Dismantle Civilisation Rotating Header Image

news

UK Home Educators Under Threat

The Uk Govt is planning to stop people home educating their children, another ancient right being removed.

Please help us keep our freedom to home educate as we, and our children, see fit.

Please support us in petitioning the Prime Minister of Great Britain to reject the recommendations of the Report to the Secretary of State on the Review of Elective Home Education in England by Graham Badman.This report is a totally disproportionate response to a ‘perceived’ problem full of unsubstantiated allegations that home educated children are more at risk of abuse than those at school. This simply is not true, as the report itself makes clear. Enacting the recommendations in this report would establish the state as “parent of first resort”, even though current legislation makes parents responsible for providing a suitable education for their children.

The report proposes to introduce monitoring and registration of home educators. Local officials would be given automatic access to private homes to interview children without their parents or any other trusted adult present. This is outrageous and a serious challenge to civil liberties. Registration may be refused or revoked on safeguarding grounds, though so far it is unclear what these grounds may be and Badman in his report stated that such grounds could be “any other concerns” that the local official had. Under such conditions, “registration” could really mean “permission” especially when home educators come up against inspectors who are anti-home education.

The proposals also introduce the need for the parent to submit an approved 12 month plan and for their child to “exhibit” at the end of the year that their plan has been successfully implemented. This will put an end to autonomous education/unschooling, as any such child-led philosophy would be decimated by having to implement such a structured scheme. This would also seriously curtail the flexibility that many structured home educators enjoy.

Across many countries there seems to be an attempt to undermine home education and to make sure that all children receive the state’s approved version of education, Sweden is moving to ban home education and it is already against the law in Germany.

Please help us stop this happening in England. This is becoming a global problem for home educators/homeschoolers. Let us unite and say with one big voice, “enough is enough!”
Petition:
We the undersigned call upon the Prime Minister of Great Britain to reject the recommendations of the Report to the Secretary of State on the Review of Elective Home Education in England by Graham Badman.

Online petition – Support home educators (homeschoolers) in England

Share

Coup d’Etat Underway in Honduras: OBAMA’S FIRST COUP D’ETAT

by Eva Golinger, at Global Research

President Zelaya of Honduras has just been kidnapped

[Note: As of 11:15am, Caracas time, President Zelaya is speaking live on Telesur from San Jose, Costa Rica. He has verified the soldiers entered his residence in the early morning hours, firing guns and threatening to kill him and his family if he resisted the coup. He was forced to go with the soldiers who took him to the air base and flew him to Costa Rica. He has requested the U.S. Government make a public statement condemning the coup, otherwise, it will indicate their compliance.]

Caracas, Venezuela – The text message that beeped on my cell phone this morning read “Alert, Zelaya has been kidnapped, coup d’etat underway in Honduras, spread the word.” It’s a rude awakening for a Sunday morning, especially for the millions of Hondurans that were preparing to exercise their sacred right to vote today for the first time on a consultative referendum concerning the future convening of a constitutional assembly to reform the constitution. Supposedly at the center of the controversary is today’s scheduled referendum, which is not a binding vote but merely an opinion poll to determine whether or not a majority of Hondurans desire to eventually enter into a process to modify their constitution.

Such an initiative has never taken place in the Central American nation, which has a very limited constitution that allows minimal participation by the people of Honduras in their political processes. The current constitution, written in 1982 during the height of the Reagan Administration’s dirty war in Central America, was designed to ensure those in power, both economic and political, would retain it with little interference from the people. Zelaya, elected in November 2005 on the platform of Honduras’ Liberal Party, had proposed the opinion poll be conducted to determine if a majority of citizens agreed that constitutional reform was necessary. He was backed by a majority of labor unions and social movements in the country. If the poll had occured, depending on the results, a referendum would have been conducted during the upcoming elections in November to vote on convening a constitutional assembly. Nevertheless, today’s scheduled poll was not binding by law.

In fact, several days before the poll was to occur, Honduras’ Supreme Court ruled it illegal, upon request by the Congress, both of which are led by anti-Zelaya majorities and members of the ultra-conservative party, National Party of Honduras (PNH). This move led to massive protests in the streets in favor of President Zelaya. On June 24, the president fired the head of the high military command, General Romeo Vásquez, after he refused to allow the military to distribute the electoral material for Sunday’s elections. General Romeo Vásquez held the material under tight military control, refusing to release it even to the president’s followers, stating that the scheduled referendum had been determined illegal by the Supreme Court and therefore he could not comply with the president’s order. As in the Unted States, the president of Honduras is Commander in Chief and has the final say on the military’s actions, and so he ordered the General’s removal. The Minister of Defense, Angel Edmundo Orellana, also resigned in response to this increasingly tense situation.

But the following day, Honduras’ Supreme Court reinstated General Romeo Vásquez to the high military command, ruling his firing as “unconstitutional’. Thousands poured into the streets of Honduras’ capital, Tegucigalpa, showing support for President Zelaya and evidencing their determination to ensure Sunday’s non-binding referendum would take place. On Friday, the president and a group of hundreds of supporters, marched to the nearby air base to collect the electoral material that had been previously held by the military. That evening, Zelaya gave a national press conference along with a group of politicians from different political parties and social movements, calling for unity and peace in the country.

As of Saturday, the situation in Honduras was reported as calm. But early Sunday morning, a group of approximately 60 armed soldiers entered the presidential residence and took Zelaya hostage. After several hours of confusion, reports surfaced claiming the president had been taken to a nearby air force base and flown to neighboring Costa Rica. No images have been seen of the president so far and it is unknown whether or not his life is still endangered.

President Zelaya’s wife, Xiomara Castro de Zelaya, speaking live on Telesur at approximately 10:00am Caracas time, denounced that in early hours of Sunday morning, the soldiers stormed their residence, firing shots throughout the house, beating and then taking the president. “It was an act of cowardness”, said the first lady, referring to the illegal kidnapping occuring during a time when no one would know or react until it was all over. Casto de Zelaya also called for the “preservation” of her husband’s life, indicating that she herself is unaware of his whereabouts. She claimed their lives are all still in “serious danger” and made a call for the international community to denounce this illegal coup d’etat and to act rapidly to reinstate constitutional order in the country, which includes the rescue and return of the democratically elected Zelaya.

Presidents Evo Morales of Bolivia and Hugo Chávez of Venezuela have both made public statements on Sunday morning condeming the coup d’etat in Honduras and calling on the international community to react to ensure democracy is restored and the constitutional president is reinstated. Last Wednesday, June 24, an extraordinary meeting of the member nations of the Bolivarian Alternative for the Americas (ALBA), of which Honduras is a member, was convened in Venezuela to welcome Ecuador, Antigua & Barbados and St. Vincent to its ranks. During the meeting, which was attended by Honduras’ Foreign Minister, Patricia Rodas, a statement was read supporting President Zelaya and condenming any attempts to undermine his mandate and Honduras’ democratic processes.

Reports coming out of Honduras have informed that the public television channel, Canal 8, has been shut down by the coup forces. Just minutes ago, Telesur announced that the military in Honduras is shutting down all electricity throughout the country. Those television and radio stations still transmitting are not reporting the coup d’etat or the kidnapping of President Zelaya, according to Foreign Minister Patricia Rodas. “Telephones and electricity are being cut off”, confirmed Rodas just minutes ago via Telesur. “The media are showing cartoons and soap operas and are not informing the people of Honduras about what is happening”. The situation is eerily reminiscent of the April 2002 coup d’etat against President Chávez in Venezuela, when the media played a key role by first manipulating information to support the coup and then later blacking out all information when the people began protesting and eventually overcame and defeated the coup forces, rescuing Chávez (who had also been kidnapped by the military) and restoring constitutional order.

Honduras is a nation that has been the victim of dictatorships and massive U.S. intervention during the past century, including several military invasions. The last major U.S. government intervention in Honduras occured during the 1980s, when the Reagain Administration funded death squads and paramilitaries to eliminate any potential “communist threats” in Central America. At the time, John Negroponte, was the U.S. Ambassador in Honduras and was responsible for directly funding and training Honduran death squads that were responsable for thousands of disappeared and assassinated throughout the region.

On Friday, the Organization of American States (OAS), convened a special meeting to discuss the crisis in Honduras, later issuing a statement condeming the threats to democracy and authorizing a convoy of representatives to travel to OAS to investigate further. Nevertheless, on Friday, Assistant Secretary of State of the United States, Phillip J. Crowley, refused to clarify the U.S. government’s position in reference to the potential coup against President Zelaya, and instead issued a more ambiguous statement that implied Washington’s support for the opposition to the Honduran president. While most other Latin American governments had clearly indicated their adamant condemnation of the coup plans underway in Honduras and their solid support for Honduras’ constitutionally elected president, Manual Zelaya, the U.S. spokesman stated the following, “We are concerned about the breakdown in the political dialogue among Honduran politicians over the proposed June 28 poll on constitutional reform. We urge all sides to seek a consensual democratic resolution in the current political impasse that adheres to the Honduran constitution and to Honduran laws consistent with the principles of the Inter-American Democratic Charter.”

As of 10:30am, Sunday morning, no further statements have been issued by the Washington concerning the military coup in Honduras. The Central American nation is highly dependent on the U.S. economy, which ensures one of its top sources of income, the monies sent from Hondurans working in the U.S. under the “temporary protected status” program that was implemented during Washington’s dirty war in the 1980s as a result of massive immigration to U.S. territory to escape the war zone. Another major source of funding in Honduras is USAID, providing over US$ 50 millon annually for “democracy promotion” programs, which generally supports NGOs and political parties favorable to U.S. interests, as has been the case in Venezuela, Bolivia and other nations in the region. The Pentagon also maintains a military base in Honduras in Soto Cano, equipped with approximately 500 troops and numerous air force combat planes and helicopters.

Foreign Minister Rodas has stated that she has repeatedly tried to make contact with the U.S. Ambassador in Honduras, Hugo Llorens, who has not responded to any of her calls thus far. The modus operandi of the coup makes clear that Washington is involved. Neither the Honduran military, which is majority trained by U.S. forces, nor the political and economic elite, would act to oust a democratically elected president without the backing and support of the U.S. government. President Zelaya has increasingly come under attack by the conservative forces in Honduras for his growing relationship with the ALBA countries, and particularly Venezuela and President Chávez. Many believe the coup has been executed as a method of ensuring Honduras does not continue to unify with the more leftist and socialist countries in Latin America.

Share

“Avenger against oligarchy” wins in Ecuador

Share

How #Not# to bring down the Banking System

RBS City Branch at the G20 protests

RBS City Branch at the G20 protests

In an attack reminiscent of the scenes at the Royal Bank of Scotland branch in the City of London during the G20 protests, anarchists in Brighton have attacked and smashed the windows of an RBS branch claiming that “With this action we want to increase the rage against the capitalist system”.  This is born of a growing anti-capitalist movement against the banks and financial institutions that brought this economic crisis upon us, and many see it as a route to bring that system down.  However, the attacks these people have used are a particularly ineffective way to express their professed rage against this system, and actions such as this will not contribute to changing the system at all – in fact it could even work against it, with public opinion decidedly against seemingly random vandalism.

These acts are undoubtedly the result of true anger and rage against an economic system that puts profit and growth above people and planet, that rewards its bankster leaders with pensions vastly bigger than what most people have to scrape by on, and is then bailed out along with many other similarily corrupt institutions by these people’s taxes.  But vandalism such as this is a particularly unarticulated expression of this anger, and is ultimately an insignificant act that will only serve to briefly quench their desire for retribution.  It certainly doesn’t bother the bank itself much – they have enough taxpayers money to reglaze their stores indefinitely.  Indeed, the perpetrators don’t even pretend it will, instead seemingly hoping that this will increase other people’s rage against the system.  Unfortunately I suspect the vast majority of the public, many of whom may indeed share the same anger, will be put off by such acts by what they may perceive as violent thugs, rather than be encouraged by it to change the system.  And if we want to change the world, it’s the public we need to start convincing and not the small numbers of those hardcore anarchists with smashing tendencies.

So how can we really change the banking system?  A physical act is tempting and works well in revolutionary fantasies, but in our situation as I have described it is generally only symbolic and even counter-productive.  However, there is a much easier and perfectly legal way to direct your anger against and weaken those banks and financial institutions that prop up the system we work against, one so simple it’s staggering so few people have suggested it – stop giving them your money.  They need regular depositors like us to keep feeding in capital which they can then multiply vastly using various financial tricks to trade across the world and fund continued growth.  Why should we keep funding infinite economic growth when we know how its destroying people and planet?  Why should we willingly be giving them the money to do this?  Complete removal from the banking system may be difficult and currently impractical for most, but reducing the amount of money we stash away in the big corporate banks, investing some of that money in useful equipment necessary for the coming transition as well as for courses to reskill, and shifting the remains to more ethical and local establishments can start the process.

I’m not claiming this will bring down any banks any time soon, but funding the very system we wish to dismantle is counter-productive, and even if a trickle of people start to reduce their connection with the globalised financial webs that create continued growth it will start to help reduce their power.  It’s certainly more effective than smashing a few windows in the night, and is legal too.  So let’s stop funding civilisation’s grip on this planet, and get on with funding a new localised stable economy instead!

Share

You Are Being Lied to About Pirates

States Johann Hari, at the Huffington Post.

Who imagined that in 2009, the world’s governments would be declaring a new War on Pirates? As you read this, the British Royal Navy – backed by the ships of more than two dozen nations, from the US to China – is sailing into Somalian waters to take on men we still picture as parrot-on-the-shoulder pantomime villains. They will soon be fighting Somalian ships and even chasing the pirates onto land, into one of the most broken countries on earth. But behind the arrr-me-hearties oddness of this tale, there is an untold scandal. The people our governments are labeling as “one of the great menace of our times” have an extraordinary story to tell — and some justice on their side.

Pirates have never been quite who we think they are. In the “golden age of piracy” – from 1650 to 1730 – the idea of the pirate as the senseless, savage thief that lingers today was created by the British government in a great propaganda-heave. Many ordinary people believed it was false: pirates were often rescued from the gallows by supportive crowds. Why? What did they see that we can’t? In his book Villains of All nations, the historian Marcus Rediker pores through the evidence to find out. If you became a merchant or navy sailor then – plucked from the docks of London’s East End, young and hungry – you ended up in a floating wooden Hell. You worked all hours on a cramped, half-starved ship, and if you slacked off for a second, the all-powerful captain would whip you with the Cat O’ Nine Tails. If you slacked consistently, you could be thrown overboard. And at the end of months or years of this, you were often cheated of your wages.

Pirates were the first people to rebel against this world. They mutinied against their tyrannical captains – and created a different way of working on the seas. Once they had a ship, the pirates elected their captains, and made all their decisions collectively. They shared their bounty out in what Rediker calls “one of the most egalitarian plans for the disposition of resources to be found anywhere in the eighteenth century.” They even took in escaped African slaves and lived with them as equals. The pirates showed “quite clearly – and subversively – that ships did not have to be run in the brutal and oppressive ways of the merchant service and the Royal navy.” This is why they were popular, despite being unproductive thieves.

The words of one pirate from that lost age – a young British man called William Scott – should echo into this new age of piracy. Just before he was hanged in Charleston, South Carolina, he said: “What I did was to keep me from perishing. I was forced to go a-pirating to live.” In 1991, the government of Somalia – in the Horn of Africa – collapsed. Its nine million people have been teetering on starvation ever since – and many of the ugliest forces in the Western world have seen this as a great opportunity to steal the country’s food supply and dump our nuclear waste in their seas.

Yes: nuclear waste. As soon as the government was gone, mysterious European ships started appearing off the coast of Somalia, dumping vast barrels into the ocean. The coastal population began to sicken. At first they suffered strange rashes, nausea and malformed babies. Then, after the 2005 tsunami, hundreds of the dumped and leaking barrels washed up on shore. People began to suffer from radiation sickness, and more than 300 died. Ahmedou Ould-Abdallah, the UN envoy to Somalia, tells me: “Somebody is dumping nuclear material here. There is also lead, and heavy metals such as cadmium and mercury – you name it.” Much of it can be traced back to European hospitals and factories, who seem to be passing it on to the Italian mafia to “dispose” of cheaply. When I asked Ould-Abdallah what European governments were doing about it, he said with a sigh: “Nothing. There has been no clean-up, no compensation, and no prevention.”

At the same time, other European ships have been looting Somalia’s seas of their greatest resource: seafood. We have destroyed our own fish-stocks by over-exploitation – and now we have moved on to theirs. More than $300m worth of tuna, shrimp, lobster and other sea-life is being stolen every year by vast trawlers illegally sailing into Somalia’s unprotected seas. The local fishermen have suddenly lost their livelihoods, and they are starving. Mohammed Hussein, a fisherman in the town of Marka 100km south of Mogadishu, told Reuters: “If nothing is done, there soon won’t be much fish left in our coastal waters.”

This is the context in which the men we are calling “pirates” have emerged. Everyone agrees they were ordinary Somalian fishermen who at first took speedboats to try to dissuade the dumpers and trawlers, or at least wage a ‘tax’ on them. They call themselves the Volunteer Coastguard of Somalia – and it’s not hard to see why. In a surreal telephone interview, one of the pirate leaders, Sugule Ali, said their motive was “to stop illegal fishing and dumping in our waters… We don’t consider ourselves sea bandits. We consider sea bandits [to be] those who illegally fish and dump in our seas and dump waste in our seas and carry weapons in our seas.” William Scott would understand those words.

No, this doesn’t make hostage-taking justifiable, and yes, some are clearly just gangsters – especially those who have held up World Food Programme supplies. But the “pirates” have the overwhelming support of the local population for a reason. The independent Somalian news-site WardherNews conducted the best research we have into what ordinary Somalis are thinking – and it found 70 percent “strongly supported the piracy as a form of national defence of the country’s territorial waters.” During the revolutionary war in America, George Washington and America’s founding fathers paid pirates to protect America’s territorial waters, because they had no navy or coastguard of their own. Most Americans supported them. Is this so different?

Did we expect starving Somalians to stand passively on their beaches, paddling in our nuclear waste, and watch us snatch their fish to eat in restaurants in London and Paris and Rome? We didn’t act on those crimes – but when some of the fishermen responded by disrupting the transit-corridor for 20 percent of the world’s oil supply, we begin to shriek about “evil.” If we really want to deal with piracy, we need to stop its root cause – our crimes – before we send in the gun-boats to root out Somalia’s criminals.

The story of the 2009 war on piracy was best summarised by another pirate, who lived and died in the fourth century BC. He was captured and brought to Alexander the Great, who demanded to know “what he meant by keeping possession of the sea.” The pirate smiled, and responded: “What you mean by seizing the whole earth; but because I do it with a petty ship, I am called a robber, while you, who do it with a great fleet, are called emperor.” Once again, our great imperial fleets sail in today – but who is the robber?

War on terror, war on piracy – wars against anyone who opposes empire and its march of ‘progress’ to turn all life on this planet into products, profits and death. Civilisation has always declared war on those who would attempt to defend themselves and their landbases from civilisation.

Share

RBS give us our money back!

Share

g20 protest by bicycle

Share

Public Money for Private Greenwash

The UK government yet again showing their ‘green’ spirit:  Government gives Land Rover £27m for green 4×4

The UK government has offered Jaguar Land Rover a grant of up to £27m towards the production of a new “green” 4×4 model.

Business Secretary Peter Mandelson said: “The Government is fully committed to supporting the UK automotive industry as it moves to a lower carbon future. This project aims to design and build a greener car in the UK, safeguarding vital skills and technologies.

Land Rover, not satisfied with some of their previous greenwashing gems , have managed to persuade the government to use taxpayers money (so your money) to fund their private greenwash.  £27million that could have funded projects directly benefiting the environment, instead going straight to a private corporation in order to sells us a ‘green 4×4′.  The fact that a green 4×4 in the true sense of sustainability is impossible, and that what this really achieves is a nod to green issues in order to sell cars, seems to be of no importance to the government, as all they really want  is to continue with the status quo of mass car production and use.

So don’t be surprised if your money is for now on used to subsidise greenwash (especially as Mandelsons quote seems to suggest for thw whole car industry), the government have as much invested in creating these lies as much as the corporations.  It’s our job to realise, uncover and sabotage this hypocrisy, and show the government that we don’t approve of public money being thrown at private greenwash.

Share

The Fallacy of Democracy

In America, there’s a lot of hoopla going on right now about the upcoming election. American citizens are given several choices for a presidential leader, and must choose the one that they feel represents them the most. Then a new dude gets elected and we’re all happy and get on with the next four years of our lives.

election.jpg

Democracy is one of the biggest delusions we have been taught to believe. You want to know why? First of all, the elections are controlled by the people already in power. The people who have the most access to campaign resources (and the most money to buy them) will obviously have the most successful campaign.  Second, we are given two choices for a leader. Two. Yes, I know there are a whole list of independent candidates on each ballot, but election propaganda sets up political freedom as an either/or choice; You pick this guy because you hate that guy. And since the majority of Americans vote for one of the two main candidates, even if you do support a minority party, your vote pretty much doesn’t count and usually ends up working against you in the end.

And the more subtle fallacy at work? A president is not elected based on popular vote. It’s electoral votes that count. So it’s easy for the people in power to do their research and figure out how they can manipulate the votes in certain areas and get a chosen candidate elected. And if that doesn’t work, then they can just “lose” or “misplace” a few thousand votes and call it good.

Of course, there is still a bunch of red tape rigamaroll invented to trick people into thinking their votes are very important. Voters must be registered. All votes are anonymous. Voters must go to the proper precinct to vote. All of this crap, and the president isn’t even chosen by us! Not to mention that the current voting process makes it impossible for low-income individuals to vote. How do they know where to get their registration forms if they don’t have a phone or internet access? How do they pick one up if they don’t have a car? How do they vote if they have to work a 10-hour shift that day, and don’t have the postage to send in an absentee ballot?

But I digress. I’ll lay my cards on the table and admit that I’m planning on voting on November 4th, and I’m really excited about the idea of having Barack Obama as a leader. But on the other hand, I know that nothing I think or say or do matters when the same old boys club is going to be reigning in the White House until the end of time. And I wish everyone else could see that too. Some do, but they still allow elections to divide them and break them down. Can’t we start believing in something other than the republic? How about ourselves? Or our communities? Or anything else that hasn’t already become corrupted by out-of-control, unbridled power?

Share

MSNBC Undercover: Sex Slaves in America

Tonight I watched a program on MSNBC called Undercover: Sex Slaves in America. The documentary was an investigation into human trafficking in large cities, specifically revolving around Korean, Thai, and Latina women. Apparently, these women are told they can have a free ride to America, and once they get there, they must pay off debts of $55,000 or more. Their debtors force them to work in $60 “massage parlors” in order to pay off the money in time. They are told they will only need to work 6 to 7 months to do this, but then are forced to stay there for 10 to 20 years by the “massage parlor” owners.

trafficking.jpg

Obviously, human trafficking is in a category of its own, but as I watched the documentary, I couldn’t help but wonder how the women felt about all of this. The government has decided to “solve” the problem by busting into the parlors renegade-style, issuing fines and closures, and then subsequently “setting the women free.” It’s interesting that we only choose to use the term “slavery” when referring to sex work, even though all lower- and middle-class citizens are also slaves of the economy, forced to work endless hours in horrible conditions for very little pay on a daily basis.

In video after video, the U.S. Health Department can be seen shaming the women, shutting down the parlors, and, in general, wreaking havoc on the women’s lives. The funny thing is that the documentary never addresses the question of what happens to the women after the parlors are busted. My guess is that they are forced into low-wage jobs, flipping burgers or working registers. They will struggle to make enough money to pay for rent and food, even though they will work long hours with no benefits, very little time off, and no maternity leave. They will also probably treated poorly due to the fact that they are foreign and don’t speak English.

My point is this: we’re so quick to identify slavery when it relates to sexuality, but what about all of the other forms of slavery going on around the world? And who are we to deny underprivileged women an opportunity to make $1000 to $2000 dollars a week, if that’s the only way they are able to do so?

Sex slavery would exist even if there weren’t a bunch of slimy dudes looking to make some money off of immigrant women, because the racism and sexism prevalent in our society enables it on a daily basis. Corporate greed and the hierarchy imposed by the status quo already enforce the slavery of the American people without even having to break the law. It seems to me that sex slavery is just a natural extension of racism, corporatism, and patriarchal attitudes, which are all things that many Americans fight staunchly to protect. Therefore, the cause of our troubles doesn’t originate from some random evil guys living in big cities – it comes from our own backyards.

Share