Indigenist Intelligence Review

Racism

noreply@blogger.com (Angryindian) — Mon, 07 Jul 2008 14:02:10 -0500

pudgyindian2: Racism

[Malcolm X was Loved and Respected by many in Ireland]

Hello folks. I am going to get going here with another discussion on racism. This is gonna be fun, don't you think.

Shusli made a post of how a young Irish "illegal immigrant" was shot to death in Silverton by one, officer Gonzalez. Andrew Hanlon, the 20-year-old young man, shot to death by Gonzalez, was unarmed.

Along comes Mr. Anonymous spreading what seem to be false statements thus far that Gonzalez was related to a couple of Columbians who were shot to death by one Joe Horn in Pasadena Texas. Seems that these two Columbian fellas, Dejusus and Ortiz, were passing through Joe's backyard after committing a burglary, so Joe shot them in the back and killed them both. Mr. Anonymous alleges that information came out of Salem that he seems to be the only one privvy to, that Gonzalez is related to the two Columbians Joe Horn got away with murdering and that Gonzalez has been waiting to avenge their deaths by killing a white man. Still haven't found any relevant information linking the two, so I have no reason to believe this is true and personally think that Mr. Anonymous is attempting to fire up a bunch of race hate for his own personal agenda.

Here is one interesting quote from Mr. Anonymous on Shusli's blog:

"OREGON IS A GANGSTER STATE FILLED WITH ROGUE COPS. OPEN SEASON ON WHITE PEOPLE BY MEXICANS."

I have encountered this type of behavior before. There are many folks out there who believe that it is not racism until it happens to a white person. I don't hear Mr. Anonymous saying that it was open season on Latinos by whites when Portland Police shot Muhia Poot to death. Nor do I hear him say that it is open season against blacks when white male Portland Police shot to death Kendra James or James Perez. You see, to folks like Mr. Anonymous, racism doesn't really happen unless it happens to a white man.

So far, there has been no clear information or for that matter any "serious and founded" allegations against Gonzalez that his killing of Hanlon was done out of hatred for white folks.

Mind you, I have no Love for cops. Those that aren't criminals know of the criminal activities of their comrades and thus complicit and I will NEVER completely trust a cop as I've read of how some have even gone after their own friends because they wanted to steal their land. Cops are also chosen for their aggressive behavior and trained to "take control" of a situation. To take control, they are trained to use force. Everyone is a criminal to a cop, and thus treated accordingly.

So here we have a system that hires mean folks to keep us "beasts" under control. This is an issue many folks have been trying to deal with for years (like "Cop Watch"), and it still continues. Cops have gotten away with murder. They are not trained to de-escalate a situation and handle it safely. They are trained to take control by force. If that means innocent people have to die, then they will kill them. It is a whole system that needs to be recognized and changed by the people. I don't think folks will change the system, however, because folks enjoy the comfort of believing that "cops are our friends."

Mr. Hanlon's murder upset Shusli. So she wrote a post about it, a eulogy, if you will. Then, Mr. Anonymous gets on their using her eulogy to spread his race hate.

Mr. Anonymous has proven himself to be an extremely disrespectful fella. He has taken someones death, most likely a murder of sorts, and is using it to spread race hate and lies in my opinion. Like all chicken shits, he doesn't use his real name. Now this is an issue I have with folks like this because when you spread your racist ideas around like that, brave up, show your superiority, and give me your name and face.

I, and many others, have spread our ideas out in writings, on the radio, on television, and I and many others are not afraid to put our names and faces behind the ideas we profess. I have been proven a couple of times that I was wrong. I have admitted on the radio and on TV when this has been the case. I am not afraid to be humbled when I am wrong. I am not afraid to put my name and face behind the words and ideas that I speak.

Racism is a tool. It is a tool used to keep us at the bottom separated so we will continue our life's mission of doing our part to create wealth for the empire. That's the way it is in civilized society, and their is a heirarchy to our alleged freedom. We as whatever race, will fight with other races of folks instead of gathering together and fighting the real monster which is empire, which the United States IS and ALWAYS HAS BEEN. So, we are thrown a few scraps by our masters and fight amongst ourselves using the masters tools so he doesn't have to protect himself from us.

So, let's get it on here, because that was some of the most disrespectful behavior I have seen by a human being. Trying to get his agenda of a race war going taking advantage of the murdering of a young man by a cop man. That kind of racism sickens me, assholes with their personal agenda of starting race wars using the death of such a young man for their own advantage, and also spreading lies to that effect as well.

So, let's get to it, folks. Let's start our racism arguments and blah blah blah....

Photo Kahentinetha, Mohawk publisher, hospitalized after police attack

noreply@blogger.com (brendanorrell@gmail.com) — Sat, 05 Jul 2008 09:21:20 -0500

Kahentinetha Horn, publisher of Mohawk Nation News, hospitalized with a heart attack on June 14, 2008, after being attacked by special forces in Canada at the Cornwall/Akwesasne border. Photo by Sagowaiaks.

By Brenda Norrell

Censored News

http://www.bsnorrell.blogspot.com/

CORNWALL, Ontario -- Kahentinetha Horn, 68, was handcuffed in a police stress hold at the border crossing. Kahentinetha told them she was having chest pains and to loosen the handcuffs. The officers responded by tightening the handcuffs. Kahentinetha was told to bend over in the presence of a male and female officer. She was suffering a trauma induced heart attack. During the attack Katenies, Mohawk Nation News editor, was beaten and jailed by the gang of at least 10 special forces. Kahentinetha is out of the hospital and is recovering. Please consider contributing to the legal fees for a lawsuit against the Canadian police and special forces who attacked the two Mohawk grandmothers.For more information on Kahentinetha's condition and letters of support: waneek@msn.ca

Please send checks and money orders to:

Mohawk Nation News

Box 991

Kahnawake, Quebec

CANADA J0L1B0

http://www.mohawknationnews.com/

'Africa Unite' and Free Zimbabwe

noreply@blogger.com (Ridwan) — Sat, 05 Jul 2008 06:31:17 -0500

This crying child was pictured outside of the US embassy in Zimbabwe. About 200 Zimbabweans were there pleading for political asylum.

Mugabe, who has violently installed himself as the president, remains characteristically defiant. He continues to define the opposition Movement for Democratic Change as representives of colonial interests.

He nontheless says he will negotiate with the opposition only if he remains the president. This position reminds me of the apartheid government's insistence that it would enter into talks with the liberation movements on the condition that they renounce armed resistance.

GuardianFilms has obtained footage of "Mugabe's henchmen ... stealing civil servant postal ballots." See the video here.

South Africa's Mail & Guardian explains how and why Shepherd Yuda secretly made the film.

"The film shows how he and his colleagues at Harare Central prison had to fill in their postal ballots in front of a Mugabe supporter, how voters had to pretend to be illiterate so an official would fill in their ballots for them, and how terrified Zimbabweans were using felt tip pens to colour their fingers to pretend they had voted, lest they be murdered by Zanu-PF gangs."

Adding to the horror is the fact that African leadership is hardly able to summon enough power to force Mugabe's hand. Except for Kenya, Nigeria, and Zambia, the rest of the continent can't find the necessary conviction to take a stand.

The worst offender is South Africa's President Thabo Mbeki. How short his memory is huh?

Not too long ago his African National Congress castigated the US and Israel, among others, for supporting apartheid brutality.

Why is Zimbabwe different now? Why support and enable the brutal dictatorship of Mugabe?

South Africa has no business being caught between historical loyalty and Mugabe's defiance. And I say this out of conviction and Africanist loyalty to democratic freedom.

Free Zimbabwe!

Remembering the Biak Massacre ten years on

noreply@blogger.com (Ana) — Fri, 04 Jul 2008 08:43:10 -0500

By.....Herman Wainggai

In early July 1998 the small West Papuan island of Biak rejoiced. Rumours were circulating that President Clinton had officially recognised West Papua’s independence. Celebrations followed and the Morning Star flag was flown freely despite being a banned ‘separatist’ symbol.

Before dawn on Monday 6 July, after a night of revelry, a large group of young people slept near the town’s harbour. A mixed army unit drawn from four battalions approached and opened fire on these people as they slept.

The survivors, and others rounded up by a house-by-house search, were assembled around a large water tower where the Morning Star flag was fluttering above their heads. The flag was taken down and ripped into pieces.

For the next 24 hours those assembled there were beaten, raped and tortured. In a socially conservative culture, young girls and women were targeted while their friends and family were forced to look on.

Later, around 100 people were loaded on navy vessels and taken out to sea. The mutilated bodies washed up on the shores of Biak for many days.

The official explanation was that these were the victims of the Aitape Tsunami in Papua New Guinea. This is despite Aitape being 1,000km away, the tsunami occurring 11 days after the massacre and the fact most of the bodies were easily recognised by family members as their missing loved ones.

There is no shortage of evidence. Two Australian aid workers, Rebecca Casey and Paul Meixner, witnessed atrocities first-hand. Church reports documented at least 70 washed up bodies and include eye-witness statements. Human rights organisations spoke out at the time. An official report was compiled by the Jakarta embassy’s Major Dan Weadon, but never released for ‘diplomatic’ reasons. Then there are the survivors who have told their stories many times.

Not a single member of the Indonesian military has faced justice and the Government continues to deny the Biak Massacre.

This Sunday marks the ten year anniversary of this tragedy. It is a day of remembrance for West Papuans throughout the world and commemoration services will be held in many cities, including Melbourne. People often speak about Biak and East Timor’s Santa Cruz Massacre in the same breath, but Biak lacks the devastating film footage that brought the East Timorese struggle to a global audience.

However, the parallels between East Timor and West Papua are compelling. Neither were part of the initial post-colonial Indonesia and both were ‘integrated’ by military force. East Timor was given a genuine act of self-determination and chose independence. West Papuais still waiting for its chance to decide its own future and, like East Timor, will rely on the voices of the international community if this is ever to occur.

In a 2001 Sun-Herald article, Australian intelligence officer Captain Andrew Plunkett stated that the Biak Massacre ‘was a dress rehearsal for the TNI [Indonesian army] in East Timor’. It is quite possible that international condemnation following Biak may have saved many lives a year later in that country.

Today, my friends and family back home live under a military occupation. I spent two and a half years in an Indonesian jail for expressing my wish for freedom. Many others have died for doing the same. If this is all part of my people’s journey then I can understand. However, if the international community continues to be blind to our plight, blind to atrocities on its doorstep; if it continues to deny us basic freedoms in the name of economics and politics, then there will be many more Biak Massacres and much more suffering. In a week’s time members of the Australian West Papuan Community will travel to Canberra in order to present Prime Minister Rudd with a letter asking him to raise human rights abuses with the Indonesian Government.
He has already done so successfully with China.

In the meantime, we will assemble in cities, towns and villages on Sunday 6 July and remember the victims of Biak and the survivors who live on with physical and psychological traumas. We will take a few moments to be silent and hold these people in our thoughts. Then we will sing, dance and celebrate the future and go on.

Kahentinetha Horn recovering after attack on life by special agents at border

noreply@blogger.com (brendanorrell@gmail.com) — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 02:02:53 -0500

By Brenda Norrell
Photo: Kahentinetha Horn at the Indigenous Border Summit of the Americas II in Arizona in 2007. Photo Brenda Norrell

Kahentinetha Horn, publisher of Mohawk Nation News, is recovering and has been released from the hospital. Kahentinetha, 68, suffered a heart attack while handcuffed in a police stress hold in custody, after being attacked by special forces at the Cornwall/Akwesasne border. Katenies, an editor of Mohawk Nation News, was also beaten and jailed. Katenies was thrown on the ground, her face ground into the concrete and a knee jabbed in her kidneys. The two Mohawk grandmothers were attacked by at least 10 special forces.
It was the third attempt on Kahentinetha's life. In 1990, she was targeted by a sniper at Oka. In 1995, she was beaten by police. During the attack June, 14, 2008, Kahentinetha was handcuffed in a police stress hold. When she screamed out in pain for officers to loosen the handcuffs, the handcuffs were tightened and she was told to bend over. She was in custody in the presence of a male and female officer and told to bend over. At this point, she suffered a trauma induced heart attack. Her brother who arrived quickly on the scene saved her life by ensuring that she was not left to die in the hospital. She was then surrounded in the hospital by family and others ensuring her safety. She is now resting and recovering.
For more information on Kahentinetha's condition and letters of support: waneek@ms.ca
To send contributions to support the lawsuit against the Canadian police/special forces who beat Kahentinetha and Katenies
Mohawk Nation News
Box 991
Kahnawake, Quebec
CANADA J0L1B0

Read more at Censored News
http://www.bsnorrell.blogspot.com/

Hatewatch: League of the South Leader Depicts Obama With ‘Rubber Spear’

noreply@blogger.com (Angryindian) — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 14:28:54 -0500

Hatewatch:

Michael Hill (right, with convicted “Aryan” terrorist Michael Tubbs), president of the neo-secessionist League of the South, has long claimed angrily that his is no racist group and that he is no white supremacist — this despite his repeated calls for a return to “general European hegemony” in the South, his description of slavery as “God-ordained,” and, in a particularly tasteless attack on African Americans, his mocking of his former black university students’ names and people helped by affirmative action (“A quote from a recent affirmative action hire: ‘Yesta-day I could not spell ‘secretary.’ Today I is one”).

Now, Hill has returned to the kind of vulgar racist humor he apparently has a particular taste for. In the latest edition of his League of the South tabloid The Free Magnolia, Hill publishes a charming item bylined by one “LeShawn Jones” that reports a fantasy marriage between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama as if it were fact. It then goes on to describe Obama, the first major party black presidential nominee in American history, as attending the “wedding” wearing “only the simple leather thong of an African tribe” with a single “accessory” — “a large, rubber spear.”

Despite being listed for years as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center and even including a convicted “Aryan” terrorist in its leadership ranks, the league has managed to make some surprising allies of late — the allegedly “progressive” secessionists of the Second Vermont Republic (SVR), who have gone so far as to co-sponsor a major conference with the league. SVR leader Thomas Naylor has angrily denied that the league or its leader — who regularly describes egalitarianism as a left-wing “Jacobin” horror — are racist in any way. In the same breath, Naylor has claimed that he was always opposed personally to racism.

Why whites are blind to their racism

noreply@blogger.com (Angryindian) — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 14:15:11 -0500

Most white Americans are blind to their racism. At least seven out of ten. And even those whites who do see it, most think it is not all that serious. Most whites live in nearly all-white neighbourhoods and see nothing racist in that. And when blacks do complain of racism, most whites do not believe it.

So why are whites so blind to their own racism? There is a short answer and a long answer.

The short answer is that they are not directly affected by it. They are never at the receiving end. Because they are white.

So when blacks talk about racism whites either have a hard time understanding it - because it is not something they have ever experienced - or they think blacks are making a big deal out of nothing: they are being too sensitive, they are living in the past and all that.

That is the short answer. The long answer is this:

America was founded on two crimes: taking the land of the red man and bringing the black man in chains to work it. To feel right and good about that whites had to be racist. They had to think of themselves as far better and more human than others.

So not only was the country built on racism, so were the hearts and minds of white people.

Back then racism was open, naked, violent and respectable. So respectable, in fact, that any white person who was was not racist, who related to blacks as equals, was called names or worse!

But then all that changed.

Starting in the 1970s racism became a sin among white Americans. It became kind of like how sex used to be: something you did not talk about openly and when you did you felt uncomfortable about it. It even had dirty words to go with it, especially the n-word. “Racist” became one of the worst things you could call a white person.

Because racism was no longer respectable it weakened considerably. But it was still there, it was still a part of how whites saw themselves and the world - but now they could not admit to it!

So then it got strange:

On the one hand, to hold on to their unfair position and advantages in society, to their white privilege, and feel right and good about it, whites had to believe racist lies. Like that blacks lacked brains or a willingness to work hard.

And yet, on the other hand, they knew that racism was wrong.

So in the 1970s whites reached a fork in the road: either give up racism and its advantages, in pride, position and wealth, or hang onto racism by becoming blind to it.

As it turned out, they gave up some of their advantages, like places at universities, but by and large they became blind. They wanted to have their cake and eat it too.

See also:

The Sovereignty Debate? Has it been silenced?

noreply@blogger.com (Ana) — Sun, 29 Jun 2008 20:37:28 -0500

Annette Sykes

The Central North Island tribes have reached a crossroads in their journey to protect their sovereignty and self-determination. In recent decades these highly articulate tribal nations have been leaders in a number of political,legal and economic strategies that promote the recognition of individual tribal entities as sovereigns enjoying government-to government relationships with the New Zealand Government. Their cries for self government having being made in fora from the Waitangi Tribunal through to the United Nations, and from the hallowed halls of political power in Wellington through to rank and file protests on the street and national hui in Turangi called to discuss the injustices of policies of the Crown that deny Maori their tino rangatiratanga.

These efforts and the sovereign status of tribes themselves has been attacked for many years by successive legislators with the spectacular Ruatoki raids of last year perhaps illustrating the depth of opposition that exists in the hearts and minds of the enforcers of state power , as responses that are neither pragmatic nor permissible in modern democracies of the kind that New Zealand settler state has promoted.

Bedeviled by contradictory pronouncements on their jurisdictional authority, and besieged by assaults on their tribal status, Central North Island tribes now face the threat of being swallowed up in “regionalization,” if not eliminated altogether if they are not vigilant.

How so one might ask? The large natural groupings policy of the Crown has now subtely been adapted to one of large corporate entities. The regionalization debate that results raises questions about the scope of tribal jurisdiction in the Central North Island region, in which the territorial jurisdiction traditionally defined as the mana whenua or jurisdicitional authority of tribal groups is blurred and will be largely absent as corporate entities designed by the state but implemented by the new friends of the state, the co-opted brown largely male bureaucracy take control of the spoils of the modern war of words, the so called negotiated settlements, which have been muted by the quiet discourse with Treasury officials in the corridors of power far from the hue and cry of the tribal instituitions on marae and wananga.

But what is emerging is more than an intellectual discussion around traditional concepts of boundaries, ahi-kaa and ringa kaha. What the Central North Island tribes will have to confront is whether the corporate models of management that are being installed over their lands are the kinds of tribal government models that their tipuna had in mind when they promoted the Whitu Tekau or the Komiti nui o Ngati Whakaue. Are these the kinds of tribal government arrangements that respect all rangatira in the tribal community women and children alike and ensure an active participation by those affected by decision making processes around land use and benefit distribution.

These developments threaten to make local tribal governments largely irrelevant in the modern context too in the provision of funding and services to their tribal members as decisions become more and more centred at regional and national for a , and have the potential to severely undermine tribal self-determination and the government-to-government relationship of tribes to the New Zealand Government if there are not immediate steps taken to ensure the accountabilities of the self-appointed management regimes to those that they purport to represent. What Maori themselves in the Central North Island need to also confront is whether these arrangements will deliver change to communities that are so desperate for revitalisation or will just be harbringer of a further death knoll that has seen the vast populations of the area travelling away from the embrace of their tribal territories to places in foreign shores to ensure that the well being of their whanau is maintained.

I felt compelled to respond today after reading a number of articles from both sides of the divide. Those that have joined the CNI, those that have been excluded from the CNI and those that do no want to be part of an initiative but have fallen in the cracks of tribal dissent and disharmony. What is concerning is that the debate has been largely framed around the legacy that the Treaty of Waitangi Settlements policies will bring to the peoples of the region rather than around whether those policies themselves actively protect the right of self government that was promised to Maori in the Treaty of Waitangi or transform that promise into one where Maori become players in a market driven philosophy centred on wealth creation rather than the health and well being of Maori communites.

Hiyam Noir: Haaretz Publisher: Israeli "Citizenship Law" make Israel an apartheid state!

noreply@blogger.com (Angryindian) — Fri, 27 Jun 2008 21:29:33 -0500

The publisher of Haaretz, Amos Schocken make today a moral statement in an editorial with the headline "Citizenship law make Israel an apartheid state".It is amazing and somewhat peculiar how a Jewish publisher today display the revelation of a truth, known to rest of the world for over six decades, from the very erection of a state named Israel, built for Jews only.Schocken is a Zionist, can a Zionist also be a humanist, sensitive to justice, moral and compassion ?

Amos Schocken admits in his editorial what the Palestinians have experienced during the six past decades, - that Israel operating on the occupied Palestinian territories, acts as an apartheid state, that Israeli has institutionalized and legalized discrimination, build on race and religion.

The Israeli government's decision last week to extend the Temporary Citizenship Law for another year,displaying the legal barriers that prevented severe discrimination against Arab citizens and harm to their civil rights,have been removed.

It is the eighth time the government has extended a "temporary" citizenship law,that in its most crucial element, an apartheid marriage law, that prohibit someone from living in Israel if he/she married an indigenous Palestinian from the West Bank and added Gaza.Strip to the list of countries for which the Israeli Interior ministry does not have the official right to approve residency,regardless of age in Israel on the base of family reunions.

The amendment to the Citizenship Law, first passed in 2003 stipulates that the Israeli interior ministry does not have authority to approve residency in Israel for a resident of Judea and Samaria,if a Palestinian native.The same stipulation applies also to family reunions [marriage] Palestinian spouses younger than 25.The law prevents Israeli citizens from marry one of their own choice, and for the couple to live inside Israel, if the spouse is a Palestinian from Judea and Samaria.

Today, (Yesterday) in History...

noreply@blogger.com (Angryindian) — Fri, 27 Jun 2008 21:24:32 -0500

The Local Crank: Today in History...

...the Battle of the Greasy Grass, where George Armstrong Custer got what was coming to him, ends when the victorious alliance of Northern Cheyenne, Lakota and Arapaho withdraw on the approach of General Alfred Terry's column (1876).

Tongan Riots

noreply@blogger.com (Ana) — Fri, 27 Jun 2008 06:49:14 -0500

The Tongan riot is part of a wider surge in class struggle in the Pacific since 2005. Since this date, Samoa, Tonga, Fiji, New Caledonia and Tahiti have experienced major strikes, and Tonga and the Solomons have experienced riots. More unrest and IMF style riots are likely, as neoliberal market reforms imposed by the IMF and World Bank have savagely cut the living standards of Pacific people, while enriching island elites. Increasingly, island elites lack the resources to control their own population, hence Australia and New Zealand have sent in troops to prop up unpopular regimes and to repress popular movements. It will be interesting to see how this rebellion develops in the Pacific

— Fydd

"If a boat ends up on a reef you don't blame the reef;
you don't blame the boat;
you don't blame the wind;
you don't blame the waves;
you blame the captain."
— Tongan Saying

On Thursday 16 November 2006, riots erupted in Nuku'alofa, the capital of the tiny kingdom of Tonga. Tonga is an archipelago of 170 islands in the South Pacific, about 3,000 km northeast of Sydney and 2,000 km northeast of New Zealand/Aotearoa. After a pro-democracy march ended outside parliament, an irate crowd of possibly 2,000-3,000 took to the streets. As they rampaged through town, they tipped over cars, attacked government buildings, smashed windows, looted businesses and then set them alight. Many people who weren't at the demonstration joined the riot. Amidst the stores, offices and hotels engulfed in flames, the looting gleefully continued. Beaming youngsters darted in and out of stores laden with looted boxes and sacks of goods as blinding waves of fire fell onto the road. For many Tongans, it was like a Christmas give-away bonanza that had come early. By the night's end, the mob had burnt down a remarkable 80% of the Central Business District of Nuku'alofa. Six people were dead, and millions of Pa'anga (the currency of Tonga) damage had been done.

Police stood by, powerless. The cops even asked looters for candles because of a power blackout! However, as the flames became too intense, the looters dispersed, and the government slowly regained control. The government granted itself tough emergency powers. The CBD was cordoned off. Armed cops and soldiers from the Tongan Defence Force patrolled the streets, indiscriminately arresting youth. The Tongan government, fearing that it was facing a revolution, quickly requested armed assistance from Australia and New Zealand to quell its unruly subjects. And so over 150 Australian and New Zealand troops and cops were flown in by their respective governments. After a few weeks, over 570 people were arrested, most of whom were beaten by soldiers and police.

This article looks at the riot itself. It looks at the background to the riot (particularly the massive strike by government workers in 2005), the causes of the riot, the targets of the rioters, and whether it was a class riot or a race riot. Most leftist publications covering the Tongan riots focus on capital's and the state's response to the riots, and tend to overlook the actual activity of the exploited class in Tonga. Perhaps this is because they don't see much radical potential in riots.

This piece doesn't examine why Australia and New Zealand sent in troops to crush the resistance, nor why they have "intervened" in the wider Pacific (both governments have also sent in troops to the Solomon Islands and East Timor). As well, I don't examine the increasingly important imperialist rivalry for control of the markets, resources and populations of the South Pacific between China, Taiwan, the US and Australia/New Zealand (often representing US interests, but not always; sometimes they pursue their own agenda in the Pacific). I recognise these imperialist aspects are essential to a broader understanding of Tonga and the Pacific, yet this isn't the purpose of this article. This doesn't mean I support Australian and New Zealand imperialism (or any other form of imperialism), also known as "peacekeeping," in the Pacific.¹

The main question that I explore in this article is whether the riot was a class riot or an anti-monarchy riot. The riot occurred just after the government, which is run by the King of Tonga, announced the stalling of democratic reform. People attending a pro-democracy rally were outraged, and went off and trashed government buildings and the business interests of the monarchy as a result. This strongly suggests, given the limited information available as to the actual motives of the rioters, that the riot was a "pro-democracy" affair. By pro-democracy, I don't mean direct democracy, such as that of workers' councils. Instead, I mean representative, parliamentary democracy.

Yet, on closer examination, the riot can't be reduced to an episode in the ongoing struggle in Tonga between the rising urban capitalist class, who support representative democracy, and the traditional aristocracy, who wish to retain the monarchy. The riot expressed the class rage of many "commoner" Tongans who've been impoverished by years of neoliberal reform and oppressed by centuries of authoritarian rule. They've been enraged by how the Tongan "royal" family and aristocracy have greatly enriched themselves through privatisation. The riot had some limited anti-capitalist content, especially in the joyful practise of proletarian shopping (also known as looting). The co-operation between thousands of rioters to carry out such a mass shopping expedition is a form of class-based self-organisation or self-activity. The rioters acted for themselves, rather than waiting for representatives to act for them.

Some have claimed the riot was a race riot against recent Chinese immigrants, who dominate the small business sector in Tonga. While the rioters did loot and burn many Chinese businesses, they also burnt down most businesses in Nuku'alofa, regardless of who owned them. Rioters initially targeted government buildings and the business interests of the monarchy rather than Chinese owned stores. Hence the riot can't be called a race riot.

Background: Feudalism, Remittances, Monarchism and all that

Tonga is one of the few surviving feudal monarchies in the world. The "royal" family and the aristocracy — made up of chiefs, who refer to themselves as the "nobility" — own about 75% of the land. The remaining 25% is owned by the government. The rest of the population are called "commoners," or more disparagingly "dirt eaters." Most "commoners" work off small plots of land, which they lease from the "royal" family, chiefly aristocracy and the government. "Royal" and "noble" landlords expect "commoners" to pay free tributes to them, normally in the form of food.

Tonga is often seen as the "friendly islands," a peaceful island paradise of golden beaches and palm trees. Tonga is historically one of the most stable and conservative countries in the Pacific. Traditionally, most "commoner" Tongans have taken to heart the Christian doctrine of humble submissiveness. The church has preached "blind humility and unseeing allegiance [to the aristocracy and monarchy] will open the door to eternal glory." However, many Tongans are overcoming this indoctrination in recent years.

The Tongan economy is based on agriculture. The majority of the population engages in some form of subsistence production of food. About 50% of Tongans produce almost all of their basic food needs through farming and fishing. The only significant industry is the processing of coconuts into copra and desiccated coconut. Tourism provides most of the hard cash. Manufacturing, which is dominated by small industries, only accounts for about 10% of Tonga's GDP. However, an increasing proportion of workers are being employed in manufacturing since the monarchy has progressively "modernised" and monetised the economy. In the 1990s, those employed in manufacturing rose from 3% to 23% of the workforce, while correspondingly those employed in agriculture and fishing decreased from 49% to 34% of the workforce.

Yet Tonga can't be viewed as a simple feudal economy stuck in the past. It has, perhaps, a mixed feudal and capitalist economy. Most Tongans rely on remittances — money sent back home by relatives working abroad. Indeed, a whopping 31% of the Tongan GDP is made up by remittances, the highest proportion of remittances of any country in the world. Only Moldova (27% of GDP), Lesotho (26%), Haiti (25%) and Bosnia & Herzegovina (22.5%) come close (see "Gender, Migration, and Domestic Labor," Prol-Position News, 5 (2006)).

Remittances help pay for Tonga's massive trade deficit. In 2004, Tonga imported $122 million and exported $34 million. According to I. C. Campbell, Tongans mainly use remittances to buy imported consumer goods and cars, and to pay for building "modern" houses with "modern" facilities. As a result, most "commoner" Tongans aren't living at a subsistence level. According to Campbell, in the late 1990s there were 17,000 cars in Tonga, which meant there was one car for about every five Tongans.

Since the early 1970s, land shortages, unemployment and the search for a better life overseas have all contributed to a Tongan diaspora abroad. The major destinations have been New Zealand, Australia and the US. Today, about half of all Tongans live overseas. During the post WWII long boom and labour shortage, capitalists encouraged migrant labour from the Pacific Islands. In 1970, a scheme began whereby Tongans were allowed to migrate temporarily to work in blue-collar employment. Many migrated to Auckland, which has the largest Polynesian population of any city in the world. Capitalists preferred Tongan factory workers because they thought they were hard-workers, sober, reliable, obedient and prepared to do the tedious work that others refused to do (see De Bres et al, 1974). Once the long boom collapsed, the New Zealand government no longer welcomed Pacific (a term which has increasingly replaced the old term "Pacific Island" in recent years) workers. Indeed, they forefully deported many through the infamous police "dawn raids" which began in 1974 under the Labour Government (see De Bres et al 1974 and De Bres and Campbell 1976). In the 1990s, a quota system operated, with stringent entry qualifications.

Today, Tongans who live overseas work largely in unskilled and semi-skilled blue-collar jobs. For example, in New Zealand, Tongans predominantly have factory jobs, such as freezing workers/abattoir workers, or other blue-collar jobs, such as cleaners. These jobs are low-paid by New Zealand standards, but are relatively well-paid by Tongan standards. In 1996, the wage rate for unskilled labour in Tonga was 80c to $1 NZ per hour, while the equivalent rate in New Zealand was almost ten times that.

Despite these remittances, Tonga is a poor country. It has one of the widest gaps between rich and poor in the South Pacific. There are a tiny number of wealthy citizens, as the aristocracy make up less than 1% of the population. The gap has widened considerably since the introduction of neoliberal reforms in recent years. Agricultural output has fallen below its 1980 level. Unemployment is high at 13%, and only a quarter of school leavers can find work. Many attempt to emigrate. In 2003, the Gross Domestic Product per capita was $US2,200. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) recently claimed that the Tongan economy was on the verge of collapse. Since 1991, GDP has fallen 1.1% per year, compared to a growth rate of 3.1% in Samoa during the same time. So as living standards in Samoa have steadily risen, they have plummeted in Tonga.

Josh Liava'a, a "key pro-democracy campaigner," has said on Niu FM (an Auckland radio station):

We have people living right in the middle of the rubbish tip, and they share the food with the dogs, the rats, the rodents, the flies and the mosquitoes...There is the no other country in the Pacific that has got that horrendous living condition and situation like some of our people are experiencing in Tonga.

This is one of the more important factors in causing an upsurge in class struggle in Tonga in recent years.

Neoliberalism and privatisation has enriched the "royal" family and the aristocracy enormously. Perhaps fearing their days are numbered with the ever-increasing encroachment of capitalism into Tonga, "royalty" and the chiefly aristocracy have broadened their portfolio. In the past, their wealth was based on owning land. Today, they also own many businesses, including key strategic industries such as electricity and telecommunications. For instance, the King has amassed a personal fortune because he owns Tonga's electricity company, its beer company, one of its mobile phone companies (Tonfon), a cable television company and the rights to Tonga's internet domain name. Princess Pilolevu owns lucrative geo-orbital satellite slots, which were originally given to the Tongan government for its own communication needs. Hence the Princess turned the government's satellite entitlement into her own private satellite communications business, Tongasat. In 2000, the new King George Tupou V, then a prince, tried to sell the genetic information of Tongans to an Australian biotech company. Overall, the "royals" and aristocracy are seen as nepotistic, corrupt, arrogant, aloof and greedy. The current King George Tupou V, who was educated at Oxford University and the Sandhurst military academy, has openly shown his contempt for "commoners."

Yet it's not only the "commoners" who have been alienated by the greed of the aristocracy. The business elite also think that the aristocratic class has unfairly looted the wealth of Tonga. They are bitterly disappointed that neoliberalism has enriched the traditional elite of Tonga rather than themselves. This is worth remembering when the pro-democracy movement is considered later in this article.

Tonga's "royal" family, established in the 19th century under the tutelage of British Methodist missionaries, wields almost absolute governmental power. The King appoints the Prime Minister and the Deputy Prime Minister for life. He also appoints the entire cabinet, the Privy Council and the Supreme Court. Parliament or Fale Alea has 30 seats, of which twelve are reserved for the appointed cabinet ministers, nine are selected by the country's 33 "nobles" or chiefs, who acquire their life titles by descent, and only nine ("the people's representatives" or "commoner politicians") are elected by popular vote.

The Tongan aristocracy wasn't imposed by European imperialism. Indeed, Tonga is unique in the Pacific because it was never fully annexed by a European power (Britain had "protectorate" status, or control of Tonga's foreign policy, from 1900 to 1970, when Tonga gained full independence). Although the Tongan aristocracy has adopted many aspects of the European and Japanese aristocratic traditions, it has also strong indigenous roots. It seems that Tongan society before European contact in the 17th century was one of the most hierarchical societies in Polynesia, apart from perhaps Hawaii. Tongan society was broadly divided into three classes:

(1) the hou'eiki (chiefs), matapule (talking chiefs) and mu'a (would-be talking chiefs)
(2) the tu'a (commoners)
(3) the popula or hopoate (slaves)

All titles were heritable. The high chief was known as the Tu'i Tonga, the ancient title for the ruler of Tonga. The Tu'i Tonga were omnipotent monarchs whose very touch rendered an object tapu (sacred). The distinction between commoners and slaves in practice was little, as chiefs could kill, beat or rob commoners without reason or defence.

The 2005 Wildcat Strike and the Pro-Democracy Movement

Resistance to the Tongan regime has been brewing since the 1960s, especially after Tongans returned home with new ideas from abroad. A popular pro-democracy movement emerged in the 1980s, but it has been a very mild movement until recently.² Its main forms of protest have been petitioning the King and holding demonstrations calling for democratic reform. As the King has ignored these pleas, many Tongans have become frustrated with the ineffectiveness of these protests. Hence they have spontaneously turned to more radical forms of protest, including a wildcat strike and rioting in the last few years.

In 2005, the largest and most successful strike in Tongan history took place. It lasted seven weeks, and involved 3,000 government workers. It was a wildcat strike: it wasn't organised by unions; instead, it helped found the Public Services Association (PSA), the union for government workers. Dr. Aivi Puloka, the president of the Public Services Association, has said.

Before the strike there was no PSA. There was no Trade Union movement. It was just a spontaneous reaction of dissatisfaction with the government...And public servants decided to walk out from work. How was it organised? It was just an announcement and everybody turned up. [Puloka interviewed by Smush and SLM].

Strikes and unions are relatively new in Tonga; according to I. C. Campbell, the first union in Tonga was formed in 1976, and the country didn't experience its first recorded strike by wage-workers (by nurses) until 1980.

The strike blossomed into a popular rebellion against the monarchy. There were daily gatherings of workers and their supporters in Nuku'alofa as well as large protests elsewhere in Tonga. The Tongan community in New Zealand also organised protests, including solidarity demonstrations outside the King of Tonga's New Zealand residence in Auckland. Some demonstrators rammed the gate of the King's residency and scuffles broke out with police and security guards. The strikers and supporters started to demand constitutional reform. Protests reached a peak with one demonstration of 10,000-20,000 people, almost one tenth to one fifth of the Tongan population and the largest march in Tongan history, calling for democratic reform. "Royal" owned houses were torched, government cars overturned, school classrooms wrecked and a petrol bomb thrown at a house owned by business partners of the current King.

The government, fearing an uprising, needed to end the strike. The PSA, whose leadership is closely tied to the major organisation of the "pro-democracy" movement, the Friendly Islands Human Rights and Democracy Movement (HRDM), feared that the strike was threatening to escape its control. Hence it suited both the government and the PSA leadership to end the strike. After 45 days, the strike was won and pay increases between 60-80% were conceded to all "public servants" or government workers.³

The strike caused divisions within the pro-democracy movement. In particular, the strike alienated some of the leadership of the "pro-democracy" movement who think that the monarchy and aristocracy have been inept in managing Tongan workers. The wage increase of almost 80% for government workers "threatens macroeconomic instability," according to Gaurav Sodhi of the Centre of Independent Studies (see Sodhi 2006). Some leaders of the pro-democracy movement, especially those tied to the business community, see the increase as "suicidal" and "unaffordable." They want a neoliberal state that reverses these gains (ie. cuts wages) and prevents rioting from occurring in the future. One reason why they want representative, bourgeois democracy is because they believe the current political set-up has made Tongan workers and peasants too rebellious.

The emerging capitalist class in Tonga, as represented by the Tongan National Business Association, aims to further its own class interests at the expense of Tongan "commoners." They see the feudal monarchy as an unwieldy obstacle to the proper "modernisation" and "liberalisation" of the Tongan economy. Ideally, they would like to see the "royal" and aristocratic monopoly on land ownership abolished, government-owned land privatised, the guarantee that allows every Tongan over 16 to lease 8 acres of government-owned land removed, large-scale agri-business set up and tourist resorts built. This process would force many "commoners" off the land and into wage-slavery in Tonga or overseas. They also want to end strong "restrictions" on commercial agriculture such as "stifling" export licences for export produce. They want to "open up" the Tongan economy to foreign ownership (which is currently prohibited) and the injection of overseas capital.

However, the pro-democracy movement shouldn't be confused with the Tongan National Business Association. For example, the HRDM seems to be a broad, and uneasy, cross-class coalition of workers, unionists, politicians, urban business elites (and expatriate capitalists overseas) and middle-class elements who've been university educated overseas. Information about the HRDM is sketchy. It appears, from the limited information available, that the HRDM's political aims are to get a higher percentage of "commoner" politicians elected in parliament and eventually a constitutional monarch along the lines of Britain. The Trotskyist World Socialist Website claim that its economic aims are to implement the demands of the IMF and World Bank.⁴ Yet it's possible that the WSWS may be confusing the HRDM's economic aims with those of the Tongan National Business Association. The Business Association are involved in the HRDM, but so too are social democrats such as "commoner" politician 'Akilisi Pohiva, who want to "share the wealth" of Tonga. Others involved in the broader pro-democracy movement don't support neoliberal policies, such as the People's Democratic Party, a leftist split from the HRDM.

Yet overall it's important to note that the downfall of authoritarian, bureaucratic regimes in Eastern Europe, Africa and Asia in the 1990s by popular movements often led to the formation of "democratic" regimes that instituted severe neoliberal reforms. That is, there is a strong relationship between the establishment of bourgeois democracy and neoliberal reform (see David Seddon and John Walton, Free Markets and Food Riots).

The Riot. A Pro-Democracy Affair?

Shortly after the strike, King Taufa'ahau Tupou IV died in 2006. He was succeeded by his eldest son, George Tupou V. Tongans expected some democratic reform under the new monarch, especially as the government formed a committee to do so following the 2005 strike. On 16 November 2006, the final sitting day of parliament for the year, a pro-democracy rally of several thousand marched to parliament in Nuku'alofa (population: c.35,000). They demanded that a vote on major democratic reforms take place before the house rose for the year. Yet parliament was adjourned for the year without having made any of the promised reforms. In frustration and anger, over 2,000 people spontaneously set off and rioted.

The rioters were of all ages. Children and the elderly took part. A large minority were women. At times, whole families participated in the looting, wheeling away their goods in supermarket trolleys. It wasn't limited to a few criminal types. Yet most of the rioters were young males. Later news reports blamed the rioting on drunken youth. One Tongan American commented on the Aotearoa (New Zealand) Indymedia website "those who participated in the riots seem to have been rowdy deported misfits from the US. Ex-gang members and scum of society."

The rioters weren't a mindless, drunken mob, indiscriminately looting and burning everything in sight. They targeted specific buildings and businesses. For example, they gutted the headquarters of the Shoreline group of companies, which runs Tonga's electricity company. Shoreline is owned by the King. They also looted and burnt down Tonfon, Tonga's major phone company, also owned by the King. So, it seems, they targeted buildings and businesses closely associated with the King and his government.

In this respect, the Tongan riot resembled the "IMF riots" against neoliberalism that erupted in Africa, South and Central America, and Asia in the 1970s, 1980s and 1990s.⁵ Like the IMF riots, the Tongan rioters deliberately targeted specific institutions that they perceived as responsible for their exploitation and degradation. The IMF riots typically targeted government buildings, symbols of international capital and foreign affluence, shopping malls, supermarkets and major retail outlets.

The Tongan riot closely followed this pattern. Rioters attacked government buildings, smashing windows in the Prime Minster's Office and Cabinet Office in Parliament House, the Magistrates Court, the Public Service Commission, and the Ministry of Finance, and overturning numerous government cars, including police cars. They also targeted symbols of international capital, such as the only overseas bank in town, the ANZ bank, and the symbols of foreign affluence, such as the Pacifica Royale luxury hotel, which is owned by King's business associates, the 'Indian Princess' Sefo and Soane Ramanlal. Further, they looted and set ablaze major retail outlets and a shopping complex (including a supermarket) owned by the unelected, royal appointed Prime Minister Feleti Seveli (who has strong links to the pro-democracy movement, and was appointed by the King to appease popular discontent). Overall, most of the symbols of modern capitalism and foreign affluence were attacked, such as banks, cinemas and shopping malls, while more traditional forms of business, such as the Nuku'alofa markets, were left alone.

So it seems to be a clear-cut case that the riot was a pro-democracy rampage. Protesters, frustrated with the autocratic, authoritarian King, as well as the lack of democratic reform, went off and attacked government buildings and the business interests of the monarchy. "Smush," an Indymedia activist from New Zealand who visited Tonga after the riots, has written,

After seeing downtown Nuku'alofa and talking to various people, I think the riot's roots lie in the people's deep frustration and anger with the government, the nobles, the King and the feudal system as a whole. The riots were targeting government buildings, companies owned by the PM, King and his family and outside the city centre some Chinese and Indian shops...In the city centre, most shops were looted and destroyed and many burnt down (ie. every shop was targeted).

However, this explanation only tells one part of the story. Yes, the riot was caused by a lack of democratic reform. Yet it was also a class riot.

Or a Festival of the Oppressed?

Latu Kolomatangi, of the pro-democracy movement, has said of the class nature of the riot:

I think on that day [the day of the riot] it was the day of the poor people to get their share from the business people. Seeing people enjoying taking goods out of the shops and burning them made me think of the poor and how they get their share from the business people. For years they collect from the poor. Thursday [the day of the riot] is a day for the poor to take their share from them. [Kolomatangi interviewed by Smush and SLM].

As such, the riot was a day of class revenge by the oppressed: they freely took from the businesses that had been taking and profiting from them. By mass looting, Tongan "commoners" went beyond mere calls for democratic reform. They organised themselves, and took freely what they needed from the stores. Claims that the riot was simply an "anti-feudal" riot are misleading as, like the IMF riots, the Tongan riot didn't revolve around the question of land ownership. It wasn't an explosion of peasant discontent over the lack of land redistribution; like the IMF riots, it was primarily an urban riot of the "urban poor."

The looting was carried out in a carnival atmosphere. One news report said "Laughing and Looting as Tonga's capital burns." An eyewitness to the looting commented, "Most Tongans had smiles on their faces like it was Christmas come early." Footage of the riot taken by European tourists and posted on a website showed a large crowd going about mass, systematic looting. Once one store was cleaned out, it was set alight. What's overwhelming from watching the footage is the carnival atmosphere of the riot — the continual din of laughter, chatter and whooping.

A classic analysis of a riot, namely of the 1965 Watts riot in Los Angeles, was written by Guy Debord of the Situationist International:

The Los Angeles rebellion was a rebellion against the commodity...Like the young delinquents of all the advanced countries...the Los Angeles blacks take modern capitalist propaganda, its publicity of abundance, literally. They want to possess now all the objects shown and abstractly accessible, because they want to use them. In this way they are challenging their exchange-value...Through theft and gift they rediscover a use that immediately refutes the oppressive rationality of the commodity, revealing its relations and even its production to be arbitrary and unnecessary. The looting of the Watts district was the most direct realization of the distorted principle: 'To each according to their false needs' — needs determined and produced by the economic system which the very act of looting rejects.

Many aspects of Debord's analysis are questionable, such as his distinction between "real" and "false" desires, and "real" and "false" needs. Much of his analysis is dated, as it only applies to the era of "abundance" during the post WWII long boom. Also, looting shouldn't be glorified, as it's clearly a limited form of class-based self-organisation. To state the obvious, rioting is a temporary and spontaneous rampage, a venting of anger, that doesn't offer constructive alternatives. Looting fixes responsibility on the retailer rather than the producer, and is thus limited to the realm of consumption. However, Debord does make a case that looting is a distorted example of communist distribution in action, in that people were taking freely from stores according to their "false" needs.

While it's true most protesters merely wanted representative democracy, their (nascent anti-capitalist) practice during the riot was sometimes ahead of their (democratic) theory. Significantly, most businesses in the CBD of Nuku'alofa were gutted, not just the interests of the "royal" family, aristocracy and Chinese community. The riot happened against the wishes of the leadership of the democracy movement. Journalist Mateni Tapueluelu told the NZ Herald, "They [the protesters] demanded that if the Government did not agree to political reform by 2008, they would do something — nobody knew what they meant," he said. "None of the leading activists or people's representatives were leading this: they tried to stop it but they couldn't stop it." For example, a prominent leader of the democracy movement, politician 'Akilisi Pohiva, went on the radio to urge demonstrators to stop looting and go home. Other pro-democracy politicians made similar pleas. Many figures in the democracy movement distanced themselves from the riot. Osi Maama, editor of the Tonga Times interviewed on the Newstalk ZB radio station immediately after the riots, commented "the thing is...a lot of people wanted to do these damages...[it was] nothing to do with political democratic movement."

As an aside, not only did they burn down most businesses in Nuku'alofa, they also burnt down the offices of the HRDM. The HRDM had their offices upstairs in the Tungi Arcade, which was torched by the rioters. Perhaps by (intentionally or unintentionally) burning down their offices, the rioters recognised that a few democratic reforms or even overthrowing the monarchy and bringing in bourgeois democracy wouldn't really alleviate, let alone abolish, their class exploitation (although the situation is complex, as getting rid of an absolutist monarchy would probably help somewhat, open up some space for further struggle, and give Tongan "commoners" much confidence in their ability to change society). Or perhaps they just wished to burn down a shopping mall. Either way, their practice was ahead of their apparent adherence to representative democracy.

Or a Race Riot?

The Tongan riot, like the rioting in the Solomon Islands in 2006, has been portrayed as an anti-Chinese rampage. Small business, particularly retail establishments on Tongatapu island — the main island of Tonga — is dominated by recent Chinese migrants who arrived under a cash-for-passports scheme that ceased in 1998. According to academic Phil Crocombe, Chinese migrants own 72% of business in Tonga. It's difficult to find exact figures as to how many Chinese live in Tonga. Some say a few hundred, others a few thousand. Tonga is ethnically homogeneous, as Tongans make up 98% of Tonga's population.

Many Chinese owned shops, especially the larger retail establishments, were looted and burnt. But Hu Yeshun, the Chinese Ambassador to Tonga, said in the People's Daily (China) immediately after the riot that "more than 25 percent of Chinese stores [about 30] were looted or burned yesterday, causing big losses to the owners." Yet since the riot set ablaze 80% of Nuku'alofa's CBD, the figure of "more than 25%" of Chinese-owned businesses being destroyed is disproportionately small. So if Yeshun's estimation is true, it suggests that rioters didn't go out of their way to destroy Chinese-owned stores, in contrast to what was reported in most capitalist media reports. Hence labelling the riot as a race riot is false.

Indeed, Indymedia reporters talked to one woman, who saw the rioters refrain from setting alight a few Chinese shops. She said the rioters looked like they were going to loot and burn down four shops, some of which were operated by Chinese. But many people stood in front of the shops to protect them. They managed to persuade the rioters not to burn the shops because it would've destroyed people's houses too. Only one shop was looted and none were burnt. On another occasion, rioters only smashed the windows of a Chinese restaurant.

Overall, while some Chinese businesses were looted, the rioters were driven by class anger rather than race hatred. The main causes of the riot weren't anti-Chinese racism. The main causes of the riot were, as I have argued above, anger with the Tongan feudal class system and the emerging capitalist system in Tonga, as well as frustration with the lack of democratic reform to the monarchical government. A small minority of Tongans dislike the Chinese, but racism doesn't appear to be too deep. Indeed, Smush has suggested that racism is more widespread amongst urban Tongan capitalists (who support the democracy movement) than Tongan urban and rural workers. Smush has written:

I do think that there are some anti-Chinese exponents amongst democracy supporters, particularly in the 'business community.' They say they are angry at the King's 'undemocratic approval' of 400 Chinese immigrants over night. The suggestion of an 'ethnic conflict,' as presented by some of the mainstream/capitalist media, (a) downplays the widely held disgust with the current system (and therefore plays in the hand of the ruling class), and (b) is far from the truth because most Tongan people are friendly, or at least not unfriendly, towards Chinese immigrants.

Conclusions

The Tongan riot was a mixed pro-democracy and class riot. Frustration with the authoritarian monarchy and its lack of democratic reform was the most obvious cause of the riot. That being the case, perhaps the Tongan riot will be just seen as an explosive episode in the transition from feudalism to capitalism in Tonga, and thus lacked anti-capitalist content. Yet in looting and burning most businesses in Nuku'alofa, rioters went beyond mere calls for representative democracy and the toppling of the hated feudal system. Dispossessed Tongans targeted institutions they thought were responsible for their impoverishment. As such, "black Thursday," as the riot has been called, was a day of class revenge. Not only is the old feudal establishment in Tonga worried that they might be soon overthrown, the leadership of the pro-democracy movement is worried that many dispossessed Tongans have become too unruly. The leadership of the pro-democracy movement will attempt to channel the rebellion into safe, bourgeois channels, such as parliamentary reform.

The Tongan riot is part of a wider surge in class struggle in the Pacific since 2005. Since this date, Samoa, Tonga, Fiji, New Caledonia and Tahiti have experienced major strikes, and Tonga and the Solomons have experienced riots. More unrest and IMF style riots are likely, as neoliberal market reforms imposed by the IMF and World Bank have savagely cut the living standards of Pacific people, while enriching island elites. Increasingly, island elites lack the resources to control their own population, hence Australia and New Zealand have sent in troops to prop up unpopular regimes and to repress popular movements. It will be interesting to see how this rebellion develops in the Pacific.

Sources:

Braddock, John. "Signs of social and economic crisis across Pacific Island states", 28 Dec. 2005, http://www.wsws.org/articles/2005/dec2005/paci-d28.shtml (and various other articles from that Trotskyist website).
de Bres, Joris, Rob Campbell and Peter Harris, Migrant Labour in the Pacific (1974).
de Bres, J. and Rob Campbell, The Overstayers (1976).
Campbell, I. C. Island Kingdom: Tonga Ancient and Modern (2001).
Capitalist newspaper, radio, web and TV reports of the riot.
Debord, Guy. "The Decline and Fall of the Spectacle-Commodity Economy", Dec. 1965, reprinted in Internationale Situationniste, 10 (March 1966), http://www.bopsecrets-org.pem.data393.net/SI/10.Watts.htm
"Gender, Migration, and Domestic Labor", Prol-Position News, 5 (2006), pp. 6-13, http://www.prol-position.net
Lay, Graeme. Pacific New Zealand (1996).
Smush and SLM, "Revolutionary not Evolutionary — Indymedia Activists report from Tonga", posted 25 Nov. 2006, http://indymedia.org.nz/newswire/display/72090/index.php, & "Abuse in Tongans Prisons", http://indymedia.org.nz/newswire/display/72115/index.php, posted 1 Dec. 2006 & "If a boat ends up on a reef", http://indymedia.org.nz/newswire/display/72103/index.php, posted 29 Nov. 2006 (all of these reports were Aotearoa Indymedia features).
Sodhi, Gaurav. "Tonga Monarchy Needs Modernity", http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0611/S00125.htm, posted 8 Nov. 2006.
Walton, John and David Seddon, eds. Free Markets and Food Riots: The Politics of Global Adjustment (1994).

Endnotes

1. I oppose these "interventions," but that doesn't mean I support Leninist "anti-imperialism," which claims people in countries dominated by foreign powers ought to form nationalist cross-class alliances to kick out the foreign enemy.

2. Most involved in the "pro-democracy" movement don't even want the overthrow of the monarchy, but instead a power-sharing relationship with the King through more "commoner" politicians being able to be elected. The "radicals" want a British style system (a parliament with a constitutional monarch).

3. Although in June 2007 the Tongan government has threatened to refuse to pay the agreed pay increases. In response, the PSA has threatened strikes.

4. See John Braddock, "Newspaper ban exposes growing conflict in Tongan ruling circles," http://www.wsws.org/articles/2003/jun2003/tong-j06.shtml, posted 6 June 2003.

5. The IMF riots mostly took the form of food riots in response to price hikes and food shortages caused by the imposition of IMF "structural adjustment policies," but they sometimes took the form of a political demonstration that got out of hand. The Tongan riot was of the latter category.

@nti-copyright :: info@rebelpress.org.nz

'White Man's Imagined Burden'

noreply@blogger.com (Ridwan) — Sun, 22 Jun 2008 05:24:01 -0500

I was flipping through news channels a few days ago and came across and interview with a white European anthropologist who was commenting on the "uncontacted Indian tribe" story that broke in late May.

The anthropolgist, whose name I unfortunately missed, commented that the Indians in the picture were firing arrows at what they thought was a giant bird.

I am not making this up. A giant bird in 2008 flying over "uncontacted" Indians somewhere in the "jungles" of Brazil. What a 'discovery' hey?

Geez!

How far have we come since Livingstone and Kipling huh?

Anyway, the other white man who took the pictures, Carlos Meirelles (61) has admitted that the story is not entirely true.

Meirelles works for the Brazilian Indian Protection Agency (Funai) and is said to be one of only a few seranistas, or indigenous tribes expert.

He knew that the folks he was picturing were not newly "discovered", in fact they have been known about since 1910.

The story he sold to the world was intended to 'protect and save' the Indians from outsiders (he says loggers) who threaten the "uncontacted" Indians. Just how much of this 'discovery' was staged is not fully disclosed but it makes me wonder about the notion of "uncontacted" tribes.

What does "uncontacted" mean? Who is supposed to be doing the 'contacting'? And how is "uncontacted" tied to the myth of 'discovery' by white 'pioneers' (now researchers)?

I am not questioning the humanitarian need to repsect and guard the rights of peole to live in remote areas and outside of the contrived rationalization of the nation-state and its purported modernity.

What I am pointing at here is the manner that the story of being "uncontacted" is seated in the architecture of racism and its institutional appendages.

Meirelles used what he knew would grab attention. He spoke to the colonial impulse to discover, plot, and catalog, tribes (savages). And for a spell it worked.

Will this be the last 'discovery'? Hell no! 'Discovery' is a mainstay of whiteness and the travel industry, in particular, knows that too well.

I mean have you watched the Travel Channel? See those kids from whiteburbia 'discovering' exotic peoples in India, Cambodia, Kenya, while expressing the Western ideal to 'learn and take back' (read appropriate).

Lonenly Planet travel guides are assembled to make the way for this kind of post-colonial 'contacting' and 'discovering'. And if you think this is a one-way exchange you would be absolutely wrong.

The tribes in India, Cambodia, Kenya, understand the penchant to romanticize and infantalize (Orientalize) them.

Nonetheless, this capitalized transaction is destructive and absolutely racist. Like the "uncontacted" tribes, the 'contacted' ones are stuck in the imagination of whiteness.

And so Columbus, Polo, Drake, among other 'discoverers' and 'contacters', live on blissfully entrenched in their racist delusions.

Ridwan Laher

Picture Credit

"Let the people decide" - An interview with Tongan activist E.Zekiel

noreply@blogger.com (Ana) — Sat, 21 Jun 2008 01:20:47 -0500

By Ryan Bodman

On November 16th 2006, Nuku'alofa was rocked by riots as frustration over the lack of democratic reforms reached boiling point. On the following days, police and military personnel rounded up a large number of people, some involved/some not involved in the rioting and looting and detained them without charge.

Since the release of these people, many concerns have been raised about the widespread neglect of standard criminal procedures by security forces. A report released by the Community Para-Legal Task-force on Human Rights (CPLTHR) indicates that of those interviewed, 41% suffered unprovoked violence at the time of their arrest. 19% claimed they were handcuffed while inside their prison cells - length of time varies between 2 hours and 10 days - while all those interviewed complained of being forcibly incommunicado during their imprisonment. This by a government which is not only directly supported by the New Zealand Government via military training and monetary support but at a time when New Zealand troops were in the country assisting these very same troops to 'restore order'.

One of those caught up in this brutality was the well known Tongan political graffiti artist E.Zekiel. I had the chance to ask E.Zekiel a few questions about his experience in prison and about the pro-democracy movement in Tonga. As well as this I had the chance to chat to a number of activists in Tonga about the role they see activists in Aotearoa/New Zealand having in the inevitable democratisation of Tonga.

Ryan Bodman: What is your involvement with the pro-democracy movement in Tonga?

E.Zekiel: I'm involved as much as I am needed, firmly supporting our people's representatives [Of the over 30 members of parliament in Tonga only 9 are elected by the population - known as the people's representatives. 6 of these are staunchly pro-democracy and are in the forefront of the pro-democracy movement. A number of them were caught up in the same net of persecution which is described in this interview].

RB: Were you involved in the 16th November '06 actions 0r caught up in the police crack down which followed?

EZ: I was not involved in the looting though nothing tastes like looted alcohol. I was graffiti-ing a wall of a building that was on fire. A very strange experience. Two days later George the boy [the king] was traveling down staunchly [with police and military escort] and I yelled out 'liliu' [change] at the top of my lungs with a clenched fist in the air. A direct confrontation with the little man [The police/military claimed E.Zekiel swore at the King thus returned shortly after this incident and apprehended him. This was despite numerous eye-witnesses telling them otherwise].

RB: What were conditions like in prison?

EZ: Conditions were really inhumane. The stench of urine was overwhelming. It was very stuffy… My cell was meant to hold 18 prisoners but they jammed in 64 of us. Ass whoopin' [hidings] was a daily occurrence . It escalated when we refused to cooperate or when we resisted. Overseas personnel turned a blind eye to these events.

RB:So abuse of those contained was a serious issue?

EZ: Most of the brutalities were unprovoked assaults both by the military and the police. Some injuries and bruises were caused during interrogation in the pigsty. The severely beaten were then taken to hospital. Like many, I was released after my injuries had healed [in E.Zekiel's case a severe cut to the head] which was after 9 days inside

RB: Despite the atrocious situation did anything positive come from your time inside?

EZ: Coming back from loo [toilet] visits our leading hands [often the people's representative highlighted earlier] would sneak into different cells to empower our commitment. We shared our ideas with those who lacked them and organising support for the movement never ceased in there.

RB: What were you charged with and what was the result of your case?

EZ: They created a lie and charged me with treason. One ticket that has a horrible nature [As elsewhere this is an extremely serious crime in Tonga]. However their prosecutor together with the Crown Law agreed to cancel my case for there was never any evidence formed against me. I survived their poisonous attack.

RB: Where is the pro-democracy movement at now in regards to aims and approaches of securing democracy for the people of Tonga?

EZ: We're gaining momentum as more and more people are becoming aware of our current situation. People are demanding change. We clearly believe that a change in the system will bring unity and other aspects that our present system fails to provide.

RB: I understand the new King's coronation is in early August - does the movement have anything planned in relation to this?

EZ: Not as far as I am aware of. Put it this way - we are boycotting the event. God knows if shit is going to go down but at the moment we have nothing planned [There are estimates that only 40% of the Tongan population will attend the coronation - compared to effectively 100% attendance at the last coronation in 1967].

While in Tonga I also had the opportunity to ask a number of people what role they felt people in Aotearoa could play in Tonga's struggle for democracy. A range of suggestions were made and they are highlighted below.

"The people of New Zealand should pressure their government to start paying more attention to the people's representatives. At the moment when they [NZ diplomats] visit they meet the King's cronies, play golf and drink with them paying no notice of the 9 people in Tonga who were actually elected by the people. When they leave all the have is their [the Tongan elite's] view of Tonga and have not met the people or tried to understand our movement".
"They just need to know about the situation here. They can't do much here 'cause they are not part 0f our society but understanding what is happening and not believing how it is shown on the news is the main thing".
"They need to show their support to Tongan people and protest outside the King's residence in Auckland to show their support. They should also encourage your government to seriously address the matter to the UN and the commonwealth".
"They should stop the New Zealand Government from financially supporting the regime here with military and monetary support".

As you can see from above many people see the need for support from Aotearoa for their struggle and there are many angles which this support can take. From a palangi's view (Pakeha, Foreigner) I feel that activists in Aotearoa could play a large role in this movement. For one our government is a massive supporter of the regime here and we could build support from within the population against the purse strings for the status-quo. As well, there are many Tongans in Aotearoa who are naturally very concerned about this issue and infact, many of those at the fore-front of the pro-democracy movement gained their experience in Australia and Aotearoa. On top of this we have freedoms to protest more then activists in Tonga which is made even more adventageous by the fact that the King spends so much time in his residence in Mt Eden, Auckland. And finally, like it or not we are Pacific islanders and solidarity across Pacific islanders against those who would exploit and repress is long overdue.

Riots broke out on 16 November 2006 after a pro-democracy demonstration in Nuku'alofa which destroyed large parts of the central city. Aotearoa Indymedia activists smush and slm traveled to Tonga a week afterwards and reported on the situation: [ 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 ] They also made a video.

see also:

Tongan Brother Taken Down by System

US military to move into South Pacific

License

This work is in the public domain.

Update re: Kahentinetha Horn

noreply@blogger.com (Angryindian) — Fri, 20 Jun 2008 17:17:09 -0500

Reader comment to B. Norrell's Censored News: Censorship on attack of Mohawk grandmothers

This remains unreported in Canada's news media and ignored by the freedom of expression organizations here, for writers and journalists. The media silence is threatening all Canadian writers who dare the truth, and it threatens all first peoples surviving the continuing threat of cultural genocide at the least. The treatment of Kahentinetha Horn and Katenies reminds me of police treatment of other vulnerable groups by the Nazis. What hypocrites will allow this ?

John Bart Gerald

Adrienne Carey Hurley: Update re: Kahentinetha Horn

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

STATEMENT--June 18, 2008

Kahnawake--Two Mohawk women were assaulted by Canada Customs officers on Saturday June 14, 2008 at 2 pm. at the Cornwall Island border in Akwesahsne.

Mohawk rights-activist and elder Kahentinetha Horn, 67, suffered arterial damage during the assault and was hospitalized under guard. Also hurt in the incident was Mohawk Nation News (MNN) editor Katenies, who was held until Sunday and released.

Charges against Ms. Horn were dropped. Ms. Horn was hospitalized in Cornwall until her release June 18. Charges against Katenies were dropped on Monday June 16.

"I understand that our people are upset about this," Ms. Horn said, after her release from hospital and under private care for her injuries.

"I am concerned that the incident has upset my daughters and grandchildren. There's no excuse for what they did to us."

The incident is under investigation. No other details are available at this time.

Contact: Family spokesman
Thohahoken (514) 726-7493

Technorati Tags: aboriginal, indigenous, activism, colonialism, genocide, americas

Remembering the 1976 Soweto Riots

noreply@blogger.com (Ridwan) — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 17:48:41 -0500

The Soweto Riots of June 16, 1976, is a milestone in the struggle against racism in South Africa.

On this day, 32 years ago, Tsietsi Mashininini led high school students and others on a march to protest the 'Afrikaans medium only' policy of the apartheid regime in Black schools.

Several thousand students took to the street and the apartheid regime responded with unbridled violence. Police and other armed 'official' murderers opened fire on children killing more than 500 according to Reuters news.

Hector Pietersen (12) was among the first to be killed. This famous picture by Sam Nzima captures Hector in the arms of Mbuyisa Makhubo. Hector's sister, Antoinette Pieterson (17), is the young woman alongside Mbuyisa.

The 1976 Soweto Riots conceal many a story of death and brutality at the hands of white racism. But it also tells a grander story of the will to defeat domination and the power of political consciousness.

Black Consciousness leader Steve Bantu Biko inspired the students to take to the streets. It is with his words that I remember the brave school children who fought for our freedom in Soweto, and elsewhere in South Africa:

"The most potent weapon in the hands of the oppressor is the mind of the oppressed."

Quote taken from Biko's
"I Write What I Like."

This day, memorialized as Youth Day by the ANC-led government, comes at a time when our post-apartheid nation is facing its most serious challenges.

In the past month our streets have seen South African Black folk declare war on Black folk from elsewhere on the continent. When the violence subsided more than 70 innocent people had lost their lives.

Of those killed more than a third were South Africans who were mistaken for migrants.

Inside of this xenephobic violence we had to stare ourselves down and admit that the dream country of 1994 hardly arrived.

We have a long way to go. And it is not a way that can be entrusted to the leaders who hold power now.

If you don't believe me, look closer at the party of Nelson Mandela (ANC), it is falling apart.

If Biko was alive today he would most likely say: I told you not to trust liberals no matter the colour of their skin.

Onward to Azania!

Ridwan Laher

SIN DUEÑOS NI PATRONES

noreply@blogger.com (Angryindian) — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 12:31:21 -0500

BOLIVIA INDIGENA: SIN DUEÑOS NI PATRONES

La Comisión Interamericana de Derechos Humanos (CIDH) inició este lunes el trabajo de investigación de las denuncias de comunidades cautivas del pueblo indígena guaraní en la zona del Chaco boliviano y sobre las agresiones que sufrieron más de una treintena de campesinos en la ciudad de Sucre Chuquisaca el pasado 24 de mayo.
Como es conocido en Bolivia se vive una ola de racismo, discriminación y todo tipo de abusos en contra de los indígenas. Está pendiente el tema del saneamiento de tierras en el oriente boliviano para su posterior otorgación a los guaraníes, de manera que ellos puedan desarrollar su vida como todo ser humano y no sometidos al trabajo forzoso sin paga de los cuales son víctimas en algunas haciendas de prósperos terranientes que en muchos casos se hicieron de esas tierras aprovechando de sus influencias en anteriores gobiernos.
De la misma manera, sigue abierto el caso de los índigenas de las diferentes comunidades de Chuquisaca que también fueron víctimas de todo tipo de abusos el pasado 24 de mayo en la ciudad de Sucre por universitarios y citadinos. Ya anteriormente, durante el desarrollo de la Asamblea Constituyente también sufrieron similar tipo de vejámenes los cuales, deben también ser investigados.
Al parecer a estas alturas del siglo XXI, siguen existiendo círculos coloniales que piensan que siguen en el siglo XVI.

--------------------------------------------

The Inter-American Commission of Human rights (CIDH) initiated east Monday the work of investigation of the denunciations of captive communities of the guaraní indigenous town in the zone of the Bolivian Chaco and on the aggressions that suffered more of some thirty farmers in the city of Sucre Chuquisaca the past 24 of May.

As it is known in Bolivia lives a wave on racism, discrimination and all type of abuses against the natives. The subject of the earth cleaning is pending in the Bolivian east for its later permission to the guaraníes, so that they can develop to their life as all human being and submissive the unavoidable work without payment of which they are victims in some properties of prosperous terranientes that in many cases were done of those earth being useful their influences in previous governments.

In the same way, it follows the case of the natives of the different communities from Chuquisaca open that also were victims of all type of abuses the past 24 of May in the city of Sucre by college students and citadinos. Already previously, during the development of the Constituent Assembly also they underwent similar type of vejámenes which, must also be investigated.

Apparently at this point of the 21st century, they continue existing colonial circles that think that they follow in century XVI.

"Slow Death in Gaza"

noreply@blogger.com (Ridwan) — Sat, 07 Jun 2008 14:03:58 -0500

Margaret Kimberley has written an excellent article entitled "Slow death in Gaza" in The Electronic Intifada (6 June 2008). She condemns the US's role in supporting Israel's apartheid suppression of Palestineans in Gaza, but she also points fingers at the rest of the world who remain silent and distant from the horror.

Kimberley begins her article by saying:

"Each American claim to moral authority becomes a foul excretion in light of US complicity in Israel's barbaric and illegal treatment of the Palestinians. Washington deploys its superpower apparatus to smother dissent against its Middle East policy in Europe and elsewhere, leaving former president Jimmy Carter and Nobel laureate Desmond Tutu as lonely defenders of Palestinian human rights. No change in American policy is on the horizon, as "the rot in America goes beyond this administration, and so does the rot in Israel." The "abomination," as Desmond Tutu describes it, against 1.6 million people in Palestine shows the hypocrisy of American and Israeli pretenses to civilization."

Tutu states further, as pointed out by Kimberley, that: "This is not something you want to wish on your worst enemy."

Tutu is right.

There is hardly a leadership voice in the West that has the courage to step up and confront Israel. To do so would risk falling on the wrong side of the US and being labelled an anti-semite and/or supporter of Islamic terrorism.

It is past the time that thinking activists everywhere should have been compelled to stand-up and contest Israel's apartheid oppression of Palestineans.

There can be no moral ground for silence and complicity at any level, including that of the individual.

One of the strengths of liberal democracy is its belief in the power of the individual to speak truth to power.

A big part of the truth of liberal democracy is its interest in universal human rights.

How, then, can any Obama or McCain supporter ignore their candidate's complicity in the US's obsessive habit of ignoring the human rights of Palestineans?

This question should ring particularly loud for the Obama crowd.

Obama supporters, however, seem more comfortable ignoring or downplaying the serious implications of his recent speech to AIPAC?

The problem is that the fate of Palestineans is like a distant flickering light in the political sight of Obama supporters.

Some want to care but can't, and won't, really relate beyond their own immediate interests.

In all, those who support leaders who are complicit in the oppression of Palestineans are no better than their leaders, and must therefore, accept the brutal consequences as an intrinsic part of their lives and their doing.

There are no innocent oppressors anywhere.

Ridwan Laher

Credit: Margaret Kimberely's article first appeared in Black Agenda Report.