2009-12-24

Sifting through the ashes

0 comments



Early September, the WIltern theatre in Los Angeles provided the stage for one of the most historical, tear-shedding moments in the alternative music scene. Industrial rock band, Nine Inch Nails performed their last explosive concert, faithfully executing thirty seven songs which spanned; Nine Inch Nails founder Trent Reznor’s, two decade career. The last incarnation of the band, composed of Robin Finck, Justin Meldal-Johnsen and Ilan Rubin maintained and brought a new dimension to the ferocity and viciousness which defined the band from the beginning. Leaving only three hours and thirteen minutes for the world to remember what has proven to be the most influential band on alternative music, Nine Inch Nails vigorously displayed how far the boundaries of musician radicalism can be pushed; defining, smashing up and redefining the madness of the postmodern world and the inevitably hatred and angst of millions of fans. The concert itself was immortalised with the presence of many special guests who have worked with the band throughout the last two decades including Synth-pop legend Gary Numan, Jane’s Addiction guitarist, Dave Navarro and the Dillinger Escape plan who single-handedly, annihilated the entire stage, leaving nothing but the corpse of dismantled drum kits and broken lighting equipment. The industrial wrecking ball was brought to a final conclusion with a heart-aching performance of “Hurt” (famously reproduced by Johnny Cash) and “In This Twilight” where Trent left the audience with the final lyrics of the song.
“And the longing that you feel
You know none of this is real
We will find a better place
In this twilight”

Despite the hurt many have felt by this emotional goodbye, this was indeed not a final goodbye for Nine Inch Nails, merely an end to touring for the “foreseeable future”. Trent Reznor has continued with the same musical innovation which brought Nine Inch Nails to popularity in the form of a variety of new projects. Nevertheless, Nine Inch Nails last performance was largely ignored, even by the alternative musical scene whose lights constantly shine on the latest boy band’s in disguise, a definite sign of the deteriorating musical standards in the twenty first century. For those who followed Nine Inch Nails “Wave goodbye tour”, one couldn’t help but feel the major significance and impact the band has made on the lives of so many. More importantly, however, the band should be remembered not only because of its innovative musical style but its revolutionary methods of communicating with fans, its constant criticism of the corporate side of the music industry and its sociological impact, which paved the way for radical “shock” musicians to take the stage.
Nine Inch Nails entered the music scene in 1989 with the album “Pretty Hate Machine” which introduced an Industrial noise within the traditional pop framework. The musical direction changed radically with the release of the EP “Broken” in 1992 which fleshed out a barbaric Industrial-metal element, accompanying the release of a banned movie of the same name following the kidnapping, torturing and killing on an unknown individual who is forced to watch Nine Inch Nails Videos. It was, however, the release of “The Downward Spiral” in 1994 which brought the nihilistic, destructive power of Industrial rock to the masses. Acquiring inspiration from David Bowie and Pink Floyd, the album reached widespread popularity with the release of the bands two most famous songs, “Closer” and “Hurt”. Trent had created a new dimension for music to exist in the postmodern world where the angst of thousands had yet to be defined artistically. “The Downward Spiral” essentially paved the way for artists such as Marilyn Manson (whose earlier albums were produced by Reznor) to take the stage and shock the world further.
The band suffered from the dictation of its corporate label, “Interscope records” on several occasions throughout Reznors career. “The Fragile” (largely considered his best work) which was released in 1999 was largely ignored by both the mainstream and alternative audience. Although striking back with “With Teeth” in 2005 and “Year Zero” in 2007, Reznors constant battle with Interscope records reached its final peak for their pricing and distribution plans for “Year Zero”. Reznor described their plans as “absurd” and urged his fans to steal his music online instead of purchasing it legally. Nine Inch Nails has now revolutionized the path for radical musicians to take, avoiding corporate labels, assisting musicians such as Saul Williams by offering the music for free while urging fans to buy the music in order to support aspiring artists. Nine Inch nails latest two albums were released in such a fashion with “Ghosts” (the first nine songs being free for download) and “The Slip” which was available for free download in its entirety.
These are simply few of the battles Nine Inch Nails has fought against corporatism from its freedom to include radical politics within its music on a live stage, several battles with fox News, and incorporating revolutionary methods of interacting with fans bypassing the common advertising “sell-out” methods to its most recent campaign against Guantanamo Bay following the use of Reznor’s music to torture detainees. More so, however, Nine Inch Nails reminds us of the constant need for art to be a relevant force in today’s world. While most artists today shy away from politics and sociological issues in an attempt to avoid controversy, it is always the artists with the greatest sincerity and self conviction that will give the powers that be the middle finger and a loud, resounding “Fuck you”.

2009-12-17

Waltz With Reality

1 comments


Darkness on the shores of Beirut. The luminous, eerie, animated sea is revealed only by three flares in the sky which unveil another three products of the same destructive force. An Israeli trio emerge from blackened sea and float in an almost dreamlike fashion to the beach. The one nearest to me turns his head and presents a set of lost, tortured features, far removed from the usual brutal indifferent masks which IDF soldiers done far too often. The face isn’t completely new though, I’ve gazed upon it before with curiosity, often taking the words of others on whether it should be dismissed or given a chance to flourish. Standing in hmv, grudgingly getting by doing what little Christmas shopping actually needs to be done, I enjoy the chance to be obliterated by my own thoughts while I gaze upon the graphic novel version of the Israeli animation film, “Waltz with Bashir”.
I first heard of the film on a special coverage on Al Jazeera which described it as an anti-war film with an alternative Israeli view on the Israeli defence force and its long and forgotten involvement in the massacres in Sabra and Shatila during the 1982 Lebanon war. I enquired about the film with a few friends who mostly attacked the production with negative criticism, mainly recurring around the supposed “positive” picture it presented of the IDF and its involvement in Lebanon. I left it at that for a while until I approached the graphic novel version, deciding to curiously glance through it. The animation was simply stunning, all encompassing a dark, barely lit atmosphere as if those three flares on the cover provided the only light for the whole movie. I didn’t grasp much of the story since that would require reading the entire novel which I had neither the time nor energy to do. I skipped to the last page where I was reunited with the same tortured face on the cover, gazing hopelessly into the future, coming to terms at being stuck in a world he didn’t know existed, his world. Rows of dead expand down a narrow alley and on the next screen it switched from animation to reveal the real pictures of the massacre. Dead Palestinian men, women and children, buried in the rubble in the middle of a refugee camp.
That last page was enough to change my mind, the film may be biased, itself being from an Israeli viewpoint but there was no way it could be described as a positive depiction of the IDF. I didn’t purchase the novel but watched the original film in its entirety and was very much benumbed with the results. From a purely artistic point of view, the film is simply gorgeous. Often surreal and hallucinatory at times, the viewer often feels himself being drifted along, interrupted by brief, temporary moments of Satori before the concluding brutal withdrawal. Politically, analysis on the film proves to be a far more complex task. The IDF is never portrayed in a positive light but is certainly humanised. Much like the actions of American soldiers during the My Lai Massacre, much of the atrocities committed by Israeli soldiers in the film were rooted down to fear. Upon landing on a beach, soldiers open fire at anything that moves including a civilian car, killing the family itself. While this is certainly no justification for killing civilians, it certainly does explain the numerous accounts in the modern world, where well disciplined troops break down and inevitably commit atrocities due, primarily to fear. My main criticism on the film is that it never portrays any intentional acts of violence of the IDF towards civilians in which there were plenty. It often hints on the barbarity of the army, indiscriminately bombing Lebanese cities, but these are removed and attention is focused mainly on Israeli fear and carelessness. It should, however, be understood that the story is told from the perspective of an Israeli soldier. Like most soldiers of an occupying force, they have little understanding of the political situation beyond the concept of a dehumanised enemy which the state constantly beats into their heads. Even then, however, the “enemy” is almost nonexistent in the film. Soldiers spend most of their time firing into thin air, bombing cities and destroying cars and flats. Despite this, the film is revolutionary in its sharp defiance of the blind patriotic, expansionist policies of the Israeli state and of the rising right wing views of the public.
Aljazeera reported that the Israeli government officially approved of the film since it clarified that Israeli soldiers didn’t carry out the massacres in Lebanon, as if that somehow cleared the blame from the shameless barbarity of the Israeli state and military. In fact, if anything, the film clarifies Israel’s direct involvement in the massacres. The IDF provided cover for the Phalange militia, fired flares at night in order to aim they carry out the atrocity and simply sat back and let it happen until morning where thousands had already been killed. There is a deep psychological explanation behind this presentation with soldiers in the film describing the camp as identical to the Warsaw ghetto. The film is directed and based upon Ari Folman, who had relatives in Auschwitz, presents his experience in the camps in the shadow of the holocaust, taking the metaphorical role of a Nazi, drawing comparisons with SS behaviour in the concentration camps and IDF behaviour during the massacres. Commentary, an American-Jewish magazine commented;
“As vilely anti-Semitic as it is to compare Israel’s actions to those of the Nazis, it is perfectly natural for Israelis to think of the Holocaust in certain situations, because they, unlike other peoples, still live in the Holocaust’s shadow."
I would agree that it is completely natural for Israelis to compare their experiences with that of the holocaust. The holocaust itself was the very least, a brutally soul-destroying event signifying the destruction of humanity in the blitz of the madness which defined the twentieth century. Comparing the actions, however, of the Israeli state and army to the Nazis as Anti-Semitic? A state founded upon the principle of a militaristic and expansionist ideology, created by immigrants with no historical connection to the land other than an abstract religious concept, excluding members of any other religious and ethnic group and routinely carries out ethnic cleansing and acts of brutality isn’t at all similar to the action of the Nazis? Sure, it’s not to the same scale but in essence, it’s the same thing. Does the history of brutal treatment towards the Jewish people render Israel immune from criticism?
Indeed, I’m more inclined to agree with the review by Haaretz which described the film as;
“Stylish, sophisticated, gifted and tasteful - but propaganda for portraying Israel and the IDF in a too positive light”
Politically, the film isn’t perfect, however if looked upon in context of the story, it does little to take the blame away from the behaviour of the Israeli military in Lebanon. Overall, it’s a piece of Israeli cinema history. Beautifully animated, humanely heartbreaking and in the end, further hope that ordinary Israelis may one day recognise the injustice of their government and realise that coexistence with the Palestinians is the only solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

2009-11-30

An unlegitimate revolution?

2 comments

In a world where the nation state has come to represent the most repressive form of cohesive authority, most left-libertarian and anarchist groups have taken a firm stance against statism and the establishment of states, most noticeably their criticism of national liberation movements. The main argument is that, far from strengthening the position of the working class in an independent nation, power is shifted from the imperialist warmongers to local elites who in turn exploit their own population and exercise a monopoly over the country’s wealth. This is certainly true to a certain degree. One only needs to look to the examples of Algeria and Vietnam who both led a vicious struggle against imperialism only to fall under the tyranny of a repressive state. Despite this, one has to ask himself under what conditions can and should anarchists support the self-determination of an oppressed people. Although the end result should be no borders, no states, the path to freedom is a long one and under the right circumstances, people may have to endure several changes within their country’s before a legitimate form of governance can exist.
Let’s consider the Palestinian case as an example. Most anarchists would oppose the efforts of national liberation movements such as Hamas or the popular front due to the corruption which ordinary Palestinians put up with under these groups. Hamas has been accused on forcibly shutting down trade unions as well as brutally silencing political opposition and same can be said about Fatah. Most would look to the solidarity between underclass Israelis and Palestinians and a long struggle to remove the state of Israel and a possible Palestinian state. While this is certainly a favourable solution, the problem is that is simply doesn’t consider the reality of the situation. The first problem is that while there is a growing Israeli underclass, only minority show sympathy with the Palestinians and even a smaller amount take part in any serious solidarity work. Israeli peace groups, often described as part of a “lunatic fringe” by mainstream Israeli media mainly campaign for a two-state solution. The Palestinian Liberation organisation rejected the possibility of a federalist solution, instead blinded the western myth that statehood is the only path to justice. There simply isn’t any motivation among ordinary Palestinians and Israelis for the favourable solution. More so, the situation in Palestine is that of apartheid and military occupation. Uri Gordon, an Israeli anarchist and activist presents two possible solutions in this situation. To oppose the possibility of an independent Palestinian state and work instead of overthrowing the Israeli state which would inevitably delay the end of the occupation until such a goal is achieved. Alternatively, anarchists could support a temporary state which would relieve Palestinians from the ruthless occupation while activists in both countries advocate the possibility of a fairer society.
Indeed, I was completely opposed to the idea of an independent Palestinian state, not only in opposition to the concept of statism but also considering the fact that Palestinian refugees would be denied any claim to their original homes in modern day Israel as well acknowledging the existence of a state based exclusively on religion. However, in a recent lecture by renowned political scientist and linguist, Noam Chomsky, entitled “Palestine and the region in the Obama era”, Chomsky provides an alternative to a push for a one state solution. While acknowledging that a Palestinian state would temporarily allow the Palestinians to recover from decades of brutal occupation, he highlighted that the process wouldn’t end two states living side by side. In fact, because the West bank, Gaza and Modern day Israel and so interconnected, geographically, economically and culturally, it will be virtually impossible to separate them. Over the years, cultural and economic ties will prompt both parties to move to federalism with the west bank and Gaza existing as autonomous areas as opposed to independent states. Whether this would then evolve to a one-state solution or even better, a no state solution is irrelevant at this point. The point is that national liberation for an oppressed people can sometimes be justified.
Another prominent example could include the efforts of the PKK (Kurdistan’s Workers Party) in the liberation of Kurdish people from the oppressive nature of the Turkish government. Indeed, Kurdish people in Turkey suffer widespread poverty due to neglect from both the nationalists and AKP. Until recently, the use of the Kurdish language was banned and even to identify as a Kurd was a form of treason. The Turkish military routinely carries out attacks on Kurdish areas, ethnically cleansing Kurdish villages, arresting hundreds of youths and detaining them without trial and brutally crushing any resistance to the racist policies of Turkish government. Similar policies in neighbouring countries mean that Kurds have formed the bulk on the underclass and even the wealthiest area of Kurdistan is the poorest of Iran. Imperial Britain, as always, had a hand in the repression of the Kurds, first offering the prospect of an independent Kurdistan in order to fight the Ottomans, then carrying out bombing campaigns in Kurdish villages to prevent a revolution that could threaten Britain’s monopoly of power in the region. For this reason, the PKK was formed to carry out an insurgency in Kurdistan, mainly against Turkish forces. The PKK is a grassroots, working class organisation fiercely opposed to the liberal independence movements in Iraq, led by tribal leaders and other elites seeking their share of power. A no state solution would simply be unrealistic at this time since it would require the overthrow of the Turkish, Syrian, Iraqi and Iranian governments. Could this neigh-impossible task ever be accomplished before another atrocity is committed against the Kurdish people?
The problem I see with most anarchists is they look upon the world from a euro-centric perspective, analysing political situations in the Middle East through the lens of western politics. This is a very dangerous way of approaching the world since anarchists will consistently fail to have an impact on the Middle East, and other cultures since they make little effort to understand the differences that exist. What is needed is a rethinking of common anarchist polices towards these issues and a serious effort to strive to understand different cultures and apply this knowledge to our political views.

2009-11-20

The Future of Resistance

0 comments


On the 5th of November, a day famous in Britain for the failed attempt to destroy parliament by gunpowder, the Palestinians officially recognise the futility of their parliament and national authority in dealing with the occupation and begin to consider the only option available. Resistance. On a televised interview, Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas formally announces his decision not to run again in the next election. The president reiterated, almost half-heartedly, that peace was still possible but explicitly blamed Israel on the stagnation of the current peace process. According to Haaretz, Abbas reminded Israelis that he has always been offering the peace branch to a reluctant adversary:
“If [Israeli and U.S.] intentions are sincere, then I am still here and have been here for years - they could have reached a deal with me already,"
Indeed, it seems Abbas has finally lost faith in the possibility of peace with the current right-wing, Netanyahu led government. Since Netanyahu’s success in the Israeli elections in 2008, he has come to the negotiation tables with his counterpart on several occasions, with Obama as a mediator. The process has, however, been something of a joke, with Israel’s refusal to halt construction, never mind removing its illegal settlements which till this day expand deep into Palestinian land. Netanyahu simply outmanoeuvred both Obama and Abbas by avoiding preconditions and whipping up international support by presenting original plans of the death camps in order to shame the west into accepting the legitimacy of Israeli settlements. In order to appear as a “fair” mediator, Obama has instead turned to Abbas, demanding Palestinians put an end to violent resistance and do all they can to convince Israel to stop the construction of settlements. This is a humiliating a ridiculous proposal as both the Palestinian authority, and Hamas (which Abbas has no influence over whatsoever) haven’t retaliated in violence since Israel’s savage attack on Gaza in January. Israel, on the other hand, continues its crippling siege of Gaza which is effectively starving the population and making reparations practically impossible. It continues to decimate Palestinian shipping on the shores, partly due to the newly discovered fresh gas reserves as well as expanding it’s illegal settlements on the west bank and slowly ethnically cleansing Palestinian residents from Jerusalem.
The accumulation of these humiliating political defeats seems to have pushed the leader (often criticised as a “sell out”) over the edge. Indeed, many blame Abbas for his willingness to betray Palestinian interests for the sake of Israeli and American approval. In 2005, he accepted 50 million dollars from the then U.S president, George W. Bush in order to “crack down on terrorists” . These funds have largely been diverted to the accounts of leading Fatah officials who are becoming increasingly wealthy while the rest of the population suffers. The west bank under the P.A has also been turned into a virtual police state with opposition being monitored and placed under tight control while unauthorised protests are often broken up violently. Abbas also repeatedly breached his constitutional powers by calling for elections in times of political upheaval in order to undermine his main rivals, Hamas. Under pressure from the U.S, Abbas declared a state of emergency in 2007 and dissolved the unity government replacing the Prime minister to his advantage. In fact, he isn’t legally the president anymore, the official term ended on the 9th January 2009. Perhaps the biggest controversy surrounding Abbas was his decision to go along with the U.S and delay the draft endorsing the recommendations made from the Goldstone report which founded that Israel was guilty of serious war crimes during the Gaza war.
Despite these numerous betrayals, I’m glad everything happened the way it did. Abbas proved, just like Arafat (to a lesser extent) before him that no matter how many concessions Palestinians make, Israel simply won’t accept peace. All those who temporarily placed their faith in the process have become disillusioned and finally realise the only road to liberation is by a mass, grass roots resistance.
Fatah has told Hadith Ana, a Nazareth based newspaper that the P.A is seriously considering a third Intifada. What is strange is that the P.A seems to recognise it will have little influence in the direction this rebellion will take. It acknowledges that it will be a grass-roots movement and largely peaceful, making comparisons with the first intifada. The decision will probably be mentioned during the 6th convention of the P.A . The Palestinian people, however, must break from their dependency of their leaders in both the west bank and Gaza. If this movement is to be successful at all, it must force Israel to make concessions, which it nearly did during the second intifada until Arafat agreed to the disastrous road map to peace. The Palestinian people have already taken positive steps towards a non-violent resistance by issuing a boycott on all Israeli goods. Many supermarkets within the west bank sell products produced in the illegal settlements which are now being targeted, not only in Palestine, but worldwide. Academic boycotts have been proposed in several universities in the UK, but have largely been rejected due to Zionist propaganda carefully intertwining any criticism of Israel with anti-Semitism.
The Palestinian people are yet again opposing the brutality of the occupation using peaceful and non violent methods. If the world chooses to ignore this effort and look for any twisted reason to blame the Palestinians, then there will inevitably be a violent uprising. Either way, the Palestinian people have acknowledged that resistance is the only path to peace and justice.