Error message

Deprecated function: The each() function is deprecated. This message will be suppressed on further calls in _menu_load_objects() (line 579 of /var/www/drupal-7.x/includes/

Major Philosophy Event for Pre-College Students Held Online This Year

Published by Anonymous (not verified) on Wed, 14/10/2020 - 11:12pm in

The 2020 Australasian Philosothon—“an event that encourages school students to investigate ethical and philosophical questions in the context of ‘communities of inquiry’”—took place at the end of last month.

The philosophy competition usually takes place in person and was originally scheduled to take place at Wesley College this year, but it was instead conducted online, over Zoom, owing to the pandemic.

Matthew Wills, the creator and organizer of Philosothon, said the online format worked well.

165 students from 21 schools, as well as 40 academics, took part. The students, as young as 14 years old, engage in two days of “intense argument and collaboration.” The topics for this year’s Philosothon were: The Trolley Problem and Implications, The Case of the Four Causes, Sorry Mr Spock Science & Emotion Are Not Only Compatible They’re Inseparable, and Philosophical Scepticism.

Participants are assessed according to a rubric and given individual and team scores. Here are the results from this year’s competition:

2020 Philosothon Team Results

Philosothon 2020 Individual Results

The Australasian Association of Philosophy (AAP) has supported the event for many years and this year was, for the first time, the official host of it. Going forward, it will be taking over the hosting and organizing of the Philosothon.

The post Major Philosophy Event for Pre-College Students Held Online This Year appeared first on Daily Nous.

No corporate Uni: Building mass struggle to defend our education, and stop fees and cuts

Published by Anonymous (not verified) on Tue, 13/10/2020 - 9:29pm in

Solidarity Sydney Student Position Paper

Cuts are raining down in universities across the country. Morrison has passed his Fee Hike Bill. 

The campaign at Usyd has shown it is possible to fight. Hundreds have mobilised repeatedly in the face of police repression. Students have gone on strike, invaded the Vice-Chancellor’s building, petitioned, passed motions and protested. Courses, jobs and hours have been won back. 

But this is only the beginning of the disaster that is unfolding across unis. The passage of the Fee Hike bill shows we are going to have to strengthen the movement to confront the attacks. 

Capitalism is in crisis. COVID-19 lockdowns and border closures have created an economic disaster. Scomo’s budget makes it clear that the Liberals want students, workers and the unemployed to bear the cost. They want to cut unis, JobSeeker and JobKeeper. Meanwhile the rich get tax cuts, hand-outs, and subsidies for planet destroying industries.

Lockdown has bolstered the power of the state. Resources have been poured into racist policing and repression of protests rather than best practice health measures to control the virus.  

At Usyd we see a microcosm of the Liberals’ agenda pushed by Vice-Chancellor Michael Spence. Hundreds of casuals have already lost their jobs, hundreds more jobs are threatened by voluntary redundancies and Med Science faces a ruinous restructure that is a sign of things to come. And this is despite the uni projecting a surplus. 

The corporate uni 

The VC is ramming through cuts there is no financial justification for. This decision is a product of the corporatised uni system. Uni was free until the late 1980s, when the ALP introduced the “Dawkins Reforms”, holding down government funding and forcing students to pay fees. At the same time they gave corporations huge tax cuts. Making up the funding shortfall meant squeezing extra money out of staff and students by charging more, making less staff do more work and degrading quality. 

CEO-like Vice-Chancellors were parachuted into unis, given massive executive power and paid huge salaries. They see cuts as a way to increase efficiency, and the pandemic as an opportunity to do what they wanted to do anyway. At Usyd, some cuts such as those in Medical Science were already planned before COVID-19 hit. 

The fight ahead 

We must oppose the fee hikes and cuts in funding and the tightening up of HECS eligibility, as part of the fight for free education, build the fight for every job and against every cut and build the power to take on the corporate uni and capitalism as a whole.

It is absolutely indisputable that mass action—and disruption of business as usual—are crucial elements of a winning strategy. Because the cuts are the product of a deeply rooted corporate logic it is not enough to simply express our opinion. We have seen this with the passage of the Fee Hike Bill. The Liberals and management will have to be forced back. In 2012 half of the academic jobs under threat at Sydney Uni were stopped by mass marches, occupations, student strikes and blockades. Similar tactics helped save Sydney College of the Arts from complete closure in 2016. In Quebec in 2012 hundreds of thousands of students went on strike for months against fee hikes, forcing the government to repeal the laws. 

A strategy for the fightback 

Mobilising hundreds on September 16 and September 23 was a real achievement given the crackdown on the right to protest and the reduced numbers of students on campus.

Systematic mass building amongst students was essential. September 16 cemented a base of active support on campus that was mobilised again on the 23rd. On September 16 in total around 25 classes passed motions supporting the strike and hundreds signed a petition against the cuts. This took hour upon hour of conversations, stalls, contacting and lecture bashing to achieve.

The fact that both the September 16 and September 23 actions were built as de-centralised protests also encouraged maximum participation, given hypocritical police restrictions and genuine concerns about COVID-19 amongst staff and students. 

We need to build more power, and the beginning of student strikes that we saw on September 16 showed the way. Almost 120 voted to strike in a student assembly in the lead-up, two classes voted to move so they could join the action, and another six adopted a position of “no penalty” for groups of students and individuals who left class to participate. 

Another real strength was the organisation of department and faculty contingents. These established organisation beyond the existing left and connected the big protests to important localised fights around the uni. The Law students’ contingent grew from five on September 16, to 19 on September 23. Medical Science students and staff mobilised for both actions, drawing attention to the cuts they are facing. Philosophy, Linguistics, Government and IR, History, Art History, Architecture, Political Economy and others have also mobilised.  

But it is a real challenge to build bigger, more disruptive and politically sharp actions in the circumstances, and there are real weaknesses we need to assess. On September 16 two classes actually voted to strike, but when the day came only individuals walked out. A significant number of students who registered for the September 16 action didn’t participate due to the police crackdown or left quickly as a result. The scale of the organising should also be put in perspective. The 2012 job cuts campaign at Usyd had the forces to gather 4000 signatures in person, last year the climate strikes saw 90+ motions passed in lectures. The is significantly more than what the cuts campaign has done so far.  

We need to bridge this gap with patient argument, the right response to police repression and by building wider awareness and collective solidarity. The police crackdown is a serious issue. One activist has been charged and dozens issued with a total of around $40,000 worth of fines.  

Unfortunately, the September 23 action (that became a centralised rally) consolidated a sentiment amongst sections of the student left that maximum “defiance” is the strategy we need. The Socialist Alternative motion regarding the upcoming October 14 protest called for “a defiant centralised rally” that will “march on the road”.

We do need to be willing to defy police when necessary, and have done so repeatedly. But when it becomes a caricature, the “defiance” approach amounts to a false strategy for change whereby the courageous actions of the most radical minority supposedly provoke wider layers of people into action.  At worst, this can lead to self-congratulatory elitism that prioritises a small minority attracting fines above building the radicalism of the thousands who oppose the cuts but are currently being consigned to the position of bystanders.

Actions this week 

We need to re-orient away from this mistaken, elitist strategy to build the kind of power we really need to win.

This week there are two actions in response to Morrison’s budget and his vicious attack on universities, students and staff.

First, there was a 60-strong NTEU (National Tertiary Education Union) staff protest in Victoria Park on October 13. This was organised openly through the submission of a Form 1 (a form notifying police of a protest).  

Police took the NTEU to the Supreme Court to stop the protest but the union won in court on Monday. This is an important crack in the use of COVID regulations to ban protests.  

The second action is the student protest with staff support under the guise of a “teach-out” on the Quad lawns on October 14. 

It was important to build the maximum student turn out for October 14 by mobilising all the faculty and department networks and hitting lectures. But we must recognise that it would have been far better to have the widest possible student walk-out and one joint, post-budget action uniting students and staff, if necessary negotiated around a Form 1 like the NTEU demonstration. 

Students could have argued to shut down classes so both staff and students could attend a united rally, just as we did in the climate strike last year. Staff and student mobilisations can reinforce each other. 

This would have been an important step in a context where the fee hike bill has passed and hundreds of NTEU members involved in National Higher Education Action Network have voted to support industrial action to defend higher education. 

But the trajectory towards “defiant” minority actions meant any effort to organise class walkouts or another student assembly was abandoned, and some in the campaign were uninterested in working to organise a joint action with the NTEU, preferring to simply use a staff teach-in as cover for a student event.

This strategic weakness was only exacerbated by a lack of representative, in-person organising meetings and accountable campaign organisation. Student activists voted on events like the “staff-student forum” last week only to have it cancelled without any explanation. There was no clear delegation of responsibility for organising key aspects of the October 14 action, leaving it to the self-appointed. Zoom meetings of the Sydney Uni EAG are often stacked and unrepresentative and there is non-transparent control of infrastructure, chairing and decisions by the unelected.  

We need democratic meetings where students outside the existing left can come, genuinely contribute and take real ownership of the campaign in maximum numbers. Addressing this is a key task if we are to build a sustained mass movement.  

Next steps 

There is time for one more major mobilisation this semester. In the wake of the budget and the passage of the fee hikes bill, the localised fight against huge job cuts at Usyd will be more important than ever. There has to be a widely advertised, Sydney Uni specific, in person meeting early next week to debrief and discuss what our next action could look like.  

There also has to be close attention to localised fights in departments and faculties. Students and staff have been organising in Med Science against massive proposed cuts. The next phase of these cuts being finalised is fast approaching. Over 220 have signed a petition, dozens have participated in a photo petition against the cuts and Med Sci staff and students have mobilised for protests. Students have also shared statements about how the cuts will impact them and Postgraduates who will lose their supervisors have also been campaigning. There must be further actions around Med Science, and the fight should be a feature of any larger actions.  

There are also looming cuts to student learning support which will hit international students particularly hard. Many students already face wait times of six weeks or two months when they try to book an appointment for assistance with their essays. This is something to watch as details emerge. 

Localised resistance delivers. In late September Conservatorium Executives decided to cut the Jazz Course by 33 hours. This cut was reversed after a petition and collective pressure from students. The win followed a series of small protests and meetings about cuts at the Con in Semester one. Every small fight creates sparks of resistance that can spread.  

After going all out for the actions this week, we must re-group and organise next week, fan every small battle and prepare our next blow against the corporate uni imposed on us by Spence and Scomo. There is a battle on for the future of our unis and our society. We need to organise, fight and win.  

The post No corporate Uni: Building mass struggle to defend our education, and stop fees and cuts appeared first on Solidarity Online.

School’s back: How the neoliberal “privatization of risk” explains the deadly decision to re-open campuses

Published by Anonymous (not verified) on Thu, 08/10/2020 - 5:59pm in

There have been at least 130,000 cases and at least 70 COVID related deaths at American colleges and universities since the pandemic begun. Yet, university campuses reopened in the Fall and continue as though the status quo must be maintained at all costs. Zachary Kaiser argues that this is reflective of the neoliberal privatisation of risk that … Continued

Dialexicon: A New Student-Led Philosophy Initiative

Published by Anonymous (not verified) on Tue, 29/09/2020 - 6:00pm in

There’s a new “platform for high school students to learn, discuss, and contribute to philosophical thought and writing.” 

Created by students in Canada, the project is a journal and website, Dialexicon, which seeks to publish “exceptional philosophical essays written by high school students.”

According to its website, Dialexicon came into existence after its creators “noticed a lack of accessible philosophy resources for high school students.” It aims “to share the voices and philosophical opinions of youth with a global audience, to provide a forum for youth to discuss philosophy with other engaged youth.“

The project is sponsored by the University of Toronto Mississauga Philosophy Department and the Philosophy Foundation UK, among others.

The journal is now accepting submissions from high school students around the world. According to one of Dialexicon‘s board members:

High school students are invited to submit a 900 to 1200 word philosophy paper on one of the four prompts listed on the website, all of which tackle pressing current events. Submitted papers will undergo a multiple-round review process, with papers being reviewed by a team of 15+ university philosophy faculty, graduate students, and international debate coaches. The deadline for submissions is November 1, 2020. The top submission will receive a $500 cash prize, and the winning submissions will be published in the Dialexicon Journal, with the profiles of the winners featured on the University of Toronto Mississauga Philosophy Department’s website. This is an excellent opportunity for high school students to hone their philosophical essay-writing skills, to potentially receive publication in a professionally adjudicated journal, and to receive a prize.

If you are a philosophy educator, we would greatly appreciate it if you could share this opportunity with any high school students who may be interested in submitting. As well, if you are interested in becoming an adjudicator or are affiliated with an organization or department that is interested in becoming a sponsor of the journal, do not hesitate to send us an email. For all questions or comments, please contact We respond to all inquiries within 48 business hours, and look forward to hearing from you!

There’s more information at the Dialexicon site.

The post Dialexicon: A New Student-Led Philosophy Initiative appeared first on Daily Nous.

If university campuses close, can everyone learn from home? What happens when the home becomes the classroom in India  

Published by Anonymous (not verified) on Tue, 29/09/2020 - 4:59pm in

The reorganisation of work lives bought about by the pandemic has also been met with a reorganisation of domestic space as the site where work now takes place. For Higher Education, this means that homes have now become classrooms. However, the fundamental premise of successful online education is the access to both electricity supply and an … Continued

Is the End of Debtfare Forced Labour?

Published by Anonymous (not verified) on Tue, 29/09/2020 - 5:26am in

In his chapter ‘The Violence of the Debtfare State’ in Vickie Cooper and David Whyte, eds., The Violence of Austerity (London: Pluto Press 2017), David Ellis uses the term ‘debtfare’ to describe the dismantling of state welfare provision and its replacement by debt and credit. And I’m starting to wonder how far this can go before something like debt slavery arises. The Romans abolished debt slavery, but the punishment for debt was addictio, forced labour. People are being forced into mountains of debt through poverty created by austerity and the removal of living wages and proper unemployment and disability benefits. Students are also mired in it through tuition fees which now may amount to tens of thousands of pounds.

I am therefore left wondering at what point the various banks and other organisations offering credit will stop it and start demanding their money back or some other form of repayment. Clearly if people remain in debt, they can’t repay the money. The alternatives seem to be either that the banks keep on giving them credit in the hope that they’ll be able to repay something, or else write it off as a loss. But if the number of people in irrecoverable debt hits millions, what happens? If the levels of indebtedness actually starts to harm the banks and the other organisations, will they turn to the state to demand some kind of forced labour in order to make good their profits?

I’ve already pointed out the similarity of the workfare schemes to the forced labour systems of Stalin’s Russia. Stalin used slave labour from the gulags to industrialise the Soviet Union. Business managers would give the KGB lists of the kind of workers their enterprise needed, and the KGB would then have those with the appropriate skills and qualifications accused of anti-Soviet crimes and arrested. The workfare scheme now used to punish the unemployed doesn’t teach anybody any new skills, nor does it allow them to find employment. Indeed the stats a while ago showed that people on workfare were less likely to get a job than if they were left to their own initiative. But workfare does supply cheap, state-subsidised labour to the scheme’s backers and the parties’ business donors, like the supermarkets.

So if the number of people in grievous, irrecoverable debt, will the government simply write them off and let them starve to death, as so many disabled people have done already thanks to false assessments under the Work Capability Tests? Or will they decide they can still make some money for business by pressing them into compulsory labour in order to work their way out of it, as in the Roman system?

I’m not saying this will happen or even that it’s likely. But I do wonder if it’s a possibility.

Protester facing jail under COVID rules after police attack anti-cuts protest at Sydney Uni

Published by Anonymous (not verified) on Sat, 19/09/2020 - 3:20pm in


Students, Students

Students and staff protested against plans for massive jobs cuts at the University of Sydney on Wednesday—only to again face a draconian and hypocritical police operation to disrupt and disperse them.

Activists organised 18 decentralised gatherings of less than 19 people, at separate locations across the university campus, to ensure that each gathering was in line with the NSW COVID-19 public health laws that limit outdoor gatherings to just 20 people. In total around 200 students and staff joined protests on the day.

But over 100 police, including several horses and riot vehicles, swarmed onto the campus—ludicrously claiming that because each separate group was protesting job cuts, this constituted a common purpose and therefore was a gathering exceeding 20 people.

Nine protesters received fines, totalling almost $10,000. And in a major escalation of police attacks on the right to protest, Solidarity member Adam Adelpour was arrested and charged—the first time someone has been charged under the COVID-19 restrictions for protesting. He now faces the prospect of an $11,000 fine or six months’ jail.

The latest police attack comes only two weeks since scores of police attacked a similar student protest at the university, on 28 August, with ten students and staff members each issued a $1000 fine under COVID-19 health laws.

Plans for job cuts of up to 30 per cent across the university emerged several weeks ago. Vice-Chancellor Michael Spence has claimed COVID-19 has led to a drastic loss of revenue. Yet in a financial update this week he revealed that the university is now expecting a budget surplus this year, due to increased domestic enrolments.

Now, the university is trying to justify plans for cuts by citing projections for revenue losses over the next few years. But it is clear that many of the restructures and sackings that it wants to push through have been planned for some time.

Adam following his arrest for protesting

Sydney University has become a flashpoint for the right to protest in recent weeks. Adam told Solidarity, “The police crackdown was absolutely ridiculous, an escalation of their response and of the attack on the right to protest, both in their willingness to aggressively disperse groups that are less than 20 and in terms of charging me for allegedly breaching the COVID-19 health orders.

“There were less than 20 in my group, and everyone except for me and one other student had dispersed. I saw a number of police surrounding one female student with a homemade sign, who was obviously distressed about what was happening. They surrounded her and started grabbing her. I was watching to make sure she was ok, and then the police came and arrested me.

“In that process another officer came over and said something like ‘charge that one’. They targeted me because they knew who I was.”

Adam had been fined at the previous university protest on 28 August, and was identified by police as an organiser.

“I was in custody at the Newtown police station from around 1.30pm that day until 7am the next morning.

“When I got to the police station, they made it clear they wanted to treat me harshly around my bail conditions, telling me that I wasn’t going to be able to go anywhere, leave my house, or protest again. They said part of my bail conditions would include a curfew.

“The police also obstructed me from speaking to lawyers. At one point I heard them telling a lawyer I was asleep to prevent me talking to them, after I had recently asked to speak to the lawyer from my cell.”

“I refused to sign the ridiculous bail conditions. The police told me the magistrate would give me even harsher bail conditions in the morning. The final bail conditions were minimal, simply that I have to reside at my address and not reoffend. That was a result of pressure from lawyers and refusing to sign.

However, despite the repression, the action was a step forward for the campaign.

“They dispersed the previous rally in order to intimidate people and discourage them from protesting,” Adam said, “That backfired. These actions were bigger, had a wider representation of staff and students and showed that the intimidation had failed. There were students and staff in lab-coats from medical science, department groups from philosophy to Government and International Relations, to history, linguistics and many others.”

“The growth of the protest actions since the last one showed the cuts can be stopped. To do that it will take further action, but the attack by police will only attract more interest in the campaign.

“There’s been too many messages to count expressing solidarity after my arrest, which again shows how much work the campaign has done to put the issues of the cuts and standing up to police on the map. Student and staff action can counter the intimidation, along with a collective willingness to confront the attacks on students, staff, workers, and the right to protest.”

By Cooper Forsyth and James Supple

The post Protester facing jail under COVID rules after police attack anti-cuts protest at Sydney Uni appeared first on Solidarity Online.

Write a great essay in 12 (easy!) steps!

Published by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 18/09/2020 - 11:39pm in


writing, Students

A couple of years ago I jotted down a step-by-step guide to help my son get started on his university essays. That’s always the most difficult bit of writing – starting – and it never gets any easier. I thought some other might find it useful as well, so I’ve put it on a short video. Have fun! Beware, last minuters: the first step is ‘start early’.

I hope this helps avoid a few essay crises. If you like it, pass it on! PS: you don’t have to go to the bar in step 12 if you don’t want to.

Would Fascist Oswald Mosley Have Treated the Windrush Migrants Better than the Tories?

Oswald Mosley, the head of the British Union of Fascists, tried to get back into British politics after the War. He’d been interned during the War, but still wished to return and lead a far right party. His new outfit was simply called the Union Movement, and Mosley desperately and vehemently denied that he would have been a collaborator had there been a Nazi invasion, and that he wasn’t a racist or anti-Semite.

There’s footage on YouTube of an interview he gave on British television in the 1970s, from the same programme, I think, which the late, great antipodean TV critic, Clive James, reviewed in his column for the Absurder. Mosley’s interviewer asks him frankly about anti-Semitism and his attitude to the Jews. At this, Mosley gets visibly angry and starts to deny that he is or has been any such thing. This is interrupted by a working class bloke in the audience, who stands up to remind him that the ordinary working people of this country saw him off, and his mate Hitler during the War, and they’ll see him off again. It’s been suggested that if the Nazis had invaded Britain, Mosley wouldn’t have collaborated with them because he would already have been shot by Special Branch as a traitor. As for the anti-Semitism, it has been claimed that Mosley genuinely didn’t hate the Jews and the BUF only turned towards anti-Semitism from a mixture of opportunism, the anti-Semitism of some of it’s rank and file and Mosley’s subordinates and advisers, and as a reaction to the hostility to the movement from the Jewish community. More recent research suggests that Mosley may already have been anti-Semitic, and I don’t doubt that if somehow he had seized power and made Britain an ally or satellite or Nazi Germany, he would have cheerfully collaborated in the Holocaust.

Some of Mosley’s post-War political views are laid out in his 1961 book, Mosley – Right Or Wrong? The book’s arranged as a series of questions on issues like the Empire, international relations, race, industry, the economy, trade unions and so on. Section 13 is on the ‘Colour Question in Britain, Immigration, The Racial Question’. In it, Mosley tells the reader what he intends to do about non-White immigrants. His solution is compulsory repatriation, but he claims he won’t be inhumane, because those deported will have their fares paid. He also intends to avoid criticism from Britain’s Black colonies by making sure Britain buys their products and helps their economy rather than their competitors’. This means, for example, that he would buy sugar from Jamaica rather than Cuba. Question 116 in this section asks the wannabe dictator how he would deal with coloured students and and coloured immigrants, who have been here a long time. Mosley’s reply is that he would continue to allow coloured people to come here for their education and that they would be made welcome. As for non-Whites, who have been resident in Britain for a long time, he states that those,

who have been good citizens and have developed roots in this country will also not be sent away. For this reason we propose that all coloured people of this character who came here before the last war, should be allowed to stay, if they wish. They are too few to create any serious problems. And on the whole they have been good citizens of Britain. (p. 118).

You can compare that with Tweezer’s and the Tories’ deportation of the Windrush Migrants. They’d been resident here for a similar length of time or more than the non-White immigrants Mosley was talking about. They also had a guaranteed legal right to remain, which Tweezer as home secretary illegally removed. It may therefore seem possible from the above passage in which Mosley states he’d let some non-White immigrants remain, that he, a horrendous Fascist, would also have respected the Windrush immigrants rights to remain.

In fact I doubt very much that he would. The history of Fascism shows that they can’t be trusted and that however moderate and respectable they appear, the reality is always dictatorship, brutality, violent repression and mass murder. Fascist leaders like Hitler and Mussolini were able to win power partly through propaganda and carefully tailoring their message to their audiences. If Hitler was speaking in a very traditionally left-wing, working class district, he’d stress the anti-capitalist strand of Nazi ideology. When campaigning in a traditionally right-wing, anti-Semitic area, he’d attack the Jews. Mosley and the other Fascist and Nazi groups were presented with the problem after the War that Europe had had enough of it. The British people had seen and fought against its horrors and weren’t going to tolerate its revival. Hence Mosley’s attempts to present himself in a more moderate light. He states at one point that he dislike the word ‘racist’ because it implies that one race is superior to another, which he rejects. Well, he might have done, but that won’t stop anyone reading him coming to the conclusion that a racist was precisely what he was. I don’t doubt therefore that if by some miracle of medicine Mosley had lived on and been in power a few years ago, he would have deported the Windrush immigrants like Theresa May and the Tories.

What is alarming is not that he would have done – you’d expect it from a Fascist leader – but that Mosley could sound more moderate and tolerant in some respects than the leaders of the modern Conservative party. Or if he doesn’t, then he doesn’t sound that much more extreme, either.

And that should show you how much trouble we’re in, and how much the Tories are moving to the extreme right.

Sasha Johnson Thrown off Twitter for Calling for Enslavement of Whites

For some reason, all the posts I found about this came from either right-wing or apolitical journalists and bloggers. In my admittedly cursory search for information on it, I didn’t find any criticism from the left. But the left has to criticise this and call it out. It’s pure, genocidal race hatred, and if it doesn’t, it hypocrisy and double standards. It sends a message that you can be bitterly racist, so long as you’re black and anti-White.

It seems at the end of last month, Sasha Johnson, who claims to be one of the leaders of Black Lives Matter Oxford, got banned by Twitter after posting this disgusting Tweet:

It’s a bit blurry, and if you can’t read it, Johnson says

The white man will not be our equal but our slave.

History is changing

No justice no peace

#BLM #Brixton #BLMUK

If you don’t know who Sasha Johnson is, she got quite a lot of attention from Conservative and far right White bloggers and Youtubers a few months ago for a video of her making a speech at a rally in Brixton. She declared that the police were like the Klu Klux Klan, which is obviously and astonishingly wrong. There is problems with racism in the cops, though all the police I know have been very good, conscientious officers who very definitely weren’t. If our cops were like the Klan, then she wouldn’t be around to say that. She’d be hanging from a tree somewhere or otherwise murdered. She’s also videoed calling for the foundation of a ‘Black militia’, surrounded by her own private Black army, who were shown all wearing stab vests and some kind of paramilitary uniform. This is to protect Blacks, probably from the police she hates and reviles. She also dismissed Black and Asian politicos like David Lammy, Sadiq Khan and Priti Patel as ‘tokenistic’, who would do nothing for Britain’s non-White minorities. On the Million Person march, whose name is clearly intended to hark back to Louis Farrakhan’s Million Man march on Washington in the 1990s, she declared that she was founding a Black political party. Whites would be denied positions of leadership. This would have the monicker The Taking The Initiative Party. She declared  “We are tired of being let down by Labour, Conservatives, and Lib-Dem and all of them. We want our own political party, one that reflects the multicultural nation that we have become.”

Guy Birchall on Johnson’s Anti-White Racism

Then she got thrown off Twitter for adding to her profile the noxious Tweet about enslaving Whites. Guy Birchall, a journo for the Scum and Spiked Online, wrote a piece for RT. Black Lives Matter have not condemned her, and he contrasts this apparent acceptance of her vicious racism with the universal condemnation shown to White supremacists and racists, like the EDL, BNP and assorted Nazis, Islamophobes and Fascists. He writes

There is little doubt that had the roles been reversed, and a prominent member of the EDL or Britain First had tweeted that black people would be “slaves,” the Old Bill would have been knocking on their door the second they hit send. Johnson is a black supremacist and is apparently finding it increasingly hard to disguise her disgust for white people and “race traitors” from the black community. The fact that Black Lives Matter UK has not denounced her blatant racism and inflammatory language does the movement no favours. 

He concludes:

The left can try and argue that racism is about systems and power structures all they like, but the rest of us know it is hatred of another race. Johnson plainly hates white people and the mere fact that she is black should not give her a free pass. She can dress up as Che Guevara all she likes, but in reality, she’s nowhere near as glamorous as the Argentine revolutionary; she’s a black, female Nick Griffin with even less charisma.


Black Anti-White Racism

Now Johnson’s undoubtedly reflecting the anti-White racism that exists in parts of the Black community. The Nation of Islam is a separatist organisation that wants an independent Black state carved out of five of the southern states of the US. In the 1960s they used to hold joint rallies with the American Nazi party. The deal was that the Blacks could have the Atlantic seaboard, and the Whites the rest of the US. It’s present leader, Louis Farrakhan, believes Whites are albinistic mutants created by an evil Meccan superscientist, Shabazz, to bring down the advanced Black civilisation that existed tens of thousands of years ago. There’s an even more extreme Black Muslim group, Ansaru Allah, who also believe that Whites are literally demonic. They consider White skin colour and features similarly abhorrent, and their leader thinks Whites are Amalekites, the ancient enemies of the Hebrews, who tried to wipe them out when they passed through their territory on the way to the Promised Land. And before all this the Rastafarians also declared that White people were literally devils.

White Enslavement from the Middle Ages to 19th Century

Johnson probably thinks she doing something daringly novel by demand the enslavement of Whites. She isn’t. Starting long before the Atlantic slave trade, Whites were also enslaved by Muslims. In the Middle Ages, Arab merchants bought White Frankish slaves from what is now France and other parts of Europe. They also raided France and Italy as part of their jihad against Christendom. This was followed by the Barbary pirates of the 16th onwards from North Africa. These also raided Britain and as far afield as Iceland for White European slaves. The Turkish Empire also enslaved Whites. Following the Ottoman conquest of the Balkans by the Sultan Bayezit, ‘the Lightning’ in the 15th century, the White Christian population was reduced to peasant serfs bound to the estates of their new Turkish masters. This continued well into the 19th century. Around 1820 or so the Greeks on Chios rebelled. This was put down with great ferocity by the Ottomans. Many were massacred. I’ve read that 23,000 Greeks were also enslaved by the Turks. These atrocities inspired the French artist, Delacroix, to paint his Massacre at Chios.

Delacroix’s Massacre at Chios. Does Johnson approve of its subject, the massacre and enslavement of Whites?

19th century Egypt had two slave markets and two separate guilds for the slavers, one for the dealers in Black slaves and another for those in Whites. British and American ships were also raided for slaves, and the south-west of England was particularly vulnerable. The executioner in one of the north African states was a former butcher from Exeter, and ships from Bristol were also taken. The parish records from the 18th century for the Gloucestershire village of St Briavels show donations given to a man collecting for money to ransom enslaved Christians. Algiers was a notorious centre for this Islamic piracy. There was a very short war in the 1820s when a British gunboat shelled the palace of the Dey of Algiers, liberating many of the White Christians forced into servitude aboard the pirates galleys. The slave raiding finally stopped with the French invasion and conquest, which led to the creation of Algeria.

Dictators also Murder their own People

At the moment Sasha Johnson is a joke, like some of the murderous fantasists of the White far right. Her Black militia was compared to Live Action Role-Players, and reminds me of nothing more than the mighty armies of storm troopers imagined by the leaders of White Nazi groups while they hold their rallies above a pub or in their front rooms. Mighty dictators in their own imaginations. But if she had power, she’d be a menace. It’s clear that she wants to persecute Whites, but like every would-be dictator she’d also kill and murder her own people and supporters. It’s been said that ‘Revolutions, like Saturn, eat their children’. The French revolutionaries murdered other French Revolutionaries in factional disputes. Hitler launched the Night of the Long Knives against the SA. Stalin killed 30 millions Soviet citizens in the purges, the artificial famine in the Ukraine and the collectivisation of agriculture, and the deportations of whole nations to Siberia. In Africa, Idi Amin, the butcher of Uganda, styled himself the conqueror of the British Empire, particularly in Africa, and claimed to be the king of Scotland. He was carried around in a litter by White businessmen. But the people he tortured and massacred most were other Black Ugandans. Robert Mugabe in the 1990s and early part of this century beat, massacred and evicted his country’s White farmers. But he started his infamous career as dictator and mass-murderer by massacring the Ndebele and other tribes, who were the traditional enemies of his Shona people.

The Black Militia – Another Mandela United Terror Organisation?

Sasha Johnson has shown an extremely aggressive, violent side in her relations with Black critics. There’s another video clip of her racially abusing a Black man and challenging him to a fight simply because he disagrees with her. She shows precisely how low she is when she calls him a ‘coon’. I think if she had any real power, she’d start trying to persecute Whites, but she’d also attack her rivals in the Black community. I can imagine her sending round her Black Militia to sort out her Black critics. Just like Winnie Mandela terrorised South African Blacks with her Mandela United football team. This was a disguised private army, responsible for numerous beatings and murder, including that of the much-admired teenage activist, Stompie Mkhetzie. And that army is certainly breaking laws passed against Fascist organisations. In the 1930s the wearing of paramilitary uniforms for political purposes was banned, a piece of legislation targeting Oswald Mosley’s British Union Fascists and other Nazi and Fascist organisations. People didn’t accept the BNP/NF when they openly strutted around in Nazi uniforms, and Johnson’s Black Militia, which she has clearly modelled on the Black Panthers without any understanding of the difference between the UK and US, shouldn’t be acceptable either.

David Olasuga on White Support for BLM

Of course, many Black members and supporters of Black Lives Matter don’t share her anti-White hatred. The Black historian and TV presenter, David Olasuga, wrote a piece in this week’s Radio Times in which he declared how heartened he was by so much White support for the movement, and the interest in Black affairs and Africa by young Whites. He noted particularly how four books on Africa had reached the top of the bestseller lists, partly due to White interest.

Black Critics of BLM and Black Anti-White Racism

And Black Lives Matter has some of its fiercest critics among Black Americans. I found a video by a right-wing Youtuber showing a number of Black Americans making it very clear why they despised it. These were men and women who had White friends and mixed-race relatives. The violence and threats they had personally experienced had come, not from Whites, but other Blacks. One of the voices was the American Conservative vlogger, YoungRippa. He warned his White viewers and listeners that Black Lives Matter wanted Blacks to hate them. I don’t share his Conservatism nor hatred of the welfare state, but unfortunately there are Black radicals who do have a bitter hatred of Whites that have emerged in the wake of the BLM movement. One of these was a hack styling herself ‘FeministaJones’, and who claims to have written for a number of respectable, mainstream magazines including Time. She put up a piece on her blog arguing that Blacks shouldn’t accept White support, because Whites would never endanger their children with the violent revolution America needs.

What! This is arrant, dangerous nonsense! No-one should be talking about putting their children in danger and demanding violent revolution. Not Blacks, not Whites, not anybody. I’ve friends and relatives, who’ve seen their businesses trashed and have fled their homes during riots here in Bristol. For all its faults, America is a democratic country. it has elected Black leaders and legislators, passed affirmative action laws, that have undoubtedly improved conditions for Blacks. Even if Blacks are still faced with poverty and institutional racism, democratic America has shown itself a world leader in this, and is admired and copied here in Britain.

Will the University and Students Treat Johnson like White Nazi Students?

It will be interesting to see how Oxford University and whatever student union, guild or association handles Johnson. I say ‘Oxford University’, but I’ve heard it suggested that she really belongs to Oxford Brookes, the former polytechnic. Either way, it remains to be seen how her uni and student body reacts to this. I remember the controversy back in the 1980s when students at his university or college turned their backs on Patrick Harrington, one of the fixtures of the BNP/NF. They made it clear that they didn’t want him in their university. The NUS passed rules making it a ‘no platform’ for ‘racists and Fascists’. And rather more recently, Hope Not Hate reported that one of the odious members of one of the Nazi organisations was expelled from his university after complaints from students about his racist views.

The same should happen to Johnson. I recognise that the long history of persecution of Blacks in the West has led to some Blacks hating Whites with some justification. But this is unacceptable. It’s racial supremacy with a Black face. And such genocidal racism is always and everywhere an affront to humanity, no matter what complexion it has.

Sasha Johnson is a Nazi. Remember the old slogan against the NF: ‘Black and White, Unite and Fight!’ That needs to apply to her. And if Black Lives Matter and the student organisations stay silent about her, they are hypocrites and tacit racists too.