About My Blog

My blog is about history, popular culture, politics and current events from a democratic socialist and Irish republican perspective. The two main topics are Northern Ireland on one hand and fighting anti-Semitism, racism and homophobia on the other. The third topic is supporting the Palestinians, and there are several minor topics. The three main topics overlap quite a bit. I have to admit that it’s not going to help me get a graduate degree, especially because it’s almost always written very casually. But there are some high-quality essays, some posts that come close to being high-quality essays, political reviews of Sci-Fi TV episodes (Star Trek and Babylon 5), and a unique kind of political, progressive poetry you won't find anywhere else. (there are also reviews of episodes of Law and Order: Special Victims Unit and reviews of Roseanne)



(The "Table of Contents" offers brief descriptions of all but the most recent posts)


Showing posts with label imperialism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label imperialism. Show all posts

Thursday, March 6, 2025

Trump, Gaza, and Genocide

(This (with a tiny bit of editing) was published 3/8/25 in the Daily Camera here (a small part of what is below wasn't submitted to the Camera- the parenthetical italicized statements))

 

Since 10th grade (1991-92) I have supported the Palestinians (i.e. I have publicly said in the last 18 months that if it resembled, in terms of targets and methods, what the Irish Republican Army did I would probably support an armed campaign by the Palestinians (see this and this). Since Oct. 8th I have often but decreasingly thought that a lot of Palestine solidarity activists might be using the term “genocide” inappropriately. Looking at the UN definition, yes there have been and are several elements of the crime found in the war on Gaza and to a much lesser degree, Israeli Apartheid in general (stretching back to the creation of the state). In the last 18 months I was not certain that there was an INTENT to destroy the Palestinian population. After I learned what kind of government there is in Israel now, and as the assault on Gaza went on and on and on, I started thinking- more and more that maybe, yes, something I THOUGHT was possible was ACTUALLY HAPPENING- the genocide of the Palestinians. But that’s nothing- in terms of my certitude that it’s genocide and in terms of the national destruction involved- compared to what Donald Trump has proposed.

Moving the entire Gaza population elsewhere would eliminate them as Gazans. They would be leaving their land, not because it’s become a “dust bowl,” not because the place was nuked and humans in general couldn’t live there anymore, etc. but because of hatred towards them in connection with their racial and/or national and/or religious identity (one thing that backs me up on this is an explanation here of how Apartheid IS the right word to apply to Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians in areas it controls). And transforming that now-blood-drenched beach-front property into something that practically no Palestinian could afford to live in would underline their loss- news reports (for example) about Trump’s Riviera would be reminders of what Trump did and would be rubbing it in. In general, Trump’s plan would involve some kind of national trauma comparable to the historical trauma experienced by American Indian communities.

(Nothing in this essay is meant to excuse or justify what happened Oct. 7th, which was mostly an attack on Israeli civilians. I have written a LOT of material critical of Hamas (here, here and here), but at this point it is time for me to focus more on the Palestinians)

In Ireland, the political party Sinn Fein (which was associated with the IRA and is now the biggest party if you look at votes in both the North and the South) announced that they will be boycotting the St. Patrick Day events at the White House this year and they are doing that because of Trump’s plans for Gaza. It might help everyone if I explain something here- SF, especially in the last 3-4 decades, makes a fair amount of effort to avoid conflicts in America with American politicians when it’s about something not central to justice for N. Ireland Catholics and/or peace in N. Ireland. That should help Americans understand how serious this situation with Gaza is- SF and most of the world are terrified by what Trump said.

In addition to the trauma experienced by Gazans, Trump’s plan will not bring peace to the middle-east. To one degree or another almost everyone there supports the Palestinians. If Egypt and/or Jordan cooperate with Trump, the governments in those two countries will probably be overthrown. The odds are pretty good there will be various renewed efforts to attack Israel. There will be more efforts to attack American targets.

There are some other flaws in Trump’s plan. How many REALLY nice pieces of real estate are A) empty of people and B) lucrative enough that two million or more Palestinians could prosper there? I have no idea what location Trump is thinking of. He kind of skirts around this, but he should be politically apprehended for pretty much saying that there will be no reconstruction in Gaza as long as the Palestinians are there but as soon as they are dragged away THEN it will be re-built for rich people. And he’s pretty much said that no, there will be no return.

Trump and Israel must be stopped before they do something horrible.

(An essay I wrote about the flaws in the Zionist argument and how to resolve the conflict is here)

Friday, July 15, 2022

My Position on Ukraine

As I’ll explain below, I basically support Ukraine. I don’t see a Nazi problem there any more serious than what most white countries have, I don’t see why it’s so important for Russia to intervene in support of the the Russia population in Ukraine, I find Putin offensive for various reasons, etc. However I am also concerned about a war starting between the US and Russia.


About 40% of my info for this is from CNN, about 40% is from NPR, and the rest is miscellaneous stuff including Dave Anderson’s column.

1. I have heard almost nothing about a current problem with Nazis in Ukraine. According to Dave Anderson in the Boulder Weekly, the Nazis are no longer politically significant. I DID read on CNN.com about a battalion of the Ukrainian military that is more right-wing than most military units. But I got the impression it was also not very significant. I have read that the President of Ukraine is Jewish, probably less than 100%. And although it’s not a good sign for him that I feel a need to say this, I get the impression he is okay with people of color (he recently addressed some body of the African Union and met with his counterpart from Indonesia). I have read of Putin making vague references to Nazism in Ukraine, but they’re incredibly vague. I have heard some stuff making me think that RUSSIA is the one with the Nazi problem.
2. I have heard almost nothing about Russian-speaking people being oppressed in Ukraine. I’m not sure what to think of what happened with Viktor Yanukovych. I don’t remember exactly what happened, but everything else I have read indicates that Ukraine is a healthy democracy and aside from the thing about Yanukovych I have not heard of anything about the Russian-speaking population of Ukraine being oppressed.
3. I don’t believe that NATO expansion explains what Putin is doing to Ukraine and I’m certain it doesn’t justify it. Putin has been acting like an imperialist- taking little bits here and there into his State or at least his spheres of influence- parts of Georgia, then a part of Ukraine and now more of Ukraine.
4. I cannot understand why anyone would blame the Ukrainian people for fighting back. At least some part of that population is going to be under the rule of a foreign nation, a foreign nation that has shown zero respect for the Ukrainian people (what Putin said shortly before the invasion, and what his forces have been doing as part of the invasion). I can only imagine how horrible that is.
5. I don’t like Putin. Last I heard, about 15-20 years ago, he made governors in Russia appointed instead of elected. He’s friendly with Trump. He’s incredibly homophobic. In general he seems pretty repulsive to me. My hope is that if the Ukraine invasion is too costly (in economic and military terms) it might weaken Putin.
6. Practically every European country that is not Russia is in NATO. And some of the exceptions are in the EU which is also supporting Ukraine. Critics of Biden’s Ukraine policy have been out-voted by almost all of Europe that is not Russia. They are worried about Russian aggression.

I realize what I just wrote might not change many minds. I’ve only been reading about 1,000 words a day about the conflict and related issues and in earlier years I am sure I missed a lot of relevant stuff. But I do support Ukraine.

I AM worried about the US getting into a war with Russia. In fact, in 2016 I told 1-3 people that Russia was the only issue where I preferred Trump over Clinton (I voted for Clinton (there were enough serious problems with Trump (i.e. he accepted support from David Duke) that I ignored the fact CO is not a swing state and failed to vote for a good 3rd party)). I can’t believe that Zelensky repeatedly asked for a no-fly zone and I’m really glad that Biden answered with a firm NO. I think the US can help Ukraine defend itself and at the same time avoid a conflict with Russia (Vietnam didn't become WWIII and neither did Afghanistan in the 1980s). Although I ended up looking a little stupid with that book review about nuclear war, the tension between the US and Russia is one of the reasons I am trying to promote the book and discussion about nuclear war.

Tom

Tuesday, April 6, 2021

Movie Reviews B

Emperor (IMDB Wikipedia)

I’m not sure how historically accurate it is, but overall it’s a fairly good movie. I’m glad that we defeated Japan in that war and it’s great that afterwards we became friends with Japan.  I also liked how one character, a senior Japanese politician who got along with the allies, pointed out that the British and Americans were roughly as imperialistic as Imperial Japan was.

I give it 2 stars out of 5.

Dr. Strange (IMDB Wikipedia)

Not anything political in this movie, but I do like super-hero stuff. I focus mostly on DC Comics stuff, but I also watch the live action movies about Marvel super-heroes.

I give it 2 stars out of five.

The Best of Enemies (IMDB Wikipedia)

This is an amazing movie. It’s a true story about a KKK leader rejecting racism. I missed the very ending when I saw it in the theater, but when I watched it at home recently, I learned that after CP Ellis transformed, he worked as a union organizer for the AFL-CIO. In general I was a little surprised at how class-conscious the Klan leader is but not that surprised. Obviously we have plenty of reasons to fight racism, but there’s one more- a lot of racists will become progressives when they reject their racist beliefs. And we need to recognize the role that unions have to play in fighting racism, as I’ve written elsewhere on this blog. We need to convince fiscally moderate and conservative Dems to support unions as a way to combat racism.

I give it 5 stars out of 5.

Easy A (IMDB Wikipedia)

This movie is about a teenage girl who lies about having sex for various reasons- for example a gay boy gets her to lie about them having sex so that he won’t be outed. She  kind of enjoys having an (inaccurate) reputation as a promiscuous young woman, but she also says towards the end that she doesn’t know when she’ll lose her virginity- but that it might be the next day or it might be on her wedding night or somewhere in between.

I give it 5 stars out of 5.

The Color of Freedom (also known as “Goodbye Bafana") (IMDB Wikipedia)

It’s based on a true story, although I’m not sure how historically accurate it is. It’s inspirational to see a racist journey through life to a point where he is friends with Nelson Mandela. This movie also highlighted the fact that Mandela was a driving force behind the armed part of the ANC’s strategy. In all honesty, the ANC’s military wing did a better job of not killing civilians than the IRA did, but the IRA wasn’t too far behind the ANC as I explain here.

Saturday, November 14, 2020

Two New Poems: "Mass Incarceration" and "Iraq"

 I wrote two new poems. For more about my poetry, see this. Both of these are based on songs I don't like.

You can see all the poems by clicking on the "lyrics" label at the bottom.

“Mass Incarceration” based on “Justice” by Skrewdriver. Original lyrics are here.

0. I THINK that when I first typed this about 5 years ago, I was thinking of the 1990s, and assumed that things in recent years were a little less obscene. I could be wrong about that, and even if it's less bad now, it's still bad.
1. This is about the mass incarceration of Blacks in America. It was the result of “law and order” laws like the 1994 Crime Bill and racist cops, DAs, judges, witnesses, jurors, and the poverty that prevents many black people from getting a good lawyer instead of an over-worked, underfunded public defender. I am not saying that all cops, judgers, jurors, etc. are racist, but many of them are
2. I am not a fan of the kind of gangs that are based in communities of color, but I know that in the past there was a lot of guilt-by-association involved with how law enforcement decide who to arrest. Also, in the movie “Set It Off” a working-class black bank-teller is suspected of being the inside-woman in a robbery because she sort of knows one of the robbers.
3. I think this has changed in the last 10-20 years, but for a long time crack convictions came with a longer sentence than cocaine convictions, and to a large extent cocaine was more popular with whites than blacks and crack was more popular with blacks than whites.
4. I can’t remember the figures and they varied over time, but Blacks were much more likely to be in prison than whites were. Blacks were more likely to be in prison than in college. The rate of incarceration for blacks was very high and America’s general rate of incarceration is very high compared to other countries, maybe all of them, I can’t remember.
5. 44% of this version is me, 56% is the original.

6. I give this poem 2 stars out of 5.

Their knees feel weak as they’re dragged from the court


Convicted because of with whom they consort


One by one, the judge locks them all away


Trumped up charges is the game the DA plays
 


Chorus:


Call that justice, well it just ain't fair,


How much longer before we care


Call that justice from a racist judge


The cop’s testimony was a total fudge

 

Stripped in a cell, they’re shackled in chains


Lost all their dignity, but trying to keep sane


A longer sentence if you happen to be black


their excuse is that instead of coke it was crack



(Repeat Chorus)



Call this a democracy and “the land of free”


They say there’s equality and meritocracy 


Here's the reality, a racist state


Warehousing Black people behind prison gates


**********

“Iraq” based on “They Stand Alone” by No Remorse. Original lyrics are here.

1. This is about the occupation of Iraq.
2. I think another reason for invading Iraq is that it provided multiple opportunities to give money to corporations. Besides arms contractors and those doing privatized work for the military (security, laundry, food, interrogations, etc.), corporations getting money for reconstruction spent about half of what they got doing actual reconstruction (often a contractor would keep half and give the rest to a subcontractor and sometimes THAT corporation would keep half and give the rest to another subcontractor).
3. Black gold is another term for oil.
4. There was a lot of corruption in the Iraqi government.
5. Haliburton was a company that Dick Cheney had been a leader of before he became VP. It got a lot of US Gov’t contracts to do stuff in Iraq.
6. Laos was bombed as part of the Vietnam War.
7. Although the original is supportive of the Palestinians and sometimes fascists are anti-intervention, this is basically in conflict with what the authors of the original lyrics believe because a lot of American Nazi skinheads joined the US military during the Occupation of Iraq and volunteered to go there and because I think that a lot of white supremacists and fascists in America were pro-war during the Vietnam War.
8. 59% of this version is me, and 41% is the original.

9. I give this poem 2 stars out of 5.

A tank rolls out on the sun bright sand.
Gunfire's heard in an occupied land.
People run, scared for their lives
The sounds of death, sounds of screaming wives

chorus
US Army man, you must go.
Your humvees and your CEOs
Iraqis you must make a stand.
You must work to free your land

A nation, full of black gold
In the minds of American oil companies, it’s already sold
Propped up by pillars, of corruption and graft
An occupation supported by ground attack aircraft

Millions for Haliburton, while Iraqis die.
World-wide news media frequently ask why.
Headquarters of Satan, in the Bush White House
It's an imperialist project, just like the bombing of Laos

Thursday, May 21, 2020

The Palestinain-Israeli Peace Process is Over

I just sort of stumbled onto a news story about something I had been largely ignoring for about 2 months. The Peace Process between Israel and the Palestinians is over. Read this. I have done two important posts about this issue. One is about how the term "Apartheid" is an appropriate description of how Israel treats the Palestinians, and one is an argument against zionism.

A good source of information about the conflict is here. For a more frequently updated and relatively neutral source, see The Times of Israel.

Tom

Sunday, April 19, 2020

Fuck George W. Bush: Three New Poems

Below are three more poems. For an explanation of how I write my poems, see this. The last one is based on lyrics I agree with, the others are NOT.

For the rest of the lyrics, click on the "lyrics" label at the bottom.

1. Smash the Klan II. What you think it's about.
2. From Out of the Ashes. The birth of the Provisional IRA in Northern Ireland.
3. Surf the Euphrates. About the Iraq War.

“Smash the Klan II” based on “Aryan Pride” by Final War. Original lyrics are here.

1. This is about slightly militant opposition to the KKK among white people. It’s sort of inspired by the time that I joined around 100-300 people in 1995 protesting a “rally” by the Klan in Boulder. At the end we surrounded the building they had rallied in front of and trapped them there for about an hour or two until the police tried something sneaky that involved getting them out in an ambulance.
2. Instead of “crossing the border,” many Mexican-Americans are partly or totally descended from Mexicans who lived in what was Mexico until it became CA, NV and the South-West of the US (and TX).
3. The 54th Mass was the 54th Massachusetts Volunteer Infantry Regiment, the segregated Black unit that fought in the American Civil War and whose story is told, accurately or otherwise, in the movie “Glory.”
4. Racists have a greatly exaggerated sense of how much anti-white bigotry there is. In a paragraph more than half-way from the top of this post that starts with “Even without that…” I explain why I think anti-white bigotry is a very small problem.
5. I exaggerate how easy it is for white people to get a job, although if we focus on times when it’s a white person and a person of color, it IS pretty easy for the white person to get the job. Affirmative Action helps a lot, but “Hispanics” and Blacks still have an unemployment rate fairly close to twice that of white people (it’s a bit higher for Blacks than for “Hispanics” and the gap fluctuates a bit, but it’s around twice; see this). Racists think that white people are discriminated against and have more trouble getting a job. Of course, that’s probably because they think that the natural order of things should involve full employment in good jobs for white people and see anything else as unfair.
6. My thoughts about the white identity and European-American ethnic identities are in the first 2/5 of this (you should also read the conclusion, which is the second to last section) (I realize that BEFORE they read that many anti-Klan white people might not like what I say, but I think that after they read it, they will).
7. The St. Patrick Battalion was a group of American soldiers, most Irish and almost all Catholics, who deserted the US Army during the US-Mexico War and joined the Mexican Army. I’m sure it varied from individual to individual, but to one degree or another they thought that what the US was doing to Mexico was unjust (they were also alienated by anti-Catholic bigotry in the US Army (and of course Catholics *used to be* on the Klan’s list as well)).
8. After I started altering stuff, I switched the first verse with the chorus. Also, there were only three verses in the original, and the fourth verse is totally mine.
9. **70% of this poem is me, 30% is the original. I don’t know if the 3rd line of the second verse in the original lyrics I found on-line is what was actually written by the original lyricist.

Many people hate the Klan for spreading prejudice
Gay people, Muslims, and Jews are on their fucking list
Black people aren’t criminals like you see on your TV
The border crossed Mexican-Americans, its a fact of history

Chorus
Brothers and sisters, join together as one.
We’ve got the fucking KKK totally on the run
in memory of the brave 54th Mass soldiers who died
Fuck the Nazis, and fuck the Klan and fuck Aryan Pride!

Racists cry “Black man, yeah Black man full of hate”
Widespread anti-White bigotry is the bullshit story they narrate
Its fucked up how white people can secure any job by race
It’s funny how the Klan deny that that’s totally the case.

Chorus

Our solidarity won't be broken, and we won’t hide from an affray
We will keep on working until we asphyxiate the KKK
Our message will be spread. Our voices loud and clear
Inform the youth, of the truth, the Klan’s greatest fear.

Chorus

We’ll never be proud of being white, it’s an artificial identity
It’s totally steeped in privilege, hate and inequality
We’re proud of being Irish, Scottish and German, Greek, Polish and Italian
We’re in solidarity with the oppressed, just like the St. Pat’s Battalion

*********

“From Out of the Ashes” based on “After the Fire” by Skrewdriver. original lyrics are here.

1. This is about the aftermath of the anti-Catholic pogrom in the Lower Falls Nationalist/Republican area of Belfast in Aug. of 1969 (it wasn’t INCREDIBLY Republican BEFORE that month, but not long afterwards it certainly was). In July, August, and September, and mostly during a period of 2-3 days, in Belfast, 1,505 Catholic families fled their homes (probably something like 18% of Belfast’s Catholic population, probably something like 1.8% of the North’s Catholic population). In one night alone 650 families were burnt, or at least forced, out of their homes.
2. The DUBLIN-BASED LEADERSHIP OF THE IRA had demilitarized it in the years before Aug. 1969 and only a few IRA weapons were available to help defend the area, a defense that was largely unsuccessful.
3. The Civil Rights Movement that started in mid- and late 1968 was overwhelmingly committed to non-violence and had hoped to democratize N. Ireland.
4. Provos refers to what we call in recent decades Sinn Fein and the IRA. They broke off from SF and the IRA (what became known as Official SF and Official IRA) partly because of the leadership’s decision to demilitarize the IRA.
6. Initially the British Army kind of saved the Catholics from police-led loyalist mobs and were welcomed for about 9 months, but they became increasingly like the notorious Black and Tans unit of the British Army that served in Ireland during the War of Independence 1919-1921.
7. Squaddie is a term for British soldier.
8. On the night of June 27th 1970, the Church of an isolated Catholic enclave in East Belfast was attacked by a loyalist mob. The British Army wouldn’t defend the area but members of the PIRA did. It was their first major action.
9. I like calling The Troubles the Second Anglo-Irish War, the first being the War of Independence.
10. There is or was a T-Shirt designed by either SF or their old American support organization Irish Northern Aid, that said: “From Out Of The Ashes Arose The Provisionals.” It was referring to the ashes of the mythical bird, the Phoenix (in this case representing the IRA they split off from (actually, I used to think it was the ashes of the burned out homes, and I kind of prefer that interpretation because there were some good people in the Officials in the early 1970s and I don't believe in speaking positively about the feud between the two groups)).
11. Skrewdriver were British and supported the British and Unionist causes in Northern Ireland.
12. Based on a fairly scientific look, only .3% of the PIRA’s operations resulted in civilian death.
13. **62% of this poem is me, 38% is the original.

The fires burned for hours, it was a time of terror.
Dublin had ordered the IRA disarmed but they were totally in error
Those nights there were burnt out homes, our community was battered
Non-violence had been our people’s hope, but now that hope was shattered

Chorus
After the fire, the ruins there did lay.
After the Provo victory there will come a brand new day.

The Falls stood in misery, and initially welcomed the British Army Man
But increasingly the Squaddies acted just like the old Black and Tans
Then, on the night of June 27th, it was known the Provos had come alive-
Seeds of resistance once sown, now had grown, new life that would not die.

Chorus

The new Anglo-Irish War is approaching, and with the Provos we shall be.
They rose from the ashes of August ’69 and they will fight for you and me.

*************

“Surf the Euphrates” based on “Surf Nicaragua” by Sacred Reich (despite their name, their politics are very progressive- I'm fairly familiar with all of their music and at least some of it is more or less socially liberal and it's also economically progressive and it's anti-war). Original lyrics are here.

1. This is about the Occupation of Iraq.
2. The Euphrates is a major river going through Iraq.
3. One of the MANY reasons Bush had for invading Iraq was that it has a lot of oil.
4. A major argument in favor of invading was that Iraq was connected to Al-Qaeda. In fact, shortly after the war began a poll found that about 70-75% of Americans thought Iraq was responsible for 9/11. It was such bullshit that Tony Blair didn’t use that argument when trying to convince the British people and Parliament to invade. It’s also been strongly suggested that the % of the anti-US forces that were foreign Islamists was very tiny.
5. There were no Weapons of Mass Destruction found, and that was predictable based on what the UN weapons inspectors were saying just before the invasion and what former Marine and former UN Weapons Inspector Scott Ritter said around 2000.
6. Donald Rumsfeld was the Secretary of Defense.
7. Based on multiple pieces of anecdotal evidence and the existence of Iraq Veterans Against the War (now, About Face), and how unpopular Bush became shortly after the 2004 election, I imagine a lot of American soldiers who voted for Bush in 2000 or 2004 wished they hadn’t after they did one or more tours there.
8. I think another reason for invading Iraq is that it provided multiple opportunities to give money to corporations. Besides arms contractors and those doing privatized work for the military, corporations getting money for reconstruction spent about half of what they got doing actual reconstruction (often a contractor would keep half and give the rest to a subcontractor and sometimes THAT corporation would keep half and give the rest to another subcontractor).
9. This poem is not pro-insurgency. It was reasonable and natural that a large majority of Iraqis wanted the US out, but my favorite slogan of the anti-war movement was “Support Our Troops, Bring Them Home.” Also, some group at some point, and they may have been anti-war, was raising money to send men and women serving there body armor, and I would have supported that (it’s different than giving them extra ammunition with which to kill Iraqi civilians). (it’s also not pro-Saddam- it would be great if Saddam had been pushed out of power in a better way, but the methods that the US and UK used were bad)
10. Besides the insurgency, there was other instability caused by the invasion and occupation- Al-Qaeda attacks on Shiite neighborhoods, ethnic cleansing by Shiites and possibly some by Sunnis, and tension between some of the Shiite population and the Occupation forces. At one point it came close to a full-blown Sunni-Shiite Civil War.
11. The Surge was a brief but dramatic increase in the number of soldiers and Marines in Iraq.
12. Between 1991 and 2003 Iraq was frequently bombed by the US and UK.
13. I think that Bush supporters enjoyed the political dimension of the war, where they tangled with anti-war groups. We were in a time of a “New McCarthyism,” where disagreeing with Bush was seen by a lot of people as politically taboo. As I said, at the beginning of the war, the vast majority of Americans blamed Iraq for 9/11.
14. As far as Bush’s reasons for invading Iraq, here is something I included in two posts about anti-Semitism:

Bush's reasons for invading Iraq were many, Israel was a small part of it. There was the opportunity to give lots of money to corporations in multiple ways, the strong desire for using the US military that most GOPers have, the desire to teach the world a lesson in terms of what the US will do to them if they piss off D.C., the desire for oil, the idea of democratizing the Middle-East. I also heard something about it being connected to countering the growing strength of the Euro. It's possible they half believed that stuff about WMDs and Al-Qaeda. Israel was a small part of it.

15. Bush liked the idea of being a popular war-time president the people would rally around.
16. **46% of this version is me, 54% is the original.
17. In a post here I describe what I did to oppose the invasion.

I know a place Where you're all going to go
They'll pay you to kill for oil If You're eighteen years old
First You'll need a haircut And then some new clothes
They'll stick you in Baghdad To play G.I. Joe

CHORUS:
You think you’re fighting Al Qaeda and that you’ll find WMD
But it’s total bullshit, concocted by Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney
But now it's too late You're entering Iraq
You voted for Bush, you’ll soon wish you could take it back

What is this we're fighting for and What are our goals
To create a cash cow for US corporations and improve Bush’s polls
Instability  and Sunni resistance grow deeper everyday
The situation worsens, the Surge is on it's the way

CHORUS:

Lessons we have learned Are easy to forget
Hints of Vietnam How soon we all forget
First we used sanctions and bombs, now go in the troops
Another chance for the Right to slander anti-war groups

Monday, March 16, 2020

"The Connolly/Larkin Brigade" A New Poem!

A new poem. I explain how I write my poems here. This one is based on a song that I like politically. For the rest of the poems, click on the "lyrics" label at the bottom.


"The Connolly/Larkin Brigade," based on “Last Lincoln Veteran” by David Rovics. Original lyrics are here.

PLEASE READ!! 1. This is a bizarre one. It’s about a very alternate history. Written from the perspective of an American socialist in, about, 2040, it’s about fictional events in the 1980s, (which is similar to the chronological perspective of the original (the original was written about 65-70 years after the events in it, when there were still some Lincoln veterans alive)).
It’s based on a song about the anti-fascist foreigners who fought in the Spanish Civil War (there was an Irish anti-fascist contingent, largely ex-IRA members, called the Connolly Column). The premise of this poem is that at some point in the 1980s, a similar call is made for people to fight in the North of Ireland. It IS possible that if the IRA had a launched a Tet-style offensive (in the Vietnam War, there was the Tet Offensive by the VietCong in 1968) as they had planned to in the 1980s, the conflict would have been transformed and it would have made sense to call for large numbers of foreign fighters.
3. James Connolly and Jim Larkin were senior or semi-senior leaders of the broad Irish republican family in the first 2-3 decades of the last century. Both spent time as union organizers in America.
4. May 1st is International Workers Day.
5. Dixieland is a racist term for the American South. Orange is the color of anti-Catholic bigotry in the Irish-British context. (UPDATE 3/18/20 I used Dixieland because A) it rhymed, B) I thought it would indicate that I was comparing the North with the South in the sense that they were both bigoted, etc.)
7. The West Bank refers to the 99% nationalist part of Derry, to the west of the River Foyle. It’s where 14 anti-internment/civil rights marchers were killed by the British Army on Bloody Sunday in 1972.
8. Chronologically three of the cities/places I chose don’t make much sense, since they were sites of ongoing struggles in the 1980s OR, the struggle hadn’t begun. Whatever.
Ramallah is in the West Bank in PALESTINE. There’s a lot of solidarity between the Irish and the Palestinians.
Paris. When Bobby Sands died (see this and the middle third of this), the socialist Prime Minister of France offered to attend the funeral, but he consulted Dublin and they said no.
Chiapas. In 1998 or 1999, on May 5th (Cinco de Mayo and the day in 1981 that Bobby Sands died) I went to a fundraiser for the Chiapas Coalition in Denver, CO (the CC were supporters of the Zapatistas, the EZLN). I asked if I could say something about Bobby Sands and they let me speak for a couple minutes. Later, another speaker who had spent time with the EZLN, said that they (the EZLN) were very concerned about the North.
Cape Town. The ANC strongly supported the IRA (see this). I think their military wing was large and I THINK they had trouble finding work for everyone and it MIGHT have made sense, in this scenario where a call is made for foreign fighters, to send some.
9.  Until late 2001 the RUC were the police in N. Ireland.
10. Orthodox republicans, if there are any left, believe(d) that the Republic proclaimed at the beginning of the 1916 Easter Rising still exists and has been usurped by the Northern State and the Southern State. I have never believed that, but it still seemed like a good adjustment to the original lyrics, and in the 1980s, I think that almost all Northern Sinn Fein members probably DID believe it, and probably a large minority of Southern SF members also believed it.
11. Margaret Thatcher was a hardcore Tory and British imperialist who was Prime Minister in the 1980s.
12. Ian Stuart Donaldson was, in the 1980s and early 1990s (until his hilarious death in 1993), the leader of the worldwide Nazi skinhead movement, and as a British Nazi, he was incredibly supportive of the British and Unionist causes in N. Ireland.
13. Ian Paisley was, between the mid-1960s and about 2005, a very visible, extremely Unionist and anti-Catholic politician.
14. In the late 1990s a US Representative, Donald Payne from NJ, sponsored legislation in the House that would ban the sale of plastic bullets to the UK. He had traveled to the North and I feel safe assuming that some US corporation was selling the plastic bullets used in the North (or he was just really cool and pro-active, but I bet they were being sold to the UK). (Payne is Black)
15. I mention they were Catholic because I recently decided it’s frustrating that American Catholics in general showed almost no interest in the conflict, frustrating because although there were other factors (anti-Irish bigotry, economic factors, etc.) to a large extent SECTARIANISM affected the lives of Northern Catholics.
16. I wanted to recognize the contributions made by gay members of the Nationalist community.
17. Here are some ways that Washington wasn’t neutral:

1) It seems that D.C. never privately put firm pressure on the British to dramatically change its policy in N. Ireland and/or create a significant role for the South in the affairs of the North (or even, better, begin a process of withdrawal). If they did this privately, it didn't work, and they should have done it publicly (it's possible that to some degree that happened between Clinton and Blair, and had some small effect on the GFA, but the GFA could have been much better, and then there's the ultimate goal of a British withdrawal).
2) Although at some point in the 1970s the President or Vice President of SF did speak at a committee hearing of the US Congress, from 1983 until 1994 the President of SF, Gerry Adams, was not allowed into the US. (he was first allowed into the U.S. in 1994). During this time SF represented about 35-40% of the Nationalist community, and probably about 60% of the poorest, most oppressed half of that community.
3) During the entire conflict, something like 20 former republican Volunteers went through either extradition or deportation proceedings. I think all the extradited were sent back to the UK, I think most of the deportation cases were deported. I know of at least one deportation, and this was probably the case with all of them, where the issue was that he said on the immigration paperwork that he was never convicted of a crime, and the U.S. government said that he in fact had been. The thing is, republican Volunteers don't consider themselves criminals, and even the British government, to some degree, has recognized this by treating them as prisoners of war during most of the conflict. But the U.S. Government disagrees. There's evidence that some very large majority of the nationalist community more or less supported the hunger-strikers of 1981 (see the middle third of this) whose struggle convinced the British to extend status as prisoners of war (or political status, basically the same thing), which makes me think that some very large majority of the nationalist community was more or less unhappy about the extraditions and deportations (also, the massive anti-internment march that was attacked on Bloody Sunday in 1972 was primarily organized not by republicans but by a senior SDLP politician).

18. I can’t abide praising Reagan for a lot of reasons. He and Thatcher were best friends.

19. Practically the entire last full verse was in the original, and the 95 yo is, I assume, someone David Rovics actually knew (possibly Robert Steck). That’s part of why I changed it to “she” and “her”. Like practically all of my poems, this is not written from my perspective, it’s some faceless American socialist character I invented. I don’t know any Communists- please tell the House Un-american Activities Committee that if they ask about me. :  )
20. The Short Strand is an isolated Catholic enclave in Unionist East Belfast.
21. I almost hate bringing this up, especially because the post I’ll link to needs some work but it’s massive and I don’t know when I’ll make it near perfect. I believe that during The Troubles, and especially after Apartheid was shattered by the ANC and before those assholes in Al-Qaeda attacked on 9/11, the world, to one degree or another kind of or totally dropped the ball when it came to solidarity with the Nationalist community. I focus like a laser on the American Left and to a lesser degree the west European Left. That post is here, and the relevant part starts with the mention of South Africa about 1/3 from the top.
22. I couldn’t make up my mind about how the story ends. But then I decided to make a few more changes and make it a happy ending- not what happened in the Short Strand, but Ireland being united in the end.
23. **36% of this version is me, 64% is the kick-ass original.
24. UPDATE 4/1/20 I maybe should have altered the very last part less than I did. I deleted the phrase "It's a place that we all know so well" because it's not well known among American progressives today, as I mention in note 21 above. I forgot that in this alternate timeline, it IS well known. But I'm going to keep it the way it is, I just didn't want anyone to think that I didn't like David's lyrics.
25. UPDATE 4/1/20 I deleted the word "most" from the 3rd line of the second verse. It implied, for example, that Hindus didn't fight. I was lazy and didn't alter that when I first wrote it, I didn't mean to exclude anyone.
26. As I prove in a fairly scientific way here, only .3% of the IRA's operations resulted in civilian death.

They were old when I was young Now they're all but passed away
Now it's just a second hand story we hear about on the first of May
When from all around the world They sailed off to Ireland
Where they fought against the Brits and to liberate Orange Dixieland
Who will recall the days When they all stood side by side
Now that the last Connolly/Larkin Veteran died

Beside striking workers Or in a St. Patrick’s Day Parade
You could see those who made the journey To join the Connolly/Larkin Brigade
When men and women of many nations Of every creed and hue
Catholics and Protestants, Muslims,  Atheists and Jews
Joined together in the West Bank To avenge the fourteen who died
Now that the last Connolly/Larkin Veteran died

The working class of many countries responded to the desperate invitation
With what weapons they could find They fought to unite the Irish nation
From Ramallah and Paris, Chiapas and Cape Town
Who will recall the Brigadistas Who bravely took the RUC down
There beside the Catholic people Even the sheep and cattle cried
Now that the last Connolly/Larkin Veteran died

The 1916 Republic had the people But the British Army had the tanks
Thatcher and Ian Stuart got only some of Paisley’s premature thanks
'Cause the plastic bullets to take down rioters Came from the USA
And the boys and girls they knocked down Were Catholic and some of them were gay
Uncle Sam wasn’t neutral, and praising Reagan is something I can’t abide
Now that the last Connolly/Larkin Veteran died

Some say people get conservative The older that they age
They say that being radical Is just a youthful stage
But the finest communist I've known Lived to 95
And she spent her whole life fighting For humanity to thrive
To forget these fallen heroes Is something I cannot abide
Now that the last Connolly/Larkin Veteran died
Now that the last Connolly/Larkin Veteran died

There's a neighborhood in East Belfast called the Short Strand
It was there that we showed our solidarity Where so many comrades made their final stand

Sunday, March 15, 2020

"Anti-Imperialist Unity" A New Poem

For the first time in about two years I wrote a new poem. I will usually do more than one at a time, but I am so excited about this that I wanted to post it ASAP. I explain how I write my poems here. (as I mention in that post, when I use the first person, I am almost never using my perspective, but I don't feel like changing all the first person terms, and I guarantee you I haven't attributed an opinion in this one to Costello that is in conflict with what he believed)

You can find all my poems by clicking on the "lyrics" label at the bottom.

“Anti-Imperialist Unity” based on “Unity is Power” by Kill, Baby, Kill, original lyrics are here.

1. The title is a phrase used by Seamus Costello, who was a leader of the Irish Republican Socialist Party and its military wing the Irish National Liberation Army. He believed in this concept, although I’m not sure what groups he had in mind besides his RSM and the Provisionals (what have been called in recent decades Sinn Fein and the IRA). Maybe he hoped he could convince his former comrades in Official SF and the Official IRA (the other side of the 1969/70 split that produced the Provisionals), but probably not. Probably People’s Democracy (a civilian but militant left-wing anti-Partition group born as a part of the civil rights movement that had taken place between 1967 and 1972), who I have reason to believe were friendly to the IRSP. Maybe 1-3? tiny left groups that were anti-Partition and maybe one or two tiny republican groups that I can’t think of. And maybe unaffiliated individuals would be welcome. I haven’t read his speeches and interviews in a long time and am not sure I can find them, but I imagine the unifying principles would be at least a lukewarm belief in socialism and a firmer opposition to Partition. He died in 1977, so this about the period 1975-1977.                 
2. The RUC were until late 2001 the police in N. Ireland.
3. I doubt Army bases were in anything smaller than a medium-sized town (i.e. Omagh, Strabane).
4. Starting around the beginning of the conflict and continuing in recent years some statistics about average pay indicate that the cost of labor is lower in N. Ireland than it is in Britain. On the other hand, the rate of unionization is higher in N. Ireland, but I think this has little effect because

A) sectarianism divides workers from taking effective action together,
B) it’s difficult for passionately anti-sectarian socialists to get into major positions of power in N. Ireland’s labor movement,
C) many of those who might take that kind of role were busy with the National Question and related issues and/or had/have criminal records from republican activity (something similar could be said about some reformed loyalists, for example the late David Ervine),
D) although the Churches aren’t nearly as central to N. Ireland politics as you might think, the Catholic Church there is not that of El Salvador’s late Archbishop Oscar Romero,
E) center-right politics dominate the Unionist community, perhaps because bigotry and colonialism tend to do that (i.e. most leftists advocate against that kind of shit, and are ignored even when they focus on issues that are purely class), and
F) it might be relevant that the police were, until recently, VERY prepared to break some heads and until recently had excellent political cover if they did so (potential strikers may have also been reluctant to confront soldiers with powerful rifles who were trained for aggression and had even better cover if they killed someone),
G) there is no labour party with the kind of power that the British Labour Party has in Britain (the SDLP don't count, see this and SF is hated by Unionists (you could say something similar about the SDLP, either because they're Catholics, or because they're socially conservative and middle-class, so the vast majority of those Protestants who are working-class and/or progressive don't vote for them))

More evidence for what I say in the last line of the 1st verse is found in the following facts taken from the book Northern Ireland: the Orange State by Michael Farrell:

“In 1974 45% of all firms in Northern Ireland employing 500 or more workers were controlled from Britain, as were 28 out of 51 firms employing between 250 and 500 workers” p. 326

5. The pride would be both the working-class kind and the Irish kind.
6. Fenian is a derogatory term for Catholic and republican, but has been adopted by republicans.
7. James Connolly was Ireland’s greatest socialist and greatest republican.
8. Republicans did a lot of feuding. Even if it was slightly unavoidable, it was bad. People who were, to one degree or another, good republicans and/or socialists were lost. It was demoralizing for the communities they were based in. It distracted form fighting the British. It was used by the British in anti-republican propaganda.
9. In 1975 the IRSP became one of the two first political parties in Ireland to call for gay rights (the other one was PD). I wouldn’t be surprised if in the mid-70s about 25% of the Provos supported gay rights (in 1991 a publication by and for IRA POWs published an article by a gay Volunteer calling for the movement to recognize the contributions made by gay and bi-sexual Volunteers).
10. **27% of this poem is me, 73% is the original.


So much wrong in the North today, the Catholics are being oppressed
What's the point of fighting each other, when the North’s in a mess?
RUC Barracks in every district, Army bases in every town
The Brits are occupiers and they’re trying to keep the cost of labor down

This is the voice of Costello, a voice full of pride
Calling out with a message now- we must all be allied
So listen fenians and reds, listen well, unity's a must
If we can't achieve to unite as one our efforts will go bust

Chorus:
Unity is power, unity is grand, Unity’s the weapon to defend our land
Unity's the answer to Connoilly’s call
Unity will set our class and nation free, Unity will bring us final victory
If we stand united, we will never fall

All these senseless feuds only give the Brits a laugh
Comrades we must stand as one, fighting on the people’s behalf
Shoulder to shoulder, brothers and sisters, make sure we'll never fail
So stick together and act as one, united we'll prevail

Chorus

To all of those who share our beliefs: United we will win
Unity brings victory, it's the power from within
So join our ranks on the battlefield, together side by side
To fight our people's enemies and for Irish freedom and gay pride

Saturday, March 7, 2020

Sinn Fein and anti-Semitism

Recently I spent a day typing a lot of updates on this blog relevant to Sinn Fein and anti-semitism. Then, about 8 hours later when I woke up, one of the first things I saw on the Web was a story about a SF TD (MP in the South) being accused of anti-Semitism. I couldn’t fucking believe it. First, there are two more stories you might want to read (if you feel like subbing to the Irish-Times) here and here.

I was of course curious what exactly the tweets had said. Even though SF (and possibly Cronin as an individual) seems to be admitting that they were anti-semitic, I wanted to know because supporters of the Palestinians are often falsely accused of being anti-Semitic but even some of the progressive ones ARE anti-Semitic. So I found the Irish news site that broke the story. An update to their original story is here. The story that has the details of the controversial tweets is here.

First, the first article linked to says:


“She had previously made the news this past weekend when the Sunday Times reported that she had accused Israeli intelligence of interfering in the recent UK election to prevent the election of Jeremy Corbyn as Prime Minister. Mr. Corbyn himself had been accused of anti-semitism in the run-in to that election.”

I haven’t followed the anti-Semitism controversy in the Labour Party very much. I DO know that one of the most outspoken critics (in terms of how big they think the problem is) of anti-Semitism in the party is also VERY supportive of the Palestinians. On the other hand, a friend who is a very solid opponent of anti-Semitism says that the accusations are pro-Israel nonsense. I wouldn’t be surprised if Israel IS involved, but at the same time the allegation about the Mossad mentioned above comes from someone who I think IS or WAS an anti-Semite.

Why do I think she is or was an anti-Semite? Let me quote and discuss each of the actually or allegedly anti-Semitic tweets.


“Israel have taken Nazism to a new level, by showing they can get away with it.”

This is the most solidly anti-Semitic of the tweets. Calling Israel Nazi is anti-Semitic. First, a friend points out that some Jews do that. That’s different. It’s fairly comparable to black people in America using the n-word. Here are my thoughts about this:

1. It's not too different from calling people of color in America racist.
2. You can call Jewish people fascists, but not Nazis.
3. If you want to say that Israeli policy towards the Palestinians could shift towards the genocidal, fine, but don't call them Nazis (for info about how horrible Israeli policy towards the Palestinians is, see this and many of the articles you’ll find here).
4. If you absolutely insist on comparing Israel to Nazi Germany, write a detailed, argumentative, well-documented 10,000 word essay, not a tweet.

From the Gript story: “Deputy Cronin once responded to a message containing an image of a large number of monkeys sitting at computers by saying that she had thought it was an image of the inside of the Israeli embassy.”

The Israeli embassy represents a fairly democratic state and the tweet was four years before the controversial “Jewish Nation State” law was adopted. Although this fairly democratic state is also engaged in something colonial, it, for better or worse is defined as the Jewish State. Many would say that’s the problem and I kind of agree (I will soon do a post about that and related matters (UPDATE 3/8/20 That post is here) and for those of you who think I am a hypocrite because I’m an Irish republican, see the brief essay at the bottom of this post), but it is 80% Jewish and although, yes this is also a problem, the State is politically even more Jewish in terms of who has power. The Jewish population in Israel is roughly between 35% and 44% of the world’s Jewish population and probably another 30%-38% (that is, a large majority of Jewish-Americans) identify with Israel (and probably 50-75% of the rest of the world’s Jewish population identify with Israel). And the best Cronin can do is the tweet described above. It shows a complete lack of willingness to take the Jewish population seriously and treat their representatives with some respect. An embassy is more a representative of a State (in the European sense) than a Government. So it’s not Netanyahu she’s making fun of. I am saying something similar to what I said in item #4 when I discussed calling Israel Nazi, but I certainly find substantive criticism of Israel much more acceptable than calling it Nazi, it's just that this tweet was not substantive criticism.

The next example of anti-Semitism is something she  re-tweeted that I almost dismissed as misunderstood by her critics- I thought it couldn’t have been anti-Semitic because it criticized Hitler. It said, according to Gript, that Hitler was a pawn of the Jewish-founded Rothschild bank. Not only was the bank owned by a Jewish family, it is frequently referred to by people who are definitely anti-semites. The thing is, this claim is saying that Jews were responsible for the Holocaust or POSSIBLY is saying that the Holocaust didn’t happen.

According to Gript.ie and some of the screen shots they show in their article, she believes strongly that banks control the world and at least once mentions a bank owned by the Rothschild family. She also tweeted that “those wars were instigated and funded by banks.” There is an anti-Semitic stereotype of bankers as Jewish and Jews as bankers. I don’t know what the stats are about religion and bankers, but if you look at a 2016 Pew Research Center poll, only 44% of Jewish-American households had a yearly income of $100,000 or more. Yes, that is higher than other religious groups, but how many bankers don’t earn A LOT more than that? I mean, if a banker’s household is earning $100,000 a year, they must be a a horrible banker. And even if we focus on those Jews earning as much as successful bankers earn, what about all of them who get rich from various other businesses such as retail, manufacturing, real estate, Hollywood, the media, etc? Also, you need a college degree to be a banker, and to one extent or another (depending on the bank and how senior the position is) you need a graduate degree, and I’m sure many people at the very top have a Ph.D. According to the PRC, in 2016, 59% of Jewish-Americans had a college degree. Ahead of them were Hindus at 77%, and Unitarian Universalists at 67%; tied with Jews were Anglicans at 59% and right below them were Episcopalians at 56%, and of course all the other religious groups and Atheists were below that. First, like I said, to one extent or another you need a graduate degree to be a banker. Second, finance is only one of roughly 100-150 degrees available in America. Anti-Semites would say that there is some kind of strong integration among Jewish people that connects the bankers and the non-banker (ridicuously vast) majority. Even during the Nazi era there was division among Jews. A minority wanted to fight, another minority collaborated or supported collaboration or advocated for it, and most were passive. Look at voting in America. In recent decades about 2/3 of those who vote vote Democratic, about 1/3 vote Republican, and although Jewish voter turnout is a little higher than it is with the general population, that still leaves a lot of Jews staying home. And on Israel there are similar divisions. In 2013 (according to the PRC), only 70% said they feel “very” or “somewhat” attached to Israel. According to a 2020 poll of Jewish-Americans (described in an article here (the Times of Israel is only slightly pro-Israel and publishes so many articles that expose what I call Israeli Apartheid that about half the articles I link to from my post about that are in the TI)) commissioned by the Jewish Electoral Institute:

Only 32% of Jewish voters characterized Israel as “one of the most important” issues to them in the upcoming election. Of far greater concern to Jews are healthcare, medicare and social security, and gun safety.

Although 91% said they were generally pro-Israel, 56% identified themselves as “critical” of the Netanyahu government, a government which had the support until recently of a majority of MKs (MPs) and which might possibly be returned to power with a similar majority of MKs.

The article describes some more results of the poll, in reference to Trump:

Fifty-one percent said they supported his Israel policies; 39% said they didn’t. A slightly larger majority (52%) said they approved of his decision to recognize Israeli sovereignty of the Golan Heights.

The US Jewish community appeared much more divided on Trump’s decision to move the American embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, which roiled the White House’s relations with the Palestinians. Whereas 45% approved of the move, 42% said they were opposed to it.

American Jews are similarly split on a dimension of the president’s peace plan that would allow Israel to annex the existing West Bank settlements: 44% approve of that policy and 40% disapprove of it.

Although this is anecdotal, I’d like to address the idea that Jews with a lower income somehow benefit from the wealth of those bankers who ARE Jewish. I have lived in Boulder, CO my entire life. As you may know, Boulder is an expensive place to live, it has always been more expensive than the county that surrounds it, and recently it has gotten very expensive and the supply of affordable housing is insufficient. I think that most of the Jewish people I have known who either work in Boulder or who I went to high school with, live/lived outside Boulder and I’m pretty sure it’s for financial reasons. 

I’m not sure if I just addressed some of what leads people to become anti-Semitic, but I think I may have.

Crucially, an aspect of this is the idea that bankers are central to capitalism. I’m not an economist or business school graduate, but I think the role of bankers in capitalism is slightly if not significantly exaggerated by people who generally like capitalism but (probably) don’t like Jews. The bankers are coordinating capitalism and the flow of capital, but are not making decisions about wages, benefits, working conditions, unions, etc. They don’t make decisions about whether or not to shift production to low-wage areas. They don’t make decisions about what to produce. I’m not saying that it’s impossible for them to make decisions about loans based on their agenda (and apparently they play a major role in urban development), but I think this is exaggerated. They want to make the loan so they can make money on it by collecting interest, and once the loan is made I seriously doubt they’ll make a negative decision if the company recognizes a union, for example- I’ve never heard of that happening and I have been a socialist for 25 years (and I doubt that hardly any businesses would take a loan whose terms involve the absence of a union because if they lose a certification election, they default on the loan). Investors do that sort of thing, and although banks are to one degree or another part of that community, they are not all of it. Unions invest, individuals invest, corporations invest, pension plans invest, non-profits invest, etc. This hostility towards banks also implies that they are inherently capitalist and do nothing good for society, communities and individuals. I have tried to find out if anti-Semites are known to also attack credit unions, an institution which I have no problem with at all. If they ARE hostile to credit unions because they extend their stereotype about Jews and bankers to them as well, that just proves beyond any doubt that they are motivated not by any hostility towards capitalism, but simply bigotry. And, although this might fuel anti-Semitic hostility towards credit unions, here and there and maybe more often than that, Jews have organized credit unions.

The actor Mel Gibson, clearly an anti-Semite, once said that all wars were the fault of Jews. Even IF there was more than the tiniest amount of truth to the stereotype about Jews and bankers, I would have to say, even as a socialist, that wars are not always solely the result of economics (and as I said, there are more components to capitalism besides banks). Imperialism is of course almost always present and there is an economic dimension to that, but there is also right-wing nationalism, racism or some other kind of bigotry. There is often support for war among the military (who often have great influence while a decision to GO TO war is being made), and that is almost always independent of capitalist beliefs and/or the defense industry. I won’t go anywhere near an exhaustive survey of war, but here are my thoughts on some wars.

1. The “American Revolution.” Although I’m not happy with the European settlement that preceded it or the westward expansion that followed it, the colonists had legitimate, non-capitalist complaints against London. I suppose some would say that the British effort in that conflict was for the benefit of banks, and there’s probably some truth to that.
2. The American Civil War. Yes there was an economic dimension, but there was also a great deal of principled opposition to slavery on one side and racist support for it on the other (yes that racism was encouraged by capitalists, but the most direct explanation for popular opposition to abolition was racism).
3. World War I. This was incredibly imperialistic and nationalistic, although I think the racist nature of that nationalism was almost nil. There was militarism. This may have been a war that could be largely attributed to bankers.
4. World War II in the Pacific. I’m not real familiar with what I call Japanese Imperialism (you could also call it Japanese Fascism). There was an economic dimension, although I’m not sure to what degree it was for the benefit of capitalists. There was undoubtedly militarism, possibly even more so than was the case with the Nazis (these Imperialists believed in what you might call a ridiculously negative and fascist warrior code that included killing prisoners or treating them much worse than the Nazis treated POWs of WESTERN Allied states). There was incredible racism towards other Asians (remember that race is socially constructed; I did a few google searches and it seems that at least MANY Japanese have light skin; Apartheid South Africa, for economic reasons, classified Japanese as White and I don’t think it was JUST economic; they were allied with Nazi Germany; I read about how an American white supremacist music label would receive a lot of orders for CDs from Japanese people who considered themselves the “white men of the East”). Although some powerful people in the United States may have primarily been worried about Japan as an imperialist rival, and FDR pursued a foreign policy that put us on a collision course with Japan, A) Japan WAS doing bad stuff, B) FDR was NOT a solid capitalist, C) Pearl Harbor was attacked, D) FDR may have allowed it to happen so that he could go to war with Germany (see below).
5. World War II in Europe. Although the Nazis were sort of capitalist and capitalists supported them, they were driven much more by bigotry, militarism, imperialism, (a crude, populist) anti-Communism and a reverence for power and strength and violence. I’d say roughly the same thing about Italian fascists, with less anti-Semitism and perhaps a little closer to socialist instead of NATIONAL socialist. The Soviet Union fought largely because they were going to be destroyed, although there were certainly some genuinely anti-fascist tendencies in Moscow (if you believe they were more than tendencies, what about the non-aggression pact between Moscow and Berlin that lasted until Germany invaded?). The British were certainly an imperialist and capitalist power at the time, but they were also a liberal democracy and recognized Nazi Germany for what it was in terms of authoritarianism and expansionism. And shortly after the war the British Left/Center-Left won a massive electoral victory, so I think most of the people at every level were motivated by a left-wing opposition to fascism. The United States quite possibly allowed a situation to develop where they would go to war with Nazi Germany. Yes, America was a capitalist and imperialist country, but once again, it was also a liberal democracy, and there seemed to be a massive center-left/left minority in the years leading up to the war and during the war, and FDR was just to the right of that (although as President he was fairly disappointing when it came to racial justice and equality, his wife was not and that’s not totally irrelevant).
6. Vietnam. The Vietnamese had been fighting for independence from the French (and briefly the Japanese) for decades and wanted a united, communist nation-state. I’m not real familiar with Vietnamese communism but banks are not inherently capitalist, and I just did some searches and apparently, for better or worse, there are almost zero Jewish people there. The United States was certainly motivated in part by capitalism. JFK and LBJ were economically to the right of FDR and Nixon certainly was. But there was also a conflict between a block of liberal (and often social) democracies and a block of communist countries that, whatever the progressive value of their social, economic and foreign policies, were authoritarian. Although the US introduced the nuclear weapon to the world, and aimed missiles at the USSR, there were a bunch of them aimed at the US.
7. Israel. Conflicts involving Israel are not anywhere near as much the fault of Jews as many people think. First, although Zionism is very flawed in multiple ways (See this) and I have serious problems with what happened to the Palestinians, the seizing and settlement of lands beyond the pre-1967 borders and states defined by ethnicity and/or religion, Israel’s Arab neighbors wanted in the past to DESTROY Israel- not in the sense that a one-state solution would “destroy” Israel, but in the sense that Jews would be driven into the sea. And this was just decades after the very flawed pacifistic response of European Jews to the Nazis contributed to 2/3 of that population being killed. As far as American fuel for Israel’s behavior towards its neighbors, see some of the material in this post. As far as an alleged Jewish role in the Bush administration’s decision to invade and occupy Iraq, see what I’ve said about support in America for Israel, and consider what I wrote elsewhere on this blog:

Bush's reasons for invading Iraq were many, Israel was a small part of it. There was the opportunity to give lots of money to corporations in multiple ways, the strong desire for using the US military that most GOPers have, the desire to teach the world a lesson in terms of what the US will do to them if they piss off D.C., the desire for oil, the idea of democratizing the Middle-East. I also heard something about it being connected to countering the growing strength of the Euro. It's possible they half believed that stuff about WMDs and Al-Qaeda. Israel was a small part of it.


I’m going to end my discussion of war there.

I believe that TD Raeda Cronin was an anti-Semite. The relevant tweets were made about 6 years ago, and she has apologized. In connection with what I write here (the first article I link to in that post is not relevant, but the rest of that post is) I’m not against the idea that SF should expel her or at least have her stand down as a TD, but I’ll continue to support SF even if they don’t. As I sort of prove here, SF is against anti-Semitism. I did this post largely because the controversy gave me a chance to discuss anti-Semitism among progressive supporters of the Palestinians, and to combine the anti-bigot part of this blog with the Ireland/N. Ireland part of the blog.

**********************


I’ve referred twice to my concern about Israel being officially called The Jewish State and being defined by ethnicity and/or religion. Some would call me a hypocrite because I’m an Irish republican. So let me explain this. Don’t call me a hypocrite. You will lose every time you try that.

After the War of Independence in Ireland, in 1920-1925 the South became what was called a “Free State.” Its independence from the UK was limited. For example, members of Parliament had to swear an oath to Queen. The 1937 Constitution created the position of President and the first President was a Protestant. Presidential terms are normally seven years and someone can serve two terms. In the 1970s there was another Protestant President for about 2 years before he died. So out of nine Presidents, two were Protestant. As far as the 1937 Constitution and Catholicism, it’s true that early drafts emphasized Catholicism and the Catholic Church, but there was GREAT opposition to that. The final draft of the relevant section recognized the existence of the main Protestant churches in Ireland, as well as the Jewish religion, and it recognized “the special position” of the Roman Catholic Church “as the guardian of the faith professed by the great majority of the citizens.” This special place for the Catholic Church was done away with in 1972. The ban on divorce was done away with in 1995. There were of course homophobic laws (only in 1993 was homosexuality decriminalized) and the constitution had to be amended in 2015 to allow for gay marriage (there wasn’t anything in the document about “a man and a woman,” but still, only in 2015 was it amended to solidly legalize gay marriage in a country where a law could be more easily overturned by politicians if the country drifted to the right) and abortion is 99% illegal there, but there is plenty of homophobia and pro-life politics among Protestants, Jews, Muslims, etc. (also, although the Catholic Church is in two ways sexist, that can be exaggerated, and in recent decades, FREQUENTLY the Tánaiste (Deputy Prime Minister) has been a woman and between 1990 and 2011 the slightly powerful position of President of Ireland was held by women, one of whom went on to be the UN’s High Commissioner for Human Rights)

Is Ireland defined by ethnicity? Until about 20 years ago the South was almost literally 100% white, and there weren’t many non-Irish white people (in the last 20 years there has been bigotry that sort of resembles racism towards, for example, Poles). In 2004 there was an Amendment to the constitution that eliminates birthright citizenship for people born to parents who are not both citizens of Ireland. But if one parent is a citizen, they get citizenship. Also, although naturalization has been restricted, it’s still possible and it’s still fairly easy for citizens of the European Community, although that could be interpreted as racist, but I don’t think they had much of a choice as a member of the EU. First, the parties in Ireland I primarily support (SF and Irish Labour) opposed it as racist (and also as being in conflict with the Good Friday Agreement). Second, although I couldn’t have said this until recently, the Taoiseach (Prime Minister) of Ireland for the last few years was a man named Leo Varadkar, whose father is Indian. Also, he’s an openly gay man. I don’t like him or his party (Fine Gael, who are sort of socially liberal but sort of pro-British and in love with capitalism). According to wikipedia, he was a government minister between 2011 and 2017 when he became Taoiseach. Between 2007 and 2011, when FG were in Opposition, he was a  Spokesperson (shadow minister?). The Irish language is recognized by the Constitution as the first official language and English is recognized as the second. A lot is done to promote the former, but practically everyone practically always speak the latter and everything official is available in both languages. The British came very close to stamping out the Irish language (and they WERE trying to).

The South is not comparable to the Jewish State. And SF doesn’t want a United Ireland to be any more Catholic or Irish than the South is now. The second half of this (starting with the sentence “A lot of people…”) talks about the former, and most of this deals with the latter.

Wednesday, September 27, 2017

Babylon 5 Reviews G

Years ago I did what you might call “reviews” of Star Trek episodes. I mostly just briefly noted what progressive politics were involved and sometimes used that as an excuse to talk about similar situations in reality.

Last year I finally watched all five seasons of Babylon 5, another sci-fi show, one I had thought of watching once in a while stretching back a couple decades. It isn’t as political or as progressive as ST but there’s some good stuff there- in fact, on one issue, a progressive take on the working-class and/or labor movement, B5 is better than ST. Because there is so little progressive material, I’m going to do one post for every four episodes reviewed, and only mention the episodes that have some progressive political stuff. I might ignore some of the more minor and/or less unique stuff about conflict resolution because from what I remember, it’s very common in this series. Also, although less so than is the case with Star Trek, multiculturalism is a big part of Babylon Five and I will also only be commenting on that when it goes further than usual. There are issues raised about telepaths- I’m going to completely ignore stuff about telepaths when reviewing these episodes. I also will probably say nothing about the conflict with the evil race the Shadows- sure, I could say Trump is as evil as they are or compare them to Nazi Germany, but that’s kind of silly (I’m sure there is nothing political about the Shadows, they’re just evil, like the Borg or the Empire). And I might skip most of the stuff about the conflict between B5 and the Earth government- I don’t remember it involving stuff like a strong capitalist agenda or racism or something.

**Season 3 Episode 3 “A Day in the Strife”** See this for a plot summary.

This episode contains a fair amount of stuff about the Centauri occupation of Narn. We learn that there is a resistance and that for every Centauri killed 500 Narn are killed. The former dissolved the old Narn government and created a provisional government. The representative of it sent to B5 opposes the resistance, saying it is the wrong time. I am inclined to think, when would be the right time? This Narn collaborator vaguely talks about waiting until they’re a bit stronger and the Centauri have been lulled into a sense of false security. Between the fact that he is officially a collaborator and at one point he blames the resistance, not the Centauri, for the nightmare the Narn are experiencing, I’m inclined to dismiss his opposition to the resistance.

Looking at N. Ireland, I believe that certainly there were some times when it was a bad idea to use violence. First I have supported the cease-fire since day one. And I would agree that in the late '60s it would have been inappropriate for the IRA to have been conducting operations in N. Ireland. But after Aug. 1969 (when there were massive anti-catholic pogroms) and especially about 9 months later when, independent of the IRA, the relationship between the British Army and the nationalist community went bad, it was legitimate for the IRA to attack the security forces. After that, they usually had the backing of about 40% of the population and in my opinion the right analysis of the situation- it was very important to unite Ireland, considering what had been done to the nationalist population around 1970. As I explain here only about .3% of the IRA’s operations were aimed at killing civilians.

There is a scene in the episode which I think is worth quoting in full. The Narn representative of the new government meets wit the Centauri ambassador (Mollari) and his aide, Vir.

Mollari: You know, I was thinking of visiting your world sometime soon. I couldn’t really get a good look at it the last time I was in the area. Do you think it would be safe for someone such as myself to visit your world now?

Na’far: Yes, quite safe.

Mollari: The streets are kept clear of troublemakers, rock throwers, protestors?

Nar’far: The surviving streets are quite empty, ambassador.

Molarri: The work farms, the relocation camps, the construction gangs are all operating at capacity?

Na’far: (nodds)

Mollari: And the executions, Na’far? The executions continue?

Na’far: The executions continue.

Mollari: Progress! It’s a beautiful thing to behold, no, Vir? [to Na’far] you may contact G’Kar, now. go, go (Na’far leaves)

Vir: Was that necessary?

Mollari: They got out of their place once. We must make sure it does not happen again.

Vir: Londo, we’ve beaten them. Their cities are in ashes, their mlitary is wiped out. They’ve lost hundreds and thousands of lives. They have nothing left!

Mollari: No, there you are wrong. They still have their pride. He tries to hide it, this one, but I can see it in his eyes. As long as it remains, they will always be a threat.

Vir: So, is that what it’s about? Pride? It’s not enough that we’ve beaten them, we have to break them?

Mollari: Yes. I’m sorry, I thought you understood that. I don’t want our people to go through this in another 100 years.


I think this illustrates the racial nature of imperialism very well.


**Season 3 Episode 5 “Voices of Authority”** See this for a plot summary.

The main political dimension to this episode is the appointment of a Political Officer to keep an eye on Sheridan. She talks a lot about his need to be more sensitive to what the Earth Government wants. She says a few other things that are worth noting:

1. She doubts that the Centauri are bent on war because Earth has a treaty with them- but in the previous year or so, the Centauri were invading planet after planet and showed no signs of stopping.

2. She says the homeless people on Earth don’t want jobs and have chosen to be homeless. She says “they’re either lazy, or they’re criminal or they’re mentally unstable.” She says that the Earth Government has promised everyone a job. But that must be something they didn’t follow up on (Captain Sheridan says the homeless can’t get jobs). At one point she admits that they re-wrote the dictionary in order to “solve” problems.

3. She talks about the expansion of McCarthy-esque policies and admits that civil rights and civil liberties will be abridged further than they already have been, and explicitly talks about keeping Earth “ideologically pure.”

**Season 3 Episode 6 “Dust to Dust”** For a plot summary see this.

There is one small bit of politics at the beginning. It's another example of the Night Watch’s McCarthyism. Captain Sheridan stands against it forcefully.

**Season 3 Episode 10 “Severed Dreams”** See this for a plot summary.

In recent episodes there was nothing that really stood out as especially political. The anti-democratic tendencies of the Earth Government  have been mentioned in episodes a little earlier so I didn’t say anything till now about the political crisis on Earth when it was exposed that the President had come into power as the result of a coup. Martial law was declared, the Senate was dissolved, and in this episode, there is a full-blown civil war.

In this episode, Mars rebels against the government, and two other colonies plus Babylon 5 declare independence.

Tuesday, September 19, 2017

Babylon 5 Reviews F

Years ago I did what you might call “reviews” of Star Trek episodes. I mostly just briefly noted what progressive politics were involved and sometimes used that as an excuse to talk about similar situations in reality.

Last year I finally watched all five seasons of Babylon 5, another sci-fi show, one I had thought of watching once in a while stretching back a couple decades. It isn’t as political or as progressive as ST but there’s some good stuff there- in fact, on one issue, a progressive take on the working-class and/or labor movement, B5 is better than ST. Because there is so little progressive material, I’m going to do one post for every four episodes reviewed, and only mention the episodes that have some progressive political stuff. I might ignore some of the more minor and/or less unique stuff about conflict resolution because from what I remember, it’s very common in this series. Also, although less so than is the case with Star Trek, multiculturalism is a big part of Babylon Five and I will also only be commenting on that when it goes further than usual. There are issues raised about telepaths- I’m going to completely ignore stuff about telepaths when reviewing these episodes. I also will probably say nothing about the conflict with the evil race the Shadows- sure, I could say Trump is as evil as they are or compare them to Nazi Germany, but that’s kind of silly (I’m sure there is nothing political about the Shadows, they’re just evil, like the Borg or the Empire). And I might skip most of the stuff about the conflict between B5 and the Earth government- I don’t remember it involving stuff like a strong capitalist agenda or racism or something.


**Season 2, Episode 12 “Acts of Sacrifice”** See this for a plot summary.

There are about seven political issues here:

1) The Narn ambassador G’Kar tries to get support from Earth Alliance and the Minbari in their war with the Centauri. The ambassador from the Minbari is reluctant to see Minbar side with the Narn, partly because they were in a war just about 10 years earlier and she doesn’t want another war. And partly because they have reason to believe that if the war started going the Narns’ way, they might try to give the Centauri a dose of their own genocidal medicine. The Narn, who experienced a near-genocidal Centauri occupation when G’Kar was younger, seem to have adopted the slogan “Never Again” but sometimes sound like they might take it to the extreme of beating the Centauri race to death.

2) Tensions between the Narn and Centuri civilians on B5 are growing. In one incident a group of the latter are in a bar talking about how the Centauri Republic is now “great again” as a result of their war with the Narn. They go on to insult the Narn people. A group of Narn hear this and a fight almost starts.

3) A representative from an unfamiliar alien race comes to B5 to meet representatives of the Earth Alliance (Sheridan wants them either as allies, or as members of the League of Non-Aligned Worlds). It quickly becomes apparent that they believe they are superior and most other races are inferior.

At one point they talk about letting evolution take it’s course and letting races die off or profit without any interference such as medical help but they DO believe in medical help for their own people.

At another point they are shown the poor part of B5, where the population is mostly human. They admire what they see as a racial policy by humans of segregating the relatively inferior parts of humanity. Obviously B5 isn’t doing that but it’s interesting to see what seems like the writers of the show taking a swipe at the Earth Alliance and B5’s leadership for failing to create a utopia like the Federation in Star Trek (to a large degree the senior staff of B5 are more or less progressive but it seems like they’re dependent on Earth Alliance for funding and the poverty on Earth follows people to B5).


**Season 2 Episode 16 “In the Shadow of Z’Ha’Dum”** See this for a plot summary.

There are 1-2 political aspects to this episode. First, Captain Sheridan detains a man for questioning for more than 10 hours without charging him. The chief of security, after 10 hours, tries to convince him to let the guy go, and resigns when he won’t. As I’ve said before the chief of security seems like the least progressive of B5’s command staff and seems more concerned about getting in trouble than about the civil liberties issue involved. I’m tempted to say that this seriously erodes my opinion of Captain Sheridan as a progressive, but on the other hand, he was detaining the guy for non-political reasons. It wasn’t a case of political dissent or alleged criminal activity. His wife was lost on a space exploration mission and he had good reason to think that the detainee knew what really happened to her. It was still wrong to detain the guy but I find it less offensive than I would if it were about dissent or crime. He ends up admitting to the security chief that he (Sheridan) was wrong and says it won’t happen again.

The other political thing is that the government on Earth has created a “Ministry of Peace.” Initially it sounds like something almost progressive. But it turns out that it sees (political) division and dissent in the human population as a threat to peace. They depoliticize dissent and see it as a criminal or psychological problem and recruit people to report such behavior to them, so that dissidents can be “helped.” Even worse, this is an illegal and more or less right-wing government (it’s not super-clear, but if they continue some of the policies of the last President and you combine that with new actions and attitudes of the new regime, they’re fairly right-wing (especially if the more offensive senators are aligned with the new President and I don’t think there’s anything saying otherwise)). Below is the full transcript of the Ministry of Peace representative trying to recruit people:

MoP: In the last 10 years Earth has rebuilt it’s defenses magnificently. We can protect our people from physical harm. But is that enough? We cannot hope to make peace with other civilizations until we have found peace with ourselves. And that, quite simply, is what the Ministry of Peace is all about. Now as Babylon 5 has an early warning system to detect possible attacks, we at the Ministry of Peace have created a system of our own. We call it the Night Watch, named after those brave citizens who stood vigil in the darkness against possible enemies. It’s a completely volunteer organization, officially endorsed by Earth Dome [the government]. Members receive 50 credits per week above and beyond their regular salaries for services rendered.

POSSIBLE RECRUIT: What kind of services?

MoP: Mainly just to be present wearing the colors of the Night Watch. Raise public awareness, make them start thinking about peace, about the way they treat one another.

POSSIBLE RECRUIT 2: I can’t believe Earth would pay us 50 credits a week just to walk around the station.

MoP: Correct. As the name implies you must also be watchful. Peace can be made or broken with a gun, a word, an idea, even a thought. Now those who work against peace sow the seeds of discontent. They plant stories. They undermine the public good. It’s not because they are necessarily evil, it’s because they don’t know any better. They’re unhappy. And they lash out in the only way they can. So if we are made aware of these problems as they occur then we can find these people. We can talk to these people. We can embrace them in the arms of society while at the same time protecting society from misinformation and harmful ideas. We’re less interested in actions than we are in attitudes. We must help protect society against it’s own worst instincts. By taking these bold steps we will help to ensure a better future for everyone. I’m proud to be a part of it and I hope you’ll all join me in becoming part of the Night Watch.


**Season 2 Episode 18 “Confessions and Lamentations”** See this for a plot summary.

Although I might not change this, when I wrote (in the intros to these reviews) that Babylon 5 wasn’t as progressive as Star Trek, I was thinking partly of the issue of gay rights. Neither ST nor B5 have any LGBT characters (well, ST kind of does, in the MIRROR UNIVERSE but that’s only about .3% of all the Star Trek episodes and B5 MIGHT have one character who is both male and female but it’s unclear and only comes up very briefly in one episode (he only outs himself to one person, who seems uncomfortable with it)). But ST drops some hints in at least 4 episodes that homophobia is wrong. I know that in the 1980s homophobia was a big part of our nation’s response to HIV/AIDS and I think that it’s probably been a  slowly declining part of it since then. With that in mind, B5 DID do (in 1995) an episode basically about HIV/AIDS.

It’s revealed that an alien race, the Markab, are experiencing a deadly plague. At one point Dr. Franklin compares the response of the Markab to the plague with the heterosexual population's response to HIV/AIDS.

After he learns about the plague, he has a conversation with a Markab doctor who had been trying to cover it up. Three of the Markab doctor’s comments are worth quoting directly.

“It is not something we talk about…. The disease only appeared once before. Centuries ago. On a small island on our world, noted for certain excesses. When it was struck down, the rest of my people believed it was a punishment by the gods for their lack of morality.”

“The first new case of Drafa [the plague] was detected nearly a year ago. The family was so scandalized by it that they lied about what killed him.”

“Some of us have been working to find a cure without enough money or resources. They [the government] don’t want to talk about it, as if the very subject makes them dirty.”


In the end, it appears that at least 99% of the Markab population is dead. And they might have found a cure if not for their hostility towards those they considered immoral.

**Season 2 Episode 22 “The Fall of Night”** See this for a plot summary.

We learn towards the beginning that the Centuari have been attacking some of the space and planets of it’s neighbors. Their ambassador claims it is to create a buffer zone around the space of the Centauris and claims it will reduce tension and war, which makes no sense. Even if the races attacked DON’T go to war with the Centauri immediately it’s unlikely they will resume normal relations with their invader before many years have passed and they will make arrangements to repel any more attacks, which will mean a lot of military forces close to the areas seized for the buffer zone.

Most of this episode is about the growing schism between B5 and the Earth Alliance. Two representatives of the Ministry of Peace (one from the Night Watch (I say a lot about it in the second review in this post)) come aboard B5 to talk with various ambassadors. The one who leads the Night Watch has an interesting conversation with a recurring minor character in the security force who is a (dissenting) member of NW. The MoP leader uses the word sedition to refer to the threat being dealt with by the NW, and mentioned the following examples: A) a store owner who felt that the regulations for imports were “nuts;” B) dock-workers consistently late for work (allegedly affecting efficiency); C) poor residents of B5 talking to reporters about poverty there and back on Earth (finally evidence that the new regime brought in by a hidden coup is capitalist); D) and lastly two more shop owners openly criticizing presidential decisions.

This next subject over-laps with the last one, but there is a lot about the Centauri-Narn conflict. I sometimes encounter minor topics that I decide to skip and in recent episodes there have been a few things about that conflict that I want to mention here. First, when the Centauri (strategically helped by the evil Shadows) find the Narn Homeworld unguarded, they bombard it from orbit with things called “mass drivers” which are banned by practically everyone except the Centauri. Here and there the B5 command staff have been fairly sympathetic to the Narn side of things, and with good reason. The last time the Centauri occupied Narn planets and space it was genocidal and after the first time a Narn outpost is occupied by the Centauri in this series (season 2, episode 9), initially the latter wanted to keep the civilian population for forced labor (they only abandon that plan when faced with a threat by Earth to send observers).

In this episode, a Narn heavy cruiser that somehow survived the defeat of Narn by the Centauri comes to B5 seeking sanctuary. After that, the leader of the MoP tells Sheridan that Earth has successfully negotiated  a non-aggression treaty with the Centauri. A member of the NW who is stationed in Command and Control reports the hidden presence of the ship. A Centauri warship shows up and ends up being destroyed by B5 while the Narn escape.

At the end of the episode, two things happen: 1) the Centauri invade more space of the League of Non-Aligned Worlds races, and 2) a shop-keeper is taken away by NW members.