Kim Jong Un Sports New Haircut, North Korea Still Totalitarian Dictatorship
2015 February 20
(courtesy of vox.com)
The biggest news out of North Korea (formally known as the Democratic Peopleâs Republic of Korea, or the DPRK) is the young dictator of roughly 25 million peopleâs new haircut.
Instead of continuing focus on the countless human rights abuses, like the  174,500+ political prisoners in the âofficialâ camps, western media instead sees fit to highlight what this haircut might mean, does this signal a new direction for the country?
The answer is quite obvious. Unless next week, we suddenly hear of the camps being closed and of impending free elections, then no, this haircut does not mean a new direction for the country.
North Korea has no free elections, every party in the legislature swears loyalty to Workerâs Party, which is constitutionally declared the leader of the state. Never mind that, look how his eyebrows are partially shaved, how strange!
Reading this article could (will) carry a strong punishment in North Korea. Also, Kimâs new haircut seems to defy gravity, much in the same way the DPRK continues to defy UN calls to improve living conditions in the country.
North Korea is treated like a spoiled child, a funny source for movies, the laughing stock of the international community. But the atrocities committed in the DPRK are, according to at least one UN report, crimes against humanity, and according to the Guardian, resemble those committed by Nazi Germany.
But look at Kim Jong unâs new hairdo? Lol, isnât it so quirky?
Three Muslim students were slain yesterday evening in Chapel Hill, NC. The perpetrator was 46 year old Craig Hicks, who shot all three to death. The Chapel Hill police have offered no comment. Subsequently to the silence, news outlets are stating that the gunmanâs motive is simply âunknownâ, or a parking spot feud. Really? More below the cut.
âFundamentalist atheismâ may sound like an oxymoron, but the phenomenon has been on a steep rise over recent years. Its devout followers commonly lurk in forums and social media, itching to fight with their adversary: the theist. These threads almost inevitably including fundie atheists rushing to use recycled jabs at religion. After all, what better way to look superior than to fling tired, reductionist hate speech at the competition? Many brush this off as petty aggression, but that isnât where it ends.
One common tactic of the militant atheists in argument is to depict atheists as levelheaded and âtheistsâ, in turn, as brutal and cruel. However, the recent killings in Chapel Hill have given a very different example: according to Abu-Salha, father of two of the victims, speaking to the newsobserver.com, âIt was execution style, a bullet in every head. This was not a dispute over a parking space; this was a hate crime. This man had picked on my daughter and her husband a couple of times before, and he talked with them with his gun in his belt. And they were uncomfortable with him, but they did not know he would go this far.â Unlike the gunman, who has been described as a âtroublemakerâ, the victims were known for community outreach.
Even that isnât the full extremity of some radical atheist action. One popular atheist Twitter account claims, âMuslim terrorists are killing people. Christian terrorists are killing people. Atheist terrorists are posting science articles online.â (x) This past July, militant atheist suicide bombers took 29 lives in Iraq. Comment, TheGoodGodAbove? And couldnât one easily argue that the Chapel Hill gunman is, in essence, a terrorist himself? If the roles were reversed, what would the headlines be saying? How many more headlines would there be? Regardless, even if fundie atheist activity were limited to the internet, the reality of the unsolicited harassment of religious people by fundie atheists still stands.
Now, this isnât to say that no religious people harass anyone, or that all atheists do. This does not take away from the fact that militant atheists do harass people. Well, Iâm right! cries Anti-theist Andy, then turning to mock those of different religious affiliations saying the exact same thing. He also extends this to people who havenât confronted him with the same assertions. This doesnât just include televangelists and scientologists: even religious folk minding their own business are often in Andyâs line of fire. Andy thinks his shit doesnât stink. Andy is wrong.
It also doesnât mean that all atheists are somehow responsible for the attack in any capacity, but there is an irony in this: according to Vox, one r/atheist user said âIâm expecting to see all the religious folks start shouting how dangerous atheists are now.â Sound familiar? Need another neckbeard rant on the perils of religion to jog your memory? It seems that fundie atheists are feeling a meager breeze of the windstorm Muslims (again, the group victimized by the Chapel Hill killings) are so accustomed to, and they are not liking it. So, where is the productivity in that comment? What should Muslims be doing in light of this attack? Apologizing? Saying, âsorry that one of yours killing three of ours might cause you some temporary annoyanceâ? Where are your comments condemning the killer, bruh? Got any other tracks to that mind of yours? Are you seriously using an anti-religious attack that claimed three Muslim studentsâ lives to whine about religious people? About the hypothetical profiling of atheists? Sound familiar? âIslamic terroristsâ? Racial profiling?)
Bruh.
Now is the time for some bigger-picture dialogue on religious persecution. This issue needs to be addressed ASAP. None of the victimization by terrorism and intolerance has to be for naught. One of the steps we have to be taking is to examine every way this manifests, including anti-theistic aggression. In a world where the majority of violent terrorism is carried out in the name of political or otherwise non-religious causes, and Muslims comprising some of the least of the terrorist demographic, yet the majority of its victims are Muslim and it is Muslims who receive the terrorist profiling, the myth of Islam or religion as a whole being the premiere force of terrorism and the like needs to be nullified. The myth, too, of the âneutral radical atheistâ is not only contradictory, but just thatâ a myth. It does not and cannot exist in a sociocultural vacuum. Religious persecution is malignant no matter who its host is. One internet saying that addresses this âRichard Dawkins is to atheism what Fred Phelps is to Christianity.â This applies more widely than just to  Richard Dawkins, anti-theist poster boy, and the last thing we need is a variety more of Fred Phelps in any incarnation, and we especially donât need more Islamophobia.
From the US to Gaza and beyond, #MuslimLivesMatter.
On February 1st, 2015, the United Steelworkers Union (USW) called for the largest national strike of oil workers since 1980. 3800 workers where initially asked to strike after talks broke down between the USW and Shell.
Demanding better wages and safer working conditions, the workers walked out of their jobs. Coming during a time of plummeting oil prices and record profits on behalf of companies like Exxon, the strike could not be better.
The past 6 years have seen great stagnation in pay. Wages in the United States have fallen or not kept pace with the rising cost of living for over 2 decades, and in a world where climate change is at least on every rational human's mind, this strike brings to the forefront a major question: what do we do as a society with all the jobs invested in industries that solely destroy the planet?
The Strike Grows
On February 8, thinkprogress reported that BP oilworkers in Toledo and elsewhere joined the strike, bringing the total number of strikers up by an additional 1,400.
Now at 13% of the US' oil refinery capacity, the strike must either grow or be resolved (hopefully the strike will succeed). A full USW strike would be 63% of the oil refineries in the United States. As of now, USW leadership is insisting the strike is over safety, not wages, and trying to keep the strike limited to a few refineries. Worker opinion luckily is the opposite, including a wish to expand the strike even further and to raise wages.
Corporations Dig In
Refusing to back down from their inaccurate position that these are needed cuts (despite being perfectly profitable and having only seen a drop in profit in the last quarter), the major players, Chevron, Exxon, Shell, and BP have all refused to back down from their demands that the workers submit to lower wages, continued safety hazards, and expensive healthcare. Using the low price of oil as an excuse to push for even more cuts they don't need for any other reason than to increase an already positive profit margin.
FLICKR/JOEY LAX-SALINAS
If the strike spreads to its highest capacity, it could no doubt at least make the industry struggle, and in the best case, paralyze the production until the corporate leadership is brought to its knees and agrees to better conditions for the workers.Â
It's no secret the United States and its allies have meddled in Middle East affairs for a long time.
The west has picked sides, overthrown governments, and the British even drew the borders of many of these nations.
Thats where the first part of the instability comes from, the same instability that ISIS loves.
Borders Disregard Ethnic and Tribal Lines
Do you see a state for the Yazidi? The Kurds? No. The majority of the middle east (Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Iraq) were part of the Ottoman Empire, which as the end of World War 1, was occupied by the victories allies (the Empire fought on the side of the Germans). The British got the majority of these as protectorates and mandates, continuing the tradition of interfering with the affairs of people it viewed as inferior.
Turkey, Syria, Iran, and Iraq all have corners that really should be part of an independent Kurdistan. The Kurds and many others have as a result become a stateless people, often subjected to oppression because of the governments of Shiites
But this isn't enough to cause instability. There has to be other things. Things like...
Governments are Supported Artificially
With the exception of Saudi Arabia, the majority of the governments enjoy support from the west that without they might not exist.
The Iraqi government installed by the US after the second gulf war. Is it effective? No. Is it popular? No. Is it unified? No. Pro-American? Maybe...Â
The Driving Force in Western Policy is Wrong
If the European Union, NATO, and the US really wanted peace in the region, they would not have engineered a coup to remove the democratically elected president of Iran. They would not have toppled the Hussein regime. They would back the Kurdish people.
The thing is, the west doesn't care too much about peace. It wants profitability. Concern about ISIS takes a back seat to concern about Turkey's concern about the PKK. It takes a backseat to concern about being on the same side in a conflict as Iran (a country that would be very different had it not been for the meddling of the CIA and MI5).
(courtesy of NBC)
Everyone knows that simply removing the Islamic State will only kick the can down the road until another group seizes the opportunity to fill the inevitable power void that current western MidEast policy creates. The US and the rest of the world can have a part in shaping the middle east, but it has to be for their benefit, not ours.
Shiite Rebels Dissolve Yemen Parliament, Take Over
Friday, February 6th, 2015
(image via Yahoo News)
After years of conflict between the Yemeni government and Shiite-Houthi rebels, the government has resigned en masse, leaving the rebels in charge of the countryâs political sphere. More below the cut.Â
The Shiite rebels have claimed their victory over Yemen. The powerhouse of a group announced their takeover of the Yemen earlier today; the final phase of action that led to the Shiite seize Sanaa (the nationâs capital and center of government) in September. Their victory and rule have now been made official as the president and former members of the Yemeni cabinet have admitted defeat in wake of longstanding action by the Houthi rebellion.
It was an unnamed Shiite correspondent who read the announcement over national television, claiming the shift in power would bring âa new era that will take Yemen to safe shores.â According to news group Yalibnan, âThe Shiâite Muslim movement, which is backed by Iran, had set a Wednesday deadline for political factions to agree a way out of the crisis, otherwise, the group said, it would impose its own solution.â Yemen has had a tumultuous recent history, and it is widely speculated that the takeover will only plummet the nation further into chaos, contrary to the groupâs claims. Only time will tell for certain.
More to come as the situation unfolds.
Follow for updates on this story and more. Request to be added to The Civil Pressâ mailing list by contacting us at [email protected]. Subscribe to our Twitter and Youtube channel for additional content.
âYou Will Know Who The Jordanians Areâ: Jordanâs Anti-ISIS Initiative
February 6th, 2015
The recent execution of Jordanian fighter pilot Lt. Moath al-Kasasbeh has sparked mass outrage in Jordan. The Jordanian people have brought passion to the streets, but thatâs far from being all the nation has in store. More below the cut.
It has been just days since the reveal of the brutal executive of Lt. Moth al-Kasasbeh of Jordan by ISIS. The 27 year old was caged and burned to death in spite of the nationâs efforts to negotiate. According to NBC News, âState media reported on Tuesday that al-Kasasbeh was killed on Jan. 3 â which could suggest Jordan knew its negotiations weeks later for the pilot's release would be for nought. It would also indicate that ISIS was bluffing â and never had any intention to spare the pilot's life.â
The response has been massive, kindled by the disturbing video of the incident put out by the terrorist organization. The anger on the streets hasnât been the only outcry-- Â King Abdullah himself has vowed ârelentlessâ war in response to the disturbing act, executing several Al-Qaeda prisoners and more. The angry king also quoted Clint Eastwoodâs acclaimed film Unforgiven, stating "Any man I see out there, I'm gonna kill him. Any son of a bitch takes a shot at me, I'm not only going to kill him, I'm going to kill his wife and all his friends and burn his damn house down."
True to King Abdullahâs words, the Jordanian military has carried out airstrikes in retaliation, and claims that they are âjust the beginningâ. This video was posted to the Jordan Armed Forces Facebook page just yesterday, featuring attack pilots like Moath al-Kasasbeh himself. To many, full-fledged war seems inevitable.
Follow for updates. Request to be added to The Civil Pressâ mailing list by contacting us at [email protected]. Subscribe to our Twitter and Youtube channel for additional content.
Something that often keeps me on edge is the fact that the protesting seems to end. The street movements never leave the streets. Why? The people clearly want progress, how can the government (that is supposedly democratic) be so at odds with what most people want? Why are there no political parties of the left in power (SYRIZA, perhaps Cuba too being the exception). While there are certainly acts on behalf of the government to crush protests (Ferguson, Occupy, every anti-G8 protest in the history of forever), given enough mobilisation and numbers, this can be overcome. And why isnât that happening? It seems that all too often, there seems to be a lack of cohesiveness in left-wing politics.
(courtesy of Getty Images)
We all thought (at least I did) that weâd see some true and lasting change a few years ago with the Occupy movement. Unfortunately, the only lasting influence we seem to have gotten from it was the introduction of the term â1%â and â99%â into the common vernacular.
Iâm already in the minority when it comes to my view that websites like tumblr and reddit, while perhaps winning battles, are a detriment to the war against intolerance, capitalism, and the right.
How can we be cohesive?
For one, stop the infighting. Sectarianism is the downfall of so many movements. Occupy had supporters ranging from centrist Obama voters to radical Marxists. It was great for getting them all out there but the fact of the matter is there are irreconcilable differences between Liberals and Socialists.
Liberals are concerned with things like raising the minimum wage, welfare, and perhaps guaranteed basic income.
Socialists want democratic control of the means of production. It is not just a matter of âimprovingâ the life of workers. It views market economies as inherently oppressive.
"Can the two never work on the same side?"
Of course they can! Donât be absurd. Socialists should and do support (and often spearhead) things like increasing the minimum wage. They provide a basis from which to promote socialism and they benefit the working class. Voting with someone with different views than you doesnât compromise your political integrity.
Meeting of the Socialist Party, Leeds, UK
Another problem is something dubbed âfairness fatigue" by one person. The problem arises from good intentions and a need to accommodate people that are oppressed in some way additional to their status in the lower class.
Perhaps during meetings and planning, we should spend less time on inward discussion and more time on political schemes and social justice outside the group. Thatâs my main complaint about high school and college level politics groups on the left. Having no backing from powerful groups and people, they cannot afford to only reflect and discuss within their own groups. They need to start at their school and work outward. How long have radical left groups existed in colleges? Shouldnât we be seeing some change beyond a small victory here and a small victory there?We can talk about injustices like sexism, classism, and racism (I want to include the -ism for trans issues but I donât know if there is one) all day long but nothing is forcing the people and institutions responsible to change. Iâm not sure about the rest of the left, but I want to leave this world having crossed off some major victories, not just a few wins.
Thursday is here again, and you know what that means: throwbacks abound. This day every week, our news feeds are flooded with old selfies, cherished anecdotes, and all the in-between. Keeping with the spirit, we at The Civil Press have decided to share some of our own. Remember when Gov. Perry couldnât identify the vagina on an anatomically correct doll? Or when two female US politicians were banned from a debate on abortion for saying âvaginaâ? This isnât The Onion, folks.Â
There is no shortage of incidents like these. They are just smaller pieces of a larger issue. Politicians without wombs or basic knowledge of wombs, and often without respect for those who bear wombs, are calling the shots on womenâs health. In the same breath that brought his blunder, Gov. Perry stated: âYou donât need to own an SUV to know where to pump the gasâ. Needless to say, the statement didnât hold up, being met with booâs from the audience of med students and debunked by his failure to locate some pretty basic anatomy, but what if he had correctly identified the vagina? Would that give him the right to act as an authority on abortion?
This journalist says no.
In fact, Iâm opposed even to the idea of some alternate universe medically competent Rick Perry acting as an authority. Iâm opposed to alternate universe left-wing, pro-choice Rick Perry acting as an authority. Why shouldnât I be? This isnât a question of political alignments: itâs a question of female autonomy.
Certainly any freedom-toting conservative brother or sister reading this can understand the desire for autonomy. Itâs a basic pillar of right wing philosophy. The same politicians who constantly push for their own freedoms impeding on the freedoms of others is ironic in the worst of ways, even hypocritical. The right wing being the anti-choice force is an oxymoron in and of itself. The double standard raises a controversial question: are these politicians genuinely committed to these pillars they claim to represent, or are they acting for their own gain?
You can draw your own conclusions on that one.
But the point here is that if a medically competent guy acting as an authority on womenâs health would be bad, a medically incompetent guy doing the same is double-bad. Perryâs âhell, I was closeâ is not close enough. The silencing of female politicians in matters of womenâs health and the censorship of medically accurate terminology only fodders the long-burning flame of medical illiteracy. This lack of understanding needs to remedied. We need to fully understand this topic in order for productive discussion to occur.
More importantly: the politicians facilitating related forums, controlling the legislature, and ultimately representing us need to better understand the topic in order for progress to occur. We need less Rick Perrys. More than that, we need more Wendy Davises--throwback to her standing for a 13 hour filibuster advocating pro-choice. We need more openness and, most of all, more legitimate, unbiased sexual education. The female reproductive system is a mystery to more people than just Texasâ far-right governor.
Perhaps some of you know about austerity. In the European Union, the 2008 debt crisis that was felt globally had a massive impact on the states of the EU.
In Greece, it was felt harder than most other member states. The ruling governments collapsed and several successive governments have made deals with the European Central Bank, the International Monetary Fund, and the European Commission (the troika). This is austerity. Massive tax hikes (on the poor). Massive spending cuts. It plunges the working class into darkness while only minimally effecting the country's ruling classes. There have been massive protests across Europe in the wake of this. Public workers have been laid off, public services privatised, regulations of banks have been relaxed. Its basically everything beneficial to the 1% and bad for the rest of us. And its not even democratic, these are terms that Greece is legally bound to by the IMF and the EU.
SYRIZA
A coalition of left wing parties. Founded in 2004, rising to the second largest party in Parliament in 2012, and barely 2 weeks ago, seizing power with just 2 seats short of an absolute majority in the Hellenic Parliament in snap elections.
Campaigning on a platform of justice, progress, and prosperity, the party's leader, Alex Tsipras, has pledged to raise taxes on the wealthy, to rehire all the public workers laid off, to increase spending on what benefits people, not business, like education, infrastructure, and healthcare. Additionally, the party is moving to nationalise key industries and to halt the privatization of several more government agencies and corporations. The person in charge of the national police was beaten by those same police in anti-austerity protests. The person to negotiate new terms with the Troika has called austerity "fiscal waterboarding". Among these appointments are several policies like absolving the poor of debt, providing free electricity to 300,000 families, and to grant citizenship to many refugees. You can read the full platform here (its from 2012 but it hasn't changed much).
SYRIZA Supporters.
This is what I want to see in the left worldwide. Not just innocent people getting their guts kicked out by the authoritarian state. No amount of protest will end the systemic oppression of minorities. While the left blocks traffic, the right takes office. While we argue about the intellectual value of tactics, the state increases its authoritarian stint. To simply continue to protest may bring change, but in how long? This party has been in power and already change is being felt. Perhaps this will lead to more victories for the left.
What Makes A Genocide? The International Court of Justice Rules on Croatia-Serbia Case
Tuesday, February 3, 2015Â
(image via BBC)
The case of Serbia and Croatiaâs claims of genocide against one another has come to a definitive ending, both granted absolvement from their alleged crimes. More below the cut.
Twenty years after the end of Croatiaâs war for independence and seventy years after the end of Yugoslavia's WWII conflict, the ICJ--the UN's high court, also known as "The Hague"-- has ruled to absolve both nations of genocide.
The rivalry has lasted decades, including attempted âethnic cleansingâ and full-fledged war. During world war two, Serbs were heavily persecuted by Croats. During Croatiaâs war for independence, the inverse was true. The persecution, however, has seemed to be mutual throughout. Read more about the nationsâ history here.
Croatia originally filed against Serbia to claim genocide in 1999, and Serbia countered with a similar suit. It wasnât the first of Serbian involvement in a genocide case or even being at the receiving end of such accusations: read more about the Bosnian genocide case here.
Serbian Justice Minister Nikola Selakovik and Croatian Foreign Minister Vesna Pusnic gave similar statements to the press following the ruling: Selakvovik stating "This marks the end of one page on the past, and I'm convinced we will start a new page on the future, much brighter and betterâ; Vesna, that she hopes the ruling helping in "closing this historic chapter and moving on to a better and safer period for people in this part of Europe."
The official ruling is posted here.
What are your thoughts on the conflict or ruling? What do you foresee in the nationsâ futures?
baratheonpilled
andulkaphoto
snowghoul
turnnoffyourmind
ellievsbear
prguitarman