyalties yet also appreciate the contested nature of ethnicity and
identity" (p. 160). A "military government ... flexible in its
cultural analysis allowed for [a] successful transition from a
wartime occupation to an occupation of a defeated country" (p. 158).
An underlying theme of the book is how to differentiate the treatment
of prisoners of war from that of occupied civilians, something that
military units--particularly the marines--struggled with.
Additionally, Short highlights problems with cooperation in joint
occupation operations which offer valuable lessons for future
military planning.

Short's sources are also a useful body of evidence for anyone
interested in these topics. Numerous bulletins and reports, including
the Army Civil Affairs Schools' three-hundred-page _Ryukyu Handbook_
for officers "slated for assignment in the Pacific," add color to a
bureaucratic process (p. 28). What stands out is the complexity of
these materials, where authors did in fact undertake extensive
research into the ethnic and cultural history of the Okinawans, but
in many cases still relied on stereotypes of "inferiority." More
robust discussions of these sources would contextualize Short's
analysis of the roles of ethnicity and race in occupation.

The emphasis on the military's use of race, ethnicity, and culture to
inform decisions about occupation is a promising element of _Uniquely
Okinawan_ but one that raises more questions than answers. Short
makes clear in her introduction that her study of occupation is
responding to a number of works (including John Dower's _War without
Mercy: Race and Power in the Pacific _[1987]) that credit the
particularly brutal actions of American soldiers against Japanese
during combat in the Pacific to racism. As opposed to these emotional
instances of race-informed actions, "military planners [of
occupation] acknowledged culture and ethnicity from a stance of
balanced evaluation meant to inform objective military decisions;
they did not use impassioned racist sentiments to drive action and
provide an excuse for wanton violence." The military leaders'
"complex, educated, sophisticated, mindful consideration of identity,
race, and ethnicity during planning and execution of the mission" is
the focus of Short's work, and the reports she references provide a
window into the attempts of the officers to understand the unique
place of Okinawans in comparison to Japanese (p. 13). But without a
clear explanation in the introduction of what concepts like "race,"
"culture," and the more ambiguous "ethnicity" meant during World War
II (and more specifically for the military), it is difficult for
Short to make a convincing case. For example, despite careful
analysis of Okinawan cultural and racial identity, military planners
clung to (racist) preconceived notions of Okinawans, and the
"destitute state of the Okinawans invoked a paternalistic, racially
driven feeling of superiority" among soldiers who read the _Ryukyu
Handbook_ (p. 78). Did it matter that soldiers and planners still
held these ideas, even if they did not contribute to racial violence
during occupation? A thorough discussion of the implications of
racial superiority would make for a more nuanced understanding of how
race functioned in this particular operation.

The lingering racialized identities Americans bestowed on the
Okinawans also contributes to a point in need of clarification:
Okinawan agency in shaping their own identity. There are certainly
instances of Okinawans successfully advocating for self-governance,
but these appear to be the result of shifting top-down policies among
the different military units. Furthermore, the necessity of survival
during war had an impact on the future of Okinawan identity. Short's
statement that the Okinawans "became pawns" in the larger scheme of
occupation indicates that a more parsed discussion of how and why the
Okinawans worked within the system (and worked around the military's
racially informed decisions) would make for a stronger argument on
the role of Okinawans in determining their own trajectory and
identity (p. 123).

Despite the need for some more clarification in certain areas,
_Uniquely Okinawan _is essential reading for anyone studying
military-civilian relationships and policy during World War II_._ If
read alongside Dayna Barnes's _Architects of Occupation: American
Experts and Planning for Post-War Japan _(2017), a detailed
description of the occupation of Okinawa is readily available to
scholars of all levels and backgrounds. But _Uniquely Okinawan_
stands alone as a fascinating study that could be easily integrated
into graduate-level and professional military education courses.

Citation: Stephanie Hinnershitz. Review of Short, Courtney A.,
_Uniquely Okinawan: Determining Identity during the U.S. Wartime
Occupation_. H-War, H-Net Reviews. October, 2020.
URL: https://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=55617

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons
Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States
License.




--
Best regards,

Andrew Stewart


H-Net Review [H-War]: Conley on Williams III and Lofton, 'Rice to Ruin: Saga of the Lucas Family, 1783-1929'

Andrew Stewart
 



---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: H-Net Staff via H-REVIEW <h-review@...>
Date: Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 9:18 AM
Subject: H-Net Review [H-War]: Conley on Williams III and Lofton, 'Rice to Ruin: Saga of the Lucas Family, 1783-1929'
To: <h-review@...>
Cc: H-Net Staff <revhelp@...>


Roy Williams III, Alexander Lucas Lofton.  Rice to Ruin: Saga of the
Lucas Family, 1783-1929.  Columbia  University of South Carolina
Press, 2018.  Illustrations. 452 pp.  $59.99 (cloth), ISBN
978-1-61117-834-0.

Reviewed by Nathaniel Conley (University of Arkansas)
Published on H-War (October, 2020)
Commissioned by Margaret Sankey

In _Rice to Ruin_, Roy Williams III and Alexander Lucas Lofton
provide a narrative of the lives of Jonathan Lucas and his
descendants, focusing on the work and journeys of the family during
the nineteenth century. While at its heart a genealogical study of
the Lucas family, it also provides contributions to the existing
literature in three broad categories: agricultural history, military
history, and South Carolina history.

As the title suggests, heavy emphasis is placed on the cultivation of
rice and associated developments. Jonathan Lucas "transformed the
rice culture" of South Carolina and was the "Eli Whitney of the rice
culture," who advanced mechanical developments that bound "the South
to two labor-intensive, lucrative crops [cotton and rice]" whose
predominance would only end after the Civil War (p. 6). Lucas's work
on the rice mills, both in South Carolina and England (and the
family's involvement with the same development in other parts of
Europe), led to the family being established as a major slaveholding
family in South Carolina whose wealth was built on rice and rice
milling.

The success and wealth of the family only diminished during the Civil
War. Williams and Lofton give a detailed account of the effects of
the Civil War on the Lucas family and _Rice to Ruin_ opens further
vistas on the conflict in South Carolina. As landowning gentlemen,
the Lucas family was heavily involved on the Confederate side of the
war and were in the South Carolina military. Economically, the Lucas
family was also affected by the war, especially by the emancipation
of slaves. Emancipation, and the economic dislocation of the war, led
to a decline in the family's fortunes, which continued into the
twentieth century.

_Rice to Ruin_ also gives excellent examples of the development of
South Carolina history and its connections to the broader Atlantic
World. Lucas not only revitalized rice cultivation and developed new
means of processing but also actively engaged in the Atlantic World
by spreading his process to England. By showing connections in the
broader Atlantic World, the authors contribute further to our
understanding of agricultural and technological developments during
the nineteenth century.

The insightful treatment of the Lucas family and their lives and
works during the nineteenth century could have been expanded in three
ways that would have added breadth to this deep history. First, what
were the lives of the slaves who worked the Lucas properties in South
Carolina like and what were their relationships to the Lucas family?
This is perhaps one of the biggest holes in the work as a whole and
could have provided much more texture to the narrative. Second, how
did the Lucas family, particularly Jonathan Lucas, interact with the
broader state and national politics and political issues of the
period? And third, how did the lives of the women of the Lucas
family, such as Charlotte Hume Lucas, conform to or alter our
understandings of gender among the planters of South Carolina?
Answers to all three of these questions are hinted at throughout
_Rice to Ruin_. Indeed, while Williams and Lofton argue that
"frequent slave purchases catapulted William Lucas [Jonathan Lucas's
son] into the upper echelons of slave ownership," there is not much
on how those slaves interacted with the Lucas family or whether the
Lucas family was involved in the politics of South Carolina, as many
elites were (p. 82). Furthermore, the role of the women of the Lucas
family are mentioned throughout but there is little sustained
attention to them, and an elaboration on the issue of gender would
have been very informative.

However, these critiques do not diminish the contribution of _Rice to
Ruin_ as a whole to the extant literature on agricultural history,
military history, and South Carolina history. For agricultural
historians, the role the Lucas family played in developing rice
cultivation and processing technology in the Lowcountry is especially
informative. The account of the Civil War through the eyes of the
Lucas men who were involved adds a new layer of details to the
individual and social experience of South Carolinians and will be
especially attractive to military historians. Furthermore, the rise
and decline of the Lucas family before and after the Civil War,
especially during the last decades of the nineteenth century, adds
another layer to the history of South Carolina. It is also an
excellent resource of local historians of South Carolina and students
of genealogy.

Citation: Nathaniel Conley. Review of Williams III, Roy; Lofton,
Alexander Lucas, _Rice to Ruin: Saga of the Lucas Family, 1783-1929_.
H-War, H-Net Reviews. October, 2020.
URL: https://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=53965

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons
Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States
License.




--
Best regards,

Andrew Stewart


H-Net Review [H-War]: Scanlon on Asher, 'Inside Israel's Northern Command: the Yom Kippur War on the Syrian Border'

Andrew Stewart
 



---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: H-Net Staff via H-REVIEW <h-review@...>
Date: Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 9:18 AM
Subject: H-Net Review [H-War]: Scanlon on Asher, 'Inside Israel's Northern Command: the Yom Kippur War on the Syrian Border'
To: <h-review@...>
Cc: H-Net Staff <revhelp@...>


Daniel Asher, ed.  Inside Israel's Northern Command: the Yom Kippur
War on the Syrian Border.  Lexington  University Press of Kentucky,
2016.  704 pp.  $65.00 (cloth), ISBN 978-0-8131-6737-4.

Reviewed by Sean Scanlon (University of Nebraska)
Published on H-War (October, 2020)
Commissioned by Margaret Sankey

_Inside Israel's Northern Command_ recounts the history of the
October 1973 Yom Kippur War on the Syrian front as experienced by the
leadership of Israel's Northern Command, the command responsible for
Israel's northern borders with Syria and Lebanon. Edited by Dani
Asher, a military historian and retired brigadier general in the
Israeli Defense Forces (IDF), the book is a narrative based on the
testimonies of the senior staff officers of Northern Command who
served during the conflict.

Asher and his fellow contributors aim to show that, while the joint
Egyptian-Syrian attack caught many Israelis by surprise, the soldiers
of Northern Command recovered quickly and fought exceptionally well
throughout the entire conflict. This message acts as a counterweight
to the conclusions of the Agranat Commission, which was established
in November of 1973 to investigate the IDF's performance during the
Yom Kippur War and was highly critical of senior IDF commanders. As
Yair Golan, a retired IDF major general and former commander of
Northern Command, states in the foreword, in Northern Command "a
vigorous, logical military operation shines through, not one of
negligence" (p. 25). Uri Simchoni, Northern Command's operations
officer during the Yom Kippur War, writes that Israel owed its
victory to "hundreds of little commanders and soldiers actions at
decisive points" (p. 682). To emphasize the importance that the
contributors attach to the bravery of individual soldiers and
officers, _Inside Israel's Northern Command_ includes three sections
listing Israelis who were decorated (often posthumously) during the
fighting on the Syrian front.   

The book begins with a brief introduction describing the history of
Northern Command from its foundation in 1948 to the eve of the Yom
Kippur War in 1973. The remainder of the book is divided into three
parts. Part 1, "Preparation for War," covers the months leading up to
the outbreak of war on October 6. After an initial chapter detailing
Syrian preparations for war, the next four chapters describe Northern
Command's operations in the years leading up to the outbreak of war
and its preparations for a potential conflict with Syria.

Part 2, "From Desperate Holdings to an Offensive towards Damascus,"
recounts the fighting between Israeli and Syrian forces from the
Syrian attack on October 6 to the October 22 ceasefire that ended the
conflict. These chapters describe in great detail how units of
Northern Command were pushed back during the initial Syrian offensive
but recovered quickly to halt the Syrian advance after only two days.
Northern Command's ability to quickly deploy its reserve forces was
critical to halting the Syrian advance and made possible the Israeli
counteroffensive that followed (chapter 8). Subsequent chapters
describe how counterattacking IDF units recovered all the territory
captured by Syrian forces and advanced as far as they could into
Syrian territory before a ceasefire was declared.   

Part 3, "Operating the Command Systems at War," delves into the
experiences of individual elements of Northern Command's staff during
the war, including the General Staff, intelligence, artillery, field
engineering, the air force, logistics, ordinance, medical services,
military police, adjutant branch, and communications. Of these
chapters, the chapter on intelligence (chapter 16) should be of great
interest. According to the intelligence officers on the northern
front, Northern Command was not surprised that war broke out, even if
they did not predict the exact moment when Syrian forces began their
attack (p. 530). This stands in contrast to Aman, Israel's
independent military intelligence branch, which failed to see the
approach of war and was strongly criticized by the Agranat
Commission.

The chief strengths of _Israel's Northern Command _are the
contributors' detailed descriptions of battlefield decision-making
during intense combat operations. However, several flaws limit its
usefulness to historians of the Yom Kippur War. First, with only a
couple of exceptions, the book does not clearly label where one
officer's contribution ends and another begins, making it difficult
to attribute any observation or conclusion to a specific person. The
editor and contributors also do not situate the book in the broader
literature on the Yom Kippur War, one of the most important moments
in the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. _Inside Israel's
Northern Command_ is also very narrowly focused, concentrating
intensely on the Syrian front with few references to the fighting
between Israeli and Egyptian forces to the south and little
comparison between the two theaters. While readers can learn a great
deal about the inner workings of the IDF at war from this book, it
should be read in conjunction with broader studies of this conflict.
Still, _Inside Israel's Northern Command_ will be of great interest
to readers looking for a detailed operational-level view of the
Israeli Defense Forces during one of the most important military
campaigns in Israel's history.

Citation: Sean Scanlon. Review of Asher, Daniel, ed., _Inside
Israel's Northern Command: the Yom Kippur War on the Syrian Border_.
H-War, H-Net Reviews. October, 2020.
URL: https://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=55180

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons
Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States
License.




--
Best regards,

Andrew Stewart


New Technologies, TikTok, Competition, and “Free” and Human Labor: An Interview with Economist Paula Bach | Left Voice

Louis Proyect
 


Fifty Years Ago Today, US Soldiers Joined the Vietnam Moratorium Protests in Mass Numbers

Louis Proyect
 

This never would have happened if the left had adopted black bloc tactics.

https://jacobinmag.com/2019/10/vietnam-war-moratorium-protest-gi-movement


MR Online | OPCW Syria whistleblower and ex-director attacked by U.S., UK, France at UN

Louis Proyect
 


Re: Fascism, Trumpism, and the left | Louis Proyect: The Unrepentant Marxist

Andrew Stewart
 

Andrew, you did not provide one quote from Lenin, one reference to anything from Lenin's writings or speeches, where Lenin outright "rejected and repudiated" any major point of Marxist wisdom.  Where can i find Lenin's "novel restatement of principles"? 
I am not going to play this childish game with you. You know exactly what the point is that I am making and you want to play what amounts to an inbred power game.


Twitter locks Kayleigh McEnany Out of her account after spreading fake news - Alternet.org

Louis Proyect
 


Inside the Republican Plot for Permanent Minority Rule | The New Republic

Louis Proyect
 

No need for a coup when you can retain power "legally".

https://newrepublic.com/article/159755/republican-voter-suppression-2020-election