The Noble Institution of Political Violence

The Democratic Republic of Congo has had a worse time of democracy than most. Subject to the crushing dictatorship of Mobutu Sese Seko until 1997, it was nonetheless unable to use this experience to build a strong commitment to peaceful democratic institutions, like Chile has. This is due to a variety of reasons, from ethnic and tribal divisions to the constant incursions and raids perpetrated by Ugandan and Rwandan paramilitaries. The most saddening thing is that one institution that DR Congo has developed, in common with much of Sub-Saharan Africa, is that of political violence. It is an expected and mostly accepted fact that new political rivals will introduce themselves largely through the medium of large-scale guerrilla warfare, terrorising innocent civilians, and generally fucking up the tiny and fragile government's ability to rule. When this happens, a process we are seeing now occurs, whereby the murderous warlord announces his love of peace, and wearied government officials and foreign ministers turn up and try to arrange a cease-fire and inclusive power-sharing talks. 

But this is completely the wrong way to go. If warlords are told instititutionally that they can achieve legitimate, self-sustaining power through this process, then of course they will do it more. It's blatantly a short-term salve. Share power is exactly what warlords should not be able to do. No government can survive if it's formed by ex-militants and warlords, all of whom see violence as a perfectly viable political tool. Forget technocracy and the rule of the educated elite, let's start with a government that's not bent on draining blood and money from its constituents until they're forced to scamper to Switzerland to avoid half-hearted international opprobrium.

Weber's famous definition of the state is that party that manages to establish a monopoly on the use of violence within a given territory. This may sound cold, but it's very true that this is one of the bases of actually building a state. Unless the new warlord, Laurent Nkunda, and his ridiculously named National Congress for the Defence of the People, want to challenge the government for power peacefully and institutionally, they need to shut the fuck up, or die. Literally.

AIRE

The AIRE, Anagrafe Italiani Residenti All'Estero, is a register of all Italians currently residing abroad. Previous to today, I'd been living in a semi-legal limbo (is there any other kind of    limbo?), officially residing in a small Italian town called Mirandola, whose greatest hero is Pico Della Mirandola, a philosopher who issued one of the first 'against all comers' challenges, loudly bragging that he could defend almost a thousand theses against any man. These theses, the wikipedia article asserts, 'he believed to provide a complete and sufficient basis for the discovery of all knowledge, and hence a model for mankind's ascent of the chain of being', making him irrevocably an hero. The article doesn't mention whether he was ever challenged, and if so, what happened, but since in contemporary Mirandola only 23 000 inhabitants remain, we can only assume it was such an epic clash that the decimating repercussions are still keenly felt today. 

In any case, being a resident of Mirandola meant that I could not access any consular services here in London, such as renewing my passport or more importantly, voting. Since being a resident of Mirandola actually doesn't benefit me in any way now that I am no longer officially my father's dependent, I decided to subscribe to the AIRE in a belated attempt at teenage rebellion. Imagine my surprise when, in response to a hastily compiled and sloppily signed form slotted under the doorway of the Italian consulate 2 months ago, I received back notification that I had been removed from the registry in Mirandola and placed on the AIRE! My surprise was great. 

So now I am officially a citizen of the world, and shall be signing all my cheques that way, which won't make them any more valid, but it certainly, certainly won't make them any less valid. I am also allowed to vote, which is nice, as Italy is possessed of one of the more peculiar voting systems that includes a constituency specifically for Italians living abroad. Stay tuned for the inevitable waves you'll see in the parliamentary system. This also represents the second of my life goals I have achieved since I started this blog, making this officially the most self-realised period of my life.

It's Just Vapour Lock, Honey!

Sandwiched in between news of the Congolese rebel army that's currently storming towns and sending UN peacekeeping forces packing, and a story on the increasing tensions between Iraq's newly (semi) independent government and the USA was this new low in journalistic tedium. The headline reads 'Smoke from car in Afghan capital spreads blast fear'. And that's exactly what the story says, in more or less as many lines. There was a car that broke down or something, and it started making a lot of smoke, so some people came to look, thinking it could have been a suicide bombing. But it wasn't. It was just a car, with a bit of smoke. They probably thought it was really stupid to think it was a suicide bombing when they hadn't heard any explosions, or seen any blood, or by virtue of the fact that the car was intact, with just a bit of smoke coming out from under the hood. 

You'd think Afghanistan's present situation would give the prospective reporter something more to work with than a broken down car. The article itself mentions that suicide bombings often happen in Afghanistan. Why not start there? 

My Unending Wrath and Bile

A man tried to defraud me by stealing my debit card information and with- drawing 100 pounds from my account in Malaysia. 

EDIT: It turns out that the person who defrauded me was not called Mr. A. Ryngit, as I previously assumed from looking over the shoulder of the fraud assistant at the HSBC. Ryngit, as everyone cleverer than me will know, is the Malaysian currency, not the name of the person who defrauded me. My apologies to an actual Mr. Ryngit, if he exists. My frustration and impotent rage now need new directions. Suggestions are welcome.

West Reassures Itself: At Least It's Not China

The New York Times has just published an article concerning the way the Communist Party in China mistreats its Uighur minority, especially with regards to their Islamic faith. The article is to be commended for the fact that it brought to light issues ailing this often under-reported region of the world.  Central Asia, with its labyrinthine country names and impressively hellish urban landscapes has been easily ignored by the media, so it's good that the article was written, even if it was the latest in a vein of implicit Sinophobe sentiment sweeping through America. 

The article points to several repressive measures China has taken against its Uighur population in order to stem the spread of Islam in the country. These include harsh regulations regarding the Hajj pilgrimage, a ban on government officials praying at mosques, and a ban on students taking part in fasting during Ramadan. These measures are undeniably harsh, but you can feel the self-righteous paranoia of the American press seeping through, pointing to the Chinese regime's discrimination against Islam with tremulous fingers and bleating 'Lookit, they're worse than us!'. Well, obviously. This doesn't make the disgusting and dangerous anti-Arab and anti-Muslim undertones sweeping through the USA and in a different way, through Europe, any less execrable.  

What China is realising is what the rest of the developed world has already realised, but is too cowardly to admit beyond far-right blogs and Domestic Security committees. Extremist radical religion is blatantly dangerous, and religion turns extremist and radical in areas which are suffering from either political dissatisfaction or economic suffering. The Uighur region of China is suffering from both of those, and is very clearly a powder keg for the Chinese regime, which have already had to deal with attacks from radical muslims that left 22 people dead in the region. Clearly there is a problem here beyond the Chinese Communist Party furiously getting their rocks off at the prospect of intimidating and oppressing yet another ethnic minority.  The way they are dealing with it is characteristically heavy-handed and unhelpful. Radical Islam burgeons in the region because the Chinese government is squeezing tight, and it won't get better if China squeezes even tighter. The Chinese authorities need to see all the red flags they're putting up (as it were), and instead turn their hand to initiatives designed to coopt and assimilate Islamic culture into their society, rather than compartmentalising and problematising it. 

(Correction: due to the strong protestations of one of my beloved readers, A Politic Blunder would like to make clear that it does not believe that the USA is more islamophobic than Europe.)

Retarded Begets Retarded

I've decided to go ahead and give you a Double-Dip of Political Palsy today. Two events, related only by the sheer amount of stupidity required in both cases, hit the news today: 

An ambiguous shootout on the Thai-Cambodian border which resulted in the deaths of two Cambodian soldiers is being hailed as the prelude to an all-out war between the two countries. Although neither side claims belligerence, and both governments have made appeals for calm, Reuters is 

doing the media equivalent of jeering 'Fight! Fight! Fight!' by going to the most impoverished, disgruntled and ill-educated members of each of the respective societies and asking them how they feel about the prospect of war. Unsurprisingly, a 65 year-old Thai farmer thinks 'the Khmers are laughing at us', and a 48 year-old Cambodian motorbike taxi driver says the Thais are 'trying to steal our house'. This is blatantly military bluster on both sides, serving Thailand's Somchai by diverting attention from the recent democratic crisis, and serving Cambodia's Hun Sen by diverting attention from how shit his regime is in general. Nonetheless: 'Fight! Fight, you pussies!' 

Sudan's President Omar Hassan al-Bashir, today announced his plan to end genocide in Darfur in perhaps the most

 disastrously retarded language he possibly could have thought of: 'Despite the difficulties and obstacles... we declare our determination to reach a final solution this time.' In the most toothless illusion of an announcement to have come out of Africa in the past 10 years (and that's saying a whole lot. Like, several books' worth.), he announced his plan to bring peace to Darfur mainly involved ending the violence. The intransigent and unhelpful rebels have been all skeptical about his desire for peace, too. The international community isn't holding it's breath, either. Official Sudanese estimates put the death toll at 10,000,  about one twentieth the figure the International Criminal Court is disseminating. Bashir claims the Western neo-colonial imperialistic media has grossly inflated the figure, ostensibly because ignoring the deaths of 200,000 people makes us feel more self-satisfied than ignoring 10,000 deaths.

The ICC has an outstanding warrant for the arrest of Bashir, shown above in his favourite peace-building outfit.

Tomorrow: FORBIDDEN LOVE! Exclusive pics of John McCain and Joseph Stiglitz's illicit affair in the sun-drenched Carribbean!

This Also Happened...

The School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS), finds its library making its most politically insightful comment yet (pictured left). 

SOAS is generally a very good school, with a friendly community and a genuinely impressive library. The administrative failures it is famous for are present, and are embarrassing, but it's easy to be sympathetic with the professors, who are truly passionate about their subject.  SOAS is also famous for possessing the highest concentration of trustafarians in the world. To be frank, I have yet to actually encounter that many of them around the campus. You see baggy hemp and dreadlocks, you smell stale weed, and you occasionally hear the hue and cry of orientalist indignation (''S'all about deh people, cha blud! Brap!''), but it's more of a sticky residue clinging to the corners of the stairwells than a pretentious wall of postcolonial elitism. If you want to be loud, idealistic, and drunk, there is certainly space for you. But at the postgraduate level especially, those who want to quietly work their way through to practical if unambitious degree aren't crowded out.

That said, the SOAS refectory had the following scrawled personal ad posted in two separate places: 'Looking for asexual cuddle-buddy. Must be at least 6 ft. tall and not too well hung. Call for hugs.' So maybe I was utterly, utterly wrong. 

Gentlemen Pirates of the High Seas

Somalia has always been a region wracked by conflict and poor economic performance. However, on September 25th the eyes of the world turned to the seas outside Somalia for a reason other than laughing and pointing at starving children. A group of approximately 20 Somali pirates have hijacked a Ukrainian freighter carrying an enormous amount of badass military hardware, including grenades, ammunition, and 33 tanks. The pirates have since been embroiled in a tense standoff, with 5 US warships surrounding it, a Russian frigate on its way, and NATO promising to send reinforcements. With literally the united military might of the world arrayed against them, the group of ill-armed pirates demanded to enter into negotiations, and nominated a spokesman for their 'organisation', Sugule Ali, who in a 45-minute phone interview discussed the pirates' demands ($20 million in ransom for the ship), and their political motivations (protecting the seas from illegal fishers and dumping). Sugule has a point, since following the obliteration of anything resembling a juridical or political structure in Somalia, its tuna-rich waters have been repeatedly overfished by commercial liners eager to cash in on the country's crisis.

However, the relentlessly awesome idea of a group of Somali fishermen turned pirates holding a massive freighter full of weapons up for ransom will no doubt be making Jerry Bruckheimer and Ridley Scott cum out of their eyes(Pirates of Somaliland!). They were unavailable for comment. The pirates themselves don't seem like too bad a lot. Somali pirates are infamous for brutal acts of wanton destruction, and this does happen to an unacceptable degree, but in fact the area has established a dangerous balance whereby most ships attacked are simply held for ransom. These particular pirates are demanding a huge sum of money, and are threatening to 'blow up the ship and its cargo - us included', if their demands are not met. Of course, once they get the money (if they aren't slaughtered by the military commando strike Lieutenant Nate Christensen of the 5th US fleet is proposing), they will face the interesting problem of actually getting far away enough from the arrayed forces of the world's military powers to actually use their booty(Pirates of Somaliland 2: Japes in Japan!, Pirates of Somaliland 3: Last Stand in Tajikistan!). 

The Vice Presidential Debate and the Undying Lies of the Right: A Politic Blunder Feature

Today in the Evening Standard, on Governor Palin, Vice-Presidential candidate. Drawn from the first paragraph:

'Onto the gladiatorial set of the vice presidential debate she strode, firmly upholstered in a black suit exuding sexy sobriety without being anywhere near fashionable. The trademark beehive had softened into a copper-highlighted style girlishly tumbling around her shoulders, like the shiny-shiny women in the hair colour ads. Homely current (sic) bun eyes were outlined in warrior black kohl.' -Anne McElvoy

Well done, Anne. Within the first paragraph, you have simultaneously lowered the tone of political debate, alerting the reader to the smug and vacuous style that obtains throughout the rest of your piece, and setting back the cause of women seeking to participate in politics as human beings, rather than mannequins. That's a lot of cunting to get done in a few dozen-odd words, and I'm frankly impressed, Anne. You must have gone to a real school.  

As for the actual debate, pundits and commentators are calling it very close, with some saying that they 'both won'. This is nonsense. The surprise here is that Joe Biden, who is known for cluttering his words and saying unfortunate things, did not, and that Sarah Palin did not speak politics like a petulant child. Sarah Palin still embarrassed herself thoroughly from beginning to end. Her assertions on foreign policy, economics and social policy were all firmly refuted by Biden, her several factual inaccuracies, lies, and citations out of context were quashed by Biden throughout, and her smug folksy demeanour seems to be finding less purchase nowadays. 

Biden, on the other hand, performed admirably. Most impressive was the discipline he showed in avoiding personal attacks or tonal insinuations, and sticking to his arguments concerning policy. Of particular note was where Biden specifically held himself back from stating that McCain has been opposed to every major attempt to extend the world's arms control regimes, saying 'I shouldn't say every...'. This is an exaggeration Palin would have been only too happy to make, but the fact that Biden compromised the rhythm and forcefulness of his comment for accuracy is admirable. The entire debate is on Youtube, and both my readers should watch it.

Top Quote:

'John McCain, knows how to win a war, he's been there, he's done it'   - Sarah Palin

If 'he's been there' refers to Vietnam, then John McCain knows how to lose an ill-executed war of aggression against a much smaller power, make an undignified withdrawal, then loudly claim for the following 40 years that 'it was a draw'.

(This is the end of my comments on the debate. The rest of the post consists of my general observations on the political techniques of the Right. Read at your own peril.)

This is by no means surprising though. Neither is it the especial fault of Sarah Palin. The Republican party, as with the vast majority of right-wing parties, have to contend with the peculiar phenomenon whereby democracy requires the majority vote, and the majority of any country is usually the worse off. Yet the Republican party is mind, body and soul a pro-business, anti-redistribution party, with a strong dollop of foreign aggression and domestic social control thrown in. The three main tools that all right-wing parties across the world use to win elections are ever the same: Jingoism and fearmongering, populism, and the Holy Grail of Efficiency.

Everyone is familiar with the first: the Right's incessant notion that the people are under constant siege. In the UK it is from hoodies, from 13-year old black boys with knives, from jihadis living in Whitechapel. In the USA it is from Iran, Iraq, and Afghanistan. It becomes a matter of utmost priority to ensure that these elements are eradicated with extreme prejudice. This, the Right will tell you, is far more important than economic reform, diplomacy, or any kind of progressive social reform. This is because of the tried and true political credo that, if a nation feels itself at war, or in mortal danger, it will ignore all other issues. This is the first way the right-wing gets the poorer majority to forget that they are voting for a government that will transparently harm their interests. 

The second main way they do this is through populist lies. The Right, in the USA especially but everywhere else as well, loves spinning stories about the 'honest, hardworking family': usually lower middle-class, devoutly religious, no-nonsense, awash with dignity and sobriety. The implication here is that decency, religion and honesty are all characteristics of the right, not the depraved, 'progressive', vicissitude-ridden left. This is a powerful narrative, especially in countries with huge swathes of fanatically religious ill-educated voters, like most of Latin America, most of Africa, and of course, the USA. This is the key behind Palin's effectiveness. This is how the Right convinces the poor majority, especially those in rural or backwater areas, that it is a government run for people like them, because it is a government formed of people like them. 

The third way the Right deceives the poor it is about to fuck over is through the ubiquitous spectre of efficiency. The right loves to talk about cutting taxes, it is in every election all over the world one of its main talking points. This is because no one likes paying taxes, and it is politically attractive to tell people that you're not going to take as much money from them. But when the Left inevitably brings up the very attractive government projects of redistribution and welfare it has planned, the voters begin to doubt that the Right is really on their side. This is when the Right, in every single election, will say that it can execute just as many government projects as the Left, and levy less taxes. The Right says that it can do this through 'streamlining', 'reform', 'oversight', 'greater efficiency', or a dozen other empty words. There is no reason to believe that the Right is somehow magically better at cutting costs and streamlining operations than the Left. And yet voters consistently see the Right as more down-to-earth, more realistic and ultimately more efficient than the Left.

Of course, all these lies are terribly effective. The rural poor are often the strongest voting base for the Right, and it has been shown to a depressing extent that the lower the education level of the working class, the more likely it is to vote for the Right. It's a basic political truth that Left-wing policies are aimed at ameliorating the lot of the poor and the struggling, and Right-wing policies are not. I'm not saying that you have to be stupid to vote for the Right. I'm saying you have to be stupid to be poor and vote for the Right.  

Thus concludes the first Politic Blunder Feature length post.

P.S. Thanks to Stephen for the source.