Talkin' 'Bout A Revolution

1960 IN ALABAMA, 2010 IN ARIZONA

How can a nation founded by immigrants turn her back on them? The US is a great country that has achieved its present global status and strength thanks to the contribution of immigrants. However, a country that once greeted newcomers and that has immigration on its own DNA is betraying its principles, distancing itself of what made it what it is now.

The border state of Arizona passed on April a new immigration law, the notorious SB 1070. This new law allows racial profiling as a mean to identify illegal immigrants within the state. According the Senate Bill 1070, immigrants have to carry with them their alien registration documents at all times since policemen have to question everyone they think that can be an illegal immigrant. If the person doesn’t have his documents with him at the time the police question him he can be detained as it will be considered a crime. The reason behind this is the aim to reduce criminality, thus relating crime to immigration. So the intentions behind this law seem clear.

In a state like Arizona, sharing a border with Mexico, I doubt policemen will question white ‘European looking’ people about their origin. It will be Hispanic people who will be targeted by the security forces. Therefore, it will be race what will determine who will be questioned. In other words, Hispanic immigrants, whether legal or illegal, will suffer a ‘legal’ (since it was passed by Governor Jan Brewer) form of racism, even though officials in Arizona don’t want to see it that way. Instead of moving on, it seems as is Brewer wants to go back to the past, when race was seen as a barrier between people.

It is somewhat ironic that this law against the Hispanic community was passed in Arizona. Around 30% of the state’s population is Hispanic, which accounts for nearly 2 million people. Mexicans lived in those lands long before the Americans annexed most of Arizona in 1848 and purchased the rest of it 1853. By that time the newcomers and aliens were the Americans but it seems that one and a half centuries later that has been forgotten. Someone should teach Governor Jan Brewer some history.

The timing of this deviant law couldn’t be better for Brewer and her acolytes. With the economy still struggling and not fully recovering and with President Barack Obama facing various political threats (both domestically and internationally) the time is right for the SB 1070 to succeed. The people, mostly those that are having a hard time making ends meet, are blinded my desperation so its no surprise that, according to an opinion poll on the issue carried out by CBS News, 57% of the people think the law is ‘about right’ and 17% think it ‘doesn’t go far enough.’ Only 23 % of the 996 people interviewed nationwide thought the draconian law ‘goes too far.’ Many of the people feel that illegal immigrants are stealing the jobs from the average American citizen. They can’t be blamed for thinking that jobs are being taken away from them in a time of recession but the problem lies in the fact that fairly conservative politicians, leaded by the notorious Tea Party, are taking advantage of it to impose their own, and in many cases intolerant, views.

There seems to be light at the end of the tunnel as the United States Justice Department has filed a federal suit that challenges the Support Our Law Enforcement and Safe Neighborhoods Act (the law’s formal name) for usurping the federal government’s authority. There are other lawsuits filed against the law by different organizations and individuals, who claim the SB 1070 violates the Constitution. Will these law suits succeed in overturning Arizona’s new immigration law? It will take some time to see what happens as it is too early to go on speculating about it.

The US, a nation sustained by immigrants, could be on the brink of taking a vital turn for the country’s future. If Arizona is the only state that comes up with this kind of laws, something which unfortunately doesn’t seem like happening, the problem will be limited to one state and therefore would be easier to eradicate. Nevertheless, if other states follow Arizona’s example, the US could suffer an identity crisis as its principles would be at risk. Thus, both the USA’s diversity and the safe haven it has represented for minorities could be endangered.

UYAN! (Wake Up!)

My dear brother, look our life is in your hands
We lost the beauty of flying bird,we are sick

l got bored of crying, of stopping
It is a fault that this immoral games go on

Wake up, from now on, wake up
Wake up, my friend, wake up
Wake up, from now on, from this dark dream

There were only colours, but they were lost too
Before we could breath
Ah! this life is a senseless joke
Everbody is aware of it

l got bored of crying, of stopping
It is a fault that this immoral games go on

Wake up, from now on, wake up
Wake up, my friend, wake up
Wake up, from now on, from this dark dream

You were still at the end of the road
But you still couldnt do anything
You were asleep, lazy, you were alone

MI PAÍS ES EL MUNDO, MIS COMPATRIOTAS LA HUMANIDAD

Las naciones y los países son una invención artificial del ser humano. Siglos de guerras, migraciones y desastres han dividido al mundo en paises; algunos pequeños, otros grandes; algunos fuertes y ricos, otros débiles y pobres. No importa lo antiguo que sea un país, pues la misma pregunta surge una y otra vez: ¿de dónde obtienen los países su legitimidad?

Algunas naciones están basadas en una lengua o cultura común como Alemania o Italia. Algunos países por el contrario son el resultado de los caprichos de la historia y engloban a un gran número de etnias, culturas y naciones. Un ejemplo de esto pueden ser China o Irak. Sin embargo, los países son una invención del ser humano que ha tenido efectos devastadores.

Los países llevan al patriotismo que a su vez lleva a lo que ha sido el cáncer de los siglos XIX y XX: el nacionalismo. Este término, en todas sus formas (racismo, imperialismo, fascismo entre otras), ha sido la causa un número incontable de guerras, siendo las dos Guerras Mundiales su creación más conocida. El nacionalismo propone que un determinado país (con todo lo que ello conlleva) es mejor que sus vecinos. “Mi cultura es superior a la tuya, mi historia es más rica que la tuya, mi país es mejor que el tuyo.” Esto ha cegado a gente durante siglos y llegó a su punto más álgido en el siglo XIX con la ola de nacionalismo que barrió Europa y que creó, entre otros, los modernos países de Grecia, Alemania e Italia. Lo único bueno que nos dejó el nacionalismo fue el romanticismo. El nacionalismo se vio reforzado por los regimenes totalitarios de la primera mitad del siglo XX. Afortunadamente, en la actualidad se puede considerar a un gran número de países como democráticos que rechazan estas teorías discriminatorias. No obstante, esta enfermedad aún no ha sido erradicada y se encuentra presente a lo largo y ancho del globo terráqueo.

“Mi país es el mejor.” Esta es la afirmación que resume el patriotismo, que según el escritor francés Guy de Maupassant, “es un tipo de religión; es un huevo en el que se incuban las guerras.” Creerse superior a otro ser humano es una idea ridícula pero es incluso más absurda cuando se fundamente en el lugar de nacimiento. Me hace gracia el hecho de que aquellos fervientes patriotas (nacionalistas los llamaría yo), no importa de que país vengan, defenderían otros países si simplemente hubiesen nacido unos kilómetros más al norte, sur, este u oeste, dentro de las fronteras de otra nación que consideran inferior. Es una contradicción, jocosa pero a la vez seria.

Las fronteras son una creación de algunos seres humanos privilegiados: los estadistas. Es fácil comprobar la vergonzante artificialidad de las fronteras en África o en Oriente Medio, donde en muchos casos no son más que líneas rectas. Aquellas fronteras han causado más daño que bien: guerras han tenido lugar por dichas líneas mal dibujadas por los poderes imperiales occidentales, familias han sido separadas (sólo hay que recordar el caos causado por la partición de la India o por la intercambio de población entre Grecia y Turquía).

Hasta que la gente no acepte el hecho de que los seres humanos son iguales, sin importar el idioma, cultura, religión o raza, este problema del nacionalismo no será resuelto. “Viajar es fatal para los prejuicios, el fanatismo y la estrechez de mente,” dijo Mark Twain, no podría estar más de acuerdo. El nacionalismo es el refugio del ignorante.

Como un radical naïve no puedo soportar la idea del nacionalismo. ¡Ignorar las banderas, los himnos y toda esa parafernalia patriótica! Los países no deberían de existir. Todos pertenecemos a la misma nación: el mundo. Eso no significa que deberíamos marchar hacia una homogeneización, ya que la diversidad es una rara joya que ha de ser preservada.

"Mi país es el mundo, mis compatriotas la humanidad" es una cita de William Lloyd Garrison.

MY COUNTRY IS THE WORLD, MY COUNTRYMEN ARE MANKIND

Nations and countries are an artificial invention of mankind. Centuries of wars, migrations and disasters have shaped the whole world into countries; some of them big others small, some strong and wealthy, others weak and poor. No matter how old a country is, the same question arises over again, where do countries get their legitimacy from?

Some nations are based on a common language or culture such as Germany or Italy. Some countries on the other hand are the result of History’s caprices and engulf a large number of ethnicities, cultures and nations, like China. However, countries are an invention of the human being which has had devastating effects.

Countries lead to patriotism and this leads to what has been the 19th and 20th centuries’ cancer: nationalism. This term, in all of its forms (racism, imperialism, fascism among others), has caused an uncountable number of wars, being the two World Wars its most notorious creations. Nationalism proposes that one’s country (with all its implications) is better than that of its neighbors. “My culture is superior to yours, my history is richer than yours, my country is better than yours.” This has blinded people throughout centuries and it reached its peak in the 19th century with a wave of nationalism that swept across Europe, which created modern Greece, Italy and Germany. The only good thing that came together with nationalism was romanticism. Nationalism saw itself strengthened by the totalitarian regimes of the first half of the 20th century. Fortunately, a large number of countries now enjoy democracy which rejects this sort of discriminatory approaches. However, this illness has not yet been eradicated and is still present in every country around the globe.

“My country is the best.” This is the affirmation that summarizes patriotism, which “is a kind of religion; it is the egg from which wars are hatched” according to the French writer Guy de Maupassant. Believing itself to be superior to another human is a ridiculous idea but it is even more absurd when it is based on the fact of place of birth. I laugh at the fact that those die-hard patriots (nationalists I call them), from whatever country they come, would defend opposite positions if they were to be borne some miles north, south, east or west, within the borders of the other country they see as inferior. It is contradictory, funny but nevertheless serious.

Borders are a creation of some privileged human beings: the statesmen. It is easy to see that when one looks at a map of Africa or the Middle East, where some borders are straight lines embarrassingly artificial. Those borders have caused more harm than good: wars have taken place because of borders badly drawn by Western imperial powers, families have been separated (just remember the chaos caused by the partition of India or by the the population exchange between Greece and Turkey) bringing pain to innocent people.

Until people don’t accept the fact that human beings are the same, no matter their language, culture, religion or race, this problem of nationalism won’t be solved. “Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness,” said Mark Twain, and I could not agree more. Nationalism is the refuge of the ignorant.

As a radical naïve I cannot stand the idea of nationalism. Ignore flags, anthems and all that patriotic paraphernalia! Countries should not exist, borders and nationalities shouldn’t exist. We all belong to the same nation: the world. That doesn’t mean though that we should march towards a homogenization, for diversity is a rare jewel that has to be conserved.

“My country is the world, my countrymen are mankind” is a quote by William Lloyd Garrison.

I SUPPORT THE IRANIAN GREEN MOVEMENT

The Iranian people, once a proud and prosperous nation, are struggling to get their freedom back. Thirty one years have passed since the autocratic shah of Iran was overthrown, but his regime was substituted by one much worse that used something as sacred as religion to stay in power and justify its actions. The Islamic Revolution, as it is known, was a step back in Iran’s, or Persia’s, history. But it has been now, three decades later, that the people have realized the oppression they are victims of.

The rigged elections that took place eight months ago where the starting point of the “Green Revolution” (“Where is my vote?” the asked). This movement, followed mainly, although not exclusively, by students, aims to achieve freedoms and civil rights which do not exist in Iran. Even though the leader of this “revolution,” Mir Hossein Musavi, would be considered rather, if not very, conservative from a Western point of view, it represents hope for Iran.

The violence used by the pro-government militias in suppressing the “green demonstrations” is a proof of the methods used by the regime lead by the populist dictator Mahmud Ahmadineyad, who is the country’s prime minister, and Ali Khamenei, the tough and intransigent Supreme Leader. These people use Islam for their own benefit; to curb liberties and to govern the country with an iron fist. People who oppose them can easily end up in jail. It is no wonder why one of the chants of the demonstrators is “death to the dictator.” There is no freedom of speech in Iran; there is hardly any freedom of thought. The proud Iranian woman, who under the shah’s regime enjoyed a large number of liberties, is one of the main victims of this vicious dictatorship. However, some Iranians have woken up.

Freedom, democracy and reforms; this is what the people are asking for. Instead they get beaten up, arrested and killed (as what happened to the 27-year-old student Neda Agha-soltan). The Green Movement is not perfect, even if they succeed they will probably do within the frame of the Islamic Republic, the theocracy will most likely remain but vital liberties could be achieved. Although it would be a great leap forward if the whole system of the Islamic Republic was brought down. The current system has symptoms of those ailing regimes which are close to the tomb, although it will be an enormously difficult task to kill it. There is something going on in Iran, something that was impossible to think about a few years ago. Part of the Iranian society is mobilizing, are we on the verge of a true revolution?

The courage of those Iranian students who go to demonstrations is admirable. They know they can be arrested, beaten up, tortured or killed, but their will is unbreakable. They risk their lives to bring down a dictatorship dressed as an “Islamic democracy.” It is thanks to those youngsters that the Green Movement is growing stronger day by day, it is them who put up a fight. Nevertheless, the impetus of these months should continue, Iran has an historic chance to choose the right path. Until then, innocent people will continue to suffer under the oppressive rule of a rotten system. The video of Neda’s death (check out youtube if you have not seen it) is a reminder of what is happening. I therefore support the Iranian Green Movement and those people who fight and sacrifice their lives for the sake of freedom and democracy.

Uprising

Who Is the Enemy? / ¿Quién es el enemigo?

All the problems have an origin that causes them. The economic crisis, the destruction of the environment, the abuse of certain corporations, the politicians’ inefficiency and corruption… These problems, defects and misfortunes have an origin, and it is towards this origin that our criticisms have to be directed. The cause of these disasters is the enemy. So you may now wonder ¿who is the enemy?

Let’s not be hypocrites. It is alright to some extent to blame the banks and other institutions, which got carried away by greed, for the financial crisis. The same goes for governments and business for the harming of the environment, to the shareholders and/or the CEOs of certain corporations for an unethical behavior and to the politicians for their avarice and ambition. However, it is a mistake to not dig deeper. The enemy isn’t any of the stated above, they are nothing more than mere details.

The enemy is closer than you would expect. ¿Who elects the politicians? ¿Who buys products belonging to firms of doubtful ethics just to save a few bucks? ¿Who complaints about the current situation but doesn’t do anything to solve it? Yes, you can start figuring out who is the enemy. Stand up, look at the mirror and you’ll se the cause of everything that’s taking place. Yes, you are the enemy as long as you continue to be a victim of conformism. Next time you wonder who is to blame for all that’s going on think a little: you are the enemy.


Todos los problemas tienen un origen que los causa. La crisis económica, la destrucción del medioambiente, el abuso de ciertas corporaciones, la ineficacia y corrupción de los políticos… Estos problemas, defectos y desgracias tienen un origen, y es hacia él donde hay que dirigir las críticas. La causa de estos desastres es el enemigo. Ahora bien, ¿quién exactamente es el enemigo?

No seamos hipócritas. Está bien hasta cierto punto echar la culpa de la crisis financiera a los bancos y otras instituciones a las que pudo la avaricia. También se puede culpar a gobiernos y empresas de la degradación del medioambiente, a los accionistas y/o presidentes de ciertas corporaciones por su comportamiento nada ético y a la codicia de los políticos por su ambición. Sin embargo, es erróneo quedarse en esto. El enemigo no es nada de lo dicho anteriormente, no son más que matices.

El enemigo está más cerca de lo que puedes creer. ¿Quién elige a los políticos? ¿Quién compra productos de empresas de dudosa ética para ahorrarse un par de euros? ¿Quién se queja de la situación pero no hace nada para remediarlo? Sí, ya puedes ir haciéndote una idea de quien es el enemigo. Levántate, mírate en el espejo y verás la causa de todo lo que está ocurriendo. Sí, tú eres el enemigo mientras sigas siendo víctima del conformismo. La próxima vez que te preguntas de quien es la culpa por lo que está pasando ahora haz autocrítica: tú eres el enemigo.