Where We Are This Week
Venezuela doubles down, Israel retaliates, Gershkovich is freed, and whites come out for Kamala.
Do White Votes Count More?
I don’t mean to be such a downer, but do you all remember 2020? Specifically, the summer of 2020. You know, the one where we all breathed hot sweat into cloth masks and lectured each other about racial politics. Doesn’t that ring a very specific, jarring bell?
You may have thought that the racial polarization in America during that time was on the outs. That’s reasonable, I suppose, as the 2024 election was yet another with two ancient white guys and a relatively riot-less summer. (For the purposes of this article, we won’t be discussing the various university encampments of the spring.)
All of that got turned upside down when Joe Biden heroically/shamefully withdrew his candidacy from the presidential election and Kamala Harris moved into pole position to secure the Democratic Party’s nomination. I know, I really shouldn’t be complaining. It’s nice to have someone not born under the shadow of World War II though she is still technically a boomer.
Racial tensions had eased over the last couple of years and now it’s all about Zionists and anti-Zionists, am I right? Simpler times.
The Harris Campaign, however, is taking a distinctly familiar approach. When Biden was the Democrat frontrunner he made all sorts of promises about nominating women of color to various positions in his cabinet, the Supreme Court, etc., and on the selection of a VP vowed it would be a woman. So, I suppose it should come as no surprise that the early days of the current vice president’s bid for the presidency color within those same lines.
This week, calls for action and fundraising were organized via Zoom entitled ‘White Women: Answer The Call! Show up for Kamala Harris’ and the less verbose, ‘White Dudes for Harris.’
Though not officially linked to the Harris campaign, neither the Dems nor the VP’s team have criticized the racial makeup of the groups — probably because the two groups of insufferable whites have raised over $13 million in a matter of days.
Life, politics, war, relationships — they’re all predicated on narrative. It’s an axiomatic truth that is supported by both post-modernism and religious thought. It’s also the foundation of a Joan Didion quote that I’ve written far too many times in this newsletter (and refuse to do so this week). It remains true, however, that the stories we tell ourselves become the stories we act out.
If, as Americans, we continue to tell the story that we ought to be subdivided along racial and gendered lines, then that is the society in which we will all reside. I’m not suggesting we ignore cultural and physical differences between groups, but maybe we don’t build an ideological wall between race and sex.
The ‘White Whomever’ groups are racist on so many different levels. One, they both repeatedly mentioned that they ought to show deference to their black or female counterparts because it’s ‘their turn’ or whatever. One gentle parenting expert scolded the other white ladies that they should refrain from ‘God-forbid, correcting a black colleague.’ What I don’t understand is — why didn’t they have a black woman tell them?
Were black men or women not allowed in those groups? Why did those uppity whites think they were capable of self-flagellation without the supervision of an approving minority? Will the DNC now keep black and white bank accounts categorized by the gender, sexual orientation, and Zodiac sign of each donor?
Also, maybe we ought to celebrate the notably decreased levels of xenophobia by the American right. So far, no one has demanded to see Harris’ birth certificate, and though, yes, she’s got a foreign-sounding middle name, there hasn’t been any of the overwrought ‘Hussein’ panic generated by President Obama’s full name.
Can you imagine a Black Dudes for Trump call where they talked about letting white guys continue to steer the country because of their ‘lived experience’? Or worse, what about White Women for Trump? White Honkies for Trump is such a boys’ club.
The problem isn’t the act of subdivision but the rules that are being applied. Segregating by race is regressive and counterproductive. Ideas are for everyone, no matter how awful they are.
Regardless, I won’t take her promises of equity seriously until I see a fundraising call specifically targeting late-fifties, half-Indian, half-Jamaican women who used to be a US Senator and are currently serving as Vice President of the United States.
Chavez Wins from the Dead
A couple of years ago, during the protests and riots against the Díaz-Canel regime, I wrote an article that began with a reference to lyrics from the Clash’s ‘Guns on the Roof’ that say ‘freedom’s always on the run.’
If that statement is true anywhere, it’s true in South America.
Since Hugo Chavez rose to power in 1999 and Venezuela drafted a new constitution, elections have been somewhat of a foregone conclusion in the South American country.
This week, Venezuela held a presidential election featuring Chavez’s literal and figurative successor Nicolás Maduro and the opposition’s candidate, Edmundo González. Ideally, after each six-year term, there would be a fair shot for another candidate or party to take control of the oil-rich nation.
Save for a hectic forty-seven hours in 2002, Chavismo — the ideological legacy of Chavez — has been the rule of the land, not strictly Marxist-Leninist in nature to be called purely communist but nationalization of key industries and authoritarian governance makes the distinction between democratic socialism and communism virtually moot.
In 2019, Venezuelan politician Juan Guaidó to led a failed soft-coup of sorts; employing a legislative rule that would allow him to call for the ousting of Maduro. In the intervening period, Guaidó received recognition from the American government and had the support of military defectors and large swathes of the citizenry. The takeover ended with four protestors being killed and scores of political dissidents either being jailed, expelled from the country or forced into hiding.
González, who had the support of a wide-ranging political coalition, sought to relieve the nation of Maduro’s stronghold by means of a legitimate election. That was his first mistake.
González’s party was able to collect the ballot receipts from the election before the totals. Exit polls and receipts showed an overwhelming landslide for the Unitary Platform, the opposition party; 67% for González. Yet, as the ballots were being counted regime thugs began actively removing ballots from polling stations in front of the public. Venezuelans were bearing witness to the theft of the election in broad daylight.
Miraculously, the Maduro regime announced his victory by a thin margin of 51%. That pesky democracy almost worked! Chavismo is poised to embark on its third decade reigning over the beleaguered public.
Of course, Maduro characterized the proceeding protests as premeditated by the ‘far-right’. I didn’t realize it was a tenant of the far-right to want free and fair elections, but he must be right.
Demonstrations have been met with violence from state police and surely will result in the prescribed ‘disappearing’ of inconvenient persons. So far, 17 citizens have been killed and over 700 have been arrested.
María Corina Machado, the opposition leader (not the presidential candidate — think Obama/Biden sort of), has called for mass demonstrations in Caracas, the nation’s capital, this Saturday and requested that protestors fly the Venezuelan flag as symbol of freedom.
Notice how whenever left-leaning anti-government protests happen in America, practically no one is flying the American flag? It’s not like that everywhere.
Many Western and South American nations, including the USA, have already recognized González as the rightful winner of the election but as long as Maduro holds sway in the military, nothing is likely to change.
As Venezuelans prepare themselves for a violent few weeks in search of liberty and justice, the New York Times is busy blaming ‘brutal capitalism’ for the nation’s impoverished and oppressed people. At least, twenty-five years of suffering and strife won’t be for nothing.
Nothing beats ignoring the truth and refusing to learn any lessons.
Ding Dong
"The blood of the children, women and elderly…we need this blood so that it will ignite within us the spirit of revolution, so that it will arouse within us persistence, so that it will arouse within us defiance and advance.”
A couple of days ago, I came home to my wife quietly working while our daughter was asleep. I sat down on the floor as she told me what she’d been up to for the past few hours. Abruptly, she exclaimed, “I heard the good news!”
Folks, this is the type of marital camaraderie you’re looking for. Find yourself a spouse who has the moral clarity to celebrate the righteous death of a terrorist and you’ll have found yourself your soulmate.
Upon his death, Reuters’ obituary for Ismail Haniyeh originally read "Tough-talking Haniyeh was seen as the more moderate face of Hamas.” First of all, can anyone describe to me what the moderate face of Hamas is in realistic terms? Ah yes, the gentle slopes of Mt. Everest.
This is the man who celebrated October 7th as a monumental victory; a man who lived lavishly in Qatar while forcing his citizens to serve as cannon-fodder to the Israeli response. This is the man who had the temerity and vileness to express his bloodlust for his own children, women, and elderly in the quote above.
Thankfully, Reuters realized their mistake, fired the editor responsible, and retitled the piece, “Who was Ismail Haniyeh and why is his assassination a blow to Hamas?” Really captures who he was, doesn’t it?
It’s par for the course, really. Last weekend, a Hezbollah missile struck a soccer field in the Golan Heights region of Israel killing 12, 10 of them children. The children were Druze, a ethnic and religious minority in Israel and their deaths resulted in a tipping point for the Israeli government.
On October 8th, Hezbollah declared war on Israel — because too few Jews were killed on the 7th, apparently — and have since bombed the northern region of Israel nonstop for the last ten months. Thousands of Israelis have been forced to evacuate the area and abandon their homes while the rockets continue to fall. The Druze have a religious connection to the land they inhabit and refused to flee — even under the orders of the IDF. The Netanyahu government has sought a policy of deterrence and defense so far, not wanting to open another front to the war with which they are already engaged.
Initially, Hezbollah proudly claimed responsibility for the strike but as details emerged of who they killed managed a crooked finger point to Israel saying it was an IDF missile that struck the field in a failed attempt to disarm a Hezbollah ordinance. How that’s any better than what actually happened is beyond comprehension.
The IDF responded swiftly and resolutely by striking Hezbollah’s headquarters in Beirut, Lebanon. The attack, confirmed by Hezbollah and Israel, was said to have killed Fouad Shukur, a top commander in the Lebanese, Iran-backed terror outfit. Tragically, at least five civilians were also killed in the airstrike as Hezbollah intentionally embeds itself amongst the civilian population. Anyone else sensing a common theme with these organizations?
President Biden’s envoy to voiced his concerns over the Israeli retaliation by saying military action wasn’t means for a solution. Mums on the word on his disapproval of the killing of the ten Druze children.
The Guardian - Israel strikes Lebanon as diplomats try to prevent regional war.
Reuters - Israeli strikes kill at least five in Lebanon, including two children
The United Nations - UN appeals for ‘maximum restraint’ following Israeli strikes in Beirut
The Washington Post - Israel Hits Targets In Lebanon
Maybe it’s just me, but I feel like these headlines are missing one or two massively important details. The fear of a broader war in the region is legitimate and if this is the beginning, let it be known the brutal killing of an ethnic minority was the straw that broke the supposed apartheid-enforcing camel’s back.
Other Western institutions may lack the moral clarity to cover the controversial Middle East in a legitimate manner, but my household doesn’t. Rest assured.
More Good News
Lastly, I would be remiss if I didn’t mention it. Wall Street Journal writer and Russian prison enthusiast, Evan Gershkovich, has been returned home thanks to a prisoner swap green lighted by President Biden.
Gershkovich spent over one year behind bars in Russia after being accused of espionage. Upon his release, he immediately asked for an interview with President Putin. Wouldn’t it be hilarious, if now, after everything, he admitted he was a CIA operative?
Welcome home, Evan.
To a better next week,
~FDA