![]()
Watch “Black Hollywood:
Blaxploitation And
Advancing An Independent
Black Cinema”
A feature documentary made in 1984 by Howard Johnson... it’s 27 years old, but, as you will see, still very relevant!
![]()
Watch “Black Hollywood:
Blaxploitation And
Advancing An Independent
Black Cinema”
A feature documentary made in 1984 by Howard Johnson... it’s 27 years old, but, as you will see, still very relevant!
![]()
The Alfred C. Carey Prize in Spoken Word Poetry
Deadline Extended to AUGUST 15, 2011
THE DEADLINE HAS BEEN EXTENDED TO AUGUST 15, 2011!The 2011 Alfred C. Carey Prize in Spoken Word Poetry
Dear Friends:
I am happy to announce the call for submissions for the second year of the Alfred C. Carey Prize in Spoken Word Poetry.
The Alfred C. Carey Prize in Spoken Word Poetry will be awarded to a poet that demonstrates the power of spoken word to address issues of class, sexuality and race in a way that transcends rhetoric and creates movement.
The winner will receive $300, and the winning poem will be published at My Feet Only Walk Forward (www.myfeetonlywalkforward.blogspot.com). Two honorable mentions will also be named.
The winner of the 2010 Carey Prize was Saymoukda Vongsay, who has also generously volunteered to make a donation in support of this year's prize.
I welcome other donations in support of the prize. If donations come in that exceed the prize total, I will increase the prize amount. There are very very very few prizes that support the work of spoken word artists, and I hope you will consider making a contribution. Donations can be made at the address provided below. Please make checks payable to David Berube (this is so that ya'll don't think I am trying to keep the moola for myself!).
About the Prize:
Alfred C. Carey was a hard working man from Northern Minnesota. He worked in construction, specifically roofing, while raising a family of 8, including three children not biologically his own. He represented a series of beautiful and sometimes hard contradictions in race, class, and history. He also, without a vocabulary around race and sexuality, accepted all of his children and grandchildren for who they were without judgment. This award is named in the honor of my grandfather who died in 1997.
Rules:
You may submit up to three poems no longer than a combined total of six pages double spaced.
You may also submit audio recordings in CD format. The recordings should not exceed 9 minutes in length.
Along with your submission please include a cover page that states your: Name, Address, Telephone Number, Email Address, Website Address, and a brief biography of no more than 6 sentences.
ALL SUBMISSIONS MUST BE POSTMARKED BY AUGUST 15, 2011. WINNERS WILL BE ANNOUNCED AUGUST 31, 2011.
Authors retain all copyright to their works, and if you would like samples returned, please include a self-addressed stamped envelope.
Make submissions to:
Alfred C. Carey Prize in Spoken Word Poetry
c/o Brandon Lacy Campos
462 W. 52nd Street #3N
New York, NY 10019
![]()
31st Fernando Rielo World Prize for Mystical Poetry
Deadline: 15 October 2011RULES FOR THE THIRTY-FIRST ANNUAL AWARD OF THE FERNANDO RIELO WORLD PRIZE FOR MYSTICAL POETRY sponsored by Fernando Rielo Foundation
Fernando Rielo Foundation is pleased to announce the Thirty-First World Prize for Mystical Poetry, which shall be governed by the following rules:
1. Previously unpublished works of poetry originally written in either Spanish or English or translated into one of these two languages shall be eligible for the Fernando Rielo World Prize for Mystical Poetry.
2. Each entry must be presented by its author. The minimum length for entries shall be 600 lines not to exceed 1300. A given work of poetry may be presented only once for this yearly award; winning works or those submitted to the Prize and awaiting the decision of the jury may not be presented for consideration to other Prizes.
3. The Prize shall be awarded for mystical poetry expressing the profound religious significance of the human person’s spiritual values.
4. The Prize shall consist of 7,000 euros and the publication of the entry selected. The Prize shall be awarded for a single entry. It may not be awarded in the absence of a suitable work.
5. The rights of author of the first edition of the winning work will consist in the monetary prize plus 100 books of this work.
6. The Jury may propose selected poems with significant mystical content from among all the works presented with a view toward their publication in an anthology by the Foundation, if the latter deems it appropriate.
7. The cover or first page of entries shall bear the title of the work and the author’s name, street address, telephone number, and email address, where applicable. The use of pseudonyms is thus prohibited. The submission of the work will be done using a PDF format to premiomundial@rielo.com. Another format will not be admitted.
Those who are unable to submit their work via email will send them to the following address:
Fundación Fernando Rielo
Jorge Juan, 82 - 1° - 6
28009 MADRID — SpainIn this case, a single bound copy of the work should be submitted, printed or typed. A copy of the work in disk or CD should be included as well, if possible.
8. The deadline for submitting entries shall be October 15, 2011, and all entries postmarked on or before this date shall be accepted.
9. The President of the Fernando Rielo Foundation shall constitute and chair the Jury.
10. The Jury’s decision shall be made on or before December 15, 2011, and both the winner and the media shall be immediately informed thereof.
11. There shall be no correspondence with the authors of entries. The entries themselves shall not be returned but shall be destroyed ten days after the Jury’s decision.
12. The decision of the Jury is final.
13. The submission of entries for consideration means full acceptance of these Rules.
I understand mystical poetry in two senses:
a) The specific or full sense, which consists of conveying, with sufficient poetic skill, the different modes of the soul’s intimate personal experience of union with God in love and pain. The Christian poet experiences this union in relation to the Most Blessed Trinity; the non-Christian poet, in relation to God alone. The fullest exclusive consecration to Supreme Love, insofar as possible in this life, is what distinguishes mystical poetry from other poetic genres. If religious poetry and, along with it, other poetic genres, are not formed by this union of love with the Absolute, they are reduced to a religere which is deformed, rather than merely formless. This deformation is the departure point for what I term “antimystical poetry” and “antireli-gious
poetry.” It is quite certain that this deformity cannot totally annihilate the transcendence which defines the poet: all poetry is openness to the mystery of suffering that is man.b) The general or incipient sense, which consists of conveying, with supreme mastery, the intimate experience of love with the Absolute in the various modes of searching presented by the human being’s spiritual inquietum cor. In this regard, I consider mysticism to be open—that is, incipient in all human beings because of the ontological fact that, rather than rational, political, or symbolic animals, they are “mystical beings.” On account of their mystical or ontological status, human beings, from the first instant of their conception, are betrothed to God—that is, united, constituted, and related. Mystical life, in keeping with this definition of man, is the incrementing, by way of grace, of the immanent constitutive presence of the Divine Persons in
the human person. This is what the elevation of mystical life to its greatest possible intimacy consists of.The aim of mystical poetry is to confess one’s faith. The human word, as the image and likeness of the divine word, with a mystical brushstroke must trace out a language of hidden perfumed essences, unevasively summoning up man’s heavenly destiny.
Mystical poetry is not at all reductive; eminently creative, it is capable of engendering new stylistic resources, new forms, and, in general terms, inexhaustible wealth for conveying the soul’s mystical union with the Creator by means of the aesthetic image. Mystical poetry is also a universal, transcendental vision of a humanity journeying towards its celestial goal. Nature and the cosmos are added to this mystical journey, offering themselves to human beings for the purpose of illuminating the noblest sense of their unitive experience of love.
Mystical poetry differs from religious poetry in that, unlike the latter, it possesses a vast horizon through which it passionately recreates the multiform values of human spirituality. So-called “religious poetry”—often confused with “antimystical or antireligious poetry,” which is ranting, brazen, condemnatory, and even blasphemous— generally exhibits the traits of searching and feeling on a cultural level, rather than creative inner experience. What poet has not posed the subject of religion, even if only tangentially? The property defining mystical poetry is not to deal with God as a topic, as an “existential” description, as a stylistic recourse, or as a kind of experimental choice, but rather to raise loving union with the Absolute to art, to such a degree that the constant of that poetry must evoke this mystical union in a most lofty manner.
The experience of the union of love with God is so intimate, so vital, and so definitive that the mystical poet, in contrast to the so-called religious poet, will never wonder about the existence or non-existence of God, not even as an aesthetic recourse, just as the existence or non-existence of the air one breathes is never questioned.
Contact Information:
For inquiries: premiomundial@rielo.com or call (17 18) 526 36 94
For submissions: premiomundial@rielo.com
Website: http://www.rielo.com
![]()
Submission Guidelines
How to Send Us Your Work: We accept submissions only through our electronic submission system. We do not accept submissions through postal services or email. You may send us manuscripts for the following submission categories: General Submissions, Story of the Week, Readers’ Narrative, or a specific Contest. Your manuscript must be in one of the following file forms: .doc, .rtf, .pdf, .docx, .txt, .wpd, .odf, .mp3, .mp4, .mov, and .flv.
Technical Difficulties: If you have any questions or encounter technical difficulties, please Contact Us.
Formatting Your Manuscript: All manuscripts should be in 12-point type, with at least one-inch margins, and sequentially numbered pages. Fiction and nonfiction should be double-spaced. Poetry should be single-spaced. The author’s name, address, telephone number, and email address should be typed at the top of the first page. Contributors are asked to include a brief biographical note with their submissions.
Timing: Submissions may be sent to us at any time, year-round.
Simultaneous Submissions: We accept multiple submissions, since we feel that it’s unreasonable to expect writers to give a magazine an exclusive look at a work unless the magazine can respond within two to three weeks. We want writers to have every possible opportunity for success, so we’re willing to risk losing a story we want when someone at another magazine may have done their reading before we have, and in that case we’ll be sorry to lose the piece but happy for the writer.
Response Time: Our response time varies from four to twelve weeks, with the slowest times usually being August/September and December/January.
Submission Fees: Narrative is a nonprofit organization with the ambition of encouraging good literary work. We do not charge readers for the magazine. However, for unsolicited submissions, we do charge a nominal fee, which helps cover the basic administrative costs related to receiving, reading, and responding to submissions. Also, a portion of the reading fee helps fund our annual Narrative Prize. Our desire is to connect readers and writers, and we strongly encourage anyone interested in submitting work to read the magazine before submitting. You may read the magazine for free. If you enjoy reading it and wish to submit, we hope you will feel that the reading fee, which is lower than most literary magazine subscription fees, is more than justified by the quality of the work the magazine offers. We are strongly committed to publishing debut and emerging writers. The reading fee is $20 for prose and drama manuscripts, $15 for up to five poems, and $20 for audio or video submissions.
Open Reading Periods: During the first two weeks of April, we do not require a reading fee for general submissions made specifically to the Open Reading category via our submissions page. However, manuscripts submitted during this period are not eligible for the Narrative Prize.
Payment to Authors: Narrative is strongly committed to supporting our authors' work. Our current rates for work are as follows:
—$150 for a Story of the Week, with $500 each for the annual Top Five Stories of the Week.
—$150-350 for 500-2,000 word manuscripts.
—$350-$1,000 for 2,000-10,000 word manuscripts.
—$1,000-$5,000 minimum for book-length works, and we may offer more, depending on the length and nature of the work.
—$50 minimum for each accepted poem and audio piece
—We do not pay for Readers’ Narratives.
All submissions with a reading fee, from new or emerging writers, are eligible for the $5,000 Narrative Prize, awarded annually.
$5,000 Narrative Prize: The $5,000 Narrative Prize will be awarded annually for the best short story, novel excerpt, poem, or work of literary nonfiction published by a new or emerging writer in Narrative. The deadline for entries for each year’s award is June 15. The winner is announced each September, and the prize is awarded in October. Notices of the award, citing the winner’s name and the title and genre of the winning piece, will be placed in prominent literary periodicals. Each winner will also be cited in an ongoing listing in Narrative. The prize is judged by the magazine’s editors and, in some years, may be divided between winners, when more than one work merits the award.
Word Count Guidelines:
SHORT SHORT STORY manuscripts must be between two and five pages in length, and no less than 500 and no more than 2,000 words.
MANUSCRIPTS OF 2,000 to 15,000 WORDS can include short stories, essays, one-act plays, and other complete short works of nonfiction, and excerpts from longer works of fiction and nonfiction.
NOVELLAS and other long works that are less than book length may run between 15,000 and 40,000 words. For works of this length, please submit the first 10,000 words with a synposis. (Based on our reading of the first 10,000 words, we will ask to see the complete manuscript if we think the work is suitable for Narrative.)
SERIALIZATION OF BOOK-LENGTH WORKS. For consideration for serialization, please send the first chapter and a one-page synopsis of the book. (Based on our reading of the first chapter and synopsis, we will ask to see the complete book manuscript if we think the book is suitable for serialization in Narrative. For further information on our program of serializations, please click here.)
POETRY submissions may contain up to five poems. Your submission should give a strong sense of your style and range. We accept submissions of all poetic forms and genres but do not accept translations.
NARRATIVE OUTLOUD AUDIO PROSE submissions may be fiction or nonfiction but should take a storytelling form. Audio prose submissions must be in MP3 format and may be up to ten minutes long.
NARRATIVE OUTLOUD AUDIO POETRY submissions must be in MP3 format and may be up to ten minutes long.
NARRATIVE OUTLOUD VIDEO submissions may be short films and documentaries of up to 15 minutes. Submissions must be in .mp4, .mov, or .flv. format.
READERS’ NARRATIVES may run up to 1,500 words.
Click here to submit your work.
a response to:
Rethinking Malcolm: What was Marable thinking? Dr. Alkalimat,You don't know me but you might know (or know of) my father, Kalamu ya Salaam. Just wanted to drop you a quick note of appreciation for your 'Rethinking Malcolm' essay. I recently finished reading the Marable book and while I was impressed by the sheer volume of it, I was left feeling very unsatisfied. You did a good job of laying out some of the reasons.
In addition to the issues you raised (perspective, philosophy, politics, etc.), I was bothered by the lack of context throughout. I was raised in a Pan-African/Black Power - oriented household, but I am too young to have a personal understanding of the tenor or mood of the X era. Therefore, I don't want to know only what Malcolm said and/or did, I also what to know what was going on at the time and what his motivations (both political and personal) might have been for doing or saying the things he did or said. This doesn't require mind-reading. To the contrary, it's basic, competent writing. My father taught me context is everything. That may overstate the matter, but not by much. If I tell you I hunted down, then shot and killed a man in cold blood, you think, "Mtume's a murderer." If I give you the context -- that year's earlier, I witnessed that same man rape and murder my wife and two children, you may still think I'm a murderer, but you've definitely got reason for pause. Or, at least you're able to better understand my seemingly inexplicable actions. Throughout Marable's book, I felt like I was being told Malcolm shot a man. And that's it. Over and over, I would think, "Why? When? How? With who? Because? To what end?" Etc. I'm not saying there was NO context. But we're talking about Malcolm X here -- the leading Black revolutionary of our times. A serious study of the man's life should involve context in damn near every paragraph! A second issue was the way Manning discussed (or described, because there was little discussion) the near-lifelong wire-tapping and surveillance that Malcolm was subjected to. Not once (that I recall...and I'm going only from memory) did Manning mention that these tactics were illegal and immoral. He didn't discuss the effect this constant harassment must have had on Malcolm's psyche and on those around him. I wanted to know the extent of it. Who was behind it? When did it start? How aware was Malcolm? Etc. It's a very important issue. Personally, I don't like it when a stranger overhears me talking to my wife on the telephone. Given that, I try to imagine living my life knowing that my EVERY word and action is being recorded by powerful, corrupt men who are intent on destroying me, and I simply can't. I can't even imagine it. Yet Marable refers to these events in the most prosaic manner imaginable. You'd think he was describing the weather. The other issue I have is something you touched on when you mentioned Manning's speculative commentary -- the bisexual encounter. I thought it was brilliant (no sarcasm) that Manning contextualized the encounter by bringing up Malcolm's similar description of "a friend" from the autobiography. We've all done that: attributed something embarrassing or regretful to "a friend" rather than ourselves. It rang true. BUT, rather than describe the encounter as what it seemed to be -- a nihilistic, drug-addled, opportunistic young man doing something distasteful for financial gain -- Marable insisted on painting a picture of ongoing bisexuality or latent homosexuality. It seemed both disingenuous and forced. Marable kept returning to the issue, even when there was no reason to. I no longer have the book, so I can't be specific, but at one point when Malcolm was in jail, Marable writes about visitors. He wrote (and I'm paraphrasing, obviously), "One of those visitors may have been [the gentleman in question]." MAY have been? Hell, one of the visitors MAY have been the Queen of England. Or the Pope. I'm thinking, "Sir, you wrote the book. Was it him or not? And if you have no clue if he visited or didn't -- WHY WRITE IT AT ALL?" My problem with the way Marable emphasized the bisexual encounter isn't the bisexual encounter, per se. (Frankly, a lot more boys and men have one-time or infrequent episodes of male/male sexual contact than any of us are likely to admit.) My problem with it is the way it colors Marable's later commentary about Malcolm's relationship with Betty. You can't help thinking: maybe Malcolm couldn't or didn't satisfy his wife sexually (if that is indeed true) because he really wanted to be with an old white man. This despite the fact that Malcolm, throughout his life, had numerous romantic relationships with women (as described by Marable) and only the one paid encounter with a man. It's like that 'bad apple' parable. Once Marable planted that seed in your mind, it colored everything that came after it. Which brings me to the last issue that bothered me about the book, and that is, Marable's treatment of Malcolm's misogyny. From what I've read about Malcolm, it is likely (at a minimum) that his attitude towards women was dismissive and/or condescending. From what I've read about everything else, and from what I've witnessed in my 39 years on the planet, that's right in line with the vast majority of American-born men of Malcolm's time. (And the men of 2011 aren't all that far along, frankly.) Add in Malcolm's allegiance to the NOI and the only surprising thing is that his attitude towards women wasn't worse. My point, however, is that Marable doesn't give us the context. We're reading the book, at the earliest, in 2011. American women are Secretaries of State, Senators, Supreme Court Justices and H.C. came mighty close to being the President. That's a slightly different reality from the '50s and '60s when none of that was the case. Give us some context. I do think it is useful and relevant to point out Malcolm's despicable attitude towards women. But put it in context. Reading the book and going on nothing else, you'd think Malcolm was not only the head of the OAAU and one-time leader of the NOI, but also the founder of MWHW (Men Who Hate Women). Furthermore, it is obvious that Malcolm was growing in that area. In his later years, there was still some anti-woman negativity, but he also repeatedly embraced the idea of women in position of leadership. Once again, Marable described these changes without contextualizing them. We're left to make the connections for ourselves. And lastly, as you said, Marable's insistence on repeatedly referring to the NOI as 'a sect' was pejorative and unnecessary. Again, thank you for your piece and thanks for reading this.If only the men worked
half as hard
Ghanaian men work hard too. I'm one of them and I know but... the energy and commitment our women display is just something else.
I just finished traveling through parts of the country, photographing beneficiaries of IFAD projects... their stories are awe-inspiring. I wish them all the best... as they strive to better their world.
![]()
Back at home in Accra, these city girls are working hard in their own way... and they deserve an applause too.
Do have a great week and remember... Hard work breaks no bone.
The most heard phrase
on the streets of Monrovia
July 11, 2011
![]()
Liberian music is going through a creative explosion. Cultural singers are taking to the studio and creating an exciting, high-energy, danceable sound. Young urban folks have invented a local Hip-Hop style called Hipco which talks to their reality, and reinvents Liberian identity for a new generation. Sometimes the two meet with exciting results. With a wealth of creativity in the Liberian music scene, what the artists lack is exposure. For the next few weeks I will be posting on Liberian music while helping to launch a Liberian music blog.
“Dumyarea” means “that’s my area” in Liberian English. It is a common phrase in the market where sellers yell it out to stake their place. Today, it is the most heard phrase on the streets of Monrovia, and the name of the song most played throughout the country. And when I say most played, I mean there is no escaping, any time of day.
Liberian singer, Junior Freeman (and his partner African Soldier?) has taken the country the storm this election season. So much so that the president used his hook in the launch of her re-election campaign. He performs a style called Gbema which is what happens when music from Liberia’s ethnically diverse interior meets computer-based music production software.
Beyond the infectious rhythm, the genius of the song is in the simple yet socially relevant lyrics, that speak to all walks of life. “Everybody got they’re own area… some people aim is to be Senator… some people area is to go up and down the street.” It’s the kind of populist anthem that everyone can get down to, and whenever it comes on, people do. This unity through music and culture is really a sight to behold in a fairly divided society.
![]()
Nonviolent Revolution
Clarified: Five Myths and
Realities Behind
Egypt's Uprising
by: Dr. Cynthia Boaz, Truthout | News AnalysisAn Egyptian flag flies as thousands of protesters attend a mass demonstration in Tahrir Square, the focal point of the Egyptian uprising, in Cairo on July 8, 2011. (Photo: Moises Saman / The New York Times)
The fall of the regimes in Tunisia and Egypt has produced prolific analysis by media commentators across the spectrum. Some of this analysis has been excellent, but much of the conventional media interpretation of the why, how and what behind these events leaves much to be desired. There are a handful of misconceptions that have been parroted repeatedly in media coverage of the "Arab Spring." These are important to recognize because the dynamics of how power is shifted matters enormously. In Gandhian language, means and ends are inseparable. That which is won through violence must be sustained through violence. That which is won through mass civil nonviolent action is more legitimate and more likely to be sustainable over the long term.
Additionally, how we understand and interpret the source of the power that emerged in Tunisia and Egypt last spring can go on to shape our long-term views about what is possible. If we consciously or unconsciously reinforce misconceptions or negative stereotypes about nonviolent action, we potentially undermine the morale of people engaged in ongoing struggles and, in the worst-case scenario, we can give credibility to the perspectives of the oppressors. What follows are the five most prevalent ways in which mainstream media has gotten the story wrong on the Egyptian uprising and the corresponding correction to each.
Misconception 1: It was spontaneous. Reality: Although commentators still tend to talk about the Egyptian revolution as though no one could have predicted it, the key variable in the victory was planning. As we saw during the height of Mubarak's crackdown, the movement was able to keep the people of Egypt unified and, for the most part, nonviolently disciplined. Considering the lengths to which the regime went to try and provoke violence, it was quite remarkable how focused, creative and disciplined the activists remained. None of that would have been possible without several years of laying the groundwork. Egyptian activists worked for years to identify and neutralize the sources of power in the nation of 83 million. Their effort extended to making personal connections with the military forces and the commanders in particular. It's a nuanced divide-and-conquer strategy. After building relationships with members of the regime's pillars of support, the movement then helped them question the legitimacy of the ruler and the system they were upholding. When media analysts talk about an uprising like the one in Egypt as spontaneous, they are revealing their lack of understanding of the dynamics of nonviolent action and, simultaneously, are taking credit away from activists, who in many cases, have worked hard for years - often at great personal risk and sacrifice - to make this kind of victory possible. Regimes like Mubarak's don't fall when people just spontaneously show up in the city square. They only fall when movements are capable of exerting sustained pressure on them over a length of time. And that for that to happen, there must be unity, strategy, vision and, most importantly, planning, planning and more planning.
Misconception 2: It was a military coup. Reality: It was a people-power revolution. This misconception stems partly from the fact that, at the end of the day, much hinged on whose side the military took in the struggle. But instead of giving the people credit for winning the military to their side through effective campaigning and salient messaging, many media commentators erroneously regard the military's defense of the people as a sign that it was they who were actually leading the uprising. But the loyalty demonstrated by the military to the people's revolution should be interpreted as a sign of how well the movement did its job, not just of how powerful the military is in Egypt. The strategy was about unifying around a shared vision of Egyptian society. This misconception also is partly attributable to the fact that many of us cannot conceptualize power as taking any form other than a militaristic one. That perspective reflects adherence to outdated assumptions and frames about violence and power, namely the notion that those two concepts are interchangeable. Fortunately, the people of Egypt know better and they've given the rest of the world an example from which to build.
Stay informed with Truthout updates delivered straight to your email inbox. Click here to sign up.
Misconception 3: It was orchestrated by the United States, either by backroom deals or "training and support" of activists. Reality: This unfortunate misconception shows a gross lack of knowledge of how nonviolent action works. There is really only one condition essential for the success of nonviolent struggle and that without which a struggle can never succeed: it must be indigenous. To claim nonviolent protests of the scale we saw in Egypt last spring can be manufactured abroad is to grossly overestimate the influence of US agents and agencies. How could US agencies organize broad-based protests and manage to get hundreds of thousands of people to maintain nonviolent discipline while under violent assault from half a world away, while these same agencies were, for more than five decades, unable to remove octogenarian Fidel Castro from his perch only 90 miles from the US border and with a population eight times smaller than Egypt's? To say that it was the United States that somehow orchestrated the events in Egypt is also to show contempt for what the people did, which is to take control of their own destiny. To question the Egyptian people's authorship of their own struggle serves the interests of a brutal dictator and others like him, and it risks undermining global support for what was, both at its heart and its implementation, an indigenous people's movement. This, by the way, is not to say that US agencies have taken no interest in or have made no attempts at influencing democracy struggles around the world. It is just to argue that, in the case of Egypt and other successful people-power revolutions, that offer of help was declined.
Misconception 4: It was an Islamist uprising. Reality: Not only is this incorrect, but it flies directly in the face of claims made by the same analysts who say they're interested in promoting genuine democracy. There were Muslims in the movement, yes. But there were also Christians, Jews, atheists, and many others. In order to test the credibility of this assertion, it is important to look at the proclaimed objectives of the movement: it was about more rights, more freedoms and more democracy. Contrast those objectives to the common stereotypes about Islam held in the West: that it is undemocratic, violent and oppressive. There is no way to reconcile those two things. Either Western analysts must concede that the Egyptian revolution was not Islamist or they must concede that Islam is not a violent, undemocratic religion. The ideal course of action would be to concede the former completely and the latter mostly. But short of that, it must be one or the other. A related argument is that we should be wary about the Egyptian victory because it will create space for the Muslim Brotherhood to assert more control in that society. There are several things to note about this claim, however: first, it has never been an acceptable argument against democracy to say that it should be limited because of the outcomes it might produce. Secondly, those who make this assertion might do well to ask themselves if they would accept Egyptians picking their leaders for them. If the answer is no, then they owe the same courtesy to the Egyptian people. And lastly, the Muslim Brotherhood (a group which itself is widely misunderstood in that it formally renounced violence as a means of change of decades ago) seems to have begun evolving along with the Egyptian people. As of last week, it formed a coalition with one of Egypt's most liberal political parties in an attempt to broaden - and moderate - its base.
Misconception 5: It wasn't nonviolent. Reality: It is unrealistic to imagine that a revolution of this scale and with a target as brutal as this regime can be totally nonviolent. But there is a distinction between saying there were a few violent outbursts by undisciplined individuals and that there was violence by the movement. This movement itself was strictly nonviolent and that is what is most relevant. In a country as large as Egypt, it is impossible to train every person individually in nonviolent strategy. And so, not understanding the necessity of nonviolent discipline, there were some incidents of rock throwing, clashes with police, vandalism and a few outbursts of individual rage. There was a militant flank in many historical nonviolent struggles - South Africa, Chile and the US civil rights movement, to name a few. In each case, as in Egypt, the presence of that contingent undoubtedly made the work of the movement both more difficult and more essential. Because of the potential for possible outbursts, the movement had to: a) distinguish itself from undisciplined radicals, b) make it clear that no violence would be tolerated and c) train new activists on the ground. Consider the lengths to which the regime went to provoke violence by the people in order to create the perceptions that what the movement was doing was not nonviolent and, therefore, not legitimate. It was critical that the movement girded against vulnerability to these kind of agents provocateurs and they did that extraordinarily well, especially considering the movement's enormous size. At the end of the day, the Egyptian uprising was one of history's most significant nonviolent struggles and that is how history will remember it.
It is important that events like the ones in Egypt are conveyed as accurately as possible by media for many reasons, but one of the most significant is that the victory of mass nonviolent action in Egypt has implications for terrorist organizations and the perceived efficacy of terrorism itself. As nonviolent methods to push grievances succeed, they de-legitimize violence as a means of promoting change. Nonviolent action offers a realistic alternative to both violence and the status quo and it is, simultaneously, a very powerful form of struggle. If we consider that terrorist organizations and members of movements tend to share the same recruitment bases - disaffected people demanding significant change - then the victory in Egypt has likely done serious damage to the PR campaigns of terrorist networks. Because of that, the people of Egypt should not only be lauded for taking back their freedom through almost entirely democratic means, but for making the world a little bit safer for everyone.
No matter how it unfolds, the Egyptian revolution will go down in the history books as a defining moment in the 21st century. Millions of Egyptians brought down one of the world's most repressive regimes, that of the U.S.-backed Hosni Mubarak, in just 18 days. Their bravery, perseverance, and tactfulness in the face of the regime's brutal crackdown not only triggered uprisings across the Arab world but inspired and influenced protests against government austerity in the U.S., Spain, Portugal, and Greece. Despite the fact that it is only a few months old, it's important to begin piecing together a people's history of the revolution to convey what happened and how it happened so that the lessons from this critical struggle can be disseminated.
The starting point for understanding the revolution is the special role that Egypt played in supporting U.S. domination and control of the region, vis-à-vis its relationship with Israel. Egypt began establishing ties with Israel under Anwar Sadat in the mid 1970s, and in 1979 the two countries signed the Camp David Accords with Jimmy Carter's support. As a result, Egypt was rewarded with billions in U.S. military aid, making it the largest recipient after Israel. It's no coincidence that this is when Sadat began eliminating many of the ‘socialist’ policies implemented underGamal Abdel Nasser in the 1960s, thus paving the way for the introduction of neoliberal policies under Hosni Mubarak.
These measures increased the level of poverty in Egypt, leading to massive disparities in wealth. Moreover, it led to the emergence of a new group of super-wealthy businessmen who benefited from their close ties to the Egyptian state. Hosni Mubarak's son Gamal and steel tycoon Ahmed Ezz were prominent figures of this wealthy class. Both are now in prison, awaiting trials on corruption charges.
Gamal's rise to power is emblematic of how detached and corrupt the regime had become. “The line between businessmen and government was completely erased” by Gamal during this period, according to student activist Hanah Elsisi. Not only did he appoint many of these new rich businessmen to powerful government positions, but together they pushed through more of the neoliberal policies that had enriched them and impoverished most Egyptians. They were seen as being responsible for the regime's almost total shutout of the opposition during the 2010 elections, giving the ruling National Democratic Party (NDP) more than 80% of the seats in parliament.
Most of the movements that have emerged over the past decade have been a response to this transformation of Egypt from epicenter of struggles against colonialism and Zionism to defender of U.S. imperialism and Israel, from a state based on the nationalization of industry and benefits for workers and the poor to privatization and the dismantling of the welfare state. It was not just a fight for liberal democracy and against corruption but for real self-determination, including freedom from U.S. domination.
The first signs of widespread opposition to this new Egyptian power paradigm emerged at the end of 2000, around a campaign of support for the second Palestinian intifada. In Cairo, tens of thousands took to the streets. University students had daily protests and sit-ins for more than a week, and high school students almost shut down the road to the airport. Like most uprisings in the Arab world, the protests centered around issues of democracy, poverty, corruption, and, ultimately, opposition to the regime.
The second wave of mass demonstrations took place in 2003-04 in response to the U.S. invasion of Iraq and the Egyptian regime's support for the war. At one point more than 30,000 protesters fought the police, briefly took over Tahrir square, and burned down a billboard of Mubarak.
When the weapons of mass destruction failed to materialize in Iraq, and George W. Bush shifted his justification for the occupation to one of building democracy, he went after Egypt to show that he was serious. Although there was never any real pressure put on the Mubarak regime to implement any democratic reforms, the confrontation did, as Mohamed Elagati, Executive Director of Arab Forum for Alternatives, says, “force the Egyptian government to give some space in terms of freedom of speech... more independence by the judiciary as well as more fair elections in 2005.”
Many of those involved in Palestine solidarity work and opposing the Iraq war took advantage of this opening and formed a coalition called the Egyptian Movement for Change, or Kefaya, in 2004. They never gained a mass following but were very daring in terms of protesting even in small numbers. Most importantly, they knew how to publicize their actions and use the media to their advantage.
As Dina Shehata, a researcher at the Al Ahram Center for Political and Strategic Studies, pointed out, many of the youth who played an important role in the revolution came out of the Youth for Change movement which was essentially the youth wing of Kefaya. Leaders like Ahmed Maher of the April 6th movement, the main youth group behind the January 25 Police Day demonstration which sparked the revolution, got their start in Kefaya.
The April 6 movement formed out of efforts, in 2008, to support the protests and strikes against surging food prices in the city of Mahalla, the site of the largest textile mill in the Middle East and one with some of the country's most militant workers. Textile workers there have a long history of struggle, but the repression that accompanied the imposition of neoliberal policies in Egypt had kept a lid on any fightbacks for almost 20 years. This peace was shattered in 2006, just two years before the food price riots, when the workers went out on strike over pay and other issues and won. Their victory led to a wave of strikes in the massive textile industry and spread to other sectors.
Workers from the Mahalla Textile Company voice their numerous grievances.
The name of the youth group comes from the date, April 6, on which they called for a general strike. While the general strike never happened, there were militant mass actions by workers and residents in Mahalla. Known as the Mahalla intifada, it took the government two days to shut it down. Three people were killed and hundreds were detained and tortured. Nevertheless, strikes, sit ins and protests continued for months in other places and eventually led to the formation of the first independent trade unions by the tax collectors, a teacher's union, and a number of other small unions in 2009.
The organizing around this struggle served as an important training ground for the future. The youth's social media skills helped spread the word about what was going on not only across Egypt but to the world. Nothing exemplifies the tech and media savviness of this movement better than Wael Ghonim, the Google marketing executive who became one of the ‘stars’ of the revolution. Even though it wasn't about one particular individual, Ghonim played an important role both in the lead up to the January 25, 2011 protest and at a critical point in the final days of the revolution.
Ghonim was first moved to political activism after police beat to death a young man namedKhaled Saeed in Alexandria in June 2010. Ghonim set up a Facebook group called “We Are All Khaled Saeed” to help publicize and organize around the case. It attracted approximately 220,000 members within just a few weeks. The case of Khaled Saeed became internationally known, in part because of this Facebook group, but also because, as Ahmed Shokr, a journalist with the English language daily Al Masry Al Youm who is active with the Association of Progressive Youth of the Revolution, explains, “[it] was a campaign that appealed to many of the elements of the Egyptian middle class... And the basic idea of the campaign was, well, if it could happen to Khaled Saeed it could happen to any one of us.”
Critics of the campaign cited the fact that most of the cases of police brutality involve poorer Egyptians and rarely receive publicity, let alone inspire protests. Nevertheless, Shokr says that “at its height in the summer of 2010 it was drawing literally thousands of people out to protests and silent vigils mostly in Alexandria. I remember some Fridays in Alexandria large segments of the Corniche, the Mediterranean waterfront, were lined up with thousands of people standing in silent vigils to support Khaled Saeed and to demand justice over his death.”
Despite the success of this campaign, the decision to put out the call for a protest against police brutality and corruption on Police Day, a national holiday held every year on January 25, was a bold and critical one. The corruption and daily humiliation ordinary Egyptians were experiencing under the regime were clearly at a breaking point.
On 17 October 2010, Zeinobia, a prominent Egyptian blogger wrote an entry in her blog Egyptian Chronicles titled “The Autumn of Fury Mubarak Edition,” a reference to a book about Anwar Sadat's last days. She said, “Strangely it is like history repeating in its own way and I wonder if the climax that we will witness Inshallah sooner or later is the end of a regime that shows all signs of weakness and fragility.”
A couple weeks later, well known socialist blogger Hossam el-Hamalawy wrote a similar entry in his blog Arabawy: “No one knows when the explosion is going to happen, but it seems everyone I meet or bump into today feel it's inevitable.” He goes on to relay a very telling conversation he had with a cab driver:
“Journalists and people on TV talk about Nazif [the Prime Minister at the time] this and Nazif that. But they never mention Mubarak. They are cowards. They should say Mubarak is bad. Mubarak is responsible... There will be another bread intifada, like that of 1977. And this time we will burn the country down. We will not burn the cars, buses or shops. These are ours. No. We will burn them. We will burn this government. We will burn down the police stations.”
To tap into this anger and widen its appeal, the main organizers of the demonstration – We Are all Khaled Saeed, the April 6 Movement, activists from Egyptian politician Mohamed El Baradei's campaign, the youth of the Muslim Brotherhood, Al Gabha party, and a few more organizations – added other demands like a higher minimum wage and an end to the state of emergency laws.
However, it was the unfolding Tunisian revolution which had the most significant impact on Egyptians and their view of the January 25 demonstration. In response to the death of one of four Egyptians who had set themselves on fire in a desperate protest against the regime (like Mohamed Bouazizi in Tunisia), Asmaa Mahfouz, an activist from the April 6 movement, made a YouTube video appeal for the demonstration in which she says:
“These self-immolators were not afraid of death, but we're afraid of security forces? Can you imagine that? Are you also like that? I will not set myself on fire. If the security forces want to set me on fire, let them come and do it. If you think yourself a man, come with me on January 25. Whoever says that women shouldn't go to protests because they could get beaten, let him have some honour and dignity and come with me on January 25.”
Early on in the day it became clear that the protest was going to be bigger than anything the organizers had expected. Elsisi explained that when organizers fanned out that morning to mobilize various neighborhoods in Cairo, instead of getting 30 or 40 people to march to Tahrir square with them, several hundred – and in some places 1,000 people or more – joined them. In total, more than 100,000 people participated in the protests that day.
Ahmed Maher, one of the April 6 leaders, best captured the significance of what was happening: “When I looked around and saw all these unfamiliar faces in the protests, and they were more brave than us, I knew that this was it for the regime,” he said.
Shehata reminds us that this “wasn't about planning a series of events that would culminate in regime breakdown... What happened was that the response to the call for a protest on the 25th was overwhelming and it gave rise to a momentum that [the youth organizers] hadn't anticipated. So yes they played an important role but also things took a course of their own and so they had to respond to events as they happened.”
Shokr adds,
“January 25 really unleashed something that was larger than any Facebook group or any individual or any political group. It unleashed something – there was sort of a buzz in the air – and suddenly you had this mass popular consensus around this single demand for the ouster of the regime. And you had millions of people on the streets... You know when you have millions of people on the streets I don't think there is any single individual or group that can claim sole credit for that. There was a larger force at work there.”
But how did events snowball from this uprising against police brutality on January 25 to Mubarak being forced to step down on February 11? First and foremost was the success of the Tunisian revolution and the uprisings across the Arab world that it ignited; these gave Egyptians a sense that their actions could actually bring down the regime.
Another factor was the spread of the uprising to other parts of the country. Many used email and social networking sites to spread the word to their networks and others outside of Cairo and Alexandria – but the internet and cell phones were cut off by January 26. That's where independent Egyptian newspapers like Al Shorouk and Al Masry Al Youm stepped in. As Elagati points out, the former went from a distribution of 30,000 to 180,000 copies, and the latter doubled to 200,000 during the revolution.
Of course, Al Jazeera played the biggest role, particularly since people were able to actually see broadcasts of the violence being perpetrated by the state forces. This was the case in Suez. Initially, the bloodiest and most intense confrontations between the people and the police actually took place in Suez, not Cairo or Alexandria. Protesters there eventually drove the police out, but, as Elagati explains, “It was a real war – like what we're seeing in Libya or in other countries... There were a lot killed. A lot more than were killed in the first three days in Cairo and Alexandria.”
The scenes of the police beating and killing protesters in Suez and elsewhere galvanized even more people to come out for the “Day of Rage” protest called for January 28. Not only did more people come out, but they were better prepared. A pivotal battle took place that day on the Kasr el Nile bridge leading into Cairo. A few thousand protesters faced off against a thousand heavily-armed riot cops for five hours, and eventually beat them back.
Across Egypt, people began to shed their fear of the police. “When they started shooting, people started to move directly at them because after a certain limit of violence people are not afraid anymore,” Elagati says. “Okay, we're going to die if we run. So we're not going to run, we're going to attack.”
Shokr says,
“The speed with which people suddenly confronted the security forces and the violence that they used against them came not just as a shock but as an inspiration to all of us who were on the ground, and that fear barrier was within the span of three days taken down.”
He goes on to say that,
“Courage was never the absence of fear. It was the realization that there's actually something more important worth fighting for.”
On February 2 Mubarak unleashed his thugs, who rode horses and camels into crowds of protesters. Even though they were slow to get involved in the demonstrations, the Muslim Brotherhood (not the youth wing which was involved from the beginning) threw themselves into the movement after this attack. They made a big difference not only because of their numbers, but because their military-like discipline was critical in these situations. Shehata said that “the Brotherhood was very much present in the square and part of the organizing committee of the square, but they... didn't raise their banners, [or chant] religious slogans, and kept a lower profile. They were careful not to overshadow the youth groups.”
After what became the most violent day in the revolution, the coalition of youth groups steering the movement made a decisive move to call for mass demonstrations on February 4 in order to regain momentum. It worked. The reign of terror unleashed by Mubarak had backfired, inspiring even more Egyptians to join the uprising. A million people in Cairo alone protested that day. It was at this moment that the key demand for the downfall of the Mubarak regime was solidified.
The final blow to the regime was in some ways its own doing. The government said that they would let the protesters remain in Tahrir, but people had to return to work on February 9. “What happened is that the people moved the revolution from the square to their workplaces,” says Elagati. Shehata adds that “groups began to mobilize as journalists, lawyers, as factory workers, under their professional and class identity. They began to do work stoppages and strikes within their workplace. And during the final two days of the revolution, there were strikes in almost every work location.”
“The protests spreading around the country were threatening to become, I don't want to say a real revolution, but something that could remove the regime completely and not just Mubarak,” says Shehata. It was at this point that the military stepped in to take power.
Some argue that this intervention by the military and its use of secret courts to detain and imprison hundreds and perhaps thousands of activists shows that the revolution has been derailed. They also argue that the economic issues that fueled the revolution, particularly the neoliberal policies, are still intact.
While this may be the case, the ousting and imprisonment of Hosni Mubarak, members of his family, and close associates – and the dissolution of the NDP – has ended authoritarian rule in Egypt and greatly weakened U.S. imperialism. Moreover, there are no signs that the military is planning on standing in the way of the first democratic elections for Parliament in September, nor the writing of a new constitution and election of a president. In short, the Egyptian revolution is still unfolding. •
Mostafa Henaway is a Canadian-born Egyptian based in Montreal where he is a community organizer with the Immigrant Workers Centre. He is active with Tadamon! Montreal which works in solidarity with struggles for self-determination, equality, and justice in the Middle East and an end to Israeli Apartheid.
Rami El-Amine is an editor of Left Turn magazine where this article first appeared.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~(((( The B u l l e t ))))~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ |
![]()
Gashole
What caused America to go from being a leading exporter of oil to the world’s largest importer? What are the economic and sociological forces that have contributed to that change and impede its solution?
Gashole is an eye-opening documentary about the history of oil prices and sheds light on a secret that the big oil companies don’t want you to know – that there are viable and affordable alternatives to petroleum fuel! It also provides a detailed examination of our continued dependence on foreign oil and examines various potential solutions – starting with claims of buried technology that dramatically improves gas mileage, to navigating bureaucratic governmental roadblocks, to evaluating different alternative fuels that are technologically available now, to questioning the American Consumers’ reluctance to embrace alternatives.
Narrated by Peter Gallagher, hear from a wide range of opinions from representatives of the US Department of Energy Representatives, Congressional leaders both Democrat and Republican, Alternative Fuel Producers, Alternative Fuel Consumers (including actor Joshua Jackson), Professors of Economics and Psychology and more. Anyone who buys gas should see this film!
Watch the full documentary now
The Lonely Londoners
![]()
Drum and Bass is Black Music…
On the 30th anniversary of the 1981 Brixton riots, a historic reaction to the hostility and xenophobic environment that informed the policing of African and Caribbean immigrants, I examined the ruthless desire to keep Britain White. I pulled from Sam Selvon’s 1956 novel “The Lonely Londoners,” which tells the story of the Caribbean community’s communal response to the English brand of white supremacy and their cultural preservation as a means for survival. Additionally, I sought the political, social, and musicological context of a sound that takes root in Sly and Robbie’s Reggae Music—Drum and Bass. Inspired by these histories, I’ve created a musical essay that epitomizes my long-term relationship with Black Britain and the parallel strategies of resistance that Black Americans have employed to attain basic human rights. Shout out to drum and bass pioneers Roni Size, Goldie, LTJ Bukem, Kemistry and Storm, Krust, and all the other sons and daughters of “The Lonely Londoners.”
I'm excited to introduce a new series of liner notes. As a part of the WildSeed Cultural Group Independent Artist in Residency program in Atlanta, Georgia (2011-2012), I will be working with my favorite thinkers, writers, cultural critics and scholars to help contextualize my mixes. The first to launch the series is Esther Armah, a fierce Black British writer, speaker, moderator and leader in the emotional justice movement. Thank you Esther for being willing to participate in this project and for helping to make "Entertainment with a Thesis" a reality.
DJ lynnee denise (feel free to repost and pass on)
Liner Notes by Esther Armah*
We made it. Not bodies. They were battered, bruised, brutalized, buried. The drum beat landed. Intact. Slipped unnoticed between bodies, souls, minds carried from West Africa’s shores via the West Indies. Landed unbent and unbroken in this new land - West London. We were the language left when mother tongue was dragged screaming from its source, we were the unshed tears of the middle passage. Company came. Sought us out. Hands grabbed at us from Empire Wind-rush bodies, carried to this place from Caribbean islands. A new language, new accent from this new nation called England. Black backs bent and shaped by British labor, sweat collected from a generation invited and despised in the same breath. Our mamas and daddies, silent and deadly. That racism DNA pounded and flattened, birthed into frustrated beats and a new generation. Defiance became the breath of those born to these Caribbean bodies mangled seeking refuge from racist rants. This was now Black Britain. Sound changed. Started to gather new notes from new generation. April 1981. Brixton streets, injustice exploded, caught fire, consumed and cleansed. Remnants of those unshed tears from that middle passage put the fire out on the streets, left it burning within Black Britain. Fragments of rage wrapped in that drum, dirt from boots pounding those streets caught between notes. Fragments, pieces, floated, landed. Sound from snatched pieces of leftover 1960s signs that screamed: ‘No Niggers, No Dogs, No Irish’, sound dragged from police officers’ brutal batons before they rained rage on nappy heads, sound from untold injustice - all fashioned into language. Called it bass. The sound from an unwelcome land. The double consciousness in the mirror whose reflection you couldn’t see. Mangled beauty drenched in righteous rage. Drum n bass. 30 years on from Brixton; bodies, boots, batons echo, haunt, haint. Now. Press play.
So honored to write these liner notes. Drum n bass are the fragments of us blown across waters and oceans, drum n bass was for the journey where it all got too much, where there was no voice, it is the emotionally unspeakable - the soundtrack of diasporic journeys. Love, love, love this Ms Lynnee...
Esther Armah is a Black British award winning international journalist, an author, playwright, radio host, company director and public speaker. She has worked in the US, UK, Africa. She is the founding director of Centric Productions, a multi-media production and creative marketing company based in New York, London and Ghana. In the UK; she has worked in print, radio and television. In print, she has written for 'The Guardian' newspaper, 'New Nation' newspaper, and in 'Pride' magazine. In radio, she has worked right across BBC radio as a documentary maker, an investigative reporter and a radio host. In tv, she has appeared on Sky Television and BBC television.